Anonymous
12/05/2020 13:27
Subject: Re:WaPo opinion piece on charters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.
This makes sense in theory, but not in practice. Most charter schools are closed. They’ll just do what DCPS does, which is hamstrung by the WTU.
Well, that is their choice. If charters are so much better, why are they almost entirely closed?
Anonymous
12/05/2020 13:22
Subject: Re:WaPo opinion piece on charters
This pandemic has taught the entire city that WTU is an evil organization
Anonymous
12/05/2020 13:21
Subject: Re:WaPo opinion piece on charters
Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.
Vouchers too.
Anonymous
12/05/2020 13:09
Subject: WaPo opinion piece on charters
75% of the charters in DC are no better than DCPS neighborhood schools and are an absolute taxpayer money suck. I think charters can serve a good purpose in DC but most of them need to close and we need a moratorium on new ones until the charter school board can get its act together.
Anonymous
12/05/2020 13:08
Subject: Re:WaPo opinion piece on charters
Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.
This makes sense in theory, but not in practice. Most charter schools are closed. They’ll just do what DCPS does, which is hamstrung by the WTU.
Anonymous
12/05/2020 13:04
Subject: Re:WaPo opinion piece on charters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.
Agreed. I think the charter sector nationwide needs controls and transparency (and especially the elimination of any for-profit involvement) but the attack on the charter sector as a whole is driven by the teacher’s union. I don’t trust their perspective anymore, as they have made it abundantly clear they represent the interests of teachers, not students.
I’d be more pro charter if they didn’t counsel out “hard to teach” kids or kids with IEPs. I guess public schools will still have to be around for those kids that the charters don’t want.
If the per pupil funding was higher for charters (and they had access to underused DCPS buildings) I think charters would be more willing and able to serve the “hard to teach”. They are already on a shoestring, by design, in comparison to DCPS. The teachers union gets what it gets.
There are very few underused DCPS buildings anymore. Some have space but it is in poor condition or is not enough space for anyone to want.
If the PCSB would shut down some of the low performing charter schools instead of making excuses and turning a blind eye and that would free up some buildings.
And given the enrollment growth within DCPS, it would be foolish to give up any buildings. They will need them all in the not-that-distant future. DCPS has to plan for the long term and guarantee space for everyone. Not just slam their door like charters can. And after the sh*i-fit Appletree and charter boosters threw about moving out of Jefferson at the end of their lease, DCPS can't have confidence that a short-term lease won't result in a big ugly dispute.
The charter board has and that has freed up some buildings. Chavez, the arts charter school, etc, - other charter schools moved into those buildings. Some charters built new buildings like Rocketship. The reality is that real estate is hard in a city like DC. Access to DCPS buildings doesn't seem to be the major issue. Access to financing to build, renovate and/or lease suitable property seems like a bigger issue.
Anonymous
12/05/2020 12:53
Subject: Re:WaPo opinion piece on charters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.
Agreed. I think the charter sector nationwide needs controls and transparency (and especially the elimination of any for-profit involvement) but the attack on the charter sector as a whole is driven by the teacher’s union. I don’t trust their perspective anymore, as they have made it abundantly clear they represent the interests of teachers, not students.
I’d be more pro charter if they didn’t counsel out “hard to teach” kids or kids with IEPs. I guess public schools will still have to be around for those kids that the charters don’t want.
If the per pupil funding was higher for charters (and they had access to underused DCPS buildings) I think charters would be more willing and able to serve the “hard to teach”. They are already on a shoestring, by design, in comparison to DCPS. The teachers union gets what it gets.
There are very few underused DCPS buildings anymore. Some have space but it is in poor condition or is not enough space for anyone to want.
If the PCSB would shut down some of the low performing charter schools instead of making excuses and turning a blind eye and that would free up some buildings.
And given the enrollment growth within DCPS, it would be foolish to give up any buildings. They will need them all in the not-that-distant future. DCPS has to plan for the long term and guarantee space for everyone. Not just slam their door like charters can. And after the sh*i-fit Appletree and charter boosters threw about moving out of Jefferson at the end of their lease, DCPS can't have confidence that a short-term lease won't result in a big ugly dispute.
Anonymous
12/05/2020 12:47
Subject: Re:WaPo opinion piece on charters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.
Agreed. I think the charter sector nationwide needs controls and transparency (and especially the elimination of any for-profit involvement) but the attack on the charter sector as a whole is driven by the teacher’s union. I don’t trust their perspective anymore, as they have made it abundantly clear they represent the interests of teachers, not students.
I’d be more pro charter if they didn’t counsel out “hard to teach” kids or kids with IEPs. I guess public schools will still have to be around for those kids that the charters don’t want.
If the per pupil funding was higher for charters (and they had access to underused DCPS buildings) I think charters would be more willing and able to serve the “hard to teach”. They are already on a shoestring, by design, in comparison to DCPS. The teachers union gets what it gets.
There are very few underused DCPS buildings anymore. Some have space but it is in poor condition or is not enough space for anyone to want.
If the PCSB would shut down some of the low performing charter schools instead of making excuses and turning a blind eye and that would free up some buildings.
Anonymous
12/05/2020 12:42
Subject: Re:WaPo opinion piece on charters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.
Agreed. I think the charter sector nationwide needs controls and transparency (and especially the elimination of any for-profit involvement) but the attack on the charter sector as a whole is driven by the teacher’s union. I don’t trust their perspective anymore, as they have made it abundantly clear they represent the interests of teachers, not students.
I’d be more pro charter if they didn’t counsel out “hard to teach” kids or kids with IEPs. I guess public schools will still have to be around for those kids that the charters don’t want.
If the per pupil funding was higher for charters (and they had access to underused DCPS buildings) I think charters would be more willing and able to serve the “hard to teach”. They are already on a shoestring, by design, in comparison to DCPS. The teachers union gets what it gets.
Anonymous
12/05/2020 12:27
Subject: Re:WaPo opinion piece on charters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.
Agreed. I think the charter sector nationwide needs controls and transparency (and especially the elimination of any for-profit involvement) but the attack on the charter sector as a whole is driven by the teacher’s union. I don’t trust their perspective anymore, as they have made it abundantly clear they represent the interests of teachers, not students.
I’d be more pro charter if they didn’t counsel out “hard to teach” kids or kids with IEPs. I guess public schools will still have to be around for those kids that the charters don’t want.
Anonymous
12/05/2020 12:26
Subject: Re:WaPo opinion piece on charters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.
This type of post makes no sense and ignores the reality on the ground.
what reality on the ground? the reality where the WTU (main charter opponent) made clear that they don’t GAF about education? The enemy of my enemy is my friend, as they say.
This argument would be far more persuasive if any charter was actually open
Anonymous
12/05/2020 12:20
Subject: Re:WaPo opinion piece on charters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.
This type of post makes no sense and ignores the reality on the ground.
what reality on the ground? the reality where the WTU (main charter opponent) made clear that they don’t GAF about education? The enemy of my enemy is my friend, as they say.
Anonymous
12/05/2020 12:19
Subject: Re:WaPo opinion piece on charters
Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.
Agreed. I think the charter sector nationwide needs controls and transparency (and especially the elimination of any for-profit involvement) but the attack on the charter sector as a whole is driven by the teacher’s union. I don’t trust their perspective anymore, as they have made it abundantly clear they represent the interests of teachers, not students.
Anonymous
12/05/2020 12:17
Subject: Re:WaPo opinion piece on charters
Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.
This type of post makes no sense and ignores the reality on the ground.
Anonymous
12/05/2020 12:01
Subject: Re:WaPo opinion piece on charters
If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.