NYTimes story - At a Success Academy Charter School, Singling Out Pupils Who Have ‘Got to Go’

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I haven't read all the posts here, but in the DCPS forum, someone said that the charters are used as a "release valve" here. Not a place for all students but as an option for families that want a good education for their children so their kids aren't stuck in failing schools. There are so many people on the education forums lately saying if a kid doesn't want to learn or is disruptive then let them leave and allow the other kids to get a decent education. Seems to me that is exactly what charters are doing. Letting kids that want to learn, learn. It's hard to begrudge a student an education for the sake of some sort of feigned equality.


There's a big difference between letting a child leave and pushing a child out. Especially keeping in mind that charter schools are publicly-funded.



I agree that there is a difference but charter schools seem to have a different mission than public schools. Public schools must educate all. If charter schools don't have to then they are doing what they can to make sure the students that can and want to learn do. FWIW, I think it's unfair to say charters do a better job than public schools since charters have a self selected population.


Seems to me that "public schools must educate all" is fiction. If that were truly the case, there would be zero demand for charters. If public schools were truly educating all, then why are there so many families who feel their family's needs are not being met? Clearly they are NOT educating all. In fact, I would suggest that public schools are pushing many families out to charters, privates, and homeschooling precisely by not meeting their needs. And, what's palpable all throughout this thread is the anger and frustration being expressed by parents who DO want their kids to be educated, as opposed to having their kids wasting their time sitting in a classroom where it's impossible to learn because of a disruptive classroom environment. If you don't understand this frustration and anger, then you are truly tonedeaf to the core problem so many of us have with traditional public schools. All we want is for our kids to be educated, and if that's not happening in the public school as taxpayers we should have the right to alternatives.


You've taken what I wrote out of context. It means that public schools don't have the ability to turn away students for low performance they way charter schools do.


Disagree - Public schools do in fact have the ability to pick and choose. DCPS has application schools that can reject low performing students. DCPS schools also routinely kick out OOB students for a variety of reasons. Many public school districts have magnets and other programs which are based on merit. Charters on the other hand are self selecting. Where they do kick students out, it's typically for behavior, not academics. As for behavior, that's typically beyond the scope of schools whether regular public schools or charters - kids with behavior problems are probably better off being in a regular public school which is far more likely to have access to other city services and infrastructure to help deal with social supports as opposed to what a standalone charter would have access to.


OOB students that are asked to leave a school are sent to ANOTHER DCPS school. They aren't forced to go private or something. They are still in the system. And no student can attend an application school by right. They are there for a singular purpose and application schools are different from mainstream schools. And if a student leaves an application school, they can still return to another DCPS school. DCPS isn't removing them from the system. They still have to make education "available" for the student. You can argue about the quality of that education if you like but the service, however poor it may be, is still offered. DCPS cannot turn a student away from access to all of their schools for low performance. If that was the case, dozens of schools in DC would be empty and we'd have the highest performing schools (what's left of them) in the country.


That doesn't change the fact that DCPS schools are still picking and choosing on a school by school basis. Yes, kids that get kicked out go back to their default neighborhood DCPS school. It also doesn't speak to the fact that most charter schools are by definition (and as explicitly stated in their charters) singular purpose and not mainstream general purpose schools, whether college prep, language immersion, etc. The notions that a given charter must support every child and be a one-size-fits-all or the flaky idea that neighborhood preferences should be imposed on charters betray a fundamental lack of understanding about what charters are and what purpose they serve. They are supposed to be part of an ecosystem of choices, to complement, augment and extend traditional public school systems with specialized offerings not currently met by the traditional public schools.


I don't know if you're the same person who's been responding but your discussion is like a moving target!

Here are the very focused points I was trying to make that kept being twisted somehow:
1. DCPS (as a whole with exceptions for specialized/test-in/application schools) must offer an education to all DC students regardless of the student's performance.
2. DC Charter schools (as a whole) are not under that obligation.
3. Charter schools are a good option for parents that want to leave failing schools.

That's it! I'm talking about the DCPS system and the Charter system. Not individual schools.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:This has been happening in DC for years.


Public schools are the only schools that really try to help students. Privates -whether charters or the snootiest privates in DC = will find ways to stigmatize and toss out students who don't fit their agenda.

That's why we have to support public education and call out the elite snobs, starting with our dear President, who send their children to private school. They set a terrible example.


Nobody here was talking about private schools until you injected that non-sequitur from out of the blue.

But that said, if it were true that public schools were trying to help ALL students, there wouldn't be so many leaving DCPS because they felt the schools were failing them.
Anonymous
How many PPs knocking charters send their kids to achools with very low FARMS rates (typically having fewer behavior issues) or to private schools?

If you have already insulated your child from having to deal with a school environment where behavior issues are a serious factor then it is pretty hypocritical to take an anti-charter school stance.

- mom of a kid at a MoCo Focus school.
Anonymous
I don't know anything about special ed law but I find it VERY disturbing that the head of Success schools released all that very detailed information about that boy. I really hope they face legal action for that. No one who truly cares about kids would do that/
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:How many PPs knocking charters send their kids to achools with very low FARMS rates (typically having fewer behavior issues) or to private schools?

If you have already insulated your child from having to deal with a school environment where behavior issues are a serious factor then it is pretty hypocritical to take an anti-charter school stance.

- mom of a kid at a MoCo Focus school.


Well, it is, and it isn't. It's possible to be against segregation of public schools by income (the problem with MCPS and DCPS, not to mention all of the school districts in the country explicitly set up to exclude poor kids) AND ALSO against segregation of public schools by parental ability to work the system/absence of special needs (the problem with charters).

That doesn't mean that you're a bad person if you send your child to a charter school. You are doing the best you can with the options available to you (just as I am doing the best I can in MCPS with the options available to me). What it does mean is that there are fundamental problems with the public education system.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:I don't know anything about special ed law but I find it VERY disturbing that the head of Success schools released all that very detailed information about that boy. I really hope they face legal action for that. No one who truly cares about kids would do that/


I didn't see in the article where Success released information about any kids. The information in the article was gathered from the families involved.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:How many PPs knocking charters send their kids to achools with very low FARMS rates (typically having fewer behavior issues) or to private schools?

If you have already insulated your child from having to deal with a school environment where behavior issues are a serious factor then it is pretty hypocritical to take an anti-charter school stance.

- mom of a kid at a MoCo Focus school.


Well, it is, and it isn't. It's possible to be against segregation of public schools by income (the problem with MCPS and DCPS, not to mention all of the school districts in the country explicitly set up to exclude poor kids) AND ALSO against segregation of public schools by parental ability to work the system/absence of special needs (the problem with charters).

That doesn't mean that you're a bad person if you send your child to a charter school. You are doing the best you can with the options available to you (just as I am doing the best I can in MCPS with the options available to me). What it does mean is that there are fundamental problems with the public education system.


Segregation of schools happens because of neighborhood schools and geography. Rich and poor generally do not live together. Charters on the other hand are not neighborhood focused, they draw students from all parts of the city which reduces a big part of the geographic segregation issue.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The parent of the child whose disciplinary record Moskowitz released to the press has filed a FERPA conplaint with US Department of ED:

http://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/2015/10/ferpa-complaint-from-fatima-geidi-to.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+blogspot/EJcmuc+(NYC+Public+School+Parents)&m=1

Moskowitz disgusts me


She does more in a day to help kids than you will do in your whole life.

Whinners like you disgust me.


I'm a teacher at a title 1 school. Not everyone can be eva Moskowitz !
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:

Segregation of schools happens because of neighborhood schools and geography. Rich and poor generally do not live together. Charters on the other hand are not neighborhood focused, they draw students from all parts of the city which reduces a big part of the geographic segregation issue.


Segregation of schools (by race or income) happens because of public policies designed to make it happen. It's not a natural phenomenon like the weather.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

Segregation of schools happens because of neighborhood schools and geography. Rich and poor generally do not live together. Charters on the other hand are not neighborhood focused, they draw students from all parts of the city which reduces a big part of the geographic segregation issue.


Segregation of schools (by race or income) happens because of public policies designed to make it happen. It's not a natural phenomenon like the weather.


You have that in large part backwards. Take a look at a Census map of socioeconomic data for Washington DC and take note of the neighborhoods, and then take a look at school neighborhoods. Policy isn't what's driving it, it's about where the wealthier people have chosen to live and what neighborhoods are gentrifying.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

Segregation of schools happens because of neighborhood schools and geography. Rich and poor generally do not live together. Charters on the other hand are not neighborhood focused, they draw students from all parts of the city which reduces a big part of the geographic segregation issue.


Segregation of schools (by race or income) happens because of public policies designed to make it happen. It's not a natural phenomenon like the weather.


You have that in large part backwards. Take a look at a Census map of socioeconomic data for Washington DC and take note of the neighborhoods, and then take a look at school neighborhoods. Policy isn't what's driving it, it's about where the wealthier people have chosen to live and what neighborhoods are gentrifying.


Wealthier people do not choose where to live at random, and it also doesn't just naturally occur that there is little or no housing for non-wealthy people in wealthy neighborhoods. All of these things are the result of policies.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:

Wealthier people do not choose where to live at random, and it also doesn't just naturally occur that there is little or no housing for non-wealthy people in wealthy neighborhoods. All of these things are the result of policies.


Here's an example of one of those policies.

In DC: http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/17261/panic-your-alley-could-have-a-cute-clean-little-brick-house/
In Montgomery County: http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/15360/building-accessory-dwellings-in-montgomery-county-can-be-easier-and-more-predictable/
Anonymous
"Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:


Segregation of schools happens because of neighborhood schools and geography. Rich and poor generally do not live together. Charters on the other hand are not neighborhood focused, they draw students from all parts of the city which reduces a big part of the geographic segregation issue.


Segregation of schools (by race or income) happens because of public policies designed to make it happen. It's not a natural phenomenon like the weather.


You have that in large part backwards. Take a look at a Census map of socioeconomic data for Washington DC and take note of the neighborhoods, and then take a look at school neighborhoods. Policy isn't what's driving it, it's about where the wealthier people have chosen to live and what neighborhoods are gentrifying.


Wealthier people do not choose where to live at random, and it also doesn't just naturally occur that there is little or no housing for non-wealthy people in wealthy neighborhoods. All of these things are the result of policies."
+1
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

Segregation of schools happens because of neighborhood schools and geography. Rich and poor generally do not live together. Charters on the other hand are not neighborhood focused, they draw students from all parts of the city which reduces a big part of the geographic segregation issue.


Segregation of schools (by race or income) happens because of public policies designed to make it happen. It's not a natural phenomenon like the weather.


You have that in large part backwards. Take a look at a Census map of socioeconomic data for Washington DC and take note of the neighborhoods, and then take a look at school neighborhoods. Policy isn't what's driving it, it's about where the wealthier people have chosen to live and what neighborhoods are gentrifying.


Wealthier people do not choose where to live at random, and it also doesn't just naturally occur that there is little or no housing for non-wealthy people in wealthy neighborhoods. All of these things are the result of policies.


There's a pendulum effect. Policy WAS red-lining which restricted the poor in or out of certain areas. That was replaced decades ago with a LACK of policies is where people self-selected where they live, and thus the wealthier could pick and choose whereas the poor cannot. Now, policy is to insert lower-income housing in the midst of more expensive areas - though, I am not entirely certain that these necessarily always make sense either. Any new construction and development in DC mandates a certain number of low-income homes. But when these are built, does it account for a real model of demographics? Do low-income families from DC actually get first preference, to allow them to relocate, or is the system gamed? Or does it open the floodgates from MD, VA or elsewhere, where such policies might not exist? Should DC continue to be a magnet for the poor? Is it sustainable? Are we creating affordable housing without also having the jobs to support them? If housing development 'x' creates 50 new homes for the poor, can we then turn around and demolish and redevelop 40 prior, run down and decrepit housing units for the poor in a better way? These questions don't really seem to have the answers in as solid, coherent and understandable of a form as they ought to...
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Not keeping her hands folded in her lap? WTF?


She screamed, threw pencils, ran off from teachers and refused to attend time out.

defiant

If you're going to try to save kids living in poverty, you'll STILL have kids who don't fit the bill. I'd rather kick out one to save five instead of allowing the one to destroy the education of the five
post reply Forum Index » Schools and Education General Discussion
Message Quick Reply
Go to: