Anonymous wrote:Wow I can’t believe the suing parent wrote this email:

“I want you all to know what might be going on with your children and what is going on with our school and your children classmates.
...
[M]y my six-year-old commented to me during that meeting on Thursday with the teachers, that a teacher had pushed her. The principal and other administrators present all immediately told me that this did not occur and that my child was lying. However, it came to past that my child was in fact telling the truth and the camera footage is very disturbing as to how this entire situation was handled.
...
I am writing this e-mail because I want to let you all know that your child might also be being abused unbeknownst to you. I would urge you all to talk to your children and believe them as the principal and staff initially lied to me about what happened. If I had not spent time listening to my children I would have quickly sided with the staff. I went to the school Friday morning to find out what the staff had to say after speaking with my child and she provided so much detail to here story. Once the staff were done with there stories That didn't match my child I insisted to see the footage and sure enough my 6 year old was telling the truth.
...
This is our community for our children to grow and feel loved. Educational development is very critical at this age and we should stand together to send a message that corporal punishment is not tolerated! Our children should be safe at school.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is funny to me. Stokes tried to walk the walk and serve in a super high risk low income area of DC - and they got what they asked for, to some extent. It’s freaking hard to run schools with high numbers of at risk. Families aren’t always easy to deal with or stable. Basically you invite in all the issues that DCPS knows all too well. It sounds like Stokes didn’t have a clue how to deal with this. I agree that counseling out the kind of parents you’ve patted yourself on the back for reaching out and serving isn’t a good look.

This. Even if everything Stokes says is true, it is part and parcel of operating over there. Children with a difficult parent need and deserve a good education as much as anyone else does. Find a way to deal with it or get out.

Sometimes HRCS are not so successful if they can't stack their classes with disproportionately high income kids and push out the hard-to-serve.

You people seriously think that only at-risk kids have behavioral problems and angry and verbally abusive parents?

The difference is that when higher SES parents act like asses, it's considered "advocacy" or "parental involvement".

When higher SES kids act out, it's immediately attributed to an undiagnosed learning disability, never poor parenting.

Anonymous wrote:This is funny to me. Stokes tried to walk the walk and serve in a super high risk low income area of DC - and they got what they asked for, to some extent. It’s freaking hard to run schools with high numbers of at risk. Families aren’t always easy to deal with or stable. Basically you invite in all the issues that DCPS knows all too well. It sounds like Stokes didn’t have a clue how to deal with this. I agree that counseling out the kind of parents you’ve patted yourself on the back for reaching out and serving isn’t a good look.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is funny to me. Stokes tried to walk the walk and serve in a super high risk low income area of DC - and they got what they asked for, to some extent. It’s freaking hard to run schools with high numbers of at risk. Families aren’t always easy to deal with or stable. Basically you invite in all the issues that DCPS knows all too well. It sounds like Stokes didn’t have a clue how to deal with this. I agree that counseling out the kind of parents you’ve patted yourself on the back for reaching out and serving isn’t a good look.

This. Even if everything Stokes says is true, it is part and parcel of operating over there. Children with a difficult parent need and deserve a good education as much as anyone else does. Find a way to deal with it or get out.

Sometimes HRCS are not so successful if they can't stack their classes with disproportionately high income kids and push out the hard-to-serve.

You people seriously think that only at-risk kids have behavioral problems and angry and verbally abusive parents?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is funny to me. Stokes tried to walk the walk and serve in a super high risk low income area of DC - and they got what they asked for, to some extent. It’s freaking hard to run schools with high numbers of at risk. Families aren’t always easy to deal with or stable. Basically you invite in all the issues that DCPS knows all too well. It sounds like Stokes didn’t have a clue how to deal with this. I agree that counseling out the kind of parents you’ve patted yourself on the back for reaching out and serving isn’t a good look.

This. Even if everything Stokes says is true, it is part and parcel of operating over there. Children with a difficult parent need and deserve a good education as much as anyone else does. Find a way to deal with it or get out.

Sometimes HRCS are not so successful if they can't stack their classes with disproportionately high income kids and push out the hard-to-serve.

Anonymous wrote:Wow I can’t believe the suing parent wrote this email:

“I want you all to know what might be going on with your children and what is going on with our school and your children classmates.
...
[M]y my six-year-old commented to me during that meeting on Thursday with the teachers, that a teacher had pushed her. The principal and other administrators present all immediately told me that this did not occur and that my child was lying. However, it came to past that my child was in fact telling the truth and the camera footage is very disturbing as to how this entire situation was handled.
...
I am writing this e-mail because I want to let you all know that your child might also be being abused unbeknownst to you. I would urge you all to talk to your children and believe them as the principal and staff initially lied to me about what happened. If I had not spent time listening to my children I would have quickly sided with the staff. I went to the school Friday morning to find out what the staff had to say after speaking with my child and she provided so much detail to here story. Once the staff were done with there stories That didn't match my child I insisted to see the footage and sure enough my 6 year old was telling the truth.
...
This is our community for our children to grow and feel loved. Educational development is very critical at this age and we should stand together to send a message that corporal punishment is not tolerated! Our children should be safe at school.”

Anonymous wrote:This is funny to me. Stokes tried to walk the walk and serve in a super high risk low income area of DC - and they got what they asked for, to some extent. It’s freaking hard to run schools with high numbers of at risk. Families aren’t always easy to deal with or stable. Basically you invite in all the issues that DCPS knows all too well. It sounds like Stokes didn’t have a clue how to deal with this. I agree that counseling out the kind of parents you’ve patted yourself on the back for reaching out and serving isn’t a good look.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tried to see the video but the link was unavailable, right?

I watched it last night. The child was sitting on a bench with an adult. Another adult was crouched in front of the child, speaking face to face, and when the child tried to stand up the crouching adult pushed the child back onto the bench. It was not a particularly hard or violent shove but I could see how a parent, especially one who is already fed up with the school and is mad that the school denied it ever happened, would react negatively to it.

What I saw was a teacher with no idea how to discipline a 6 year old.

Anonymous wrote:Where is mention of wether this happened at Stokes EE or Brookland?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very sad, I'm glad she has professional legal representation.

This is the dark under-belly of charter schools: they try to act like private schools and abdicate their responsibility to educate children with disabilities. I doubt Stokes is the first or the last.

And glad that WLC is taking a more aggressive approach. Five year ban, come on! I could understand even the remainder of the school year as a cooling-off period. But this is a naked attempt to get rid of people. Yes, at-risk families can be challenging. But charters need to do their share of the work. Not just send them back to their IB and carry on talking about how much DCPS sucks.

Dcps DOES IN FACT suck so there is that.

Sure it does, but it's galling how the charter sector loves to crap on DCPS while also sticking them with the hardest kids and parents.

I'm so sick of seeing this tired old line about charters crapping on DCPS. I've worked at a charter - at the school level we partnered with the nearby DCPS school for volunteers, parking, PD and events. We didn't think about DCPS too much day to day frankly and I don't think they thought much about us. People in schools are busy running schools. It's people outside of schools who want to make the comparisons. Something happens at one DCPS school and all of DCPS is bad. Something happens at one charter school and all charters are bad. This makes no sense.

Well after seeing that video I think we can at least agree that Stokes is bad.

NOT At All. It sounds to me that this kid was a problem from Day 1. The apple doesn’t fall to far from the tree! Some people say “an involved parent” , I say an “opportunist” for sure!

Signed,

From the Waitlist

“opportunist” for what? for a better education? is not like they are suing for money! I hope you stay on the waitlist forever!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very sad, I'm glad she has professional legal representation.

This is the dark under-belly of charter schools: they try to act like private schools and abdicate their responsibility to educate children with disabilities. I doubt Stokes is the first or the last.

And glad that WLC is taking a more aggressive approach. Five year ban, come on! I could understand even the remainder of the school year as a cooling-off period. But this is a naked attempt to get rid of people. Yes, at-risk families can be challenging. But charters need to do their share of the work. Not just send them back to their IB and carry on talking about how much DCPS sucks.

Dcps DOES IN FACT suck so there is that.

Sure it does, but it's galling how the charter sector loves to crap on DCPS while also sticking them with the hardest kids and parents.

I'm so sick of seeing this tired old line about charters crapping on DCPS. I've worked at a charter - at the school level we partnered with the nearby DCPS school for volunteers, parking, PD and events. We didn't think about DCPS too much day to day frankly and I don't think they thought much about us. People in schools are busy running schools. It's people outside of schools who want to make the comparisons. Something happens at one DCPS school and all of DCPS is bad. Something happens at one charter school and all charters are bad. This makes no sense.

Well after seeing that video I think we can at least agree that Stokes is bad.

NOT At All. It sounds to me that this kid was a problem from Day 1. The apple doesn’t fall to far from the tree! Some people say “an involved parent” , I say an “opportunist” for sure!

Signed,

From the Waitlist

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very sad, I'm glad she has professional legal representation.

This is the dark under-belly of charter schools: they try to act like private schools and abdicate their responsibility to educate children with disabilities. I doubt Stokes is the first or the last.

And glad that WLC is taking a more aggressive approach. Five year ban, come on! I could understand even the remainder of the school year as a cooling-off period. But this is a naked attempt to get rid of people. Yes, at-risk families can be challenging. But charters need to do their share of the work. Not just send them back to their IB and carry on talking about how much DCPS sucks.

Dcps DOES IN FACT suck so there is that.

Sure it does, but it's galling how the charter sector loves to crap on DCPS while also sticking them with the hardest kids and parents.

I'm so sick of seeing this tired old line about charters crapping on DCPS. I've worked at a charter - at the school level we partnered with the nearby DCPS school for volunteers, parking, PD and events. We didn't think about DCPS too much day to day frankly and I don't think they thought much about us. People in schools are busy running schools. It's people outside of schools who want to make the comparisons. Something happens at one DCPS school and all of DCPS is bad. Something happens at one charter school and all charters are bad. This makes no sense.

Well after seeing that video I think we can at least agree that Stokes is bad.

NOT At All. It sounds to me that this kid was a problem from Day 1. The apple doesn’t fall to far from the tree! Some people say “an involved parent” , I say an “opportunist” for sure!

Signed,

From the Waitlist