BASIS DC will seek to expand to include K to 4th grade

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I mean - since BASIS does not socially promote, the kids graduating from 4th will necessarily be ready to move to 5th, regardless of their demographics.

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

Not if they've failed 4th.

Why would they be allowed to not socially promote their own grads but not test incoming kids? I bet the no social promotion doesn't start until 5th/existing MS.

Because they wouldn't be "incoming", they'd be part of the same LEA. Depending on how it's structured.

Very much doubt they'd have an option not to socially promote their own kids from 4th to 5th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

Would love for BASIS ES to have similar results. It’s great to see LT on an upward trajectory, which I hear is in part contributed to the buy-in of more IB families and support through the PTO. This, along with DCPS funding and resources have helped ensure the proportion of students needing coaching and supports does not exceed available resources at LT. Some of the former HRCS were in similar positions but as the proportion of kids exceeded the available resources, those schools went into the downward spirals. The demographics is not the issue, it’s ensuring that there are adequate supports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

Would love for BASIS ES to have similar results. It’s great to see LT on an upward trajectory, which I hear is in part contributed to the buy-in of more IB families and support through the PTO. This, along with DCPS funding and resources have helped ensure the proportion of students needing coaching and supports does not exceed available resources at LT. Some of the former HRCS were in similar positions but as the proportion of kids exceeded the available resources, those schools went into the downward spirals. The demographics is not the issue, it’s ensuring that there are adequate supports.

Right, so, the Uniform Per-Student Funding Formula provides extra funding for each student with an IEP.

If you think special needs doesn't correlate with demographics, I don't know what to tell ya.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

Would love for BASIS ES to have similar results. It’s great to see LT on an upward trajectory, which I hear is in part contributed to the buy-in of more IB families and support through the PTO. This, along with DCPS funding and resources have helped ensure the proportion of students needing coaching and supports does not exceed available resources at LT. Some of the former HRCS were in similar positions but as the proportion of kids exceeded the available resources, those schools went into the downward spirals. The demographics is not the issue, it’s ensuring that there are adequate supports.

Right, so, the Uniform Per-Student Funding Formula provides extra funding for each student with an IEP.

If you think special needs doesn't correlate with demographics, I don't know what to tell ya.

I’m trying to follow. I’m referring to charters operating on 80% of what DCPS receives, fundraising that goes to more than just teacher bonuses, and a school that appears to collaborate with parents through the PTO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

Would love for BASIS ES to have similar results. It’s great to see LT on an upward trajectory, which I hear is in part contributed to the buy-in of more IB families and support through the PTO. This, along with DCPS funding and resources have helped ensure the proportion of students needing coaching and supports does not exceed available resources at LT. Some of the former HRCS were in similar positions but as the proportion of kids exceeded the available resources, those schools went into the downward spirals. The demographics is not the issue, it’s ensuring that there are adequate supports.

Right, so, the Uniform Per-Student Funding Formula provides extra funding for each student with an IEP.

If you think special needs doesn't correlate with demographics, I don't know what to tell ya.

I’m trying to follow. I’m referring to charters operating on 80% of what DCPS receives, fundraising that goes to more than just teacher bonuses, and a school that appears to collaborate with parents through the PTO.

Cite for that 80% figure? I don't even know what your point is right now. Schools and PTOs can decide how to spend their fundraising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

Would love for BASIS ES to have similar results. It’s great to see LT on an upward trajectory, which I hear is in part contributed to the buy-in of more IB families and support through the PTO. This, along with DCPS funding and resources have helped ensure the proportion of students needing coaching and supports does not exceed available resources at LT. Some of the former HRCS were in similar positions but as the proportion of kids exceeded the available resources, those schools went into the downward spirals. The demographics is not the issue, it’s ensuring that there are adequate supports.

Elementary is so different than MS/HS. Most kids are diagnosed with LDs in K-2. It's not like parents are going to know their kid has a disability before enrolling. BASIS is going to have to be prepared DAY 1 to have MTSS/RTI running. Along with psychologists for initial testing for IEPs and Special Education Teachers. Hope they have a plan

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

Would love for BASIS ES to have similar results. It’s great to see LT on an upward trajectory, which I hear is in part contributed to the buy-in of more IB families and support through the PTO. This, along with DCPS funding and resources have helped ensure the proportion of students needing coaching and supports does not exceed available resources at LT. Some of the former HRCS were in similar positions but as the proportion of kids exceeded the available resources, those schools went into the downward spirals. The demographics is not the issue, it’s ensuring that there are adequate supports.

Right, so, the Uniform Per-Student Funding Formula provides extra funding for each student with an IEP.

If you think special needs doesn't correlate with demographics, I don't know what to tell ya.

I’m trying to follow. I’m referring to charters operating on 80% of what DCPS receives, fundraising that goes to more than just teacher bonuses, and a school that appears to collaborate with parents through the PTO.

If you would rather compare to a charter, how about ITDS? It isn't far from the BASIS proposed location. ITDS offers Equitable Access preference, has 17% at-risk and 22% SWD, has respectable test scores, and kids go to BASIS from ITDS sometimes. So BASIS could probably achieve similar results with similar demographics, riiiiiiigh?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

Would love for BASIS ES to have similar results. It’s great to see LT on an upward trajectory, which I hear is in part contributed to the buy-in of more IB families and support through the PTO. This, along with DCPS funding and resources have helped ensure the proportion of students needing coaching and supports does not exceed available resources at LT. Some of the former HRCS were in similar positions but as the proportion of kids exceeded the available resources, those schools went into the downward spirals. The demographics is not the issue, it’s ensuring that there are adequate supports.

Elementary is so different than MS/HS. Most kids are diagnosed with LDs in K-2. It's not like parents are going to know their kid has a disability before enrolling. BASIS is going to have to be prepared DAY 1 to have MTSS/RTI running. Along with psychologists for initial testing for IEPs and Special Education Teachers. Hope they have a plan

Yes, this is my understanding as well and I am hoping that they have a plan for it instead of wishful thinking that those families would know up front and self-select out of applying to the school like they do in middle school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I mean - since BASIS does not socially promote, the kids graduating from 4th will necessarily be ready to move to 5th, regardless of their demographics.

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

BASIS will be forced to socially promote in ES if they are allowed to open. Zero chance PCSB allows a non-socially promoting ES.

Why do you think this is so? It's not true. The PCSB has no policy or rule that encourages or restricts social promotion. Also, a decade ago or more the DCMR rule that covered DCPS retention and promotion was clarified to state that "a DCPS student can be retained at any grade level."

https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/38-781.02

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

Would love for BASIS ES to have similar results. It’s great to see LT on an upward trajectory, which I hear is in part contributed to the buy-in of more IB families and support through the PTO. This, along with DCPS funding and resources have helped ensure the proportion of students needing coaching and supports does not exceed available resources at LT. Some of the former HRCS were in similar positions but as the proportion of kids exceeded the available resources, those schools went into the downward spirals. The demographics is not the issue, it’s ensuring that there are adequate supports.

Right, so, the Uniform Per-Student Funding Formula provides extra funding for each student with an IEP.

If you think special needs doesn't correlate with demographics, I don't know what to tell ya.

I’m trying to follow. I’m referring to charters operating on 80% of what DCPS receives, fundraising that goes to more than just teacher bonuses, and a school that appears to collaborate with parents through the PTO.

If you would rather compare to a charter, how about ITDS? It isn't far from the BASIS proposed location. ITDS offers Equitable Access preference, has 17% at-risk and 22% SWD, has respectable test scores, and kids go to BASIS from ITDS sometimes. So BASIS could probably achieve similar results with similar demographics, riiiiiiigh?

Quite frankly 17% is low for at-risk in DC. There's no reason to think that BASIS can't achieve with that level of at-risk. On average, DC schools are about 50% at-risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

Would love for BASIS ES to have similar results. It’s great to see LT on an upward trajectory, which I hear is in part contributed to the buy-in of more IB families and support through the PTO. This, along with DCPS funding and resources have helped ensure the proportion of students needing coaching and supports does not exceed available resources at LT. Some of the former HRCS were in similar positions but as the proportion of kids exceeded the available resources, those schools went into the downward spirals. The demographics is not the issue, it’s ensuring that there are adequate supports.

Right, so, the Uniform Per-Student Funding Formula provides extra funding for each student with an IEP.

If you think special needs doesn't correlate with demographics, I don't know what to tell ya.

I’m trying to follow. I’m referring to charters operating on 80% of what DCPS receives, fundraising that goes to more than just teacher bonuses, and a school that appears to collaborate with parents through the PTO.

If you would rather compare to a charter, how about ITDS? It isn't far from the BASIS proposed location. ITDS offers Equitable Access preference, has 17% at-risk and 22% SWD, has respectable test scores, and kids go to BASIS from ITDS sometimes. So BASIS could probably achieve similar results with similar demographics, riiiiiiigh?

Quite frankly 17% is low for at-risk in DC. There's no reason to think that BASIS can't achieve with that level of at-risk. On average, DC schools are about 50% at-risk.

Indeed. Yet people seem to think allowing the different demographics of a BASIS elementary would ruin BASIS middle and high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

Would love for BASIS ES to have similar results. It’s great to see LT on an upward trajectory, which I hear is in part contributed to the buy-in of more IB families and support through the PTO. This, along with DCPS funding and resources have helped ensure the proportion of students needing coaching and supports does not exceed available resources at LT. Some of the former HRCS were in similar positions but as the proportion of kids exceeded the available resources, those schools went into the downward spirals. The demographics is not the issue, it’s ensuring that there are adequate supports.

Right, so, the Uniform Per-Student Funding Formula provides extra funding for each student with an IEP.

If you think special needs doesn't correlate with demographics, I don't know what to tell ya.

I’m trying to follow. I’m referring to charters operating on 80% of what DCPS receives, fundraising that goes to more than just teacher bonuses, and a school that appears to collaborate with parents through the PTO.

If you would rather compare to a charter, how about ITDS? It isn't far from the BASIS proposed location. ITDS offers Equitable Access preference, has 17% at-risk and 22% SWD, has respectable test scores, and kids go to BASIS from ITDS sometimes. So BASIS could probably achieve similar results with similar demographics, riiiiiiigh?

Quite frankly 17% is low for at-risk in DC. There's no reason to think that BASIS can't achieve with that level of at-risk. On average, DC schools are about 50% at-risk.

Indeed. Yet people seem to think allowing the different demographics of a BASIS elementary would ruin BASIS middle and high school.

I’m not able to locate links to any of the demographics referenced in this thread. Does anyone know what the demographics at MV and TR ES are? Those are the school scenarios we are trying to avoid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

Would love for BASIS ES to have similar results. It’s great to see LT on an upward trajectory, which I hear is in part contributed to the buy-in of more IB families and support through the PTO. This, along with DCPS funding and resources have helped ensure the proportion of students needing coaching and supports does not exceed available resources at LT. Some of the former HRCS were in similar positions but as the proportion of kids exceeded the available resources, those schools went into the downward spirals. The demographics is not the issue, it’s ensuring that there are adequate supports.

Right, so, the Uniform Per-Student Funding Formula provides extra funding for each student with an IEP.

If you think special needs doesn't correlate with demographics, I don't know what to tell ya.

I’m trying to follow. I’m referring to charters operating on 80% of what DCPS receives, fundraising that goes to more than just teacher bonuses, and a school that appears to collaborate with parents through the PTO.

If you would rather compare to a charter, how about ITDS? It isn't far from the BASIS proposed location. ITDS offers Equitable Access preference, has 17% at-risk and 22% SWD, has respectable test scores, and kids go to BASIS from ITDS sometimes. So BASIS could probably achieve similar results with similar demographics, riiiiiiigh?

Quite frankly 17% is low for at-risk in DC. There's no reason to think that BASIS can't achieve with that level of at-risk. On average, DC schools are about 50% at-risk.

Indeed. Yet people seem to think allowing the different demographics of a BASIS elementary would ruin BASIS middle and high school.

I’m not able to locate links to any of the demographics referenced in this thread. Does anyone know what the demographics at MV and TR ES are? Those are the school scenarios we are trying to avoid.

https://osse.dc.gov/dcschoolreportcard/schoolsnapshot

You can click into a pdf for each school here. You can also learn a lot of this stuff on the OSSE enrollment audit spreadsheets.

But I think the data will show you that it's not really about the demographics-- ITS, MV, and TR are all pretty similar demographically (aside from the high number of ELLs at MV which is to be expected). The difference is in the leadership and classroom management.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

Would love for BASIS ES to have similar results. It’s great to see LT on an upward trajectory, which I hear is in part contributed to the buy-in of more IB families and support through the PTO. This, along with DCPS funding and resources have helped ensure the proportion of students needing coaching and supports does not exceed available resources at LT. Some of the former HRCS were in similar positions but as the proportion of kids exceeded the available resources, those schools went into the downward spirals. The demographics is not the issue, it’s ensuring that there are adequate supports.

Right, so, the Uniform Per-Student Funding Formula provides extra funding for each student with an IEP.

If you think special needs doesn't correlate with demographics, I don't know what to tell ya.

I’m trying to follow. I’m referring to charters operating on 80% of what DCPS receives, fundraising that goes to more than just teacher bonuses, and a school that appears to collaborate with parents through the PTO.

Cite for that 80% figure? I don't even know what your point is right now. Schools and PTOs can decide how to spend their fundraising.

This was a misunderstanding on my part. I had heard for years that charters received less funding than regular DCPS or maybe that was just in reference to the teacher salaries since they aren’t part of WTU. Thanks to your prompt I am now up to speed on the equal funding received from the city. Great to know and eliminates that concern.

I wouldn’t downplay the role an active PTO plays in school success though. I could be misinformed on this topic as well, but I thought the BASIS model doesn’t support that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Ludlow-Taylor can produce kids who do well at BASIS, then BASIS elementary should be able to do the same thing with the same demographics, right? So all BASIS has to do is use the at-risk preference to mimic Ludlow-Taylor's setup. Easy peasy!

It is actually easier than that. BASIS will get kids in K+ and be able to teach them how to study and instill executive functioning well before 5th.

And Ludlow-Taylor was recently 17% at-risk and 14% students with disabilities. So BASIS can aim for 17% at-risk, through the preference. That's higher than the 8% at BASIS right now, but if it works for Ludlow-Taylor then why shouldn't it work for BASIS? Amirite?

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/001-0271(Ludlow-Taylor%20Elementary%20School).pdf

https://stossepublicdocsprod.blob.core.windows.net/public-docs/dc-school-report-card/2021-22/profiles/168-3068(BASIS%20DC%20PCS).pdf

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about how people are saying (I think) that BASIS middle school won't do well if BASIS operates an elementary school, because the kids moving from BASIS 4th grade to BASIS 5th grade will be demographically different and therefore not as academically advanced. I think that's what they're saying, anyway. But if Ludlow-Taylor can successfully prepare kids for BASIS despite some of them being at-risk, then can't BASIS also prepare kids for BASIS with a similar at-risk percentage?

Would love for BASIS ES to have similar results. It’s great to see LT on an upward trajectory, which I hear is in part contributed to the buy-in of more IB families and support through the PTO. This, along with DCPS funding and resources have helped ensure the proportion of students needing coaching and supports does not exceed available resources at LT. Some of the former HRCS were in similar positions but as the proportion of kids exceeded the available resources, those schools went into the downward spirals. The demographics is not the issue, it’s ensuring that there are adequate supports.

Right, so, the Uniform Per-Student Funding Formula provides extra funding for each student with an IEP.

If you think special needs doesn't correlate with demographics, I don't know what to tell ya.

I’m trying to follow. I’m referring to charters operating on 80% of what DCPS receives, fundraising that goes to more than just teacher bonuses, and a school that appears to collaborate with parents through the PTO.

Cite for that 80% figure? I don't even know what your point is right now. Schools and PTOs can decide how to spend their fundraising.

This was a misunderstanding on my part. I had heard for years that charters received less funding than regular DCPS or maybe that was just in reference to the teacher salaries since they aren’t part of WTU. Thanks to your prompt I am now up to speed on the equal funding received from the city. Great to know and eliminates that concern.

I wouldn’t downplay the role an active PTO plays in school success though. I could be misinformed on this topic as well, but I thought the BASIS model doesn’t support that.

Very gracious, thank you. FYI, whether there is or is not funding parity is a matter of debate, people have different opinions about it, and a big part of the question is how much of a buffer should DCPS get for dealing with the uncertainty of being a by-right school district and taking all comers every day of every year.

My understanding is that BASIS very much wants parent donations and frequently requests them, but is straight-up hostile to an organized PTO and any significant parent input or feedback.