What would an at-risk preference do? New MSDC research paper out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are 16 DCPS and charter schools 10% or less at-risk students now (based on the 2018-19 enrollment audit). Adult-ed or alternative programs are not included.

A question mark means that there are fewer than 10 at-risk students enrolled, so a percentage cannot be calculated. https://osse.dc.gov/node/1306796

Brent 4.2% at risk
Deal 6.7%
Eaton 6.0%
Eliot Hine 4%
Hearst 6%
Janney ?
Key ?
Lafayette 2.8%
Maury 2.2%
Mann ?
Murch 4.1%
Oyster-Adams 10%
Peabody ?
Ross ?
School within a School ?
Stoddert 3.4%

BASIS DC 8.5%
LAMB 9%
Lee Montessori 10%
Mundo Verde 9.1%
Washington Latin MS 6.2%
Yu Ying PCS 4.4%

I am surprised that Eliot Hine has such a low at-risk percentage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are 16 DCPS and charter schools 10% or less at-risk students now (based on the 2018-19 enrollment audit). Adult-ed or alternative programs are not included.

A question mark means that there are fewer than 10 at-risk students enrolled, so a percentage cannot be calculated. https://osse.dc.gov/node/1306796

Brent 4.2% at risk
Deal 6.7%
Eaton 6.0%
Eliot Hine 4%
Hearst 6%
Janney ?
Key ?
Lafayette 2.8%
Maury 2.2%
Mann ?
Murch 4.1%
Oyster-Adams 10%
Peabody ?
Ross ?
School within a School ?
Stoddert 3.4%

BASIS DC 8.5%
LAMB 9%
Lee Montessori 10%
Mundo Verde 9.1%
Washington Latin MS 6.2%
Yu Ying PCS 4.4%

I am surprised that Eliot Hine has such a low at-risk percentage.

Shoot - you are right. I made a math error. Delete it from the list.

[Anonymous]

is at risk the same thing as high poverty?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are 16 DCPS and charter schools 10% or less at-risk students now (based on the 2018-19 enrollment audit). Adult-ed or alternative programs are not included.

A question mark means that there are fewer than 10 at-risk students enrolled, so a percentage cannot be calculated. https://osse.dc.gov/node/1306796

Brent 4.2% at risk
Deal 6.7%
Eaton 6.0%
Eliot Hine 4%
Hearst 6%
Janney ?
Key ?
Lafayette 2.8%
Maury 2.2%
Mann ?
Murch 4.1%
Oyster-Adams 10%
Peabody ?
Ross ?
School within a School ?
Stoddert 3.4%

BASIS DC 8.5%
LAMB 9%
Lee Montessori 10%
Mundo Verde 9.1%
Washington Latin MS 6.2%
Yu Ying PCS 4.4%

I am surprised that Eliot Hine has such a low at-risk percentage.

Shoot - you are right. I made a math error. Delete it from the list.

Shoot, I was hoping to be pleasantly surprised and questioninng my assumptions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:is at risk the same thing as high poverty?

At risk means at risk of academic failure. It is defined as being from a family eligible for TANF (temporary assistance for needy families or SNAP (nutrition assistance); experiencing homelessness; being in the foster care system, or, for high school, ne year older than your expected grade (presumably because student was retained at least once).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are 16 DCPS and charter schools 10% or less at-risk students now (based on the 2018-19 enrollment audit). Adult-ed or alternative programs are not included.

A question mark means that there are fewer than 10 at-risk students enrolled, so a percentage cannot be calculated. https://osse.dc.gov/node/1306796

Brent 4.2% at risk
Deal 6.7%
Eaton 6.0%
Eliot Hine 4%
Hearst 6%
Janney ?
Key ?
Lafayette 2.8%
Maury 2.2%
Mann ?
Murch 4.1%
Oyster-Adams 10%
Peabody ?
Ross ?
School within a School ?
Stoddert 3.4%

BASIS DC 8.5%
LAMB 9%
Lee Montessori 10%
Mundo Verde 9.1%
Washington Latin MS 6.2%
Yu Ying PCS 4.4%

I am surprised that Eliot Hine has such a low at-risk percentage.

Shoot - you are right. I made a math error. Delete it from the list.

Shoot, I was hoping to be pleasantly surprised and questioninng my assumptions.

Yup this list is the only schools that are acceptable to the DCUM (read UMC+ more white than DC overall)

If these folks aren't inbound or lottery into one of the charters most people either go private or leave

And reality is you are going to be hard pressed to get a challenging educational environment in any other school not on this list. There are a few noteworthy exceptions which can be found by looking at the lottery wait lists. And again not surprisingly the schools listed have the longest wait lists.

[Anonymous]

"So would anyone be supportive of giving at-risk preference over IB students for Pk3 and Pk4 at DCPS?"

Would you -- if they stay, as they would, for the rest of elementary, and junior high, etc? So PK3 and PK4 get filled with at risk. Maybe one additional classroom gets opened up for K, maybe 2 if it is a big school. Where will all the other IB kids go? And then you have a school which is 75% at risk or 3/5 at risk. That is assuming a lot of at-risk kids apply, but there probably are a lot.

Or let's say it is just 1/3 of at risk kids admitted for pre-K, so that by K it is about one classroom's worth of at risk spread across the classes. That is still a whole extra class that would have to be added to K to maintain the IB by right kids. Where do you put all of these kids, and where do you get the money to add the extra classes. Unless more of them leave the system, which they might.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"So would anyone be supportive of giving at-risk preference over IB students for Pk3 and Pk4 at DCPS?"

Would you -- if they stay, as they would, for the rest of elementary, and junior high, etc? So PK3 and PK4 get filled with at risk. Maybe one additional classroom gets opened up for K, maybe 2 if it is a big school. Where will all the other IB kids go? And then you have a school which is 75% at risk or 3/5 at risk. That is assuming a lot of at-risk kids apply, but there probably are a lot.

Or let's say it is just 1/3 of at risk kids admitted for pre-K, so that by K it is about one classroom's worth of at risk spread across the classes. That is still a whole extra class that would have to be added to K to maintain the IB by right kids. Where do you put all of these kids, and where do you get the money to add the extra classes. Unless more of them leave the system, which they might.

If the school gets crowded they can reduce the number of preschool classrooms offered. Surprise surprise, overcrowding to allow for preschool is fine when it is serving IB siblings from mostly middle and upper class families. Will it be tolerable for poor kids?

The money comes from downtown under the UPSFF. It follows the student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"So would anyone be supportive of giving at-risk preference over IB students for Pk3 and Pk4 at DCPS?"

Would you -- if they stay, as they would, for the rest of elementary, and junior high, etc? So PK3 and PK4 get filled with at risk. Maybe one additional classroom gets opened up for K, maybe 2 if it is a big school. Where will all the other IB kids go? And then you have a school which is 75% at risk or 3/5 at risk. That is assuming a lot of at-risk kids apply, but there probably are a lot.

Or let's say it is just 1/3 of at risk kids admitted for pre-K, so that by K it is about one classroom's worth of at risk spread across the classes. That is still a whole extra class that would have to be added to K to maintain the IB by right kids. Where do you put all of these kids, and where do you get the money to add the extra classes. Unless more of them leave the system, which they might.

If the school gets crowded they can reduce the number of preschool classrooms offered. Surprise surprise, overcrowding to allow for preschool is fine when it is serving IB siblings from mostly middle and upper class families. Will it be tolerable for poor kids?

The money comes from downtown under the UPSFF. It follows the student.

Eliminating PK in order to admit more at-risk kids seems counter-productive. At-risk kids benefit MORE from PK than other kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"So would anyone be supportive of giving at-risk preference over IB students for Pk3 and Pk4 at DCPS?"

Would you -- if they stay, as they would, for the rest of elementary, and junior high, etc? So PK3 and PK4 get filled with at risk. Maybe one additional classroom gets opened up for K, maybe 2 if it is a big school. Where will all the other IB kids go? And then you have a school which is 75% at risk or 3/5 at risk. That is assuming a lot of at-risk kids apply, but there probably are a lot.

Or let's say it is just 1/3 of at risk kids admitted for pre-K, so that by K it is about one classroom's worth of at risk spread across the classes. That is still a whole extra class that would have to be added to K to maintain the IB by right kids. Where do you put all of these kids, and where do you get the money to add the extra classes. Unless more of them leave the system, which they might.

If the school gets crowded they can reduce the number of preschool classrooms offered. Surprise surprise, overcrowding to allow for preschool is fine when it is serving IB siblings from mostly middle and upper class families. Will it be tolerable for poor kids?

The money comes from downtown under the UPSFF. It follows the student.

This doesn’t make sense. The overcrowding at these schools does not come from “overcrowding to allow for preschool”. Rather it comes from the number of IB kids who show up at K (whether in PK or not). If you cut pk you still have those same IB kids at K. If you add at risk kids in PK, you still have the IB kids at K. I’m all for an at-risk preference in PK but to be practicable it would either have to “IB at risk have preference” (which probably would not do much at these schools but it would be more equitable than the IB sibling preference) or a fairly low cap, like let in 5-10% at risk (from anywhere) at the top of the pref list).

[Anonymous]

DP who hasn't read the whole thread.

I would like to see a system that makes preK attendance mandatory for the children of any parent on any form of assistance, in foster care, etc. The schools would provide wrap around services for these kids and families, would be in the neighborhoods where the kids live, and be staffed by experts in ECE in high poverty communities. Generational poverty will continue until we get the young generation early enough to understand that they have options and we teach them the ways and benefits of exercising those options. Sending kids who live in poverty to OOB schools isn't enough -- YET. We need to show these kids that they can learn in their own community. That their community believes they can achieve and expects them to do it. We need to make it easier for parents living in poverty to get their kids to a strong school close to home, not a strong school that's two bus rides away and a light year different. I am NOT saying that poor kids shouldn't be in WOTP schools. I AM saying there's a better and more efficient way to spend the limited resources that DCPS has and make a difference in the communities that most need opportunities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"So would anyone be supportive of giving at-risk preference over IB students for Pk3 and Pk4 at DCPS?"

Would you -- if they stay, as they would, for the rest of elementary, and junior high, etc? So PK3 and PK4 get filled with at risk. Maybe one additional classroom gets opened up for K, maybe 2 if it is a big school. Where will all the other IB kids go? And then you have a school which is 75% at risk or 3/5 at risk. That is assuming a lot of at-risk kids apply, but there probably are a lot.

Or let's say it is just 1/3 of at risk kids admitted for pre-K, so that by K it is about one classroom's worth of at risk spread across the classes. That is still a whole extra class that would have to be added to K to maintain the IB by right kids. Where do you put all of these kids, and where do you get the money to add the extra classes. Unless more of them leave the system, which they might.

If the school gets crowded they can reduce the number of preschool classrooms offered. Surprise surprise, overcrowding to allow for preschool is fine when it is serving IB siblings from mostly middle and upper class families. Will it be tolerable for poor kids?

The money comes from downtown under the UPSFF. It follows the student.

They do cut Pre-K at overcrowded affluent schools. Janney just cut a class last year, and as a result, more than a third of IB kids were shut out (all siblings still got in though, so maybe that's the red line current parents are drawing).

[Anonymous]

Here's my plan:

10% minimum at-risk in every school, with at-risk expanded to include anyone zoned for a failing IB school
at-risk preference for IB kids in PK
at-risk preference for city-wide schools
creation of additional DCPS city-wide magnets that are designed for economic and racial diversity
repeat whatever Harlem Childrens Zone did for the schools that are still failing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"So would anyone be supportive of giving at-risk preference over IB students for Pk3 and Pk4 at DCPS?"

Would you -- if they stay, as they would, for the rest of elementary, and junior high, etc? So PK3 and PK4 get filled with at risk. Maybe one additional classroom gets opened up for K, maybe 2 if it is a big school. Where will all the other IB kids go? And then you have a school which is 75% at risk or 3/5 at risk. That is assuming a lot of at-risk kids apply, but there probably are a lot.

Or let's say it is just 1/3 of at risk kids admitted for pre-K, so that by K it is about one classroom's worth of at risk spread across the classes. That is still a whole extra class that would have to be added to K to maintain the IB by right kids. Where do you put all of these kids, and where do you get the money to add the extra classes. Unless more of them leave the system, which they might.

If the school gets crowded they can reduce the number of preschool classrooms offered. Surprise surprise, overcrowding to allow for preschool is fine when it is serving IB siblings from mostly middle and upper class families. Will it be tolerable for poor kids?

The money comes from downtown under the UPSFF. It follows the student.

They do cut Pre-K at overcrowded affluent schools. Janney just cut a class last year, and as a result, more than a third of IB kids were shut out (all siblings still got in though, so maybe that's the red line current parents are drawing).

Almost two thirds of Brent's IB PS3ers were left out this year and IB siblings were left out a few years back but no changes were made. Not really sure what the redline is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP who hasn't read the whole thread.

I would like to see a system that makes preK attendance mandatory for the children of any parent on any form of assistance, in foster care, etc. The schools would provide wrap around services for these kids and families, would be in the neighborhoods where the kids live, and be staffed by experts in ECE in high poverty communities. Generational poverty will continue until we get the young generation early enough to understand that they have options and we teach them the ways and benefits of exercising those options. Sending kids who live in poverty to OOB schools isn't enough -- YET. We need to show these kids that they can learn in their own community. That their community believes they can achieve and expects them to do it. We need to make it easier for parents living in poverty to get their kids to a strong school close to home, not a strong school that's two bus rides away and a light year different. I am NOT saying that poor kids shouldn't be in WOTP schools. I AM saying there's a better and more efficient way to spend the limited resources that DCPS has and make a difference in the communities that most need opportunities.

This plus parental support. Because at the end of the day the kids are with the parents more than in school. The parents need to be taught how to be responsible parents a key skill which is missing and of the major causes of inter generational poverty