Anonymous wrote:

Hilarious. ANY school would be better off screening for aptitude and working with available talent. That's exactly why the private schools do it - because they can. But, a magnet charter? That is ground that DC will not cede willingly to the charters. Charter law does not allow it, and everyone knows that if they could cherry-pick, they would. So, if anyone is going to allowed to do it, it will be a DCPS middle school. Not Basis.

The following article argues that BASIS uses high attrition as a solution to the rigorous non-selective charter dilemma:

http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2011/03/blog-post.html

While the data are a little dated, the spreadsheet presented in the article shows that of the 78 students in the 6th grade at BASIS Tucson during the 2004-2005 school year, only 27 were still there during the 2009-2010 school year as part of the 11th grade class. (BASIS offers its students the option of graduating in the 11th grade.) In other words, only 35% of the 2004-2005 6th grade class actually graduated from BASIS Tucson.

At first, the 35% graduation rate seems like a terrible indictment of the BASIS model. At least that's how the author of the article portrays it. However, it seems to me that the 35% graduation rate is a natural consequence of a non-selective admissions process for a school with a rigorous academic program.

Suppose your goal is to ensure that at least 35 students complete a rigorous 8-year academic program. You might choose to accomplish this goal in one of two ways:

Option A: Admit the 35 most promising from a pool of 100 applicants. (Actually, you might want to admit a couple more to guard against attrition.)

Option B: Admit all 100 applicants and allow them to self-select the 35 who graduate. (Actually, if you're lucky, more than 35 will make it.)

BASIS has chosen Option B. In fact, BASIS doesn't have a choice, as the DC charter law does not permit Option A. However, non-selective admissions is part of the BASIS philosophy, so it would likely have chosen Option B even if Option A were allowed.

Option B is more equitable than Option A. While Option A offers the rigorous academic program only to the 35 applicants who make the cut at the outset, Option B offers repeated opportunities over many years to all 100 applicants to make it into the 35 through hard work.

Based on national rankings of high schools, BASIS Tucson and Thomas Jefferson in Virginia are comparably ranked. BASIS Tucson has achieved this success through a high attrition rate, while Thomas Jefferson has achieved it through a high rejection rate. Only about 16% of the applicants were accepted during a recent admissions round.

To me it seems clear that the BASIS Tucson approach is more equitable, and I hope that the model is as successful in DC as it has been in Tucson.

I'm just confused that even with selective admissions and a brutal work schedule, the students of our two 'big' magnets aren't performing better

The vast majority of students' needs are not being met. The average, the above average, the special needs students, and the challenged. The so called advanced learners are not entitled to any greater services than any other city child. Their families should not be allowed to change the charter law to allow them to keep their precious lottery spot throughout high school at taxpayer expense unless every other child gets a fair chance to join that school and cannot be shut out because the families of allegedly advanced students got lucky when their kid is in kinder.

You can't shut out other kids you don't want in your tax payer funded school, under some foolish delusion that you earned it because your child is advanced, and somehow, underserved.

what's wrong with you?



There is nothing wrong with me You are kidding yourself if you think DC schools serve advanced learners since DC schools do not even have gifted IEPs or any gifted programs. In fact, most public schools around the country do not have gifted education or only have so-called "gifted education" programs for a couple of hours a week especially in elementary or middle schools.

OTOH DC schools most certainly to try to serve struggling learners and special needs kids with IEPs or via sending kids to private schools. Most public school classrooms set their priorities on struggling learners and allow advanced learners to not really learn anything.

How do you propose to meet the needs of a kid who is years ahead of their classmates??????

I guess you do not believe in serving the needs of all kids.

As for shutting other kids out of schools, I am not advocating that. I am advocating choices for those who want or need a rigorous education in order to meet the needs of all kids. I also think admissions criteria is not necessarily a bad thing.

Why is it ok to have try outs for sports teams??? Is not this discriminatory???? Why is it ok for sports teams to have try outs but not some schools???

In spite of your best wishes, there are very few gifted children in any school system and it is laughable to suggest that they are underserved. I understand, your district has a ridiculous measure that qualifies 40-70% of the kids in your school as "gifted" and you believe that your kid is worthy of some special accommodation because they test well. Cool. But, make no mistake. They are not gifted and they are no some left behind population ignored because of their brilliance. They are just, plainly, smart kids.

Why does this matter? Simple?

allocation of resources. You think your kid is YEARS ahead of other kids. I question the measure that would conclude that. I have 20 years experience in education and know that the kid who is YEARS ahead of other kids comes along, maybe once every ten years. You have no such experience and think your kid is brilliant. I get it. If you get others to think your poor brilliant kid is underserved, maybe you can convince the system to take pity on poor, underserved you. But again, here this. Your hardworking and smart kid is neither truly gifted, no worthy of extra services to assuage their first world problems.

Where should the resources go? Where they will do the most good. In service of the students in greatest need. This is not rocket science.

Anonymous wrote:Not the pp, but there seems in dc to be a significant number of people who believe no one should acheive unless everyone is going to achieve at the same time in the same way. I think it is meant as a defense against certain people rigging the system and jogging resources, but in the end it just results in almost no one achieving and a pervasive guilt/suspicion of those who do well. It is small minded thinking at its worst. There is justice and equity which are sorely needed, but it gets mistaken for everyone being perfectly equal which is impossible and, I imagine, not desireable.

Well put. All too true. The point is that kids and parents should be able to excercise choice over a number of appealing options for MS and HS. For those who don't approve of elite magnet programs, and prefer to get involved at Latin, Basis, Banneker, SWW etc., great, you have choices that you're happy with. Simply let a top magnet program or two exist for MS and HS for those who see value in permitting tax payer dollars to support selective admissions programs like TJ's. Given that such programs exist in countless school districts nationwide and this particular district supports no "Gold Medal" high school as yet, why not replicate what's working well elsewhere? NYC has developed strong safeugards (e.g. extensive test prep for low-income applicants, and required applicant interviews for those who make the initial cut on the tough SSAT admissions test) to prevent its famous magnets from being swamped with affluent whites. DC could easily do the same. The point is not to knock Basis' approach, or Banneker's, but to offer bona fide school choice in an increasingly diverse city. Some kids and parents will invaribly care far more about Ivy League admissions than others, so give them a tried and tested path to success and leave them be.

Is there anyone on DCUM who doesn't approve of elite magnet programs?! (Not that it matters of course, because it's not up to us.) The reality is that according to current law, only DCPS can create a magnet program. Since they haven't done that, a charter school (Latin) stepped in to fill that void, at least with respect to course offerings. They can't exclude anyone based on performance, but they can design a rigorous program. Now Basis is going to attempt to do the same. In the absence of magnets this is what we have. Good on them. You can't ask the charters to do more without changing the law. If you want an elite magnet (not a bad thing as far as I can tell), it will have to be done by DCPS. Ergo, your beef is with Kaya Henderson, not anyone on this board.

Next?

"No one gets theirs until I get mine." And reflected in that attitude is evidently that kids should not be expected to work hard, learn and achieve, and "how dare Basis come along and meet the need of kids and families that are willing to make that investment of effort for their children's future" - and thereby evidently not meet the "needs" of those who don't want to work hard, learn and achieve.

Seems to me that the detractors from schools like Basis already got exactly what results from that kind of thinking - schools that perfectly meet the needs of kids who are not expected to work hard, learn and achieve.

So, we've already tried it your way, we've already gotten what results from doing it your way, and now it's time for another approach, and if you don't like what schools like Basis are doing, then either keep sending your kids to the disaster that is regular public schools or dream up your own charter school, and do the work it takes to make it happen.

Basis isn't open yet. No record, no rep.

pp some kids and parents will definitely care far more about Ivy League admission but everyone wants their kids to be successful in school.

Middle schooling is a very critical period. If children fall behind in any core subject, then high school will become very difficult, and eventually they will drop out. Even if someone wants to learn a trade or attend a technical school, they still should read and write with no difficulty, as well as possess a certain level in math and sciences. Having a well focused education (with textbooks) does not mean cramming/ drilling or killing creativity as many innovative educational models are suggesting.

Not the pp, but there seems in dc to be a significant number of people who believe no one should acheive unless everyone is going to achieve at the same time in the same way. I think it is meant as a defense against certain people rigging the system and jogging resources, but in the end it just results in almost no one achieving and a pervasive guilt/suspicion of those who do well. It is small minded thinking at its worst. There is justice and equity which are sorely needed, but it gets mistaken for everyone being perfectly equal which is impossible and, I imagine, not desireable.

Well put. All too true. The point is that kids and parents should be able to excercise choice over a number of appealing options for MS and HS. For those who don't approve of elite magnet programs, and prefer to get involved at Latin, Basis, Banneker, SWW etc., great, you have choices that you're happy with. Simply let a top magnet program or two exist for MS and HS for those who see value in permitting tax payer dollars to support selective admissions programs like TJ's. Given that such programs exist in countless school districts nationwide and this particular district supports no "Gold Medal" high school as yet, why not replicate what's working well elsewhere? NYC has developed strong safeugards (e.g. extensive test prep for low-income applicants, and required applicant interviews for those who make the initial cut on the tough SSAT admissions test) to prevent its famous magnets from being swamped with affluent whites. DC could easily do the same. The point is not to knock Basis' approach, or Banneker's, but to offer bona fide school choice in an increasingly diverse city. Some kids and parents will invaribly care far more about Ivy League admissions than others, so give them a tried and tested path to success and leave them be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"No one gets theirs until I get mine." And reflected in that attitude is evidently that kids should not be expected to work hard, learn and achieve, and "how dare Basis come along and meet the need of kids and families that are willing to make that investment of effort for their children's future" - and thereby evidently not meet the "needs" of those who don't want to work hard, learn and achieve.

Seems to me that the detractors from schools like Basis already got exactly what results from that kind of thinking - schools that perfectly meet the needs of kids who are not expected to work hard, learn and achieve.

So, we've already tried it your way, we've already gotten what results from doing it your way, and now it's time for another approach, and if you don't like what schools like Basis are doing, then either keep sending your kids to the disaster that is regular public schools or dream up your own charter school, and do the work it takes to make it happen.

I can't figure out who you're talking to here. Whose way have we already tried? Who doesn't like what Basis is doing?

I like what Basis is doing, just like I liked what Latin has been doing before it. I don't get why you have such a chip on your shoulder. Is it because Basis can't be a magnet school with an entrance requirement, and has to meet the needs of the students it gets, even if they're not TJ material?

Not the pp, but there seems in dc to be a significant number of people who believe no one should acheive unless everyone is going to achieve at the same time in the same way. I think it is meant as a defense against certain people rigging the system and jogging resources, but in the end it just results in almost no one achieving and a pervasive guilt/suspicion of those who do well. It is small minded thinking at its worst. There is justice and equity which are sorely needed, but it gets mistaken for everyone being perfectly equal which is impossible and, I imagine, not desireable.

Anonymous wrote:I believe Banneker's selection process is color-blind. However, the city residents are not color-blind and certain segments of the city fail to apply to Banneker.

Banneker fills its vacancies with the top students who apply. If others choose to apply and their grades and scores are higher, they will get the vacant seat.

What comes first, the egg or the chicken.

You said it all. Some of us are not color-blind.

Anonymous wrote:"No one gets theirs until I get mine." And reflected in that attitude is evidently that kids should not be expected to work hard, learn and achieve, and "how dare Basis come along and meet the need of kids and families that are willing to make that investment of effort for their children's future" - and thereby evidently not meet the "needs" of those who don't want to work hard, learn and achieve.

Seems to me that the detractors from schools like Basis already got exactly what results from that kind of thinking - schools that perfectly meet the needs of kids who are not expected to work hard, learn and achieve.

So, we've already tried it your way, we've already gotten what results from doing it your way, and now it's time for another approach, and if you don't like what schools like Basis are doing, then either keep sending your kids to the disaster that is regular public schools or dream up your own charter school, and do the work it takes to make it happen.

I can't figure out who you're talking to here. Whose way have we already tried? Who doesn't like what Basis is doing?

I like what Basis is doing, just like I liked what Latin has been doing before it. I don't get why you have such a chip on your shoulder. Is it because Basis can't be a magnet school with an entrance requirement, and has to meet the needs of the students it gets, even if they're not TJ material?

"No one gets theirs until I get mine." And reflected in that attitude is evidently that kids should not be expected to work hard, learn and achieve, and "how dare Basis come along and meet the need of kids and families that are willing to make that investment of effort for their children's future" - and thereby evidently not meet the "needs" of those who don't want to work hard, learn and achieve.

Seems to me that the detractors from schools like Basis already got exactly what results from that kind of thinking - schools that perfectly meet the needs of kids who are not expected to work hard, learn and achieve.

So, we've already tried it your way, we've already gotten what results from doing it your way, and now it's time for another approach, and if you don't like what schools like Basis are doing, then either keep sending your kids to the disaster that is regular public schools or dream up your own charter school, and do the work it takes to make it happen.

I believe Banneker's selection process is color-blind. However, the city residents are not color-blind and certain segments of the city fail to apply to Banneker.

Banneker fills its vacancies with the top students who apply. If others choose to apply and their grades and scores are higher, they will get the vacant seat.

What comes first, the egg or the chicken.

"You can't shut out other kids you don't want in your tax payer funded school, under some foolish delusion that you earned it because your child is advanced, and somehow, underserved. "

Again, are you against Banneker for this very reason?

Your train of thought is the exact reason DCPS is such a failure of a school system: No one gets theirs until I get mine. Good luck with that. Hasn't worked in the past.

Yes, against Banneker because I'm no longer convinced that it serves the target population, high achievers, well. I quit interviewing Banneker applicants, after nearly a decade of doing it as an alum volunteer for my Ivy, recently, burned out on the poor prep the school offers in comparison to suburban magnets (particularly TJ in Alexandria). The school's guidance counselors remain convinced that kids with 600s on SATs and a handful of AP classes/tests under their belts (scoring 2s and 3s in almost every case) are in the running because they came from poor families as much as anything else. I discovered through hard experience that "open enrollment" kids, poor and middle-class alike, can almost never compete with counterparts in highly selective programs. The latter group comes up through MS TAG programs, gets 700s, and takes twice around as many AP exams as DCPS kids, scoring 4s and 5s. As other posts have emphasized, Banneker's average SAT scores are below the national average of around 520.

Why not one or two DC middle schools, and one or two high schools, that can compete with the top suburban and NYC programs? Not dozens, not most, just one or two?

In my view, the real difference between NYC's magnets and DC's selective admission high schools is not the size of the cities, as was pointed out, but NY's willingness to support a relatively race-blind, if not need-blind, admissions policy. The student populations of the six or seven famous NYC magnets are all least 59% Asian (US News and World Report lists will confirm) in a city that's around 10% Asian.

As for my own family, my husband and I have chosen DCPS for elementary with a view to Mo. Co for MS and HS. We're not reformers, we're public school and Ivy League financial aid babies concerned that the deficit of rigorous magnets (Banneker and SWW don't make the grade) shortchanges the brightest and most disciplined poor kids, mainly by driving most middle class parents from public schools after elementary. These children are growing up much like we did, in New England and New York (where urban magnets are the norm).

No, I certainly don't see the current City Council or mayor pushing the amend DC Law on Charter Schools, or promoting selective admission schools-within-schools in DCPS for that matter. But I do see tremendous potential in a decade or so. If you lived in the District in the 90s, as we did, you couldn't possibly have predicted how far the city would come between then and now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Hilarious. ANY school would be better off screening for aptitude and working with available talent. That's exactly why the private schools do it - because they can. But, a magnet charter? That is ground that DC will not cede willingly to the charters. Charter law does not allow it, and everyone knows that if they could cherry-pick, they would. So, if anyone is going to allowed to do it, it will be a DCPS middle school. Not Basis.

Yes, but the charter school law could always be changed. Why is it ok for magnet public schools to screen applicants but not some charter schools????

Seems to me that the law should be changed to allow for some application based charter schools so that all students needs are met unlike now where they are not.

It could be changed, but is there the political will to do it? Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of magnet middle schools.

Here's the thing: the DC Council and/or the Mayor would have to approve it, and that isn't going to happen. If the law is changed, then once one charter is allowed to cherry-pick, then a LOT of them will, effectively dumping the rest of the students back in to DCPS. So, yes I can see people getting on board with the selective school concept, but it will have to come from DCPS where more control can be exerted over the process.

"You can't shut out other kids you don't want in your tax payer funded school, under some foolish delusion that you earned it because your child is advanced, and somehow, underserved. "

Again, are you against Banneker for this very reason?

Your train of thought is the exact reason DCPS is such a failure of a school system: No one gets theirs until I get mine. Good luck with that. Hasn't worked in the past.