Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The data on high needs students (ELL, students with disabilities, at risk) is collected during the enrollment audit and posted by OSSE. 2017-18 was not an anomaly.

The percentage of students at each level of disabilities (1-4) the sectors are virtually even and have been for a few years now.

DCPS sends a higher percentage of its students to private special education schools than charters. Should we consider that kicking students out and keeping who they want?

You look this up enrollment audit report too.

Please feel free to re-calculate the numbers if you would like. Without the adult ed charters.

The private school population is so small that it's hard to draw statistical conclusions from it. I suspect DCPS gets a lot of these kids through Early Stages (another great example of a service to high-needs kids that DCPS offers and charters don't), so they end up in private schools directly without going through the school choice process in the same way general education kids do.

I don’t think you know what you’re taking about. All LEAs have to evaluate children for disabilities, and I doubt there are many private placements straight out of Early Stages.

You need to give up this argument because nobody is persuaded. “Charters don’t serve special needs kids” is clearly a union shill lie.

In DCPS kids go from Early Stages evaluation to a self-contained preschool class and then to private if more is needed. Or to River Terrace or St. colette.

The argument is not that charters don't serve special needs kids. The argument is that they don't serve *more*, especially when you look at PK-12 and not adult ed.

The real point I'd that charters don't have the same responsibility to take all kids mid year, so it is not an equivalent comparison to compare budgets or performance. And that charters push out the most difficult kids. Most at risk kids do not have severe behavioral problems and are not extremely below grade level. Most kids in special ed, even with Level IV IEPs, are delightful if their needs are being handled correctly. But there is a group of very hard and expensive to serve children (and sometimes it's actually the parents that are difficult) that charters try to avoid, so DCPS must serve. It isn't about the total numbers. It is about this small group of costly and disruptive kids.

Who should be sent to their own classroom/school. Inclusion is overrated and I think too liberally interpreted. I think schools should face down any lawsuit that kids who throw desks around the room should be educated in mainstream classrooms. Is that the mosg appropriate setting, really? It would be a good project for DCPS to take in, how to appropriately educate disruptive kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The data on high needs students (ELL, students with disabilities, at risk) is collected during the enrollment audit and posted by OSSE. 2017-18 was not an anomaly.

The percentage of students at each level of disabilities (1-4) the sectors are virtually even and have been for a few years now.

DCPS sends a higher percentage of its students to private special education schools than charters. Should we consider that kicking students out and keeping who they want?

You look this up enrollment audit report too.

Please feel free to re-calculate the numbers if you would like. Without the adult ed charters.

The private school population is so small that it's hard to draw statistical conclusions from it. I suspect DCPS gets a lot of these kids through Early Stages (another great example of a service to high-needs kids that DCPS offers and charters don't), so they end up in private schools directly without going through the school choice process in the same way general education kids do.

I don’t think you know what you’re taking about. All LEAs have to evaluate children for disabilities, and I doubt there are many private placements straight out of Early Stages.

You need to give up this argument because nobody is persuaded. “Charters don’t serve special needs kids” is clearly a union shill lie.

In DCPS kids go from Early Stages evaluation to a self-contained preschool class and then to private if more is needed. Or to River Terrace or St. colette.

The argument is not that charters don't serve special needs kids. The argument is that they don't serve *more*, especially when you look at PK-12 and not adult ed.

The real point I'd that charters don't have the same responsibility to take all kids mid year, so it is not an equivalent comparison to compare budgets or performance. And that charters push out the most difficult kids. Most at risk kids do not have severe behavioral problems and are not extremely below grade level. Most kids in special ed, even with Level IV IEPs, are delightful if their needs are being handled correctly. But there is a group of very hard and expensive to serve children (and sometimes it's actually the parents that are difficult) that charters try to avoid, so DCPS must serve. It isn't about the total numbers. It is about this small group of costly and disruptive kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The data on high needs students (ELL, students with disabilities, at risk) is collected during the enrollment audit and posted by OSSE. 2017-18 was not an anomaly.

The percentage of students at each level of disabilities (1-4) the sectors are virtually even and have been for a few years now.

DCPS sends a higher percentage of its students to private special education schools than charters. Should we consider that kicking students out and keeping who they want?

You look this up enrollment audit report too.

DCPS has MORE children with disabilities on a higher level. Most charters don't even have self-contained programs.

Also you think DCPS wants to send these kids to private? You are not familiar with DCPS' or their 'easily sued' history...

DCPS was notorious for having to send kids to private placements because of screwing up procedural IDEA issues.

As for higher level disabilities, the data actually show that DCPS and charters serve about the same percentage (charters a tiny bit higher).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The data on high needs students (ELL, students with disabilities, at risk) is collected during the enrollment audit and posted by OSSE. 2017-18 was not an anomaly.

The percentage of students at each level of disabilities (1-4) the sectors are virtually even and have been for a few years now.

DCPS sends a higher percentage of its students to private special education schools than charters. Should we consider that kicking students out and keeping who they want?

You look this up enrollment audit report too.

Please feel free to re-calculate the numbers if you would like. Without the adult ed charters.

The private school population is so small that it's hard to draw statistical conclusions from it. I suspect DCPS gets a lot of these kids through Early Stages (another great example of a service to high-needs kids that DCPS offers and charters don't), so they end up in private schools directly without going through the school choice process in the same way general education kids do.

I don’t think you know what you’re taking about. All LEAs have to evaluate children for disabilities, and I doubt there are many private placements straight out of Early Stages.

You need to give up this argument because nobody is persuaded. “Charters don’t serve special needs kids” is clearly a union shill lie.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The data on high needs students (ELL, students with disabilities, at risk) is collected during the enrollment audit and posted by OSSE. 2017-18 was not an anomaly.

The percentage of students at each level of disabilities (1-4) the sectors are virtually even and have been for a few years now.

DCPS sends a higher percentage of its students to private special education schools than charters. Should we consider that kicking students out and keeping who they want?

You look this up enrollment audit report too.

DCPS has MORE children with disabilities on a higher level. Most charters don't even have self-contained programs.

Also you think DCPS wants to send these kids to private? You are not familiar with DCPS' or their 'easily sued' history...

Anonymous wrote:The data on high needs students (ELL, students with disabilities, at risk) is collected during the enrollment audit and posted by OSSE. 2017-18 was not an anomaly.

The percentage of students at each level of disabilities (1-4) the sectors are virtually even and have been for a few years now.

DCPS sends a higher percentage of its students to private special education schools than charters. Should we consider that kicking students out and keeping who they want?

You look this up enrollment audit report too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The data on high needs students (ELL, students with disabilities, at risk) is collected during the enrollment audit and posted by OSSE. 2017-18 was not an anomaly.

The percentage of students at each level of disabilities (1-4) the sectors are virtually even and have been for a few years now.

DCPS sends a higher percentage of its students to private special education schools than charters. Should we consider that kicking students out and keeping who they want?

You look this up enrollment audit report too.

Please feel free to re-calculate the numbers if you would like. Without the adult ed charters.

The private school population is so small that it's hard to draw statistical conclusions from it. I suspect DCPS gets a lot of these kids through Early Stages (another great example of a service to high-needs kids that DCPS offers and charters don't), so they end up in private schools directly without going through the school choice process in the same way general education kids do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My views on charters have completely changed with COVID. Bring on the charters. Teacher’s unions don’t care about education.

Same. I’m now pro-voucher. Pro-charter. Anti-union. It’s a complete 180 for me.

+1000

WTU has made a tremendous number of enemies through all this.

Anonymous wrote:The data on high needs students (ELL, students with disabilities, at risk) is collected during the enrollment audit and posted by OSSE. 2017-18 was not an anomaly.

The percentage of students at each level of disabilities (1-4) the sectors are virtually even and have been for a few years now.

DCPS sends a higher percentage of its students to private special education schools than charters. Should we consider that kicking students out and keeping who they want?

You look this up enrollment audit report too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.

Agreed. I think the charter sector nationwide needs controls and transparency (and especially the elimination of any for-profit involvement) but the attack on the charter sector as a whole is driven by the teacher’s union. I don’t trust their perspective anymore, as they have made it abundantly clear they represent the interests of teachers, not students.

I’d be more pro charter if they didn’t counsel out “hard to teach” kids or kids with IEPs. I guess public schools will still have to be around for those kids that the charters don’t want.

My son is having his IEP yanked at a DCPS. Meanwhile his friend at a charter has an extraordinary IEP team. I know charters have their individual issues but I do not buy any of the conventional wisdom accusations against charters anymore.

How many charters have self contained rooms? We all already know about Bridges. How many others? How many have BES classrooms (these are behavior classes fit kids with emotional disabilities). So spare me the I don’t believe conventional wisdom crap. Charters do NOT educate the hardest kids.

Here you go - actual statistics! Did you think they weren’t collected?

https://dcpcsb.org/dc-public-charter-schools-serve-higher-percentages-risk-students-and-high-needs-special-education

Diane Ravitch and her union buddies should be given zero credibility ever again.

That is really old data. And why don't you google "Monument" and see if you are still so proud of the charter sector in this area.

I'm really perplexed at why the PP thinks these statistics help her cause. First of all, it's SY 17-18 data. Don't you think if more recent data made the charter sector look good, it would be publicized? They do love to toot their own horn. Second, this shows a higher percentage of at-risk kids, but at-risk is a huge category in DCPS and not all of those kids are actually living in poverty or especially hard to serve. And DCPS has more English Language Learners, which is challenging in its own way. Third, for special needs, this data includes adult-ed charters, so again it isn't really an apples to apples comparison. And even when adult-ed is included, the charter sector only had more kids in two of the four IEP categories, and it's only a little bit higher. DCPS has more of the highest level IEPs, and more total special needs overall. So really, this data a roughly even split at best. The bottom line is DCPS still had more kids with special needs, and that's with the charter sector counting its adult students.

Most importantly, it doesn't consider DCPS' obligation to serve all kids at all times, having high-needs placements available immediately for whoever moves to the city or leaves their charter or gets expelled or pushed out or served so poorly that they leave. If the charter sector wants to take on some of that responsibility for guaranteeing capacity, that would be an interesting project. But until they do, it just isn't the same.

2018 is very recent data. We’re not even done with 2020 yet. And as much as you argue the data are pretty clear - no big difference between student populations. What’s your next anti-charter argument, because we’re done with this one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.

Agreed. I think the charter sector nationwide needs controls and transparency (and especially the elimination of any for-profit involvement) but the attack on the charter sector as a whole is driven by the teacher’s union. I don’t trust their perspective anymore, as they have made it abundantly clear they represent the interests of teachers, not students.

I’d be more pro charter if they didn’t counsel out “hard to teach” kids or kids with IEPs. I guess public schools will still have to be around for those kids that the charters don’t want.

My son is having his IEP yanked at a DCPS. Meanwhile his friend at a charter has an extraordinary IEP team. I know charters have their individual issues but I do not buy any of the conventional wisdom accusations against charters anymore.

How many charters have self contained rooms? We all already know about Bridges. How many others? How many have BES classrooms (these are behavior classes fit kids with emotional disabilities). So spare me the I don’t believe conventional wisdom crap. Charters do NOT educate the hardest kids.

Here you go - actual statistics! Did you think they weren’t collected?

https://dcpcsb.org/dc-public-charter-schools-serve-higher-percentages-risk-students-and-high-needs-special-education

Diane Ravitch and her union buddies should be given zero credibility ever again.

That is really old data. And why don't you google "Monument" and see if you are still so proud of the charter sector in this area.

Isnt the reason they are around TO educate? Instead of expecting ALL schools to be ALL things to ALL people, im all in favor of specializing.
Some charters are specific in their mission to reach specific populations. If some of these kids are being "left" in public schools, maybe public schools should focus on these hard to help kids with specialty programming. They certainly have the respurces.

It's okay to "specialize" but it's not okay to avoid the hardest kids and claim higher performance. It isn't an apples to apples comparison and it's dishonest to say that it is. And when charters approach 50% of the school system, it produces a concentration of high-needs students in the traditional system that makes it more difficult for high-needs-concentration schools to function.

again - look at the actual data. DCPS and charters serve the same/similar proportion of at-risk kids. If anything charters should be taking over the operations of failed DCPS schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.

Agreed. I think the charter sector nationwide needs controls and transparency (and especially the elimination of any for-profit involvement) but the attack on the charter sector as a whole is driven by the teacher’s union. I don’t trust their perspective anymore, as they have made it abundantly clear they represent the interests of teachers, not students.

I’d be more pro charter if they didn’t counsel out “hard to teach” kids or kids with IEPs. I guess public schools will still have to be around for those kids that the charters don’t want.

My son is having his IEP yanked at a DCPS. Meanwhile his friend at a charter has an extraordinary IEP team. I know charters have their individual issues but I do not buy any of the conventional wisdom accusations against charters anymore.

How many charters have self contained rooms? We all already know about Bridges. How many others? How many have BES classrooms (these are behavior classes fit kids with emotional disabilities). So spare me the I don’t believe conventional wisdom crap. Charters do NOT educate the hardest kids.

Here you go - actual statistics! Did you think they weren’t collected?

https://dcpcsb.org/dc-public-charter-schools-serve-higher-percentages-risk-students-and-high-needs-special-education

Diane Ravitch and her union buddies should be given zero credibility ever again.

That is really old data. And why don't you google "Monument" and see if you are still so proud of the charter sector in this area.

I'm really perplexed at why the PP thinks these statistics help her cause. First of all, it's SY 17-18 data. Don't you think if more recent data made the charter sector look good, it would be publicized? They do love to toot their own horn. Second, this shows a higher percentage of at-risk kids, but at-risk is a huge category in DCPS and not all of those kids are actually living in poverty or especially hard to serve. And DCPS has more English Language Learners, which is challenging in its own way. Third, for special needs, this data includes adult-ed charters, so again it isn't really an apples to apples comparison. And even when adult-ed is included, the charter sector only had more kids in two of the four IEP categories, and it's only a little bit higher. DCPS has more of the highest level IEPs, and more total special needs overall. So really, this data a roughly even split at best. The bottom line is DCPS still had more kids with special needs, and that's with the charter sector counting its adult students.

Most importantly, it doesn't consider DCPS' obligation to serve all kids at all times, having high-needs placements available immediately for whoever moves to the city or leaves their charter or gets expelled or pushed out or served so poorly that they leave. If the charter sector wants to take on some of that responsibility for guaranteeing capacity, that would be an interesting project. But until they do, it just isn't the same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If WTU has taught us anything, it’s that we need more charters.

Agreed. I think the charter sector nationwide needs controls and transparency (and especially the elimination of any for-profit involvement) but the attack on the charter sector as a whole is driven by the teacher’s union. I don’t trust their perspective anymore, as they have made it abundantly clear they represent the interests of teachers, not students.

I’d be more pro charter if they didn’t counsel out “hard to teach” kids or kids with IEPs. I guess public schools will still have to be around for those kids that the charters don’t want.

My son is having his IEP yanked at a DCPS. Meanwhile his friend at a charter has an extraordinary IEP team. I know charters have their individual issues but I do not buy any of the conventional wisdom accusations against charters anymore.

How many charters have self contained rooms? We all already know about Bridges. How many others? How many have BES classrooms (these are behavior classes fit kids with emotional disabilities). So spare me the I don’t believe conventional wisdom crap. Charters do NOT educate the hardest kids.

Here you go - actual statistics! Did you think they weren’t collected?

https://dcpcsb.org/dc-public-charter-schools-serve-higher-percentages-risk-students-and-high-needs-special-education

Diane Ravitch and her union buddies should be given zero credibility ever again.

That is really old data. And why don't you google "Monument" and see if you are still so proud of the charter sector in this area.

Isnt the reason they are around TO educate? Instead of expecting ALL schools to be ALL things to ALL people, im all in favor of specializing.
Some charters are specific in their mission to reach specific populations. If some of these kids are being "left" in public schools, maybe public schools should focus on these hard to help kids with specialty programming. They certainly have the respurces.

It's okay to "specialize" but it's not okay to avoid the hardest kids and claim higher performance. It isn't an apples to apples comparison and it's dishonest to say that it is. And when charters approach 50% of the school system, it produces a concentration of high-needs students in the traditional system that makes it more difficult for high-needs-concentration schools to function.