And yet the Council just reformed virtual the other week. With no power. |
There are no checks on the mayor WRT schools. DCPS often refused to comply with Ed COmmittee requests (when there was an Ed committee) for even basic stats or information.
Mayoral elections every 4 years are not a particularly efficient way to effect change policy at DCPS. |
They added a hundred kids because they could do that without it costing any $. Anything real would have required a full legislative process and would not have been possible this year. So no, that was a tweak but not a reform. |
Well it also requires something like 1,200 kids in charters to go virtual (unfunded, of course). |
This is a reason I don't think we should remove mayoral control. The Council, 6 weeks after school started, required new virtual options to be stood up at every charter LEA, while not providing funding for any of it. That is a terrible way to run schools and promote in-person learning (which the Council still expresses is "the best option). You can disagree or agree with whether the Council made the right action, but the disruption of this type of governance suggests it ain't good to allow more of it. |
First of all - it's "RATIONALE" not "rational" secondly -- Mayoral control has been an unmitigated failure. Public schools have become politically driven rather than focused on better student outcomes across the board. Thanks for the heads up so I can testify to end Mayoral control. |
I mean, the research cited above shows that isn't true. |
And an elected school board with five different elections every 4 years is more efficient? |
You'll need to go into a bit more detail about A) what exactly you mean by "politically driven" and B) why ending mayoral control -- and handing over control to an elected school board -- would make it less politically driven? Or do you just mean something like making the Chancellor only dismissable for cause? |
+1 |
[citation needed] |
I don't "need" to do anything ![]() Educators should drive decision making on policy. Educators should run schools and school boards are far more accountable to citizens than a mayoral appointees. Political appointees cut out meaningful and necessary voices in the process with little real accountability to school communities. I guess there's accountability if you game the boundary system for your own kid, but there's no accountability for failing to deliver better outcomes for students, however desperate the effort to quantify any measurable "success" through questionable metrics (spoiler alert -- rich kids test better than poor kids). |
DP here. I think it would be a game changer if the chancellor wasn't personally loyal to the next step up. You see zero space between the chancellor and the mayor even when they mayor is full of it (please ask me for examples). Being voted in by a board would give them space to speak up when there's funny business going on. |
SAVE MAYORAL CONTROL is basically Vote Ferebee. I thought that was what we were against? |
no no nonono no no no. educators are not experts in education policy. sorry, no. i say this as a person who is a former teacher with a degree in education who now works with experts in ed policy and ed research. |