Reply to Ludlow-Taylor getting a new a new Principal

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Ludlow-Taylor getting a new a new Principal"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Leading for Increased Effectiveness should include a bullet for "Increasing in-boundary percentages with cash bonus awarded to principal, teachers and PTA for each in-boundary student attracted or retained above prek..."[/quote]

That's a brilliant suggestion!  have you thought about providing that feedback to the chancellor's Critical Response Team?  Also, do you have any concrete suggestions for how a principal, teacher, or PTA can in-boundary percentages beyond pre-k, especially when parents don't want their children at L-T, for example?  What I can't wrap my head around is that so many in-boundary parents on DCUM talk about wanting a neighborhood school yet they don't want to grow the school with their children.  It stands to reason that if there is a large percentage of in-boundary ps3, pk4, and k students, and parents keep their in-boundary children enrolled after ps3 - k, they then will have a bona fide neighorhood school with high achieving, high-SES students.[/quote]

Thanks.  I've made this suggestion to Tommy Wells and Charles Allen at any rate, but maybe I should suggest it to the CRT.  The cynic in me says that DCPS could care less if neighborhood kids use neighborhood schools as long as seats are filled.  If DCPS cared, they wouldn't have stood by these past six or seven years as Watkins has slipped from 40% in-boundary to 21%.  Nor would they have let Payne and Miner hover at around one-third in-boundary year after year, even as the neighborhoods around them change radically.   No, bonuses are only paid for raising test scores, even if mass cheating is obviously involved (as at L-T in 2009 and 2010).

Concrete suggestions on how L-T could raise in-boundary percentages?  Brent and Maury in-boundary parents with kids in the upper grades (I am not one) are the local experts on the subject.  Growing LT with one's children is just too big a headache for most in-boundary gentrifiers in a city where lottery seats at far more diverse and upper middle-income friendly schools can be found without much trouble.  Look at this thread - posters are called racist at the drop of a hat when the truth is almost always a lot more complicated. [/quote]

No, folks are not called racist when they are advocating for their child to be in classrooms with fewer disruptions, more advanced opportunities, more diversity, more resources, etc. They are called racist when they make negative assumptions and hold low expecations about other people's children based merely on their skin color. [/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