Elementary School hopping and How much Choice is too much?

[Anonymous]

This is a necessary side effect of choice in the charter system. If families can't vote with their feet for ANY reason (not just what OP thinks is valid), you don't set up the market competition which is supposed to improve and weed out schools.

Honestly I agree that this change is disruptive, but i find the whole charter system screwy and likely discriminatory b/c navigating the lottery and logistics requires fairly savvy parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing that bothers me about the school hopping is that, at least during early childhood, the changes are not always based on the actual experience of the child. They're based on the preferences of the parent. I'm not talking about leaving English-only for dual language, because that is more understandable to me. Many of my friends are super concerned about getting their 3yo into a good feeder pattern, and since there is only one feeder pattern that is acceptable, they are all jockeying to get into some elementary school that feeds to Deal, without considering whether the elementary school is the best fit for their child or their family or whether DEAL is the best fit for their child or their family, 6 years down the road.

It is kind of crazy-making to hear the following over and over:

"Susie has had such a great year at EOTP school but we are transferring to WOTP school next year. Yes, we know that it'll take an hour and change to get there, then get to work, but it's worth it, because we really want her to go to Deal."

This won't change until the EOTP schools get better in the upper grades (beyond 2nd) and the EOTP middle/high schools improve. I really can't blame parents for thinking in the long-term, especially if they own their property and can't easily move.

I understand and agree with this logic, but I also think that the likelihood of these things happening all on their own without the families of high achieving students is small. Clearly throwing money at the problem and building fancy new buildings is not going to solve the problem. So how does it happen?

Money and fancy new buildings may not close the achievement gap (because poverty and all that jazz). But some of these EOTP schools are teaching kids really well - just look at student growth.

So one step you can take is to check your assumptions about what makes a school "better".

I'm the PP you're responding to. I'm not worried about my assumptions. We didn't play the lottery this year. We're not planning on playing again in elementary school. I'm not sold on our feeder middle school but I'm also not opposed to it and am willing to give it a few more years before I make any decisions about what DD needs, because she is in kindergarten and if we need to move, we can move. I know what goes on in the upper grades at my school. I know the teachers and I know the struggles they have in the classroom. I see the quality education and the kids and I am hopeful and proud of those kids. My concern is that the parents I know who have young children who are hedging their bets by playing the lottery every year do not see things the way that I see them.

My hope is that the test scores will increase as more people come into the system during Early Childhood and stay, either because they (like me) are willing to stay somewhere that seems just fine or because there are not enough open spaces for them to escape to another school. My fear is that that will not happen and it's another cycle of buyer's remorse and another cycle of "What do you know, with your futile optimism?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'm the PP you're responding to. I'm not worried about my assumptions. We didn't play the lottery this year. We're not planning on playing again in elementary school. I'm not sold on our feeder middle school but I'm also not opposed to it and am willing to give it a few more years before I make any decisions about what DD needs, because she is in kindergarten and if we need to move, we can move. I know what goes on in the upper grades at my school. I know the teachers and I know the struggles they have in the classroom. I see the quality education and the kids and I am hopeful and proud of those kids. My concern is that the parents I know who have young children who are hedging their bets by playing the lottery every year do not see things the way that I see them.

My hope is that the test scores will increase as more people come into the system during Early Childhood and stay, either because they (like me) are willing to stay somewhere that seems just fine or because there are not enough open spaces for them to escape to another school. My fear is that that will not happen and it's another cycle of buyer's remorse and another cycle of "What do you know, with your futile optimism?"

I was with you (I think) until the last sentence. What does that mean?

[Anonymous]

I meant that there are people now who, upon hearing someone say that they're excited to go to their low performing local school, go out of their way to tell the optimistic parents how once upon a time, they were optimistic too, but no one ever stays, because nothing can be done. The person I'm thinking of goes out of her way to mention how she wished she'd moved or tried the lottery for other schools, because trying to be part of improvement at our school was a waste of energy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I meant that there are people now who, upon hearing someone say that they're excited to go to their low performing local school, go out of their way to tell the optimistic parents how once upon a time, they were optimistic too, but no one ever stays, because nothing can be done. The person I'm thinking of goes out of her way to mention how she wished she'd moved or tried the lottery for other schools, because trying to be part of improvement at our school was a waste of energy.

This exact situation happened at my school. A bitter former parent basically told all the new parents under a new administration that she once was optimistic too and remembered how that optimism quickly dissipated. I really think she is rooting against success at the school because she isn't there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I meant that there are people now who, upon hearing someone say that they're excited to go to their low performing local school, go out of their way to tell the optimistic parents how once upon a time, they were optimistic too, but no one ever stays, because nothing can be done. The person I'm thinking of goes out of her way to mention how she wished she'd moved or tried the lottery for other schools, because trying to be part of improvement at our school was a waste of energy.

This exact situation happened at my school. A bitter former parent basically told all the new parents under a new administration that she once was optimistic too and remembered how that optimism quickly dissipated. I really think she is rooting against success at the school because she isn't there.

Hmm I wonder if we're in the same neighborhood. I learned the bitter parent is moving her kid on to yet another charter school next year.

[Anonymous]

So it there is too much school choice and it is too easy to switch schools, but the system is discriminatory because it is too difficult for many to manage.

Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I meant that there are people now who, upon hearing someone say that they're excited to go to their low performing local school, go out of their way to tell the optimistic parents how once upon a time, they were optimistic too, but no one ever stays, because nothing can be done. The person I'm thinking of goes out of her way to mention how she wished she'd moved or tried the lottery for other schools, because trying to be part of improvement at our school was a waste of energy.

This exact situation happened at my school. A bitter former parent basically told all the new parents under a new administration that she once was optimistic too and remembered how that optimism quickly dissipated. I really think she is rooting against success at the school because she isn't there.

Hmm I wonder if we're in the same neighborhood. I learned the bitter parent is moving her kid on to yet another charter school next year.

No, the person I am thinking of didn't move to a charter. Not surprising that there are a lot of bitter former parents out there, I guess.

[Anonymous]

It is a strange world that we live . A vitriolic ( can I say very bitter) parent lambasted lamasted our school on DCUM before transferring to another school. Lauded the new school ad nauseum. We've learned that family has reapplied and has a low WL#. Is there no justice?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is a strange world that we live . A vitriolic ( can I say very bitter) parent lambasted lamasted our school on DCUM before transferring to another school. Lauded the new school ad nauseum. We've learned that family has reapplied and has a low WL#. Is there no justice?

Has a low WL# back at the old school that the parent lambasted or an entirely different school? I don't get how these parents really think all of this moving around helps their kids. If you are going to move on, be strategic about it and think hard before you act. Some folks just jump ship based on "buzz" about a school generated on DCUM of all places!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a strange world that we live . A vitriolic ( can I say very bitter) parent lambasted lamasted our school on DCUM before transferring to another school. Lauded the new school ad nauseum. We've learned that family has reapplied and has a low WL#. Is there no justice?

Has a low WL# back at the old school that the parent lambasted or an entirely different school? I don't get how these parents really think all of this moving around helps their kids. If you are going to move on, be strategic about it and think hard before you act. Some folks just jump ship based on "buzz" about a school generated on DCUM of all places!

Pp said reapplied son parent is trying to come back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a strange world that we live . A vitriolic ( can I say very bitter) parent lambasted lamasted our school on DCUM before transferring to another school. Lauded the new school ad nauseum. We've learned that family has reapplied and has a low WL#. Is there no justice?

Has a low WL# back at the old school that the parent lambasted or an entirely different school? I don't get how these parents really think all of this moving around helps their kids. If you are going to move on, be strategic about it and think hard before you act. Some folks just jump ship based on "buzz" about a school generated on DCUM of all places!

I really doubt this is true in many cases at all.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, I also hate it when someone sells their house in my neighborhood and moves to a more ritzy one. Or when the same kind of people apply for a new job, and are hired, in order to get away from our horrible, no-account boss. There oughtta be a law against it, imo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I also hate it when someone sells their house in my neighborhood and moves to a more ritzy one. Or when the same kind of people apply for a new job, and are hired, in order to get away from our horrible, no-account boss. There oughtta be a law against it, imo.

Of course families should make decisions and take opportunities to improve their lives. But the research seems to show that lots of churn isn't good for kids' education (ex. http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/student-mobility/). The caveat is that research is more focused on lower-income kids bouncing from one sub-par school to another rather than high SES kids moving from a decent public elementary to a well-regarded charter, to a fancy private school. But our current "choice" focused system certainly encourages churn, which may have risks that aren't really talked about or fully understood. Especially for kids that are already at risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I also hate it when someone sells their house in my neighborhood and moves to a more ritzy one. Or when the same kind of people apply for a new job, and are hired, in order to get away from our horrible, no-account boss. There oughtta be a law against it, imo.

Your metaphor works only if your neighbor sells their house every year for 2-5 years or have long work histories of 1 year jobs.

I don't mind people trading up to go to a better school. A dear friend of mine is leaving our school next year because her child was offered a spot at their dream school. She feels very conflicted about it because her child has had a great year, but she would also be crazy not to take the spot. The churn that people are talking about is people who send their kids to different schools for several years running.