Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see all these unhappy ITS, EW Stokes and DCB families jumping to enroll at Noyes, Bunker Hill and Lamond Riggs

+ 1000

Lamond Riggs isn’t a school, might want to fact check before you get all snarky.

Right? I was thinking you mean the library?

These unhappy charter HRCS parents may however be applying to the upper NW and more popular DCPS elementaries now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see all these unhappy ITS, EW Stokes and DCB families jumping to enroll at Noyes, Bunker Hill and Lamond Riggs

+ 1000

Lamond Riggs isn’t a school, might want to fact check before you get all snarky.

Anonymous wrote:I don't see all these unhappy ITS, EW Stokes and DCB families jumping to enroll at Noyes, Bunker Hill and Lamond Riggs

True. Stokes waitlist is a mile long. However, Stokes extended the deadline to fill out the intent to enroll form for the next school year due to lack of response.

Do the schools get notified when their current students enter the lottery?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree you should attend city council meetings and submit testimony. The mayor may at least push them somewhat.

Also write Perry Stein she hasn’t covered this yet. Charters are lagging way behind now.

The Post won't publish anything critical of charters.

Uh...did you read the WP piece on LAMB! From several months ago? Many found it very critical.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another day goes by with no update whatsoever from ITS!

Sigh. Same.

Other schools are at least sending emails about the possibility of re-opening. But I guess that is too much to ask of ITS as they are determined to run out the clock.

Y'all need to advocate. It won't happen otherwise.

The problem with ITS is the director is leaving so she does not care. The families association is basically supine, the school has convinced them they have literally no power and exist only to provide money with no strings attached.

I'm not at ITS, but that sounds so frustrating. I'm so sorry. I wonder if it's worth it to try to go directly to the Council of the Whole meetings, and suggest that the Mayor gets the charters to do at least as much as DCPS.

Oh please. They love giving charters maximum "flexibility".

Sorry; are you a charter parent? Is so, what do you propose ITS does? If not, why are you in this dialogue?

I am an ITS parent and I have proposed that the school get it together and inform parents of the reopening plan. But they won't, and the families association won't pressure them, so here we are. Lagging behind peer schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree you should attend city council meetings and submit testimony. The mayor may at least push them somewhat.

Also write Perry Stein she hasn’t covered this yet. Charters are lagging way behind now.

The Post won't publish anything critical of charters.

Anonymous wrote:I agree you should attend city council meetings and submit testimony. The mayor may at least push them somewhat.

Also write Perry Stein she hasn’t covered this yet. Charters are lagging way behind now.

I agree you should attend city council meetings and submit testimony. The mayor may at least push them somewhat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another day goes by with no update whatsoever from ITS!

Sigh. Same.

Other schools are at least sending emails about the possibility of re-opening. But I guess that is too much to ask of ITS as they are determined to run out the clock.

Y'all need to advocate. It won't happen otherwise.

The problem with ITS is the director is leaving so she does not care. The families association is basically supine, the school has convinced them they have literally no power and exist only to provide money with no strings attached.

I'm not at ITS, but that sounds so frustrating. I'm so sorry. I wonder if it's worth it to try to go directly to the Council of the Whole meetings, and suggest that the Mayor gets the charters to do at least as much as DCPS.

Oh please. They love giving charters maximum "flexibility".

Sorry; are you a charter parent? Is so, what do you propose ITS does? If not, why are you in this dialogue?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree that LAMB is working hard toward opening in some capacity.

Note to other charter school parents: There was a set of parents who made a stink several months ago about reopening. It was very contentious on the parent board. However, I do believe that without that set of parents pushing for IPL, we wouldn't be getting any sort of hybrid now. Certainly the planning seems to have been in the works for many months now.

This is very true, and although I doubt the admin would admit that this made any difference, you can still come to your own conclusions.

Planning has been in the works for months, because first there were surveys to see how teachers felt about coming back, pre-vaccine, then parent surveys, then a lot of logistical planning around those numbers, then a lot of worry about case numbers, and finally, vaccinations.

I strongly disagree that the parents who were straight up rude and hostile had anything to do with reopening.

That was only literally 2 parents. Many others were quite reasonable.

This is accurate. There were many, many parents that tried to engage in dialogue about reopening. There were definitely rude and hostile parents that were pushing toward reopening (I would put it at a single parent) and there were a handful of rude and hostile parents who were adamantly opposed to reopening.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see all these unhappy ITS, EW Stokes and DCB families jumping to enroll at Noyes, Bunker Hill and Lamond Riggs

+ 1000

Until DCPS is offering a firm guarantee of a seat for your specific child, rather than just the possibility of having a seat at some time this spring, I don't see why anyone would benefit from switching. But the lack of communication from ITS is deplorable and falls far short of what other HRCS are doing.

If I was a Stokes or DCB parent, I would play the lottery for MV and LAMB. Both offering some form of hybrid and higher chance they will go full IPL next year. Then decide to make move or not if you get a spot.

Anonymous wrote:I don't see all these unhappy ITS, EW Stokes and DCB families jumping to enroll at Noyes, Bunker Hill and Lamond Riggs

Some may leave for Takoma or Whittier or lottery for other schools where parents are leaving for private or just leave DC, if they can manage the drive. The seats (or whatever you call someone logging in from home) will be filled and they'll all get their full funding but there may be a good bit of churn. Many people don't have the option to leave and that sucks, especially when the schools are showing how much they do (or don't) value families.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see all these unhappy ITS, EW Stokes and DCB families jumping to enroll at Noyes, Bunker Hill and Lamond Riggs

+ 1000

Until DCPS is offering a firm guarantee of a seat for your specific child, rather than just the possibility of having a seat at some time this spring, I don't see why anyone would benefit from switching. But the lack of communication from ITS is deplorable and falls far short of what other HRCS are doing.

Anonymous wrote:I don't see all these unhappy ITS, EW Stokes and DCB families jumping to enroll at Noyes, Bunker Hill and Lamond Riggs

+ 1000

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree that LAMB is working hard toward opening in some capacity.

Note to other charter school parents: There was a set of parents who made a stink several months ago about reopening. It was very contentious on the parent board. However, I do believe that without that set of parents pushing for IPL, we wouldn't be getting any sort of hybrid now. Certainly the planning seems to have been in the works for many months now.

This is very true, and although I doubt the admin would admit that this made any difference, you can still come to your own conclusions.

Planning has been in the works for months, because first there were surveys to see how teachers felt about coming back, pre-vaccine, then parent surveys, then a lot of logistical planning around those numbers, then a lot of worry about case numbers, and finally, vaccinations.

I strongly disagree that the parents who were straight up rude and hostile had anything to do with reopening.

That was only literally 2 parents. Many others were quite reasonable.