Hypothetical consequences of a lottery change

[Anonymous]

Was I trying to change the school? Sure. Trying to change it into a school that had an active parent group. A school that had a decent website. A school that didn't have trash all over its playground. Not all change is bad!

[Anonymous]

To clarify, I was part of the PTO so I’m sharing first hand accounts from parents. I know it’s not true at all schools. I believe all parents are doing the best they can for their kids. Sometimes that’s moving schools, for whatever reason. I also do believe principal changes can be the best way to change a school. I think frequent turn over of PTOs is not good for long term improvement. But I’m not trying to have a discussion about PTOs or parent involvement.

What I am talking specifically about is families getting into a school for PreK because it’s convenient and free, not because they are committed to the school. They leave at the first opportunity. What if families basically had to stay as a condition for accepting that free spot?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To clarify, I was part of the PTO so I’m sharing first hand accounts from parents. I know it’s not true at all schools. I believe all parents are doing the best they can for their kids. Sometimes that’s moving schools, for whatever reason. I also do believe principal changes can be the best way to change a school. I think frequent turn over of PTOs is not good for long term improvement. But I’m not trying to have a discussion about PTOs or parent involvement.

What I am talking specifically about is families getting into a school for PreK because it’s convenient and free, not because they are committed to the school. They leave at the first opportunity. What if families basically had to stay as a condition for accepting that free spot?

I've been around the block with PTO moms of all types and many of them have a controlling streak, but this takes the cake. Award for the most controlling daydream i've ever heard about schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a white mom of a child in ECE who has also been very involved with their Title I school's PTO, the type of comments from OP are so demoralizing. It's frustrating when someone subscribes motive for another person volunteering based on their race and age of child.

Yes, characterizing the involvement of ECE parents in the PTO as "trying to change" the school is not an accurate reflection of why most parents joint the PTO when their kids are in early grades. For me it was just a desire to be involved, get to know other parents, and support whatever the school was already doing however I could. I wasn't trying to take over or tell anyone how to run the school. In fact most of the time it was the opposite -- as a newer parent at the school, getting involved in the PTO was a way for me to learn from veteran parents, teachers, and administrators about the school. I just didn't know anything when it all started. I also have an only child so every single age/grade/phase is a first time experience for me, I've found the more information I have, the better.

Thank you! It's wonderful when parent like you get involved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To clarify, I was part of the PTO so I’m sharing first hand accounts from parents. I know it’s not true at all schools. I believe all parents are doing the best they can for their kids. Sometimes that’s moving schools, for whatever reason. I also do believe principal changes can be the best way to change a school. I think frequent turn over of PTOs is not good for long term improvement. But I’m not trying to have a discussion about PTOs or parent involvement.

What I am talking specifically about is families getting into a school for PreK because it’s convenient and free, not because they are committed to the school. They leave at the first opportunity. What if families basically had to stay as a condition for accepting that free spot?

Then they wouldn't accept it. Obviously. It's not a price worth paying.

I get that it's annoying but you need to get out of your fantasy world here. Focus on quality.

[Anonymous]

OP, rather than thinking "How can the system try to coerce people to attend a school they are unhappy with", you should think "How can the school improve performance and parent satisfaction?" Because that's the real problem here. And as your child gets older and you have more experiences, you too will have experiences that make you want to leave, or feel that you must leave because the down side of staying is too much.

Stop thinking about critical mass and demographics so much. Those things are not enough. As evidenced by CMI and Two Rivers. This idea wouldn't solve your problem anyway. Even if everyone did stay, it will still be a low performance school if the teaching isn't high quality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, rather than thinking "How can the system try to coerce people to attend a school they are unhappy with", you should think "How can the school improve performance and parent satisfaction?" Because that's the real problem here. And as your child gets older and you have more experiences, you too will have experiences that make you want to leave, or feel that you must leave because the down side of staying is too much.

Stop thinking about critical mass and demographics so much. Those things are not enough. As evidenced by CMI and Two Rivers. This idea wouldn't solve your problem anyway. Even if everyone did stay, it will still be a low performance school if the teaching isn't high quality.

NP and I agree with your sentiment but do think charters are different than DCPS in terms of ability to attract high quality teachers if the school gets families to stay longer. DCPS teachers are more likely to transfer schools within the system because of pay and pension benefits. So if a school could get more community buy in, it will attract teachers of higher quality. Charters don’t have the same pull.

[Anonymous]

PP again and this is why high quality schools like Basis still have high teacher turnover versus Banneker or Walls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, rather than thinking "How can the system try to coerce people to attend a school they are unhappy with", you should think "How can the school improve performance and parent satisfaction?" Because that's the real problem here. And as your child gets older and you have more experiences, you too will have experiences that make you want to leave, or feel that you must leave because the down side of staying is too much.

Stop thinking about critical mass and demographics so much. Those things are not enough. As evidenced by CMI and Two Rivers. This idea wouldn't solve your problem anyway. Even if everyone did stay, it will still be a low performance school if the teaching isn't high quality.

NP and I agree with your sentiment but do think charters are different than DCPS in terms of ability to attract high quality teachers if the school gets families to stay longer. DCPS teachers are more likely to transfer schools within the system because of pay and pension benefits. So if a school could get more community buy in, it will attract teachers of higher quality. Charters don’t have the same pull.

Well yes, you can have some impact on teacher quality (which isn't the same thing as retention and is sometimes the opposite of retention).

Charters have other kinds of pull for teachers. If DCPS were really that much a better deal, charters would have no good teachers at all, because DCPS would hire them. Some teachers really like the flexibility, the specific model of their school, or things like a fixed class size and not having to take new kids mid-year. Some teachers aren't fully licensed so DCPS won't take them. There Re lots of reasons.

[Anonymous]

We have two children at a Title 1 school.

The more posts on DCUM I read about 2nd grade onward always makes me nervous.

I really want to stay at this school until 5th, and we probably will. But the idea that my kid(s) friends may all leave by the time 3rd grade rolls around really stinks.

[Anonymous]

I am on the exec board of a Title I PTO. My "campaign speech" was literally: "I don't have time for this, but I will do if no one else is up for it." No one was.

We also aren't trying to "change" our excellent school by making it whiter or wealthier or whatever. Our school is majority low-income and majority students or color and we love it as it is.

We just want to support our amazing principal and teachers with some extra funds raised from the businesses that surround our school and from our ANC. Most of our families don't have the $$ to pay for field trips or donate for things like pizza for the annual picnic. Our principal was paying for that stuff out of her own pocket until we started helping.

In exchange for all this grant writing and letters to local businesses, you want me to sign away my right to lottery should this excellent principal leave and the school go downhill? In exchange for free PreK, which the city's wealthy families can get privately? Sorry, but nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am on the exec board of a Title I PTO. My "campaign speech" was literally: "I don't have time for this, but I will do if no one else is up for it." No one was.

We also aren't trying to "change" our excellent school by making it whiter or wealthier or whatever. Our school is majority low-income and majority students or color and we love it as it is.

We just want to support our amazing principal and teachers with some extra funds raised from the businesses that surround our school and from our ANC. Most of our families don't have the $$ to pay for field trips or donate for things like pizza for the annual picnic. Our principal was paying for that stuff out of her own pocket until we started helping.

In exchange for all this grant writing and letters to local businesses, you want me to sign away my right to lottery should this excellent principal leave and the school go downhill? In exchange for free PreK, which the city's wealthy families can get privately? Sorry, but nope.

This. What a terrible deal! I worked my butt off for our Title I, but at a certain point could no longer put my kid through what was happening there. If you want to run off a lot of people who are making an effort, go for it, OP. Hope you enjoy what's left.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We have two children at a Title 1 school.

The more posts on DCUM I read about 2nd grade onward always makes me nervous.

I really want to stay at this school until 5th, and we probably will. But the idea that my kid(s) friends may all leave by the time 3rd grade rolls around really stinks.

Ask around and see what happens at your kids' school, but that just wasn't our experience. Yes, some kids left, but the ones who were planning on lotterying for Latin/BASIS stuck around through fourth, probably because they didn't want to change schools twice.

[Anonymous]

OP had good intentions. rich families WOTP take spots at these schools just to get up and leave when K starts.

Maybe they would leave these spots for parents who want to go to these schools -- and stay there -- if the rich parents were forced to stay (meaning they wouldnt take the spot).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have two children at a Title 1 school.

The more posts on DCUM I read about 2nd grade onward always makes me nervous.

I really want to stay at this school until 5th, and we probably will. But the idea that my kid(s) friends may all leave by the time 3rd grade rolls around really stinks.

Ask around and see what happens at your kids' school, but that just wasn't our experience. Yes, some kids left, but the ones who were planning on lotterying for Latin/BASIS stuck around through fourth, probably because they didn't want to change schools twice.

The parents we have come close with say they will stay.. so that does give me hope. But I tend to think they wont for a "winning" lottery ticket. They do the lottery "for fun" each year type thing tells me for the right win- they will bounce.

And I am not saying I blame them! I just have not thought about the lottery for years and it has been much less anxiety haha