Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The above discussion is an advertisement for choice sets or some sort of set aside for lower SES kids who want to attend schools with this type of fund raising capacity.
The DME would say so. However, to the more acute observers, choice set would mean that the high SES parents, responsible for the organization and contribution to the PTAs, would just flee the DCPS system, and go do the same job elsewhere (provates, MoCo, etc...). Not a good at all outcome for DCPS.
I'm sorry, but that is just not my EOTP experience. People here work hard at schools that are really struggling. I go to a 99% FARMs school with an active PTA of mainly high SES people. The lower-income families volunteer in other capacities, many by doing so in their kids' and grandkids' rooms. Maybe wotp people would bail, but I have a hard time believing that when you would be assigned to one of three excellent schools.
so in a school of 300 kids there are three high SES PTA parents? you cannot compare the situation of high SES parents who chose to buy in an up and coming area with struggling schools with same parents who bought in more expensive areas counting on the local school. these people ( and I am one of them) would not be happy to drive p their kids farther away to schools that are doing less well and would not spend $$ and a lot of time in fundraising. they will leave DCPS altogether, there wil be less high SES parents in DCPS and I am not sure who is going to gain
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The above discussion is an advertisement for choice sets or some sort of set aside for lower SES kids who want to attend schools with this type of fund raising capacity.
The DME would say so. However, to the more acute observers, choice set would mean that the high SES parents, responsible for the organization and contribution to the PTAs, would just flee the DCPS system, and go do the same job elsewhere (provates, MoCo, etc...). Not a good at all outcome for DCPS.
I'm sorry, but that is just not my EOTP experience. People here work hard at schools that are really struggling. I go to a 99% FARMs school with an active PTA of mainly high SES people. The lower-income families volunteer in other capacities, many by doing so in their kids' and grandkids' rooms. Maybe wotp people would bail, but I have a hard time believing that when you would be assigned to one of three excellent schools.
so in a school of 300 kids there are three high SES PTA parents? you cannot compare the situation of high SES parents who chose to buy in an up and coming area with struggling schools with same parents who bought in more expensive areas counting on the local school. these people ( and I am one of them) would not be happy to drive their kids farther away to schools that are doing less well and would not spend $$ and a lot of time in fundraising. they will leave DCPS altogether, there wil be less high SES parents in DCPS and I am not sure who is going to gain
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At my title I, 99% FARMs school at full capacity, we receive $318,884 in title I funds, in a school that is community eligible for title I in which almost all the students are poor. That's significantly less money than Janney beings in for fundraising through the PTA, and my school has a population that has much greater academic and non-academic needs than at Janney. Don't bullshit us and say that JKLM schools bring in less than title 1; it simply is not true.
Is that school as big as Janney?
Anonymous wrote:At my title I, 99% FARMs school at full capacity, we receive $318,884 in title I funds, in a school that is community eligible for title I in which almost all the students are poor. That's significantly less money than Janney beings in for fundraising through the PTA, and my school has a population that has much greater academic and non-academic needs than at Janney. Don't bullshit us and say that JKLM schools bring in less than title 1; it simply is not true.
Anonymous wrote:At my title I, 99% FARMs school at full capacity, we receive $318,884 in title I funds, in a school that is community eligible for title I in which almost all the students are poor. That's significantly less money than Janney beings in for fundraising through the PTA, and my school has a population that has much greater academic and non-academic needs than at Janney. Don't bullshit us and say that JKLM schools bring in less than title 1; it simply is not true.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The above discussion is an advertisement for choice sets or some sort of set aside for lower SES kids who want to attend schools with this type of fund raising capacity.
The DME would say so. However, to the more acute observers, choice set would mean that the high SES parents, responsible for the organization and contribution to the PTAs, would just flee the DCPS system, and go do the same job elsewhere (provates, MoCo, etc...). Not a good at all outcome for DCPS.
I'm sorry, but that is just not my EOTP experience. People here work hard at schools that are really struggling. I go to a 99% FARMs school with an active PTA of mainly high SES people. The lower-income families volunteer in other capacities, many by doing so in their kids' and grandkids' rooms. Maybe wotp people would bail, but I have a hard time believing that when you would be assigned to one of three excellent schools.
Anonymous wrote:At my title I, 99% FARMs school at full capacity, we receive $318,884 in title I funds, in a school that is community eligible for title I in which almost all the students are poor. That's significantly less money than Janney beings in for fundraising through the PTA, and my school has a population that has much greater academic and non-academic needs than at Janney. Don't bullshit us and say that JKLM schools bring in less than title 1; it simply is not true.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The above discussion is an advertisement for choice sets or some sort of set aside for lower SES kids who want to attend schools with this type of fund raising capacity.
The DME would say so. However, to the more acute observers, choice set would mean that the high SES parents, responsible for the organization and contribution to the PTAs, would just flee the DCPS system, and go do the same job elsewhere (provates, MoCo, etc...). Not a good at all outcome for DCPS.
I'm sorry, but that is just not my EOTP experience. People here work hard at schools that are really struggling. I go to a 99% FARMs school with an active PTA of mainly high SES people. The lower-income families volunteer in other capacities, many by doing so in their kids' and grandkids' rooms. Maybe wotp people would bail, but I have a hard time believing that when you would be assigned to one of three excellent schools.
This is confusing. How many high SES families can there be at a 99% farms school?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The above discussion is an advertisement for choice sets or some sort of set aside for lower SES kids who want to attend schools with this type of fund raising capacity.
The DME would say so. However, to the more acute observers, choice set would mean that the high SES parents, responsible for the organization and contribution to the PTAs, would just flee the DCPS system, and go do the same job elsewhere (provates, MoCo, etc...). Not a good at all outcome for DCPS.
I'm sorry, but that is just not my EOTP experience. People here work hard at schools that are really struggling. I go to a 99% FARMs school with an active PTA of mainly high SES people. The lower-income families volunteer in other capacities, many by doing so in their kids' and grandkids' rooms. Maybe wotp people would bail, but I have a hard time believing that when you would be assigned to one of three excellent schools.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not when you add in the fundraising that other schools do. And they need much more than they get.
are you arguing schools should not be allowed to do private fundraising? not really following. i don't think you can prohibit families from fundraising for their schools. would you rather diminish family involvement with schools?
No, but to say that title 1 schools have more $ is missing the private fundraising. And title 1 schools definitely need more money, given the populations they are working with.
The point you are missing is that it is not a lack of money that is the problem at title I schools. They get more money, significantly more money and it is not solving the problems.
It is not more money. WOTP school infrasonic more than makes up for additional title 1 funds. And the interventions for failing EOTP schools that wotp parents on this thread have suggested--including longer school days--cost money. Of course the failing schools need more, precisely because they need to meet non-academic needs for their kids. At our school, eg, if kids didn't get free meals, many would not eat. That is a very different set of problems from those who are wotp and needs a hell of a lot more money and services to address.
I haven't decided how I feel about the proposals from the DME office, but to me, the status quo is unacceptable. I at least think minimum FARM set asides at wealthier schools make sense.
Sorry, should read "WOTP school fundraising"
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The above discussion is an advertisement for choice sets or some sort of set aside for lower SES kids who want to attend schools with this type of fund raising capacity.
The DME would say so. However, to the more acute observers, choice set would mean that the high SES parents, responsible for the organization and contribution to the PTAs, would just flee the DCPS system, and go do the same job elsewhere (provates, MoCo, etc...). Not a good at all outcome for DCPS.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not when you add in the fundraising that other schools do. And they need much more than they get.
are you arguing schools should not be allowed to do private fundraising? not really following. i don't think you can prohibit families from fundraising for their schools. would you rather diminish family involvement with schools?
No, but to say that title 1 schools have more $ is missing the private fundraising. And title 1 schools definitely need more money, given the populations they are working with.
The point you are missing is that it is not a lack of money that is the problem at title I schools. They get more money, significantly more money and it is not solving the problems.
It is not more money. WOTP school infrasonic more than makes up for additional title 1 funds. And the interventions for failing EOTP schools that wotp parents on this thread have suggested--including longer school days--cost money. Of course the failing schools need more, precisely because they need to meet non-academic needs for their kids. At our school, eg, if kids didn't get free meals, many would not eat. That is a very different set of problems from those who are wotp and needs a hell of a lot more money and services to address.
I haven't decided how I feel about the proposals from the DME office, but to me, the status quo is unacceptable. I at least think minimum FARM set asides at wealthier schools make sense.
Wotp fundraising does not ' more than make up for additional title 1 funds'. In the example above the difference in funding is $3 million , nowhere near what the PTA raises.
When you kick neighborhoid kids out of wotp schools to make room for Farms kids , do you plan on kicking out the ones whos parents donate the least to make sure PTA funding stays the same?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not when you add in the fundraising that other schools do. And they need much more than they get.
are you arguing schools should not be allowed to do private fundraising? not really following. i don't think you can prohibit families from fundraising for their schools. would you rather diminish family involvement with schools?
No, but to say that title 1 schools have more $ is missing the private fundraising. And title 1 schools definitely need more money, given the populations they are working with.
The point you are missing is that it is not a lack of money that is the problem at title I schools. They get more money, significantly more money and it is not solving the problems.
It is not more money. WOTP school infrasonic more than makes up for additional title 1 funds. And the interventions for failing EOTP schools that wotp parents on this thread have suggested--including longer school days--cost money. Of course the failing schools need more, precisely because they need to meet non-academic needs for their kids. At our school, eg, if kids didn't get free meals, many would not eat. That is a very different set of problems from those who are wotp and needs a hell of a lot more money and services to address.
I haven't decided how I feel about the proposals from the DME office, but to me, the status quo is unacceptable. I at least think minimum FARM set asides at wealthier schools make sense.