BASIS: PCSB staff recommends conditional continuance due to SWD

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The crux of the problem is that the ed powers in this city want to have it both ways: they want to continue to underfund charters relative to DCPS programs on a per capita basis while requiring the latter to provide DCPS-level support for SN students and English Language Learners. They don't want students with disabilities and poor kids to be excluded from the best public schools, but refuse to provide the GT education that would help the brightest poor kids students enjoy strong representation in the public HS programs offering the most rigor. They want high-performing test-in magnets that compare to the top performers in other US cities, but won't support the requisite K-8 prep and ability grouping to create them. Something has to give, with the charter board, OSSE and the Mayor's office turning a blind eye because they boxed themselves into a corner long ago. At BASIS, conveniently, it's support for SN and ELL. As long as a couple students a year from BASIS continue to crack MIT and Yale, no politician is going to mess with BASIS DC. It's no secret that the franchise has found far more fertile ground to expand its public school empire in Texas and Louisiana than in DC. The Charter Board is toothless without political backing.

Excellent summation. To that I would add that the failure of DCPS to address the bolded sentence is WHY ---20 years into charter schools---charters went from the original intent of being "niche" educational programs: dual language, montessori/experiential learning, etc.---into serving 45% of the kids currently using public education in the District. So now that charters are essentially a parallel school system, the first sentence---creating unreasonable expectations for charters as a result of underfunding---has become the reality.
What I would like to see is a charter that is expressly special-ed---like a charter version of LAB. And with an admissions system that either lets you lottery for it with an existing IEP, OR allows a charter to charter transfer for kids who are identified as needing greater services than the charter can provide. That would seem to be much more practical than the current world---which expects all schools to be all things for SPED kids. I have a SPED kid. We would never have lotteried DC into a program like BASIS and then demanded that BASIS accommodate DC. That would have unreasonable for both the schools and DC.

THIS. In the last 20 years, DCPS could have competed with charter "niche" educational programs by innovating, using the best school systems in other big cities as models. They could have ramped up their test-in HS magnet programs to offer BASIS level academics fed by test-in MS programs, like NYC, Chicago and Boston do. They could have introduced bona fide academic tracking across core subjects in most of their MS programs. They could even have created superior language immersion programs, with lotteries for native speakers across the board. DCPS didn't bother, hence almost half the public school students in the city are enrolled in charters, including the great majority of UMC families outside the Deal-Wilson catchment areas. Good for you, PP, for not demanding that a cash-strapped charter provides your student with state of the art SN programming.

when your ultimate argument is that it is unfair for parents to seek legally entitled education for their disabled kids, you lose all credibility as an analyst of the situation. what you REALLY think is that SN kids don’t deserve any resources or anything that takes away from your kid.

Again, if its so easy, simple, then why argue? I mean, its the law, isn't it. Should be a slam dunk to get whatever you think your kid is legally entitled to.

If I was in charge of Basis, sure. But all the Basis boosters here are saying they don’t think Basis should have to do it.

But why do you care? if you are 100% protected by simple legal rights, why do you argue with people?

I'm being pedantic, but trying to make the point that claiming "but the law" isn't enough, which is why you and other people are arguing. "The law" is always subject to interpretation, which is why, as so many SN parents here attest, it's damn hard to get the services their kids need. I suspect you are arguing with posters on this thread because at the end of the day it's not easy or simple. And not black and white. If you want advocates for SN services and support, perhaps a different approach is warranted.

What kind of "different approach" do you think is warranted, when there are Basis advocates on here saying "Basis should be exempt from the law becuase it is special"? Is your question about what else should be brought to bear to ensure that Basis complies with the law, for individual kids, and for DC kids overall? There's no black and white here - the claims that some Basis boosters are making that Basis should just ... not follow the law. If what you're saying is that nothing can guarantee a specific outcome for an individual child, sure. But that's different from getting the services they are legally entitled to.

I don't see one post where anyone claims Basis shouldn't "follow the law" nor do I see any evidence that Basis is not, in fact doing so. Again, enrollment, not actual violations are at issue.

But your sentence bolded above hits right on the issue- exactly. Basis is challenging and demands A LOT. And most- more than half- of kids leave by high school. This is for all sorts of reasons, but workload is a part of it. I think there is a concern that advocates are saying "you must change the structure so that kids with SN can't fail," or "You can't have standards so high that SN kids can't meet them." Perhaps its because we are ignorant about what supports really consititue for kids or perhaps its because we know that lots of NT kids struggle at Basis too. I don't know.

ok you don’t know so MYOB. IDEA compliance is required for all. I don’t have to show you my kid’s IEP. Maybe do some self-reflection about your personal values if you’re so panicked that Basis might have to add 2-3 more special ed staff and some kids may get additional time on tests. SN are not contagious.

If that is really your reaction to my post, then you are cementing the image that you are only concerned about "sticking it to Basis" and not actually about solving the problem. So be it. Have a good night, my very angry friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The crux of the problem is that the ed powers in this city want to have it both ways: they want to continue to underfund charters relative to DCPS programs on a per capita basis while requiring the latter to provide DCPS-level support for SN students and English Language Learners. They don't want students with disabilities and poor kids to be excluded from the best public schools, but refuse to provide the GT education that would help the brightest poor kids students enjoy strong representation in the public HS programs offering the most rigor. They want high-performing test-in magnets that compare to the top performers in other US cities, but won't support the requisite K-8 prep and ability grouping to create them. Something has to give, with the charter board, OSSE and the Mayor's office turning a blind eye because they boxed themselves into a corner long ago. At BASIS, conveniently, it's support for SN and ELL. As long as a couple students a year from BASIS continue to crack MIT and Yale, no politician is going to mess with BASIS DC. It's no secret that the franchise has found far more fertile ground to expand its public school empire in Texas and Louisiana than in DC. The Charter Board is toothless without political backing.

Excellent summation. To that I would add that the failure of DCPS to address the bolded sentence is WHY ---20 years into charter schools---charters went from the original intent of being "niche" educational programs: dual language, montessori/experiential learning, etc.---into serving 45% of the kids currently using public education in the District. So now that charters are essentially a parallel school system, the first sentence---creating unreasonable expectations for charters as a result of underfunding---has become the reality.
What I would like to see is a charter that is expressly special-ed---like a charter version of LAB. And with an admissions system that either lets you lottery for it with an existing IEP, OR allows a charter to charter transfer for kids who are identified as needing greater services than the charter can provide. That would seem to be much more practical than the current world---which expects all schools to be all things for SPED kids. I have a SPED kid. We would never have lotteried DC into a program like BASIS and then demanded that BASIS accommodate DC. That would have unreasonable for both the schools and DC.

THIS. In the last 20 years, DCPS could have competed with charter "niche" educational programs by innovating, using the best school systems in other big cities as models. They could have ramped up their test-in HS magnet programs to offer BASIS level academics fed by test-in MS programs, like NYC, Chicago and Boston do. They could have introduced bona fide academic tracking across core subjects in most of their MS programs. They could even have created superior language immersion programs, with lotteries for native speakers across the board. DCPS didn't bother, hence almost half the public school students in the city are enrolled in charters, including the great majority of UMC families outside the Deal-Wilson catchment areas. Good for you, PP, for not demanding that a cash-strapped charter provides your student with state of the art SN programming.

when your ultimate argument is that it is unfair for parents to seek legally entitled education for their disabled kids, you lose all credibility as an analyst of the situation. what you REALLY think is that SN kids don’t deserve any resources or anything that takes away from your kid.

Again, if its so easy, simple, then why argue? I mean, its the law, isn't it. Should be a slam dunk to get whatever you think your kid is legally entitled to.

If I was in charge of Basis, sure. But all the Basis boosters here are saying they don’t think Basis should have to do it.

But why do you care? if you are 100% protected by simple legal rights, why do you argue with people?

I'm being pedantic, but trying to make the point that claiming "but the law" isn't enough, which is why you and other people are arguing. "The law" is always subject to interpretation, which is why, as so many SN parents here attest, it's damn hard to get the services their kids need. I suspect you are arguing with posters on this thread because at the end of the day it's not easy or simple. And not black and white. If you want advocates for SN services and support, perhaps a different approach is warranted.

What kind of "different approach" do you think is warranted, when there are Basis advocates on here saying "Basis should be exempt from the law becuase it is special"? Is your question about what else should be brought to bear to ensure that Basis complies with the law, for individual kids, and for DC kids overall? There's no black and white here - the claims that some Basis boosters are making that Basis should just ... not follow the law. If what you're saying is that nothing can guarantee a specific outcome for an individual child, sure. But that's different from getting the services they are legally entitled to.

I don't see one post where anyone claims Basis shouldn't "follow the law" nor do I see any evidence that Basis is not, in fact doing so. Again, enrollment, not actual violations are at issue.

But your sentence bolded above hits right on the issue- exactly. Basis is challenging and demands A LOT. And most- more than half- of kids leave by high school. This is for all sorts of reasons, but workload is a part of it. I think there is a concern that advocates are saying "you must change the structure so that kids with SN can't fail," or "You can't have standards so high that SN kids can't meet them." Perhaps its because we are ignorant about what supports really consititue for kids or perhaps its because we know that lots of NT kids struggle at Basis too. I don't know.

ok you don’t know so MYOB. IDEA compliance is required for all. I don’t have to show you my kid’s IEP. Maybe do some self-reflection about your personal values if you’re so panicked that Basis might have to add 2-3 more special ed staff and some kids may get additional time on tests. SN are not contagious.

If that is really your reaction to my post, then you are cementing the image that you are only concerned about "sticking it to Basis" and not actually about solving the problem. So be it. Have a good night, my very angry friend.

the people with knowledge and investment in SN kids will solve the problem, presuming Basis complies with the charter board’s conditions. I’m not sure why you think I should be crowdsourcing “solutions” to special education with anonymous strangers who know nothing about it (and in some cases actively hostile to it). maybe as the kids say you should take a seat. The Dept of Ed has a ton of FAQs on IDEA if you want to educate yourself. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The crux of the problem is that the ed powers in this city want to have it both ways: they want to continue to underfund charters relative to DCPS programs on a per capita basis while requiring the latter to provide DCPS-level support for SN students and English Language Learners. They don't want students with disabilities and poor kids to be excluded from the best public schools, but refuse to provide the GT education that would help the brightest poor kids students enjoy strong representation in the public HS programs offering the most rigor. They want high-performing test-in magnets that compare to the top performers in other US cities, but won't support the requisite K-8 prep and ability grouping to create them. Something has to give, with the charter board, OSSE and the Mayor's office turning a blind eye because they boxed themselves into a corner long ago. At BASIS, conveniently, it's support for SN and ELL. As long as a couple students a year from BASIS continue to crack MIT and Yale, no politician is going to mess with BASIS DC. It's no secret that the franchise has found far more fertile ground to expand its public school empire in Texas and Louisiana than in DC. The Charter Board is toothless without political backing.

Excellent summation. To that I would add that the failure of DCPS to address the bolded sentence is WHY ---20 years into charter schools---charters went from the original intent of being "niche" educational programs: dual language, montessori/experiential learning, etc.---into serving 45% of the kids currently using public education in the District. So now that charters are essentially a parallel school system, the first sentence---creating unreasonable expectations for charters as a result of underfunding---has become the reality.
What I would like to see is a charter that is expressly special-ed---like a charter version of LAB. And with an admissions system that either lets you lottery for it with an existing IEP, OR allows a charter to charter transfer for kids who are identified as needing greater services than the charter can provide. That would seem to be much more practical than the current world---which expects all schools to be all things for SPED kids. I have a SPED kid. We would never have lotteried DC into a program like BASIS and then demanded that BASIS accommodate DC. That would have unreasonable for both the schools and DC.

THIS. In the last 20 years, DCPS could have competed with charter "niche" educational programs by innovating, using the best school systems in other big cities as models. They could have ramped up their test-in HS magnet programs to offer BASIS level academics fed by test-in MS programs, like NYC, Chicago and Boston do. They could have introduced bona fide academic tracking across core subjects in most of their MS programs. They could even have created superior language immersion programs, with lotteries for native speakers across the board. DCPS didn't bother, hence almost half the public school students in the city are enrolled in charters, including the great majority of UMC families outside the Deal-Wilson catchment areas. Good for you, PP, for not demanding that a cash-strapped charter provides your student with state of the art SN programming.

when your ultimate argument is that it is unfair for parents to seek legally entitled education for their disabled kids, you lose all credibility as an analyst of the situation. what you REALLY think is that SN kids don’t deserve any resources or anything that takes away from your kid.

Again, if its so easy, simple, then why argue? I mean, its the law, isn't it. Should be a slam dunk to get whatever you think your kid is legally entitled to.

If I was in charge of Basis, sure. But all the Basis boosters here are saying they don’t think Basis should have to do it.

But why do you care? if you are 100% protected by simple legal rights, why do you argue with people?

I'm being pedantic, but trying to make the point that claiming "but the law" isn't enough, which is why you and other people are arguing. "The law" is always subject to interpretation, which is why, as so many SN parents here attest, it's damn hard to get the services their kids need. I suspect you are arguing with posters on this thread because at the end of the day it's not easy or simple. And not black and white. If you want advocates for SN services and support, perhaps a different approach is warranted.

What kind of "different approach" do you think is warranted, when there are Basis advocates on here saying "Basis should be exempt from the law becuase it is special"? Is your question about what else should be brought to bear to ensure that Basis complies with the law, for individual kids, and for DC kids overall? There's no black and white here - the claims that some Basis boosters are making that Basis should just ... not follow the law. If what you're saying is that nothing can guarantee a specific outcome for an individual child, sure. But that's different from getting the services they are legally entitled to.

I don't see one post where anyone claims Basis shouldn't "follow the law" nor do I see any evidence that Basis is not, in fact doing so. Again, enrollment, not actual violations are at issue.

But your sentence bolded above hits right on the issue- exactly. Basis is challenging and demands A LOT. And most- more than half- of kids leave by high school. This is for all sorts of reasons, but workload is a part of it. I think there is a concern that advocates are saying "you must change the structure so that kids with SN can't fail," or "You can't have standards so high that SN kids can't meet them." Perhaps its because we are ignorant about what supports really consititue for kids or perhaps its because we know that lots of NT kids struggle at Basis too. I don't know.

ok you don’t know so MYOB. IDEA compliance is required for all. I don’t have to show you my kid’s IEP. Maybe do some self-reflection about your personal values if you’re so panicked that Basis might have to add 2-3 more special ed staff and some kids may get additional time on tests. SN are not contagious.

Maybe do some self-reflection yourself.

You really think there is a magic solution here?

Read this thread about SPED teachers lying to parents and quitting for better employment elsewhere (even though DCPS teachers are some of the highest paid in the country):

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/45/1015378.page

Here is one sample:

“Also, as an extra burden I taught sped. And the gulf between what we promised parents and what we actually had the supplies and resources to provide is huge. So I felt like I was daily left with 2 choices. 1. Lie to parents about what was happening 2. Work non stop to make myself not feel like a liar- even though my efforts never covered the Gap.”

You really think that some DCPS school with 50% illiteracy that checks all the boxes for SPED is doing its job? It isn’t.

After perusing a few pages of this thread, I find myself a lot less sympathetic to arguments about SPED. You strike me as both dogmatic and naïve. All you are doing is hurting your cause.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The crux of the problem is that the ed powers in this city want to have it both ways: they want to continue to underfund charters relative to DCPS programs on a per capita basis while requiring the latter to provide DCPS-level support for SN students and English Language Learners. They don't want students with disabilities and poor kids to be excluded from the best public schools, but refuse to provide the GT education that would help the brightest poor kids students enjoy strong representation in the public HS programs offering the most rigor. They want high-performing test-in magnets that compare to the top performers in other US cities, but won't support the requisite K-8 prep and ability grouping to create them. Something has to give, with the charter board, OSSE and the Mayor's office turning a blind eye because they boxed themselves into a corner long ago. At BASIS, conveniently, it's support for SN and ELL. As long as a couple students a year from BASIS continue to crack MIT and Yale, no politician is going to mess with BASIS DC. It's no secret that the franchise has found far more fertile ground to expand its public school empire in Texas and Louisiana than in DC. The Charter Board is toothless without political backing.

Excellent summation. To that I would add that the failure of DCPS to address the bolded sentence is WHY ---20 years into charter schools---charters went from the original intent of being "niche" educational programs: dual language, montessori/experiential learning, etc.---into serving 45% of the kids currently using public education in the District. So now that charters are essentially a parallel school system, the first sentence---creating unreasonable expectations for charters as a result of underfunding---has become the reality.
What I would like to see is a charter that is expressly special-ed---like a charter version of LAB. And with an admissions system that either lets you lottery for it with an existing IEP, OR allows a charter to charter transfer for kids who are identified as needing greater services than the charter can provide. That would seem to be much more practical than the current world---which expects all schools to be all things for SPED kids. I have a SPED kid. We would never have lotteried DC into a program like BASIS and then demanded that BASIS accommodate DC. That would have unreasonable for both the schools and DC.

THIS. In the last 20 years, DCPS could have competed with charter "niche" educational programs by innovating, using the best school systems in other big cities as models. They could have ramped up their test-in HS magnet programs to offer BASIS level academics fed by test-in MS programs, like NYC, Chicago and Boston do. They could have introduced bona fide academic tracking across core subjects in most of their MS programs. They could even have created superior language immersion programs, with lotteries for native speakers across the board. DCPS didn't bother, hence almost half the public school students in the city are enrolled in charters, including the great majority of UMC families outside the Deal-Wilson catchment areas. Good for you, PP, for not demanding that a cash-strapped charter provides your student with state of the art SN programming.

when your ultimate argument is that it is unfair for parents to seek legally entitled education for their disabled kids, you lose all credibility as an analyst of the situation. what you REALLY think is that SN kids don’t deserve any resources or anything that takes away from your kid.

Again, if its so easy, simple, then why argue? I mean, its the law, isn't it. Should be a slam dunk to get whatever you think your kid is legally entitled to.

If I was in charge of Basis, sure. But all the Basis boosters here are saying they don’t think Basis should have to do it.

But why do you care? if you are 100% protected by simple legal rights, why do you argue with people?

I'm being pedantic, but trying to make the point that claiming "but the law" isn't enough, which is why you and other people are arguing. "The law" is always subject to interpretation, which is why, as so many SN parents here attest, it's damn hard to get the services their kids need. I suspect you are arguing with posters on this thread because at the end of the day it's not easy or simple. And not black and white. If you want advocates for SN services and support, perhaps a different approach is warranted.

What kind of "different approach" do you think is warranted, when there are Basis advocates on here saying "Basis should be exempt from the law becuase it is special"? Is your question about what else should be brought to bear to ensure that Basis complies with the law, for individual kids, and for DC kids overall? There's no black and white here - the claims that some Basis boosters are making that Basis should just ... not follow the law. If what you're saying is that nothing can guarantee a specific outcome for an individual child, sure. But that's different from getting the services they are legally entitled to.

I don't see one post where anyone claims Basis shouldn't "follow the law" nor do I see any evidence that Basis is not, in fact doing so. Again, enrollment, not actual violations are at issue.

But your sentence bolded above hits right on the issue- exactly. Basis is challenging and demands A LOT. And most- more than half- of kids leave by high school. This is for all sorts of reasons, but workload is a part of it. I think there is a concern that advocates are saying "you must change the structure so that kids with SN can't fail," or "You can't have standards so high that SN kids can't meet them." Perhaps its because we are ignorant about what supports really consititue for kids or perhaps its because we know that lots of NT kids struggle at Basis too. I don't know.

ok you don’t know so MYOB. IDEA compliance is required for all. I don’t have to show you my kid’s IEP. Maybe do some self-reflection about your personal values if you’re so panicked that Basis might have to add 2-3 more special ed staff and some kids may get additional time on tests. SN are not contagious.

Maybe do some self-reflection yourself.

You really think there is a magic solution here?

Read this thread about SPED teachers lying to parents and quitting for better employment elsewhere (even though DCPS teachers are some of the highest paid in the country):

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/45/1015378.page

Here is one sample:

“Also, as an extra burden I taught sped. And the gulf between what we promised parents and what we actually had the supplies and resources to provide is huge. So I felt like I was daily left with 2 choices. 1. Lie to parents about what was happening 2. Work non stop to make myself not feel like a liar- even though my efforts never covered the Gap.”

You really think that some DCPS school with 50% illiteracy that checks all the boxes for SPED is doing its job? It isn’t.

After perusing a few pages of this thread, I find myself a lot less sympathetic to arguments about SPED. You strike me as both dogmatic and naïve. All you are doing is hurting your cause.

and that matters … why? it’s a legal requirement. and the fact that you think some complete non sequitur anecdote is relevant just cements the fact that you have no clue what you’re talking about. luckily my child’s right to access the school is based on the law, not on whether some ignorant dude finds me “dogmatic” on the internet. lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The crux of the problem is that the ed powers in this city want to have it both ways: they want to continue to underfund charters relative to DCPS programs on a per capita basis while requiring the latter to provide DCPS-level support for SN students and English Language Learners. They don't want students with disabilities and poor kids to be excluded from the best public schools, but refuse to provide the GT education that would help the brightest poor kids students enjoy strong representation in the public HS programs offering the most rigor. They want high-performing test-in magnets that compare to the top performers in other US cities, but won't support the requisite K-8 prep and ability grouping to create them. Something has to give, with the charter board, OSSE and the Mayor's office turning a blind eye because they boxed themselves into a corner long ago. At BASIS, conveniently, it's support for SN and ELL. As long as a couple students a year from BASIS continue to crack MIT and Yale, no politician is going to mess with BASIS DC. It's no secret that the franchise has found far more fertile ground to expand its public school empire in Texas and Louisiana than in DC. The Charter Board is toothless without political backing.

Excellent summation. To that I would add that the failure of DCPS to address the bolded sentence is WHY ---20 years into charter schools---charters went from the original intent of being "niche" educational programs: dual language, montessori/experiential learning, etc.---into serving 45% of the kids currently using public education in the District. So now that charters are essentially a parallel school system, the first sentence---creating unreasonable expectations for charters as a result of underfunding---has become the reality.
What I would like to see is a charter that is expressly special-ed---like a charter version of LAB. And with an admissions system that either lets you lottery for it with an existing IEP, OR allows a charter to charter transfer for kids who are identified as needing greater services than the charter can provide. That would seem to be much more practical than the current world---which expects all schools to be all things for SPED kids. I have a SPED kid. We would never have lotteried DC into a program like BASIS and then demanded that BASIS accommodate DC. That would have unreasonable for both the schools and DC.

THIS. In the last 20 years, DCPS could have competed with charter "niche" educational programs by innovating, using the best school systems in other big cities as models. They could have ramped up their test-in HS magnet programs to offer BASIS level academics fed by test-in MS programs, like NYC, Chicago and Boston do. They could have introduced bona fide academic tracking across core subjects in most of their MS programs. They could even have created superior language immersion programs, with lotteries for native speakers across the board. DCPS didn't bother, hence almost half the public school students in the city are enrolled in charters, including the great majority of UMC families outside the Deal-Wilson catchment areas. Good for you, PP, for not demanding that a cash-strapped charter provides your student with state of the art SN programming.

when your ultimate argument is that it is unfair for parents to seek legally entitled education for their disabled kids, you lose all credibility as an analyst of the situation. what you REALLY think is that SN kids don’t deserve any resources or anything that takes away from your kid.

Again, if its so easy, simple, then why argue? I mean, its the law, isn't it. Should be a slam dunk to get whatever you think your kid is legally entitled to.

If I was in charge of Basis, sure. But all the Basis boosters here are saying they don’t think Basis should have to do it.

But why do you care? if you are 100% protected by simple legal rights, why do you argue with people?

I'm being pedantic, but trying to make the point that claiming "but the law" isn't enough, which is why you and other people are arguing. "The law" is always subject to interpretation, which is why, as so many SN parents here attest, it's damn hard to get the services their kids need. I suspect you are arguing with posters on this thread because at the end of the day it's not easy or simple. And not black and white. If you want advocates for SN services and support, perhaps a different approach is warranted.

What kind of "different approach" do you think is warranted, when there are Basis advocates on here saying "Basis should be exempt from the law becuase it is special"? Is your question about what else should be brought to bear to ensure that Basis complies with the law, for individual kids, and for DC kids overall? There's no black and white here - the claims that some Basis boosters are making that Basis should just ... not follow the law. If what you're saying is that nothing can guarantee a specific outcome for an individual child, sure. But that's different from getting the services they are legally entitled to.

I don't see one post where anyone claims Basis shouldn't "follow the law" nor do I see any evidence that Basis is not, in fact doing so. Again, enrollment, not actual violations are at issue.

But your sentence bolded above hits right on the issue- exactly. Basis is challenging and demands A LOT. And most- more than half- of kids leave by high school. This is for all sorts of reasons, but workload is a part of it. I think there is a concern that advocates are saying "you must change the structure so that kids with SN can't fail," or "You can't have standards so high that SN kids can't meet them." Perhaps its because we are ignorant about what supports really consititue for kids or perhaps its because we know that lots of NT kids struggle at Basis too. I don't know.

ok you don’t know so MYOB. IDEA compliance is required for all. I don’t have to show you my kid’s IEP. Maybe do some self-reflection about your personal values if you’re so panicked that Basis might have to add 2-3 more special ed staff and some kids may get additional time on tests. SN are not contagious.

Maybe do some self-reflection yourself.

You really think there is a magic solution here?

Read this thread about SPED teachers lying to parents and quitting for better employment elsewhere (even though DCPS teachers are some of the highest paid in the country):

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/45/1015378.page

Here is one sample:

“Also, as an extra burden I taught sped. And the gulf between what we promised parents and what we actually had the supplies and resources to provide is huge. So I felt like I was daily left with 2 choices. 1. Lie to parents about what was happening 2. Work non stop to make myself not feel like a liar- even though my efforts never covered the Gap.”

You really think that some DCPS school with 50% illiteracy that checks all the boxes for SPED is doing its job? It isn’t.

After perusing a few pages of this thread, I find myself a lot less sympathetic to arguments about SPED. You strike me as both dogmatic and naïve. All you are doing is hurting your cause.

and that matters … why? it’s a legal requirement. and the fact that you think some complete non sequitur anecdote is relevant just cements the fact that you have no clue what you’re talking about. luckily my child’s right to access the school is based on the law, not on whether some ignorant dude finds me “dogmatic” on the internet. lol.

I agree with the above poster. Your attitude and self righteousness is off putting. You are a very poor example of the SN community. I suggest you step back and do some self reflection off your high horse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The crux of the problem is that the ed powers in this city want to have it both ways: they want to continue to underfund charters relative to DCPS programs on a per capita basis while requiring the latter to provide DCPS-level support for SN students and English Language Learners. They don't want students with disabilities and poor kids to be excluded from the best public schools, but refuse to provide the GT education that would help the brightest poor kids students enjoy strong representation in the public HS programs offering the most rigor. They want high-performing test-in magnets that compare to the top performers in other US cities, but won't support the requisite K-8 prep and ability grouping to create them. Something has to give, with the charter board, OSSE and the Mayor's office turning a blind eye because they boxed themselves into a corner long ago. At BASIS, conveniently, it's support for SN and ELL. As long as a couple students a year from BASIS continue to crack MIT and Yale, no politician is going to mess with BASIS DC. It's no secret that the franchise has found far more fertile ground to expand its public school empire in Texas and Louisiana than in DC. The Charter Board is toothless without political backing.

Excellent summation. To that I would add that the failure of DCPS to address the bolded sentence is WHY ---20 years into charter schools---charters went from the original intent of being "niche" educational programs: dual language, montessori/experiential learning, etc.---into serving 45% of the kids currently using public education in the District. So now that charters are essentially a parallel school system, the first sentence---creating unreasonable expectations for charters as a result of underfunding---has become the reality.
What I would like to see is a charter that is expressly special-ed---like a charter version of LAB. And with an admissions system that either lets you lottery for it with an existing IEP, OR allows a charter to charter transfer for kids who are identified as needing greater services than the charter can provide. That would seem to be much more practical than the current world---which expects all schools to be all things for SPED kids. I have a SPED kid. We would never have lotteried DC into a program like BASIS and then demanded that BASIS accommodate DC. That would have unreasonable for both the schools and DC.

THIS. In the last 20 years, DCPS could have competed with charter "niche" educational programs by innovating, using the best school systems in other big cities as models. They could have ramped up their test-in HS magnet programs to offer BASIS level academics fed by test-in MS programs, like NYC, Chicago and Boston do. They could have introduced bona fide academic tracking across core subjects in most of their MS programs. They could even have created superior language immersion programs, with lotteries for native speakers across the board. DCPS didn't bother, hence almost half the public school students in the city are enrolled in charters, including the great majority of UMC families outside the Deal-Wilson catchment areas. Good for you, PP, for not demanding that a cash-strapped charter provides your student with state of the art SN programming.

Except NYC is in the process of dismantling theirs.

Not really. NYC is changing the GT system for elementary schools, that's it. MS test-in programs like Hunter College will remain, as will the 9 super duper test-in HS magnets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
and that matters … why? it’s a legal requirement. and the fact that you think some complete non sequitur anecdote is relevant just cements the fact that you have no clue what you’re talking about. luckily my child’s right to access the school is based on the law, not on whether some ignorant dude finds me “dogmatic” on the internet. lol.

DP. If you SN child is bright, motivated, and would thrive in an academically rigorous environment, then nothing is impeding your child's access to the school. If your child isn't the above, then why are you fighting tooth and nail to ensure that every single school is a perfect fit for your child? My child has ADHD with significant issues with auditory processing. BASIS is a great fit for her. Immersion schools would be a terrible fit, since she lacks the auditory processing to parse a spoken foreign language very well. I'm not out there stomping my feet and complaining that all of the immersion programs are denying my child's right to access them, nor am I lobbying to shut down the programs. Instead, I recognize that immersion programs are a wonderful opportunity for many kids, even if they're a poor fit for my child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
and that matters … why? it’s a legal requirement. and the fact that you think some complete non sequitur anecdote is relevant just cements the fact that you have no clue what you’re talking about. luckily my child’s right to access the school is based on the law, not on whether some ignorant dude finds me “dogmatic” on the internet. lol.

DP. If you SN child is bright, motivated, and would thrive in an academically rigorous environment, then nothing is impeding your child's access to the school. If your child isn't the above, then why are you fighting tooth and nail to ensure that every single school is a perfect fit for your child? My child has ADHD with significant issues with auditory processing. BASIS is a great fit for her. Immersion schools would be a terrible fit, since she lacks the auditory processing to parse a spoken foreign language very well. I'm not out there stomping my feet and complaining that all of the immersion programs are denying my child's right to access them, nor am I lobbying to shut down the programs. Instead, I recognize that immersion programs are a wonderful opportunity for many kids, even if they're a poor fit for my child.

you have a very limited understanding of accomodations, as well as Basis’s financial obligation here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
and that matters … why? it’s a legal requirement. and the fact that you think some complete non sequitur anecdote is relevant just cements the fact that you have no clue what you’re talking about. luckily my child’s right to access the school is based on the law, not on whether some ignorant dude finds me “dogmatic” on the internet. lol.

DP. If you SN child is bright, motivated, and would thrive in an academically rigorous environment, then nothing is impeding your child's access to the school. If your child isn't the above, then why are you fighting tooth and nail to ensure that every single school is a perfect fit for your child? My child has ADHD with significant issues with auditory processing. BASIS is a great fit for her. Immersion schools would be a terrible fit, since she lacks the auditory processing to parse a spoken foreign language very well. I'm not out there stomping my feet and complaining that all of the immersion programs are denying my child's right to access them, nor am I lobbying to shut down the programs. Instead, I recognize that immersion programs are a wonderful opportunity for many kids, even if they're a poor fit for my child.

you have a very limited understanding of accomodations, as well as Basis’s financial obligation here.

But a good understanding of the PPP's tantrum-based responses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
and that matters … why? it’s a legal requirement. and the fact that you think some complete non sequitur anecdote is relevant just cements the fact that you have no clue what you’re talking about. luckily my child’s right to access the school is based on the law, not on whether some ignorant dude finds me “dogmatic” on the internet. lol.

DP. If you SN child is bright, motivated, and would thrive in an academically rigorous environment, then nothing is impeding your child's access to the school. If your child isn't the above, then why are you fighting tooth and nail to ensure that every single school is a perfect fit for your child? My child has ADHD with significant issues with auditory processing. BASIS is a great fit for her. Immersion schools would be a terrible fit, since she lacks the auditory processing to parse a spoken foreign language very well. I'm not out there stomping my feet and complaining that all of the immersion programs are denying my child's right to access them, nor am I lobbying to shut down the programs. Instead, I recognize that immersion programs are a wonderful opportunity for many kids, even if they're a poor fit for my child.

you have a very limited understanding of accomodations, as well as Basis’s financial obligation here.

But a good understanding of the PPP's tantrum-based responses.

It’s interesting that you think I’d be deterred from protecting my kid’s rights by calling it a “tantrum.” As if I’m not already very well versed in how standing up for my child risks being tagged as the “crazy mom.” It’s a tale as old as time and I really don’t care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
and that matters … why? it’s a legal requirement. and the fact that you think some complete non sequitur anecdote is relevant just cements the fact that you have no clue what you’re talking about. luckily my child’s right to access the school is based on the law, not on whether some ignorant dude finds me “dogmatic” on the internet. lol.

DP. If you SN child is bright, motivated, and would thrive in an academically rigorous environment, then nothing is impeding your child's access to the school. If your child isn't the above, then why are you fighting tooth and nail to ensure that every single school is a perfect fit for your child? My child has ADHD with significant issues with auditory processing. BASIS is a great fit for her. Immersion schools would be a terrible fit, since she lacks the auditory processing to parse a spoken foreign language very well. I'm not out there stomping my feet and complaining that all of the immersion programs are denying my child's right to access them, nor am I lobbying to shut down the programs. Instead, I recognize that immersion programs are a wonderful opportunity for many kids, even if they're a poor fit for my child.

you have a very limited understanding of accomodations, as well as Basis’s financial obligation here.

The financial obligation -- especially to pay for the kid to go elsewhere -- is actually something I am sympathetic to charter schools regarding. DCPS doesn't require the individual school to pay and can basically increase their budget as needed, so the burden isn't on the individual school in the same way. My kid is at a DCPS by the way, so no skin in this game for me, but I actually do think it's not really a fair apples-to-apples comparison here.

In terms of the accommodations, can I get a sense of what Basis should be providing that it isn't? And that would actually make Basis -- rather than getting a kid placed elsewhere -- a success for you kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
In terms of the accommodations, can I get a sense of what Basis should be providing that it isn't? And that would actually make Basis -- rather than getting a kid placed elsewhere -- a success for you kid?

She's not going to answer that. She's just going to continue insisting that BASIS is violating her child's rights without explaining exactly what accommodations her child needs that wouldn't be available at BASIS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
and that matters … why? it’s a legal requirement. and the fact that you think some complete non sequitur anecdote is relevant just cements the fact that you have no clue what you’re talking about. luckily my child’s right to access the school is based on the law, not on whether some ignorant dude finds me “dogmatic” on the internet. lol.

DP. If you SN child is bright, motivated, and would thrive in an academically rigorous environment, then nothing is impeding your child's access to the school. If your child isn't the above, then why are you fighting tooth and nail to ensure that every single school is a perfect fit for your child? My child has ADHD with significant issues with auditory processing. BASIS is a great fit for her. Immersion schools would be a terrible fit, since she lacks the auditory processing to parse a spoken foreign language very well. I'm not out there stomping my feet and complaining that all of the immersion programs are denying my child's right to access them, nor am I lobbying to shut down the programs. Instead, I recognize that immersion programs are a wonderful opportunity for many kids, even if they're a poor fit for my child.

you have a very limited understanding of accomodations, as well as Basis’s financial obligation here.

The financial obligation -- especially to pay for the kid to go elsewhere -- is actually something I am sympathetic to charter schools regarding. DCPS doesn't require the individual school to pay and can basically increase their budget as needed, so the burden isn't on the individual school in the same way. My kid is at a DCPS by the way, so no skin in this game for me, but I actually do think it's not really a fair apples-to-apples comparison here.

In terms of the accommodations, can I get a sense of what Basis should be providing that it isn't? And that would actually make Basis -- rather than getting a kid placed elsewhere -- a success for you kid?

OSSE pays for private placements for charters and DCPS I believe. Basis is cheaping out on services.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
In terms of the accommodations, can I get a sense of what Basis should be providing that it isn't? And that would actually make Basis -- rather than getting a kid placed elsewhere -- a success for you kid?

She's not going to answer that. She's just going to continue insisting that BASIS is violating her child's rights without explaining exactly what accommodations her child needs that wouldn't be available at BASIS.

Obviously I’m not going to post my child’s IEP. And all you’d do anyway is make some argument that my kid doesn’t fit Basis’s “niche.” If you are genuinely interested in the menu of special needs accomodations you can do what SN parents do and checkout Wrightslaw and many other online sources. We paid $1000s to a consult as well. And of course an IEP is individual so my kid’s IEP tells you little about what other kids need. Mine doesn’t need extended time for tests or speech therapy; othet kids might.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
In terms of the accommodations, can I get a sense of what Basis should be providing that it isn't? And that would actually make Basis -- rather than getting a kid placed elsewhere -- a success for you kid?

She's not going to answer that. She's just going to continue insisting that BASIS is violating her child's rights without explaining exactly what accommodations her child needs that wouldn't be available at BASIS.

Obviously I’m not going to post my child’s IEP. And all you’d do anyway is make some argument that my kid doesn’t fit Basis’s “niche.” If you are genuinely interested in the menu of special needs accomodations you can do what SN parents do and checkout Wrightslaw and many other online sources. We paid $1000s to a consult as well. And of course an IEP is individual so my kid’s IEP tells you little about what other kids need. Mine doesn’t need extended time for tests or speech therapy; othet kids might.

Translation: no. I prefer to keep my demands opaque, unfouded, shrill, and broad.