Category Listing
Blog Roll
Smiling children looking up towards camera
Find a Charter School
Choose a school type from the menu below to begin your search.
Get Connected With PCSB
PCSBlog
Sort By: Title   |   Blog Date

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

State Board to Vote on Attendance Rules; PCSB Has Concerns

UPDATE: The State Board of Education (SBOE) decided Wednesday (4/17) to allow further public comments on the proposed rulemaking, tabling the issue until at least the time of their May meeting. PCSB will continue to work with the SBOE and to ensure that the final regulations are in the best interest of all stakeholders.


PCSB recognizes that attendance and truancy are important issues. PCSB tracks student absences and shares the data with city agencies and the public. We have also recently begun making these data public and are pleased to report that truancy rates at charter schools are lower this year than last.

The State Board of Education is also considering this issue, and is scheduled to hold a final vote the night of April 17 on rules pertaining to mandatory school attendance. PCSB strongly supports efforts to improve attendance and reduce truancy; however, we continue to have concerns about how these regulations may impact PCSB’s oversight of public charter schools.

We have shared PCSB’s concerns, and also made suggestions to the State Board, most recently in an April 15 letter and look forward to working collaboratively with Office of the State Superintendent of Education and the State Board on effectively addressing this issue.


Posted by: PCSB at
 | permalink





Tuesday, March 05, 2013

High Schools as “Dropout Factories”: Fact or Fiction?

There’s been some increased focus as of late on “dropout factories,” a term that refers to high schools that do not graduate a significant portion of their students. U.S. Secretary for Education Arne S. Duncan appeared last month with Alma Powell and America’s Promise, which is working on the issue of high school completion.

Then comes a recent Washington Examiner article on “Dropout Factories” that cites a report by the Alliance for Excellent Education saying, “The number of ‘dropout factory’ high schools in the District has shot up in the past decade, defying state trends nationwide.”

The piece went on to state that DC had 13 “dropout factories” in 2011 and in 2010, of which five were DC charter schools.  

Here’s the problem: Dropout factory is defined as a school with a graduating class less than 60% the size of the freshman class. So if students transfer from the school, and graduate from somewhere else, they are still counted as a “dropout” under this crude measure -- unless the school fills that transferring student’s seat with another student.

This measure has long been supplanted by a more sophisticated way of measuring dropouts, known as the Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate.  Under ACGR, which is now the national standard for measuring graduation rates, a student who transfers out is not counted as a dropout if there is documentation that the student enrolled in another high school

According to the outdated way of measuring high school graduation rates, which five charter schools in 2010 qualified as “dropout factories?” Kamit PCS; William E Doar, Jr. PCS;  IDEA PCS; Cesar Chavez Capitol Hill PCS and Thurgood Marshall PCS.

Let’s take a moment to review the record on each of those:

  • Kamit was closed by PCSB for poor academic performance.
  • William E. Doar, Jr. voluntarily closed their high school for poor academic performance.
  • IDEA PCS is executing a turnaround plan after a threatened closure by PCSB.  The school’s graduation rate in 2012 was 78 percent  using ACGR  - 17 percentage points higher than the DC average.
  • Cesar Chavez Capitol Hill had a 2012 graduation rate of 64 percent - far too low, but higher than the DC average.
  • Thurgood Marshall Academy PCS has a 2012 graduation rate of 78 percent - again, 17 percentage points higher than the DC average.

In sum, the article uses outdated data and methodology to claim that there are five charter school “dropout factories” in DC.    Indeed a review of 2012 graduation rates for all DC high schools shows that there are just two charter schools with graduation rates below the state average of 61 percent. Meanwhile, charter school graduation rates in DC are 77 percent.  Far from being “dropout factories”, DC charter high schools are raising graduation rates across the city.


Posted by: PCSB at
 | permalink





Saturday, February 16, 2013

No Screening in DC

Friday Reuters published an article raising some disturbing issues concerning the way some charter schools around the nation create barriers to certain families.  The Reuters article describes how certain charter schools require for applicants such things as lengthy essays, birth certificates, mandatory interviews, documentation of disabilities, or letters of reference.

Such requirements create subtle and not-so-subtle barriers to families.  They violate the core principle that charter schools are public schools, open to all students.  

These types of barriers are not permitted in DC.

PCSB for the past several years has reviewed the application forms of all DC charter schools.  We reject any application forms that request more than such basic information as name, address, age, grade level, and the presence of a sibling in a school.  Schools may not ask for information on special education status, disciplinary history, or family income.  They may not create barriers to students applying to their schools.

PCSB goes beyond this.  We call schools posing as parents with special needs students who wish to apply to the school.  We document whether the school puts up barriers or counsels students to apply elsewhere, and then work with the school to correct their practices.  (For the record, we find very few violations.)

Once a student has applied, the school holds a lottery if they have more applicants for a grade than they have spaces.   If a student wins the lottery and is admitted, the school may then ask for more extensive information to enable them to properly serve the admitted student.  This includes income (for free lunch qualification), and special education status (so that the school can immediately begin delivering appropriate special education services.)

The Reuters article raises troubling issues that policy makers and legislators need to look into urgently.  It's important to note that the practices they document are already prohibited in DC.

Posted by: Scott Pearson at
 | permalink





Wednesday, February 13, 2013

Don't Protect, Let's Plan for More High-Quality DC Schools

In an earlier blog post, I addressed what I thought was missing from this Washington Post piece on charter school enrollment and market share issues – a focus on high-quality schools and the growing enrollment in public schools across our city. Let me add another element to the conversation, on the topic of joint planning.

Everyone in the city, from residents to public officials, supports the idea of more joint education planning.  Mayor Gray called for such an effort in his recent State of the District address.  And DC Council Education Committee Chair David Catania has publicly stated his support for this.

What do we mean by planning? It’s a word used more frequently in the transportation field to talk about where to build new roads or create new traffic patterns. It’s a similar conversation for schools – what kind of schools are needed? Where? How can we create more high-performing schools that serve all students?

PCSB supports education planning.  We have long worked closely with the Office of the State Superintendent and DC Public Schools on issues related to a charter school closure, such as making sure students are placed. Also, the published analysis of school location and performance in DC, known as the IFF study, took collaboration across the entire education sector. Since the election of Mayor Gray our collaboration across the city on such issues as school closure, transportation and health has increased substantially.   

As this joint work has evolved, our conversations with DCPS, OSSE and the Deputy Mayor for Education have been around scoping a more comprehensive effort at joint planning  -- with a goal of producing the joint blueprint the mayor described in his address.  Central to our discussions have been how we can best involve parents, school leaders, and community members in this process.

With nearly as many DC students attending charter schools (43%) as traditional district schools, there is an increasing need to think more systematically about the overall DC educational system.   For example, here is some of the feedback I have heard from parents, the community and city officials alike that planning could start to address:

-       Too many DC neighborhoods still lack a high-performing school with available for nearby children;

-       Supply for high-performing schools still exceeds demand as evident in long charter waiting lists and high DCPS out-of-boundary requests;

-       The current system of choice – whereby families apply for dozens of independent lotteries – may not optimize outcomes for their students.  A family who most wants to attend a school in the neighborhood may end up getting into, and commuting to, a school across town;

-       Given the number of students who travel out of their neighborhoods to attend both DCPS and charter schools, there may be a need to look into policies and operations around transportation for school-aged youth;

-       We can identify ways to share resources around charter and DCPS schools, facilitating joint enrollment, hybrid schools, and shared programs;

-       When the city will soon have 26 former school buildings sitting empty; there is no rationality in having so many schools paying rent to private landlords;

-       The way the city funds schools – based on a single count in October and unequal between charters and DCPS – does not take into account student mobility and the lack of equity between the two systems.  It needs reexamination;

-       We have no common view about projections of future growth around the city.

PCSB is eager to find sustainable solutions to these concerns. Where our views may differ from others is around the nature of competition.  

Charter were created more than 15 years ago in DC as a way to spur choice, innovation an quality, with the goal of charter competition inspiring improvement in traditional schools.  I’ve heard more than once a concern about the locations of charters being an issue, and how existing schools – charter and traditional - need to be “protected” from a charter school opening nearby.

“Protecting” an existing school from competition by keeping out new entrants from locating nearby makes little sense.  Competition builds quality and strengthens neighborhoods. 

Rather than focus our energies walling off places schools can’t go, we should be working to get more great schools to locate in those neighborhoods most in need of more quality seats.   Let’s identify places we need great schools, and then offer facilities to our highest performing schools to open there.   

And, as I said in this post, rather than capping charter growth, we should consider how charters and DCPS together can continue attracting more families to public schools in the District.

Moreover, joint planning is different from central planning.   Joint planning takes a system built around competition and choice and seeks to optimize it.  Central planning allocates resources based on a single perspective of what is best for the city.

There is a lot of good joint planning can do for our city.  It can improve choices and efficiency, while preserving the autonomies and competition that have done so much to improve public schooling in the District.  We are eager to engage in this process with our partners in the city, and to hear more from community members about how best this process can serve them.


Posted by: Scott Pearson at
 | permalink





Thursday, January 17, 2013

Center for Education Reform: DC Has Strongest Charter Law in Nation

The Center for Education Reform announced that fewer than half of the charter school laws that exist around the country earn a passing grade when it comes to meeting parent demand to choose a charter education, and educators being able to easily open and operate innovative charter schools.

 

But DC stands out as having the strongest charter school law in the nation – for the second year in a row, according to the center’s new ranking of charter law across the country.

 

Along with DC, only three out of 43 states that have charter school laws earned an A (Minnesota, Indiana and Michigan)

 

I think I know why. Passed in 1996, the DC law calls for an independent authorizer. Research has shown that a stand-alone body has greater ability to hold schools accountable for performance, without being beholden to special interests if they are part of another system, like the local school district, or state education board.

 

Also, the DC charter law gives the schools clear autonomy to design their programs as they see fit. In this area the Center for Education Reform gave DC a 12 out of a possible 15 points.

 

Finally, the DC law largely gives charter schools funding equity with the traditional system. In DC, charters receive $3,000 per student, plus there is a credit enhancement and a fund that gives schools direct loans to buy, renovation and maintain facilities.

 

To read the full report click here.


Posted by: By Scott Pearson at 11:42am
 | permalink