Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago, an EOTR DCPS elementary school was taken over by a charter--not just that the DCPS was closed and a charter used the building, but a regular school that had to take all in-bound kids was operated by a charter. The charter gave up. They weren't getting the test scores they wanted, and their model wasn't working with the kids they were getting and the churn throughout the year.

Charters have the opportunity to have a student body where all the kids have a grownup that planned seven months ahead and filled out the lottery forms and enrollment paperwork. They can kick out kids who come late, miss school, misbehave, or show up without uniforms and materials. DCPS schools do not have that opportunity.

Honestly this is the main point, and most of the time the charters *still* don't outperform DCPS w/r/t test scores. But so many charter supporters ignore it entirely, or make these specious arguments about how "they take some IEPs too!" as if there's anything approaching an apples to apples comparison to be made. But the truth is they just want to avoid at risk kids, and if their avoidance also drains money from the schools left behind to take care of those kids: so what?

This is a really reasonable argument. My question to you is: what’s the alternative?

That’s not rhetorical. I’d really like to know what your ideas are for improving this.

Each ward should have one or two immersion elementary schools and one magnet middle/high school. The lottery system should add a Ward preference for those schools, and structure bus routes within the Ward to get kids to/from school (like the Deal bus). There is clearly appetite for these offerings (along with Montessori and, to a lesser extent, arts programming) but charter schools, despite what they all write when applying for a charter, are distributing the offerings in an imbalanced way and entire segments of the city are not being served. We also need differentiation in middle and high school to keep families long-term, but since charters aren't offering that either I'm not sure it's relevant to this question.

More chances to "win" the lottery means more people of means will stay around to play it. And putting the "winning" schools in W7&8 instead of promising you're going to and then opening in W5 means that kids don't have to trek across the City to get a decent public education.

Lol. You think WTUs and progressives would like this plan either?

I'm not playing shirts vs skins like you seem to be. I'm trying to help kids in a fair way, and answer the PP's question.

I don't think there's any reason to assume teachers would be against it, except for the differentiation which is a bit outside the scope of the original question.

You’re being naive though. It is very much “shirts and skins” in that the exact same people who are against charters are also against honors, magnets, homework, and anything else that they see as against “equity.” In fact, dismantling honors programs and magnets and neighborhood schools is their new target now that they have lost the charter battle.

Moreover, this TV show created this story line specifically to send a political message. So yes, it is appropriate to point out that your response is inapposite.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago, an EOTR DCPS elementary school was taken over by a charter--not just that the DCPS was closed and a charter used the building, but a regular school that had to take all in-bound kids was operated by a charter. The charter gave up. They weren't getting the test scores they wanted, and their model wasn't working with the kids they were getting and the churn throughout the year.

Charters have the opportunity to have a student body where all the kids have a grownup that planned seven months ahead and filled out the lottery forms and enrollment paperwork. They can kick out kids who come late, miss school, misbehave, or show up without uniforms and materials. DCPS schools do not have that opportunity.

Honestly this is the main point, and most of the time the charters *still* don't outperform DCPS w/r/t test scores. But so many charter supporters ignore it entirely, or make these specious arguments about how "they take some IEPs too!" as if there's anything approaching an apples to apples comparison to be made. But the truth is they just want to avoid at risk kids, and if their avoidance also drains money from the schools left behind to take care of those kids: so what?

Charters are full of at-risk kids, Latino kids, and Black kids. And I don’t think it’s true that charters in DC kick kids out like that. Stats, please? Also, arguably, it’s a feature not a bug that kids with severe behavior issues can be removed. DCPS should make greater use of alternative schools as well.

They don't kick kids out! And also, I'm glad they kick kids out, it's why I ranked them so high!

Here’s the actual data showing suspension and expulsion rates - very low.

https://dcpcsb.egnyte.com/dl/rc5LdC1UK6

And yes, I think both DCPS and charters should have the ability to engage in effective discipline.

More than 5% is very low? Or you believe that all the "mid year withdrawals" moved out of town?

Compare to the most recent DCPS data that google provides, showing that literally no kids were expelled in 2019. (https://dcschoolreportcard.org/leas/1-0000/school-safety-discipline?lang=en) So yes, the schools that "counsel out" the 5% of their student body they don't want to deal with, *after* starting from the premise that all these kids come from homes with involved parents, should be outperforming public schools. They rarely do, though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago, an EOTR DCPS elementary school was taken over by a charter--not just that the DCPS was closed and a charter used the building, but a regular school that had to take all in-bound kids was operated by a charter. The charter gave up. They weren't getting the test scores they wanted, and their model wasn't working with the kids they were getting and the churn throughout the year.

Charters have the opportunity to have a student body where all the kids have a grownup that planned seven months ahead and filled out the lottery forms and enrollment paperwork. They can kick out kids who come late, miss school, misbehave, or show up without uniforms and materials. DCPS schools do not have that opportunity.

Honestly this is the main point, and most of the time the charters *still* don't outperform DCPS w/r/t test scores. But so many charter supporters ignore it entirely, or make these specious arguments about how "they take some IEPs too!" as if there's anything approaching an apples to apples comparison to be made. But the truth is they just want to avoid at risk kids, and if their avoidance also drains money from the schools left behind to take care of those kids: so what?

This is a really reasonable argument. My question to you is: what’s the alternative?

That’s not rhetorical. I’d really like to know what your ideas are for improving this.

Each ward should have one or two immersion elementary schools and one magnet middle/high school. The lottery system should add a Ward preference for those schools, and structure bus routes within the Ward to get kids to/from school (like the Deal bus). There is clearly appetite for these offerings (along with Montessori and, to a lesser extent, arts programming) but charter schools, despite what they all write when applying for a charter, are distributing the offerings in an imbalanced way and entire segments of the city are not being served. We also need differentiation in middle and high school to keep families long-term, but since charters aren't offering that either I'm not sure it's relevant to this question.

More chances to "win" the lottery means more people of means will stay around to play it. And putting the "winning" schools in W7&8 instead of promising you're going to and then opening in W5 means that kids don't have to trek across the City to get a decent public education.

I’m the PP. Thank you. I think the idea of magnet middle schools is a good one, and would make a huge difference for me and my family and how we felt about charters (they would no longer be make or break for us).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago, an EOTR DCPS elementary school was taken over by a charter--not just that the DCPS was closed and a charter used the building, but a regular school that had to take all in-bound kids was operated by a charter. The charter gave up. They weren't getting the test scores they wanted, and their model wasn't working with the kids they were getting and the churn throughout the year.

Charters have the opportunity to have a student body where all the kids have a grownup that planned seven months ahead and filled out the lottery forms and enrollment paperwork. They can kick out kids who come late, miss school, misbehave, or show up without uniforms and materials. DCPS schools do not have that opportunity.

Honestly this is the main point, and most of the time the charters *still* don't outperform DCPS w/r/t test scores. But so many charter supporters ignore it entirely, or make these specious arguments about how "they take some IEPs too!" as if there's anything approaching an apples to apples comparison to be made. But the truth is they just want to avoid at risk kids, and if their avoidance also drains money from the schools left behind to take care of those kids: so what?

This is a really reasonable argument. My question to you is: what’s the alternative?

That’s not rhetorical. I’d really like to know what your ideas are for improving this.

Each ward should have one or two immersion elementary schools and one magnet middle/high school. The lottery system should add a Ward preference for those schools, and structure bus routes within the Ward to get kids to/from school (like the Deal bus). There is clearly appetite for these offerings (along with Montessori and, to a lesser extent, arts programming) but charter schools, despite what they all write when applying for a charter, are distributing the offerings in an imbalanced way and entire segments of the city are not being served. We also need differentiation in middle and high school to keep families long-term, but since charters aren't offering that either I'm not sure it's relevant to this question.

More chances to "win" the lottery means more people of means will stay around to play it. And putting the "winning" schools in W7&8 instead of promising you're going to and then opening in W5 means that kids don't have to trek across the City to get a decent public education.

Lol. You think WTUs and progressives would like this plan either?

I'm not playing shirts vs skins like you seem to be. I'm trying to help kids in a fair way, and answer the PP's question.

I don't think there's any reason to assume teachers would be against it, except for the differentiation which is a bit outside the scope of the original question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago, an EOTR DCPS elementary school was taken over by a charter--not just that the DCPS was closed and a charter used the building, but a regular school that had to take all in-bound kids was operated by a charter. The charter gave up. They weren't getting the test scores they wanted, and their model wasn't working with the kids they were getting and the churn throughout the year.

Charters have the opportunity to have a student body where all the kids have a grownup that planned seven months ahead and filled out the lottery forms and enrollment paperwork. They can kick out kids who come late, miss school, misbehave, or show up without uniforms and materials. DCPS schools do not have that opportunity.

Honestly this is the main point, and most of the time the charters *still* don't outperform DCPS w/r/t test scores. But so many charter supporters ignore it entirely, or make these specious arguments about how "they take some IEPs too!" as if there's anything approaching an apples to apples comparison to be made. But the truth is they just want to avoid at risk kids, and if their avoidance also drains money from the schools left behind to take care of those kids: so what?

This is a really reasonable argument. My question to you is: what’s the alternative?

That’s not rhetorical. I’d really like to know what your ideas are for improving this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago, an EOTR DCPS elementary school was taken over by a charter--not just that the DCPS was closed and a charter used the building, but a regular school that had to take all in-bound kids was operated by a charter. The charter gave up. They weren't getting the test scores they wanted, and their model wasn't working with the kids they were getting and the churn throughout the year.

Charters have the opportunity to have a student body where all the kids have a grownup that planned seven months ahead and filled out the lottery forms and enrollment paperwork. They can kick out kids who come late, miss school, misbehave, or show up without uniforms and materials. DCPS schools do not have that opportunity.

Honestly this is the main point, and most of the time the charters *still* don't outperform DCPS w/r/t test scores. But so many charter supporters ignore it entirely, or make these specious arguments about how "they take some IEPs too!" as if there's anything approaching an apples to apples comparison to be made. But the truth is they just want to avoid at risk kids, and if their avoidance also drains money from the schools left behind to take care of those kids: so what?

Charters are full of at-risk kids, Latino kids, and Black kids. And I don’t think it’s true that charters in DC kick kids out like that. Stats, please? Also, arguably, it’s a feature not a bug that kids with severe behavior issues can be removed. DCPS should make greater use of alternative schools as well.

They don't kick kids out! And also, I'm glad they kick kids out, it's why I ranked them so high!

Here’s the actual data showing suspension and expulsion rates - very low.

https://dcpcsb.egnyte.com/dl/rc5LdC1UK6

And yes, I think both DCPS and charters should have the ability to engage in effective discipline.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago, an EOTR DCPS elementary school was taken over by a charter--not just that the DCPS was closed and a charter used the building, but a regular school that had to take all in-bound kids was operated by a charter. The charter gave up. They weren't getting the test scores they wanted, and their model wasn't working with the kids they were getting and the churn throughout the year.

Charters have the opportunity to have a student body where all the kids have a grownup that planned seven months ahead and filled out the lottery forms and enrollment paperwork. They can kick out kids who come late, miss school, misbehave, or show up without uniforms and materials. DCPS schools do not have that opportunity.

Honestly this is the main point, and most of the time the charters *still* don't outperform DCPS w/r/t test scores. But so many charter supporters ignore it entirely, or make these specious arguments about how "they take some IEPs too!" as if there's anything approaching an apples to apples comparison to be made. But the truth is they just want to avoid at risk kids, and if their avoidance also drains money from the schools left behind to take care of those kids: so what?

This is a really reasonable argument. My question to you is: what’s the alternative?

That’s not rhetorical. I’d really like to know what your ideas are for improving this.

Each ward should have one or two immersion elementary schools and one magnet middle/high school. The lottery system should add a Ward preference for those schools, and structure bus routes within the Ward to get kids to/from school (like the Deal bus). There is clearly appetite for these offerings (along with Montessori and, to a lesser extent, arts programming) but charter schools, despite what they all write when applying for a charter, are distributing the offerings in an imbalanced way and entire segments of the city are not being served. We also need differentiation in middle and high school to keep families long-term, but since charters aren't offering that either I'm not sure it's relevant to this question.

More chances to "win" the lottery means more people of means will stay around to play it. And putting the "winning" schools in W7&8 instead of promising you're going to and then opening in W5 means that kids don't have to trek across the City to get a decent public education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago, an EOTR DCPS elementary school was taken over by a charter--not just that the DCPS was closed and a charter used the building, but a regular school that had to take all in-bound kids was operated by a charter. The charter gave up. They weren't getting the test scores they wanted, and their model wasn't working with the kids they were getting and the churn throughout the year.

Charters have the opportunity to have a student body where all the kids have a grownup that planned seven months ahead and filled out the lottery forms and enrollment paperwork. They can kick out kids who come late, miss school, misbehave, or show up without uniforms and materials. DCPS schools do not have that opportunity.

Honestly this is the main point, and most of the time the charters *still* don't outperform DCPS w/r/t test scores. But so many charter supporters ignore it entirely, or make these specious arguments about how "they take some IEPs too!" as if there's anything approaching an apples to apples comparison to be made. But the truth is they just want to avoid at risk kids, and if their avoidance also drains money from the schools left behind to take care of those kids: so what?

This is a really reasonable argument. My question to you is: what’s the alternative?

That’s not rhetorical. I’d really like to know what your ideas are for improving this.

Each ward should have one or two immersion elementary schools and one magnet middle/high school. The lottery system should add a Ward preference for those schools, and structure bus routes within the Ward to get kids to/from school (like the Deal bus). There is clearly appetite for these offerings (along with Montessori and, to a lesser extent, arts programming) but charter schools, despite what they all write when applying for a charter, are distributing the offerings in an imbalanced way and entire segments of the city are not being served. We also need differentiation in middle and high school to keep families long-term, but since charters aren't offering that either I'm not sure it's relevant to this question.

More chances to "win" the lottery means more people of means will stay around to play it. And putting the "winning" schools in W7&8 instead of promising you're going to and then opening in W5 means that kids don't have to trek across the City to get a decent public education.

Lol. You think WTUs and progressives would like this plan either?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago, an EOTR DCPS elementary school was taken over by a charter--not just that the DCPS was closed and a charter used the building, but a regular school that had to take all in-bound kids was operated by a charter. The charter gave up. They weren't getting the test scores they wanted, and their model wasn't working with the kids they were getting and the churn throughout the year.

Charters have the opportunity to have a student body where all the kids have a grownup that planned seven months ahead and filled out the lottery forms and enrollment paperwork. They can kick out kids who come late, miss school, misbehave, or show up without uniforms and materials. DCPS schools do not have that opportunity.

Honestly this is the main point, and most of the time the charters *still* don't outperform DCPS w/r/t test scores. But so many charter supporters ignore it entirely, or make these specious arguments about how "they take some IEPs too!" as if there's anything approaching an apples to apples comparison to be made. But the truth is they just want to avoid at risk kids, and if their avoidance also drains money from the schools left behind to take care of those kids: so what?

Charters are full of at-risk kids, Latino kids, and Black kids. And I don’t think it’s true that charters in DC kick kids out like that. Stats, please? Also, arguably, it’s a feature not a bug that kids with severe behavior issues can be removed. DCPS should make greater use of alternative schools as well.

They don't kick kids out! And also, I'm glad they kick kids out, it's why I ranked them so high!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago, an EOTR DCPS elementary school was taken over by a charter--not just that the DCPS was closed and a charter used the building, but a regular school that had to take all in-bound kids was operated by a charter. The charter gave up. They weren't getting the test scores they wanted, and their model wasn't working with the kids they were getting and the churn throughout the year.

Charters have the opportunity to have a student body where all the kids have a grownup that planned seven months ahead and filled out the lottery forms and enrollment paperwork. They can kick out kids who come late, miss school, misbehave, or show up without uniforms and materials. DCPS schools do not have that opportunity.

Honestly this is the main point, and most of the time the charters *still* don't outperform DCPS w/r/t test scores. But so many charter supporters ignore it entirely, or make these specious arguments about how "they take some IEPs too!" as if there's anything approaching an apples to apples comparison to be made. But the truth is they just want to avoid at risk kids, and if their avoidance also drains money from the schools left behind to take care of those kids: so what?

This is a really reasonable argument. My question to you is: what’s the alternative?

That’s not rhetorical. I’d really like to know what your ideas are for improving this.

Each ward should have one or two immersion elementary schools and one magnet middle/high school. The lottery system should add a Ward preference for those schools, and structure bus routes within the Ward to get kids to/from school (like the Deal bus). There is clearly appetite for these offerings (along with Montessori and, to a lesser extent, arts programming) but charter schools, despite what they all write when applying for a charter, are distributing the offerings in an imbalanced way and entire segments of the city are not being served. We also need differentiation in middle and high school to keep families long-term, but since charters aren't offering that either I'm not sure it's relevant to this question.

More chances to "win" the lottery means more people of means will stay around to play it. And putting the "winning" schools in W7&8 instead of promising you're going to and then opening in W5 means that kids don't have to trek across the City to get a decent public education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago, an EOTR DCPS elementary school was taken over by a charter--not just that the DCPS was closed and a charter used the building, but a regular school that had to take all in-bound kids was operated by a charter. The charter gave up. They weren't getting the test scores they wanted, and their model wasn't working with the kids they were getting and the churn throughout the year.

Charters have the opportunity to have a student body where all the kids have a grownup that planned seven months ahead and filled out the lottery forms and enrollment paperwork. They can kick out kids who come late, miss school, misbehave, or show up without uniforms and materials. DCPS schools do not have that opportunity.

Honestly this is the main point, and most of the time the charters *still* don't outperform DCPS w/r/t test scores. But so many charter supporters ignore it entirely, or make these specious arguments about how "they take some IEPs too!" as if there's anything approaching an apples to apples comparison to be made. But the truth is they just want to avoid at risk kids, and if their avoidance also drains money from the schools left behind to take care of those kids: so what?

Charters are full of at-risk kids, Latino kids, and Black kids. And I don’t think it’s true that charters in DC kick kids out like that. Stats, please? Also, arguably, it’s a feature not a bug that kids with severe behavior issues can be removed. DCPS should make greater use of alternative schools as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago, an EOTR DCPS elementary school was taken over by a charter--not just that the DCPS was closed and a charter used the building, but a regular school that had to take all in-bound kids was operated by a charter. The charter gave up. They weren't getting the test scores they wanted, and their model wasn't working with the kids they were getting and the churn throughout the year.

Charters have the opportunity to have a student body where all the kids have a grownup that planned seven months ahead and filled out the lottery forms and enrollment paperwork. They can kick out kids who come late, miss school, misbehave, or show up without uniforms and materials. DCPS schools do not have that opportunity.

Honestly this is the main point, and most of the time the charters *still* don't outperform DCPS w/r/t test scores. But so many charter supporters ignore it entirely, or make these specious arguments about how "they take some IEPs too!" as if there's anything approaching an apples to apples comparison to be made. But the truth is they just want to avoid at risk kids, and if their avoidance also drains money from the schools left behind to take care of those kids: so what?

This is a really reasonable argument. My question to you is: what’s the alternative?

That’s not rhetorical. I’d really like to know what your ideas are for improving this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago, an EOTR DCPS elementary school was taken over by a charter--not just that the DCPS was closed and a charter used the building, but a regular school that had to take all in-bound kids was operated by a charter. The charter gave up. They weren't getting the test scores they wanted, and their model wasn't working with the kids they were getting and the churn throughout the year.

Charters have the opportunity to have a student body where all the kids have a grownup that planned seven months ahead and filled out the lottery forms and enrollment paperwork. They can kick out kids who come late, miss school, misbehave, or show up without uniforms and materials. DCPS schools do not have that opportunity.

Honestly this is the main point, and most of the time the charters *still* don't outperform DCPS w/r/t test scores. But so many charter supporters ignore it entirely, or make these specious arguments about how "they take some IEPs too!" as if there's anything approaching an apples to apples comparison to be made. But the truth is they just want to avoid at risk kids, and if their avoidance also drains money from the schools left behind to take care of those kids: so what?

Anonymous wrote:Look at Alabama, Arkansaw, Missouri, Mississippi, and Oklahoma and come back and show us where school choice is a good idea? Literally the worst of public education.

That is utter BS by the Christian right. Great now more child abuse given the number one place kids get abused is by Christian ministers, pastors priests etc.

Not to mention you pay for this. Seriously people book banners do not make good schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago, an EOTR DCPS elementary school was taken over by a charter--not just that the DCPS was closed and a charter used the building, but a regular school that had to take all in-bound kids was operated by a charter. The charter gave up. They weren't getting the test scores they wanted, and their model wasn't working with the kids they were getting and the churn throughout the year.

Charters have the opportunity to have a student body where all the kids have a grownup that planned seven months ahead and filled out the lottery forms and enrollment paperwork. They can kick out kids who come late, miss school, misbehave, or show up without uniforms and materials. DCPS schools do not have that opportunity.

Honestly this is the main point, and most of the time the charters *still* don't outperform DCPS w/r/t test scores. But so many charter supporters ignore it entirely, or make these specious arguments about how "they take some IEPs too!" as if there's anything approaching an apples to apples comparison to be made. But the truth is they just want to avoid at risk kids, and if their avoidance also drains money from the schools left behind to take care of those kids: so what?