Reply to DCPS and “Equity”

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "DCPS and “Equity”"

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]Schools in DC are lavishly funded, including the terrible ones. The facilities are gorgeous; teachers' salaries are very, very generous. Money isn't the problem. [/quote]

+1[/quote]

This is just completely untrue. As someone typing this from an ES where we still don't have an elevator, functioning water fountains, consistent heat/ac, among others[/quote]

Per pupil spending is 22.5k which is more than almost anywhere else in the country. [/quote]

You know the # but not what it means or why it is so high. DC has to fund all schools within a single, high cost city environment. Contrast that with states like CA where there are rural districts and Alabama where they would rather pray than do book learning.

But by all means, continue to repeat a meaningless stat.  [/quote]

Interesting story. DC outspends LA, Chicago, San Francisco, Atlanta, Seattle... Boston and NYC are the only districts that spend more. I guess you consider San Francisco rural and low cost? [/quote]

CA has a State Board of Education an other statewide resources that are cost shared by all districts and students in the entire state. All of DC's expenses are absorbed by DC directly. SF has only as many students as DCPS, and half as many as the combined DCPS/DCPS population. DC's economically a risk population is also 50% more than SF's. If you had a basic understanding of pubic education you'd understand that this drives interventions and specialists. The per pupil funding delta between DC, SF and those other cities is nominal and more than explained by these factors.

I would be more inclined to have this discussion with someone who had both the intellectual curiosity to understand the issues and a genuine interest in improving public education. You have neither. [/quote]

NP ... Step down from your high horse. You failed to mention that SF has a much higher population of ELL students (27% vs 16%) and if you are in the know then you know that ELL students receive more funding per pupil than At-Risk students. And your claim that DC has 50% more "economically a [sic] risk population" is wrong. The proper comparison is DC "At-Risk" students (45%) versus what SF calls "Socioeconomically Disadvantaged" (53%). In your calculation you mistakenly use DC's "Economically Disadvantaged" students metric which is not definitionally equivalent to SF's metric. The DC metric you used artificially inflates the count of disadvantaged students (and this is a well-known issue to those of us in DC that are curious) because it includes all students who attend a school where DCPS has decided to provide FRL to all students even though not all students in the school qualify. Since you have such a high level of intellectual curiosity, you probably already knew that. Why you chose to intentionally compare apples-to-oranges is only a question you can answer. Those of us who have a genuine interest in improving public education would not do such a thing.[/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