Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah I don’t think so. Tell your charter board to increase teacher salaries if you don’t like current pay structures. Charter teachers should unionize if they want the collective bargaining power that the WTU has. Why on earth should they benefit from the DCPS union’s efforts if they choose not to unionize (MV aside)?

Some context for anyone who’s trying to figure out what this is about: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1109459.page

This is silly. Salaries can't be increased independent of funding. The salaries of the unionized charter school are lower than the other charters. It isn't that the union isn't effective, they just can't raise salaries to compete with other charters (or DCPS) without getting equivalent funding.

Charters can make changes to their payscale and salaries if they want to. They get to manage their own budgets. If they wanted to cut back on something else, they could afford more in salaries. Some schools have costly buildings. Some have more aides, some have less. Some have smaller class size, some larger. Then there's salaries for their leadership, and how much they pay to consultants and charter management organizations.

At our school (ITDS), there are way more aides than DCPS provides for its schools. In DCPS, for example, there would not typically be a full-time aide in an upper elementary classroom unless it were PTO-funded or required by a student's IEP. DCPS aims for class sizes of 22-24ish for elementary, but will go higher on a case by case basis-- I've personally seen elementary classes as high as 29 kids. ITDS caps class size at 24, occasionally 25. If ITDS school went up to 25 in all classrooms, it would have $100K in formula funding. It's the school's choice to make. But it seems perfectly right and fair for a school with more students to get more funding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is as it stands now in the city budget, charter schools will get approx $3500 less per student - which seems unfair to me (a taxpayer who pays for public - including charter - schools). Per student allocation from the city should be the same, whether DCPS or Charter.

I have no idea if that dollar amount is true, but no, the SCHOOLS aren’t getting less. Rather, DCPS TEACHERS are getting retro compensation per the WTU collective bargaining agreement. Charter teachers do not have a collective bargaining agreement, nor do charter schools have a requirement to spend additional funds on teacher compensation. So it’s really apples to oranges unless you want to argue that the WTU agreement should apply to non-unionized charter teachers?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:off-topic but in response to the above. certain popular middle school charters start in 5th not 6th grade. they chose this presumably so students would years ago try the school for 5th knowing they could always leave for 6th. its now a not so great set-up where a large cohort of students leave the neighborhood school before 5th and the other students feel left behind.

Too bad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah I don’t think so. Tell your charter board to increase teacher salaries if you don’t like current pay structures. Charter teachers should unionize if they want the collective bargaining power that the WTU has. Why on earth should they benefit from the DCPS union’s efforts if they choose not to unionize (MV aside)?

Some context for anyone who’s trying to figure out what this is about: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1109459.page

This is silly. Salaries can't be increased independent of funding. The salaries of the unionized charter school are lower than the other charters. It isn't that the union isn't effective, they just can't raise salaries to compete with other charters (or DCPS) without getting equivalent funding.

Charters can make changes to their payscale and salaries if they want to. They get to manage their own budgets. If they wanted to cut back on something else, they could afford more in salaries. Some schools have costly buildings. Some have more aides, some have less. Some have smaller class size, some larger. Then there's salaries for their leadership, and how much they pay to consultants and charter management organizations.

At our school (ITDS), there are way more aides than DCPS provides for its schools. In DCPS, for example, there would not typically be a full-time aide in an upper elementary classroom unless it were PTO-funded or required by a student's IEP. DCPS aims for class sizes of 22-24ish for elementary, but will go higher on a case by case basis-- I've personally seen elementary classes as high as 29 kids. ITDS caps class size at 24, occasionally 25. If ITDS school went up to 25 in all classrooms, it would have $100K in formula funding. It's the school's choice to make. But it seems perfectly right and fair for a school with more students to get more funding.

Wouldn't a school with more students automatically get more funding through the Uniform funding formula, precisely because they have more students? So you are right that it is fair that a school with more students gets more funding. That is not the same as equitable funding per student, however.

And the only way that DCPS can find money to pay their teachers more is because they are getting this money outside of the uniform funding formula. Charters aren't getting the same increase to also increase their salaries. You are right that they could change their pay structure, but that isn't the issue here. DCPS is getting this extra money outside of the UFF that charters aren't in order to increase salaries. They aren't having to make alterations to their budgets, as you suggest, to find the extra money. It is just being given to them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah I don’t think so. Tell your charter board to increase teacher salaries if you don’t like current pay structures. Charter teachers should unionize if they want the collective bargaining power that the WTU has. Why on earth should they benefit from the DCPS union’s efforts if they choose not to unionize (MV aside)?

Some context for anyone who’s trying to figure out what this is about: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1109459.page

This is silly. Salaries can't be increased independent of funding. The salaries of the unionized charter school are lower than the other charters. It isn't that the union isn't effective, they just can't raise salaries to compete with other charters (or DCPS) without getting equivalent funding.

Charters can make changes to their payscale and salaries if they want to. They get to manage their own budgets. If they wanted to cut back on something else, they could afford more in salaries. Some schools have costly buildings. Some have more aides, some have less. Some have smaller class size, some larger. Then there's salaries for their leadership, and how much they pay to consultants and charter management organizations.

At our school (ITDS), there are way more aides than DCPS provides for its schools. In DCPS, for example, there would not typically be a full-time aide in an upper elementary classroom unless it were PTO-funded or required by a student's IEP. DCPS aims for class sizes of 22-24ish for elementary, but will go higher on a case by case basis-- I've personally seen elementary classes as high as 29 kids. ITDS caps class size at 24, occasionally 25. If ITDS school went up to 25 in all classrooms, it would have $100K in formula funding. It's the school's choice to make. But it seems perfectly right and fair for a school with more students to get more funding.

Wouldn't a school with more students automatically get more funding through the Uniform funding formula, precisely because they have more students? So you are right that it is fair that a school with more students gets more funding. That is not the same as equitable funding per student, however.

And the only way that DCPS can find money to pay their teachers more is because they are getting this money outside of the uniform funding formula. Charters aren't getting the same increase to also increase their salaries. You are right that they could change their pay structure, but that isn't the issue here. DCPS is getting this extra money outside of the UFF that charters aren't in order to increase salaries. They aren't having to make alterations to their budgets, as you suggest, to find the extra money. It is just being given to them.

When a student leaves a charter after count day, does the money follow the student to the receiving school or does the charter keep it? When a student leaves a charter, does the charter have to fill that seat, perhaps from a waitlist? Is a charter required to take students at any time during the school year?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah I don’t think so. Tell your charter board to increase teacher salaries if you don’t like current pay structures. Charter teachers should unionize if they want the collective bargaining power that the WTU has. Why on earth should they benefit from the DCPS union’s efforts if they choose not to unionize (MV aside)?

Some context for anyone who’s trying to figure out what this is about: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1109459.page

This is silly. Salaries can't be increased independent of funding. The salaries of the unionized charter school are lower than the other charters. It isn't that the union isn't effective, they just can't raise salaries to compete with other charters (or DCPS) without getting equivalent funding.

Charters can make changes to their payscale and salaries if they want to. They get to manage their own budgets. If they wanted to cut back on something else, they could afford more in salaries. Some schools have costly buildings. Some have more aides, some have less. Some have smaller class size, some larger. Then there's salaries for their leadership, and how much they pay to consultants and charter management organizations.

At our school (ITDS), there are way more aides than DCPS provides for its schools. In DCPS, for example, there would not typically be a full-time aide in an upper elementary classroom unless it were PTO-funded or required by a student's IEP. DCPS aims for class sizes of 22-24ish for elementary, but will go higher on a case by case basis-- I've personally seen elementary classes as high as 29 kids. ITDS caps class size at 24, occasionally 25. If ITDS school went up to 25 in all classrooms, it would have $100K in formula funding. It's the school's choice to make. But it seems perfectly right and fair for a school with more students to get more funding.

Wouldn't a school with more students automatically get more funding through the Uniform funding formula, precisely because they have more students? So you are right that it is fair that a school with more students gets more funding. That is not the same as equitable funding per student, however.

And the only way that DCPS can find money to pay their teachers more is because they are getting this money outside of the uniform funding formula. Charters aren't getting the same increase to also increase their salaries. You are right that they could change their pay structure, but that isn't the issue here. DCPS is getting this extra money outside of the UFF that charters aren't in order to increase salaries. They aren't having to make alterations to their budgets, as you suggest, to find the extra money. It is just being given to them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah I don’t think so. Tell your charter board to increase teacher salaries if you don’t like current pay structures. Charter teachers should unionize if they want the collective bargaining power that the WTU has. Why on earth should they benefit from the DCPS union’s efforts if they choose not to unionize (MV aside)?

Some context for anyone who’s trying to figure out what this is about: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1109459.page

This is silly. Salaries can't be increased independent of funding. The salaries of the unionized charter school are lower than the other charters. It isn't that the union isn't effective, they just can't raise salaries to compete with other charters (or DCPS) without getting equivalent funding.

Charters can make changes to their payscale and salaries if they want to. They get to manage their own budgets. If they wanted to cut back on something else, they could afford more in salaries. Some schools have costly buildings. Some have more aides, some have less. Some have smaller class size, some larger. Then there's salaries for their leadership, and how much they pay to consultants and charter management organizations.

At our school (ITDS), there are way more aides than DCPS provides for its schools. In DCPS, for example, there would not typically be a full-time aide in an upper elementary classroom unless it were PTO-funded or required by a student's IEP. DCPS aims for class sizes of 22-24ish for elementary, but will go higher on a case by case basis-- I've personally seen elementary classes as high as 29 kids. ITDS caps class size at 24, occasionally 25. If ITDS school went up to 25 in all classrooms, it would have $100K in formula funding. It's the school's choice to make. But it seems perfectly right and fair for a school with more students to get more funding.

Anonymous wrote:off-topic but in response to the above. certain popular middle school charters start in 5th not 6th grade. they chose this presumably so students would years ago try the school for 5th knowing they could always leave for 6th. its now a not so great set-up where a large cohort of students leave the neighborhood school before 5th and the other students feel left behind.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah I don’t think so. Tell your charter board to increase teacher salaries if you don’t like current pay structures. Charter teachers should unionize if they want the collective bargaining power that the WTU has. Why on earth should they benefit from the DCPS union’s efforts if they choose not to unionize (MV aside)?

Some context for anyone who’s trying to figure out what this is about: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1109459.page

This is silly. Salaries can't be increased independent of funding. The salaries of the unionized charter school are lower than the other charters. It isn't that the union isn't effective, they just can't raise salaries to compete with other charters (or DCPS) without getting equivalent funding.

Anonymous wrote:Yeah I don’t think so. Tell your charter board to increase teacher salaries if you don’t like current pay structures. Charter teachers should unionize if they want the collective bargaining power that the WTU has. Why on earth should they benefit from the DCPS union’s efforts if they choose not to unionize (MV aside)?

Some context for anyone who’s trying to figure out what this is about: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1109459.page

Anonymous wrote:All funding for public education is supposed to go through the UPSFF -- whether it's backpay for teachers or $$ for pencils. Now DCPS is going to get an additional $180 million outside the UPSFF. Not legal, plain and simple.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is as it stands now in the city budget, charter schools will get approx $3500 less per student - which seems unfair to me (a taxpayer who pays for public - including charter - schools). Per student allocation from the city should be the same, whether DCPS or Charter.

It is the same in the UPSFF. DCPS gets more because of IMPACT, and as a buffer to cover mid-year arrivals. Then there's facilities funding, you can look up that lawsuit if you want.

Bottom line, if charters want to do a performance system, take kids mid-year, do Early Stages, and have bigger class sizes, then their funding would change. And charter teachers are welcome to form unions if they like. Go right ahead. But don't reject the union and then want the benefits without doing the work.

Charter parents, FYI-- adding just one kid to each class would mean you could give your teachers a raise. It's up to you!