Anonymous wrote:For goodness sake. Stop seeing everything through race tinged glasses. One of the largest issues with public education in this city is that the AA middle class eschews the public schools. So does- historically- the white middle class. If charters keep middle class people of all races here, that is a positive outcome. So is providing good quality alternatives to crappy neighborhood schools for poor kids.

Exactly. Since the earliest days of DC as a political entity the major fault line has been in the black community between poor and working class blacks on the one hand and bourgeois middle-class blacks on the other. Every DC resident who moved to town since 1995 should be required to read "Dream City".

The funny thing about charters helping parents stay in the city is that parents think, oh, if DCPS doesn't work out, I can have the kids in a charter!

But then, when it comes down to it, the highest-rated charters are nearly full, so then people start reconsidering DCPS because they've started to put down roots.

It's an interesting psychological cycle. I know not everyone thinks like this, but I think many do.

Anonymous wrote:Actually I am sympathetic to that point. Although it is troubling. I am white but many of my AA friends who are parents say the same thing. They need to have an even higher standard for the academic challenge and social milieu at their kids school because their AA child is more likely to identify with and fall into the wrong crowd or to be teased for their interest or success in school. I have heard this over and over

I agree with this. It's also not great for minority kids (whether they are geniuses or not) to be in a school system where the underachievers are also primarily non-white. I imagine this also affects teacher expectations and interactions. These are all uncomfortable issues facing minority families in DC where race and class are so closely correlated.

Actually I am sympathetic to that point. Although it is troubling. I am white but many of my AA friends who are parents say the same thing. They need to have an even higher standard for the academic challenge and social milieu at their kids school because their AA child is more likely to identify with and fall into the wrong crowd or to be teased for their interest or success in school. I have heard this over and over

Anonymous wrote:
This is a very important point. I know several AA parents from Ward 3 who would not consider sending their kids to Wilson. All send their kids to St. Johns. They don't want their kids exposed to low SES AA kids is how they explained it.

If true, that is a troubling attitude. No better than white families who are afraid of exposing their children to low SES AA kids.

Anonymous wrote:For goodness sake. Stop seeing everything through race tinged glasses. One of the largest issues with public education in this city is that the AA middle class eschews the public schools. So does- historically- the white middle class. If charters keep middle class people of all races here, that is a positive outcome. So is providing good quality alternatives to crappy neighborhood schools for poor kids.

This is a very important point. I know several AA parents from Ward 3 who would not consider sending their kids to Wilson. All send their kids to St. Johns. They don't want their kids exposed to low SES AA kids is how they explained it.

Anonymous wrote:Wait Charter Schools are putting the boom in this city? Then the majority of the charters are heavily AA populated, so do we attribute the boom to public education to AAs? I am just saying, we can't have it both ways of which the AAs are responsible for all of the ills and then on the other hand the educational boom is the result of whose population.

Granted the word boost maybe used instead of boom. Therefore the boost in some education statistics may be attributed to whites but as for the boom. Think not.

If charter schools didn't exist, where would those black students now attending them go to school? Given my experience with parents of such students, they would not have tolerated poor-performing DCPS schools. Therefore, they would have gone private in cases in which they could afford it or moved out of DC. Charters have helped both white and black families stay in the city.

For goodness sake. Stop seeing everything through race tinged glasses. One of the largest issues with public education in this city is that the AA middle class eschews the public schools. So does- historically- the white middle class. If charters keep middle class people of all races here, that is a positive outcome. So is providing good quality alternatives to crappy neighborhood schools for poor kids.

Wait Charter Schools are putting the boom in this city? Then the majority of the charters are heavily AA populated, so do we attribute the boom to public education to AAs? I am just saying, we can't have it both ways of which the AAs are responsible for all of the ills and then on the other hand the educational boom is the result of whose population.

Granted the word boost maybe used instead of boom. Therefore the boost in some education statistics may be attributed to whites but as for the boom. Think not.

What is the charter per pupil allotment?
Eof theP parents would figure out that they could offer popular charters donations close to the per pupil allotment and encourage enrollment expansion of popular charters faster.

That's kind of what happened with JKLMM---as private school tuition skyrocketed, IB parents figured out that they could pay a $2000 HSA donation and get their local IB elementary school to be able to have extra music and language teachers and field trips over and above DCPS. Those JKLMM HSA budgets are a big contributor to the quality of those schools.

East of the Park parents will just try to do the same thing with charters to spur enrollment, because the PP is correct---it is the perceptions of safety and behavioral issues that is as much of a driver as the actual curriculum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if Hardy isn't good enough by the time our children reach relevant age, we'll go private.

I feel like the experience of too many people has been of broadly middle class suburban schools that have high levels of success. However, I just don't think that is necessary. Hardy has proficient-testing kids, advanced-testing kids and everyone with parents who aren't clueless does fine. People have the idea that they need to segregate their kids away from any child who is not high-performing or else they will turn out dumb.

It just isn't true. Rich kids at mixed income schools don't get dragged down.

I think the concerns revolve around safety as much (or more so) than performance. *That* is the elephant in the room. And any attempt to address the problem in a way that produces a race-neutral outcome will be very, very difficult in a city where race is a proxy for SES, and where poverty tracks closely with behavioral issues.

Anonymous wrote:All this going into an election year is a political hot button no one wants to touch. Not Gray nor the new mayor if he doesn't stay. More DCPS dysfunction at the expense of parents who are starting to stay in the city longer and invest in the future of school.

If by DCPS dysfunction you mean "the same controversy and infighting you see in any public school system anywhere in the country" then you're absolutely right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh, please. I live in this area and know only one family who sends their kids WOTP for school (and it's not a JKLM). Most of the kids we know here go to charter schools or (gasp!) EoTP DCPS.

Until the pressure on charters reaches a certain point (could be sooner than later), you will continue to see parents abandoning their local schools at the first opportunity. There is no incentive to "pioneer" at a crappy DCPS when decent or good charters provide an escape hatch.

The rise of charter schools has been a key contributor to the revitalization of residential neighborhoods EOTP. It has allowed families to live in areas where the local DCPS schools are failing.

Absolutely. We moved to Columbia Heights pre-kids, with every intention of leaving when our eventual kids became school-aged. Fast forward 5 years, as we're lookign at houses in the burbs, and we hit the jackpot in the charter school lottery. Five years later, we're still here, and so are a lot of other kids in our immediate neighborhood. None of whom, by the way, would be attending Tubman is Charters didn't exist.

+1. Without charters DC would not be booming the way it is now. Period. It is disingenuous to make charter schools the enemy of a healthy city. They allow kids in poor neighborhoods to get a decent education and they entice wealthier people to live in places that could use an infusion of some wealth.

We have tried it the other way ( only DCPS neighborhood schools ) and it failed miserably for decades. Lets not go backwards

Anonymous wrote:

Oh, please. I live in this area and know only one family who sends their kids WOTP for school (and it's not a JKLM). Most of the kids we know here go to charter schools or (gasp!) EoTP DCPS.

Until the pressure on charters reaches a certain point (could be sooner than later), you will continue to see parents abandoning their local schools at the first opportunity. There is no incentive to "pioneer" at a crappy DCPS when decent or good charters provide an escape hatch.

The rise of charter schools has been a key contributor to the revitalization of residential neighborhoods EOTP. It has allowed families to live in areas where the local DCPS schools are failing.