JKLM residents are killing elementaries in lower NW

[Anonymous]

Op, I am confused. Are you asserting that the unprepared K kids result from IB students who don't get into ECE at their neighborhood schools? If they applied- they would beat out the OB kids, right? So the problem is that folks IB for your school don't want ECE. Your beef is not with OOB folks- but with your IB population.

This is exactly right. The OOB kids don't get in unless there are available slots after all the IB kids are placed. What OP really is arguing for is that her school's PS and PK classes remain under-enrolled rather that be filled with kids who are IB at JKLM. Which is, of course, ridiculous. She's also claiming that the presence is these children results in underprepared IB kindergarteners. Equally ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Op, I am confused. Are you asserting that the unprepared K kids result from IB students who don't get into ECE at their neighborhood schools? If they applied- they would beat out the OB kids, right? So the problem is that folks IB for your school don't want ECE. Your beef is not with OOB folks- but with your IB population.

This is exactly right. The OOB kids don't get in unless there are available slots after all the IB kids are placed. What OP really is arguing for is that her school's PS and PK classes remain under-enrolled rather that be filled with kids who are IB at JKLM. Which is, of course, ridiculous. She's also claiming that the presence is these children results in underprepared IB kindergarteners. Equally ridiculous.

Yes, OP, what schools are you talking about anyway? And which is the school with 25 percent Oyster IB at PK?

[Anonymous]

This happens all over the city. Maury/Brent/Peabody kids have been going to other ECE programs for years.

[Anonymous]

Yay - neighbors against neighbors. This is fun!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Op, I am confused. Are you asserting that the unprepared K kids result from IB students who don't get into ECE at their neighborhood schools? If they applied- they would beat out the OB kids, right? So the problem is that folks IB for your school don't want ECE. Your beef is not with OOB folks- but with your IB population.

This is exactly right. The OOB kids don't get in unless there are available slots after all the IB kids are placed. What OP really is arguing for is that her school's PS and PK classes remain under-enrolled rather that be filled with kids who are IB at JKLM. Which is, of course, ridiculous. She's also claiming that the presence is these children results in underprepared IB kindergarteners. Equally ridiculous.

It's hard for hearst to be fully enrolled IB when members of current Janney community resist being rezoned to Hearst.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Op, I am confused. Are you asserting that the unprepared K kids result from IB students who don't get into ECE at their neighborhood schools? If they applied- they would beat out the OB kids, right? So the problem is that folks IB for your school don't want ECE. Your beef is not with OOB folks- but with your IB population.

This is exactly right. The OOB kids don't get in unless there are available slots after all the IB kids are placed. What OP really is arguing for is that her school's PS and PK classes remain under-enrolled rather that be filled with kids who are IB at JKLM. Which is, of course, ridiculous. She's also claiming that the presence is these children results in underprepared IB kindergarteners. Equally ridiculous.

Yes, OP, what schools are you talking about anyway? And which is the school with 25 percent Oyster IB at PK?

I wonder this, too. Maybe Francis-Stevens?

[Anonymous]

I bet Marie reed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Op, I am confused. Are you asserting that the unprepared K kids result from IB students who don't get into ECE at their neighborhood schools? If they applied- they would beat out the OB kids, right? So the problem is that folks IB for your school don't want ECE. Your beef is not with OOB folks- but with your IB population.

This is exactly right. The OOB kids don't get in unless there are available slots after all the IB kids are placed. What OP really is arguing for is that her school's PS and PK classes remain under-enrolled rather that be filled with kids who are IB at JKLM. Which is, of course, ridiculous. She's also claiming that the presence is these children results in underprepared IB kindergarteners. Equally ridiculous.

Okay, I think you have completely misunderstood what some folks have been arguing. I'm not sure I buy their argument, but I don't think you should misrepresent it (I assume unintentionally). I think what they are arguing is that Upper NW families apply in droves to Lower NW school PK slots because they don't have PK3 and cannot get in to their own schools for PK4. These schools have slots because they do not have enough IB families to take all of the PK slots so they have OOB slots available. Because so many families apply, many of Upper NW families take the OOB slots at Lower NW schools for PK, but then leave the school at K when they have rights to there own school. The Lower NW schools then take new OOB children from other parts of the city at K. Some posters have suggested that these new OOB families are less well prepared -- why hasn't been said, but let's be charitable and say it is because the programs in their previous schools weren't as rigorous, were not as well funded or well run, or that the move from one school to another was disruptive to them. Also implied is that this churn is disruptive to the school. Friendships are broken, classroom dynamics shaken up, etc.. Finally, unsaid here, but definitely on other threads, is that the Upper NW families are not as invested in the school -- don't volunteer or give, because they know they are leaving. So I am skeptical of these arguments, but I wouldn't call them ridiculous. Why the OOB children coming in at K should be underprepared is not clear, but if they are coming from schools with substantially lower test scores, which is likely, it is at least plausible. Is shifting a bunch of children in and out of the school disruptive? Probably a little. Would the Upper NW families probably invest less because they are short-timers? Probably true too, though they might be able/willing to give more than other families with less means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don't most jklm do private preschool?

Yes, absolutely for age 3. I have never once met a person in my Murch boundary neighborhood who has cast about the city for a free spot in a DCPS for pk3.

For age four, I have met two household IB for Murch who sent their kids -- interestingly, both families had twins -- to Hearst for pk4. One of these families did this about 8 years ago, the other, more recently.

It's not a common thing in these parts, at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't most jklm do private preschool?

Yes, absolutely for age 3. I have never once met a person in my Murch boundary neighborhood who has cast about the city for a free spot in a DCPS for pk3.

For age four, I have met two household IB for Murch who sent their kids -- interestingly, both families had twins -- to Hearst for pk4. One of these families did this about 8 years ago, the other, more recently.

It's not a common thing in these parts, at all.

So the families used Hearst for pk4 and then left? Doubt they contributed much to the community. This is exactly why they should not do this. If they can pay for pk3, they can pay for pk4, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't most jklm do private preschool?

Yes, absolutely for age 3. I have never once met a person in my Murch boundary neighborhood who has cast about the city for a free spot in a DCPS for pk3.

For age four, I have met two household IB for Murch who sent their kids -- interestingly, both families had twins -- to Hearst for pk4. One of these families did this about 8 years ago, the other, more recently.

It's not a common thing in these parts, at all.

Fight by anecdote! I know several Upper NW families that used public schools for PK3, and many who sent their kids to other schools for PK4 because they couldn't get into their IB school. So by my limited experience it must be a very common thing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Upper NW families "lotterying" into lower NW schools is only going to intensify as these schools drop PK classrooms to try to mitigate their overcrowding problems. In principle, you could remove their rights to enter the lottery elsewhere, but I doubt the city has any political appetite for that.

How on Earth would you even do that? Hey I know! Maybe you could draw a line around Ward 3 and announce every adult living there has to pay property taxes twice! Or, charge a $1000 annual surcharge to licensed drivers who also have a child in Key.

Or more analogously, make a rule that anyone living in Ward 3 cannot attend Deal unless they went all the way through J, L, or Mu. first and didn't attend private elementary school. Let's stick it to 'em!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't most jklm do private preschool?

Yes, absolutely for age 3. I have never once met a person in my Murch boundary neighborhood who has cast about the city for a free spot in a DCPS for pk3.

For age four, I have met two household IB for Murch who sent their kids -- interestingly, both families had twins -- to Hearst for pk4. One of these families did this about 8 years ago, the other, more recently.

It's not a common thing in these parts, at all.

Fight by anecdote! I know several Upper NW families that used public schools for PK3, and many who sent their kids to other schools for PK4 because they couldn't get into their IB school. So by my limited experience it must be a very common thing!

"upper NW" isn't the same as Ward 3.

How many families do you know who own homes in 20015 or 20016 and send their kids across the city for pk3? Be honest.

[Anonymous]

8:50 spells out the argument well.

Basicallh they are saying please don't take up our OOB spots if you dont want to commit long term. Leave those for families who really want to stay at the school.

I've never been at a DCPS but it's pretty clear to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Upper NW families "lotterying" into lower NW schools is only going to intensify as these schools drop PK classrooms to try to mitigate their overcrowding problems. In principle, you could remove their rights to enter the lottery elsewhere, but I doubt the city has any political appetite for that.

How on Earth would you even do that? Hey I know! Maybe you could draw a line around Ward 3 and announce every adult living there has to pay property taxes twice! Or, charge a $1000 annual surcharge to licensed drivers who also have a child in Key.

Or more analogously, make a rule that anyone living in Ward 3 cannot attend Deal unless they went all the way through J, L, or Mu. first and didn't attend private elementary school. Let's stick it to 'em!!!

I think it would be pretty easy for the DC public school lottery to remove OOB rights to PK3 or PK4 by address. I would suspect it would take them a day of programming if not an afternoon. The question is not how would you do it, but it is an equitable and just thing to do. I think that is the harder sell, though not impossible. They city already choose to not give Ward 3 schools PK3. This would be essentially equivalent.