- Muriel Bowser won’t debate David Catania until late summer [FOCUS mentioned]
- Bowser nixes June education debate organized by FOCUS [FOCUS mentioned]
- Contributor forum: Changes in school boundaries and feeder patterns
- Catania Helps Secure Additional $77M for D.C. Schools
- DCPS releases full school lottery data
- D.C. school system receives waiver for two snow days
- A year in the lives of two DC schools: a Q&A with the author of a new book [Mundo Verde PCS mentioned]
Muriel Bowser won’t debate David Catania until late summer [FOCUS mentioned]
The Washington Post
By Mike Debonis
April 8, 2014
Those of you chomping at the bit to watch Democratic mayoral nominee Muriel Bowser go toe-to-toe with presumptive independent candidate David A. Catania will have to wait at least a few months.
A charter-school advocacy group — Friends of Choice in Urban Schools, or FOCUS — in recent days explored hosting an education-oriented mayoral candidate forum sometime in June. But the Bowser campaign declined Monday, making clear the Democrat has no plans to publicly engage with Catania until he qualifies for the Nov. 4 general-election ballot.
“Once the field is set, we’ll look at the invitations that come in,” said Bo Shuff, Bowser’s campaign manager. That policy would preclude any debates or joint forums before a ballot petition deadline passes on Aug. 6, and it could mean no such events until early September, when the petition challenge period expires.
Shuff said his candidate assumed a similar posture ahead of the primary election, though that is not entirely true: Bowser participated in at least one forum several weeks before the petition deadline.
And while Catania, an at-large D.C. Council member who has qualified for citywide ballots five times previously, would seem to have proven the capacity to collect the necessary 3,000 voter signatures, Shuff said that is of no moment: “It’s not about questioning David Catania’s ability to get on the ballot. Like we did in the primary. we’re going to wait until the field is set.”
Ben Young, Catania’s campaign manager, said the explanation amounted to “an excuse to avoid a debate, plain and simple” and that voters “deserve better.”
“Our next mayor can’t be afraid to engage in a respectful exchange of ideas about how to secure the city’s future,” he said. “We just witnessed a primary nearly 100 percent focused on scandal, and voters responded by tuning out and staying home. Now is our chance to re-engage them with a substantive debate about the issues they care about.”
During a Friday appearance on WAMU-FM, Bowser was questioned on her intentions regarding potential future debates and forums.
“I don’t run away from people asking questions,” she said, before questioning just how competitive her contest with Catania actually is, referencing recent polls showing her leading by 20 points or more in a head-to-head race. “We’re going to participate in forums. … Our goal, of course, is to make sure as many people as possible get to hear my views.”
Michael Musante, FOCUS’s director of government relations, says the group is still hoping to host a forum, though questions of date and format remain unresolved. “We’re just in the early stage of talking to these campaigns and will also be inviting other official candidates to participate,” he said in an e-mail.
Bowser nixes June education debate organized by FOCUS [FOCUS mentioned]
The Examiner
By Mark Lerner
April 9, 2014
The local charter movement is awash with questions regarding the future of public policies regarding their school system. For example, will surplus DCPS buildings continue to be turned over to them? Will the next Administration adhere to the recommendations of the Advocacy Study or start from scratch regarding funding inequities between charters and the traditional schools? Will the new Mayor impose a neighborhood preference regarding enrollment? Will the facility allotment increase for the first time in years as proposed in Mr. Gray's budget or will it remain at $3,000 per student each term? Will Kaya Henderson, who is charter school friendly, remain in her job as Chancellor or be replaced? Most importantly, is there any possibility that D.C. will follow New York state's lead in guaranteeing charters permanent homes?
Therefore, it would be nice to hear Miss Bowser's and Mr. Catania's positions on these and other matters. So Friends of Choice in Urban Schools invited the two major Mayoral candidates to debate these issues sometime in June. Only one problem, Councilwoman Bowser turned them down.
Apparently, her campaign has said that they will wait until Councilman Catania is officially the independent candidate for office. The sparring will therefore not occur before August 6th, according to the Washington Post's Mike DeBonis, which is the deadline for ballot petitions, or until the first part of September when the end is reached for petition challenges.
Miss Bowser's campaign manager Bo Shuff stated to Mr. DeBonis that she is following the same process adhered to during the Democratic primary. But the Post reporter revealed that Miss Bowser actually participated in a candidate debate shortly before the petition deadline was reached. In any case, there are so many important concerns at the forefront of public education we should get an opportunity to compare and contrast the opinions of these two individuals as soon as possible. It always takes longer than might be expected for voters to become acquainted with the viewpoints of those running.
Let's hope Miss Bowser changes her mind and allows the education debate to proceed in June.
Contributor forum: Changes in school boundaries and feeder patterns
Greater Greater Education
By Natalie Wexler
April 8, 2014
The DC Advisory Committee on Student Assignment released its proposals for changing school boundaries and feeder patterns on Saturday. It's a subject that evokes strong emotions and opinions.
The committee, spearheaded by the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Education (DME), floated three different scenarios reflecting different combinations of policy objectives.
One example (Example B) would basically retain the current system of geographic boundaries and assigned schools, albeit with some changes. Most significantly, schools would set aside between 10% and 20% of their seats, depending on grade level, for out-of-boundary students whose assigned school is "low-performing."
The other two proposals (Examples A and C) would use combinations of "choice sets" and lotteries for some grade levels. In a choice set situation, families would apply to several schools within a certain boundary and would be guaranteed a slot in one of them, but not necessarily their first choice. In Example A, elementary-level choice sets might include charter schools.
Lotteries might have preferences for proximity, low-performing assigned schools, and other factors. In both Examples A and C, admission to high school would be by citywide lottery only.
Do these proposals provide enough predictability to families who have made decisions about where to live based on existing boundaries? Do they go too far in trying to use the assignment process to promote equity? Or not far enough? Our contributors weigh in below, and we invite you to use the comments to join the conversation.
Sandra Moscoso: I'm really impressed by the massive organization on the DME's part that is going into this effort. Regardless of how I feel about components of the policy examples, I can at least begin to envision scenarios.
The fact that the DME's team is also publishing data behind this makes me hopeful that ideas will also come from parents and advocates who may not be directly involved in the committees, focus groups, or working groups.
On charter coordination: If including elementary charters in choice sets is on the table, that should be applicable to all charters, not just those who choose to participate. And in EVERY meeting I attended leading up to Saturday's working group, someone raised the misalignment of grades between DCPS and charters. [Charters often start middle school at 5th grade, but DCPS starts it at 6th.] Why is this not reflected in any of the policy examples?
On citywide schools: The working group questionnaires put forth proximity preference for secondary citywide schools and NOT for elementary citywide schools. As the parent of both elementary and middle school students, I can confirm that proximity is much more important when getting a younger child to school.
With two proposals making all high schools lottery-only, I wonder if serious consideration is being given to removing high schools from the feeder track. The value of predictability is very quickly lost in that scenario. I sincerely hope this is not how this process will end.
Allison Link: I would be incredibly disappointed if Policy Example A were adopted. Eliminating neighborhood schools altogether would be a bad idea on several fronts. I currently work as a teacher's assistant at Anne Beers Elementary School, and several of the kids I work with are second- or even third-generation Beers students. This policy would almost completely sever this meaningful tie between families, their communities, and their schools that remains prevalent in DCPS.
Additionally, if parents moving into a neighborhood don't know which school their child will attend, the number of young families who choose to stay in DC as their children reach elementary age will diminish drastically.
Finally, a policy based on school choice would likely eliminate academic diversity altogether from DCPS schools, as the most accomplished and/or aggressive students and parents would clamor for the highest quality schools. DCPS already suffers from significant racial and socioeconomic segregation, and this policy would probably worsen that.
At the same time, holding onto the current neighborhood-school-only policy ignores the significant and lasting presence of charter schools in the DC area. For this reason, Example B doesn't sit well with me either. It essentially ignores several of the problems we already face, such as the flight of families as their children reach middle-school age, and the low in-boundary percentages of many schools on the east side of town.
These thoughts might point me in the direction of Example C, but unfortunately I don't think this compromise proposal totally gets the job done either. If students are entirely unsure of what high school they will attend, they might be unable to develop relationships with friends and future teachers/coaches/mentors through their siblings or older friends.
I like the idea of a lottery-based middle school system, as it would allow DCPS to spread its resources more evenly among middle schools across the district. But I wonder if we should then have a specific high school that students would attend once they get their middle school through a lottery.
David Alpert: Setting aside 10% of seats at a school for lower-income students seems like a great idea. The percentage probably should be 25%, but maybe 10% is what they could get.
I think having predictability is important. The pattern in DC of parents getting their kids into a good elementary school and then spending every year trying to get into a good middle school seems destructive. Parents should know where their kids will go to middle school.
Martin Moulton: I get the idea of a lottery-only high school scheme. High-schoolers can get around on their own. It would also give them a greater appreciation for the diversity of the city. BUT we don't yet have enough high-performing seats to make that work.
With all the low income/black families in the District, I'm not clear on why a 25% low-income set-aside would be such a stretch. There is surely a tipping point when it's probably counterproductive. But the small subset of those who need extra services will be better served in a 25%/75% arrangement than being warehoused with more students in need of extra attention and services.
Below high school, there should be more predictability. And we must simply stop acting as if the nation's capital is a small southern hamlet rather than an international city. Every student needs to be at least bilingual.
I don't have a dog in this race. And I realize many people are invested in their community/feeder expectations. But those special interests should have ZERO impact on how the system is designed for the future success of public schools.
Catania Helps Secure Additional $77M for D.C. Schools
The Washington Informer
By Dorothy Rowley
April 8, 2014
D.C.'s public schools system is about to receive more than $77 million to assist thousands of needy and at-risk students, partly due to Council Member David Catania's Fair Funding Act legislation.
Catania, an at-large independent who chairs the council's education committee, said the funds have been added to the proposed budget for fiscal 2015.
"With the release of the proposed fiscal year 2015 budget, we will deliver the resources needed to begin to address the real barriers that stand in the way of our most challenged students and academic success," said Catania, who is running for mayor in the Nov. 4 general election.
According to Catania's legislation, which was passed by the D.C. Council, "at-risk" students are those who are homeless, within the foster care system, eligible for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), or high school students above the expected age for their grade. A combined 37,000 students in both public and charter schools fall under one or more of these categories.
"After visiting 132 of our public schools and speaking with educators and parents, it is clear that we must act now to address the impacts of poverty and inequity in our city," he said. "The Fair Funding Act [is one of] the first steps in moving us down the path toward ensuring that every student in every school receives a high quality education, with no exceptions."
In addition to Catania's work reforming the city's public schools, he is also credited with helping the District to claim the lowest rate of uninsured children in the nation, as well as boasting the second-lowest uninsured rate for all individuals.
DCPS releases full school lottery data
The Washington Post
By Emma Brown
April 8, 2014
A week after D.C. parents found out how they fared in the District’s citywide school enrollment lottery, the traditional school system has released more data meant to give a fuller picture of how the lottery played out across the city.
Parents can now see how many children applied for slots at each grade level at each DCPS school; how many got in; and who among those admitted and those waitlisted had a preference in the lottery, such as a sibling already enrolled at the school.
It’s the same information that the school system has made available in previous years, but it was not released this year, the first year that all traditional and most charter schools joined together in a common lottery. Parents complained, arguing that the school-by-school data not only helps them judge the chances of getting off a waitlist, but also provides transparency that’s necessary for families to trust that the lottery is fair.
The data show the wide disparity in demand for schools around the city. For example, Aiton Elementary, a long-struggling school east of the Anacostia River, has 37 preschool slots available for three-year-olds, but only 11 of those slots were filled through the lottery. Janney Elementary in Northwest, one of the more highly sought-after schools in the city, filled all 78 of its prekindergarten slots. Janney waitlisted more than 300 children, including dozens who live within the school’s attendance zone (preschoolers are not guaranteed the right to attend their neighborhood school).
Click here to find lottery data on all DCPS schools.
Each of the city’s dozens of charter schools will decide whether to release the same information, said Deputy Mayor for Education Abigail Smith. Charters are not required to release those data, and schools that are not highly sought-after may not want to advertise that fact by publicizing application numbers.
D.C. school system receives waiver for two snow days
The Washington Post
By Emma Brown
April 8, 2014
D.C. Public Schools students will not have to make up two of this year’s six snow days, officials said Monday.
The last day of school will be Friday, June 20, originally a professional development day for teachers and now a full instructional day.
City schools are required to have class 180 days a year, but the school system was granted a waiver from that requirement because of the unusually large number of school days that were canceled for inclement weather this past winter.
Students made up one snow day when they went to school March 28, which was supposed to be a work day for teachers and a day off for children. Monday, June 2 has been converted from a day for parent-teacher conferences into an instructional day, and Thursday, June 19, has been lengthened from a half-day to a full day.
The waiver means students will not have to make up the class time they missed when school was closed March 3 and March 24.
The District’s schools close less often for weather than most surrounding school systems, all of which have had to reconfigure their schedules to handle the large number of snow days this winter.
A year in the lives of two DC schools: a Q&A with the author of a new book [Mundo Verde PCS mentioned]
Greater Greater Education
By Natalie Wexler
April 8, 2014
A new book takes an in-depth look at two DC schools: a DCPS school in a gentrifying neighborhood that is struggling to improve, and a charter school navigating its first year.
Sam Chaltain, an education activist and blogger, has written Our School: Searching for Community in the Era of Choice, scheduled for release later this month. It focuses on a year in the lives of Bancroft Elementary School, in Mt. Pleasant, and Mundo Verde, a bilingual charter school that has adopted a progressive "expeditionary learning" approach.
Chaltain embedded himself deeply in both schools, and the result is an almost novelistic exploration of what teachers, administrators, parents, and students at these schools experienced.
The narrative sometimes breaks away from these detailed stories to consider larger questions like the effect of high-stakes testing on instruction and the role of freedom in education. And a 15-page epilogue catalogs Chaltain's recommendations for change.
The result is an engaging and thought-provoking book that raises some timely questions. Here are his answers to some of them.
What motivated you to write this book? What questions were you hoping to answer?
So much of the conversation about school reform today is contentious and two-dimensional, and we'll never figure out how to reimagine public education if we continue to fight over whether unions are great or horrible, or whether school choice is the devil or angel incarnate. It's more complicated than that.
I wanted to paint a personal, yearlong story about what it's like to be a teacher, a student, or a parent at this moment in time, with the hope that doing so might help people better see the state of modern school reform as it is—and begin to hint at what it ought to be.
How did you choose the two schools that you wrote about?
I chose Mundo Verde because I believed that the thoroughness of their overall plan would carry them through the inevitable first-year challenges and speed bumps; I wasn't interested in chronicling a story of failure.
And I chose Bancroft because I wanted a public school that was neither a de facto private school—based on location—nor a school that was struggling to survive. Plus, Bancroft is located in a neighborhood that features both million-dollar homes and public housing, which means it brings together a diverse cross-section of the city.
You recently co-authored an op-ed in the Washington Post advocating more socioeconomic diversity in DC's schools. How diverse were the schools in the book, and do you feel that diversity made a difference to the schools' level of achievement?
Both schools are extremely diverse, but I think focusing on the schools' levels of achievement is the wrong way to assess the value of having such diversity.
These days, the word "achievement" has actually come to mean just two things—student reading and math scores—and how well or poorly students score on those exams can almost always be predicted by their socioeconomic status. That doesn't mean test scores don't matter; it just means that the way we use them now overstates their value.
Once we view school quality through a wider lens, I think the value of greater socioeconomic diversity becomes clear. The public school system is the only institution that is guaranteed to reach 90% of every generation, and it was founded to help young people become active and productive members of a democratic society.
It's harder to do that when you're the only "anything" in a school community, or if everyone around you comes from similar circumstances. And that's why I believe we all benefit when we feel a sense of shared ownership for our schools and, by extension, our children.
What advantages or disadvantages did you see to being a charter school rather than a DCPS school, and vice versa?
One of the more interesting things I learned over the course of writing Our School was that to a large degree, each sector—the charter community on one side, and DCPS on the other—is in need of the other's core strength.
In the charter world, for example, there's so much energy and creativity, in large part because, for better and for worse, everything is being reinvented, from the professional development calendar to the school report card.
What charters lack, however, are the advantages of scale, which is why you see groups of them banding together to defray, say, the total costs of special ed or content specialists.
Of course, scale is precisely what the districts have in spades—but that scale can (and has) come with a cost. Lots of key decisions get made too far from the individual school or classroom, and that distance ends up having a sort of stultifying effect.
So what would it take to unleash the innovative spirit and autonomy of a charter school within the system of a citywide district? Well, this is essentially what they have in Boston, where a certain number of "pilot schools" within the district have charter-like autonomy. I profiled a year in the life of one of these schools, and you can see for yourself what it engendered.
But DC is its own unique entity, and what excites me most about the future is the level of collaboration that exists between DCPS and the charter community. Can these two systems find a way to interact in the interest of creating more high-quality public schools?
Can our city's policies start to incentivize educators to tend to the full range of our children's developmental needs—and stop pretending that the only thing that matters is a narrow slice of their cognitive growth? And can we find a way to make our public school system(s) the foundation of a deeper commitment to a more equitable, vibrant civic life for us all?
Our School was not written to answer all of those questions. But I do hope it helps spark some more fruitful dialogue that can point us all in the right direction. Now is the time.