Mundo Verde Public Charter: Failing on Its Most Basic Mission

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are several former families posting here. We spend seven years at MV. My older child went from prek- 5th and we pulled my second child. I know dozens and dozens of parents who tried to solve similar problems, and all left in frustration. These are families who joined the school in the first or second year if its existence with nothing but enthusiasm and hope. And families who joined a few years later, hoping for the best. All tried to change things when they saw problems arise. They had senior roles in the Padres parent organization, They tried to stop expansion. They supported the forming of the union. They volunteered in the classrooms.

The administration shuts down dissent and is secretive about what's going on. And then they craft some spin-doctored talking points that don't address any of the concerns families raise. It is not a situation that can be changed, unless the senior administration is replaced.

I know two families who pulled kids mid-year this year because things were untenable.

Leave now or leave later.

Not at MV but according to the retention data they aren’t bleeding students.

Which sort of speaks to how bad the alternatives are.

The "immersion program juju" is strong in DC. Parents seem to be willing to put up with a lot of garbage to be able to say their snowflake is in an immersion program. It is hilarious. Take a look at the Basis thread that has been overtaken by immersion devotes. They are all over the place arguing that foreign language instruction is the most important part of any academic program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are several former families posting here. We spend seven years at MV. My older child went from prek- 5th and we pulled my second child. I know dozens and dozens of parents who tried to solve similar problems, and all left in frustration. These are families who joined the school in the first or second year if its existence with nothing but enthusiasm and hope. And families who joined a few years later, hoping for the best. All tried to change things when they saw problems arise. They had senior roles in the Padres parent organization, They tried to stop expansion. They supported the forming of the union. They volunteered in the classrooms.

The administration shuts down dissent and is secretive about what's going on. And then they craft some spin-doctored talking points that don't address any of the concerns families raise. It is not a situation that can be changed, unless the senior administration is replaced.

I know two families who pulled kids mid-year this year because things were untenable.

Leave now or leave later.

Not at MV but according to the retention data they aren’t bleeding students.

Which sort of speaks to how bad the alternatives are.

I posted previously about similar dynamics at my kids' charter, and this is true. A bad day at one of these better-regarded charters is still better than a good day at my inbound.

Same! Everyone leaves my IB between first and third grade. In addition, we have 0% chance at DCI if we stayed at our IB.

Well, for the kids who are in upper elementary now, MV really was a better option several years ago. Nowadays I guess it just depends what you're willing to tolerate in exchange for Spanish and the unspecified probability of DCI. But the way MV burns through its K and older waitlists, any family with a kid at Langley, Seaton, or Garrison past preschool has effectively chosen that over MV. And those schools have full or near-full K classes. This was not the case 5 years ago. And it's part of why MV's star has dimmed.

Laugh all you want, the numbers are there. People are choosing Langley over MV in K, 1st, 2nd. LANGLEY.

But they aren't staying in 3-5. Langley's PARRC scores are pretty terrible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the teachers’ union has done absolutely nothing.

Wrong. It has made it harder to get rid of teachers who cannot control a classroom and allow bullying.

Ok, they're not 'allowing' bullying. I would guess they're either so overwhelmed that they don't catch it (bullies can be sneaky) or they don't know how to intervene. Dealing with unkind behavior or kids don't know how to be kind or channel their energy--it's hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the kind of post people write before they move IB for Oyster. Have you considered DC Bilingual, OP? It's a nice neighborhood, and I think a much better functioning school.

+1 I wouldn’t say they are going to OA, but they are going to some school WOTP. Op is not going to her IB DCPS, even when people here think that her experience would have been much better at their Title 1 DCPS.

Oyster Adams is not better. Maybe it’s better in Spanish instruction since Mundo still enrolls kids with no Spanish in upper grades, but if you’re trying to escape a culture of bullying look elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are several former families posting here. We spend seven years at MV. My older child went from prek- 5th and we pulled my second child. I know dozens and dozens of parents who tried to solve similar problems, and all left in frustration. These are families who joined the school in the first or second year if its existence with nothing but enthusiasm and hope. And families who joined a few years later, hoping for the best. All tried to change things when they saw problems arise. They had senior roles in the Padres parent organization, They tried to stop expansion. They supported the forming of the union. They volunteered in the classrooms.

The administration shuts down dissent and is secretive about what's going on. And then they craft some spin-doctored talking points that don't address any of the concerns families raise. It is not a situation that can be changed, unless the senior administration is replaced.

I know two families who pulled kids mid-year this year because things were untenable.

Leave now or leave later.

Not at MV but according to the retention data they aren’t bleeding students.

Which sort of speaks to how bad the alternatives are.

I posted previously about similar dynamics at my kids' charter, and this is true. A bad day at one of these better-regarded charters is still better than a good day at my inbound.

Same! Everyone leaves my IB between first and third grade. In addition, we have 0% chance at DCI if we stayed at our IB.

You all know that it’s not only a choice between your IB and a charter with behavior issues? We and many other normal middle class families are at OOB DCPS schools. DCI, and even more so a CHANCE at DCI is not compelling for many of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are several former families posting here. We spend seven years at MV. My older child went from prek- 5th and we pulled my second child. I know dozens and dozens of parents who tried to solve similar problems, and all left in frustration. These are families who joined the school in the first or second year if its existence with nothing but enthusiasm and hope. And families who joined a few years later, hoping for the best. All tried to change things when they saw problems arise. They had senior roles in the Padres parent organization, They tried to stop expansion. They supported the forming of the union. They volunteered in the classrooms.

The administration shuts down dissent and is secretive about what's going on. And then they craft some spin-doctored talking points that don't address any of the concerns families raise. It is not a situation that can be changed, unless the senior administration is replaced.

I know two families who pulled kids mid-year this year because things were untenable.

Leave now or leave later.

Not at MV but according to the retention data they aren’t bleeding students.

Different poster not at Mundo- i would try a different charter before dcps.

Which sort of speaks to how bad the alternatives are.

I posted previously about similar dynamics at my kids' charter, and this is true. A bad day at one of these better-regarded charters is still better than a good day at my inbound.

Same! Everyone leaves my IB between first and third grade. In addition, we have 0% chance at DCI if we stayed at our IB.

You all know that it’s not only a choice between your IB and a charter with behavior issues? We and many other normal middle class families are at OOB DCPS schools. DCI, and even more so a CHANCE at DCI is not compelling for many of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are several former families posting here. We spend seven years at MV. My older child went from prek- 5th and we pulled my second child. I know dozens and dozens of parents who tried to solve similar problems, and all left in frustration. These are families who joined the school in the first or second year if its existence with nothing but enthusiasm and hope. And families who joined a few years later, hoping for the best. All tried to change things when they saw problems arise. They had senior roles in the Padres parent organization, They tried to stop expansion. They supported the forming of the union. They volunteered in the classrooms.

The administration shuts down dissent and is secretive about what's going on. And then they craft some spin-doctored talking points that don't address any of the concerns families raise. It is not a situation that can be changed, unless the senior administration is replaced.

I know two families who pulled kids mid-year this year because things were untenable.

Leave now or leave later.

Not at MV but according to the retention data they aren’t bleeding students.

Which sort of speaks to how bad the alternatives are.

I posted previously about similar dynamics at my kids' charter, and this is true. A bad day at one of these better-regarded charters is still better than a good day at my inbound.

Same! Everyone leaves my IB between first and third grade. In addition, we have 0% chance at DCI if we stayed at our IB.

Well, for the kids who are in upper elementary now, MV really was a better option several years ago. Nowadays I guess it just depends what you're willing to tolerate in exchange for Spanish and the unspecified probability of DCI. But the way MV burns through its K and older waitlists, any family with a kid at Langley, Seaton, or Garrison past preschool has effectively chosen that over MV. And those schools have full or near-full K classes. This was not the case 5 years ago. And it's part of why MV's star has dimmed.

Laugh all you want, the numbers are there. People are choosing Langley over MV in K, 1st, 2nd. LANGLEY.

But they aren't staying in 3-5. Langley's PARRC scores are pretty terrible.

Those scores are several years old so whatever. If you control for demographics, MV's scores are not impressive at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i feel so sad for the families that are lured in based on the rumors and false pictures painted during the open houses.

MV (and maybe other charters) need to be held to account for making false claims. During the MV open house, I remember an elaborate slide show of photos from field trips to Rock Creek Park (though I think they haven't been there in many many years), and our tour guide, when asked what the teacher turnover rate was, said something along the lines of "teachers are very happy and rarely leave." At the Bancroft DCPS open house when someone asked an identical question, the principal pulled out the data and said "86%"

it makes it so hard for parents to get a clear idea of what kind of school they are entering when the open houses are full of exaggerations and falsehoods... then you end up with someone like OP feeling so devasted. I have so many friends who entered MV with such high hopes and they are ALL gone now, and left very disgusted and disappointed.

How can this school be held to account?

There is really no accountability for charters short of egregiously bad test scores or outright fraud. But if MV parents would stop defending it and tell prospective parents the actual truth, that might help by damaging the school enough that the board intervenes.

If you search these boards, you'll find lots of parents speaking the truth about the school, dating back YEARS. Many passionately testified at the hearing about the expansion plan because they saw the revolving door of teachers, lack of transparency, poor discipline, etc. The school was a mess and in the hole financially, so its solution was to expand to get more per pupil funding. It just replicated the mess. But none of the people with pre-K kids playing the lottery back then wanted to hear it. I think I was accused of wanting to pull the ladder up behind me. Someone might have called me racist. We were just speaking the truth and hoping others could learn from our mistake. Oh well.

We are at another charter--with what sounds like similar issues to MV. I'm constantly stunned at how some parents continue to be in utter denial at the reality of the discipline and academic issues at our school. It's bizarre--it's like they don't question obvious issues in front of them.

They're in denial because they don't want to move, don't have a better option, and don't want to admit to themselves that they made the wrong choice. It's stunning how little incoming preschool parents research the upper elementary grades. And how blatantly people will lie to preschool parents about what their school is really like. People will tell the truth anonymously, but not in person within their own community unless they really, really trust the person they're talking with.

It’s not so simple. Most schools are great for early years so parents will speak highly of their school. It’s also confusing when you don’t know what it should be like, having never had a child in school before, and doubly so when COVID hit and everything became very opaque.

It takes a lot to tank a school in local public opinion. Think SSMA. Most of the time you’ll hear local parents in upper grades speak both positively and negatively of a school. It isn’t like hiding the truth but different experiences.

Our experience at LAMB has been mixed and that’s what I often tell people as well. I wouldn’t sugar coat it. Most neighbors speaking one ok one are blatantly honest, I’ve found, and the good bad and ugly. What we don’t tend to have are a lot of other options.

Also at lamb. I think the administration at LAMB is also weak, and I have had a mixed experience as well. But the huge difference is that lamb teachers are generally excellent. Because they’re montessori they don’t jump ship as easily as those from Mundo can and do. Also we don’t take kids in upper grades which seems to be a huge reason for so much disruption in classrooms. That is just short sighted.

This thread is depressing partially bc every Mundo family I know is frantically playing the lottery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are several former families posting here. We spend seven years at MV. My older child went from prek- 5th and we pulled my second child. I know dozens and dozens of parents who tried to solve similar problems, and all left in frustration. These are families who joined the school in the first or second year if its existence with nothing but enthusiasm and hope. And families who joined a few years later, hoping for the best. All tried to change things when they saw problems arise. They had senior roles in the Padres parent organization, They tried to stop expansion. They supported the forming of the union. They volunteered in the classrooms.

The administration shuts down dissent and is secretive about what's going on. And then they craft some spin-doctored talking points that don't address any of the concerns families raise. It is not a situation that can be changed, unless the senior administration is replaced.

I know two families who pulled kids mid-year this year because things were untenable.

Leave now or leave later.

Not at MV but according to the retention data they aren’t bleeding students.

Which sort of speaks to how bad the alternatives are.

I posted previously about similar dynamics at my kids' charter, and this is true. A bad day at one of these better-regarded charters is still better than a good day at my inbound.

Same! Everyone leaves my IB between first and third grade. In addition, we have 0% chance at DCI if we stayed at our IB.

Well, for the kids who are in upper elementary now, MV really was a better option several years ago. Nowadays I guess it just depends what you're willing to tolerate in exchange for Spanish and the unspecified probability of DCI. But the way MV burns through its K and older waitlists, any family with a kid at Langley, Seaton, or Garrison past preschool has effectively chosen that over MV. And those schools have full or near-full K classes. This was not the case 5 years ago. And it's part of why MV's star has dimmed.

Laugh all you want, the numbers are there. People are choosing Langley over MV in K, 1st, 2nd. LANGLEY.

But they aren't staying in 3-5. Langley's PARRC scores are pretty terrible.

Those scores are several years old so whatever. If you control for demographics, MV's scores are not impressive at all.

All scores are several years old. But doubt they will improve with the pandemic learning loss. Langley/ Seaton/ etc might be amazing, but families are still bailing in the upper grades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i feel so sad for the families that are lured in based on the rumors and false pictures painted during the open houses.

MV (and maybe other charters) need to be held to account for making false claims. During the MV open house, I remember an elaborate slide show of photos from field trips to Rock Creek Park (though I think they haven't been there in many many years), and our tour guide, when asked what the teacher turnover rate was, said something along the lines of "teachers are very happy and rarely leave." At the Bancroft DCPS open house when someone asked an identical question, the principal pulled out the data and said "86%"

it makes it so hard for parents to get a clear idea of what kind of school they are entering when the open houses are full of exaggerations and falsehoods... then you end up with someone like OP feeling so devasted. I have so many friends who entered MV with such high hopes and they are ALL gone now, and left very disgusted and disappointed.

How can this school be held to account?

There is really no accountability for charters short of egregiously bad test scores or outright fraud. But if MV parents would stop defending it and tell prospective parents the actual truth, that might help by damaging the school enough that the board intervenes.

If you search these boards, you'll find lots of parents speaking the truth about the school, dating back YEARS. Many passionately testified at the hearing about the expansion plan because they saw the revolving door of teachers, lack of transparency, poor discipline, etc. The school was a mess and in the hole financially, so its solution was to expand to get more per pupil funding. It just replicated the mess. But none of the people with pre-K kids playing the lottery back then wanted to hear it. I think I was accused of wanting to pull the ladder up behind me. Someone might have called me racist. We were just speaking the truth and hoping others could learn from our mistake. Oh well.

We are at another charter--with what sounds like similar issues to MV. I'm constantly stunned at how some parents continue to be in utter denial at the reality of the discipline and academic issues at our school. It's bizarre--it's like they don't question obvious issues in front of them.

They're in denial because they don't want to move, don't have a better option, and don't want to admit to themselves that they made the wrong choice. It's stunning how little incoming preschool parents research the upper elementary grades. And how blatantly people will lie to preschool parents about what their school is really like. People will tell the truth anonymously, but not in person within their own community unless they really, really trust the person they're talking with.

It’s not so simple. Most schools are great for early years so parents will speak highly of their school. It’s also confusing when you don’t know what it should be like, having never had a child in school before, and doubly so when COVID hit and everything became very opaque.

It takes a lot to tank a school in local public opinion. Think SSMA. Most of the time you’ll hear local parents in upper grades speak both positively and negatively of a school. It isn’t like hiding the truth but different experiences.

Our experience at LAMB has been mixed and that’s what I often tell people as well. I wouldn’t sugar coat it. Most neighbors speaking one ok one are blatantly honest, I’ve found, and the good bad and ugly. What we don’t tend to have are a lot of other options.

Also at lamb. I think the administration at LAMB is also weak, and I have had a mixed experience as well. But the huge difference is that lamb teachers are generally excellent. Because they’re montessori they don’t jump ship as easily as those from Mundo can and do. Also we don’t take kids in upper grades which seems to be a huge reason for so much disruption in classrooms. That is just short sighted.

This thread is depressing partially bc every Mundo family I know is frantically playing the lottery.

If MV didn't take in new kids, their upper grades would be teeny tiny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are several former families posting here. We spend seven years at MV. My older child went from prek- 5th and we pulled my second child. I know dozens and dozens of parents who tried to solve similar problems, and all left in frustration. These are families who joined the school in the first or second year if its existence with nothing but enthusiasm and hope. And families who joined a few years later, hoping for the best. All tried to change things when they saw problems arise. They had senior roles in the Padres parent organization, They tried to stop expansion. They supported the forming of the union. They volunteered in the classrooms.

The administration shuts down dissent and is secretive about what's going on. And then they craft some spin-doctored talking points that don't address any of the concerns families raise. It is not a situation that can be changed, unless the senior administration is replaced.

I know two families who pulled kids mid-year this year because things were untenable.

Leave now or leave later.

Not at MV but according to the retention data they aren’t bleeding students.

Which sort of speaks to how bad the alternatives are.

I posted previously about similar dynamics at my kids' charter, and this is true. A bad day at one of these better-regarded charters is still better than a good day at my inbound.

Same! Everyone leaves my IB between first and third grade. In addition, we have 0% chance at DCI if we stayed at our IB.

Well, for the kids who are in upper elementary now, MV really was a better option several years ago. Nowadays I guess it just depends what you're willing to tolerate in exchange for Spanish and the unspecified probability of DCI. But the way MV burns through its K and older waitlists, any family with a kid at Langley, Seaton, or Garrison past preschool has effectively chosen that over MV. And those schools have full or near-full K classes. This was not the case 5 years ago. And it's part of why MV's star has dimmed.

Laugh all you want, the numbers are there. People are choosing Langley over MV in K, 1st, 2nd. LANGLEY.

But they aren't staying in 3-5. Langley's PARRC scores are pretty terrible.

Those scores are several years old so whatever. If you control for demographics, MV's scores are not impressive at all.

All scores are several years old. But doubt they will improve with the pandemic learning loss. Langley/ Seaton/ etc might be amazing, but families are still bailing in the upper grades.

Just like they are at MV

[Anonymous]

urban education doesn't work when the needy kids exceed the less-burdensome ones, the interests of the majority will prevail...even if the majority is harmed by others in said majority

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are several former families posting here. We spend seven years at MV. My older child went from prek- 5th and we pulled my second child. I know dozens and dozens of parents who tried to solve similar problems, and all left in frustration. These are families who joined the school in the first or second year if its existence with nothing but enthusiasm and hope. And families who joined a few years later, hoping for the best. All tried to change things when they saw problems arise. They had senior roles in the Padres parent organization, They tried to stop expansion. They supported the forming of the union. They volunteered in the classrooms.

The administration shuts down dissent and is secretive about what's going on. And then they craft some spin-doctored talking points that don't address any of the concerns families raise. It is not a situation that can be changed, unless the senior administration is replaced.

I know two families who pulled kids mid-year this year because things were untenable.

Leave now or leave later.

Not at MV but according to the retention data they aren’t bleeding students.

Which sort of speaks to how bad the alternatives are.

I posted previously about similar dynamics at my kids' charter, and this is true. A bad day at one of these better-regarded charters is still better than a good day at my inbound.

Same! Everyone leaves my IB between first and third grade. In addition, we have 0% chance at DCI if we stayed at our IB.

Well, for the kids who are in upper elementary now, MV really was a better option several years ago. Nowadays I guess it just depends what you're willing to tolerate in exchange for Spanish and the unspecified probability of DCI. But the way MV burns through its K and older waitlists, any family with a kid at Langley, Seaton, or Garrison past preschool has effectively chosen that over MV. And those schools have full or near-full K classes. This was not the case 5 years ago. And it's part of why MV's star has dimmed.

Laugh all you want, the numbers are there. People are choosing Langley over MV in K, 1st, 2nd. LANGLEY.

But they aren't staying in 3-5. Langley's PARRC scores are pretty terrible.

Those scores are several years old so whatever. If you control for demographics, MV's scores are not impressive at all.

All scores are several years old. But doubt they will improve with the pandemic learning loss. Langley/ Seaton/ etc might be amazing, but families are still bailing in the upper grades.

Right. Langley and Seaton aren't that great, for sure. Yet MV is such a mess that people get offers from MV and stick with Langley and Seaton. Why? Didn't used to be that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are several former families posting here. We spend seven years at MV. My older child went from prek- 5th and we pulled my second child. I know dozens and dozens of parents who tried to solve similar problems, and all left in frustration. These are families who joined the school in the first or second year if its existence with nothing but enthusiasm and hope. And families who joined a few years later, hoping for the best. All tried to change things when they saw problems arise. They had senior roles in the Padres parent organization, They tried to stop expansion. They supported the forming of the union. They volunteered in the classrooms.

The administration shuts down dissent and is secretive about what's going on. And then they craft some spin-doctored talking points that don't address any of the concerns families raise. It is not a situation that can be changed, unless the senior administration is replaced.

I know two families who pulled kids mid-year this year because things were untenable.

Leave now or leave later.

Not at MV but according to the retention data they aren’t bleeding students.

Which sort of speaks to how bad the alternatives are.

I posted previously about similar dynamics at my kids' charter, and this is true. A bad day at one of these better-regarded charters is still better than a good day at my inbound.

Same! Everyone leaves my IB between first and third grade. In addition, we have 0% chance at DCI if we stayed at our IB.

Well, for the kids who are in upper elementary now, MV really was a better option several years ago. Nowadays I guess it just depends what you're willing to tolerate in exchange for Spanish and the unspecified probability of DCI. But the way MV burns through its K and older waitlists, any family with a kid at Langley, Seaton, or Garrison past preschool has effectively chosen that over MV. And those schools have full or near-full K classes. This was not the case 5 years ago. And it's part of why MV's star has dimmed.

This thread started about Calle Ocho. Many IB for these kids are Bunker Hill, maybe Burroughs, surrounding schools. Not the super gentrified ones like Seaton. I have only heard of many kids enrolling at BH I’m the last two years, before that not common.

I’d like to know if the problems of MV P street are at 8th now, or not. It might not help to speak generally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i feel so sad for the families that are lured in based on the rumors and false pictures painted during the open houses.

MV (and maybe other charters) need to be held to account for making false claims. During the MV open house, I remember an elaborate slide show of photos from field trips to Rock Creek Park (though I think they haven't been there in many many years), and our tour guide, when asked what the teacher turnover rate was, said something along the lines of "teachers are very happy and rarely leave." At the Bancroft DCPS open house when someone asked an identical question, the principal pulled out the data and said "86%"

it makes it so hard for parents to get a clear idea of what kind of school they are entering when the open houses are full of exaggerations and falsehoods... then you end up with someone like OP feeling so devasted. I have so many friends who entered MV with such high hopes and they are ALL gone now, and left very disgusted and disappointed.

How can this school be held to account?

There is really no accountability for charters short of egregiously bad test scores or outright fraud. But if MV parents would stop defending it and tell prospective parents the actual truth, that might help by damaging the school enough that the board intervenes.

If you search these boards, you'll find lots of parents speaking the truth about the school, dating back YEARS. Many passionately testified at the hearing about the expansion plan because they saw the revolving door of teachers, lack of transparency, poor discipline, etc. The school was a mess and in the hole financially, so its solution was to expand to get more per pupil funding. It just replicated the mess. But none of the people with pre-K kids playing the lottery back then wanted to hear it. I think I was accused of wanting to pull the ladder up behind me. Someone might have called me racist. We were just speaking the truth and hoping others could learn from our mistake. Oh well.

We are at another charter--with what sounds like similar issues to MV. I'm constantly stunned at how some parents continue to be in utter denial at the reality of the discipline and academic issues at our school. It's bizarre--it's like they don't question obvious issues in front of them.

They're in denial because they don't want to move, don't have a better option, and don't want to admit to themselves that they made the wrong choice. It's stunning how little incoming preschool parents research the upper elementary grades. And how blatantly people will lie to preschool parents about what their school is really like. People will tell the truth anonymously, but not in person within their own community unless they really, really trust the person they're talking with.

It’s not so simple. Most schools are great for early years so parents will speak highly of their school. It’s also confusing when you don’t know what it should be like, having never had a child in school before, and doubly so when COVID hit and everything became very opaque.

It takes a lot to tank a school in local public opinion. Think SSMA. Most of the time you’ll hear local parents in upper grades speak both positively and negatively of a school. It isn’t like hiding the truth but different experiences.

Our experience at LAMB has been mixed and that’s what I often tell people as well. I wouldn’t sugar coat it. Most neighbors speaking one ok one are blatantly honest, I’ve found, and the good bad and ugly. What we don’t tend to have are a lot of other options.

Also at lamb. I think the administration at LAMB is also weak, and I have had a mixed experience as well. But the huge difference is that lamb teachers are generally excellent. Because they’re montessori they don’t jump ship as easily as those from Mundo can and do. Also we don’t take kids in upper grades which seems to be a huge reason for so much disruption in classrooms. That is just short sighted.

This thread is depressing partially bc every Mundo family I know is frantically playing the lottery.

True. Although our LAMB teachers have also been a mixed bag, and several have left. I will say a school absolutely needs to focus on teacher retention and support, or that school won’t be good. In this area DCPs has a real leg up due to their pay and benefits. Not sure how charters can compete, not that DCPS is an easy job.