Reply to BASIS: PCSB staff recommends conditional continuance due to SWD

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "BASIS: PCSB staff recommends conditional continuance due to SWD"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]The crux of the problem is that the ed powers in this city want to have it both ways: they want to continue to underfund charters relative to DCPS programs on a per capita basis while requiring the latter to provide DCPS-level support for SN students and English Language Learners. [b]They don't want students with disabilities and poor kids to be excluded from the best public schools, but refuse to provide the GT education that would help the brightest poor kids students enjoy strong representation in the public HS programs offering the most rigor. They want high-performing test-in magnets that compare to the top performers in other US cities, but won't support the requisite K-8 prep and ability grouping to create them.[/b] Something has to give, with the charter board, OSSE and the Mayor's office turning a blind eye because they boxed themselves into a corner long ago. At BASIS, conveniently, it's support for SN and ELL. As long as a couple students a year from BASIS continue to crack MIT and Yale, no politician is going to mess with BASIS DC. It's no secret that the franchise has found far more fertile ground to expand its public school empire in Texas and Louisiana than in DC. The Charter Board is toothless without political backing.[/quote]

Excellent summation. [b] To that I would add that the failure of DCPS to address the bolded sentence is WHY ---20 years into charter schools---charters went from the original intent of being "niche" educational programs:  dual language, montessori/experiential learning, etc.---into serving 45% of the kids currently using public education in the District.  [/b]So now that charters are essentially a parallel school system, the first sentence---creating unreasonable expectations for charters as a result of underfunding---has become the reality.
What I would like to see is a charter that is expressly special-ed---like a charter version of LAB.  And with an admissions system that either lets you lottery for it with an existing IEP, OR allows a charter to charter transfer for kids who are identified as needing greater services than the charter can provide.  That would seem to be much more practical than the current world---which expects all schools to be all things for SPED kids.  I have a SPED kid.  We would never have lotteried DC into a program like BASIS and then demanded that BASIS accommodate DC.    That would have unreasonable for both the schools and DC.[/quote]

THIS.  In the last 20 years, DCPS could have competed with charter "niche" educational programs by innovating, using the best school systems in other big cities as models.  They could have ramped up their test-in HS magnet programs to offer BASIS level academics fed by test-in MS programs, like NYC, Chicago and Boston do.  They could have introduced bona fide academic tracking across core subjects in most of their MS programs.  They could even have created superior language immersion programs, with lotteries for native speakers across the board.  DCPS didn't bother, hence almost half the public school students in the city are enrolled in charters, including the great majority of UMC families outside the Deal-Wilson catchment areas.  Good for you, PP, for not demanding that a cash-strapped charter provides your student with state of the art SN programming.  [/quote]

when your ultimate argument is that it is unfair for parents to seek [b]legally entitled education[/b] for their disabled kids, you lose all credibility as an analyst of the situation. what you REALLY think is that SN kids don’t deserve any resources or anything that takes away from your kid.[/quote]

Again, if its so easy, simple, then why argue? I mean, its the law, isn't it. Should be a slam dunk to get whatever you think your kid is legally entitled to. [/quote]

If I was in charge of Basis, sure. But all the Basis boosters here are saying they don’t think Basis should have to do it. [/quote]
But why do you care? if you are 100% protected by simple legal rights, why do you argue with people?

I'm being pedantic, but trying to make the point that claiming "but the law" isn't enough, which is why you and other people are arguing. "The law" is always subject to interpretation, which is why, as so many SN parents here attest, it's damn hard to get the services their kids need. I suspect you are arguing with posters on this thread because at the end of the day it's not easy or simple. And not black and white. If you want advocates for SN services and support, perhaps a different approach is warranted. [/quote]

What kind of "different approach" do you think is warranted, when there are Basis advocates on here saying "Basis should be exempt from the law becuase it is special"?  Is your question about what else should be brought to bear to ensure that Basis complies with the law, for individual kids, and for DC kids overall? There's no black and white here - the claims that some Basis boosters are making that Basis should just ... not follow the law.  [b]If what you're saying is that nothing can guarantee a specific outcome for an individual child, sure[/b]. But that's different from getting the services they are legally entitled to.  [/quote]

I don't see one post where anyone claims Basis shouldn't "follow the law" nor do I see any evidence that Basis is not, in fact doing so. Again, enrollment, not actual violations are at issue.

But your sentence bolded above hits right on the issue- exactly. Basis is challenging and demands A LOT. And most- more than half- of kids leave by high school. This is for all sorts of reasons, but workload is a part of it. I think there is a concern that advocates are saying "you must change the structure so that kids with SN can't fail," or "You can't have standards so high that SN kids can't meet them." Perhaps its because we are ignorant about what supports really consititue for kids or perhaps its because we know that lots of NT kids struggle at Basis too. I don't know.
[/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