FOCUS DC News Wire 11/4/13

 

 

The century-old building now housing the Carlos Rosario International Public Charter School (1100 Harvard Street NW) may soon become a historic landmark.

 

The Design Review Committee of Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANC) 1B/U Street voted 4 - 1 to support the petition by Historic Washington Architecture, Inc., to DC's Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB) to have the building declared a landmark. The vote took place at the Design Review Committee's meeting of October 28.

 

Kent Boese, President of Historic Washington Architecture, Inc., appeared before ANC2B to make the request. Boese is also chair of ANC 1A/Columbia Heights.

 

Boese explained the building was designed in 1910 by Snowden Ashford, a noted Washington architect. Although a designer of many DC schools, Ashford's most well-known building may be the North Hall expansion of Eastern Market.

 

The school started operation in 1913 and was originally known as the Washington Normal School. Later, it was called the James Ormand Wilson Normal School, after the then-superintendent of DC schools. It was a whites-only school in segregated Washington, dedicated largely to teacher preparation.

 

The application for historic protection outlines the school's more recent history:

After sitting vacant for a period, the property was leased to the Carlos Rosario International Public Charter School in 2001. At that time, the school was an abandoned shell with broken windows. So the school embarked on an $18 million renovation. Upon completion, the school moved into the building in 2004.

 

The DC government owns this property. However, the DC has decided charter schools are not subject to historic preservation rules to the same extent as schools run directly by the city. Boese explained this gave the school the freedom put on a new glass atrium at the front entrance of the building (see photo) without seeking HPRB approval. 

 

If the school became a listed landmark, it would become more difficult to make  further changes to the appearance of the building. However, existing changes would remain.

 

The school is in ANC1B district 09. The Commissioner is James Turner. Turner sent a message to the committee asking for support for the application.

 

The Design Review Committee's recommendation will go to the full ANC1B for approval. Their next scheduled meeting is Thursday, November 7, at 7pm, at the Reeves Center (14th and U Streets). 

 

The application for historic landmark status is available as a 28-page .pdf file here.

 

 

The Washington D.C. (District) charter school scorecard shows improvements in a number of areas, truancy, suspensions, and math and reading scores. 

 

Truancy by students, a trend that school officials wish to eradicate in the Washington D.C. public school system, including charter schools, has improved. 

 

During the 2013 school year the Districts charter schools accounted for 21 percent of the 2,482 truant students, according to recent testimony by Brenda Donald, Director of the Child and Family Services Agency during a hearing before the Council of the District. 

 

The attendance rate for D.C.’s charter school was 91 percent for the 2013 school year, which is an improvement from the 89 percent of the prior school year, according to a D.C. Public Charter School Board (PCSB) powerpoint presentation.

 

Less Misconduct

Charter schools deal with truancy and student misconduct just like traditional public schools. During 2013, 0.5 percent of charter school students were expelled, a decrease of 0.2 percent over the prior year. 

 

Overall, 186 students were expelled during the 2013 school year, down from 227 students during the 2012 school year, according to a PCSB powerpoint, published by the Washington Post.

 

Above Average Scores

A comparison between traditional and charter schools in the District showed that charter school students scored higher in math and reading during the last school year.

 

The District’s charter school students “performed well above the state average in math and reading on the District of Columbia Comprehensive Assessment System (DC CAS) tests,” according to a report released in mid-2013 by PCSB. 

 

Scores were up by 3.9 percent in math and reading during the last school year and were higher than the District’s proficiency average. 

 

English language learners, economically disadvantaged, special education, as well as racial and ethnic subgroups, saw improvement in their reading and math skills. 

 

“What we see in these result is Charter schools helping to close the achievement gap in DC,” stated John H. McKoy, chair of the PCSB.

 

Student Population

The total D.C. school population for the 2013 school year amounted to 45,557 students, including exchange and evening students. 

 

Charter schools enrolled 36,823 students for the 2014 school year, which is approximately 44 percent of the Districts total school population. Enrollment for charter schools increased by 6.2 percent over the 2013 school year, according to PCSB. 

 

Scott Pearson, executive director of PCSB, said in a recent press release, “A strength of charter schools is to offer a diverse array of programs, choices and options … These latest enrollment figures show that parents and students are taking advantage of these options.” 

 

History

It has been about seventeen years since in 1996, since an amendment to the Washington D.C. School Reform Act of 1995 established PCSB. However, the D.C. Board of Education (BOE) retained oversight over the Districts charter schools. 

 

In 2007, the former mayor of D.C., Adrian Fenty, assumed responsibility over the traditional D.C. public school system and assigned oversight of D.C.’s charter school to PCSB.

 

The Nation’s Charter Schools

According to the National Education Association (NEA), “Charter schools are publicly funded elementary or secondary schools that have been freed from some of the rules, regulations, and statutes that apply to other public schools.” 

 

Charter schools offer new and creative teaching methods. Traditional public schools may adopt these methods if they were successful in improving student scores. 

 

Charter school educational authorities lay down specific results, which are defined in the schools charter. The authorities that granted the charter reviews it every three to five years for compliance and the charter may be revoked for non-compliance. 

 

The first two charter schools were established in Minnesota in 1991. By 2004, there were 3,000 charter schools, enrolling 750,000 students, in 37 states, D.C. and Puerto Rico according to the NEA. 

 

According to data from the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), 5.34 percent of all U.S. schools are charter schools, which are a small portion of all U.S. schools.

 

National Scorecard

The curricular freedom enjoyed by charters schools does not always translate into improved test scores. Between 1991 and 2004, over 400 charter schools were closed nationwide because their performance was not up to par. 

 

In the Final Nation’s Report Card, published in 2004, the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) stated that overall the achievement scores of students from charter schools were lower than those of students in traditional schools. 

 

However, according to a 2013 National Charter School Study by Stanford University, “Charter schools now advance the learning gains of their students’ more than traditional public schools in reading.” 

 

Additionally, charter school students math skills are on par with students from traditional public schools.

 

The Stanford study shows that disadvantaged students, such as those from impoverished homes, special education students, English language learners and black students benefit the most from attending a charter school.

 

 

When I started tutoring students in writing at a high-poverty D.C. public high school this year, I was prepared to run into some problems. I knew it was hard for an overworked teacher with a class of 25 or 30 students to engage in the kind of one-on-one work that teaching writing often requires. That’s why I volunteered to help.

 

Still, I was shocked by what I found. Even though I’ve generally worked with the school’s higher-performing students, I’ve encountered some who aren’t familiar with terms such as “subject” and “verb.” A number don’t know why “Although I read the book” isn’t a complete sentence.

 

But the problems go deeper than ignorance of the rules of grammar, spelling and punctuation. Many students have no idea how to write a paragraph that hangs together, let alone a coherent five-paragraph essay. They don’t understand how to draw a connection between a claim and a piece of evidence, a basic necessity in constructing a logical argument.

 

These aren’t just writing skills. These are thinking skills of the type the students will need to succeed in college, on the job or even just to dispute a charge on a credit card bill — and to knowledgeably exercise their right to vote.

 

I have no reason to believe that the level of writing at the school where I’ve been tutoring is worse than at any other high-poverty D.C. high school — or any other high-poverty school in the country, for that matter. Expository writing skills simply haven’t been taught in many elementary schools for the past 30 years or so. Instead, what has been taught, at some schools, is self-expression: stories, poems, personal essays. That approach may get kids to embrace the idea of writing, but it doesn’t teach them how to write. One of my students showed me a poem she composed that was so powerful it took my breath away, but she couldn’t write a logical paragraph to save her life.

 

These widespread problems are about to become painfully apparent. The District and 45 states have adopted the Common Core standards, which put much more emphasis on explanatory and analytical writing skills. Beginning next year, D.C. students will be taking new standardized tests that require them to demonstrate those skills. Scores will probably plummet.

 

Shortly before I started tutoring in January, I came across an article in the Atlantic magazine about a writing program that had produced dramatic effects at a low-performing high school on Staten Island. The program, devised by an educator named Judith Hochman, had students writing in history and science as well as English, using a format that was both structured and adaptable. The number of students taking college-level courses more than doubled, classroom discussions grew more sophisticated and the graduation rate rose from 63 percent before the writing program began to an expected 80 percent this year.

 

I tried some of the program’s techniques with the students I was tutoring and immediately saw their potential. One exercise requires students to complete a sentence “stem” using the conjunctions “but,” “because” and “so.” Because one of my students was writing about Jackie Robinson, I gave him the stem, “Jackie Robinson was an admirable person.” I had to explain what the word “admirable” meant, but then I could almost see the wheels in his brain turning as he came up with various endings. Even an exercise as simple as using “but” requires you to analyze, compare and contrast.

 

I’ve also seen the power of the technique to boost reading comprehension, something that’s generally tested using multiple-choice questions. But there’s nothing like summarizing a text in writing to force you to really understand it.

 

Last spring I found out that D.C. Public Schools (DCPS) was considering experimenting with Hochman’s program, and I jumped at the chance to help fund the effort through a small family foundation for which I’m a trustee. This year the program is being piloted in two middle schools and two high schools. The Atlantic article sparked a lot of interest in the Hochman Project, but DCPS is, to its credit, the only school district in the country that is trying to implement it on a large scale.

 

There’s no guarantee, of course, that the program will work here the way it did in New York. It requires commitment and enthusiasm from teachers and administrators. And in some cases, students who have not yet mastered the skill of writing a coherent sentence are being asked to write analytical essays. That’s like asking them to run a marathon while they’re learning how to walk.

 

But it’s worth a try. I know there are students in these schools who are hungry to learn. Teaching them to write has the power to unlock their intelligence in a way that teaching them to answer multiple-choice questions can never accomplish. And if we keep telling them they can go to college, we owe it to them to provide them with the skills they’ll need to survive once they get there.

 

 

Less than one in five third-graders from low-income families score at or above the national average in math, reading and science assessments, and only about half maintain a healthy weight and are in “excellent” or “very good” health.

 

That compares with about half of children from higher-income families who are scoring above average on standardized tests and 62 percent of children from wealthier families who are in very good health.

 

Such disparities in early achievement and health are ­illustrated in a report by the Annie E. Casey Foundation called “The First Eight Years: Giving Kids a Foundation for Lifetime Success.” The report, which is being released Monday, tracks children’s well-being across multiple areas and in every state.

 

The report argues that for all children to have a strong foundation, they need better access to quality early care and education, and coordinated health care and support services for their families.

 

Policy recommendations include stronger parental leave policies, mental-health services for new mothers and broader access to quality, affordable day care and preschool .

 

“All children need nurturing and plentiful opportunities to develop during their crucial first eight years,” said Patrick McCarthy, president and chief executive of the foundation.

 

“Today’s complicated world can strain families’ ability to ensure their children are receiving all the stimulation and care they need to develop to their full potential,” he said.

 

The report shows that children from low-income families are less likely to perform well in social and emotional skills, such as exhibiting self-control (63 percent compared with 75 percent of children from wealthier families) and are less likely to show interest and participate in learning activities (66 percent compared with 80 percent).

 

The study draws on data from the government-funded Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, which tracks children over time.

 

Nearly half of children 8 years old and younger are living in low-income households, according to the report. The poverty marker is defined as those with incomes below 200 percent of the 2012 federal poverty threshold, or $46,566 for a family of two adults and two children.

 

That includes 42 percent of children in the District, 34 percent of those in Maryland and 38 percent in Virginia.

 

Mississippi has the highest proportion of children 8 and younger considered low-income — 63 percent.