Catania's Statement on Boundary/Feeder Changes

[Anonymous]

I'm really no fan of Bowser and can't think of anything she can do at this point to sway my vote her way.

So I really, really want a reason to vote for Catania but this statement isn't doing it, either. The boundary/assignment changes could not possibly please everyone but it can be refined and amended. All can agree that school quality needs to be addressed, but that can't happen in a year so what's the point of delay - especially when there are grandfather clauses for those who want status quo?

For all the talk of Catania's intelligence and thorough understanding of the state of DCPS, he's been pretty whisper quiet on what he thinks needs to be done to raise school quality. What's his vision? More funding? Innovative programming? Just . . . "make the schools better"???

It doesn't take a lot to criticize what we've got. It seems to me that Catania is just more vociferous than most, but it doesn't mean he's got a plan for making it better. If he wants to be a drag on the painful boundary review process we just went through without at least talking about what direction he wants to go in, I have to keep giving him the side eye.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, based on this statement, I'm definitely voting for Bowser.

Can you tell us specifically why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People, please. Saying he "can't support a plan that moves students into a lower-performing school" is a safe statement for him since his support of the plan is now unnecessary. A statement that might have committed him to something would have been "I will undo any plan that moves students into lower performing schools."

He has said that..maybe not those exact words but I heard him speak in the Spring at my neighborhood school and that is what he said. He told us that there is a way to undo it legislatively and he would do just that if kids are moved to lower performing schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm really no fan of Bowser and can't think of anything she can do at this point to sway my vote her way.

So I really, really want a reason to vote for Catania but this statement isn't doing it, either. The boundary/assignment changes could not possibly please everyone but it can be refined and amended. All can agree that school quality needs to be addressed, but that can't happen in a year so what's the point of delay - especially when there are grandfather clauses for those who want status quo?

For all the talk of Catania's intelligence and thorough understanding of the state of DCPS, he's been pretty whisper quiet on what he thinks needs to be done to raise school quality. What's his vision? More funding? Innovative programming? Just . . . "make the schools better"???

It doesn't take a lot to criticize what we've got. It seems to me that Catania is just more vociferous than most, but it doesn't mean he's got a plan for making it better. If he wants to be a drag on the painful boundary review process we just went through without at least talking about what direction he wants to go in, I have to keep giving him the side eye.

This. This. This. And, if Catania really cared about eduction, why isn't he busting his butt promising to make these new schools top-notch. Putting in a budget, securing the best teachers from a nationwide search, finding leaders to run it, etc. If he was dynamite, he could say let's make this happen and inspire confidence. Like pp said, Gray handed him the perfect set-up, and he's not taking it.

[Anonymous]

So here's the thing that's killing me. The boundary redraw had nothing to do with improving school quality and everything to do with right-sizing schools. PERIOD.

Why does it take a boundary redraw for anyone to pay attention to school quality? These issues existed well-before the DME proposal. Where was Catania then?

I'll be curious to see if the proposal will be halted for a year. The whole thing is stupid and backwards - typical DC I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm really no fan of Bowser and can't think of anything she can do at this point to sway my vote her way.

So I really, really want a reason to vote for Catania but this statement isn't doing it, either. The boundary/assignment changes could not possibly please everyone but it can be refined and amended. All can agree that school quality needs to be addressed, but that can't happen in a year so what's the point of delay - especially when there are grandfather clauses for those who want status quo?

For all the talk of Catania's intelligence and thorough understanding of the state of DCPS, he's been pretty whisper quiet on what he thinks needs to be done to raise school quality. What's his vision? More funding? Innovative programming? Just . . . "make the schools better"???

It doesn't take a lot to criticize what we've got. It seems to me that Catania is just more vociferous than most, but it doesn't mean he's got a plan for making it better. If he wants to be a drag on the painful boundary review process we just went through without at least talking about what direction he wants to go in, I have to keep giving him the side eye.

+1

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really no fan of Bowser and can't think of anything she can do at this point to sway my vote her way.

So I really, really want a reason to vote for Catania but this statement isn't doing it, either. The boundary/assignment changes could not possibly please everyone but it can be refined and amended. All can agree that school quality needs to be addressed, but that can't happen in a year so what's the point of delay - especially when there are grandfather clauses for those who want status quo?

For all the talk of Catania's intelligence and thorough understanding of the state of DCPS, he's been pretty whisper quiet on what he thinks needs to be done to raise school quality. What's his vision? More funding? Innovative programming? Just . . . "make the schools better"???

It doesn't take a lot to criticize what we've got. It seems to me that Catania is just more vociferous than most, but it doesn't mean he's got a plan for making it better. If he wants to be a drag on the painful boundary review process we just went through without at least talking about what direction he wants to go in, I have to keep giving him the side eye.

This. This. This. And, if Catania really cared about eduction, why isn't he busting his butt promising to make these new schools top-notch. Putting in a budget, securing the best teachers from a nationwide search, finding leaders to run it, etc. If he was dynamite, he could say let's make this happen and inspire confidence. Like pp said, Gray handed him the perfect set-up, and he's not taking it.

Catania can't do that now. He is not yet the mayor. But, that's exactly what he wants to do. The DME released a plan calling for a bunch of things -- new schools for one -- that require budget support and all levels of planning. The recommendations don't include any of that. Catania's entire statement is essentially saying that while the recommendations have a lot of good ideas, they are simply ideas. Before parents are discouraged by half-baked ideas, develop them into concrete projects that can be implemented.

I'm seeing in some of the discussions in other threads that there is considerable confusion and/or lack of understanding of the final recommendations. I think it is highly likely that many current supporters are going to give many of the recommendations a second though when they understand them better. It is much better to slow down and make sure we are getting the deal that we want rather than rushing and ending up with buyer's remorse.

[Anonymous]

To the extent that the extra year is to put some more thought into the two? new middle schools, 10% set asides, guaranteed pk3 for title 1, I'm all for it. My biggest hang up with Catania's plan is the focus on no children being redistricted to a worse performing school. School quality is a problem that's much bigger than Hardy not being as "good" as Deal or Eastern not being as good as Wilson. Children who were in bounds for low performing schools who are now in bounds for low performing schools get no promises of quality improvement. The goal is to make Hardy as good as Deal, but if you were in bounds for Eliot Hine and still in bounds for Eliot Hine, you'll just have to wait.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:To the extent that the extra year is to put some more thought into the two? new middle schools, 10% set asides, guaranteed pk3 for title 1, I'm all for it. My biggest hang up with Catania's plan is the focus on no children being redistricted to a worse performing school. School quality is a problem that's much bigger than Hardy not being as "good" as Deal or Eastern not being as good as Wilson. Children who were in bounds for low performing schools who are now in bounds for low performing schools get no promises of quality improvement. The goal is to make Hardy as good as Deal, but if you were in bounds for Eliot Hine and still in bounds for Eliot Hine, you'll just have to wait.

Why would you have to wait? If I was one of those assigned to Eliot-Hine, I would argue that my needs deserved priority over four new middle schools. That's the sort of issue more consideration of this plan might address.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm really no fan of Bowser and can't think of anything she can do at this point to sway my vote her way.

So I really, really want a reason to vote for Catania but this statement isn't doing it, either. The boundary/assignment changes could not possibly please everyone but it can be refined and amended. All can agree that school quality needs to be addressed, but that can't happen in a year so what's the point of delay - especially when there are grandfather clauses for those who want status quo?

For all the talk of Catania's intelligence and thorough understanding of the state of DCPS, he's been pretty whisper quiet on what he thinks needs to be done to raise school quality. What's his vision? More funding? Innovative programming? Just . . . "make the schools better"???

It doesn't take a lot to criticize what we've got. It seems to me that Catania is just more vociferous than most, but it doesn't mean he's got a plan for making it better. If he wants to be a drag on the painful boundary review process we just went through without at least talking about what direction he wants to go in, I have to keep giving him the side eye.

You summed up my position to a 'T'. At this point, I'd prefer Gray over either one of them. What's a little election fraud between friends?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really no fan of Bowser and can't think of anything she can do at this point to sway my vote her way.

So I really, really want a reason to vote for Catania but this statement isn't doing it, either. The boundary/assignment changes could not possibly please everyone but it can be refined and amended. All can agree that school quality needs to be addressed, but that can't happen in a year so what's the point of delay - especially when there are grandfather clauses for those who want status quo?

For all the talk of Catania's intelligence and thorough understanding of the state of DCPS, he's been pretty whisper quiet on what he thinks needs to be done to raise school quality. What's his vision? More funding? Innovative programming? Just . . . "make the schools better"???

It doesn't take a lot to criticize what we've got. It seems to me that Catania is just more vociferous than most, but it doesn't mean he's got a plan for making it better. If he wants to be a drag on the painful boundary review process we just went through without at least talking about what direction he wants to go in, I have to keep giving him the side eye.

This. This. This. And, if Catania really cared about eduction, why isn't he busting his butt promising to make these new schools top-notch. Putting in a budget, securing the best teachers from a nationwide search, finding leaders to run it, etc. If he was dynamite, he could say let's make this happen and inspire confidence. Like pp said, Gray handed him the perfect set-up, and he's not taking it.

You understand that this is dcps, not a new charter school? He can't scour the nation for the best teachers. He must deal with a union. There are serious constraints at dcps that make change difficult. Just look at the rhee battles. If dcps were so agile and responsive to student needs, there wouldn't be so many charters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm really no fan of Bowser and can't think of anything she can do at this point to sway my vote her way.

So I really, really want a reason to vote for Catania but this statement isn't doing it, either. The boundary/assignment changes could not possibly please everyone but it can be refined and amended. All can agree that school quality needs to be addressed, but that can't happen in a year so what's the point of delay - especially when there are grandfather clauses for those who want status quo?

For all the talk of Catania's intelligence and thorough understanding of the state of DCPS, he's been pretty whisper quiet on what he thinks needs to be done to raise school quality. What's his vision? More funding? Innovative programming? Just . . . "make the schools better"???

It doesn't take a lot to criticize what we've got. It seems to me that Catania is just more vociferous than most, but it doesn't mean he's got a plan for making it better. If he wants to be a drag on the painful boundary review process we just went through without at least talking about what direction he wants to go in, I have to keep giving him the side eye.

better students, obviously -- this is what we've learned via school reform, NCLB and gentrification

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really no fan of Bowser and can't think of anything she can do at this point to sway my vote her way.

So I really, really want a reason to vote for Catania but this statement isn't doing it, either. The boundary/assignment changes could not possibly please everyone but it can be refined and amended. All can agree that school quality needs to be addressed, but that can't happen in a year so what's the point of delay - especially when there are grandfather clauses for those who want status quo?

For all the talk of Catania's intelligence and thorough understanding of the state of DCPS, he's been pretty whisper quiet on what he thinks needs to be done to raise school quality. What's his vision? More funding? Innovative programming? Just . . . "make the schools better"???

It doesn't take a lot to criticize what we've got. It seems to me that Catania is just more vociferous than most, but it doesn't mean he's got a plan for making it better. If he wants to be a drag on the painful boundary review process we just went through without at least talking about what direction he wants to go in, I have to keep giving him the side eye.

This. This. This. And, if Catania really cared about eduction, why isn't he busting his butt promising to make these new schools top-notch. Putting in a budget, securing the best teachers from a nationwide search, finding leaders to run it, etc. If he was dynamite, he could say let's make this happen and inspire confidence. Like pp said, Gray handed him the perfect set-up, and he's not taking it.

You understand that this is dcps, not a new charter school? He can't scour the nation for the best teachers. He must deal with a union. There are serious constraints at dcps that make change difficult. Just look at the rhee battles. If dcps were so agile and responsive to student needs, there wouldn't be so many charters.

Rhee weakened the union and fired and hired 100's of new teachers and raised their salaries -- still the scores did not go up -- for the poor kids, anyhow. It's obviously not bad teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So here's the thing that's killing me. The boundary redraw had nothing to do with improving school quality and everything to do with right-sizing schools. PERIOD.

Why does it take a boundary redraw for anyone to pay attention to school quality? These issues existed well-before the DME proposal. Where was Catania then?

I'll be curious to see if the proposal will be halted for a year. The whole thing is stupid and backwards - typical DC I guess.

Catania did take the time to visit just about every DC public and charter school from what I understand including our school. He also held community meetings in every section in town on education. I don't think Bowser did this at all. Catania has my vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So here's the thing that's killing me. The boundary redraw had nothing to do with improving school quality and everything to do with right-sizing schools. PERIOD.

Why does it take a boundary redraw for anyone to pay attention to school quality? These issues existed well-before the DME proposal. Where was Catania then?

I'll be curious to see if the proposal will be halted for a year. The whole thing is stupid and backwards - typical DC I guess.

Human nature? People with power and capital and who are at least somewhat content with their school options weren't exactly going to go to war to fight for the kids across town...that is, until the first proposal came out and "school quality" and "neighborhood schools" became a way to prevent those radical school assignment changes from coming into effect.