Anyone NOT taking their SWS PK spot?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Ditto! |
Anonymous
| My son was #29 on the SWS waitlist for kindergarten last year and we got a call in early May. I know that last year may have been the exception rather than the rule. But don't lose hope just yet. There can be movement over the summer. |
Anonymous
| I know of 2 families moving out of what will be 1st, and one out of what will be K. Looking at the way people ranked ps3 it may be that there's less movement there than in other grades? Hard to say this year as pps hav stated, but as example: if Sibling A on K WL gets a spot, then sibling B who was at #145 is moved up to #1 on the ps3 list and most families awarded a spot initially in PS3 have ranked it first, so they end up taking those spots... I really don't expect they'll work through the low teens this year with the new ranking policies. |
Anonymous
| Bump...anyone else? |
Anonymous
As someone with good wait list number for Ps3, I do not like this story. |
Anonymous
How reliable? If Wells runs for mayor, a candidate like Elissa Silverman who supports neighborhood preference, and charters in general, is likely to get elected and is unlikely to let that one rest. Never say never in a fast-changing city... Another majority white school EotP, you mean along with Brent and soon, Maury? But SWS has been majority white since day 1, 15 years ago. How big a deal would it be for the program to go from majority white for early ed to majority white PreS to 5th grade? |
Anonymous
| ^^ i think it would be a big deal because of Ludlow Taylor to the west and Miner to the East. |
Anonymous
Only if you deliberately cherry pick numbers. You could add Maury to the east as well (40% OOB btw), so I don't see your point. Not to mention LT is 80% OOB (and underenrolled at that) and Miner is 70% OOB (more fully enrolled) SWS has always had OOB families, but they mostly live on the Hill or in close proximity. It has nothing to do with DCPS and everything to do with school preferences and choice. |
Anonymous
|
^ not sure I follow this train of argument. Are you saying proximity should be given so that those in that teeny square of proximity have more choice?
I feel for families in proximity without preference, especially since it appears the IB folks have thrown in the towel at LT. However, if I were DCPS that argument would hold little traction with me. This is a "specialized school" with a unique curriculum and what will be a unique environment. I believe the legal definition of "specialized" may have been debated on another thread in regards to SWS, but regardless of that definition, the bottom line is: if I'm Kaya, I'm not handing this what-will-most-likely-be coveted school over to a group of, well yes, rich white folks, if I want to a) come off as fair-and-balanced and b) compete with charters. There are a number of "specialized" programs (many immersion) in DCPS that the IB/proximity families have a rational argument for preference at. They helped develop the program, there is no other option IB, etc. But, no offense, you really sort of tripped into your proximity so she doesn't owe you anything. What you need is some traction at LT, some more high-performing schools feeding into SH, a viable high school, etc. I look forward to the day when LT is coveted. It's got to happen eventually... And Kaya knows it, so why should she shoot herself in the foot with this one? |
Anonymous
| ^ In what decade do you think LT will be a viable school for IB parents? I don't see it happening with the current principal or in the current decade. |
Anonymous
| Are you 22:34? "Never say never in a fast-changing city..."? |
Anonymous
|
SWS is as "specialized" as LT is. That means, that both offer a Reggio inspired environment. The difference is, SWS is actually good at it.
And just for your information, being a neighborhood school is part of the Reggio philosophy. Maybe that is why it is not working out so well at LT and traditionally has been better at SWS. Before those clowns decided to make it city-wide this year, it was neighborhood for 15 years and thriving. |
Anonymous
|
Ya - they should have put it straight into van ness, and kept the boundaries of prefernce the same until van ness could have supported the population requirement, ergo making it a neighborhood school.
Alas, that wouldn't have helped LT IB families in any way, and this being the only sound argument for proximity (Reggio works best when community-centered) it seems the best bet is to have the school itself drive the argument. |
Anonymous
PP here -- you're putting words in my mouth. It has nothing to do with neighborhood preference. Even when SWS had the Cluster boundaries, families were able to gain seats at SWS OOB. It was never strictly IB as the Cluster sib preference was an entry point for some families. Many of those families live on Cap Hill or nearby but not all.
May apply to the LT IB, but there are many legit ways and a LOT of families at SWS who've never lived in the Cluster boundary or exercied any kind of proximity. SWS has a strong neighborhood brand which attracts from the Hill largely by word of mouth. It's small even after expansion, specialized, and probably not on everybody's radar or everybody's preference. It attracts LT families who struck out early and have been able to lottery into K and 1 where there's less competition for seats than PS3. LT should work harder to retain these families instead of shipping them off to SWS and elsewhere. Is there a rule I'm missing which requires every DCUM post about SWS to become a Ludlow Taylor rant? |
Anonymous
| ^. Sorry, still missing your point I think (and I didn't bring up the preference subject, nor LT/Maury...I was a NP.) Do you not want proximity preference then? What is it about? |