Anonymous wrote:Catania has outlined his vision of big change for the schools. He sponsored seven education bills in front of the council, and his education platform is basically the same.

Unfortunately, much if that vision is unsupported by research. He wants to hold students back a grade, but that hasn't been found to be effective.

https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/cde/cdewp/99-06.pdf

One of his bills proposed to turn failing schools over to "third parties" I.e. charters. As we have seen, there are charters, and then there are charters. The lack of financial transparency from charter management companies who might apply for such a takeover has proven to be very troubling. This part of the plan looks to me like a transfer of public funds to a few private businesspeople with an unclear benefit to kids.

He's going to throw the lottery into disarray by tossing the proposed new boundaries in favor of some as yet to be determined redo that will magically not move any child to a school that has lower test scores than their current IB schools. I'd be interested to see the math on that.

I don't mean to suggest that Bowsr has a more coherent plan. She may do less damage.

Sadly, there is a ton of research out there on what does work:
1) universal pre-k (see the work of Nobel Laureate James Heckman),
2) Targeted feedback for teachers plus proven curricula (see Murnane and Duncan)

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/02/how-public-schools-can-fight-back-against-inequality/283669/

3) NYC has had success with the small high school model

Yet, you won't hear any DC mayoral candidate proposing any of these proven models.

Anonymous wrote:One has to ask one's self, what do the private funders get out of it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catania has outlined his vision of big change for the schools. He sponsored seven education bills in front of the council, and his education platform is basically the same.

Unfortunately, much if that vision is unsupported by research. He wants to hold students back a grade, but that hasn't been found to be effective.

https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/cde/cdewp/99-06.pdf

One of his bills proposed to turn failing schools over to "third parties" I.e. charters. As we have seen, there are charters, and then there are charters. The lack of financial transparency from charter management companies who might apply for such a takeover has proven to be very troubling. This part of the plan looks to me like a transfer of public funds to a few private businesspeople with an unclear benefit to kids.

He's going to throw the lottery into disarray by tossing the proposed new boundaries in favor of some as yet to be determined redo that will magically not move any child to a school that has lower test scores than their current IB schools. I'd be interested to see the math on that.

I don't mean to suggest that Bowsr has a more coherent plan. She may do less damage.

Sadly, there is a ton of research out there on what does work:
1) universal pre-k (see the work of Nobel Laureate James Heckman),
2) Targeted feedback for teachers plus proven curricula (see Murnane and[guardian] Duncan)

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/02/how-public-schools-can-fight-back-against-inequality/283669/

3) NYC has had success with the small high school model

Yet, you won't hear any DC mayoral candidate proposing any of these proven models.

I almost bought this. I like programs that work too and small schools as an option for parents. We can have quality teachers, good curricula, and filled schools with Catania. Bowser's backing of WTU shows she cares more about getting elected than results for parents and students.

Anonymous wrote:Catania has outlined his vision of big change for the schools. He sponsored seven education bills in front of the council, and his education platform is basically the same.

Unfortunately, much if that vision is unsupported by research. He wants to hold students back a grade, but that hasn't been found to be effective.

https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/cde/cdewp/99-06.pdf

One of his bills proposed to turn failing schools over to "third parties" I.e. charters. As we have seen, there are charters, and then there are charters. The lack of financial transparency from charter management companies who might apply for such a takeover has proven to be very troubling. This part of the plan looks to me like a transfer of public funds to a few private businesspeople with an unclear benefit to kids.

He's going to throw the lottery into disarray by tossing the proposed new boundaries in favor of some as yet to be determined redo that will magically not move any child to a school that has lower test scores than their current IB schools. I'd be interested to see the math on that.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catania has outlined his vision of big change for the schools. He sponsored seven education bills in front of the council, and his education platform is basically the same.

Unfortunately, much if that vision is unsupported by research. He wants to hold students back a grade, but that hasn't been found to be effective.

https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/cde/cdewp/99-06.pdf

One of his bills proposed to turn failing schools over to "third parties" I.e. charters. As we have seen, there are charters, and then there are charters. The lack of financial transparency from charter management companies who might apply for such a takeover has proven to be very troubling. This part of the plan looks to me like a transfer of public funds to a few private businesspeople with an unclear benefit to kids.

He's going to throw the lottery into disarray by tossing the proposed new boundaries in favor of some as yet to be determined redo that will magically not move any child to a school that has lower test scores than their current IB schools. I'd be interested to see the math on that.

I want to gently disagree with some of what you are saying. Catania's bill (now law) ending social promotion does not hold kids back in a vacuum, but links to services aimed at resolving the issues that resulted in the student failing. This goes hand in hand with his bill deal with truancy. Catania's efforts are not aimed at punishment but identifying and solving problems so that students don't get left behind. This is even complemented by his bill (again, now law) that classifies students who are a year behind as "at risk" and provides extra funding for them. So, rather being promoted a grade and continually to flounder, a failing student will be held back and provided additional resources and interventions to help them get them earn promotion.

His bill dealing with third parties taking over failing schools appears to have been the result of the Administration pulling a fast one. Kaya Henderson told Catania that such authority was necessary for her to turn around failing schools. She essentially wanted her own chartering authority. Catania maintains that he introduced the measure at Henderson's request. Then, the Administration distanced themselves from the bill. Catania has said that he opposes the large national charter companies coming in to takeover DCPS schools. As far as I know, he has not moved this bill in his committee.

Finally, you completely mistake Catania's position regarding the boundaries. I'm surprised because his position has been clearly stated. He will delay the current plan for one year. He has said nothing about changing the boundary plan, let alone proposed a redo. You seem to have confused Catania's and Bowser's positions. It is Bowser who has said that she will not accept the Mayor's plan but given no idea what she will replace it with. She has only said that she will get education experts around a table.

JoshH wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catania has outlined his vision of big change for the schools. He sponsored seven education bills in front of the council, and his education platform is basically the same.

Unfortunately, much if that vision is unsupported by research. He wants to hold students back a grade, but that hasn't been found to be effective.

https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/cde/cdewp/99-06.pdf

One of his bills proposed to turn failing schools over to "third parties" I.e. charters. As we have seen, there are charters, and then there are charters. The lack of financial transparency from charter management companies who might apply for such a takeover has proven to be very troubling. This part of the plan looks to me like a transfer of public funds to a few private businesspeople with an unclear benefit to kids.

He's going to throw the lottery into disarray by tossing the proposed new boundaries in favor of some as yet to be determined redo that will magically not move any child to a school that has lower test scores than their current IB schools. I'd be interested to see the math on that.

I want to gently disagree with some of what you are saying. Catania's bill (now law) ending social promotion does not hold kids back in a vacuum, but links to services aimed at resolving the issues that resulted in the student failing. This goes hand in hand with his bill deal with truancy. Catania's efforts are not aimed at punishment but identifying and solving problems so that students don't get left behind. This is even complemented by his bill (again, now law) that classifies students who are a year behind as "at risk" and provides extra funding for them. So, rather being promoted a grade and continually to flounder, a failing student will be held back and provided additional resources and interventions to help them get them earn promotion.

His bill dealing with third parties taking over failing schools appears to have been the result of the Administration pulling a fast one. Kaya Henderson told Catania that such authority was necessary for her to turn around failing schools. She essentially wanted her own chartering authority. Catania maintains that he introduced the measure at Henderson's request. Then, the Administration distanced themselves from the bill. Catania has said that he opposes the large national charter companies coming in to takeover DCPS schools. As far as I know, he has not moved this bill in his committee.

Finally, you completely mistake Catania's position regarding the boundaries. I'm surprised because his position has been clearly stated. He will delay the current plan for one year. He has said nothing about changing the boundary plan, let alone proposed a redo. You seem to have confused Catania's and Bowser's positions. It is Bowser who has said that she will not accept the Mayor's plan but given no idea what she will replace it with. She has only said that she will get education experts around a table.

If Bowser wins, I am buying stock in tables.

Anonymous wrote:Catania has outlined his vision of big change for the schools. He sponsored seven education bills in front of the council, and his education platform is basically the same.

Unfortunately, much if that vision is unsupported by research. He wants to hold students back a grade, but that hasn't been found to be effective.

https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/cde/cdewp/99-06.pdf

One of his bills proposed to turn failing schools over to "third parties" I.e. charters. As we have seen, there are charters, and then there are charters. The lack of financial transparency from charter management companies who might apply for such a takeover has proven to be very troubling. This part of the plan looks to me like a transfer of public funds to a few private businesspeople with an unclear benefit to kids.

He's going to throw the lottery into disarray by tossing the proposed new boundaries in favor of some as yet to be determined redo that will magically not move any child to a school that has lower test scores than their current IB schools. I'd be interested to see the math on that.

I don't mean to suggest that Bowsr has a more coherent plan. She may do less damage.

Sadly, there is a ton of research out there on what does work:
1) universal pre-k (see the work of Nobel Laureate James Heckman),
2) Targeted feedback for teachers plus proven curricula (see Murnane and Duncan)

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/02/how-public-schools-can-fight-back-against-inequality/283669/

3) NYC has had success with the small high school model

Yet, you won't hear any DC mayoral candidate proposing any of these proven models.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catania has outlined his vision of big change for the schools. He sponsored seven education bills in front of the council, and his education platform is basically the same.

Unfortunately, much if that vision is unsupported by research. He wants to hold students back a grade, but that hasn't been found to be effective.

https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/cde/cdewp/99-06.pdf

One of his bills proposed to turn failing schools over to "third parties" I.e. charters. As we have seen, there are charters, and then there are charters. The lack of financial transparency from charter management companies who might apply for such a takeover has proven to be very troubling. This part of the plan looks to me like a transfer of public funds to a few private businesspeople with an unclear benefit to kids.

He's going to throw the lottery into disarray by tossing the proposed new boundaries in favor of some as yet to be determined redo that will magically not move any child to a school that has lower test scores than their current IB schools. I'd be interested to see the math on that.

I don't mean to suggest that Bowsr has a more coherent plan. She may do less damage.

Sadly, there is a ton of research out there on what does work:
1) universal pre-k (see the work of Nobel Laureate James Heckman),
2) Targeted feedback for teachers plus proven curricula (see Murnane and Duncan)

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/02/how-public-schools-can-fight-back-against-inequality/283669/

3) NYC has had success with the small high school model

Yet, you won't hear any DC mayoral candidate proposing any of these proven models.

Doesn't DC already have the closest thing possible to universal PreK? The proposed Title I set asides for IB stidents will presumably close any gaps.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catania has outlined his vision of big change for the schools. He sponsored seven education bills in front of the council, and his education platform is basically the same.

Unfortunately, much if that vision is unsupported by research. He wants to hold students back a grade, but that hasn't been found to be effective.

https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/cde/cdewp/99-06.pdf

One of his bills proposed to turn failing schools over to "third parties" I.e. charters. As we have seen, there are charters, and then there are charters. The lack of financial transparency from charter management companies who might apply for such a takeover has proven to be very troubling. This part of the plan looks to me like a transfer of public funds to a few private businesspeople with an unclear benefit to kids.

He's going to throw the lottery into disarray by tossing the proposed new boundaries in favor of some as yet to be determined redo that will magically not move any child to a school that has lower test scores than their current IB schools. I'd be interested to see the math on that.

I want to gently disagree with some of what you are saying. Catania's bill (now law) ending social promotion does not hold kids back in a vacuum, but links to services aimed at resolving the issues that resulted in the student failing. This goes hand in hand with his bill deal with truancy. Catania's efforts are not aimed at punishment but identifying and solving problems so that students don't get left behind. This is even complemented by his bill (again, now law) that classifies students who are a year behind as "at risk" and provides extra funding for them. So, rather being promoted a grade and continually to flounder, a failing student will be held back and provided additional resources and interventions to help them get them earn promotion.

His bill dealing with third parties taking over failing schools appears to have been the result of the Administration pulling a fast one. Kaya Henderson told Catania that such authority was necessary for her to turn around failing schools. She essentially wanted her own chartering authority. Catania maintains that he introduced the measure at Henderson's request. Then, the Administration distanced themselves from the bill. Catania has said that he opposes the large national charter companies coming in to takeover DCPS schools. As far as I know, he has not moved this bill in his committee.

Finally, you completely mistake Catania's position regarding the boundaries. I'm surprised because his position has been clearly stated. He will delay the current plan for one year. He has said nothing about changing the boundary plan, let alone proposed a redo. You seem to have confused Catania's and Bowser's positions. It is Bowser who has said that she will not accept the Mayor's plan but given no idea what she will replace it with. She has only said that she will get education experts around a table.