BASIS Head of School included the following message in this week's newsletter:

"We wanted to update you about our 5 year renewal process. As you may know, we were up for our 5 year renewal last night and were renewed unanimously! Thank you for all your support and we are excited for another successful renewal in 5 more years.

You are likewise aware of the proposed K-4 amendment we submitted last month. Due to the inability to find a proper location that could not only service a K-4 demand but enhance our 5-12 experience BASIS.Ed has formally withdrawn the application from consideration. This decision was difficult but we want to ensure the success of our current school and will be resubmitting when the time is right."

Anonymous wrote:I remain disappointed. Having my current 3rd grader (next year 4th grader) at BASIS would have guaranteed him a spot with the middle school, and I would have traveled anywhere in DC for the one year.

For those of us who are not IB to Deal, and recognize that getting into Latin through the lottery is impossible at best, BASIS is the only real option and it's getting harder and harder.

You need to direct your disappointment at the BASIS leadership. Call their Arizona people and ask if they plan to resubmit in a year.

As for difficulty getting in, they went very deep into the wait list this year for 5th - in fact everyone on it may have been offered a slot before count day. Despite the way it looked immediately after the initial lottery, it wasn't so difficult to get in at 5th after all.

BASIS and Latin accept the same number of 5th graders, so it truly depends on your lottery draw.And Latin hasn't given up on its plans to open a second campus. It could happen by the time your kid is old enough.

I remain disappointed. Having my current 3rd grader (next year 4th grader) at BASIS would have guaranteed him a spot with the middle school, and I would have traveled anywhere in DC for the one year.

For those of us who are not IB to Deal, and recognize that getting into Latin through the lottery is impossible at best, BASIS is the only real option and it's getting harder and harder.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the board will ask about it at tonight's meeting

The Board voted to grant the existing BASIS another 5 year charter as expected.

The withdrawn application to expand did not come up.

Extended without condition. The DCPCSB simply does not have the issues with BASIS that some of you would like to imagine they do. I suspect BASIS withdrew the application because it needed more work.

As for Ward 7/8 yet another charter got approved to serve, let's also not pretend that schools aren't willing to serve those wards. BASIS already has students from 7 & 8. BASIS opened its current school with the intention of it being centrally located to serve students from all wards.

They'd been working on it for more than a year. Basically they just failed their own comprehensive exam. It is embarrassing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charter advocate and BASIS critic just blogged about the BASIS decision to withdraw its application to expand.

https://parentshaveschoolchoicekidswin.com/2016/11/21/basis-pcs-withdraws-application-to-expand/

One could argue that high achieving, higher income kids are left behind by the traditional school system in DCPS. Unless you can buy a million dollar house in upper NW or Cap Hill for Brent, then your kid is screwed.

Right. Not a single school other than Brent or Janney that provides an education IN THE ENTIRE CITY!

A good education with like minded high achieving students? Limited. When Too many schools in DC have grades where less than 10% are meeting basic readiness standards. There is a reason high income parents flee to places like basis.

There are other schools in the city other than upper NW and Cap Hill where this can be found (in fact the one school that outperforms all of them is not listed) but there are too many people that just look for a white majority as their "proxy"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the board will ask about it at tonight's meeting

The Board voted to grant the existing BASIS another 5 year charter as expected.

The withdrawn application to expand did not come up.

Extended without condition. The DCPCSB simply does not have the issues with BASIS that some of you would like to imagine they do. I suspect BASIS withdrew the application because it needed more work.

As for Ward 7/8 yet another charter got approved to serve, let's also not pretend that schools aren't willing to serve those wards. BASIS already has students from 7 & 8. BASIS opened its current school with the intention of it being centrally located to serve students from all wards.

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the board will ask about it at tonight's meeting

The Board voted to grant the existing BASIS another 5 year charter as expected.

The withdrawn application to expand did not come up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charter advocate and BASIS critic just blogged about the BASIS decision to withdraw its application to expand.

https://parentshaveschoolchoicekidswin.com/2016/11/21/basis-pcs-withdraws-application-to-expand/

One could argue that high achieving, higher income kids are left behind by the traditional school system in DCPS. Unless you can buy a million dollar house in upper NW or Cap Hill for Brent, then your kid is screwed.

Right. Not a single school other than Brent or Janney that provides an education IN THE ENTIRE CITY!

A good education with like minded high achieving students? Limited. When Too many schools in DC have grades where less than 10% are meeting basic readiness standards. There is a reason high income parents flee to places like basis.

I wonder if the board will ask about it at tonight's meeting

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Wards 7 and 8, the two that BASIS refused to consider, have the highest numbers of elementary school aged children. Ward 2 has the fewest elementary aged children. BASIS admitted that their own research showed that families wouldn't travel as far for elementary school as they will for middle and high school. They literally could not come up with an answer at the hearing as to why they refused to consider wards 7 and 8.

They said in the hearing that because ward 2 was centrally located, it enabled them to draw from many different wards and they demonstrated this was so with the current school. They also said that because it was near their current school, it allowed for positive interaction and tutoring between the older and younger children, so it's somewhat disingenuous to suggest that "literally could not come up with an answer" when they provided a pretty clear one.

In addition, it's irrelevant. The requirement you quoted only requires them to show there is a need in the location, not to show that it is somehow better than every other possible location.

Are you trying to argue the charter board has no legitmate interest in ensuring DC children have equal access to charters? Because that is certainly not right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Charter schools are not private schools. Under the law, schools do NOT get to decide if kids with special needs who are educated in the general classroom are a fit. The school has to fit the student. That's how it works. You don't seem to have internalized that fully and I suggest you do. Maybe DC schools are not a good fit for you if you think that considering BASIS's proven record of flouting IDEA is "excessive focus."

As for ward locations -- it's right there in the charter law that the applicant has to provide a "A statement of the need for the proposed school in the geographic area of the school site."

You are misrepresenting what I said. There is a world of difference between a charter having to provide "a statement of the need for the proposed school in the geographic area of the school site" and the charter board specifically imposing or suggesting geographic preferences above and beyond providing a statement of need for the geographic area the charter itself proposes.

Wards 7 and 8, the two that BASIS refused to consider, have the highest numbers of elementary school aged children. Ward 2 has the fewest elementary aged children. BASIS admitted that their own research showed that families wouldn't travel as far for elementary school as they will for middle and high school. They literally could not come up with an answer at the hearing as to why they refused to consider wards 7 and 8.

short answer -- no one from WotP or possibly WotR is travelling to Wards 7 or 8 for ES

I watched the same hearing and the answers just don't ring true to those of us with kids in the current school.

All the same explanations and excuses from people from Arizona who weren't even with BASIS when the current school was launched. These people don't know one DC neighborhood from another and were insane for projecting that the elementary school would attract mostly students who now attend YY and the Ward 3 elementary schools.

Trust me - you dodged a bullet.

Anonymous wrote:

Wards 7 and 8, the two that BASIS refused to consider, have the highest numbers of elementary school aged children. Ward 2 has the fewest elementary aged children. BASIS admitted that their own research showed that families wouldn't travel as far for elementary school as they will for middle and high school. They literally could not come up with an answer at the hearing as to why they refused to consider wards 7 and 8.

They said in the hearing that because ward 2 was centrally located, it enabled them to draw from many different wards and they demonstrated this was so with the current school. They also said that because it was near their current school, it allowed for positive interaction and tutoring between the older and younger children, so it's somewhat disingenuous to suggest that "literally could not come up with an answer" when they provided a pretty clear one.

In addition, it's irrelevant. The requirement you quoted only requires them to show there is a need in the location, not to show that it is somehow better than every other possible location.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Charter schools are not private schools. Under the law, schools do NOT get to decide if kids with special needs who are educated in the general classroom are a fit. The school has to fit the student. That's how it works. You don't seem to have internalized that fully and I suggest you do. Maybe DC schools are not a good fit for you if you think that considering BASIS's proven record of flouting IDEA is "excessive focus."

As for ward locations -- it's right there in the charter law that the applicant has to provide a "A statement of the need for the proposed school in the geographic area of the school site."

You are misrepresenting what I said. There is a world of difference between a charter having to provide "a statement of the need for the proposed school in the geographic area of the school site" and the charter board specifically imposing or suggesting geographic preferences above and beyond providing a statement of need for the geographic area the charter itself proposes.

Wards 7 and 8, the two that BASIS refused to consider, have the highest numbers of elementary school aged children. Ward 2 has the fewest elementary aged children. BASIS admitted that their own research showed that families wouldn't travel as far for elementary school as they will for middle and high school. They literally could not come up with an answer at the hearing as to why they refused to consider wards 7 and 8.

Anonymous wrote:

Charter schools are not private schools. Under the law, schools do NOT get to decide if kids with special needs who are educated in the general classroom are a fit. The school has to fit the student. That's how it works. You don't seem to have internalized that fully and I suggest you do. Maybe DC schools are not a good fit for you if you think that considering BASIS's proven record of flouting IDEA is "excessive focus."

As for ward locations -- it's right there in the charter law that the applicant has to provide a "A statement of the need for the proposed school in the geographic area of the school site."

You are misrepresenting what I said. There is a world of difference between a charter having to provide "a statement of the need for the proposed school in the geographic area of the school site" and the charter board specifically imposing or suggesting geographic preferences above and beyond providing a statement of need for the geographic area the charter itself proposes.