Reply to Last night’s open house at ITS

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Last night’s open house at ITS"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Not all kids are placed through the lottery.  If ITS (or any school) really wanted more at-risk kids, it could operate more self-contilained SN classrooms and work with downtown for placements.  Ask for more Early Stages spots and proactively backfill mid-year vacancies via downtown's placement process.  It isn't really that hard.  If the administration and parents really wanted to, they would have done it already.  Happy Black History Month![/quote]

They could do this, but that would obviously change their mission.  I don't think it's a great idea to just expand to include more special needs children if that doesn't already fit within their expertise.  It would be fair for charters to take more Early Stages placements so there's parity with DCPS schools, but I don't think turning every charter into a special needs school is the answer.  [/quote]

Of course it would change their mission!  Changing their mission to genuinely include social justice is the point!  Would that be such a bad thing?

Expertise in special needs can be acquired if the school is motivated to do so.  And it doesn't necessarily require an expansion.  A charter does not have to become a "special needs school" to do a better job serving special needs and at-risk students.  A self-contained classroom is usually 4-8 kids.  That's not really asking that much.[/quote]

Of course it's asking a lot.  You have a pretty simplistic view of what a self-contained classroom means -- and do you also understand that you couldn't just shunt the special needs kids into a self-contained classroom?  I mean, I think more resources for special needs kids is great, but you can't just snap your fingers and create this.  The other measures suggested (outreach, wraparound services, an at-risk set aside) would make more sense and are more in line with ITS's existing capacities.

signed, 
Mom with a kid with an IEP who doesn't think SN kids are just an afterthought that you can "expand" to include[/quote]

But if it's fine to place responsibility for self-contained classrooms, and everything that involves, on low-performing neighborhood schools, hlthen why can't a high-performing school like ITS be asked to so the same? Langley and its self-contained classrooms did not always exist.  Langley was created after Shaed was closed, making way for Inspired Teachng to have the building.  So if it can be created at Langley, why not at ITS?  "Not part of the model" just means ITS doesn't want to deal with it.[/quote]

I really don't understand why you're seizing on this issue. I don't think you know anything about how special education actually works and you're just using this as a straw man because you don't like ITS for some reason. Self-contained/specialized special needs programs are not concentrated in low-performing schools as far as I know. SWS has self contained classrooms and an autism program, and Hearst has an HFA program.  ITS from everything I have heard has an appropriate percentage of IEPs indicating that they are not denying services, and they have a decent/strong reputation on the SN board here.

Maybe you're trying to make a point about the charter sector not having to share in all the expenses DCPS does? It's not a bad idea to make sure the charter sector contributes equally, but this is already happening through programs that specialize in higher needs students like St Colletas and Bridges. There are absolutely improvements to make, but not in the way you're suggesting. [/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