WaPo Editorial today on DCPS/charter collaboration

[Anonymous]

Anyone else find it worrying that charters can't get buildings? I am all for DCPS/charter collaboration but my sense is that some of the high-performing/HRCS are keeping young families in the city or in diverse neighborhoods (who'd otherwise be fleeing to Bethesda/Arlington or WOTP). And the best charters in low-income neighborhoods (DC Prep, KIPP etc) are offering kids in Wards 7 and 8 a chance in life they wouldn't otherwise have. Shouldn't Bowser be helping these schools move into the vacant buildings the city is sitting on?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/an-education-partnership/2015/08/28/1105ed04-4d05-11e5-84df-923b3ef1a64b_story.html

"Progress under former mayor Vincent C. Gray (D) seems to have stalled; according to charter advocates, of 12 D.C.-owned buildings that are a priority for charters, only one or two are possibly being made available for K-12 charter schools. Equally troubling was the mayor’s decision this year to rescind monies approved by the D.C. Council to help two charter schools build permanent facilities."

[Anonymous]

+1000. My kids have been in charters since PK3 and are now entering 6th and 9th grade.

They are getting good academic educations but have yet to attend a school with a gym or a cafeteria, not to mention decent play space. Meanwhile DCPS is building Taj Mahal buildings (Roosevelt HS) and letting plenty of other spaces sit empty. It's maddening.

[Anonymous]

The Mayor is not in favor of charter school programming and adding Jennifer was just throwing a bone to charter advocates. She is in favor of neighborhood preference, restricting location of charters and general limiting charter autonomy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:+1000. My kids have been in charters since PK3 and are now entering 6th and 9th grade.

They are getting good academic educations but have yet to attend a school with a gym or a cafeteria, not to mention decent play space. Meanwhile DCPS is building Taj Mahal buildings (Roosevelt HS) and letting plenty of other spaces sit empty. It's maddening.

We drive by Shaw Middle every day. Why is that school sitting empty - I know plenty of charter schools that would jump on the chance to make that a quality school.

Or how about any of the other school/city buildings just sitting empty.

[Anonymous]

it is depressing that DCPS buildings sit empty (and rotting) when they could be put to other purpose. If not for charters, then for something else. See this 2012 thread on the empty Shaw middle school building in a prime area of the city. It's nearing the end of 2015 and it's still empty with no plans for it.

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/231105.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Mayor is not in favor of charter school programming and adding Jennifer was just throwing a bone to charter advocates. She is in favor of neighborhood preference, restricting location of charters and general limiting charter autonomy.

In this sense she is no different than Fenty or Gray. It's just that she has held that view since she was on the Council. Fenty and Gray were very friendly to charters when on the Council - but changed once they got to the mayoral suite.

[Anonymous]

So basically screw you 44% of DC's children?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1000. My kids have been in charters since PK3 and are now entering 6th and 9th grade.

They are getting good academic educations but have yet to attend a school with a gym or a cafeteria, not to mention decent play space. Meanwhile DCPS is building Taj Mahal buildings (Roosevelt HS) and letting plenty of other spaces sit empty. It's maddening.

We drive by Shaw Middle every day. Why is that school sitting empty - I know plenty of charter schools that would jump on the chance to make that a quality school.

Or how about any of the other school/city buildings just sitting empty.

Shaw Middle was a potential site for City Center Middle School. So charters and DCPS schools are equally getting the shaft. As a parent of a DCPS elementary student, I was hoping that it would go toward a DCPS middle school, but if not, something ought to be done with that building. Charter or whatever. It is an eye sore.

[Anonymous]

I dunno. In the middle of the city in particular, it's probably not the worst idea to hang onto well-located DCPS buildings for their use in the near-ish future as re-envisioned DCPS middle schools.

Your 3 year olds are going to be in middle and high school, you know this, right? And they can't all go to Deal.

[Anonymous]

I stay in the city for my local DCPS. Charters we can't get into are irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:+1000. My kids have been in charters since PK3 and are now entering 6th and 9th grade.

They are getting good academic educations but have yet to attend a school with a gym or a cafeteria, not to mention decent play space. Meanwhile DCPS is building Taj Mahal buildings (Roosevelt HS) and letting plenty of other spaces sit empty. It's maddening.

+100 regarding the disgrace of Taj Mahal buildings, especially given context of budget cuts for so many other public schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I stay in the city for my local DCPS. Charters we can't get into are irrelevant.

Right, but you can "get into" a good local DCPS school because you are IB and can afford to live in that neighborhood. Yes, not everyone can get into charters because their lotteries are full... but with full lotteries, stopping growth of the very best ones is sort of counterproductive...?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I stay in the city for my local DCPS. Charters we can't get into are irrelevant.

Right, but you can "get into" a good local DCPS school because you are IB and can afford to live in that neighborhood. Yes, not everyone can get into charters because their lotteries are full... but with full lotteries, stopping growth of the very best ones is sort of counterproductive...?

And denying unused, appropriate space to charters is the best way to impede them.

[Anonymous]

another incoherent editorial from the Washington Post.

The whole point of charters is that they are forced to compete for students (and thus funding) and that this competitive pressure is what drives the charters to perform.

Encouraging greater collaboration with DCPS is completely counter to this fundamental principle.

And at the same time, why on earth would DCPS want this to succeed?

Trying to force parties to collaborate when it is against their interest is doomed to fail.

The Washington Post's local editorials are a joke. I can't believe anyone takes them seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1000. My kids have been in charters since PK3 and are now entering 6th and 9th grade.

They are getting good academic educations but have yet to attend a school with a gym or a cafeteria, not to mention decent play space. Meanwhile DCPS is building Taj Mahal buildings (Roosevelt HS) and letting plenty of other spaces sit empty. It's maddening.

We drive by Shaw Middle every day. Why is that school sitting empty - I know plenty of charter schools that would jump on the chance to make that a quality school.

Or how about any of the other school/city buildings just sitting empty.

Shaw Middle was a potential site for City Center Middle School. So charters and DCPS schools are equally getting the shaft. As a parent of a DCPS elementary student, I was hoping that it would go toward a DCPS middle school, but if not, something ought to be done with that building. Charter or whatever. It is an eye sore.

It's depressing to see Shaw Middle school. It's been boarded up for years at this point. Probably will go to a luxury condo developer if Muriel can get it past all the protests.

Look at all the Taj Mahal schools being built or already built at 1/2 capacity like Dunbar.