Reply to Are we fools not to play lottery for our 3 y o?

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Are we fools not to play lottery for our 3 y o?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

Nowhere do I or any other PPs say "all kids are getting a better education".  Of course that would be ridiculous, because there are charter schools that are not doing well and there are still plenty of failing DCPS schools.  No one said ALL kids, not here, not anywhere that I've seen on DCUM.  So you can move on from that part of your argument.

Re: your bolded statement, are you saying that the kids now in charters that are performing well or excellently would be doing just as well in DCPS?  How can you get around the fact that with the #s of students enrolled in Tier 1 and Tier 2 charters, THEY are getting a better education than their neighborhood schools?  And yes, the PP who keeps talking about how charters have led to disinvestment of parents in their neighborhood DCPS schools, as if somehow that would have happened if not for charters, has talked about the negative effect of charters.  So yes, someone has said they're bad, even if they're still trying to get their kids in because it's the only "rickety lifeboat" they have.

So, again, the question still remains for those who damn the existence of charters (and yes, that is exactly the bottom line of PPs), what should have/could have happened at the time the charter movement really got going, that would have served the numbers of underserved kids who are now getting a better education at charter schools?  Do you know how many low income kids are enrolled in adequately-to-well performing charters now?  If you damn charters, you are saying that either it doesn't matter that a signficant number of underserved kids are better off or that the generations of those kids who would have had crappy outcomes was worth sacrificing in order for ___________ to happen instead.  (____________ being whatever it is you think would have happened to actually improve DCPS, and we're all still waiting on what that is).[/quote]

I'm not the "rickety boats" poster, but there's no doubt that charters have led to disinvestment of parents in their neighborhood DCPS schools. It is a FACT that high-SES families in Brookland, N. Michigan Park and Woodridge send their kids to a) charter or b) Catholic schools. And a not-insignificant number homeschool. [b]Yes, some students are getting better educations at charters than they would at their IB schools, but the whole point of IB schools is to have a school of right where you are guaranteed a spot. The charter school does not yet fill that role.[/b]

[/quote]

And nowhere that I've posted on this topic (either in this thread or others) have I ever said that that's not true.  It is absolutely true that charters have led some parents who, absent charter school choice would be looking much more seriously at what they can do with their neighborhood school.  There are still many parents in various stages of "school takeovers" happening in DC, but I have never and would never deny that charters have taken parents away who would have invested in neighborhood schools instead.

Where PPs are wrong or at least are not able to explain why they're "right" is the point made that BECAUSE of charters, some paernt-led reviolution of neighborhood schools that otherwise would have happened did not happen.  Read up-thread, that is exactly what one of the most vocal PPs says over and over (and maybe other PPs).  That is the point we are discussing:

If that's true, prove it, what was going on at the time charters got off the ground that indicates that all the prior years of drowning DCPS schools and limited parent investment was turning around enough that it was a mistake to focus on starting something new?

And what should have been done with kids at that moment in time when charters got going that would not have sacrificed further generations of awful outcomes that - for the hundreds (more?) now enrolled in good charters, have improved for the better?[/quote]

And by the way, not only do charters not serve the role bolded above, they are not MEANT to serve that role.  Charters were the best alternative anyone could come up with for educating students who were getting left behind by a public school system that was unable in some instances, and unwilling in others, to change.  They were never meant to be "your friendly neighborhood school, for neighborhood kids".  They were meant to be an alternative for kids whose neighborhood schools should have been closed ages ago to get an education.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics