New System for Public Hearings on School Closings


Dissatisfied by the outcome of the lengthy hearings on the DCPS school closing and consolidation plan, concerned citizens continue to fight to have their voices heard. Last Tuesday, they assembled at Savoy Elementary School to express their concerns to City Council Members David Catania, Muriel Bowser and Marion Barry. Unlike a standard town hall meeting, where individuals have free reign of the public platform, this event was structured as a series of small group discussions. A facilitator was provided to each group to takes notes that were later shared with the room. This format was intended to foster clear and equitable communication among all participants, but potentially squelched the passion that would be expressed through unregulated individual testimony.

Another forum that DCPS has provided for pubic input on school closings is the Idea Submission webpage, where the public is asked to share “creative and innovative ideas for improving our school consolidation and reorganization proposal.” The posts on this site are a mixture of small group notes from the Savoy meeting (“Ward 8 Meeting, Table Notes 1, Nancy Huvendick, Facilitator- NancyH13”), earnest commentary from parents (“Just doesn’t make any sense- Tiffany G”) and inspired suggestions from stakeholders (“Save Davis Elementary- Make it a pilot Japanese Immersion- Diona K”).

The Idea Submission Page offers unlimited space for citizen testimony, but is anyone actually listening to these online appeals? Does The Council see this site as a breeding ground for innovation, or a sound proof pen for disgruntled constituents? The actual impact of any advocacy is unknown until it takes effect, so for now, those with opinions on school closings should utilize all available mediums so we can figure out the best plan for DCPS.

What DCPS can Learn from KIPP Charters


Recently, KIPP charter schools announced that they are working with colleges across the nation to help recruit KIPP graduates. The Washington Post reports that, “KIPP will promote the 20 colleges among its 39,000 students nationwide, and in exchange, the colleges will identify and recruit top KIPP students, help those who have financial need and ensure those who enroll stay on track to graduate.” DC universities such as Georgetown University and Trinity University pledged to identify top recruits from KIPP charters in DC. These students will have merits of academic achievement with expressed financial need, help universities diversify socio-economically, and the university help support these students to complete their bachelor’s degree.
Programs like these offer successful charter schools more of a competitive advantage for parents looking to optimize school-choice. While all charter schools may not be as successful of a brand as KIPP, there are some takeaway points to the culture of college readiness and aptitude that District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS) can learn from. Many, as the Washington Post also reports in the article, claim that KIPP benefits from having more invested parents. Realistically, KIPP has policies that demand parental involvement and attentiveness. Arguably, increasing parental engagement and community involvement in DCPS could be easily replicated.
There is much published evidence to suggest a positive relationship between increasing parental involvement and achieving better school outcomes. There are published guidelines for schools to promote parental involvement policies.
Given the research, maybe DCPS should start ranking or assessing schools based on community involvement. DCPS has several new staff members that seem interested in incorporating greater parental involvement to improve DCPS schools. Efforts of increasing family engagement within schools is seem unmeasured and largely undocumented on both the DCPS and Office of the State Superintendent of Education's website.  
As the KIPP charters show, parental involvement is one aspect of school success. Parents are excited about their children’s learning at KIPP because the charter provides students quality education with outcomes of measurable educational attainment. The charter’s environment of success and academic achievement is reflected in parental involvement and later student educational attainment. KIPP’s policies regarding parental involvement are something DCPS needs to take notes on.

DC VOICE Testimony on School Closures within DCPS November 19, 2012


Public Hearing on School Closures within DCPS, November 19, 2012
Erika Landberg, DC VOICE

Good afternoon.  Thank you for this opportunity to testify on public school closing issues.  As a DCPS parent in the 70s, my son’s elementary school was closed when he was in first grade.  As a member of the DC Board of Education in the 1990s I voted on 18 proposed school closures:  I am no stranger to school closing, or to the often negative consequences that result when closings are not conducted with care and consultation with the communities affected.  Nevertheless, I am not against school closings.  For various reasons, they can be necessary.  This time I suggest we do two things differently:  1) redesign how we use underutilized school buildings and 2) design a community-based consolidation process.

Turn Underutilized School Buildings into Community Schools
In Chancellor Henderson’s press release accompanying her school closure proposals, she said:  “…we need our schools to look very different.”  Many of us would agree, but would go far beyond the examples which follow her statement:  rigorous coursework at all levels?  career and technical programs?  Those should already be in place and not need school closings to make them happen.
No, we at DC VOICE are talking about schools that not only look different but operate differently.  I’m talking about community schools – open longer hours and offering multiple programming for all ages, including their students.  Such schools become centers, anchors, of their communities, with the available space used to house multiple services from health and dental services to child care and tutoring to adult education and job training.  Such schools end up increasing student achievement because of their additional resources, partnerships and programming, their intentional community and parent engagement, and their services to families which enable those families in turn to be more supportive of their children’s learning. 

In his testimony on Friday, my colleague Jeff Smith reminded the Council that the legislation you passed last year, and funded in the 2013 budget is not being implemented as of yet.  The opportunity is here and now, and two possibilities emerge as part of this closing process:   One is to rethink a couple of the schools on the proposed list, schools that have 200-300 students now, have extra space, and are in communities that would especially benefit from the community school structure.  The second possibility is to look at consolidations that for whatever reasons should take place, and turn the consolidated school into a community school – so that the families from the closing school really do have a different and better place for their children and themselves, a place that will make them choose to go there instead of leaving DCPS and causing enrollment to fall.  By the way, experience elsewhere in the country has shown that enrollment often goes up as families realize the benefits and want to be part of a community school.

Design and Implement a Community-based Consolidation Process
When a school is closed and consolidated into another one, the parents of those displaced children don’t just fall into line and go to the new school.  Particularly now in Washington, DC when parents have so many options.  In 2006, DC VOICE conducted a study:  DCPS 2006 School Consolidations:  How did the Transitions Go?  We made 6 recommendations, which I have attached here.  And while all six are important, I want to focus on two today: 
  •  Form a transition task force at each school consolidation site
  • Develop and implement a communications and marking plan

The kind of task force we envision would have official standing, in the community and in the eyes of DCPS.  It would have decision making power; its ideas and proposals could not be dismissed.  It would have parents, community members and teachers on it for sure, so that the broadest spectrum possible of persons would have a voice and be part of the consolidation process, from beginning to school opening in the fall and beyond.

One of its tasks would be to personally contact every family and staff member in the closing school and ask them what is important to keep from the present school, including what programs should transfer; what their hopes and dreams are for their children in a new school; and, as much as possible, describe what to expect in the new school.  Such a task force would actually design and implement a marketing campaign for the new consolidated school. 

For that matter, DCPS needs to develop a marketing mentality and practices across the school system, regarding all of its schools.  Because we live in a time when parents have many choices, intentional outreach and marketing are needed for the school system to keep its market share, so to speak.  School closings make the system particularly vulnerable to enrollment loss.  If done badly – ignoring the dual needs to create truly different community schools with richer and more comprehensive programming, and to conduct school consolidations and marketing effectively – the enrollment decline could be catastrophic over time. 

DC VOICE Testimony at Hearing on School Closures - November 15, 2012


DC VOICE Testimony at D.C. City Council Hearing
Public Oversight Hearing on Review of School Closures within the District of Columbia Public Schools and Public Hearing on Bill 19-734: School Boundary Review Act
Thursday, November 15, 2012

Good Afternoon, my name is Jeff Smith. I'm the parent of a 6 year old DCPS student and a member of DC VOICE, a small civil rights organization whose lone civil rights issue is public education in the District of Columbia.

My testimony revolves solely around 4 findings and 4 questions that we would hope that council and its staff obtain answers to and shares with the public while it considers the Chancellors proposed list of school closings.

The Chancellor was quoted as saying, “we need to stop investing in the same things we have been investing in.  We need to make more radical progress.”  From this quote, one could interpret this to relate to school closings.   It is easy to see where some benefits might be derived from consolidating some programs and realizing several efficiencies.  It seems like a great idea to expand success and access to high-performing schools like School Without Walls.

But we closed 22 schools four years ago; we closed 5 two years before that.  That was a huge social, emotional and fiscal investment for this community and we have not been given information that shows the benefit or progress derived from those investments and now we are looking to invest in more of the same.  We have not received an evaluation of the last round of school closings or for that matter of Mayoral Control.

Question 1: what enhancements can affected communities count on? For example, how does closing schools carry over into more highly qualified teachers or ensure that additional counselors and enrichment activities are available to our children? Or, will many simply transfer into larger settings with the same programmatic offerings?

Additionally, we shouldn’t allow the Mayor to advance a proposal void of essential facts and figures such as the potential savings or cost avoidance that such a proposal brings about.
Question 2: How will the council and DCPS justify the closing of schools as an investment to the public and how will they measure their impact? How will they let the community know that they made a good decision to close these specific schools, and not just any schools?

One option offered is that we would convert these sites to charter schools. Given trends in enrollment and a growing demand for charter schools, this seems unavoidable. But what experience has shown us, is that the charters will simply claim the students in that neighborhood that were previously at DCPS’s under enrolled schools causing a further loss of enrollment.  Ceasar Chavez in my neighborhood is a perfectly good example.

Bruce Monroe was closed.  Chavez opened up the next year on the same property just down the same block.  Now all the kids I knew in my neighborhood that went to Bruce Monroe, except 1, now attend Chavez instead of the nearby Park View School that Bruce was moved into. There seems to be a cycle that promotes perpetual under-enrollment in public schools under this model.

Question 3: What is DCPS doing to stop enrollment loss? What size school system is envisioned by DCPS?

Just 5 years ago, DCPS began the process of dismantling Junior High Schools and instead making k-8’s and 6-8’s called Middle Schools.  Parents like myself were concerned with sending their kindergartners to school with 8th graders. That was the case when my wife and I looked into sending my daughter to Stevens, which had just converted to k-8.  Now we are shifting again to suggest sending 6th graders to school with 12th graders and Stevens will instead be combined with a High School. If we are doing this solely for facilities purposes, the High School and Junior High should remain separate as two entities – similar to Bell Multi-Cultural.  If, such as the case with K-8’s, there is a educational benefit to co-locating these various grades, that should be made clear as well along with whatever provisions will be taken to avoid increased bullying and intimidation by High School students onto their Middle School peers.

Question 4: How can the asset of having “extra” space be used to co-locate more programs and services for young people and their families.  If Middle School children and HIgh School students can occupy the same building, what is stopping DCPS from utilizing dual-use of buildings to house public services in the community schools format?

In 2009 we helped the D.C. City Council author legislation to create community schools that would offer comprehensive services and programming.  That bill was approved and funded this year after extensive and genuine community engagement.  Yet more than 200 days after its final approval OSSE has failed to comply with any of the requirements this body authored for establishing such schools or dispersing those monies.  Before shuttering more doors, city council owes the citizenry an answer to what’s happening with existing efforts to more efficiently use public school space in a way that supports students.  My Colleague Erika Landberg will talk more about Community Schools when she testifies on Monday.

Cincinnati Community Schools Update


The success of the Cincinnati Community schools has brought positive national attention to the Cincinnati Public Schools. The most exciting news from Cincinnati is how high the graduation rate has climbed, from 51% to 82%.  The Urban Teachers Federation (UTF) reports, “the district has moved from academic emergency to “academic watch” to “continuous improvement” to “effective” as of 2010, the only urban district in the state with that distinction.” These great changes have been accredited to the adoption of community schools, full service schools that provide a range of resources for students, both academic and health related. For example, the UTF also notes that 49 of Cincinnati’s 55 public schools have two mental health clinicians on school premises.

Started in 2001, the Cincinnati Community Learning Centers (CLCs) seek to “support student achievement, revitalize neighborhoods and maximize the community’s return on their financial investments…providing access for students, families and community to health, safety and social services, as well as recreational, educational and cultural opportunities.” The Cincinnati model has been described as a “cradle to career” educational support system.
Urban school districts like New York, Knoxville, Los Angeles and Washington have mulled over the implementation of community schools in their districts. The success of Cincinnati may be replicable, but implementing these systems may take time. Community schools ideologies have been adopted by successful private charter enterprises, in example Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) and the Harlem Children’s Zone. Both provide additional and remedial support services to promote a more holistic methodology of learning to children.
So what does this mean for schools in Washington, DC?  The good news is that DC VOICE, a community-based organization, has researched and promoted the development of community schools here in DC. The City Council passed legislation to establish at least five community schools, and allotted $1 million in the 2013 budget for building community schools.  The Mayor has placed the responsibility for implementing this initiative in the Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE).  The bad news is that progress has stalled and the legislatively mandated Community Schools Advisory Committee that will plan and oversee implementation has not yet convened. The good news is that the Office of Boards and Commissions (OBC) has begun soliciting membership on this Committee and reports being in the final stages of identifying the Committee's full membership.   OSSE is working with the OBC to have appointments made as soon as possible, so the Community Schools Advisory Committee can convene.
DC VOICE will continue to press for action to establish Community Schools here.  The Cincinnati story shows not only that it can be done, but that that approach to education makes a great difference in how well schools perform and how well children achieve.  We’ve come too far to stop now.
Voice your support for community schools through DC VOICE. Tweet your opinions to @DCVOICE, “Like” DCVOICE on Facebook or send us an email at! To find out more about DC VOICE and how to get involved, visit our involvement page on our website,!

The Common Core Curriculum: Is It Right for DC?


Following the lead of 40 other states, DC has adopted the Common Core Standards for its public schools. These standards are designed to provide a framework for comparison among states and keep students and educators on the same page nationwide. Supported by DC School Chancellor Michelle Rhee, The DC State Board of Education voted in the standards on July 21, 2010 by a margin of 6 to 1. Unfortunately, since little public discourse regarding the standards occurred prior to their adoption, some citizens are skeptical of their applicability here.

 The standards are comprised of long term and grade specific standards for English Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematics. According to the Common Core Standards Initiative, the body that produces reports outlining the standards, the core standards seek to promote higher level learning processes. For example, the ELA standards approach reading, writing, speaking/listening and language as related skills and integrate their assessment. They also embed media and research skills within the ELA standards. The Math standards provide clear and specific benchmarks for proficiency, but also stress conceptual understanding, measured through one’s ability to justify their work.

The Common Core Standards have been central to a local and national discourse on the standardization of education. One common criticism of the standards is that they water down education through standardization. According to educator Marion Brady the common core standards are flawed because they “assume that what kids need to know is covered by one or another of the traditional core subjects. In fact, the unexplored intellectual terrain lying between and beyond those familiar fields is vast.” Others argue that national standards stifle teacher independence within the classroom. But documents from the Common Core Standards Initiative assert that the standards do not dictate instruction methods: “The standards define what all students should know and be able to do, not how teachers should teach.” Nor do standards set a ceiling on what kids can be taught, just a floor.

If implementation continues here as planned,  the current standardized assessment, the DC CAS will be replaced by an assessment based on the Common Core Standards by 2014 DC. Hopefully, there will be opportunities for public discourse in preparation for the change, so that parents and communities  gain a  greater understanding of the Common Core Standards and what they mean for students and their teachers.

Opinion/Editorial: A More Honest Discussion about Public Charter Schools: The Importance of Information to Promote School Choice


The District of Columbia has increased student enrollment in charter schools, well above the national enrollment numbers. Almost 44% of District of Columbia Public School (DCPS) students are enrolled in charter schools, yet only 4% of students are enrolled in charter schools nationally.[1] But despite the popularity of charter schools, especially within the District of Columbia, are these schools effective and accountable?

The Stanford University Center on Research for Education Outcomes (CREDO) published, Multiple Choice: Charter School Performance in 16 States,” declaring that charter schools may not be more effective than regular schools, in the aggregate. Published in 2009, CREDO’s “analysis looks at student achievement growth on state achievement tests in both reading and math, controlling for student demographics and eligibility for program support such as free or reduced-price lunch and special education”.[2] CREDO maintains that most charter schools are not better than public schools; in fact, almost 37% of charter schools perform worse and only 17% of charter schools perform better than regular public schools. On the individual level, the CREDO found that the charter students in the District of Columbia receive no significant advantage than their public school peers of the same race and class.[3]
The report has been controversial; especially as the popularity of the charter school movement grows. Many have critiqued the study for being misleading in its interpretation and for having internal structural, methodological problems with collecting data. For example, disadvantaged students (English Language Learners, students with special needs, low-income students, and black students) are recorded as performing better in charter schools than their peers in public schools.[4] These are great gains for minority classes and disadvantaged students. 

Despite these critiques, there have been other studies that confirm the Stanford results. Mathematica, a policy and public research institute, suggests that the findings are reputable.[5] Charter schools are popular, but there may be some perceptual issues with how much all charter schools (not only the high-performing charter schools) can reform education. These independent structures alone are probably not enough to fix the entire education system. 

There is some evidence to suggest that lacking legal frameworks for holding charter schools accountable and poor results are intertwined. For example, this  Economist article ties Ohio’s lack of charter school regulation with Ohio’s poor performing charter schools.[6] On the other hand, Ohio’s public school system, particularly the Cincinnati Public School’s have flourished under the community schools, comprehensive approach to learning model. Others, such as Bill Perkins, the Harlem Senate representative, see charter schools as the public sector scrimping on the democratic promise to educate the general public.[7]
Some may suggest that these flaws are naturally fixable, as charters with low enrollment due to poor performance are easily closeable. There must be a greater public transparency and legal oversight over charter schools to ensure that their successes are well deserved. Immediate intervention that holds charter schools up to some standards of educational achievement must be observed, especially as these schools receive increasing amounts of federal funding. A proper measure of accountability is an important feature in assessing charter school’s performance. These processes are an important step in continuing a realistic discussion of the role of charter schools in public education; especially as more and more urban public school systems, like DC, rely on charters to educate children. 

The District of Columbia maintains that there charter schools are regulated, so DC public charter schools are of the highest quality. The Office of the Superintendent of Education (OSSE) has set up the Office of Public Charter School Financing and Support (OPCSFS), with the quality assurance program to regulate the amount of public funding that charter schools are receiving and their annual progress of students. The OPCSFS financing, technical assistance, and grants to improve the quality of public charter schools and supports the exchange of best practices between traditional public and public charter schools.[8], [9]  The “Quality Initiatives” program is “designed to improve the academic achievement of students attending DC public charter schools”.8 However, the Initiative neglects to mention what it means to be a successful charter school, nor what happens to charter schools when they fail to meet appropriate standards. It would be important to see how these two programs interact with the DC public to provide the most accurate and up to date information about the success of public schools (both traditional and charter). This will be an important tool in promoting transparency of all schools, facilitating better school choice within the District. 

If charter schools may not be as effective as advertised, then they need to be more accountable to the public. I would not say that charter schools are a poor choice, but I would hold that the perception of them as naturally superior to public schools might be misleading. I would urge for a greater release of school performance information, by all types of schools as the greatest tool that families need to make the best choice for their children. The academic performance of students is a school’s product—families must be able to compare all products to make the best decision.

Claire Bocage, Opinion Author 

[1] Stanford University. Center for Research on Education Outcomes. New Stanford Report Finds Serious Quality Challenge in National Charter School Sector. Palo Alto: Stanford University, 2009. Print.
[2] Stanford University. Center for Research on Education Outcomes. New Stanford Report Finds Serious Quality Challenge in National Charter School Sector. Palo Alto: Stanford University, 2009. Print.
[3] Stanford University. Center for Research on Education Outcomes, “CHARTER SCHOOL PERFORMANCE IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FOUND TO BE SIMILAR TO THEIR TRADITIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOL PEERS”. National Release, 2009. Print
[4] Charting a better course: Charter schools raise educational standards for vulnerable children
The Economist, July 5 2012
[5] Charting a better course: Charter schools raise educational standards for vulnerable children
The Economist, July 5 2012

[6] Charting a better course: Charter schools raise educational standards for vulnerable children
The Economist, July 5 2012

[7] “A great day in Harlem: Charter schools”. The Economist, March 30, 2010


Kwame Brown's resignation creates further void in education


With the shocking and sudden departure of City Council Chairman, Kwame Brown, comes a void in one of the sole-remaining accountability vehicles for public education in the nation's capital.  While one of Kwame Brown's last acts as Chairman was to appoint a new head of the city council's powerful and money-driven economic committee, the city council education committee, which was also uncharacteristically placed under the committee of the whole in recent years, received no such special attention or new committee head.  With upcoming hearings already scheduled for education under the Committee of the Whole, it is unclear who chairs that committee or even whether it still exists.

Since being placed under the committee of the whole in 2007, the city council's education committee has been signature for poor meeting attendance by its members, unresponsiveness by its staff, few outcomes or feedback from its hearings and a lack of vision or direction overall.

We hope this new and unexpected development at the council will also signal a new direction for what we view as a committee more urgent and in need of a transition plan then economic development - the committee on education.

For year's DC VOICE and partners such as SHAPPE, 21st Century School Fund, Teaching for Change, Empower DC and MLOV have called for the establishment of a real education committee with active members, responsive staff and a chair undistracted by the business of running the full council.  I think it’s time we got our wish.

Educational (in)Equity Part 3


This week we were going to highlight some data from our Ready Middle Schools Project, but it seems more pertinent to comment on the recent articles by the Examiner highlighting the gap between the District's best and worst schools and an article from the Post detailing how Northwest schools continue to crowd.

Now, these articles don't really tell us anything we don't though. By "we" we mean people who have seen the evidence and act upon, not those who refuse to do anything with it - like the Deputy Mayor for Education's office and the Chancellor's office.

Go ahead and take a look at the chart below, it is basically saying that the learning gap between the best and worst schools is growing. The study concludes that "if two students have the same test scores in 2010, but one attends a wealthy, high-performing school and the other attends the opposite, the student at the wealthy school likely would have outpaced the latter student substantially in 2011, even though they were on equal footing the year before." In other words, the students at the low-preforming schools do not continue to learn and grow intellectually.

We see, then, that the same school system is basicaly two systems, one for the rich and one for the poor, and isn't it amazing that this system can get it right in one place and not in another?

Why do you think everyone wants to go to Northwest schools? Clearly, they have more resources, more supports, and more money to educate children.

Is poverty the excuse? Why is it that schools with poorer students are funded less and then expected to obtain miraculous results?

This reform claims to be about "students-first." Let's see if they really are. Let's call on them to stop firing teachers, to stop defunding schools, and start paying attention to the needs and the wants of the community.

Why are teachers from poorer schools being cut?

Why is the evidence constantly being ignored?

Teachers are constanlty fired over poor results like this, the saying goes that they do not add any "value" to a students education. This may or may not be true, but what we can see is that enough is enough, this current reform has failed (and will continue to fail) because it is not about educating the whole child. Reformers say it is the teachers fault, and we have tried firing teachers. Our so-called reformers have failed us, the evidence has spoken, and now it is time for heads at the top to roll. After all, are they adding any "value?"

A growing gap
A recent report shows that, on average, students at the best schools are outpacing their peers at the worst schools on the city's standardized tests.
Average two-year median growth percentile by ward
Top 5 Schools - Reading
SchoolNeighborhoodDC CAS   proficiency 2011Growth scores
Hyde-Addison Elementary SchoolGeorgetown81.2%79.7%
Murch Elementary SchoolTenleytown85.9%77.7%
Benjamin Banneker Academic High SchoolPleasant Plains (magnet school)94.3%75.9%
Stoddert Elementary SchoolGlover Park78.2%74%
Key Elementary SchoolPalisades87.7%72%
Top 5 Schools - Math
Key Elementary SchoolPalisades90.8%73%
Bancroft Elementary SchoolMount Pleasant53.1%72.3%
Ross Elementary SchoolDupont Circle70.7%72%
Murch Elementary SchoolTenleytown85.9%71.7%
Stoddert Elementary SchoolGlover Park84.1%70.2%
Bottom 5 Schools - Reading
Eastern Senior High SchoolEast Capitol Hill7.1%27.5%
Savoy Elementary SchoolAnacostia21%27.6%
Aiton Elementary SchoolLincoln Heights21.7%28.5%
Noyes Education CampusBrookland31.9%29.5%
Tyler Elementary SchoolCapitol Hill28%30%
Bottom 5 Schools - Math
Drew Elementary SchoolNortheast Boundary13.3%23.2%
Johnson Middle SchoolDouglass17.1%24.6%
Savoy Elementary SchoolAnacostia15.4%25.2%
Aiton Elementary SchoolLincoln Heights16.7%28.6%
Noyes Education CampusBrookland29%29%
Note: Growth scores refer to the "median growth percentile," which refer to year-to-year growth on the D.C. Comprehensive Assessment System exams. The numbers are averaged between the growth seen in the 2009-2010 school year and the 2010-2011 school year. For example, a school's MGP of 77.7 percent means the average student scored better in 2011 than 77.7 percent of students citywide who received the same score as the student in 2009. Alternative and special-education schools were not included in these charts.


©2009 The DC VOICE Ostrich |