Mayor Plans to Underfund Charter Schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't these all public schools? Shouldn't they all be funded the same way? I can understand funding schools differently if they serve a lot of at-risk kids, kids learning english, kids with disabilities, etc., but otherwise who cares if it is a charter school or a DCPS school. Schools are schools. Kids are kids. No?

They are not the same. The union issue is well established here. As is the special ed. But it really cannot be stated enough that charter schools simply do not have to serve the same population as DCPS. And they don't want to. Look at what happens at charters Nov. 1 after enrollment numbers for the year are finalized. Look at the requirements for teaching. Look at the marketing frankly.

DCPS schools are community hubs. Charter schools serve only their families and students. And they want the same city resources without contributing to the city in the same way.

I'm not demonizing parents who send their kids to charters, but a massive flaw in DC education is that charters have been given equal footing to community schools at the expense of those communities.

But they haven't been given equal footing. Not ever. Not in this budget or any other budget that DC has ever passed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should kill the charters and focus on bringing DCPS schools up to scratch.

So for parents who can't afford to move into neighborhoods with good schools or to send their kids to private school (2 "acceptable" forms of school choice) we should get rid of the system of school choice that nearly 50% of public school parents in DC have chosen so that they can return to the neighborhood schools they fled. Got it.

Good news for you - it looks like the Mayor is doing her part to kill off the sector. Let's see if she can finish the job before she gets voted out or the control board comes back.

"Good schools" is usually just code for "schools with fewer poor students." I think DC should provide advanced classes for advanced students, in whatever numbers they exist at a particular school. If you have that, I don't know what really makes a "good" school other than not having poor kids dragging down your test scores.

[Anonymous]

The charters have done an amazing job given the fact that DC has shortchanged them every time. Facilities are expensive and DCPS is sitting on ones that aren't full of students and constantly doing complete and expensive renovations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The charters have done an amazing job given the fact that DC has shortchanged them every time. Facilities are expensive and DCPS is sitting on ones that aren't full of students and constantly doing complete and expensive renovations.

There are plenty of low-performing charter schools. Maybe close some of them and then you'll have more buildings available.

DCPS has to serve all comers, forever. That's why they hold on to buildings. Would charters like to make that commitment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The charters have done an amazing job given the fact that DC has shortchanged them every time. Facilities are expensive and DCPS is sitting on ones that aren't full of students and constantly doing complete and expensive renovations.

Hahahahaha sorry but please go visit some DCPS buildings in need of modernization. DC sold off a bunch of buildings to charters and others so now they have inadequate swing space for modernizations of 100 year old buildings and no where to expand.

But also they literally have to keep some of those schools with lower enrollments because those kids have to go to school somewhere. Education isn't a privilege, it's a right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't these all public schools? Shouldn't they all be funded the same way? I can understand funding schools differently if they serve a lot of at-risk kids, kids learning english, kids with disabilities, etc., but otherwise who cares if it is a charter school or a DCPS school. Schools are schools. Kids are kids. No?

They are not the same. The union issue is well established here. As is the special ed. But it really cannot be stated enough that charter schools simply do not have to serve the same population as DCPS. And they don't want to. Look at what happens at charters Nov. 1 after enrollment numbers for the year are finalized. Look at the requirements for teaching. Look at the marketing frankly.

DCPS schools are community hubs. Charter schools serve only their families and students. And they want the same city resources without contributing to the city in the same way.

I'm not demonizing parents who send their kids to charters, but a massive flaw in DC education is that charters have been given equal footing to community schools at the expense of those communities.

But they haven't been given equal footing. Not ever. Not in this budget or any other budget that DC has ever passed.

They absolutely have been given equal footing in terms of acceptance amongst the city officials. They cannot, for the reasons many have argued, be given the same financial resources nor do they deserve them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The charters have done an amazing job given the fact that DC has shortchanged them every time. Facilities are expensive and DCPS is sitting on ones that aren't full of students and constantly doing complete and expensive renovations.

Hahahahaha sorry but please go visit some DCPS buildings in need of modernization. DC sold off a bunch of buildings to charters and others so now they have inadequate swing space for modernizations of 100 year old buildings and no where to expand.

But also they literally have to keep some of those schools with lower enrollments because those kids have to go to school somewhere. Education isn't a privilege, it's a right.

They can consolidate schools. They have consolidated schools. And whose fault is it that those schools are poorly maintained? DCPS' fault. Don't blame charters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

"Good schools" is usually just code for "schools with fewer poor students." I think DC should provide advanced classes for advanced students, in whatever numbers they exist at a particular school. If you have that, I don't know what really makes a "good" school other than not having poor kids dragging down your test scores.

This is a misinformed statement. Can we stop with the stereotypes? There are plenty of “good students” (academically gifted) who are “poor” (parents don’t have money). And there are wealthy students who are not good students.

What do you say about kids with learning disabilities? Do they create “bad schools?”

It’s faulty logic. Some students need more supports than others. Generalizing does nothing to help people. It only hurts (you included).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The charters have done an amazing job given the fact that DC has shortchanged them every time. Facilities are expensive and DCPS is sitting on ones that aren't full of students and constantly doing complete and expensive renovations.

Hahahahaha sorry but please go visit some DCPS buildings in need of modernization. DC sold off a bunch of buildings to charters and others so now they have inadequate swing space for modernizations of 100 year old buildings and no where to expand.

But also they literally have to keep some of those schools with lower enrollments because those kids have to go to school somewhere. Education isn't a privilege, it's a right.

They can consolidate schools. They have consolidated schools. And whose fault is it that those schools are poorly maintained? DCPS' fault. Don't blame charters.

You cannot just consolidate schools out of a ward.

DGS specifically is who is charged with maintenance, not DCPS.

And they're not just poorly maintained, they're old. They need modernization. So they're being modernized.

Sorry charters want to reap the benefits of DCPS without any of the regulations or requirements.

[Anonymous]

In addition to the reality of charters and DCPSes having different populations on average and DCPS having to take comers mid-year (from charters and elsewhere), there's also the fact that even if the extra money went to charters, they *wouldn't spend the same amount on salaries* so it would basically just be giving charters more money in real terms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"Good schools" is usually just code for "schools with fewer poor students." I think DC should provide advanced classes for advanced students, in whatever numbers they exist at a particular school. If you have that, I don't know what really makes a "good" school other than not having poor kids dragging down your test scores.

This is a misinformed statement. Can we stop with the stereotypes? There are plenty of “good students” (academically gifted) who are “poor” (parents don’t have money). And there are wealthy students who are not good students.

What do you say about kids with learning disabilities? Do they create “bad schools?”

It’s faulty logic. Some students need more supports than others. Generalizing does nothing to help people. It only hurts (you included).

I don't think anybody is saying all rich kids are smart an all poor kids are not smart. However, there is extensive research about the impact of poverty on educational outcomes. Some schools do a better job than others at providing the wrap around services and support to make sure all children can succeed, but not all schools have these types of support/staff.
And likewise, kids with learning disabilities do not create 'bad schools', but I would reverse that and say that I would define a school as a 'bad school' if it turned away or did not serve a child with a learning disability appropriately. And as has been mentioned here before, there are various types of IEPs - ranging from a small number of hours for academic or speech support, ranging to self contained classrooms or dedicated aides. There are definitely some schools in DC that do not have the staff or training to appropriately educate students in that latter category.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"Good schools" is usually just code for "schools with fewer poor students." I think DC should provide advanced classes for advanced students, in whatever numbers they exist at a particular school. If you have that, I don't know what really makes a "good" school other than not having poor kids dragging down your test scores.

This is a misinformed statement. Can we stop with the stereotypes? There are plenty of “good students” (academically gifted) who are “poor” (parents don’t have money). And there are wealthy students who are not good students.

What do you say about kids with learning disabilities? Do they create “bad schools?”

It’s faulty logic. Some students need more supports than others. Generalizing does nothing to help people. It only hurts (you included).

I think you are misinterpreting what I wrote (or I expressed it poorly). I was making the point that when people talk about good schools and bad schools they are usually largely relying on metrics like test scores which are much more tightly correlated with socioeconomic status and parents’ education than they are with anything about the school. Many people opt out of perfectly good schools they deem “bad” because of low tests or other indicia that mostly come down to an “undesirable” student population. Frankly I think a lot of DC charter families fall into this trap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"Good schools" is usually just code for "schools with fewer poor students." I think DC should provide advanced classes for advanced students, in whatever numbers they exist at a particular school. If you have that, I don't know what really makes a "good" school other than not having poor kids dragging down your test scores.

This is a misinformed statement. Can we stop with the stereotypes? There are plenty of “good students” (academically gifted) who are “poor” (parents don’t have money). And there are wealthy students who are not good students.

What do you say about kids with learning disabilities? Do they create “bad schools?”

It’s faulty logic. Some students need more supports than others. Generalizing does nothing to help people. It only hurts (you included).

I think you are misinterpreting what I wrote (or I expressed it poorly). I was making the point that when people talk about good schools and bad schools they are usually largely relying on metrics like test scores which are much more tightly correlated with socioeconomic status and parents’ education than they are with anything about the school. Many people opt out of perfectly good schools they deem “bad” because of low tests or other indicia that mostly come down to an “undesirable” student population. Frankly I think a lot of DC charter families fall into this trap.

I'm sorry, but this is clearly from someone who is at a "bad" school but has a smart kid, and thinks it's all fine.

I moved my kid from a "bad" DCPS school to a "good" DCPS school, and the painful truth is that the good school actually does teach them more. There is more instruction and more projects and my child is being pushed farther in math and ELA. The standards are higher.

Is it correlated with the student population? Probably it is. Because the average student is capable of more, so they can ask more of all of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"Good schools" is usually just code for "schools with fewer poor students." I think DC should provide advanced classes for advanced students, in whatever numbers they exist at a particular school. If you have that, I don't know what really makes a "good" school other than not having poor kids dragging down your test scores.

This is a misinformed statement. Can we stop with the stereotypes? There are plenty of “good students” (academically gifted) who are “poor” (parents don’t have money). And there are wealthy students who are not good students.

What do you say about kids with learning disabilities? Do they create “bad schools?”

It’s faulty logic. Some students need more supports than others. Generalizing does nothing to help people. It only hurts (you included).

I think you are misinterpreting what I wrote (or I expressed it poorly). I was making the point that when people talk about good schools and bad schools they are usually largely relying on metrics like test scores which are much more tightly correlated with socioeconomic status and parents’ education than they are with anything about the school. Many people opt out of perfectly good schools they deem “bad” because of low tests or other indicia that mostly come down to an “undesirable” student population. Frankly I think a lot of DC charter families fall into this trap.

I'm sorry, but this is clearly from someone who is at a "bad" school but has a smart kid, and thinks it's all fine.

I moved my kid from a "bad" DCPS school to a "good" DCPS school, and the painful truth is that the good school actually does teach them more. There is more instruction and more projects and my child is being pushed farther in math and ELA. The standards are higher.

Is it correlated with the student population? Probably it is. Because the average student is capable of more, so they can ask more of all of them.

THIS. The academic ability of the majority dictates where the teaching will be and the level of rigor. Full stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"Good schools" is usually just code for "schools with fewer poor students." I think DC should provide advanced classes for advanced students, in whatever numbers they exist at a particular school. If you have that, I don't know what really makes a "good" school other than not having poor kids dragging down your test scores.

This is a misinformed statement. Can we stop with the stereotypes? There are plenty of “good students” (academically gifted) who are “poor” (parents don’t have money). And there are wealthy students who are not good students.

What do you say about kids with learning disabilities? Do they create “bad schools?”

It’s faulty logic. Some students need more supports than others. Generalizing does nothing to help people. It only hurts (you included).

I think you are misinterpreting what I wrote (or I expressed it poorly). I was making the point that when people talk about good schools and bad schools they are usually largely relying on metrics like test scores which are much more tightly correlated with socioeconomic status and parents’ education than they are with anything about the school. Many people opt out of perfectly good schools they deem “bad” because of low tests or other indicia that mostly come down to an “undesirable” student population. Frankly I think a lot of DC charter families fall into this trap.

I'm sorry, but this is clearly from someone who is at a "bad" school but has a smart kid, and thinks it's all fine.

I moved my kid from a "bad" DCPS school to a "good" DCPS school, and the painful truth is that the good school actually does teach them more. There is more instruction and more projects and my child is being pushed farther in math and ELA. The standards are higher.

Is it correlated with the student population? Probably it is. Because the average student is capable of more, so they can ask more of all of them.

THIS. The academic ability of the majority dictates where the teaching will be and the level of rigor. Full stop.

I’ve taught at both kinds of schools. At the lower performing school they were struck about staying on schedule, no extra recess, all academics all the time. At the other school it was about creating a happy school experience. We did seasonal activities, we did cultural activities each week, kids had extra recess every once in awhile. I get the pressure to get scores up, but kids deserve to have fun too, and I think that’s been lost in some schools.