February 5, 2008
Controversy Over DCPS Closures Comes to An End
Last week, Mayor Adrian Fenty and Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee released their revised school closure list, which spared six schools and added an additional four, a move that has caused most education watchers to declare any lingering controversy over the closures to be all but dead.
In his column in Sunday’s Post, Marc Fisher called out the “knee-jerk politicians” on the D.C. Council, notably Ward 8 Council member Marion Barry, for their sudden shift to praising the Mayor after the release of the revised list, a flip-flop so extreme that Rhee dubbed Barry’s behavior "fascinating." Fisher praised Rhee and Fenty for sticking to their guns, and went on to make the larger point that the school closings raised far less fuss than what had been suggested in the media, and that any controversy that did exist was led almost entirely by Barry and a handful of vigorous protesters, only a few of whom were actually parents of school children.
Parent and former schools reformer Marc Simon had a different take, writing in the Post that Rhee’s focus is all wrong: “Rhee seems focused on buildings and bureaucracy, not on strategies for improving teaching and learning. She has the wrong diagnosis, or she lacks the skills and experience. Either way, she hasn't put forward a plan that addresses what happens in the classrooms.” Ouch – harsh words from one former teacher to another, but Simon raises an interesting point. Council politics aside, maybe the closings would have gone down easier if there had been a more clearly defined rationale from the Chancellor as to the benefit for student achievement.
Fisher was back with more yesterday, offering some insight into what will become of the school campuses once closed. City law states that the buildings must be offered to charter schools first, and Fenty has said that while none of the sites will be sold, he isn’t opposed to developing some of them into condos, with emphasis on an “affordable housing component.”
It seems that while we’ve heard a lot about the closures from the perspectives of the D.C. Council, Mayor’s office, and parents, there hasn’t been much airtime for the reactions of the faculty and staff of the schools on the list. Linsey Mayhew, a teacher at Gage-Eckington Elementary School in Ward 1, said that if anything, the school’s pending closure seemed to bring a sense of relief, describing the faculty’s dissatisfaction at the way the school was run.
"People were unhappy to begin with," Mayhew explained, "and we know that it’s a good thing."
Mayhew said that a mentor would be working to help teachers find placement at different schools for next year, but is worried that knowledge of the school’s closing might affect student performance. “Recently, at our first Saturday School session, we had a ton of students, but at the last one, after the letters had gone home about the closure, only about half as many kids showed up.”
Photo by AlbinoFlea




Keeping a huge school building open for a small charter school is fairly stupid.
If charter schools are a supportable idea they need to be able to support themselves without constantly looking to the city for things like freebie or reduced rents.
The city has a major asset in some of these school sites. For instance, Hine JR High. That site is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, which is hundreds of millions more than a charter school will ever be able to reimburse the city for.
Redevelop Hine. Tear that nasty building down. Redevelop the site so that it's stunning location next to Eastern Market and the Metro is fully utilized. Make a crapton of underground parking, first floor retail, and condos and office space up top.
If you'd like, reserve a space for a charter school.
The city would get a butt ton of money, whether they sold the site or retained it and let a developer develop it (not sure how that would work for condos but I'm sure it's been done before somewhere).
the argument that rhee isn't focusing on the teaching side of things, and only the bricks and mortar, is false.
she's said time and again that having a strong physical plant that the students can be proud of, feel safe and secure in, and not feel is neglected would be a first step towards aiding student improvement.
the teaching and curriculum side of things will be released in due time, i'm sure. if it isn't, her reign will be short, like all the others were...
Fenty has said he won't sell the closed schools' properties to developers. I hope that won't be the case. There are some schools slated to be closed in the downtown area that make much more sense as commercial properties. Sell off those, and re-invest the money in fixing the structure of existing schools. This obsession with "no selling ever of any public property" makes no sense to me. Other than being a knee-jerk reaction against any sort of development.
Hillman said charter schools "need to be able to support themselves" !?!
WTF???
Charter schools are PUBLIC SCHOOLS!! Chartered public schools now serve 30% of District public school students, and have been an essential resource for the District to improve student outcomes in public education. They need to get the same public resources as every other public school, which include access to adequate facilities. We are wasting our tax dollars when a charter school has to pay rent to a private landlord.
I am still amazed by how little understanding there is about public charter schools. For reference, here's a handy-dandy definition:
Charter schools are tuition-free public autonomous schools that are given the freedom to be more innovative in exchange for increased accountability for improving student achievement.
Wallenda:
Yes, charter schools should be self-supporting. I understand that legally they aren't. I'm saying perhaps they should be.
You don't like how the city educates your kid? Fine. Start your own school. But don't expect me to pay for it in a stunningly unwise way, like wasting a valuable resource like Hine Jr High. Especially since chances are pretty damn good your charter school is going to be much, much smaller than a traditional public school.
Charter schools demanding that they get space in huge existing public schools, then us keeping those spaces afloat just for a charter school is stupid.
It's a simple matter of economics.
Let's see... Charter schools are public schools, and public schools should support themselves? Wow, that is some sort of interesting economics alright.