New Charter Schools Approved

[Anonymous]

OK, so PCSB is saying that we need to open more high-demand charters and that's most important....but they're the ones who approved all of the anemic PCS middle and high schools too. Not that DCPS doesn't have attendance problems, but . . . which argument is PCSB choosing here? More schools, or more high-demand schools, or just "we do whatever we want and stop with the questions!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK, so PCSB is saying that we need to open more high-demand charters and that's most important....but they're the ones who approved all of the anemic PCS middle and high schools too. Not that DCPS doesn't have attendance problems, but . . . which argument is PCSB choosing here? More schools, or more high-demand schools, or just "we do whatever we want and stop with the questions!"

They approved 5 of 11 proposals. They believe the ones they are approving will, in fact, provide more high-quality seats. You can't say they are anemic in advance of them opening. If by anemic you mean small, the highest demand/performing charter middle and high schools are all small.

Not ever high-demand school wants to expand, and they can be urged to, but not forced to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, so PCSB is saying that we need to open more high-demand charters and that's most important....but they're the ones who approved all of the anemic PCS middle and high schools too. Not that DCPS doesn't have attendance problems, but . . . which argument is PCSB choosing here? More schools, or more high-demand schools, or just "we do whatever we want and stop with the questions!"

They approved 5 of 11 proposals. They believe the ones they are approving will, in fact, provide more high-quality seats. You can't say they are anemic in advance of them opening. If by anemic you mean small, the highest demand/performing charter middle and high schools are all small.

Not ever high-demand school wants to expand, and they can be urged to, but not forced to.

Anemic because the application was unimpressive. For example, like the board was, I am very not persuaded that Girls Global can attract its target numbers in the area it wants to locate in. And that calls into question the financial plan.

The DCPCSB is basically making appropriations and public finance decisions outside the budget process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, so PCSB is saying that we need to open more high-demand charters and that's most important....but they're the ones who approved all of the anemic PCS middle and high schools too. Not that DCPS doesn't have attendance problems, but . . . which argument is PCSB choosing here? More schools, or more high-demand schools, or just "we do whatever we want and stop with the questions!"

They approved 5 of 11 proposals. They believe the ones they are approving will, in fact, provide more high-quality seats. You can't say they are anemic in advance of them opening. If by anemic you mean small, the highest demand/performing charter middle and high schools are all small.

Not ever high-demand school wants to expand, and they can be urged to, but not forced to.

Anemic because the application was unimpressive. For example, like the board was, I am very not persuaded that Girls Global can attract its target numbers in the area it wants to locate in. And that calls into question the financial plan.

The DCPCSB is basically making appropriations and public finance decisions outside the budget process.

That's how the law was set up. They aren't doing anything they aren't empowered to do. If you don't like the law, work to change it.

[Anonymous]

and meanwhile be chill about PCSB walking around lighting little fires everywhere and saying oops, that's how it's designed, can't help it myeehhhh? No, thanks. I'll complain and work to change things when and where I can, not be hustled to take my complaints elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:and meanwhile be chill about PCSB walking around lighting little fires everywhere and saying oops, that's how it's designed, can't help it myeehhhh? No, thanks. I'll complain and work to change things when and where I can, not be hustled to take my complaints elsewhere.

Exactly. Oh look at us, we care soooo much about children that we are forced to open school after school with zero regard for the functioning of the system as a whole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:and meanwhile be chill about PCSB walking around lighting little fires everywhere and saying oops, that's how it's designed, can't help it myeehhhh? No, thanks. I'll complain and work to change things when and where I can, not be hustled to take my complaints elsewhere.

Exactly. Oh look at us, we care soooo much about children that we are forced to open school after school with zero regard for the functioning of the system as a whole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:and meanwhile be chill about PCSB walking around lighting little fires everywhere and saying oops, that's how it's designed, can't help it myeehhhh? No, thanks. I'll complain and work to change things when and where I can, not be hustled to take my complaints elsewhere.

Exactly. Oh look at us, we care soooo much about children that we are forced to open school after school with zero regard for the functioning of the system as a whole.

They close them too. No one seems to have a problem with that.

I have no IB MS at all (EC) and the HS is awful. I’m grateful to have my kids in a high performing charter for those grades. Why should other families be denied those same options, especially families who can’t easily relocate out of the city and who can’t afford a private school. We have waited long enough and MS and HS are too serious to mess around with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:and meanwhile be chill about PCSB walking around lighting little fires everywhere and saying oops, that's how it's designed, can't help it myeehhhh? No, thanks. I'll complain and work to change things when and where I can, not be hustled to take my complaints elsewhere.

Exactly. Oh look at us, we care soooo much about children that we are forced to open school after school with zero regard for the functioning of the system as a whole.

They close them too. No one seems to have a problem with that.

I have no IB MS at all (EC) and the HS is awful. I’m grateful to have my kids in a high performing charter for those grades. Why should other families be denied those same options, especially families who can’t easily relocate out of the city and who can’t afford a private school. We have waited long enough and MS and HS are too serious to mess around with.

Well, the schools that they close are pretty awful and they give them a huge amount of time to flounder and fail before closing. So it is okay, but it doesn't benefit the kids to shuffle from school to school, and their performance does not alway improve at a new school. Rather than churning through openings and closings it would be better to focus on improving the existing charters. That would create more high performing schools without the churn and this round of applications is pretty underwhelming.

A lot of what makes a school "high performing" is having students enter at a good academic level and have a supportive home environment. Spreading those kids across too many different schools means that each one has not enough for a big cohort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:and meanwhile be chill about PCSB walking around lighting little fires everywhere and saying oops, that's how it's designed, can't help it myeehhhh? No, thanks. I'll complain and work to change things when and where I can, not be hustled to take my complaints elsewhere.

Exactly. Oh look at us, we care soooo much about children that we are forced to open school after school with zero regard for the functioning of the system as a whole.

They close them too. No one seems to have a problem with that.

I have no IB MS at all (EC) and the HS is awful. I’m grateful to have my kids in a high performing charter for those grades. Why should other families be denied those same options, especially families who can’t easily relocate out of the city and who can’t afford a private school. We have waited long enough and MS and HS are too serious to mess around with.

Well, the schools that they close are pretty awful and they give them a huge amount of time to flounder and fail before closing. So it is okay, but it doesn't benefit the kids to shuffle from school to school, and their performance does not alway improve at a new school. Rather than churning through openings and closings it would be better to focus on improving the existing charters. That would create more high performing schools without the churn and this round of applications is pretty underwhelming.

A lot of what makes a school "high performing" is having students enter at a good academic level and have a supportive home environment. Spreading those kids across too many different schools means that each one has not enough for a big cohort.

In the meantime the Chater school board has a job, kudos, kickbacks, business deals etc, never mind the kids. This constant opening and closing and floundering only happens to poor kids they are worse off than if they went to their neighborhood school and those resources help support the school. But no never mind, just keep opening and closing schools based on goodness only know what basis.

[Anonymous]

Congratulations City Bridge

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:and meanwhile be chill about PCSB walking around lighting little fires everywhere and saying oops, that's how it's designed, can't help it myeehhhh? No, thanks. I'll complain and work to change things when and where I can, not be hustled to take my complaints elsewhere.

Exactly. Oh look at us, we care soooo much about children that we are forced to open school after school with zero regard for the functioning of the system as a whole.

They close them too. No one seems to have a problem with that.

I have no IB MS at all (EC) and the HS is awful. I’m grateful to have my kids in a high performing charter for those grades. Why should other families be denied those same options, especially families who can’t easily relocate out of the city and who can’t afford a private school. We have waited long enough and MS and HS are too serious to mess around with.

Well, the schools that they close are pretty awful and they give them a huge amount of time to flounder and fail before closing. So it is okay, but it doesn't benefit the kids to shuffle from school to school, and their performance does not alway improve at a new school. Rather than churning through openings and closings it would be better to focus on improving the existing charters. That would create more high performing schools without the churn and this round of applications is pretty underwhelming.

A lot of what makes a school "high performing" is having students enter at a good academic level and have a supportive home environment. Spreading those kids across too many different schools means that each one has not enough for a big cohort.

In the meantime the Chater school board has a job, kudos, kickbacks, business deals etc, never mind the kids. This constant opening and closing and floundering only happens to poor kids they are worse off than if they went to their neighborhood school and those resources help support the school. But no never mind, just keep opening and closing schools based on goodness only know what basis.

Just make neighborhood schools work for families already. Do what it takes, DCPS.