Some cities (Chicago, Denver) have established neighborhood preferences for some of their charter schools. But the concept is not popular within the charter movement, which regards it as a potential threat to school autonomy and the breadth of choice for families outside the neighborhoods in question. Others warn that it could adversely impact a charter school if neighborhood families don’t buy into a school’s culture or educational philosophy.
I don't understand this argument. At best it implicitly acknowledges that running a neighborhood school is inherently more difficult than a charter.
Question from Ken Vaudreuil asked about the process for the direct mail around lottery outreach. Jeremy clarified that we worked with a direct mail to buy lists of households with targeted age groups. For a similar prices as a small postcard (.50), the postal service has saturation mailings available. Include specific Southern Lincoln and Manville. We need to do this for a number of reasons: 1) urban/suburban communities model is integral to the work here ; 2) make sure everyone is aware of this choice and RIDE has explicitly asked that we work to make sure all 4 of our sending districts are represented better; and 3) excited to talk about growth to scholars.
I'm in favor of desegregation strategies, but I don't understand why RIMA and RIDE only apply these principles to BVP. They have been explicitly repudiated by RIDE and RIMA for the Achievement First Mayoral Academies. Why?
Also, I can't really believe we're in a place where it makes sense to spend money advertising heavily over-enrolled, successful public schools. As Maryellen Butke says:
People should be asking how we’re spending that money and how much of it is reaching classrooms. We should invest heavily in education but we need to ensure the money is being used to support great teachers and leaders in our schools.
Someone should tell her about this dubious application of public school funds.