So - yes, charters being experiments and such seems to invite parents to criticize. But it does go to show that some mechanism for dispute resolution is needed. And, DCPS as we also know has plenty of its own problems. On both fronts, I am sure there is expertise out there about how to better run schools of both kinds. Having no mechanism for raising issues seems like a lose-lose situation for both DCPS and Charter....

Anonymous wrote:Admins aren't more effective at DCI, of course they're not. Parents need to wake up to see DCPC for what it is, not a high capacity organization.

Charter schools were supposed to be incubators and innovators, trying out novel approaches to achieve better results for underserved kids.

They were never meant to be ‘high capacity’ organizations or to look or behave like traditional schools. There is a minimum level of competency that should be reached and maintained (and some schools have failed on this). But Id like to see more schools close.

My nominee: CMI. It was supposed to incorporate floortime to better serve all kids, particularly those with disabilities. It has not proven successful by that measure at all and has had more than 5 years to do so. Time to close, move on and try something else.

Repeat across the sector

The problem is - if you read the threads - you were made aware about the leadership issues and you through to yourself - oh - those are just high maintenance parents - or these are growing pains and it will get better.

Do you think after being in leadership for 5-10 years all of a sudden these individuals are going to change?

Admins aren't more effective at DCI, of course they're not. Parents need to wake up to see DCPC for what it is, not a high capacity organization.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s a feature, not a bug. If you want true autonomy for the school leadership then you give up accountability.

I think poster raises a good point. Charters are essentially set up to be their own fiefdoms paid for with taxpayer dollars. I am at MV and while my kids have had generally good experiences so far, I am starting to find it disconcerting that if I ever have a problem there is essentially no where to go since school leadership is pretty useless. I am considering moving to the suburbs to be part of a functional school system.

Exactly. There is nowhere to go, if your neighborhood school is egregiously underperforming. It may be fine for early grades, but what is a 5th grader or middle schooler to do? Sacrifice the whole educational pathway through high school, to express discontent that will be ignored anyway? Leaving is not a viable strategy to make change, if they can easily replace you. Parents need some way to at least force the charter board to take an interest. A hearing with public testimony could compel the board to answer parent questions, at least. Nobody likes to bring bad publicity on their school, but I'm running out of other ideas.

This. Things are generally okay for ECE - even poorly performing DCPS schools frequently get this right. Then the problems start after we've already committed years to Chinese immersion. That's when we realize the admin lacks the skills and motivation to resolve serious issues. So do we accept that we sacrificed years of our children's education for the language immersion to pull them out and end the language immersion experience? Accompanied by a move to a better school district (likely suburbs)? Or do we stick with it in the hopes that DCI is better than our feeder? Or will we encounter the same types of admin issues at DCI?

As PP suggested, we need better oversight of the charter schools. There has to be some way to hold the admin accountable, because right now it's brick wall city.

What were you expecting, PP? Why did it take you years to figure out that YY admins lack the skills and motivation to resolve serious issues? I figured this out at the open house I attended after we got a PreK4 spot. The principal was a bitch when I raised my hand to politely asked which dialects the Chinese teachers speak, if they speak to bilingual children in "home" dialects or only in Mandarin, what sort of dialect transition support is built into the curriculum (if any) and how much communication comes home in Chinese. I asked the last question for the sake of my in-laws, who also attended but can't read English well and provide most of our family's childcare. She didn't seemed to know the answer to any of my questions, but took the opportunity to snap at me for asking them in front of my in-laws and the other parents. Later, at break, my in-laws and I chatted with teachers who speak our dialect to get basic info - the teachers were very forthcoming, and said critical things about her as an admin. I realized that she wasn't on top of things - how could she be? We moved to a good school district within DC and enrolled at a DCPS. Better oversight of charters will only get you so far when DCPC is hiring admins who are unqualified in fundamental ways. Why would DCI be better than the feeder?

I too love the teachers at my HRCS, but morale is so low it’s starting to impact my child who is in PK3. For example: my child’s aid lost his glasses during a field trip and didn’t even send him home with so much as a note. Two: on Friday i walked into my child’s classroom to find: lead teacher was engagement very sweetly with kids, my child’said was texting her boyfriend, and my child—- nowhere to be found! He had ran out of the classroom, to the back spot od the school where i was told he routinely runs just to get his aid to chase her... i was told the door is USUALLY locked and he doesn’t UsUALLy run out when it is open. There were about 50 -60 parents, teacher and admin staff in the lobby and nobody even tried to stop my 3 year old (admittedly hyperactive... which is why he has an aid) child from running out that door that leads directly to a drive way packed with cars. So... now you tell me how there aren’t any DCPS that are better than that! The place is a zoo.

Anonymous wrote:Follow the money and you'll understand why you don't have a chance.

The schools get their money based on enrollment. More students means more money. There's a long wait list for any halfway decent school, so there's generally someone to take your spot if you leave.

Now follow where that money goes. Charter schools are non-profit, so it's all clean, right? Sometimes. And sometimes the non-profit pays a for-profit management company to run the school or certain aspects of it. No big deal, right? It's just subcontracting. It makes sense sometimes. And then other times the for-profit has close ties to the non-profit, or even has the same board members. And they get paid really well.

None of that is illegal, and is not even investigated or overseen by the DCPCSB, whose members are also sometimes involved with these schemes. It doesn't even come to light unless there's a criminal investigation that uncovers it. See, for example, the scandal at CAPCS.

Your power as a parent is little to nothing. The financial interests rule.

The schools most parents are complaining about in this thread (LAMB, MV) do not, infact, use charter management organizations. So the above is not that relevant to their particular version of dysfunction.

Follow the money and you'll understand why you don't have a chance.

The schools get their money based on enrollment. More students means more money. There's a long wait list for any halfway decent school, so there's generally someone to take your spot if you leave.

Now follow where that money goes. Charter schools are non-profit, so it's all clean, right? Sometimes. And sometimes the non-profit pays a for-profit management company to run the school or certain aspects of it. No big deal, right? It's just subcontracting. It makes sense sometimes. And then other times the for-profit has close ties to the non-profit, or even has the same board members. And they get paid really well.

None of that is illegal, and is not even investigated or overseen by the DCPCSB, whose members are also sometimes involved with these schemes. It doesn't even come to light unless there's a criminal investigation that uncovers it. See, for example, the scandal at CAPCS.

Your power as a parent is little to nothing. The financial interests rule.

All you can really do is make a huge stink, go to the media, and publicly humiliate your school leadership. Nobody really wants to do that. The sad thing is, sometimes it doesn't even work (see LAMB).

Anonymous wrote:How much autonomy are you/other parents/admin willing to give up in exchange?

It doesn't really matter. The DCPCSB is not going to allow changes. And they have the backing of the council, so they'll get their way.

There is some pretty significant lobbying power from the business side of the charter industry and they are not going to give up their position of power.

You should go to the school’s Board before the DCPCSB, but that assumes you have a functional and responsible Board. Some are, some are very dysfunctional, and some are rubber stamps for the admins.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience as a founding family, parents need to back up at some point and let the admin run the business. If you have a problem in class, that’s another issue.

-Same. It's always nice to be acknowledged and have ways to contribute that are valued--and charters are frankly not always the best with that kind of follow up, but at the end of the day the buck stops with the admin and faculty, and they don't want (nor should they) a bunch of parent back seat drivers. If you want to be that involved, get a job application I would say.

These are all very facile answers when your school hasn't either been subject to a child predator or lost 25% of its teaching staff or has parents leaving in droves due to intense bullying.

Right, that's when you vote with your feet.

And consider yourself lucky to not be tied there based on your home address. Folks who aren't happy with the administration at your school - I get it, but this is EXACTLY what school choice is. You chose it. You can un-choose it. If there are a million families on the waiting list eager to backfill your seat, there's not much you can do.

But I don't think that it should be so drastic of a choice. I do think that bad apples in the leadership or those who've simply outlasted their peak time should be subject to at least some form of questioning from the PCSB. There should be at least some form of public accountability for any school, even if it is constrained substantially to avoid some of the roadblocks often encountered in public systems...

Well then you need to get the charter to change the PCSB's mandate.

Right now they can jawbone (and they did -- see Darren Woodruff's public comments to the LAMB Board) about leadership issues and parent complaints.

But the only time they can act is if there is financial impropriety or if a school fails to make academic progress.

There were parents testifying before the Council a couple weeks ago about ways to improve accountability. But right now the system isn't built for it. The assumption was the Boards would be inclined to take stronger action than they have to date.

I think there should be requirements that most Board meetings be public (except perhaps personnel decisions/discussions), agendas and minutes being required to be posted publicly, and that the parents who sit on a charter board must be elected by the school's parents (not hand picked by the Board).

OP here, thank you for a good discussion. This is what I think is needed. Amendments to the requirements for transparency, and additionally, some reforms to the PCSB to allow for more parent involvement or a method to raise concerns there. I think these problems are solvable and shouldn't require everyone to leave! - that's super disruptive. No, parents need recourse of some kind.

As for the ITS person, thanks. We're happy for you. But your current good luck isn't helpful. Don't think it couldn't happen to you after a few years at Tier 1.

The bottom line is, many of us love our schools and we don't want to let fixable problems bring them down.

This. Our Pk3 cohort started out satisfied and feeling lucky to be at a HRCS. But the longer you spend at a school, the greater chance you will become aware of some less good things about it. There are problems that directly affect only a few students, yet are nonetheless serious and important. And newer or less involved parents may not pick up on patterns and connections indicative of problems behind the scenes.

I think parents being able to force a DCPSB visit or hearing would be great. There is no significant loss of autonomy legally, but it would definitely get the administration's attention and force issues out into the open.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience as a founding family, parents need to back up at some point and let the admin run the business. If you have a problem in class, that’s another issue.

-Same. It's always nice to be acknowledged and have ways to contribute that are valued--and charters are frankly not always the best with that kind of follow up, but at the end of the day the buck stops with the admin and faculty, and they don't want (nor should they) a bunch of parent back seat drivers. If you want to be that involved, get a job application I would say.

These are all very facile answers when your school hasn't either been subject to a child predator or lost 25% of its teaching staff or has parents leaving in droves due to intense bullying.

Right, that's when you vote with your feet.

And consider yourself lucky to not be tied there based on your home address. Folks who aren't happy with the administration at your school - I get it, but this is EXACTLY what school choice is. You chose it. You can un-choose it. If there are a million families on the waiting list eager to backfill your seat, there's not much you can do.

But I don't think that it should be so drastic of a choice. I do think that bad apples in the leadership or those who've simply outlasted their peak time should be subject to at least some form of questioning from the PCSB. There should be at least some form of public accountability for any school, even if it is constrained substantially to avoid some of the roadblocks often encountered in public systems...

Well then you need to get the charter to change the PCSB's mandate.

Right now they can jawbone (and they did -- see Darren Woodruff's public comments to the LAMB Board) about leadership issues and parent complaints.

But the only time they can act is if there is financial impropriety or if a school fails to make academic progress.

There were parents testifying before the Council a couple weeks ago about ways to improve accountability. But right now the system isn't built for it. The assumption was the Boards would be inclined to take stronger action than they have to date.

I think there should be requirements that most Board meetings be public (except perhaps personnel decisions/discussions), agendas and minutes being required to be posted publicly, and that the parents who sit on a charter board must be elected by the school's parents (not hand picked by the Board).

OP here, thank you for a good discussion. This is what I think is needed. Amendments to the requirements for transparency, and additionally, some reforms to the PCSB to allow for more parent involvement or a method to raise concerns there. I think these problems are solvable and shouldn't require everyone to leave! - that's super disruptive. No, parents need recourse of some kind.

As for the ITS person, thanks. We're happy for you. But your current good luck isn't helpful. Don't think it couldn't happen to you after a few years at Tier 1.

The bottom line is, many of us love our schools and we don't want to let fixable problems bring them down.

How much autonomy are you/other parents/admin willing to give up in exchange?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s a feature, not a bug. If you want true autonomy for the school leadership then you give up accountability.

I think poster raises a good point. Charters are essentially set up to be their own fiefdoms paid for with taxpayer dollars. I am at MV and while my kids have had generally good experiences so far, I am starting to find it disconcerting that if I ever have a problem there is essentially no where to go since school leadership is pretty useless. I am considering moving to the suburbs to be part of a functional school system.

Exactly. There is nowhere to go, if your neighborhood school is egregiously underperforming. It may be fine for early grades, but what is a 5th grader or middle schooler to do? Sacrifice the whole educational pathway through high school, to express discontent that will be ignored anyway? Leaving is not a viable strategy to make change, if they can easily replace you. Parents need some way to at least force the charter board to take an interest. A hearing with public testimony could compel the board to answer parent questions, at least. Nobody likes to bring bad publicity on their school, but I'm running out of other ideas.

This. Things are generally okay for ECE - even poorly performing DCPS schools frequently get this right. Then the problems start after we've already committed years to Chinese immersion. That's when we realize the admin lacks the skills and motivation to resolve serious issues. So do we accept that we sacrificed years of our children's education for the language immersion to pull them out and end the language immersion experience? Accompanied by a move to a better school district (likely suburbs)? Or do we stick with it in the hopes that DCI is better than our feeder? Or will we encounter the same types of admin issues at DCI?

As PP suggested, we need better oversight of the charter schools. There has to be some way to hold the admin accountable, because right now it's brick wall city.