Redshirting consequences at Lafayette

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is another question- if these parents are allowed to just enroll their kids in whatever grade they want, why cant a parent who misses a grade cut off by a few days enroll their kid too young? Ex my child’s birthday is October 5th and I don’t want to pay for another year of daycare. Let them enroll in PK3.

People really don’t see where all of this leads if we don’t stick to the birthday cutoffs?

Tried to do this for our October child and was told there is no flexibility in DCPS for this. Didn't occur to me to call the news! Maybe next time.

And if these parents get their way and can enroll their child in kindergarten this school year, I would encourage all parents with kids born in the month of October who turn 3 to go to the press when DCPS says they can’t enroll early. Because this situation opens a whole can of worms as to what is policy and allowed.

[Anonymous]

PP again, and in the scenario of enrolling kids too young under current policies, that is $25,000 in savings to cut out a year of private daycare and get your kid in PK3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Going strictly by the age guidelines, you could have the following situation:

Kid A could have been a micro preemie who was due at the beginning of January, but was born on September 30th.

Kid B could have been due on September 23rd, but instead was 8 days overdue and born on October 1st.

According to DCPS guidelines, Kid A has to enroll in kindergarten this fall, but Kid B can enroll next year. Does that seem right to you?

There should be a little flexibility. I was born early, which made me eligible to enroll for kindergarten a year earlier than if I’d been born on my due date. I’m glad my parents held me back. I feel like I was in the correct grade and my classmates were peers.

There is flexibility. There’s a process. And as stated before, for things like developmental delays, ESL, traumatic history, neurodivergence, etc. If these parents fell into an any of these categories, they’d make sure that was the headline. If their kid was a micropreemie, they’d have put it up on billboards during this ridiculous campaign. That’s not the case. They’re naturally and normally near the end of DCPS’ cutoff (and not all are late September…) and have just always thought they were special. They are legitimately making this harder for people who do need this process and it’s EMBARRASSING.

Wait - you know of a “process”? A clear, legitimate process? Can you share more?

How do you go about doing this?

I’ll wait…..

The whole issue here is that there isn’t a process or consistency for any of this or anything DCPS does. DCPS created this disaster but failing to have any real procedures in place. They caused this by allowing the lottery and enrollment site to allow enrollment for kids past the “cut off” without question.

What they should do now, is walk it back - cooperate and then put in place clear rules going forward.

So give these parents exactly what they demand but then every parent after gets a no? Squeaky wheel and all. And those squeaky wheels sure do seem to be concentrated in one part of DC.

There are different types of squeaky wheels from all over the city.

Thanks for confirming that there was/is no process

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is another question- if these parents are allowed to just enroll their kids in whatever grade they want, why cant a parent who misses a grade cut off by a few days enroll their kid too young? Ex my child’s birthday is October 5th and I don’t want to pay for another year of daycare. Let them enroll in PK3.

People really don’t see where all of this leads if we don’t stick to the birthday cutoffs?

Pre-K 3 and 4 are different. They’re not compulsory and DCPS doesn’t need to provide them.

Tried to do this for our October child and was told there is no flexibility in DCPS for this. Didn't occur to me to call the news! Maybe next time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Going strictly by the age guidelines, you could have the following situation:

Kid A could have been a micro preemie who was due at the beginning of January, but was born on September 30th.

Kid B could have been due on September 23rd, but instead was 8 days overdue and born on October 1st.

According to DCPS guidelines, Kid A has to enroll in kindergarten this fall, but Kid B can enroll next year. Does that seem right to you?

There should be a little flexibility. I was born early, which made me eligible to enroll for kindergarten a year earlier than if I’d been born on my due date. I’m glad my parents held me back. I feel like I was in the correct grade and my classmates were peers.

There is flexibility. There’s a process. And as stated before, for things like developmental delays, ESL, traumatic history, neurodivergence, etc. If these parents fell into an any of these categories, they’d make sure that was the headline. If their kid was a micropreemie, they’d have put it up on billboards during this ridiculous campaign. That’s not the case. They’re naturally and normally near the end of DCPS’ cutoff (and not all are late September…) and have just always thought they were special. They are legitimately making this harder for people who do need this process and it’s EMBARRASSING.

Wait - you know of a “process”? A clear, legitimate process? Can you share more?

How do you go about doing this?

I’ll wait…..

The whole issue here is that there isn’t a process or consistency for any of this or anything DCPS does. DCPS created this disaster but failing to have any real procedures in place. They caused this by allowing the lottery and enrollment site to allow enrollment for kids past the “cut off” without question.

What they should do now, is walk it back - cooperate and then put in place clear rules going forward.

The rules are that your kid can't redshirt without the principal's signoff. That's always been the rule. At most, what has changed is the amount of discretion the principal has now that Lafayette moms screwed this up for kids with actual issues so very badly by causing DCPS to focus on what standards/process principals themselves are utilizing. (FWIW the MySchool lottery actually prompts you to confirm your intent if you try to misregister your child.)

This post was in response to “redshirting” for medical/developmental issues

[Anonymous]

Policies like this explains why no one ever responds DCPS has the best schools: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/1279885.page

What do parents think are the goal for these kids? To start companies? Solve global warming? What education do kids need for the future?

Or yes, argue over phonics for September vs October birthdays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was held back when I was little. No one called it redshirting then. I won't go into the reasons for privacy's sake. But the idea that this gave me some advantage over my classmates is just bizarre and ridiculous and kinda paranoid. I know everyone here is in high dudgeon and luxuriating in their own sense of self-righteousness, but you're really making a very big mountain out of a very small molehill. It's really not that big of deal.

Think of it this way: It gave you an advantage over yourself that was not red-shirted, right? That's what your parents wanted to do it? So, imagine the you whose parents don't go to the news... you're getting, at the very least, an advantage over them. There are some aspects of school that are zero-sum, including selective admissions later on, and PPs have eloquently explained how a culture of red-shirting changes the bar for everyone in problematic ways.

You must really, really hate affirmative action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Going strictly by the age guidelines, you could have the following situation:

Kid A could have been a micro preemie who was due at the beginning of January, but was born on September 30th.

Kid B could have been due on September 23rd, but instead was 8 days overdue and born on October 1st.

According to DCPS guidelines, Kid A has to enroll in kindergarten this fall, but Kid B can enroll next year. Does that seem right to you?

There should be a little flexibility. I was born early, which made me eligible to enroll for kindergarten a year earlier than if I’d been born on my due date. I’m glad my parents held me back. I feel like I was in the correct grade and my classmates were peers.

There is flexibility. There’s a process. And as stated before, for things like developmental delays, ESL, traumatic history, neurodivergence, etc. If these parents fell into an any of these categories, they’d make sure that was the headline. If their kid was a micropreemie, they’d have put it up on billboards during this ridiculous campaign. That’s not the case. They’re naturally and normally near the end of DCPS’ cutoff (and not all are late September…) and have just always thought they were special. They are legitimately making this harder for people who do need this process and it’s EMBARRASSING.

Wait - you know of a “process”? A clear, legitimate process? Can you share more?

How do you go about doing this?

I’ll wait…..

The whole issue here is that there isn’t a process or consistency for any of this or anything DCPS does. DCPS created this disaster but failing to have any real procedures in place. They caused this by allowing the lottery and enrollment site to allow enrollment for kids past the “cut off” without question.

What they should do now, is walk it back - cooperate and then put in place clear rules going forward.

So give these parents exactly what they demand but then every parent after gets a no? Squeaky wheel and all. And those squeaky wheels sure do seem to be concentrated in one part of DC.

There are different types of squeaky wheels from all over the city.

Thanks for confirming that there was/is no process

The process is you can’t hold your kid back a grade without principal approval. The principal said no. You just didn’t like the answer, but that’s the process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Policies like this explains why no one ever responds DCPS has the best schools: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/1279885.page

What do parents think are the goal for these kids? To start companies? Solve global warming? What education do kids need for the future?

Or yes, argue over phonics for September vs October birthdays.

Redshirting is going to help these kids solve global warming? You're reaching.

DCPS is not trying to cater to wealthy people. So you are right that it will never be the best school district in the area as defined by wealthy people. Middle and working class people define "best schools" differently that wealthy people do.

For instance, DCPS is the only school district in the area that guarantees free PK3 and PK4 for every student in the district. And DCPS's PK program is phenomenal, with extremely high caliber of teaching across the board, including in Title 1 schools. That's a huge assist for working families, immigrant families, families who struggle to afford childcare, families where English is not their first language (guarantees early exposure to an English-language classroom for their kids), etc. That might not matter to you if you can easily afford private PK, can afford in-home childcare to facilitate part-time preschool programs, etc. But for the average DC family, it's an incredible benefit.

DCPS was also one of the first school districts in the area to recognize that the Lucy Caulkins method was BS and they needed to emphasize phonic instruction starting in K. DCPS also was also a leader in the area in diagnosing dyslexia and other learning disabilities early via in-school evaluations, to ensure kids are getting needed interventions earlier. For families who may not have the resources to supplement a lackluster reading program at home, or the knowledge or means to identify learning disabilities early, these are important offerings that you do not find in some of the "best schools" in the area as defined by rich people who may not value these assets as much.

The biggest drawbacks in DCPS are at the MS and HS level, where the vast majority of schools have serious issues both with academic performance and behavior. As a middle class family, that's where the value of DCPS sees a steep drop off, and it's when we, and many other middle and working class families, start considering other options (charters, moving to the suburbs, maybe parochial school if we can swing it). However, as a family in this boat, one of the first things you learn is that for middle class families, the "good" suburban districts aren't necessarily a solution because a middle class family cannot afford to live IB for the "best" suburban schools. In the burbs, middle and working class families are in a similar situation as they in the city -- underwhelming MS and HS options, many with major behavioral issues and a lot of kids performing poorly on academics. Some suburban districts offer lottery options like DC, but without the public transit infrastructure in DC that can make lotterying into a school across town feasible for a family on a budget with no SAH parent.

I'm not a DCPS apologist. The district has major issues and I'm one of the first to complain about them. But the idea that it's the lack of redshirting in the district that is the real problem is myopic at best. I don't have any problem with DCPS's strict limits on redshirting (at least, that's what I've experienced at my NE school, I didn't even know that schools in upper NW had worked out this exception for themselves until this Lafayette issue to publicized). I don't think there is anything wrong with DCPS that would be solved by more parental discretion in redshirting, and I could see ways in which such a policy would actually undermine the district's efforts to improve, especially at the MS and HS level. Redshirting also undermines the district's functional policies on early intervention for LDs and literacy, which I value, and can come into conflict with the district's terrific universal PK program (it is hard to design a redshirting policy that is equitable when so many families use the universal PK program, which would result in families requesting a third year of city-funded PK in order to redshirt -- it's not workable).

If that all sounds like hell on earth to you, by all means flee to a private or to Bethesda or Falls Church. For me, comparing to DCPS to suburban schools I can actually afford, it does okay, and is frankly preferable in a number of ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is another question- if these parents are allowed to just enroll their kids in whatever grade they want, why cant a parent who misses a grade cut off by a few days enroll their kid too young? Ex my child’s birthday is October 5th and I don’t want to pay for another year of daycare. Let them enroll in PK3.

People really don’t see where all of this leads if we don’t stick to the birthday cutoffs?

Pre-K 3 and 4 are different. They’re not compulsory and DCPS doesn’t need to provide them.

Tried to do this for our October child and was told there is no flexibility in DCPS for this. Didn't occur to me to call the news! Maybe next time.

This was for K, not to get into pre-k early. I’m happy it didn’t work out—as someone said earlier in one of these threads, I would have accidentally given up a year of him at home—but was just trying to find a more engaging academic environment for a kid who was ready for it.

[Anonymous]

The jealousy and pettiness and sense of victimhood on this thread is something to behold. A gentle reminder that DC public schools are not very good. Standardized testing suggests your kids would get a better education if they went to any random public school in Iowa. So the idea that if a kid "reshirts" or, put more directly, repeats a grade at a mediocre school, that he or she will get some amazing benefit and be transformed into a math whiz or something seems disconnected from reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was held back when I was little. No one called it redshirting then. I won't go into the reasons for privacy's sake. But the idea that this gave me some advantage over my classmates is just bizarre and ridiculous and kinda paranoid. I know everyone here is in high dudgeon and luxuriating in their own sense of self-righteousness, but you're really making a very big mountain out of a very small molehill. It's really not that big of deal.

Think of it this way: It gave you an advantage over yourself that was not red-shirted, right? That's what your parents wanted to do it? So, imagine the you whose parents don't go to the news... you're getting, at the very least, an advantage over them. There are some aspects of school that are zero-sum, including selective admissions later on, and PPs have eloquently explained how a culture of red-shirting changes the bar for everyone in problematic ways.

That's absurd. That's like saying no student should ever be allowed to have a math tutor because it's unfair to all the other kids who didnt have the same math tutor. And no, no one has explained why any of this is "problematic" for everyone else. They've only complied a list of tortured scenarios, build on questionable assumptions, that, in a million years, will never become reality.

Way to move the goalposts. This person was asking why redshirting is considered an advantage. I explained why. Tutoring *is* an advantage. Obviously not everything that gives an advantage should be banned (e.g., studying), but similarly, some things that give an advantage should obviously be banned (e.g. cheating). That said, whether to ban something because it provides an advantage is a totally different question than PP’s dopey why’s it an advantage question.

Not everything that gives an advantage should be banned BUT mostly it should probably not be given to some but not others by the school either.

There are exceptions, like reading intervention or whatever, but those are made for documented issues and according to a process, not just because Timmy’s mom wants it for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was held back when I was little. No one called it redshirting then. I won't go into the reasons for privacy's sake. But the idea that this gave me some advantage over my classmates is just bizarre and ridiculous and kinda paranoid. I know everyone here is in high dudgeon and luxuriating in their own sense of self-righteousness, but you're really making a very big mountain out of a very small molehill. It's really not that big of deal.

Think of it this way: It gave you an advantage over yourself that was not red-shirted, right? That's what your parents wanted to do it? So, imagine the you whose parents don't go to the news... you're getting, at the very least, an advantage over them. There are some aspects of school that are zero-sum, including selective admissions later on, and PPs have eloquently explained how a culture of red-shirting changes the bar for everyone in problematic ways.

You must really, really hate affirmative action.

Not at all, actually. There are some justifications for giving certain kids/people an advantage in various ways. I think IB PK seats, for instance, should go exclusively to IB FARMS-eligible families before the rest are lotteried off to other IB families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The jealousy and pettiness and sense of victimhood on this thread is something to behold. A gentle reminder that DC public schools are not very good. Standardized testing suggests your kids would get a better education if they went to any random public school in Iowa. So the idea that if a kid "reshirts" or, put more directly, repeats a grade at a mediocre school, that he or she will get some amazing benefit and be transformed into a math whiz or something seems disconnected from reality.

Maybe this is a disconnect — I don’t think “redshirt” is used for repeating a grade. It is a term for NOT starting when you “should” have so you can start the next year (when you will be on the oldest end of the grade rather than the younger end).

No one has a problem with kids who need to repeat a grade, a decision in which the school has a say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The jealousy and pettiness and sense of victimhood on this thread is something to behold. A gentle reminder that DC public schools are not very good. Standardized testing suggests your kids would get a better education if they went to any random public school in Iowa. So the idea that if a kid "reshirts" or, put more directly, repeats a grade at a mediocre school, that he or she will get some amazing benefit and be transformed into a math whiz or something seems disconnected from reality.

The idea that Lafayette moms are saying that other folks have a "sense of victimhood" is amazing. If you hate DCPS so much, go elsewhere. It sounds like folks at Lafayette would rather you did too.