Yet another teacher has left BASIS and parents are in the dark

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a child has a disability that requires private placement at a special needs school, it makes no sense that his/her parents would send them to a school like BASIS in the first place and expect that they will be "fine" using a modified curriculum and "accommodated".

Yes, it's true. OSSE pays the tuition for private placements not the charter. The child is still considered a student of the charter school even while attending the private SN school.

Are you serious? Are you confused about the concept of public education? Or are you just willfully stupid?

Yes, I'm serious. Stop being so purposely obtuse. If your child is not at grade level in all subjects, you don't send them to a school like BASIS and expect them to accommodate and remediate whether or not they have an IEP. Have some common sense. To purposely choose a school that is a BAD fit and then argue that they should be accommodated b/c everyone is entitled to a public education is ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Basis has a model that is demanding and challenging for ANY child, whether with disabilities or no. But that's their model, like it or not - and I don't think it will change. They already have a half dozen or more other schools already operating on this model.

Our child has disabilities but is very bright and is very highly functioning so it hasn't been an issue for us, DC is thriving at Basis. I know of several other kids with disabilities who are also doing extremely well there, because they are bright and highly functioning. But, it entails hours of work after school and on weekends to keep up.

It's individual decisions but Basis isn't for everyone. Many kids without disabilities will wash out because it's too demanding and challenging - and it will be even more hard for some of the kids with disabilities. IEPs and 504s are fine and reasonable accommodations are fine but if the expectation is that the curriculum or model should change, or that it should be any less demanding, I don't think that will happen, since they already have a half dozen or more schools operating on this same model. I think Basis would sooner pick up stakes and move elsewhere. And sadly, that's what some would sooner have them do - and there would be nothing academically equivalent to replace it.

I read things like this and I just shudder. It's as though you think a public school can decide it's just not going to serve children with special needs because "it's their model." Since when does a model trump federal law? I have to wonder what it will take for some local civil rights lawyers and/or education advocates to take a serious look at this school and respond accordingly. There has to be something one can do to facilitate that...

That's nonsense. They do serve children with special needs - I know for a fact that many of the special needs students are doing just fine - ours is. To make a broad accusation like that is outrageous and baseless, unless you have evidence and have personally met with every special needs family there - and I'm pretty sure you've never talked to us and some of the other sn families that we know.

So you "shudder" at the fact that a school would want to offer a rigorous curriculum? I shudder at the fact that most schools DON'T offer a sufficiently rigorous and challenging curriculum. Nobody is forcing anyone to go to Basis - there are lots of choices out there that would meet your evident desire for a less demanding curriculum. Civil rights come into play when you have no choices, when you are forced into something unacceptable. But that's definitely not the case here - there are a wealth of choices in this city, where it comes to schools that don't offer as much challenge. We on the other hand have vastly fewer choices available to us, since we DO want challenging academics. And here you want to take our choices away? What about our civil rights that you seem to want to trample all over? FAPE applies to us as well, it's not a one-way-street to be abused by just one set of interests at the expense of all others.

Actually you have this all backwards. No one is forced to go to BASIS but anyone can choose to go to BASIS. That is the point of a charter school. Equal access to everyone. It isn't incumbent upon the student to make a public school work for them but incumbent upon the school to make it work for all students. BASIS is great and perhaps, in the DC setting, should have opened as a private school. They chose to open as a charter school which means they accept the students regardless of ability, want of a rigorous education, parent involvement, previous school ability to educate properly, etc.

Challenging academics isn't a civil right.

No, I think YOUR view is entirely backward. Yes, it's YOUR choice - but that doesn't mean you pick any school and force it to fit your expectations, instead you pick a school that already IS a fit for your expectations - particularly that we have dozens and dozens of schools to pick from.

By your backward worldview, evidently it would be appropriate to send a kid with no disabilities to St. Colettas - and then demand they accelerate him with Algebra I in 5th grade like they do in Basis. Or, to send a kid to Carlos Rosario and demand Mandarin immersion. Your view of the world makes ZERO sense. Whatsoever.

Frankly, your view of the world is far more abusive and destructive to the public school ecosystem than anything else going on in these threads.

You sound angry and confused about how public schooling works, including charters. Sadly for you, BASIS didn't apply to be a specialized charters school like St. Colettas (or say LAYC or Yu Ying). Nor did they apply to target only academically advanced children. Therefore they are stuck with those darn kids they get via lottery, even the slow ones. Now if they want to have another Charter where their application clearly says they are targeting only academically advanced children then go for it. Until then they have to operate under the system which they picked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a child has a disability that requires private placement at a special needs school, it makes no sense that his/her parents would send them to a school like BASIS in the first place and expect that they will be "fine" using a modified curriculum and "accommodated".

Yes, it's true. OSSE pays the tuition for private placements not the charter. The child is still considered a student of the charter school even while attending the private SN school.

Are you serious? Are you confused about the concept of public education? Or are you just willfully stupid?

Yes, I'm serious. Stop being so purposely obtuse. If your child is not at grade level in all subjects, you don't send them to a school like BASIS and expect them to accommodate and remediate whether or not they have an IEP. Have some common sense. To purposely choose a school that is a BAD fit and then argue that they should be accommodated b/c everyone is entitled to a public education is ridiculous.

It isn't obtuse - purposely or not - to insist that public schools follow the law. Basis isn't allowed to cherry-pick. Period. If you want a private school for your child, then pay for one. Or apply to an application-based HS in DC. Don't expect a public school to be allowed to break the law just because you like it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Basis has a model that is demanding and challenging for ANY child, whether with disabilities or no. But that's their model, like it or not - and I don't think it will change. They already have a half dozen or more other schools already operating on this model.

Our child has disabilities but is very bright and is very highly functioning so it hasn't been an issue for us, DC is thriving at Basis. I know of several other kids with disabilities who are also doing extremely well there, because they are bright and highly functioning. But, it entails hours of work after school and on weekends to keep up.

It's individual decisions but Basis isn't for everyone. Many kids without disabilities will wash out because it's too demanding and challenging - and it will be even more hard for some of the kids with disabilities. IEPs and 504s are fine and reasonable accommodations are fine but if the expectation is that the curriculum or model should change, or that it should be any less demanding, I don't think that will happen, since they already have a half dozen or more schools operating on this same model. I think Basis would sooner pick up stakes and move elsewhere. And sadly, that's what some would sooner have them do - and there would be nothing academically equivalent to replace it.

I read things like this and I just shudder. It's as though you think a public school can decide it's just not going to serve children with special needs because "it's their model." Since when does a model trump federal law? I have to wonder what it will take for some local civil rights lawyers and/or education advocates to take a serious look at this school and respond accordingly. There has to be something one can do to facilitate that...

That's nonsense. They do serve children with special needs - I know for a fact that many of the special needs students are doing just fine - ours is. To make a broad accusation like that is outrageous and baseless, unless you have evidence and have personally met with every special needs family there - and I'm pretty sure you've never talked to us and some of the other sn families that we know.

So you "shudder" at the fact that a school would want to offer a rigorous curriculum? I shudder at the fact that most schools DON'T offer a sufficiently rigorous and challenging curriculum. Nobody is forcing anyone to go to Basis - there are lots of choices out there that would meet your evident desire for a less demanding curriculum. Civil rights come into play when you have no choices, when you are forced into something unacceptable. But that's definitely not the case here - there are a wealth of choices in this city, where it comes to schools that don't offer as much challenge. We on the other hand have vastly fewer choices available to us, since we DO want challenging academics. And here you want to take our choices away? What about our civil rights that you seem to want to trample all over? FAPE applies to us as well, it's not a one-way-street to be abused by just one set of interests at the expense of all others.

Actually you have this all backwards. No one is forced to go to BASIS but anyone can choose to go to BASIS. That is the point of a charter school. Equal access to everyone. It isn't incumbent upon the student to make a public school work for them but incumbent upon the school to make it work for all students. BASIS is great and perhaps, in the DC setting, should have opened as a private school. They chose to open as a charter school which means they accept the students regardless of ability, want of a rigorous education, parent involvement, previous school ability to educate properly, etc.

Challenging academics isn't a civil right.

No, I think YOUR view is entirely backward. Yes, it's YOUR choice - but that doesn't mean you pick any school and force it to fit your expectations, instead you pick a school that already IS a fit for your expectations - particularly that we have dozens and dozens of schools to pick from.

By your backward worldview, evidently it would be appropriate to send a kid with no disabilities to St. Colettas - and then demand they accelerate him with Algebra I in 5th grade like they do in Basis. Or, to send a kid to Carlos Rosario and demand Mandarin immersion. Your view of the world makes ZERO sense. Whatsoever.

Frankly, your view of the world is far more abusive and destructive to the public school ecosystem than anything else going on in these threads.

You are confused about the law. Mandarin immersion isn't a civil right. Free and appropriate public education - which means access to the general curriculum - is. It's not complicated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BASIS is all about acceleration.
I learned this last year during meetings.
When I asked about modification and differentiation, I was told point blank that "unfortunately BASIS is not this kind of school." IEP's are being written but not followed. I was told that a speech teacher was already hired in November, yet my child has to meet her.
Let BASIS become a test-in gifted and talented school and not promise parents they will serve all kids. It was so obvious to me that this year's " IEP results" had been cut and pasted from last year.
I am utterly disappointed and feel I am being lied to.

Herein lies the crux of the problem. No DC Charter school can become a test in school. BASIS was supposed to be, as nasty and cruel as it sounds, a "flunk out" school and their charter allows them to do that. You can flunk out with or without an IEP.

+1

[Anonymous]

^ Yeah, but the kids with the IEPs can complain that they did not receive services and accommodations. Some parents forget FAPE stands for Free APPROPRIATE Public Education.

[Anonymous]

Who has the final say on what's appropriate? What's appropriate for one IEP might end up violating what's appropriate for another student with an IEP. What if an IEP expects a school to violate its charter? Or its contractual obligations? Or it demands more resources than is financially possible? Realistically, one IEP just can't necessarily trump everything else, and there can't be an expectation that it be a one-way street - because that could trigger other legal repercussions.

If one family with an IEP pursues legal action that ends up undermining the curriculum or diverting resources from what's appropriate for another family with an IEP, that second family could well have grounds for taking legal action as well - including against the first family.

This is some treacherous territory.

[Anonymous]

Just to put your mind at ease, pp: The courts have defined through case law what "appropriate" means in FAPE under IDEA. It certainly does not mean that a SN child with cognitive delays be accommodated at an accelerated STEM focused school. The school is not "appropriate" even if it is public and free.

Also, the limited resources excuse or "we can't afford it" is not an adequate defense for failing to implement a child's IEP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who has the final say on what's appropriate? What's appropriate for one IEP might end up violating what's appropriate for another student with an IEP. What if an IEP expects a school to violate its charter? Or its contractual obligations? Or it demands more resources than is financially possible? Realistically, one IEP just can't necessarily trump everything else, and there can't be an expectation that it be a one-way street - because that could trigger other legal repercussions.

If one family with an IEP pursues legal action that ends up undermining the curriculum or diverting resources from what's appropriate for another family with an IEP, that second family could well have grounds for taking legal action as well - including against the first family.

This is some treacherous territory.

You clearly don't understand IEPs at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just to put your mind at ease, pp: The courts have defined through case law what "appropriate" means in FAPE under IDEA. It certainly does not mean that a SN child with cognitive delays be accommodated at an accelerated STEM focused school. The school is not "appropriate" even if it is public and free.

Also, the limited resources excuse or "we can't afford it" is not an adequate defense for failing to implement a child's IEP.

I don't think people understand Basis where it comes to acceleration. Nobody is being forced to be accelerated at Basis. Acceleration, i.e. things like placement into Algebra I in 5th or 6th grade, or into the LEAP program, is offered as a function of diagnostic exams to place students at a level appropriate to their mastery, but is only done at the discretion and by the choice of the families. If the diagnostic says they are ready for Algebra I in 5th grade, that doesn't mean they have to do it. They could also follow the regular course sequence as well and take Algebra I in 7th grade. And, if a student did try jumping ahead into the accelerated track, they could always drop back to the regular sequence if it's too much to take on.

Also, there are probably thousands of public schools in districts all over the country which are STEM focused and which have acceleration and similar types of features - what Basis does is really not all that new or unusual. As such, I seriously doubt that IDEA precludes this in public schools.

I'm no attorney but in my reading of materials around IDEA, I noted that one of the clear provisions of IDEA is that FAPE requires that the quality of educational services provided to students with disabilities be equal to those provided to non-disabled students - so, if a family's intention is serious modification to the student's coursework to downgrade it to a level they feel is appropriate to the student's capability, then I would think the family's own expectation of the curriculum and workload is in fact no longer of equivalent quality as compared to what the other students are doing, would go against IDEA's stated definition of FAPE. As such, any desired modifications asked of a school really can't downgrade the curriculum and expectations without violating IDEA as well. If the school is expecting the student to meet an equivalent level of rigor as the rest of the students, then they are actually upholding IDEA and definitional FAPE requirement of equality to other students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a child has a disability that requires private placement at a special needs school, it makes no sense that his/her parents would send them to a school like BASIS in the first place and expect that they will be "fine" using a modified curriculum and "accommodated".

Yes, it's true. OSSE pays the tuition for private placements not the charter. The child is still considered a student of the charter school even while attending the private SN school.

Are you serious? Are you confused about the concept of public education? Or are you just willfully stupid?

Yes, I'm serious. Stop being so purposely obtuse. If your child is not at grade level in all subjects, you don't send them to a school like BASIS and expect them to accommodate and remediate whether or not they have an IEP. Have some common sense. To purposely choose a school that is a BAD fit and then argue that they should be accommodated b/c everyone is entitled to a public education is ridiculous.

It isn't obtuse - purposely or not - to insist that public schools follow the law. Basis isn't allowed to cherry-pick. Period. If you want a private school for your child, then pay for one. Or apply to an application-based HS in DC. Don't expect a public school to be allowed to break the law just because you like it.

Application-based high schools are nowhere near the level of private high schools, nor near where BASIS wants to be. BASIS can't cherry-pick, but families shouldn't pick BASIS just because it's "better" than an abysmal DCPS. This undermines the point of charters snd should be called out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think people understand Basis where it comes to acceleration. Nobody is being forced to be accelerated at Basis. Acceleration, i.e. things like placement into Algebra I in 5th or 6th grade, or into the LEAP program, is offered as a function of diagnostic exams to place students at a level appropriate to their mastery, but is only done at the discretion and by the choice of the families. If the diagnostic says they are ready for Algebra I in 5th grade, that doesn't mean they have to do it. They could also follow the regular course sequence as well and take Algebra I in 7th grade. And, if a student did try jumping ahead into the accelerated track, they could always drop back to the regular sequence if it's too much to take on.

Also, there are probably thousands of public schools in districts all over the country which are STEM focused and which have acceleration and similar types of features - what Basis does is really not all that new or unusual. As such, I seriously doubt that IDEA precludes this in public schools.

I'm no attorney but in my reading of materials around IDEA, I noted that one of the clear provisions of IDEA is that FAPE requires that the quality of educational services provided to students with disabilities be equal to those provided to non-disabled students - so, if a family's intention is serious modification to the student's coursework to downgrade it to a level they feel is appropriate to the student's capability, then I would think the family's own expectation of the curriculum and workload is in fact no longer of equivalent quality as compared to what the other students are doing, would go against IDEA's stated definition of FAPE. As such, any desired modifications asked of a school really can't downgrade the curriculum and expectations without violating IDEA as well. If the school is expecting the student to meet an equivalent level of rigor as the rest of the students, then they are actually upholding IDEA and definitional FAPE requirement of equality to other students.

What they said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just to put your mind at ease, pp: The courts have defined through case law what "appropriate" means in FAPE under IDEA. It certainly does not mean that a SN child with cognitive delays be accommodated at an accelerated STEM focused school. The school is not "appropriate" even if it is public and free.

Also, the limited resources excuse or "we can't afford it" is not an adequate defense for failing to implement a child's IEP.

I don't think people understand Basis where it comes to acceleration. Nobody is being forced to be accelerated at Basis. Acceleration, i.e. things like placement into Algebra I in 5th or 6th grade, or into the LEAP program, is offered as a function of diagnostic exams to place students at a level appropriate to their mastery, but is only done at the discretion and by the choice of the families. If the diagnostic says they are ready for Algebra I in 5th grade, that doesn't mean they have to do it. They could also follow the regular course sequence as well and take Algebra I in 7th grade. And, if a student did try jumping ahead into the accelerated track, they could always drop back to the regular sequence if it's too much to take on.

Also, there are probably thousands of public schools in districts all over the country which are STEM focused and which have acceleration and similar types of features - what Basis does is really not all that new or unusual. As such, I seriously doubt that IDEA precludes this in public schools.

I'm no attorney but in my reading of materials around IDEA, I noted that one of the clear provisions of IDEA is that FAPE requires that the quality of educational services provided to students with disabilities be equal to those provided to non-disabled students - so, if a family's intention is serious modification to the student's coursework to downgrade it to a level they feel is appropriate to the student's capability, then I would think the family's own expectation of the curriculum and workload is in fact no longer of equivalent quality as compared to what the other students are doing, would go against IDEA's stated definition of FAPE. As such, any desired modifications asked of a school really can't downgrade the curriculum and expectations without violating IDEA as well. If the school is expecting the student to meet an equivalent level of rigor as the rest of the students, then they are actually upholding IDEA and definitional FAPE requirement of equality to other students.

Schools modify curriculums all the time. iDEA is so students can access the curriculum. When people say modify the curriculum it may in some cases mean using an entirely different curriculum for that specific child. If that is what the child needs then the school has to provide it. I don't know what Basis does but we have been in a grade where our child was pulled for language to use a completely different curriculum at his level. He Wa the only child out of 75+ who used that specific curriculum. This happens all the time in IEP situations. I am sure Basis can handle that. They may not want to (seems with an investigation they really don't want to) but it would mean there are children who pass their grade using a different, perhaps less rigorous, curriculum. I don't know what tey do in their other schools but they must have figured that out by now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just to put your mind at ease, pp: The courts have defined through case law what "appropriate" means in FAPE under IDEA. It certainly does not mean that a SN child with cognitive delays be accommodated at an accelerated STEM focused school. The school is not "appropriate" even if it is public and free.

Also, the limited resources excuse or "we can't afford it" is not an adequate defense for failing to implement a child's IEP.

I don't think people understand Basis where it comes to acceleration. Nobody is being forced to be accelerated at Basis. Acceleration, i.e. things like placement into Algebra I in 5th or 6th grade, or into the LEAP program, is offered as a function of diagnostic exams to place students at a level appropriate to their mastery, but is only done at the discretion and by the choice of the families. If the diagnostic says they are ready for Algebra I in 5th grade, that doesn't mean they have to do it. They could also follow the regular course sequence as well and take Algebra I in 7th grade. And, if a student did try jumping ahead into the accelerated track, they could always drop back to the regular sequence if it's too much to take on.

Also, there are probably thousands of public schools in districts all over the country which are STEM focused and which have acceleration and similar types of features - what Basis does is really not all that new or unusual. As such, I seriously doubt that IDEA precludes this in public schools.

I'm no attorney but in my reading of materials around IDEA, I noted that one of the clear provisions of IDEA is that FAPE requires that the quality of educational services provided to students with disabilities be equal to those provided to non-disabled students - so, if a family's intention is serious modification to the student's coursework to downgrade it to a level they feel is appropriate to the student's capability, then I would think the family's own expectation of the curriculum and workload is in fact no longer of equivalent quality as compared to what the other students are doing, would go against IDEA's stated definition of FAPE. As such, any desired modifications asked of a school really can't downgrade the curriculum and expectations without violating IDEA as well. If the school is expecting the student to meet an equivalent level of rigor as the rest of the students, then they are actually upholding IDEA and definitional FAPE requirement of equality to other students.

Schools modify curriculums all the time. iDEA is so students can access the curriculum. When people say modify the curriculum it may in some cases mean using an entirely different curriculum for that specific child. If that is what the child needs then the school has to provide it. I don't know what Basis does but we have been in a grade where our child was pulled for language to use a completely different curriculum at his level. He Wa the only child out of 75+ who used that specific curriculum. This happens all the time in IEP situations. I am sure Basis can handle that. They may not want to (seems with an investigation they really don't want to) but it would mean there are children who pass their grade using a different, perhaps less rigorous, curriculum. I don't know what tey do in their other schools but they must have figured that out by now?

I am going to send my kid to Oyster and see if they will teach using French immersion.

[Anonymous]

Well more apt would be sending the kid to Oyster and having an IEP that prevents immersion.