Anonymous wrote:I don't really follow some of this logic. The research does not suggest that making a school bigger improves it. I would think an effective charter worth its salt would be careful about expanding its grade cohort too dramatically. Charters exist because they want to be independent. I don't think most of them would look at colocation as a plus.

I am also concerned about giving more resources to charters, given the lack of transparency. Most high scoring charters have high SES students. The ones that get high scores with kids living in poverty, like KIPP, seem to be doing okay. (Google Richard Barth's salary).

X 100

Anonymous wrote:Kaya doesn't want a sit down. Charters would replicate in a heart beat but there's no space and Kaya and the machine won't release any.

Name the specific charters you are so sure would replicate. I know of 3 of the ones with longest waitlists, they've been asked repeatedly and had offers made to them, and they've all said no.

Which schools specifically have longest waiting lists and you are sure would say yes "in a heartbeat"? Other than maybe 2 Rivers which just opened a new site this year. Who else?

Anonymous wrote:The Mayor and DME Niles should sit down with the charter schools with the longest waiting lists and ask:

1. What are you doing to serve more students?
2. If we provide you with more resources, will you serve more students?
3. How will you maintain or improve current quality as you move to serve more students?
4. What can we do to be helpful beyond providing more funding?
5. If we offered you a co-location opportunity within a DCPS school, would you take it? Why or why not?

What my answers would be on behalf of the most successful charters:

1. We're not doing anything, we're too busy trying to run a quality school for the students we have and the new ones we're getting. It's not feasible, wise or fair to expect the most successful schools to just keep "expanding". Instead you should be studying what we do and taking more lessons learned back to neighborhood DCPS schools and other people interested in starting new charters.

2. We'd love more resources, but not, we are filled to capacity. Invest in DC's schools that are not even close to capacity.

3. See answers 1 & 2

4. Repeat: Instead you should be studying what we do and taking more lessons learned back to neighborhood DCPS schools and other people interested in starting new charters.

5. [This one there may not be a uniform answer for, but to me it would be "No. What's working in our schools is not rocket science. Dig deeper into what is working and apply to DCPS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should give a long, hard look at why it is that so many families are seeking out charters (whether immersion or other offerings) and look at what DCPS could solidly offer there. If DCPS wants to stay competetive and relevant to meaningful education rather than just continuing to be the default, the fall-back, the choice of last resort, then they need to start seriously looking at what it takes to attract and retain families. And for Bowser, she needs to be looking at it not as city services being provided but also attracting and retaining tax base that will help the city.

I think they (DCPS) is doing quite a bit to "stay competitive and relevant".

DC is barely even rolling out things like G&T programs. Families aren't seeing it. If DC offered something akin to a TJ there would be a lot of families that would flock to it.

DCPS does not want to have a traditional GT program. It is not an accident that they do not have a test in program at the elementary grades. Their philosophy is to provide resources to schools and training to teachers and how to meet the needs of their high-performing students in the form of programs like junior great books SEM and AP & other things.