Interim OSSE Report on Student Absenteeism

[Anonymous]

If you miss 1st period at Wilson you are marked absent for the day.

Makes no sense to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does it take in DCPS to actually be fired? Not reassigned or brought back to central office and drawing a salary?

You don't understand. These issues are happening systemically. Principals are following orders FROM central office to get graduation rates up. Firing principals and/or teachers does not solve this problem.

I suspect it's a little more subtle than that. Principals are told to get their graduation rates. When they ask how they can do that if kids aren't coming to school, they're told to "be creative." Or, "go talk to the principal at Ballou, she's got some great innovations."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Report is pretty shocking. This is why graduation rates have gone up - because they will graduate just about anyone not because DCPS is doing anything better. If I was a Ballou parent, I would be outraged at the shenanigans at the school. Principal needs to be fired now but I feel bad as I’m sure there are people involved above her who will escape unscathed.

If a kid is missing that many days, then its clear the parents are all that interested or on top of their kids academic career. I think the parents expect the kids to do all the parenting. THis is the problem.

Some of these students don't have parents.

And for those students and other at-risk students the system should provide the needed wrap-around services, the exceptions to policy, etc.. There were 214 homeless seniors last year compared to the 3800 who were not homeless. So let's not try and negate the argument for more parent engagement by throwing around orphan and/or homeless status. That sort of argument is intended to shame people into not actually addressing a very real problem...the problem of checked out, bad parenting.

40% of all DCPS students are at risk. The percentage is even higher in the high schools.

DCPS had 2307 graduates last year. We should assume that at least 900 of those students were at risk.

Where can I find DCPS' or OSSE's definition of "at-risk status"? I saw this line in today's report: "For homeless students, a component of at-risk status, the corresponding share is 34.1% (Figure 18)" and thought it was saying that being homeless is a necessary component of being categorized as "at-risk." Therefore, I thought when the report reported 214 homeless seniors last year that would equate with the at-risk category. I'm guessing based on PP's response that it incorrect. So where is "at-risk" defined? And what are all the various "components"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Report is pretty shocking. This is why graduation rates have gone up - because they will graduate just about anyone not because DCPS is doing anything better. If I was a Ballou parent, I would be outraged at the shenanigans at the school. Principal needs to be fired now but I feel bad as I’m sure there are people involved above her who will escape unscathed.

If a kid is missing that many days, then its clear the parents are all that interested or on top of their kids academic career. I think the parents expect the kids to do all the parenting. THis is the problem.

Some of these students don't have parents.

And for those students and other at-risk students the system should provide the needed wrap-around services, the exceptions to policy, etc.. There were 214 homeless seniors last year compared to the 3800 who were not homeless. So let's not try and negate the argument for more parent engagement by throwing around orphan and/or homeless status. That sort of argument is intended to shame people into not actually addressing a very real problem...the problem of checked out, bad parenting.

40% of all DCPS students are at risk. The percentage is even higher in the high schools.

DCPS had 2307 graduates last year. We should assume that at least 900 of those students were at risk.

Where can I find DCPS' or OSSE's definition of "at-risk status"? I saw this line in today's report: "For homeless students, a component of at-risk status, the corresponding share is 34.1% (Figure 18)" and thought it was saying that being homeless is a necessary component of being categorized as "at-risk." Therefore, I thought when the report reported 214 homeless seniors last year that would equate with the at-risk category. I'm guessing based on PP's response that it incorrect. So where is "at-risk" defined? And what are all the various "components"?

At risk is defined in the DCPS budget process. From the 2016 budget guidance:

"The new category defined at-risk in a specific way. It includes students who are homeless, in the foster care system, receive the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),
and over-age high school students."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Report is pretty shocking. This is why graduation rates have gone up - because they will graduate just about anyone not because DCPS is doing anything better. If I was a Ballou parent, I would be outraged at the shenanigans at the school. Principal needs to be fired now but I feel bad as I’m sure there are people involved above her who will escape unscathed.

If a kid is missing that many days, then its clear the parents are all that interested or on top of their kids academic career. I think the parents expect the kids to do all the parenting. THis is the problem.

Some of these students don't have parents.

And for those students and other at-risk students the system should provide the needed wrap-around services, the exceptions to policy, etc.. There were 214 homeless seniors last year compared to the 3800 who were not homeless. So let's not try and negate the argument for more parent engagement by throwing around orphan and/or homeless status. That sort of argument is intended to shame people into not actually addressing a very real problem...the problem of checked out, bad parenting.

40% of all DCPS students are at risk. The percentage is even higher in the high schools.

DCPS had 2307 graduates last year. We should assume that at least 900 of those students were at risk.

Where can I find DCPS' or OSSE's definition of "at-risk status"? I saw this line in today's report: "For homeless students, a component of at-risk status, the corresponding share is 34.1% (Figure 18)" and thought it was saying that being homeless is a necessary component of being categorized as "at-risk." Therefore, I thought when the report reported 214 homeless seniors last year that would equate with the at-risk category. I'm guessing based on PP's response that it incorrect. So where is "at-risk" defined? And what are all the various "components"?

At risk is defined in the DCPS budget process. From the 2016 budget guidance:

"The new category defined at-risk in a specific way. It includes students who are homeless, in the foster care system, receive the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),
and over-age high school students."

Thanks, PP. I wonder if an over-age high school student means any student registered for adult education sponsored through DCPS or charters. It would be useful for this discussion to understand how many students fall into each of those categories, how many students check multiple boxes, etc.

[Anonymous]

Adding -- DCPS provides schools with an additional $2,000 for every at-risk student from the city budget -- separate from federal Title 1 funds.

This article from 2015 shows how many at-risk students were enrolled at each school.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2015/02/06/at-risk-funding-in-the-district-school-by-school/?utm_term=.9376a823ada0

[Anonymous]

People keep missing the point in all of this

Too many people are graduating who don't have the knowledge to graduate period. Absenteeisim is just a distraction. These "graduates" can't make their way out of a paper bag in many cases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People keep missing the point in all of this

Too many people are graduating who don't have the knowledge to graduate period. Absenteeisim is just a distraction. These "graduates" can't make their way out of a paper bag in many cases.

Right, but that's not what the news report was about. So that's not what this interim report is about.

But if they don't show up, there's no way they are going to learn. Showing up is a necessary step 1.

[Anonymous]

Someone needs to be fired over this. Whether it is the Ballou Principal or someone over her. You need to start with accountability. I forget names but last summer there were a couple of Deputy Chiefs and Chiefs who were all over the Kojo show, Twitter and even the Washington Post crowing about the superb accomplishment of Ballou students with their 100% college acceptance and that Reeves was a star principal. They seem to be lying low but they sounded pretty dumb even back then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does it take in DCPS to actually be fired? Not reassigned or brought back to central office and drawing a salary?

You realize the principal at Ballou was a carry over from Oakland by the Chancellor. Firing her would show poor judgment by the Chancellor for bringing her on.

Cronyism is alive and well.

She started at Ballou as Principal in 2014.

[Anonymous]

The basic thing is . . . if most students are not in school 50% of the time . . . what could they possibly be learning that well?

Not awesome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:C’mon- my kids miss 5-6 days max especially HS kid. 18 days is a lot. Also look at PARCC correlation. If your kid is missing 18 days and getting 4s and 5s on the PARCC, I guess they are fine. This is not the case for majority of students though.

This is unexcused absences, plus a child only needs to step their foot in the door and they are considered present in class! So many excuses, and we blame the teachers and the kids!

[Anonymous]

I haven't gotten past the first page of elitest attitudes that the school year is so long. I wonder why you all are okay with just being okay. Because compared to other countries we are behind.

But enjoy your ski trip!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does it take in DCPS to actually be fired? Not reassigned or brought back to central office and drawing a salary?

You don't understand. These issues are happening systemically. Principals are following orders FROM central office to get graduation rates up. Firing principals and/or teachers does not solve this problem.

+1000 the teachers were the ones who blew the whistle, and presented emails and had filed grievance procedures so the directives came from above and Antwan was informed about this last year. Only reacting now to save face due to NPR. Then in the WP he blamed the teachers. On the other boards we have a reporter investigating CHEC, no mention today about that! It's all a farce, students are not learning overall as is evidenced by the lousy PARCC scores. You can spin it how you want elsewhere about DCPS rising, but those in the know, no it is all fake!

[Anonymous]

If you're kids are so smart they don't need to be in school and need to have their own attendance police, please feel free to homeschool.