Anonymous wrote:DCPS can't solve this.
We're losing the true middle class in DC -- and around the country.
We need more jobs, jobs with wage growth over time, and more affordable housing.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:no one gives a shit about the extracurriclars if the academics are a mess. But go on DCPS, Im sure adding in art classes and archery will totally get all those high SES parents of Brents 4th grade class to stick around for Jefferson.
OP here. I tend to agree. I'm sure we all have long wish lists of what our neighborhood schools are missing, and suggestions for how they could be improved. But what I'm really looking for, and I think what DCPS needs to hear, is about the key "dealbreaker" elements that caused us to reject our neighborhood schools.
Lots of people are saying test scores, and that makes sense to me. Yes, there may be situations where parents tempted to look OOB will stomach low test scores, for example if you know your local school is really good despite the test scores or if you don't have another good option. And on the flip side, I can imagine situations where parents might reject a high test score school, for example if it's in an inconvenient location. The break point where each parent decides probably depends on a lot of small personal factors that are specific to each family. It really seems like a school with low test scores just doesn't get the benefit of the doubt, so parents will look for ways to avoid those low test scores.
What do people think about that description of the problem? Generally true for most people (although obviously not every single person), or way off base?
As a for instance test case, if your local neighborhood schools (ES/MS/HS) started consistently hitting 35% proficient (level 4+5) in the PARCC scores, would you choose to attend them rather than going OOB? What if they reach 50% proficiency? Here are the 2016 PARCC scores by school for reference - https://dcps.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcps/publication/attachments/2016%20PARCC%20FINAL%20Results%20Press%20Deck%20FINAL.pdf If you look at page 11, you can see the PARCC scores for each school. The "% L4 + L5" column shows the total percentage of students testing proficient at each school.
Anonymous wrote:no one gives a shit about the extracurriclars if the academics are a mess. But go on DCPS, Im sure adding in art classes and archery will totally get all those high SES parents of Brents 4th grade class to stick around for Jefferson.
Different poster responding to answer your question. I assume what PP meant by money not following the students was the first PP's tweak-the-formula proposal that funding should be based on capacity not enrollment. Key parts of each comment underlined. HTHAnonymous wrote:What are you talking about? Money does follow the student. A school gets a baseline amount for every student enrolled. On top of that, a school gets additional funds if a high number of students live in poverty, are not native English speakers or have special needs.Anonymous wrote:And then DCPS schools would have NO reason to ever improve, as money doesn't follow the student. (Deal and Wilson are getting screwed already with per pupil funding). Then more students would seek to go to charters...Anonymous wrote:And because of the way that DC allocates per pupil funding, Deal will always be the monster school that can offer everything, and all the other middle schools will pale in comparison. If they could tweak the formula somehow so that Deal got less incremental money for each student over a certain number, and the other middle schools were funded based on their capacity not their enrollment, some of the funding inequity would balance.
Anonymous wrote:Extra-curriculars isn't not about the money, it's about a large enough student body so you can get a critical mass of students interested in an activity.
A school with 40-60 students per grade is simply not going to be able to support more than 1-2 sports teams, a school play or a debate team unless they all decide to get involved in the same activity.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And then DCPS schools would have NO reason to ever improve, as money doesn't follow the student. (Deal and Wilson are getting screwed already with per pupil funding). Then more students would seek to go to charters...Anonymous wrote:And because of the way that DC allocates per pupil funding, Deal will always be the monster school that can offer everything, and all the other middle schools will pale in comparison. If they could tweak the formula somehow so that Deal got less incremental money for each student over a certain number, and the other middle schools were funded based on their capacity not their enrollment, some of the funding inequity would balance.
What are you talking about? Money does follow the student. A school gets a baseline amount for every student enrolled. On top of that, a school gets additional funds if a high number of students live in poverty, are not native English speakers or have special needs.
The upper northwest schools get a lot because their w rollmenta are large, and the high needs schools get more per students because their students need more.
The funding for high needs students isn't actually enough to cover their true needs. And the wealthy parents in upper NW give so much that the equity gap gets even bigger.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And then DCPS schools would have NO reason to ever improve, as money doesn't follow the student. (Deal and Wilson are getting screwed already with per pupil funding). Then more students would seek to go to charters...Anonymous wrote:And because of the way that DC allocates per pupil funding, Deal will always be the monster school that can offer everything, and all the other middle schools will pale in comparison. If they could tweak the formula somehow so that Deal got less incremental money for each student over a certain number, and the other middle schools were funded based on their capacity not their enrollment, some of the funding inequity would balance.
What are you talking about? Money does follow the student. A school gets a baseline amount for every student enrolled. On top of that, a school gets additional funds if a high number of students live in poverty, are not native English speakers or have special needs.
The upper northwest schools get a lot because their w rollmenta are large, and the high needs schools get more per students because their students need more.
Anonymous wrote:And then DCPS schools would have NO reason to ever improve, as money doesn't follow the student. (Deal and Wilson are getting screwed already with per pupil funding). Then more students would seek to go to charters...Anonymous wrote:And because of the way that DC allocates per pupil funding, Deal will always be the monster school that can offer everything, and all the other middle schools will pale in comparison. If they could tweak the formula somehow so that Deal got less incremental money for each student over a certain number, and the other middle schools were funded based on their capacity not their enrollment, some of the funding inequity would balance.
And then DCPS schools would have NO reason to ever improve, as money doesn't follow the student. (Deal and Wilson are getting screwed already with per pupil funding). Then more students would seek to go to charters...Anonymous wrote:And because of the way that DC allocates per pupil funding, Deal will always be the monster school that can offer everything, and all the other middle schools will pale in comparison. If they could tweak the formula somehow so that Deal got less incremental money for each student over a certain number, and the other middle schools were funded based on their capacity not their enrollment, some of the funding inequity would balance.