Question re: Charter Schools v. LEA innovative, autonomous schools and D.C. Autonomous Schools.

[jody]

D.C. says it operates some schools according to three autonomous school models: Autonomous Schools, DC Collaborative for Change (DC3), and Partnership Schools.

It then describes:

Autonomous Schools (four schools): designed to provide schools that have demonstrated academic success with the structural space to innovate as a means of further increasing student academic achievement. Schools that are granted autonomy receive enhanced flexibility in five core areas: budget, instructional program, professional development, schedule (within parameters), and textbooks. Eligibility for autonomous status requires that 75% of a school’s student body be proficient in math and reading or have averaged more than 10% growth in both reading and math over the previous three years. In order to qualify, a school must also complete a letter of intent and receive a score of at least three in each area of a Quality School Review (QSR), and a score of four in “Leadership” or “Teaching and Learning.”

What is your experience with schools operated like D.C.’s Autonomous Schools that on the surface look like competitors to charter schools?

SOURCE: http://seo.dc.gov/seo/frames.asp?doc=/seo/lib/seo/DC_RTTT_Application_FINAL_Sections_VI_and_VII.pdf

[YvonneCa]

1. I'm unsure. First of all...

...those three 'levels' for schools sound like what President Obama refers to in speeches. He often talks about 1)successful schools, that we just need to remove hindrances from...2) schools that are improving that just need support to reach their goals and become like the successful schools...and then 3) the under-performing schools. For the under performing schools, he and Sec. Duncan propose four options: Transform, turn around, close them, or give them to a charter school.

http://educatedguess.org/blog/2010/03/04/failing-schools-list-on-monday/


Second, my experience...mostly observation...of level one schools is they they tend to be located in more affluent areas in California. Their tax base is better. It seems they make AYP without breaking a sweat. :)

Level 2 and 3 schools tend to be in older, more established parts of the community. There is more poverty and the tax base has eroded over time. I have worked in level 2 and 3 schools. In fact, I've worked at a level 3 that did things right and 'graduated' to level 2. :7 I have lived in a district that was evenly divided between the levels...right along socio-economic lines. School district board meetings were quite interesting!

[jody]

2. Thanks. I haven't been close to K-12 schools for over a decade and the terms are confusing. n/t

[YvonneCa]

3. You are most welcome.BTW...

...GREAT sig line! :)