Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the “woke” mostly genuinely believe that kids benefit from racial and socioeconomic integration and want better schools for everyone. its complex.

Too easy.

Your articulated goals are not defined in a such a manner as to be universally understood. For instance, what does "integration" mean? Does it mean that a school accurately reflects the make-up of the IB population? In which case some schools would be virtually all white with almost no economically disadvantaged. If not, then there's a disconnect between the IB preference system and the goals you so cavalierly throw around. Which begs the question, why are you so certain those are the goals if the people who set the system up did so in a manner that doesn't result in those goals being achieved?

What are "better schools"? Does that mean the bottom is brought up? The top are advanced even more so year after year? Both? Is a one point increase for a kid 2 grade levels below more valuable than a one point test increase for the kid already two grade levels above? Half as valuable? What's the proper ratio? Do we invest in more advanced classes or more remedial Special Ed resources? That is one of the main issues facing public education. Resources are finite; how many and in what percentage should they be brought to the fore for the most at risk vs those desiring advanced classes?

A necessary first step to solving for any issues is to first (1) agree on meaning of defined terms and (2) identify what 'success' looks like. The "woke" to whom I made (admittedly derisive) reference like to throw around platitudes and bumper sticker phrases and try and intimidate anyone who doesn't agree with their (ill defined) policy goals as racist or "Karens". They seek "equity" but they don't define it, and often times their definition is horribly regressive and equates to lowering standards and/or assuming economically disadvantaged and POC can't meet a higher standard.

These are all fair questions and I'll tell you where I (and I think many other DCPS parents) draw the line. We were deciding whether to move from the Hill to NWDC many many years ago. I went to a Wilson open house. They were very clear that their student body was large enough and academically strong enough that they could offer AP classes in every single subject (which is far more than many many small public HSs across the country will offer). But they had to dedicate their resources to their under-performing students. That meant very large class sizes for AP, with a much lower student-teacher ratio for the less advanced classes. Basically the message was, we welcome the academically advanced students and you can count on us to provide the coursework and the teachers. But don't expect small classes, hand-holding, or excellent college counseling. While I might prefer a school that could provide more of that, it was a trade-off I was willing to make in order to stay in DC, where our family was (and is) very happy. And I appreciated that the Wilson leadership (at least at the time, I don't know if this has changed), was up-front about all of it. We decided to move to NW for the Wilson option. There was no way in the world we would even consider sending our kids to Eastern, however, which didn't even offer AP or true honors classes in the first place (and whose description of "curriculum" on their website was rather confusing and concerning).

The transparency you experienced at Wilson is what is so seriously lacking today EOTP. No one really knows whether there are AP classes if they are "AP for all (read: not AP), actual tracking, super secret tracking, etc. I am certain DCPS behaves like this to avoid having to own any firm policy decisions and to be all things to all people, but it is hurting them more than they realize. I often make fun of people on DCUM who complain that Charles Allen or others don't "just fix" public education. But one thing I do think they all fail at is having public hearings where the Ferrebbe (sp?) asked direct questions about offerings in specific MS and HS and forced to be transparent.

One of the things that annoys me about the BASIS bashing on DCUM is that the school is THE most transparent school in DC. They tell you exactly what they are and are not and the tell you straight up that they don't want your suggestions for how to change. You can disagree with the approach, but you can't whine and complain when it turns out to be exactly what they told you it would be. See the person complaining that BASIS wouldn't change their curriculum for her Chinese nephew as an example.

You're painting with much too broad a brush. The BASIS admin team is young, inexperienced and composed of moving parts. In a school that's had 8 heads in 12 years and is essentially run from Arizona, you can't always sure who you're talking to, or who's going to follow up. The goal posts can move. When we were at BASIS, Chinese-speaking parents pushed to organize advanced Chinese middle school classes. This happened at least twice. One HOS would work with the parents, the next wouldn't necessarily. One school year, we cycled through 3 heads. Transparency wasn't the hallmark of that particular year. Maybe BASIS' leadership has stabilized now, but I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

You seem weirdly focused on age and not experience and qualifications. Also seems weird start your post with a statement of fact that the team "is young, inexperienced..." and then admit you don't know anything about the current team, and yet you still "wouldn't hold your breath". Here are some facts.

Current HOS has 2 Master's degrees in education and a J.D. He's in his 3rd year as HOS and has been at BASIS since 2014 in a series of more senior roles. Your indictment based on age alone would be no more valid than someone saying all long time DCPS admins are lazy re-treads. Some of them are. And many of them are committed admins who have been fighting DC Central to help kids for years.

The issue with "who you are talking to" is true of any school (company or business) anytime there are changes in leadership. Odd that you think this applies only to BASIS. Ask anyone who has ever had an IP or 504 in any school what happens when the admin or SPED group changes; you fight all over again. That's not a BASIS thing. Several DCPS schools have changed principals mid-year too. It sucks. But not a BASIS thing.

Yes, BASIS curriculum is handed down from on high in AZ. If you didn't know that when you entered then you weren't paying attention. That centralized and unwavering curriculum and rigor is the reason many BASIS families like the school; it is unencumbered by the constantly lowered standards of most of the DC schools (AP for everyone?).

No dog in this fight anymore - our last graduated from BASIS. No denying that it was atually a "BASIS thing" to have a new head almost every year for a decade. Haven't heard of that happening at SH or Deal. Hope that's a closed chapter at BASIS but all the leadership changes really hurt the kids.

The "centralized, unwavering curriculum" is overrated at BASIS. Fact is, the burbs do rigor better without it. A number of public high schools in nova and moco teach tougher subjects than BASIS, other than maybe for math.

BASIS just doesn't get the money it needs to do better, including for paying better administratosr & teachers. Not sure it's fare to blame BASIS but whitewashing all these problems is kinda silly. Too bad that SH & Deal aren't improving.

Did BASIS move to VA or MD and no one told me? Are DC residents allowed to send their kids there now? Every time I see someone like you post about how much better things are somewhere not in DC I want to throw my computer through a wall. I can name 10 places in the country with better schools than DC where BASIS level academics are offered, but I don't live there so what purposes does it serve for me to introduce them into the discussion?

"A new one almost every year for a decade"...except the last 3 years where it has been the same? Square that circle for me.

Start your own separate Basis thread please.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the “woke” mostly genuinely believe that kids benefit from racial and socioeconomic integration and want better schools for everyone. its complex.

Too easy.

Your articulated goals are not defined in a such a manner as to be universally understood. For instance, what does "integration" mean? Does it mean that a school accurately reflects the make-up of the IB population? In which case some schools would be virtually all white with almost no economically disadvantaged. If not, then there's a disconnect between the IB preference system and the goals you so cavalierly throw around. Which begs the question, why are you so certain those are the goals if the people who set the system up did so in a manner that doesn't result in those goals being achieved?

What are "better schools"? Does that mean the bottom is brought up? The top are advanced even more so year after year? Both? Is a one point increase for a kid 2 grade levels below more valuable than a one point test increase for the kid already two grade levels above? Half as valuable? What's the proper ratio? Do we invest in more advanced classes or more remedial Special Ed resources? That is one of the main issues facing public education. Resources are finite; how many and in what percentage should they be brought to the fore for the most at risk vs those desiring advanced classes?

A necessary first step to solving for any issues is to first (1) agree on meaning of defined terms and (2) identify what 'success' looks like. The "woke" to whom I made (admittedly derisive) reference like to throw around platitudes and bumper sticker phrases and try and intimidate anyone who doesn't agree with their (ill defined) policy goals as racist or "Karens". They seek "equity" but they don't define it, and often times their definition is horribly regressive and equates to lowering standards and/or assuming economically disadvantaged and POC can't meet a higher standard.

These are all fair questions and I'll tell you where I (and I think many other DCPS parents) draw the line. We were deciding whether to move from the Hill to NWDC many many years ago. I went to a Wilson open house. They were very clear that their student body was large enough and academically strong enough that they could offer AP classes in every single subject (which is far more than many many small public HSs across the country will offer). But they had to dedicate their resources to their under-performing students. That meant very large class sizes for AP, with a much lower student-teacher ratio for the less advanced classes. Basically the message was, we welcome the academically advanced students and you can count on us to provide the coursework and the teachers. But don't expect small classes, hand-holding, or excellent college counseling. While I might prefer a school that could provide more of that, it was a trade-off I was willing to make in order to stay in DC, where our family was (and is) very happy. And I appreciated that the Wilson leadership (at least at the time, I don't know if this has changed), was up-front about all of it. We decided to move to NW for the Wilson option. There was no way in the world we would even consider sending our kids to Eastern, however, which didn't even offer AP or true honors classes in the first place (and whose description of "curriculum" on their website was rather confusing and concerning).

The transparency you experienced at Wilson is what is so seriously lacking today EOTP. No one really knows whether there are AP classes if they are "AP for all (read: not AP), actual tracking, super secret tracking, etc. I am certain DCPS behaves like this to avoid having to own any firm policy decisions and to be all things to all people, but it is hurting them more than they realize. I often make fun of people on DCUM who complain that Charles Allen or others don't "just fix" public education. But one thing I do think they all fail at is having public hearings where the Ferrebbe (sp?) asked direct questions about offerings in specific MS and HS and forced to be transparent.

One of the things that annoys me about the BASIS bashing on DCUM is that the school is THE most transparent school in DC. They tell you exactly what they are and are not and the tell you straight up that they don't want your suggestions for how to change. You can disagree with the approach, but you can't whine and complain when it turns out to be exactly what they told you it would be. See the person complaining that BASIS wouldn't change their curriculum for her Chinese nephew as an example.

You're painting with much too broad a brush. The BASIS admin team is young, inexperienced and composed of moving parts. In a school that's had 8 heads in 12 years and is essentially run from Arizona, you can't always sure who you're talking to, or who's going to follow up. The goal posts can move. When we were at BASIS, Chinese-speaking parents pushed to organize advanced Chinese middle school classes. This happened at least twice. One HOS would work with the parents, the next wouldn't necessarily. One school year, we cycled through 3 heads. Transparency wasn't the hallmark of that particular year. Maybe BASIS' leadership has stabilized now, but I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

You seem weirdly focused on age and not experience and qualifications. Also seems weird start your post with a statement of fact that the team "is young, inexperienced..." and then admit you don't know anything about the current team, and yet you still "wouldn't hold your breath". Here are some facts.

Current HOS has 2 Master's degrees in education and a J.D. He's in his 3rd year as HOS and has been at BASIS since 2014 in a series of more senior roles. Your indictment based on age alone would be no more valid than someone saying all long time DCPS admins are lazy re-treads. Some of them are. And many of them are committed admins who have been fighting DC Central to help kids for years.

The issue with "who you are talking to" is true of any school (company or business) anytime there are changes in leadership. Odd that you think this applies only to BASIS. Ask anyone who has ever had an IP or 504 in any school what happens when the admin or SPED group changes; you fight all over again. That's not a BASIS thing. Several DCPS schools have changed principals mid-year too. It sucks. But not a BASIS thing.

Yes, BASIS curriculum is handed down from on high in AZ. If you didn't know that when you entered then you weren't paying attention. That centralized and unwavering curriculum and rigor is the reason many BASIS families like the school; it is unencumbered by the constantly lowered standards of most of the DC schools (AP for everyone?).

No dog in this fight anymore - our last graduated from BASIS. No denying that it was atually a "BASIS thing" to have a new head almost every year for a decade. Haven't heard of that happening at SH or Deal. Hope that's a closed chapter at BASIS but all the leadership changes really hurt the kids.

The "centralized, unwavering curriculum" is overrated at BASIS. Fact is, the burbs do rigor better without it. A number of public high schools in nova and moco teach tougher subjects than BASIS, other than maybe for math.

BASIS just doesn't get the money it needs to do better, including for paying better administratosr & teachers. Not sure it's fare to blame BASIS but whitewashing all these problems is kinda silly. Too bad that SH & Deal aren't improving.

I don't have a problem with people expressing concern about admin turnover. What gets me exercised it this myopic or confirmation bias view that somehow only BASIS has turnover, and since only BASIS has turnover that must be a function of compensation and/or some other major problem. Setting aside the fact that the current HOS is in year 3, you choose to just ignore the reality of admin turnover across the board. JR/Wilson is on Principal #3 in the last 2 years. Here's the new principal list for DCPS for the last 3 years:

Principal Announcements for School Year 2020-2021
Elena Bell
Takoma Education Campus (Interim) - MScott Berkowitz - Peabody Watkins Elementary School - Eric Dabney - Kimball Elementary School - Shaunte Daniel - Ludlow-Taylor Elementary School (Interim) - Kimberly Douglas - Lawrence E. Boone Elementary - Franchita Eborn-Simon Elementary School-Tracy Foster-Truesdell Education Campus-Eric Fraser-Stuart-Hobson Middle School-Derek Gorham-C.W. Harris Elementary School (Interim)-Amelia Hunt-Stevens Early-Learning Center-Reggie Hunt-Ron Brown College Preparatory High School-Dwan Jordon-Johnson Middle School-Kristina Kellogg-Langley Elementary School-Chunita Pilgrim-Burrville Elementary School-Jennifer Tompkins-Bunker Hill Elementary School-Camille Townsend-Houston Elementary School
Principal Announcements for School Year 2021-2022
Katrel Angry-Miner Elementary School (Interim)-Greg Bargeman-Wilson High School (Interim)-LaCondria Beckwith-Ketcham Elementary School-Brandon Clayton-Takoma Elementary School-Latisha Coleman-Johnson Middle School (Interim) -Shaunte Daniel-Excel Academy (Interim)-Shawna Dix-Browne Education Campus-Amelia Hunt-Military Road Early Learning Center -Sylvia Isaac-School Without Walls High School-Dwan Jordon-DCPS Virtual-Learning Program-Demetrius Lucas-Hendley Elementary School (Interim)-Penelope Miller-Ludlow-Taylor Elementary School (Interim)-Julian Pineda
Oyster-Adams Bilingual School-Karen Rivas-Stoddert Elementary School -Danielle Singh-Janney Elementary School -Shanna Young-School Without Walls @ Francis-Stevens
Principal Announcements for School Year 2022-2023
Maquita Alexander-Van Ness Elementary School-Sah Brown-Jackson-Reed High School-Kennard Branch-Bard High School Early College DC (Head of School with Principal Anderson)-Gloria Bumpass-Ballou STAY Opportunity Academy-Latisha Coleman-Johnson Middle School-Lucas Cooke-MacFarland Middle School-Donnell Cox, Jr.-Kelly Miller Middle School (Interim)-Lawrence Dance-Miner Elementary School-Shaunte Daniel-Excel Academy-Brandon Eatman-Roosevelt High School-Steven Eskay-Eaton Elementary School-Cara Fuller-Phelps Architecture, Construction, and Engineering High School
Merlyne Graves-Garfield Elementary School-Taeneress Griffin-Cleveland Elementary School-Errol Johnson-Hardy Middle School-Laena Lee-Nalle Elementary School-Demetrius Lucas-Hendley Elementary School-William Lyles-Ida B. Wells Middle School-Penelope Miller-Ludlow-Taylor Elementary School-Steve Miller
Eastern High School-Tyra Russell-Shepherd Elementary School (Interim)-Kortni Stafford -McKinley Middle School and McKinley Technology High School-Veronica Torres -Seaton Elementary School-Brooks Warnick -Mann Elementary School (Interim)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the “woke” mostly genuinely believe that kids benefit from racial and socioeconomic integration and want better schools for everyone. its complex.

Too easy.

Your articulated goals are not defined in a such a manner as to be universally understood. For instance, what does "integration" mean? Does it mean that a school accurately reflects the make-up of the IB population? In which case some schools would be virtually all white with almost no economically disadvantaged. If not, then there's a disconnect between the IB preference system and the goals you so cavalierly throw around. Which begs the question, why are you so certain those are the goals if the people who set the system up did so in a manner that doesn't result in those goals being achieved?

What are "better schools"? Does that mean the bottom is brought up? The top are advanced even more so year after year? Both? Is a one point increase for a kid 2 grade levels below more valuable than a one point test increase for the kid already two grade levels above? Half as valuable? What's the proper ratio? Do we invest in more advanced classes or more remedial Special Ed resources? That is one of the main issues facing public education. Resources are finite; how many and in what percentage should they be brought to the fore for the most at risk vs those desiring advanced classes?

A necessary first step to solving for any issues is to first (1) agree on meaning of defined terms and (2) identify what 'success' looks like. The "woke" to whom I made (admittedly derisive) reference like to throw around platitudes and bumper sticker phrases and try and intimidate anyone who doesn't agree with their (ill defined) policy goals as racist or "Karens". They seek "equity" but they don't define it, and often times their definition is horribly regressive and equates to lowering standards and/or assuming economically disadvantaged and POC can't meet a higher standard.

These are all fair questions and I'll tell you where I (and I think many other DCPS parents) draw the line. We were deciding whether to move from the Hill to NWDC many many years ago. I went to a Wilson open house. They were very clear that their student body was large enough and academically strong enough that they could offer AP classes in every single subject (which is far more than many many small public HSs across the country will offer). But they had to dedicate their resources to their under-performing students. That meant very large class sizes for AP, with a much lower student-teacher ratio for the less advanced classes. Basically the message was, we welcome the academically advanced students and you can count on us to provide the coursework and the teachers. But don't expect small classes, hand-holding, or excellent college counseling. While I might prefer a school that could provide more of that, it was a trade-off I was willing to make in order to stay in DC, where our family was (and is) very happy. And I appreciated that the Wilson leadership (at least at the time, I don't know if this has changed), was up-front about all of it. We decided to move to NW for the Wilson option. There was no way in the world we would even consider sending our kids to Eastern, however, which didn't even offer AP or true honors classes in the first place (and whose description of "curriculum" on their website was rather confusing and concerning).

The transparency you experienced at Wilson is what is so seriously lacking today EOTP. No one really knows whether there are AP classes if they are "AP for all (read: not AP), actual tracking, super secret tracking, etc. I am certain DCPS behaves like this to avoid having to own any firm policy decisions and to be all things to all people, but it is hurting them more than they realize. I often make fun of people on DCUM who complain that Charles Allen or others don't "just fix" public education. But one thing I do think they all fail at is having public hearings where the Ferrebbe (sp?) asked direct questions about offerings in specific MS and HS and forced to be transparent.

One of the things that annoys me about the BASIS bashing on DCUM is that the school is THE most transparent school in DC. They tell you exactly what they are and are not and the tell you straight up that they don't want your suggestions for how to change. You can disagree with the approach, but you can't whine and complain when it turns out to be exactly what they told you it would be. See the person complaining that BASIS wouldn't change their curriculum for her Chinese nephew as an example.

You're painting with much too broad a brush. The BASIS admin team is young, inexperienced and composed of moving parts. In a school that's had 8 heads in 12 years and is essentially run from Arizona, you can't always sure who you're talking to, or who's going to follow up. The goal posts can move. When we were at BASIS, Chinese-speaking parents pushed to organize advanced Chinese middle school classes. This happened at least twice. One HOS would work with the parents, the next wouldn't necessarily. One school year, we cycled through 3 heads. Transparency wasn't the hallmark of that particular year. Maybe BASIS' leadership has stabilized now, but I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

You seem weirdly focused on age and not experience and qualifications. Also seems weird start your post with a statement of fact that the team "is young, inexperienced..." and then admit you don't know anything about the current team, and yet you still "wouldn't hold your breath". Here are some facts.

Current HOS has 2 Master's degrees in education and a J.D. He's in his 3rd year as HOS and has been at BASIS since 2014 in a series of more senior roles. Your indictment based on age alone would be no more valid than someone saying all long time DCPS admins are lazy re-treads. Some of them are. And many of them are committed admins who have been fighting DC Central to help kids for years.

The issue with "who you are talking to" is true of any school (company or business) anytime there are changes in leadership. Odd that you think this applies only to BASIS. Ask anyone who has ever had an IP or 504 in any school what happens when the admin or SPED group changes; you fight all over again. That's not a BASIS thing. Several DCPS schools have changed principals mid-year too. It sucks. But not a BASIS thing.

Yes, BASIS curriculum is handed down from on high in AZ. If you didn't know that when you entered then you weren't paying attention. That centralized and unwavering curriculum and rigor is the reason many BASIS families like the school; it is unencumbered by the constantly lowered standards of most of the DC schools (AP for everyone?).

No dog in this fight anymore - our last graduated from BASIS. No denying that it was atually a "BASIS thing" to have a new head almost every year for a decade. Haven't heard of that happening at SH or Deal. Hope that's a closed chapter at BASIS but all the leadership changes really hurt the kids.

The "centralized, unwavering curriculum" is overrated at BASIS. Fact is, the burbs do rigor better without it. A number of public high schools in nova and moco teach tougher subjects than BASIS, other than maybe for math.

BASIS just doesn't get the money it needs to do better, including for paying better administratosr & teachers. Not sure it's fare to blame BASIS but whitewashing all these problems is kinda silly. Too bad that SH & Deal aren't improving.

Did BASIS move to VA or MD and no one told me? Are DC residents allowed to send their kids there now? Every time I see someone like you post about how much better things are somewhere not in DC I want to throw my computer through a wall. I can name 10 places in the country with better schools than DC where BASIS level academics are offered, but I don't live there so what purposes does it serve for me to introduce them into the discussion?

"A new one almost every year for a decade"...except the last 3 years where it has been the same? Square that circle for me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the “woke” mostly genuinely believe that kids benefit from racial and socioeconomic integration and want better schools for everyone. its complex.

Too easy.

Your articulated goals are not defined in a such a manner as to be universally understood. For instance, what does "integration" mean? Does it mean that a school accurately reflects the make-up of the IB population? In which case some schools would be virtually all white with almost no economically disadvantaged. If not, then there's a disconnect between the IB preference system and the goals you so cavalierly throw around. Which begs the question, why are you so certain those are the goals if the people who set the system up did so in a manner that doesn't result in those goals being achieved?

What are "better schools"? Does that mean the bottom is brought up? The top are advanced even more so year after year? Both? Is a one point increase for a kid 2 grade levels below more valuable than a one point test increase for the kid already two grade levels above? Half as valuable? What's the proper ratio? Do we invest in more advanced classes or more remedial Special Ed resources? That is one of the main issues facing public education. Resources are finite; how many and in what percentage should they be brought to the fore for the most at risk vs those desiring advanced classes?

A necessary first step to solving for any issues is to first (1) agree on meaning of defined terms and (2) identify what 'success' looks like. The "woke" to whom I made (admittedly derisive) reference like to throw around platitudes and bumper sticker phrases and try and intimidate anyone who doesn't agree with their (ill defined) policy goals as racist or "Karens". They seek "equity" but they don't define it, and often times their definition is horribly regressive and equates to lowering standards and/or assuming economically disadvantaged and POC can't meet a higher standard.

These are all fair questions and I'll tell you where I (and I think many other DCPS parents) draw the line. We were deciding whether to move from the Hill to NWDC many many years ago. I went to a Wilson open house. They were very clear that their student body was large enough and academically strong enough that they could offer AP classes in every single subject (which is far more than many many small public HSs across the country will offer). But they had to dedicate their resources to their under-performing students. That meant very large class sizes for AP, with a much lower student-teacher ratio for the less advanced classes. Basically the message was, we welcome the academically advanced students and you can count on us to provide the coursework and the teachers. But don't expect small classes, hand-holding, or excellent college counseling. While I might prefer a school that could provide more of that, it was a trade-off I was willing to make in order to stay in DC, where our family was (and is) very happy. And I appreciated that the Wilson leadership (at least at the time, I don't know if this has changed), was up-front about all of it. We decided to move to NW for the Wilson option. There was no way in the world we would even consider sending our kids to Eastern, however, which didn't even offer AP or true honors classes in the first place (and whose description of "curriculum" on their website was rather confusing and concerning).

The transparency you experienced at Wilson is what is so seriously lacking today EOTP. No one really knows whether there are AP classes if they are "AP for all (read: not AP), actual tracking, super secret tracking, etc. I am certain DCPS behaves like this to avoid having to own any firm policy decisions and to be all things to all people, but it is hurting them more than they realize. I often make fun of people on DCUM who complain that Charles Allen or others don't "just fix" public education. But one thing I do think they all fail at is having public hearings where the Ferrebbe (sp?) asked direct questions about offerings in specific MS and HS and forced to be transparent.

One of the things that annoys me about the BASIS bashing on DCUM is that the school is THE most transparent school in DC. They tell you exactly what they are and are not and the tell you straight up that they don't want your suggestions for how to change. You can disagree with the approach, but you can't whine and complain when it turns out to be exactly what they told you it would be. See the person complaining that BASIS wouldn't change their curriculum for her Chinese nephew as an example.

You're painting with much too broad a brush. The BASIS admin team is young, inexperienced and composed of moving parts. In a school that's had 8 heads in 12 years and is essentially run from Arizona, you can't always sure who you're talking to, or who's going to follow up. The goal posts can move. When we were at BASIS, Chinese-speaking parents pushed to organize advanced Chinese middle school classes. This happened at least twice. One HOS would work with the parents, the next wouldn't necessarily. One school year, we cycled through 3 heads. Transparency wasn't the hallmark of that particular year. Maybe BASIS' leadership has stabilized now, but I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

You seem weirdly focused on age and not experience and qualifications. Also seems weird start your post with a statement of fact that the team "is young, inexperienced..." and then admit you don't know anything about the current team, and yet you still "wouldn't hold your breath". Here are some facts.

Current HOS has 2 Master's degrees in education and a J.D. He's in his 3rd year as HOS and has been at BASIS since 2014 in a series of more senior roles. Your indictment based on age alone would be no more valid than someone saying all long time DCPS admins are lazy re-treads. Some of them are. And many of them are committed admins who have been fighting DC Central to help kids for years.

The issue with "who you are talking to" is true of any school (company or business) anytime there are changes in leadership. Odd that you think this applies only to BASIS. Ask anyone who has ever had an IP or 504 in any school what happens when the admin or SPED group changes; you fight all over again. That's not a BASIS thing. Several DCPS schools have changed principals mid-year too. It sucks. But not a BASIS thing.

Yes, BASIS curriculum is handed down from on high in AZ. If you didn't know that when you entered then you weren't paying attention. That centralized and unwavering curriculum and rigor is the reason many BASIS families like the school; it is unencumbered by the constantly lowered standards of most of the DC schools (AP for everyone?).

No dog in this fight anymore - our last graduated from BASIS. No denying that it was atually a "BASIS thing" to have a new head almost every year for a decade. Haven't heard of that happening at SH or Deal. Hope that's a closed chapter at BASIS but all the leadership changes really hurt the kids.

The "centralized, unwavering curriculum" is overrated at BASIS. Fact is, the burbs do rigor better without it. A number of public high schools in nova and moco teach tougher subjects than BASIS, other than maybe for math.

BASIS just doesn't get the money it needs to do better, including for paying better administratosr & teachers. Not sure it's fare to blame BASIS but whitewashing all these problems is kinda silly. Too bad that SH & Deal aren't improving.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Push back, folks. Don’t let BASIS admins shortchange you when you ask for a reasonable option that’s widely available in well-run suburban public schools, particularly if granting your request that will cost the franchise precisely nothing. Don’t let Deal admins do the same. These are your tax dollars at work.

In a nutshell, we're never going to have better public schools unless more DC parents challenge policies limiting achievement.

ding ding ding

My younger self used to wonder why so many parents sent their children to private schools. I get it now.

My older self wishes parent could be excised from school communities entirely. The kids are awesome. Parents not so much

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Push back, folks. Don’t let BASIS admins shortchange you when you ask for a reasonable option that’s widely available in well-run suburban public schools, particularly if granting your request that will cost the franchise precisely nothing. Don’t let Deal admins do the same. These are your tax dollars at work.

In a nutshell, we're never going to have better public schools unless more DC parents challenge policies limiting achievement.

ding ding ding

My younger self used to wonder why so many parents sent their children to private schools. I get it now.

will you guys please stfu about Basis in this thread. especially the entitled parent who wants to enroll their child in Basis, except for that Basis should also have a gym and a library and let kids take whatever they want and have older administrators and be located in Virginia and have clowns at lunch and and and

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the “woke” mostly genuinely believe that kids benefit from racial and socioeconomic integration and want better schools for everyone. its complex.

Too easy.

Your articulated goals are not defined in a such a manner as to be universally understood. For instance, what does "integration" mean? Does it mean that a school accurately reflects the make-up of the IB population? In which case some schools would be virtually all white with almost no economically disadvantaged. If not, then there's a disconnect between the IB preference system and the goals you so cavalierly throw around. Which begs the question, why are you so certain those are the goals if the people who set the system up did so in a manner that doesn't result in those goals being achieved?

What are "better schools"? Does that mean the bottom is brought up? The top are advanced even more so year after year? Both? Is a one point increase for a kid 2 grade levels below more valuable than a one point test increase for the kid already two grade levels above? Half as valuable? What's the proper ratio? Do we invest in more advanced classes or more remedial Special Ed resources? That is one of the main issues facing public education. Resources are finite; how many and in what percentage should they be brought to the fore for the most at risk vs those desiring advanced classes?

A necessary first step to solving for any issues is to first (1) agree on meaning of defined terms and (2) identify what 'success' looks like. The "woke" to whom I made (admittedly derisive) reference like to throw around platitudes and bumper sticker phrases and try and intimidate anyone who doesn't agree with their (ill defined) policy goals as racist or "Karens". They seek "equity" but they don't define it, and often times their definition is horribly regressive and equates to lowering standards and/or assuming economically disadvantaged and POC can't meet a higher standard.

These are all fair questions and I'll tell you where I (and I think many other DCPS parents) draw the line. We were deciding whether to move from the Hill to NWDC many many years ago. I went to a Wilson open house. They were very clear that their student body was large enough and academically strong enough that they could offer AP classes in every single subject (which is far more than many many small public HSs across the country will offer). But they had to dedicate their resources to their under-performing students. That meant very large class sizes for AP, with a much lower student-teacher ratio for the less advanced classes. Basically the message was, we welcome the academically advanced students and you can count on us to provide the coursework and the teachers. But don't expect small classes, hand-holding, or excellent college counseling. While I might prefer a school that could provide more of that, it was a trade-off I was willing to make in order to stay in DC, where our family was (and is) very happy. And I appreciated that the Wilson leadership (at least at the time, I don't know if this has changed), was up-front about all of it. We decided to move to NW for the Wilson option. There was no way in the world we would even consider sending our kids to Eastern, however, which didn't even offer AP or true honors classes in the first place (and whose description of "curriculum" on their website was rather confusing and concerning).

The transparency you experienced at Wilson is what is so seriously lacking today EOTP. No one really knows whether there are AP classes if they are "AP for all (read: not AP), actual tracking, super secret tracking, etc. I am certain DCPS behaves like this to avoid having to own any firm policy decisions and to be all things to all people, but it is hurting them more than they realize. I often make fun of people on DCUM who complain that Charles Allen or others don't "just fix" public education. But one thing I do think they all fail at is having public hearings where the Ferrebbe (sp?) asked direct questions about offerings in specific MS and HS and forced to be transparent.

One of the things that annoys me about the BASIS bashing on DCUM is that the school is THE most transparent school in DC. They tell you exactly what they are and are not and the tell you straight up that they don't want your suggestions for how to change. You can disagree with the approach, but you can't whine and complain when it turns out to be exactly what they told you it would be. See the person complaining that BASIS wouldn't change their curriculum for her Chinese nephew as an example.

You're painting with much too broad a brush. The BASIS admin team is young, inexperienced and composed of moving parts. In a school that's had 8 heads in 12 years and is essentially run from Arizona, you can't always sure who you're talking to, or who's going to follow up. The goal posts can move. When we were at BASIS, Chinese-speaking parents pushed to organize advanced Chinese middle school classes. This happened at least twice. One HOS would work with the parents, the next wouldn't necessarily. One school year, we cycled through 3 heads. Transparency wasn't the hallmark of that particular year. Maybe BASIS' leadership has stabilized now, but I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

You seem weirdly focused on age and not experience and qualifications. Also seems weird start your post with a statement of fact that the team "is young, inexperienced..." and then admit you don't know anything about the current team, and yet you still "wouldn't hold your breath". Here are some facts.

Current HOS has 2 Master's degrees in education and a J.D. He's in his 3rd year as HOS and has been at BASIS since 2014 in a series of more senior roles. Your indictment based on age alone would be no more valid than someone saying all long time DCPS admins are lazy re-treads. Some of them are. And many of them are committed admins who have been fighting DC Central to help kids for years.

The issue with "who you are talking to" is true of any school (company or business) anytime there are changes in leadership. Odd that you think this applies only to BASIS. Ask anyone who has ever had an IP or 504 in any school what happens when the admin or SPED group changes; you fight all over again. That's not a BASIS thing. Several DCPS schools have changed principals mid-year too. It sucks. But not a BASIS thing.

Yes, BASIS curriculum is handed down from on high in AZ. If you didn't know that when you entered then you weren't paying attention. That centralized and unwavering curriculum and rigor is the reason many BASIS families like the school; it is unencumbered by the constantly lowered standards of most of the DC schools (AP for everyone?).

Anonymous wrote:Push back, folks. Don’t let BASIS admins shortchange you when you ask for a reasonable option that’s widely available in well-run suburban public schools, particularly if granting your request that will cost the franchise precisely nothing. Don’t let Deal admins do the same. These are your tax dollars at work.

In a nutshell, we're never going to have better public schools unless more DC parents challenge policies limiting achievement.

Push back, folks. Don’t let BASIS admins shortchange you when you ask for a reasonable option that’s widely available in well-run suburban public schools that, particularly if granting your request that will cost the franchise precisely nothing. Don’t let Deal admins do the same. These are your tax dollars at work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the “woke” mostly genuinely believe that kids benefit from racial and socioeconomic integration and want better schools for everyone. its complex.

Too easy.

Your articulated goals are not defined in a such a manner as to be universally understood. For instance, what does "integration" mean? Does it mean that a school accurately reflects the make-up of the IB population? In which case some schools would be virtually all white with almost no economically disadvantaged. If not, then there's a disconnect between the IB preference system and the goals you so cavalierly throw around. Which begs the question, why are you so certain those are the goals if the people who set the system up did so in a manner that doesn't result in those goals being achieved?

What are "better schools"? Does that mean the bottom is brought up? The top are advanced even more so year after year? Both? Is a one point increase for a kid 2 grade levels below more valuable than a one point test increase for the kid already two grade levels above? Half as valuable? What's the proper ratio? Do we invest in more advanced classes or more remedial Special Ed resources? That is one of the main issues facing public education. Resources are finite; how many and in what percentage should they be brought to the fore for the most at risk vs those desiring advanced classes?

A necessary first step to solving for any issues is to first (1) agree on meaning of defined terms and (2) identify what 'success' looks like. The "woke" to whom I made (admittedly derisive) reference like to throw around platitudes and bumper sticker phrases and try and intimidate anyone who doesn't agree with their (ill defined) policy goals as racist or "Karens". They seek "equity" but they don't define it, and often times their definition is horribly regressive and equates to lowering standards and/or assuming economically disadvantaged and POC can't meet a higher standard.

These are all fair questions and I'll tell you where I (and I think many other DCPS parents) draw the line. We were deciding whether to move from the Hill to NWDC many many years ago. I went to a Wilson open house. They were very clear that their student body was large enough and academically strong enough that they could offer AP classes in every single subject (which is far more than many many small public HSs across the country will offer). But they had to dedicate their resources to their under-performing students. That meant very large class sizes for AP, with a much lower student-teacher ratio for the less advanced classes. Basically the message was, we welcome the academically advanced students and you can count on us to provide the coursework and the teachers. But don't expect small classes, hand-holding, or excellent college counseling. While I might prefer a school that could provide more of that, it was a trade-off I was willing to make in order to stay in DC, where our family was (and is) very happy. And I appreciated that the Wilson leadership (at least at the time, I don't know if this has changed), was up-front about all of it. We decided to move to NW for the Wilson option. There was no way in the world we would even consider sending our kids to Eastern, however, which didn't even offer AP or true honors classes in the first place (and whose description of "curriculum" on their website was rather confusing and concerning).

The transparency you experienced at Wilson is what is so seriously lacking today EOTP. No one really knows whether there are AP classes if they are "AP for all (read: not AP), actual tracking, super secret tracking, etc. I am certain DCPS behaves like this to avoid having to own any firm policy decisions and to be all things to all people, but it is hurting them more than they realize. I often make fun of people on DCUM who complain that Charles Allen or others don't "just fix" public education. But one thing I do think they all fail at is having public hearings where the Ferrebbe (sp?) asked direct questions about offerings in specific MS and HS and forced to be transparent.

One of the things that annoys me about the BASIS bashing on DCUM is that the school is THE most transparent school in DC. They tell you exactly what they are and are not and the tell you straight up that they don't want your suggestions for how to change. You can disagree with the approach, but you can't whine and complain when it turns out to be exactly what they told you it would be. See the person complaining that BASIS wouldn't change their curriculum for her Chinese nephew as an example.

You're painting with much too broad a brush. The BASIS admin team is young, inexperienced and composed of moving parts. In a school that's had 8 heads in 12 years and is essentially run from Arizona, you can't always sure who you're talking to, or who's going to follow up. The goal posts can move. When we were at BASIS, Chinese-speaking parents pushed to organize advanced Chinese middle school classes. This happened at least twice. One HOS would work with the parents, the next wouldn't necessarily. One school year, we cycled through 3 heads. Transparency wasn't the hallmark of that particular year. Maybe BASIS' leadership has stabilized now, but I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a nephew who left BASIS after 8th grade and a niece--they are siblings--who left Deal after 7th. Both have gone on to HS in Fairfax, one at TJ. When I asked my sibling what, in her experience, was the main difference between the DC public middle schools the family had experienced and Fairfax I found her answer interesting, "flexibility and respect for individual preferences."

BASIS wouldn't permit my nephew to study Chinese, which the family speaks at home, at an advanced level. He took beginning Chinese at BASIS to avoid being forced to study a new language, and wasn't permitted to take AP Chinese exam at BASIS in the 8th grade. My sibling registered him to take the AP at Sidwell, where he scored a 5. Fairfax lets him take college-level Chinese at a local community college (for free). Meanwhile, my niece wasn't permitted to take algebra in 6th grade at Deal, although she was ready for it, so my sibling signed her up for algebra with Stanford Pre-Collegiate studies on-line. Deal forced her to repeat algebra in 7th grade ("for scheduling purposes") and the rest of her middle school course work wasn't sufficiently challenging.

The family had enough and bailed for Fairfax. They've kept their NW house and plan to return post HS.

BASIS is up front about what they are and are not, offer and don't. So, to summarize, your sister/brother sent their kid to a school that doesn't offer advanced level Chinese or languages before 8th grade and were shocked to learn that the school didn't have special rules or offerings for them?

Tell me you are entitled without telling me.

You're reading comprehension skills are lacking. The family wasn't asking for support for advanced level Chinese. They were asking to be left alone to pursue it independently (without being forced to study beginning Spanish or another language from 8th grade). They asked if the kid could take AP Chinese at the school 8th grade and were told, no, not allowed. As background, BASIS allows "qualified" juniors and seniors to take AP Chinese on campus.

I wish DC had far more similarly entitled public school families, those who push back to forge a viable path to our nation's best universities via public schools. BASIS has a pronounced controlling bent that limits some of its most promising students, unlike top suburban high schools in this Metro area.

What? Here's what they wrote:

BASIS wouldn't permit my nephew to study Chinese, which the family speaks at home, at an advanced level. He took beginning Chinese at BASIS to avoid being forced to study a new language, and wasn't permitted to take AP Chinese exam at BASIS in the 8th grade.

They wanted the kid to be able to take a language class at a level they don't offer in 8th grade. That they didn't offer when the kid enrolled. They don't allow independent study in foreign language in MS. And they didn't when the kid enrolled.

They wanted the rules that were in place when they enrolled to not apply to them. Your defense is that they REALLY REALLY wanted it and/or they "just wanted to be left alone" to create an independent study curriculum that isn't offered.

Tell me you enjoy gaslighting without telling me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the “woke” mostly genuinely believe that kids benefit from racial and socioeconomic integration and want better schools for everyone. its complex.

Too easy.

Your articulated goals are not defined in a such a manner as to be universally understood. For instance, what does "integration" mean? Does it mean that a school accurately reflects the make-up of the IB population? In which case some schools would be virtually all white with almost no economically disadvantaged. If not, then there's a disconnect between the IB preference system and the goals you so cavalierly throw around. Which begs the question, why are you so certain those are the goals if the people who set the system up did so in a manner that doesn't result in those goals being achieved?

What are "better schools"? Does that mean the bottom is brought up? The top are advanced even more so year after year? Both? Is a one point increase for a kid 2 grade levels below more valuable than a one point test increase for the kid already two grade levels above? Half as valuable? What's the proper ratio? Do we invest in more advanced classes or more remedial Special Ed resources? That is one of the main issues facing public education. Resources are finite; how many and in what percentage should they be brought to the fore for the most at risk vs those desiring advanced classes?

A necessary first step to solving for any issues is to first (1) agree on meaning of defined terms and (2) identify what 'success' looks like. The "woke" to whom I made (admittedly derisive) reference like to throw around platitudes and bumper sticker phrases and try and intimidate anyone who doesn't agree with their (ill defined) policy goals as racist or "Karens". They seek "equity" but they don't define it, and often times their definition is horribly regressive and equates to lowering standards and/or assuming economically disadvantaged and POC can't meet a higher standard.

These are all fair questions and I'll tell you where I (and I think many other DCPS parents) draw the line. We were deciding whether to move from the Hill to NWDC many many years ago. I went to a Wilson open house. They were very clear that their student body was large enough and academically strong enough that they could offer AP classes in every single subject (which is far more than many many small public HSs across the country will offer). But they had to dedicate their resources to their under-performing students. That meant very large class sizes for AP, with a much lower student-teacher ratio for the less advanced classes. Basically the message was, we welcome the academically advanced students and you can count on us to provide the coursework and the teachers. But don't expect small classes, hand-holding, or excellent college counseling. While I might prefer a school that could provide more of that, it was a trade-off I was willing to make in order to stay in DC, where our family was (and is) very happy. And I appreciated that the Wilson leadership (at least at the time, I don't know if this has changed), was up-front about all of it. We decided to move to NW for the Wilson option. There was no way in the world we would even consider sending our kids to Eastern, however, which didn't even offer AP or true honors classes in the first place (and whose description of "curriculum" on their website was rather confusing and concerning).

The transparency you experienced at Wilson is what is so seriously lacking today EOTP. No one really knows whether there are AP classes if they are "AP for all (read: not AP), actual tracking, super secret tracking, etc. I am certain DCPS behaves like this to avoid having to own any firm policy decisions and to be all things to all people, but it is hurting them more than they realize. I often make fun of people on DCUM who complain that Charles Allen or others don't "just fix" public education. But one thing I do think they all fail at is having public hearings where the Ferrebbe (sp?) asked direct questions about offerings in specific MS and HS and forced to be transparent.

One of the things that annoys me about the BASIS bashing on DCUM is that the school is THE most transparent school in DC. They tell you exactly what they are and are not and the tell you straight up that they don't want your suggestions for how to change. You can disagree with the approach, but you can't whine and complain when it turns out to be exactly what they told you it would be. See the person complaining that BASIS wouldn't change their curriculum for her Chinese nephew as an example.

You can tell!! Look at the AP test score data on the DCPS site. If the vast majority of test takers are getting below a 3, they are not meaningfully limiting it to students who are prepared for that class. You can see the same with algebra classes for middle school - look at the proficiency data for PARCC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a nephew who left BASIS after 8th grade and a niece--they are siblings--who left Deal after 7th. Both have gone on to HS in Fairfax, one at TJ. When I asked my sibling what, in her experience, was the main difference between the DC public middle schools the family had experienced and Fairfax I found her answer interesting, "flexibility and respect for individual preferences."

BASIS wouldn't permit my nephew to study Chinese, which the family speaks at home, at an advanced level. He took beginning Chinese at BASIS to avoid being forced to study a new language, and wasn't permitted to take AP Chinese exam at BASIS in the 8th grade. My sibling registered him to take the AP at Sidwell, where he scored a 5. Fairfax lets him take college-level Chinese at a local community college (for free). Meanwhile, my niece wasn't permitted to take algebra in 6th grade at Deal, although she was ready for it, so my sibling signed her up for algebra with Stanford Pre-Collegiate studies on-line. Deal forced her to repeat algebra in 7th grade ("for scheduling purposes") and the rest of her middle school course work wasn't sufficiently challenging.

The family had enough and bailed for Fairfax. They've kept their NW house and plan to return post HS.

BASIS is up front about what they are and are not, offer and don't. So, to summarize, your sister/brother sent their kid to a school that doesn't offer advanced level Chinese or languages before 8th grade and were shocked to learn that the school didn't have special rules or offerings for them?

Tell me you are entitled without telling me.

You're reading comprehension skills are lacking. The family wasn't asking for support for advanced level Chinese. They were asking to be left alone to pursue it independently (without being forced to study beginning Spanish or another language from 8th grade). They asked if the kid could take AP Chinese at the school 8th grade and were told, no, not allowed. As background, BASIS allows "qualified" juniors and seniors to take AP Chinese on campus.

I wish DC had far more similarly entitled public school families, those who push back to forge a viable path to our nation's best universities via public schools. BASIS has a pronounced controlling bent that limits some of its most promising students, unlike top suburban high schools in this Metro area.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the “woke” mostly genuinely believe that kids benefit from racial and socioeconomic integration and want better schools for everyone. its complex.

Too easy.

Your articulated goals are not defined in a such a manner as to be universally understood. For instance, what does "integration" mean? Does it mean that a school accurately reflects the make-up of the IB population? In which case some schools would be virtually all white with almost no economically disadvantaged. If not, then there's a disconnect between the IB preference system and the goals you so cavalierly throw around. Which begs the question, why are you so certain those are the goals if the people who set the system up did so in a manner that doesn't result in those goals being achieved?

What are "better schools"? Does that mean the bottom is brought up? The top are advanced even more so year after year? Both? Is a one point increase for a kid 2 grade levels below more valuable than a one point test increase for the kid already two grade levels above? Half as valuable? What's the proper ratio? Do we invest in more advanced classes or more remedial Special Ed resources? That is one of the main issues facing public education. Resources are finite; how many and in what percentage should they be brought to the fore for the most at risk vs those desiring advanced classes?

A necessary first step to solving for any issues is to first (1) agree on meaning of defined terms and (2) identify what 'success' looks like. The "woke" to whom I made (admittedly derisive) reference like to throw around platitudes and bumper sticker phrases and try and intimidate anyone who doesn't agree with their (ill defined) policy goals as racist or "Karens". They seek "equity" but they don't define it, and often times their definition is horribly regressive and equates to lowering standards and/or assuming economically disadvantaged and POC can't meet a higher standard.

These are all fair questions and I'll tell you where I (and I think many other DCPS parents) draw the line. We were deciding whether to move from the Hill to NWDC many many years ago. I went to a Wilson open house. They were very clear that their student body was large enough and academically strong enough that they could offer AP classes in every single subject (which is far more than many many small public HSs across the country will offer). But they had to dedicate their resources to their under-performing students. That meant very large class sizes for AP, with a much lower student-teacher ratio for the less advanced classes. Basically the message was, we welcome the academically advanced students and you can count on us to provide the coursework and the teachers. But don't expect small classes, hand-holding, or excellent college counseling. While I might prefer a school that could provide more of that, it was a trade-off I was willing to make in order to stay in DC, where our family was (and is) very happy. And I appreciated that the Wilson leadership (at least at the time, I don't know if this has changed), was up-front about all of it. We decided to move to NW for the Wilson option. There was no way in the world we would even consider sending our kids to Eastern, however, which didn't even offer AP or true honors classes in the first place (and whose description of "curriculum" on their website was rather confusing and concerning).

The transparency you experienced at Wilson is what is so seriously lacking today EOTP. No one really knows whether there are AP classes if they are "AP for all (read: not AP), actual tracking, super secret tracking, etc. I am certain DCPS behaves like this to avoid having to own any firm policy decisions and to be all things to all people, but it is hurting them more than they realize. I often make fun of people on DCUM who complain that Charles Allen or others don't "just fix" public education. But one thing I do think they all fail at is having public hearings where the Ferrebbe (sp?) asked direct questions about offerings in specific MS and HS and forced to be transparent.

One of the things that annoys me about the BASIS bashing on DCUM is that the school is THE most transparent school in DC. They tell you exactly what they are and are not and the tell you straight up that they don't want your suggestions for how to change. You can disagree with the approach, but you can't whine and complain when it turns out to be exactly what they told you it would be. See the person complaining that BASIS wouldn't change their curriculum for her Chinese nephew as an example.