Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope Rocketship can pull through. It is a tough environment but the model is innovative and the students are capable. They could hire more experienced staff in ELA and Math for targeted academic interventions. I think they wil reach their goal of 35% at Legacy and Rise. The communities need those schools and with more time, I think there will be academic improvements.

I also hope that Rocketship starts to thrive. The PCSB has given them time and kids are there so those wishing for Rocketship's failure are wishing for the failure of kids during critical elementary years. What I don't understand is the model -- is it really innovative today when so many schools now rely on technology to support instruction and have blended software/online programs into their core offerings. Can you say more about the model and how it's innovative?

Oh FFS. Nobody is wishing for failure of the kids! The kids will do better if Rocketship is closed and they are sent to any of the many better-performing schools in the area. Yes, Ward 8 has many schools that are better than Rocketship. Enough already. Five years of poorly serving these kids is enough. Accountability means closure happens when performance is low.

I don't disagree with "enough already" BUT here's what is being missed -- Rocketship isn't closed. It isn't being closed. It isn't in danger of being closed. The PCSB has already decided that they are getting more time so the kids in Rocketship now need it to improve. In fact, the PCSB has given Rocketship at least three years for continued failure. Or to thrive. I'm hoping for thriving because a PK-5 student losing three years of a quality education is rarely repairable.

What you're missing is that schools sometimes close "voluntarily" (or are closed by their organization) when they realize they can't survive. Hope Tolson went that way. It avoids a humiliating public closure that makes the organization look bad. If the Rocketship org ever gets out of its denial, that may happen. Or they may "consolidate" with nearby Rocketship Rise and pretend it isn't a failure of Legacy. But it is.

Not missing that at all. Hope didn't just close a campus -- they went completely out of business and they did so in the face of vastly harder and faster conditions. Hope originally had multiple campuses. When enrollment declined severely, they were able to close one and continue. They only relinquished when they got down to one campus with continued declining enrollment and declining academics and conditions applied in months (end of the school year) not applied a few years later. Unlike Hope going completely out of business, Rocketship has a national organization that will have to address its obligations in DC (and its reputation nationally).

You nailed it with the consolidation idea. The best course seems to be consolidation if they can offload the facility and debt from the more failed campus.

Lol our posts crossed! Do you think the PCSB intentionally put Hope out of business with impossible conditions? I guess I just don't see how Legacy can meet the 35% standard...

The PCSB had deep hope that Hope would close on its own.

Bringing it back to SSMA, it feels similar there. PCSB loves setting conditions that are not possible (and even if they were, I honestly wouldn’t trust because the results would be so out of step with the trend that I’d believe data error or fluke that won’t ever be repeated or something more nefarious first) rather than just owning up to closure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope Rocketship can pull through. It is a tough environment but the model is innovative and the students are capable. They could hire more experienced staff in ELA and Math for targeted academic interventions. I think they wil reach their goal of 35% at Legacy and Rise. The communities need those schools and with more time, I think there will be academic improvements.

I also hope that Rocketship starts to thrive. The PCSB has given them time and kids are there so those wishing for Rocketship's failure are wishing for the failure of kids during critical elementary years. What I don't understand is the model -- is it really innovative today when so many schools now rely on technology to support instruction and have blended software/online programs into their core offerings. Can you say more about the model and how it's innovative?

Oh FFS. Nobody is wishing for failure of the kids! The kids will do better if Rocketship is closed and they are sent to any of the many better-performing schools in the area. Yes, Ward 8 has many schools that are better than Rocketship. Enough already. Five years of poorly serving these kids is enough. Accountability means closure happens when performance is low.

I don't disagree with "enough already" BUT here's what is being missed -- Rocketship isn't closed. It isn't being closed. It isn't in danger of being closed. The PCSB has already decided that they are getting more time so the kids in Rocketship now need it to improve. In fact, the PCSB has given Rocketship at least three years for continued failure. Or to thrive. I'm hoping for thriving because a PK-5 student losing three years of a quality education is rarely repairable.

What you're missing is that schools sometimes close "voluntarily" (or are closed by their organization) when they realize they can't survive. Hope Tolson went that way. It avoids a humiliating public closure that makes the organization look bad. If the Rocketship org ever gets out of its denial, that may happen. Or they may "consolidate" with nearby Rocketship Rise and pretend it isn't a failure of Legacy. But it is.

Not missing that at all. Hope didn't just close a campus -- they went completely out of business and they did so in the face of vastly harder and faster conditions. Hope originally had multiple campuses. When enrollment declined severely, they were able to close one and continue. They only relinquished when they got down to one campus with continued declining enrollment and declining academics and conditions applied in months (end of the school year) not applied a few years later. Unlike Hope going completely out of business, Rocketship has a national organization that will have to address its obligations in DC (and its reputation nationally).

You nailed it with the consolidation idea. The best course seems to be consolidation if they can offload the facility and debt from the more failed campus.

Lol our posts crossed! Do you think the PCSB intentionally put Hope out of business with impossible conditions? I guess I just don't see how Legacy can meet the 35% standard...

The PCSB had deep hope that Hope would close on its own.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope Rocketship can pull through. It is a tough environment but the model is innovative and the students are capable. They could hire more experienced staff in ELA and Math for targeted academic interventions. I think they wil reach their goal of 35% at Legacy and Rise. The communities need those schools and with more time, I think there will be academic improvements.

I also hope that Rocketship starts to thrive. The PCSB has given them time and kids are there so those wishing for Rocketship's failure are wishing for the failure of kids during critical elementary years. What I don't understand is the model -- is it really innovative today when so many schools now rely on technology to support instruction and have blended software/online programs into their core offerings. Can you say more about the model and how it's innovative?

Oh FFS. Nobody is wishing for failure of the kids! The kids will do better if Rocketship is closed and they are sent to any of the many better-performing schools in the area. Yes, Ward 8 has many schools that are better than Rocketship. Enough already. Five years of poorly serving these kids is enough. Accountability means closure happens when performance is low.

I don't disagree with "enough already" BUT here's what is being missed -- Rocketship isn't closed. It isn't being closed. It isn't in danger of being closed. The PCSB has already decided that they are getting more time so the kids in Rocketship now need it to improve. In fact, the PCSB has given Rocketship at least three years for continued failure. Or to thrive. I'm hoping for thriving because a PK-5 student losing three years of a quality education is rarely repairable.

What you're missing is that schools sometimes close "voluntarily" (or are closed by their organization) when they realize they can't survive. Hope Tolson went that way. It avoids a humiliating public closure that makes the organization look bad. If the Rocketship org ever gets out of its denial, that may happen. Or they may "consolidate" with nearby Rocketship Rise and pretend it isn't a failure of Legacy. But it is.

Not missing that at all. Hope didn't just close a campus -- they went completely out of business and they did so in the face of vastly harder and faster conditions. Hope originally had multiple campuses. When enrollment declined severely, they were able to close one and continue. They only relinquished when they got down to one campus with continued declining enrollment and declining academics and conditions applied in months (end of the school year) not applied a few years later. Unlike Hope going completely out of business, Rocketship has a national organization that will have to address its obligations in DC (and its reputation nationally).

You nailed it with the consolidation idea. The best course seems to be consolidation if they can offload the facility and debt from the more failed campus.

Lol our posts crossed! Do you think the PCSB intentionally put Hope out of business with impossible conditions? I guess I just don't see how Legacy can meet the 35% standard...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope Rocketship can pull through. It is a tough environment but the model is innovative and the students are capable. They could hire more experienced staff in ELA and Math for targeted academic interventions. I think they wil reach their goal of 35% at Legacy and Rise. The communities need those schools and with more time, I think there will be academic improvements.

I also hope that Rocketship starts to thrive. The PCSB has given them time and kids are there so those wishing for Rocketship's failure are wishing for the failure of kids during critical elementary years. What I don't understand is the model -- is it really innovative today when so many schools now rely on technology to support instruction and have blended software/online programs into their core offerings. Can you say more about the model and how it's innovative?

Oh FFS. Nobody is wishing for failure of the kids! The kids will do better if Rocketship is closed and they are sent to any of the many better-performing schools in the area. Yes, Ward 8 has many schools that are better than Rocketship. Enough already. Five years of poorly serving these kids is enough. Accountability means closure happens when performance is low.

I don't disagree with "enough already" BUT here's what is being missed -- Rocketship isn't closed. It isn't being closed. It isn't in danger of being closed. The PCSB has already decided that they are getting more time so the kids in Rocketship now need it to improve. In fact, the PCSB has given Rocketship at least three years for continued failure. Or to thrive. I'm hoping for thriving because a PK-5 student losing three years of a quality education is rarely repairable.

On the contrary, it is in danger of being closed if it does not meet the performance metrics starting in school year 27-28. Now, the PCSB does whatever they want so they might not close Rocketship even if it doesn't meet the stated goal. But if you look at how terrible Rocketship Legacy's scores are, it's hard to see how it can improve fast enough.

Rocketship DC is also in danger of being closed by the Rocketship organization if enrollment continues to decline. Ridiculous Rocketship booster PP whines about not comparing to pre-COVID metrics, but that's beside the point. Rocketship's DC enrollment in the current school year is 1078, down from 1197 last year and 1376 the year before that. (I did this with the Subsequent Financial Memo). Legacy, the worst-performing camps, lost 92 kids relative to the 530 it had last year. This is simply not sustainable. No kids = no school.

I so get it. The earliest possible closure by the PCSB would be at the end of the 28-29 school year. That's a long time from now if you are a kid/family in that school who may not have the knowledge to get out. Closure by the national organization? Seems very unlikely given the sunk costs -- how will they recoup the facility investments or make good on facility-related debt? School buildings are staying empty for a reason. IMO, the PCSB conditions aren't enough to make them go right away. Enrollment loss might be but that too seems like it will be a slow burn leading to closure a few years out - not at the end of this year and not at the end of next year.

I think it's hard to predict what Rocketship organization will do. They might merge as soon as the remaining expected population fits in the Rise building-- and I think it might fit right now, because Rise used to have 685 students and now has only 346. Then they can sell off or lease out Legacy. That puts an end to their lowest performing campus and shores up their finances. But they probably won't because Rocketship organization is clearly fine with poor performance and losing money in DC.

The motion that was approved, starting at 3:27:33 says that there must be for Rise and Legacy an ASPIRE score of at least 35% in SY 27-28 and SY-28-29, and if not, must close at the end of the *following* school year. So you are right that end of year 28-29 is the earliest under these conditions of the motion that the PCSB could force closure. But that still exists in the context of PCSB's power to intervene basically at will when a school is in dire straits or economically not viable. Basically the PCSB can do whatever it wants, with a veneer of procedure applied to save face.

You seem knowledgeable, did you anticipate Hope Tolson closing in the way that they did? The whole decisions n meeting is (or was) on YouTube and it's an interesting watch.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope Rocketship can pull through. It is a tough environment but the model is innovative and the students are capable. They could hire more experienced staff in ELA and Math for targeted academic interventions. I think they wil reach their goal of 35% at Legacy and Rise. The communities need those schools and with more time, I think there will be academic improvements.

I also hope that Rocketship starts to thrive. The PCSB has given them time and kids are there so those wishing for Rocketship's failure are wishing for the failure of kids during critical elementary years. What I don't understand is the model -- is it really innovative today when so many schools now rely on technology to support instruction and have blended software/online programs into their core offerings. Can you say more about the model and how it's innovative?

Oh FFS. Nobody is wishing for failure of the kids! The kids will do better if Rocketship is closed and they are sent to any of the many better-performing schools in the area. Yes, Ward 8 has many schools that are better than Rocketship. Enough already. Five years of poorly serving these kids is enough. Accountability means closure happens when performance is low.

I don't disagree with "enough already" BUT here's what is being missed -- Rocketship isn't closed. It isn't being closed. It isn't in danger of being closed. The PCSB has already decided that they are getting more time so the kids in Rocketship now need it to improve. In fact, the PCSB has given Rocketship at least three years for continued failure. Or to thrive. I'm hoping for thriving because a PK-5 student losing three years of a quality education is rarely repairable.

What you're missing is that schools sometimes close "voluntarily" (or are closed by their organization) when they realize they can't survive. Hope Tolson went that way. It avoids a humiliating public closure that makes the organization look bad. If the Rocketship org ever gets out of its denial, that may happen. Or they may "consolidate" with nearby Rocketship Rise and pretend it isn't a failure of Legacy. But it is.

Not missing that at all. Hope didn't just close a campus -- they went completely out of business and they did so in the face of vastly harder and faster conditions. Hope originally had multiple campuses. When enrollment declined severely, they were able to close one and continue. They only relinquished when they got down to one campus with continued declining enrollment and declining academics and conditions applied in months (end of the school year) not applied a few years later. Unlike Hope going completely out of business, Rocketship has a national organization that will have to address its obligations in DC (and its reputation nationally).

You nailed it with the consolidation idea. The best course seems to be consolidation if they can offload the facility and debt from the more failed campus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope Rocketship can pull through. It is a tough environment but the model is innovative and the students are capable. They could hire more experienced staff in ELA and Math for targeted academic interventions. I think they wil reach their goal of 35% at Legacy and Rise. The communities need those schools and with more time, I think there will be academic improvements.

I also hope that Rocketship starts to thrive. The PCSB has given them time and kids are there so those wishing for Rocketship's failure are wishing for the failure of kids during critical elementary years. What I don't understand is the model -- is it really innovative today when so many schools now rely on technology to support instruction and have blended software/online programs into their core offerings. Can you say more about the model and how it's innovative?

Oh FFS. Nobody is wishing for failure of the kids! The kids will do better if Rocketship is closed and they are sent to any of the many better-performing schools in the area. Yes, Ward 8 has many schools that are better than Rocketship. Enough already. Five years of poorly serving these kids is enough. Accountability means closure happens when performance is low.

I don't disagree with "enough already" BUT here's what is being missed -- Rocketship isn't closed. It isn't being closed. It isn't in danger of being closed. The PCSB has already decided that they are getting more time so the kids in Rocketship now need it to improve. In fact, the PCSB has given Rocketship at least three years for continued failure. Or to thrive. I'm hoping for thriving because a PK-5 student losing three years of a quality education is rarely repairable.

On the contrary, it is in danger of being closed if it does not meet the performance metrics starting in school year 27-28. Now, the PCSB does whatever they want so they might not close Rocketship even if it doesn't meet the stated goal. But if you look at how terrible Rocketship Legacy's scores are, it's hard to see how it can improve fast enough.

Rocketship DC is also in danger of being closed by the Rocketship organization if enrollment continues to decline. Ridiculous Rocketship booster PP whines about not comparing to pre-COVID metrics, but that's beside the point. Rocketship's DC enrollment in the current school year is 1078, down from 1197 last year and 1376 the year before that. (I did this with the Subsequent Financial Memo). Legacy, the worst-performing camps, lost 92 kids relative to the 530 it had last year. This is simply not sustainable. No kids = no school.

I so get it. The earliest possible closure by the PCSB would be at the end of the 28-29 school year. That's a long time from now if you are a kid/family in that school who may not have the knowledge to get out. Closure by the national organization? Seems very unlikely given the sunk costs -- how will they recoup the facility investments or make good on facility-related debt? School buildings are staying empty for a reason. IMO, the PCSB conditions aren't enough to make them go right away. Enrollment loss might be but that too seems like it will be a slow burn leading to closure a few years out - not at the end of this year and not at the end of next year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope Rocketship can pull through. It is a tough environment but the model is innovative and the students are capable. They could hire more experienced staff in ELA and Math for targeted academic interventions. I think they wil reach their goal of 35% at Legacy and Rise. The communities need those schools and with more time, I think there will be academic improvements.

I also hope that Rocketship starts to thrive. The PCSB has given them time and kids are there so those wishing for Rocketship's failure are wishing for the failure of kids during critical elementary years. What I don't understand is the model -- is it really innovative today when so many schools now rely on technology to support instruction and have blended software/online programs into their core offerings. Can you say more about the model and how it's innovative?

Oh FFS. Nobody is wishing for failure of the kids! The kids will do better if Rocketship is closed and they are sent to any of the many better-performing schools in the area. Yes, Ward 8 has many schools that are better than Rocketship. Enough already. Five years of poorly serving these kids is enough. Accountability means closure happens when performance is low.

I don't disagree with "enough already" BUT here's what is being missed -- Rocketship isn't closed. It isn't being closed. It isn't in danger of being closed. The PCSB has already decided that they are getting more time so the kids in Rocketship now need it to improve. In fact, the PCSB has given Rocketship at least three years for continued failure. Or to thrive. I'm hoping for thriving because a PK-5 student losing three years of a quality education is rarely repairable.

What you're missing is that schools sometimes close "voluntarily" (or are closed by their organization) when they realize they can't survive. Hope Tolson went that way. It avoids a humiliating public closure that makes the organization look bad. If the Rocketship org ever gets out of its denial, that may happen. Or they may "consolidate" with nearby Rocketship Rise and pretend it isn't a failure of Legacy. But it is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope Rocketship can pull through. It is a tough environment but the model is innovative and the students are capable. They could hire more experienced staff in ELA and Math for targeted academic interventions. I think they wil reach their goal of 35% at Legacy and Rise. The communities need those schools and with more time, I think there will be academic improvements.

I also hope that Rocketship starts to thrive. The PCSB has given them time and kids are there so those wishing for Rocketship's failure are wishing for the failure of kids during critical elementary years. What I don't understand is the model -- is it really innovative today when so many schools now rely on technology to support instruction and have blended software/online programs into their core offerings. Can you say more about the model and how it's innovative?

Oh FFS. Nobody is wishing for failure of the kids! The kids will do better if Rocketship is closed and they are sent to any of the many better-performing schools in the area. Yes, Ward 8 has many schools that are better than Rocketship. Enough already. Five years of poorly serving these kids is enough. Accountability means closure happens when performance is low.

I don't disagree with "enough already" BUT here's what is being missed -- Rocketship isn't closed. It isn't being closed. It isn't in danger of being closed. The PCSB has already decided that they are getting more time so the kids in Rocketship now need it to improve. In fact, the PCSB has given Rocketship at least three years for continued failure. Or to thrive. I'm hoping for thriving because a PK-5 student losing three years of a quality education is rarely repairable.

On the contrary, it is in danger of being closed if it does not meet the performance metrics starting in school year 27-28. Now, the PCSB does whatever they want so they might not close Rocketship even if it doesn't meet the stated goal. But if you look at how terrible Rocketship Legacy's scores are, it's hard to see how it can improve fast enough.

Rocketship DC is also in danger of being closed by the Rocketship organization if enrollment continues to decline. Ridiculous Rocketship booster PP whines about not comparing to pre-COVID metrics, but that's beside the point. Rocketship's DC enrollment in the current school year is 1078, down from 1197 last year and 1376 the year before that. (I did this with the Subsequent Financial Memo). Legacy, the worst-performing camps, lost 92 kids relative to the 530 it had last year. This is simply not sustainable. No kids = no school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope Rocketship can pull through. It is a tough environment but the model is innovative and the students are capable. They could hire more experienced staff in ELA and Math for targeted academic interventions. I think they wil reach their goal of 35% at Legacy and Rise. The communities need those schools and with more time, I think there will be academic improvements.

I also hope that Rocketship starts to thrive. The PCSB has given them time and kids are there so those wishing for Rocketship's failure are wishing for the failure of kids during critical elementary years. What I don't understand is the model -- is it really innovative today when so many schools now rely on technology to support instruction and have blended software/online programs into their core offerings. Can you say more about the model and how it's innovative?

Oh FFS. Nobody is wishing for failure of the kids! The kids will do better if Rocketship is closed and they are sent to any of the many better-performing schools in the area. Yes, Ward 8 has many schools that are better than Rocketship. Enough already. Five years of poorly serving these kids is enough. Accountability means closure happens when performance is low.

I don't disagree with "enough already" BUT here's what is being missed -- Rocketship isn't closed. It isn't being closed. It isn't in danger of being closed. The PCSB has already decided that they are getting more time so the kids in Rocketship now need it to improve. In fact, the PCSB has given Rocketship at least three years for continued failure. Or to thrive. I'm hoping for thriving because a PK-5 student losing three years of a quality education is rarely repairable.

Anonymous wrote:Students have the potential to improve under the right conditions. It is unreasonable to compare enrollment numbers from pre- and post-COVID periods, as academic performance relies on many interdependent systems.

Rocketship deserves another opportunity to navigate these complexities and identify the best path forward for institutional success.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope Rocketship can pull through. It is a tough environment but the model is innovative and the students are capable. They could hire more experienced staff in ELA and Math for targeted academic interventions. I think they wil reach their goal of 35% at Legacy and Rise. The communities need those schools and with more time, I think there will be academic improvements.

Hello Rocketship staff person. Please explain why you think the communities need these schools given that they are performing lower than many nearby schools.

This sounds like Ed Consultant nonsense. Every school was impacted by COVID. Why are you giving Rocketship a pass when other schools have recovered?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope Rocketship can pull through. It is a tough environment but the model is innovative and the students are capable. They could hire more experienced staff in ELA and Math for targeted academic interventions. I think they wil reach their goal of 35% at Legacy and Rise. The communities need those schools and with more time, I think there will be academic improvements.

I also hope that Rocketship starts to thrive. The PCSB has given them time and kids are there so those wishing for Rocketship's failure are wishing for the failure of kids during critical elementary years. What I don't understand is the model -- is it really innovative today when so many schools now rely on technology to support instruction and have blended software/online programs into their core offerings. Can you say more about the model and how it's innovative?

Oh FFS. Nobody is wishing for failure of the kids! The kids will do better if Rocketship is closed and they are sent to any of the many better-performing schools in the area. Yes, Ward 8 has many schools that are better than Rocketship. Enough already. Five years of poorly serving these kids is enough. Accountability means closure happens when performance is low.

Anonymous wrote:I hope Rocketship can pull through. It is a tough environment but the model is innovative and the students are capable. They could hire more experienced staff in ELA and Math for targeted academic interventions. I think they wil reach their goal of 35% at Legacy and Rise. The communities need those schools and with more time, I think there will be academic improvements.

I also hope that Rocketship starts to thrive. The PCSB has given them time and kids are there so those wishing for Rocketship's failure are wishing for the failure of kids during critical elementary years. What I don't understand is the model -- is it really innovative today when so many schools now rely on technology to support instruction and have blended software/online programs into their core offerings. Can you say more about the model and how it's innovative?

Anonymous wrote:Students have the potential to improve under the right conditions. It is unreasonable to compare enrollment numbers from pre- and post-COVID periods, as academic performance relies on many interdependent systems.

Rocketship deserves another opportunity to navigate these complexities and identify the best path forward for institutional success.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope Rocketship can pull through. It is a tough environment but the model is innovative and the students are capable. They could hire more experienced staff in ELA and Math for targeted academic interventions. I think they wil reach their goal of 35% at Legacy and Rise. The communities need those schools and with more time, I think there will be academic improvements.

Hello Rocketship staff person. Please explain why you think the communities need these schools given that they are performing lower than many nearby schools.

Some schools haven't lost enrollment despite COVID. But Rocketship has lost a lot of its enrollment. Why?

And why does it deserve another chance after Rocketship itself acknowledges they have performed unacceptably? Just for fun? Just because it *might* succeed despite having failed thus far? Come on.

Students have the potential to improve under the right conditions. It is unreasonable to compare enrollment numbers from pre- and post-COVID periods, as academic performance relies on many interdependent systems.

Rocketship deserves another opportunity to navigate these complexities and identify the best path forward for institutional success.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope Rocketship can pull through. It is a tough environment but the model is innovative and the students are capable. They could hire more experienced staff in ELA and Math for targeted academic interventions. I think they wil reach their goal of 35% at Legacy and Rise. The communities need those schools and with more time, I think there will be academic improvements.

Hello Rocketship staff person. Please explain why you think the communities need these schools given that they are performing lower than many nearby schools.

Oh look a Rocketship booster! Why don't you tell us why enrollment has declined so drastically.