Head Start next year?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Did anyone get this letter or is this just more troll BS? |
Anonymous
I’m a teacher at a Title I school and a six page packet went home to every student in the school (not just Pre-K). I only had time to skim it but it seemed to confirm what was posted here—funding renewal prompted the change. It also seemed excessively long and complicated just to say “we’ll still have Pre-K, just different rules for schools.” |
Anonymous
You tried to throw shade, but failed. Not sure how to ‘ge’ the next chancellor. Keep me posted! |
Anonymous
Did it say which schools? What is going to happen at your school? |
Anonymous
I only received a letter. Information concerning our school will be released sometime this summer. |
Anonymous
| DCPS will have the full list of Head Start schools this summer after Head Start awards the grant amount. Even if DCPSs is awarded the full $14.5 million they requested, I would guess that only 30-40 schools will have Head Start. Everything else will probably see a drastic reduction in support. |
Anonymous
Gentrified schools don't need Head Start. Head Start is to even the playing field, the reason why DC has universal PK in the first place. |
Anonymous
|
I could see DCPS trying to keep it at these schools:
Marie Reed Cleveland Bruce Monroe Truesdell Barnard Tubman Brightwood Dorothy Height |
Anonymous
|
All of the dual language schools and the schools with large numbers of immigrants should keep it. DCPS can surely work with schools like Bancroft to enroll more Head Start eligible kids. The only schools where it really makes sense to cut the program are below.
Ludlow Taylor Van Ness Payne West Garrison Burroughs Bunker Hill Langdon Langley Amidon Bowen Payne Miner JO Wilson Tyler Takoma Whittier |
Anonymous
I would not take it from Langley. PK4 is a lot less gentrified than PK3. And you have to remember they have several separate classrooms for preschoolers with a lot of special needs. Add those in and the numbers are way more at-risk. |
Anonymous
Special needs students are not technically considered at risk (don't get me started on that). However, there is a separate funding stream to provide them with additional support. The federal government to eliminate Head Start completely (not going to happen) and those kids would not lose funding. As for being gentrified - it is the overall ECE population. So you would mix PK4 with PK3. Sounds like it on the bubble. |
Anonymous
|
I expect that of the same people who really want their schools to "flip" with more high SES IB children - or who celebrate when they do - are going to be claiming that their school should remain Head Start eligible.
You can't have it both ways. |
Anonymous
They are not automatically at-risk, but as it happens many of them are at-risk at Langley because they meet the criteria, and that means they count in the calculation. PK3 at Langley is pretty gentrified, but the class size goes up for PK4 and again for K, so even before backfilling they are adding new kids. Some are middle or high income, but overall it is a net increase in the proportion who are at-risk. Langley may lose Head Start eventually, but not this year. Eventually they will need a third K classroom and that will also bring more at-risk kids. And there is some permanent affordable housing in the boundary including right across the street. So it is hard to see Langley losing it for quite some time. |
Anonymous
+1 Say it louder for the people in the back! |
Anonymous
| Seaton is closer to losing it than Langley is. More gentrified and not as much self-contained special ed rooms. |