Lottery/school despair

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, hon. You are *much* more in control of this than you think. You *can* stay in your home, if you are willing to open your mind to more schools. It's a choice that you are making. Lots of people attend schools like Langley, Seaton, Burroughs, Miner, etc., and they like it! If that's not what you want, fine. But it's a thing that lots of real people are doing all over the city. You're choosing not to be open-minded and do what you need to do to make a lower-performing school work for your family. But it's a choice. And you'll feel less in despair about this if you recognize that it is a choice.

Oh please. It’s a choice that is no longer tenable in MS.

Lots of people stay for MS. And since OP's child is entering 1st, OP has lots of time to ponder her strategy and figure something out. Right now, she is *choosing* to be unhappy with schools that other people find acceptable. That's her choice, but it's a choice. The self-pity is not necessary.

No the overwhelming majority of middle class families going to the schools above are not staying in the upper grades much less tracking to the middle schools that they feed into.

OP’s standards are higher than families who choose to stay in schools above. At least you have that part right.

Right, most are not but some are. And the total of high-SES people who are staying *in DC but not at Deal/Hardy* for middle school is pretty high. I would consider switching to any EOTP middle school, DCPS or charter, to be "staying" even if it isn't the feeder.

And yes it's a choice. There's no need to act so powerless. Look, I'd love to have a nice big yard like country folk do, and I can't have that on the Hill. Am I powerless? No, I'm choosing to live on the Hill.

BS. The total percentage of high SES families going to middle schools besides Deal/Hardy is NOT high,

I don’t know what kool aid you are drinking.

I'm not sure about percentages, but to say there aren't a bunch of high-SES families if you add up Stuart-Hobson, Eliot-Hine and Jefferson, BASIS, Latin, Latin, Inspired Teaching, and let's not forget DCI, plus miscellaneous others at smaller schools, it's a lot of people in total.

We are talking DCPS middle schools. Try to stay on topic here.

No, we are not. We're talking about OP's options, which includes charter middle schools.

We are talking about DCPS schools, especially those on the short lists and then posters mentioned the middle school feeds to these schools.

BTW your chances of getting into Basis or Latin decreases every year as more families come up the chain needing middle schools. Forget about DCI if you are not in a feeder.

Middle school seats are the most competitive in the city. If you think elementary was bad, you’ve seen nothing yet.

OP has been saying this whole time she would love to get into Inspired Teaching. And if you will actually look at the data, you will see that the acceptance rate for 5th graders *in the initial lottery* is over 50%. For non-siblings it's still over 45%. Then chances are pretty good for 6th as well. Last year ITS cleared, or nearly cleared, its 5th grade waitlist, and came close for 6th. So calm down.

OP doesn’t need middle school for a few years and it will be much more competitive as ITS gets more interest downstream from families shut out of the other charters.

Frankly, I would just move now OP to solid pyramid so you get a good elementary and middle school. I’ve looked at ITS middle and crossed it off the list. There is a reason why many ITS families don’t send their kid to the middle school there. Nevertheless with supply and demand, it will get harder to get into ITS for middle school like I said as more families are shut out of everything

Well yes, but OP says that she likes ITS. I know not everyone stays for middle school, that's why OP has a good chance of getting in. If OP can find somewhere satisfactory to hold her through 4th, and try for ITS, Brent, and Ludlow-Taylor each year as well as Latin and BASIS in 5th, there's a very high probability that it will work out. And there's still 6th at Latin, DCI, ITS, and Stuart-Hobson as a backup year. Yes, I know MV and TR are a hot mess so everyone's trying to get into ITS, but that will likely work its way through the system in the next year or two. It just simply is not that hard to get into Ludlow-Taylor upper grades (based on last year's data), and even if ITS did become more difficult to get into, it still would be pretty likely to happen if OP tries each year.

[Anonymous]

Here is what OP can do.

1) Go to Watkins for 1st-5th and then Stuart-Hobson.

2) Go to Watkins and then try to get into ITS/Latin/BASIS, with Stuart-Hobson feeder rights as a backup.

3) Get into somewhere else she likes well enough this year, rather than giving up in despair in early July.

I really don't understand why Watkins isn't the answer to OP's problem. Is Watkins not good enough either?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is what OP can do.

1) Go to Watkins for 1st-5th and then Stuart-Hobson.

2) Go to Watkins and then try to get into ITS/Latin/BASIS, with Stuart-Hobson feeder rights as a backup.

3) Get into somewhere else she likes well enough this year, rather than giving up in despair in early July.

I really don't understand why Watkins isn't the answer to OP's problem. Is Watkins not good enough either?

Talk to CH families. People don’t stay at Watkins and it doesn’t get much buy in for a reason and the percentage of hill families who go to SH is small.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what OP can do.

1) Go to Watkins for 1st-5th and then Stuart-Hobson.

2) Go to Watkins and then try to get into ITS/Latin/BASIS, with Stuart-Hobson feeder rights as a backup.

3) Get into somewhere else she likes well enough this year, rather than giving up in despair in early July.

I really don't understand why Watkins isn't the answer to OP's problem. Is Watkins not good enough either?

Talk to CH families. People don’t stay at Watkins and it doesn’t get much buy in for a reason and the percentage of hill families who go to SH is small.

Well I know, but OP said she would be happy with the schools on the Hill, so I'm taking her at her word. We're trying to help OP with her actual problem, which is finding the best school that she can get into this year with a bad lottery number. Right?

[Anonymous]

I think Watkins is a good option for OP. Since Peabody is separate, 1st is kind of the entry year at Watkins. Watkins is large - think 5 classes per grade. There are lots of OOB students. But enough people stay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is what OP can do.

1) Go to Watkins for 1st-5th and then Stuart-Hobson.

2) Go to Watkins and then try to get into ITS/Latin/BASIS, with Stuart-Hobson feeder rights as a backup.

3) Get into somewhere else she likes well enough this year, rather than giving up in despair in early July.

I really don't understand why Watkins isn't the answer to OP's problem. Is Watkins not good enough either?

Doesn't Watkins have a lot of attrition from Peabody? I haven't looked at the numbers, but most of the families we know who did Peabody for ECE left before moving to Watkins. It seems to be considered a significant downgrade for some reason.

[Anonymous]

I think there is less of a small size neighborhood feel than at Brent/Maury/Ludlow/Payne.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what OP can do.

1) Go to Watkins for 1st-5th and then Stuart-Hobson.

2) Go to Watkins and then try to get into ITS/Latin/BASIS, with Stuart-Hobson feeder rights as a backup.

3) Get into somewhere else she likes well enough this year, rather than giving up in despair in early July.

I really don't understand why Watkins isn't the answer to OP's problem. Is Watkins not good enough either?

Doesn't Watkins have a lot of attrition from Peabody? I haven't looked at the numbers, but most of the families we know who did Peabody for ECE left before moving to Watkins. It seems to be considered a significant downgrade for some reason.

It’s a downgrade because Watkins admits a large volume of OOB underperforming kids and the administration focuses solely on closing the achievement gap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what OP can do.

1) Go to Watkins for 1st-5th and then Stuart-Hobson.

2) Go to Watkins and then try to get into ITS/Latin/BASIS, with Stuart-Hobson feeder rights as a backup.

3) Get into somewhere else she likes well enough this year, rather than giving up in despair in early July.

I really don't understand why Watkins isn't the answer to OP's problem. Is Watkins not good enough either?

Doesn't Watkins have a lot of attrition from Peabody? I haven't looked at the numbers, but most of the families we know who did Peabody for ECE left before moving to Watkins. It seems to be considered a significant downgrade for some reason.

It’s a downgrade because Watkins admits a large volume of OOB underperforming kids and the administration focuses solely on closing the achievement gap.

Well, OP has a bad number so her only options are schools that aren't great. You could do a lot worse than Watkins to SH, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what OP can do.

1) Go to Watkins for 1st-5th and then Stuart-Hobson.

2) Go to Watkins and then try to get into ITS/Latin/BASIS, with Stuart-Hobson feeder rights as a backup.

3) Get into somewhere else she likes well enough this year, rather than giving up in despair in early July.

I really don't understand why Watkins isn't the answer to OP's problem. Is Watkins not good enough either?

Doesn't Watkins have a lot of attrition from Peabody? I haven't looked at the numbers, but most of the families we know who did Peabody for ECE left before moving to Watkins. It seems to be considered a significant downgrade for some reason.

It’s a downgrade because Watkins admits a large volume of OOB underperforming kids and the administration focuses solely on closing the achievement gap.

Well, OP has a bad number so her only options are schools that aren't great. You could do a lot worse than Watkins to SH, though.

She has the better option of moving out of the city and never have to worry about K-12 again, be in a good academic performing pyramid, good facilities, good sports and extracurricular offerings in addition to bigger space.

Why would you stay in a school you are not happy or move to another similar poorly performing school and then have no idea what the hell you are going to do for middle school with a high probability of ending up in a crappy middle school too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what OP can do.

1) Go to Watkins for 1st-5th and then Stuart-Hobson.

2) Go to Watkins and then try to get into ITS/Latin/BASIS, with Stuart-Hobson feeder rights as a backup.

3) Get into somewhere else she likes well enough this year, rather than giving up in despair in early July.

I really don't understand why Watkins isn't the answer to OP's problem. Is Watkins not good enough either?

Doesn't Watkins have a lot of attrition from Peabody? I haven't looked at the numbers, but most of the families we know who did Peabody for ECE left before moving to Watkins. It seems to be considered a significant downgrade for some reason.

It’s a downgrade because Watkins admits a large volume of OOB underperforming kids and the administration focuses solely on closing the achievement gap.

Well, OP has a bad number so her only options are schools that aren't great. You could do a lot worse than Watkins to SH, though.

But if OP is currently at a school similar to Watkins (or even at Watkins), there is also nothing to gain. I think the issue is that it’s probably a lateral move.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what OP can do.

1) Go to Watkins for 1st-5th and then Stuart-Hobson.

2) Go to Watkins and then try to get into ITS/Latin/BASIS, with Stuart-Hobson feeder rights as a backup.

3) Get into somewhere else she likes well enough this year, rather than giving up in despair in early July.

I really don't understand why Watkins isn't the answer to OP's problem. Is Watkins not good enough either?

Doesn't Watkins have a lot of attrition from Peabody? I haven't looked at the numbers, but most of the families we know who did Peabody for ECE left before moving to Watkins. It seems to be considered a significant downgrade for some reason.

It’s a downgrade because Watkins admits a large volume of OOB underperforming kids and the administration focuses solely on closing the achievement gap.

Well, OP has a bad number so her only options are schools that aren't great. You could do a lot worse than Watkins to SH, though.

But if OP is currently at a school similar to Watkins (or even at Watkins), there is also nothing to gain. I think the issue is that it’s probably a lateral move.

Well, OP did say she would be happy with schools on the Hill, or Seaton. So if Seaton would be an upgrade, the current school is probably worse than Watkins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what OP can do.

1) Go to Watkins for 1st-5th and then Stuart-Hobson.

2) Go to Watkins and then try to get into ITS/Latin/BASIS, with Stuart-Hobson feeder rights as a backup.

3) Get into somewhere else she likes well enough this year, rather than giving up in despair in early July.

I really don't understand why Watkins isn't the answer to OP's problem. Is Watkins not good enough either?

Doesn't Watkins have a lot of attrition from Peabody? I haven't looked at the numbers, but most of the families we know who did Peabody for ECE left before moving to Watkins. It seems to be considered a significant downgrade for some reason.

It’s a downgrade because Watkins admits a large volume of OOB underperforming kids and the administration focuses solely on closing the achievement gap.

Well, OP has a bad number so her only options are schools that aren't great. You could do a lot worse than Watkins to SH, though.

But if OP is currently at a school similar to Watkins (or even at Watkins), there is also nothing to gain. I think the issue is that it’s probably a lateral move.

Well, OP did say she would be happy with schools on the Hill, or Seaton. So if Seaton would be an upgrade, the current school is probably worse than Watkins.

Ok, but how much worse? If you’re at a school where families start bailing at K and the issues are apparent, is moving to a school where that starts happening at 2nd an upgrade?

Moving your kid to a new school has challenges even when the school is a true upgrade. Explaining it to your kid, making new friends, being the new family. Moving to a marginally better school where you are probably going to run into similar issues is not worth those costs, especially if you’ll just wind up moving again if you can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what OP can do.

1) Go to Watkins for 1st-5th and then Stuart-Hobson.

2) Go to Watkins and then try to get into ITS/Latin/BASIS, with Stuart-Hobson feeder rights as a backup.

3) Get into somewhere else she likes well enough this year, rather than giving up in despair in early July.

I really don't understand why Watkins isn't the answer to OP's problem. Is Watkins not good enough either?

Doesn't Watkins have a lot of attrition from Peabody? I haven't looked at the numbers, but most of the families we know who did Peabody for ECE left before moving to Watkins. It seems to be considered a significant downgrade for some reason.

It’s a downgrade because Watkins admits a large volume of OOB underperforming kids and the administration focuses solely on closing the achievement gap.

Well, OP has a bad number so her only options are schools that aren't great. You could do a lot worse than Watkins to SH, though.

But if OP is currently at a school similar to Watkins (or even at Watkins), there is also nothing to gain. I think the issue is that it’s probably a lateral move.

Well, OP did say she would be happy with schools on the Hill, or Seaton. So if Seaton would be an upgrade, the current school is probably worse than Watkins.

Ok, but how much worse? If you’re at a school where families start bailing at K and the issues are apparent, is moving to a school where that starts happening at 2nd an upgrade?

Moving your kid to a new school has challenges even when the school is a true upgrade. Explaining it to your kid, making new friends, being the new family. Moving to a marginally better school where you are probably going to run into similar issues is not worth those costs, especially if you’ll just wind up moving again if you can.

This. I can’t believe the idiocracy of posters here suggesting what is likely a barely minimal improvement if any at all. Uproot your kid and yourself for a move like this is not worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what OP can do.

1) Go to Watkins for 1st-5th and then Stuart-Hobson.

2) Go to Watkins and then try to get into ITS/Latin/BASIS, with Stuart-Hobson feeder rights as a backup.

3) Get into somewhere else she likes well enough this year, rather than giving up in despair in early July.

I really don't understand why Watkins isn't the answer to OP's problem. Is Watkins not good enough either?

Doesn't Watkins have a lot of attrition from Peabody? I haven't looked at the numbers, but most of the families we know who did Peabody for ECE left before moving to Watkins. It seems to be considered a significant downgrade for some reason.

It’s a downgrade because Watkins admits a large volume of OOB underperforming kids and the administration focuses solely on closing the achievement gap.

Well, OP has a bad number so her only options are schools that aren't great. You could do a lot worse than Watkins to SH, though.

But if OP is currently at a school similar to Watkins (or even at Watkins), there is also nothing to gain. I think the issue is that it’s probably a lateral move.

Well, OP did say she would be happy with schools on the Hill, or Seaton. So if Seaton would be an upgrade, the current school is probably worse than Watkins.

Ok, but how much worse? If you’re at a school where families start bailing at K and the issues are apparent, is moving to a school where that starts happening at 2nd an upgrade?

Moving your kid to a new school has challenges even when the school is a true upgrade. Explaining it to your kid, making new friends, being the new family. Moving to a marginally better school where you are probably going to run into similar issues is not worth those costs, especially if you’ll just wind up moving again if you can.

This. I can’t believe the idiocracy of posters here suggesting what is likely a barely minimal improvement if any at all. Uproot your kid and yourself for a move like this is not worth it.

Yeah I do not understand the advice to shuffle an elementary kid around between multiple struggling schools at 7/8/9 years old. It would honestly be better to stay at one failing school, supplement like crazy, and make your best possible move, whatever it is, to guarantee a decent MS/HS.