Redshirting consequences at Lafayette

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're planning to testify at the SBOE hearing next week presumably about how it's incredibly unfair that DCPS is enforcing its own policy. It is spearheaded by a Lafayette parent as I understand.

The letter they're circulating uses some pretty extreme language saying kindergarten access is being threatened if your child was born before September 30th and leads to a lot of confusion. It's actually pretty gross to try and scare parents about something that absolutely will not threaten their kid's access to kindergarten but they seem to be targeting UMC PTOs too which is equally gross.

If the SBOE or DCPS give any air to this I’m going to be so angry. There are kindergarteners in DCPS exposed to mold and lead in their dilapidated buildings but no lets focus on rich parents whining because they didn’t get their way.

Tell that outrage to the idiot DCPS person who referred child protective services to these parents. Taking time and resources away from families who really need it for a publicity stunt.

Please get facts straight, DCPS doesn’t have a policy. It’s a date at which children born before are entitled to kindergarten. Not that they must enter kindergarten.

It’s really amazing how easy it is for people to make up their own alternative facts.

It wasn't like these families were shying away from the cameras WRT being "found" for CPS.

But aren't these children in school- private pre-k?

"Private pre-k" is childcare, not school.

Mmmmm… not sure what pre k you are sending your kids to but lots of pre k programs are not daycares…..

"Unless specifically exempted, every Caregiver and Child Development Facility, regardless of the name by which the Facility is designated must be licensed to operate a child care facility in the District of Columbia." https://osse.dc.gov/node/446

Yes, many private pre k programs provide educational content. But at the end of the day, they are still childcare. Public, public charter, and even private elementary and secondary schools operate under total different requirements than childcare facilities.

So you’re saying the pre-k programs at GDS, sidwell, Beauvoir etc are daycares?

No. If you clicked on the OSSE link you would see that those programs fall under an exempted category.

I'm not sure why someone spending $45K+ at one of those schools would care about the kindergarten cut-off age for public school.

I am well aware these programs are exempt. I am making the point that most true pre-K programs are not daycare. We personally know of many families who went to schools that are part of the exempted category and later went on to public school (including K).

In that case, you can carry on at the private school (an "educational institution" in the compulsory school attendance law) or you can switch to DCPS and expect to comply with the DCPS policy very clearly laid out in the enrollment handbook.

As we tell young children “You need to focus on yourself and what you’re doing and worry less about what others are doing”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're planning to testify at the SBOE hearing next week presumably about how it's incredibly unfair that DCPS is enforcing its own policy. It is spearheaded by a Lafayette parent as I understand.

The letter they're circulating uses some pretty extreme language saying kindergarten access is being threatened if your child was born before September 30th and leads to a lot of confusion. It's actually pretty gross to try and scare parents about something that absolutely will not threaten their kid's access to kindergarten but they seem to be targeting UMC PTOs too which is equally gross.

If the SBOE or DCPS give any air to this I’m going to be so angry. There are kindergarteners in DCPS exposed to mold and lead in their dilapidated buildings but no lets focus on rich parents whining because they didn’t get their way.

Tell that outrage to the idiot DCPS person who referred child protective services to these parents. Taking time and resources away from families who really need it for a publicity stunt.

Please get facts straight, DCPS doesn’t have a policy. It’s a date at which children born before are entitled to kindergarten. Not that they must enter kindergarten.

It’s really amazing how easy it is for people to make up their own alternative facts.

This is wrong. The law is that kids must be in school by 5. A date by which they MUST be in school (not a date where if you're born before that you're entitled to be in K... that doesn't even make any sense and would mean any child below X date is entitled to start K... even if they're 2). DCPS POLICY is that kids are placed into school according to an age cut off. If you think DC doesn't have a *policy*, I assume you think I can choose any grade I want for any of my children?

Again, my understanding is that there is a min age to start, not a max. What about children transferring in from other states? Lastly, didn't I read that these kids are already in school- private pre-k? Why would CFS be called?

Your understanding is wrong. There is a max age to start to school (i.e., you must start school if you were born on or before the cut off date) by law. There is a minimum age to start by policy. You cannot announce you want to start free school at 2. There are also policies regarding grade placement, which is actually what is at issue here. If you genuinely think DCPS has no policies around grade placement, I don't know what to tell you and feel free to try to enroll your 6 year old in 9th grade and see what they do.

Don't be ridiculous. This person is clearly talking about kindergarten enrollment, and any reasonable person would assume we are talking about 5/6 year olds. No one is trying to enroll a 6 year old in the 9th grade.

Way to miss the point entirely. The point is that obviously DCPS has age-based placement policies. If you think this example is crazy, then you are agreeing that age-based policies are in place. It's crazy the extent to which folks are trying to tie themselves in knots to defend the premise that DCPS doesn't have age-based placement policies. News flash: The Lafayette parents are lying. DCPS has policies. The previous principal -- and possibly some principals at other schools -- did not enforce that policy. The policy didn't change. Most principals around the district enforced the policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're planning to testify at the SBOE hearing next week presumably about how it's incredibly unfair that DCPS is enforcing its own policy. It is spearheaded by a Lafayette parent as I understand.

The letter they're circulating uses some pretty extreme language saying kindergarten access is being threatened if your child was born before September 30th and leads to a lot of confusion. It's actually pretty gross to try and scare parents about something that absolutely will not threaten their kid's access to kindergarten but they seem to be targeting UMC PTOs too which is equally gross.

If the SBOE or DCPS give any air to this I’m going to be so angry. There are kindergarteners in DCPS exposed to mold and lead in their dilapidated buildings but no lets focus on rich parents whining because they didn’t get their way.

Tell that outrage to the idiot DCPS person who referred child protective services to these parents. Taking time and resources away from families who really need it for a publicity stunt.

Please get facts straight, DCPS doesn’t have a policy. It’s a date at which children born before are entitled to kindergarten. Not that they must enter kindergarten.

It’s really amazing how easy it is for people to make up their own alternative facts.

It wasn't like these families were shying away from the cameras WRT being "found" for CPS.

But aren't these children in school- private pre-k?

"Private pre-k" is childcare, not school.

Mmmmm… not sure what pre k you are sending your kids to but lots of pre k programs are not daycares…..

"Unless specifically exempted, every Caregiver and Child Development Facility, regardless of the name by which the Facility is designated must be licensed to operate a child care facility in the District of Columbia." https://osse.dc.gov/node/446

Yes, many private pre k programs provide educational content. But at the end of the day, they are still childcare. Public, public charter, and even private elementary and secondary schools operate under total different requirements than childcare facilities.

So you’re saying the pre-k programs at GDS, sidwell, Beauvoir etc are daycares?

No. If you clicked on the OSSE link you would see that those programs fall under an exempted category.

I'm not sure why someone spending $45K+ at one of those schools would care about the kindergarten cut-off age for public school.

I am well aware these programs are exempt. I am making the point that most true pre-K programs are not daycare. We personally know of many families who went to schools that are part of the exempted category and later went on to public school (including K).

In that case, you can carry on at the private school (an "educational institution" in the compulsory school attendance law) or you can switch to DCPS and expect to comply with the DCPS policy very clearly laid out in the enrollment handbook.

As we tell young children “You need to focus on yourself and what you’re doing and worry less about what others are doing”

As you well know, kids having classmates 15-18 months older than them has a real effect. This is not an individual decision with no effects on others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're planning to testify at the SBOE hearing next week presumably about how it's incredibly unfair that DCPS is enforcing its own policy. It is spearheaded by a Lafayette parent as I understand.

The letter they're circulating uses some pretty extreme language saying kindergarten access is being threatened if your child was born before September 30th and leads to a lot of confusion. It's actually pretty gross to try and scare parents about something that absolutely will not threaten their kid's access to kindergarten but they seem to be targeting UMC PTOs too which is equally gross.

If the SBOE or DCPS give any air to this I’m going to be so angry. There are kindergarteners in DCPS exposed to mold and lead in their dilapidated buildings but no lets focus on rich parents whining because they didn’t get their way.

Tell that outrage to the idiot DCPS person who referred child protective services to these parents. Taking time and resources away from families who really need it for a publicity stunt.

Please get facts straight, DCPS doesn’t have a policy. It’s a date at which children born before are entitled to kindergarten. Not that they must enter kindergarten.

It’s really amazing how easy it is for people to make up their own alternative facts.

It wasn't like these families were shying away from the cameras WRT being "found" for CPS.

But aren't these children in school- private pre-k?

"Private pre-k" is childcare, not school.

Mmmmm… not sure what pre k you are sending your kids to but lots of pre k programs are not daycares…..

"Unless specifically exempted, every Caregiver and Child Development Facility, regardless of the name by which the Facility is designated must be licensed to operate a child care facility in the District of Columbia." https://osse.dc.gov/node/446

Yes, many private pre k programs provide educational content. But at the end of the day, they are still childcare. Public, public charter, and even private elementary and secondary schools operate under total different requirements than childcare facilities.

So you’re saying the pre-k programs at GDS, sidwell, Beauvoir etc are daycares?

No. If you clicked on the OSSE link you would see that those programs fall under an exempted category.

I'm not sure why someone spending $45K+ at one of those schools would care about the kindergarten cut-off age for public school.

I am well aware these programs are exempt. I am making the point that most true pre-K programs are not daycare. We personally know of many families who went to schools that are part of the exempted category and later went on to public school (including K).

In that case, you can carry on at the private school (an "educational institution" in the compulsory school attendance law) or you can switch to DCPS and expect to comply with the DCPS policy very clearly laid out in the enrollment handbook.

As we tell young children “You need to focus on yourself and what you’re doing and worry less about what others are doing”

You're telling me everything these people have been doing, like going to the media, wasn't supposed to draw public attention to them? I wouldn't even know about this otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're planning to testify at the SBOE hearing next week presumably about how it's incredibly unfair that DCPS is enforcing its own policy. It is spearheaded by a Lafayette parent as I understand.

The letter they're circulating uses some pretty extreme language saying kindergarten access is being threatened if your child was born before September 30th and leads to a lot of confusion. It's actually pretty gross to try and scare parents about something that absolutely will not threaten their kid's access to kindergarten but they seem to be targeting UMC PTOs too which is equally gross.

If the SBOE or DCPS give any air to this I’m going to be so angry. There are kindergarteners in DCPS exposed to mold and lead in their dilapidated buildings but no lets focus on rich parents whining because they didn’t get their way.

Tell that outrage to the idiot DCPS person who referred child protective services to these parents. Taking time and resources away from families who really need it for a publicity stunt.

Please get facts straight, DCPS doesn’t have a policy. It’s a date at which children born before are entitled to kindergarten. Not that they must enter kindergarten.

It’s really amazing how easy it is for people to make up their own alternative facts.

It wasn't like these families were shying away from the cameras WRT being "found" for CPS.

But aren't these children in school- private pre-k?

"Private pre-k" is childcare, not school.

Mmmmm… not sure what pre k you are sending your kids to but lots of pre k programs are not daycares…..

"Unless specifically exempted, every Caregiver and Child Development Facility, regardless of the name by which the Facility is designated must be licensed to operate a child care facility in the District of Columbia." https://osse.dc.gov/node/446

Yes, many private pre k programs provide educational content. But at the end of the day, they are still childcare. Public, public charter, and even private elementary and secondary schools operate under total different requirements than childcare facilities.

So you’re saying the pre-k programs at GDS, sidwell, Beauvoir etc are daycares?

No. If you clicked on the OSSE link you would see that those programs fall under an exempted category.

I'm not sure why someone spending $45K+ at one of those schools would care about the kindergarten cut-off age for public school.

I am well aware these programs are exempt. I am making the point that most true pre-K programs are not daycare. We personally know of many families who went to schools that are part of the exempted category and later went on to public school (including K).

In that case, you can carry on at the private school (an "educational institution" in the compulsory school attendance law) or you can switch to DCPS and expect to comply with the DCPS policy very clearly laid out in the enrollment handbook.

As we tell young children “You need to focus on yourself and what you’re doing and worry less about what others are doing”

You're telling me everything these people have been doing, like going to the media, wasn't supposed to draw public attention to them? I wouldn't even know about this otherwise.

Including providing pictures of their kids!
The parents selected to be interviewed by the news.
The parents provided their names (which for some reason DCUM does not want to post even though it is in the News Article)
This isn't people being outed - they sought out the coverage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're planning to testify at the SBOE hearing next week presumably about how it's incredibly unfair that DCPS is enforcing its own policy. It is spearheaded by a Lafayette parent as I understand.

The letter they're circulating uses some pretty extreme language saying kindergarten access is being threatened if your child was born before September 30th and leads to a lot of confusion. It's actually pretty gross to try and scare parents about something that absolutely will not threaten their kid's access to kindergarten but they seem to be targeting UMC PTOs too which is equally gross.

If the SBOE or DCPS give any air to this I’m going to be so angry. There are kindergarteners in DCPS exposed to mold and lead in their dilapidated buildings but no lets focus on rich parents whining because they didn’t get their way.

Tell that outrage to the idiot DCPS person who referred child protective services to these parents. Taking time and resources away from families who really need it for a publicity stunt.

Please get facts straight, DCPS doesn’t have a policy. It’s a date at which children born before are entitled to kindergarten. Not that they must enter kindergarten.

It’s really amazing how easy it is for people to make up their own alternative facts.

This is wrong. The law is that kids must be in school by 5. A date by which they MUST be in school (not a date where if you're born before that you're entitled to be in K... that doesn't even make any sense and would mean any child below X date is entitled to start K... even if they're 2). DCPS POLICY is that kids are placed into school according to an age cut off. If you think DC doesn't have a *policy*, I assume you think I can choose any grade I want for any of my children?

Again, my understanding is that there is a min age to start, not a max. What about children transferring in from other states? Lastly, didn't I read that these kids are already in school- private pre-k? Why would CFS be called?

Your understanding is wrong. There is a max age to start to school (i.e., you must start school if you were born on or before the cut off date) by law. There is a minimum age to start by policy. You cannot announce you want to start free school at 2. There are also policies regarding grade placement, which is actually what is at issue here. If you genuinely think DCPS has no policies around grade placement, I don't know what to tell you and feel free to try to enroll your 6 year old in 9th grade and see what they do.

Don't be ridiculous. This person is clearly talking about kindergarten enrollment, and any reasonable person would assume we are talking about 5/6 year olds. No one is trying to enroll a 6 year old in the 9th grade.

Way to miss the point entirely. The point is that obviously DCPS has age-based placement policies. If you think this example is crazy, then you are agreeing that age-based policies are in place. It's crazy the extent to which folks are trying to tie themselves in knots to defend the premise that DCPS doesn't have age-based placement policies. News flash: The Lafayette parents are lying. DCPS has policies. The previous principal -- and possibly some principals at other schools -- did not enforce that policy. The policy didn't change. Most principals around the district enforced the policy.

+1

There are clearly age policies. Let’s use a closer example- someone’s child will turn 7 in October but they claim the child is immature and try to enroll them in kindergarten. They are past thr maximum age and can’t be enrolled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're planning to testify at the SBOE hearing next week presumably about how it's incredibly unfair that DCPS is enforcing its own policy. It is spearheaded by a Lafayette parent as I understand.

The letter they're circulating uses some pretty extreme language saying kindergarten access is being threatened if your child was born before September 30th and leads to a lot of confusion. It's actually pretty gross to try and scare parents about something that absolutely will not threaten their kid's access to kindergarten but they seem to be targeting UMC PTOs too which is equally gross.

If the SBOE or DCPS give any air to this I’m going to be so angry. There are kindergarteners in DCPS exposed to mold and lead in their dilapidated buildings but no lets focus on rich parents whining because they didn’t get their way.

Tell that outrage to the idiot DCPS person who referred child protective services to these parents. Taking time and resources away from families who really need it for a publicity stunt.

Please get facts straight, DCPS doesn’t have a policy. It’s a date at which children born before are entitled to kindergarten. Not that they must enter kindergarten.

It’s really amazing how easy it is for people to make up their own alternative facts.

It wasn't like these families were shying away from the cameras WRT being "found" for CPS.

But aren't these children in school- private pre-k?

"Private pre-k" is childcare, not school.

Mmmmm… not sure what pre k you are sending your kids to but lots of pre k programs are not daycares…..

"Unless specifically exempted, every Caregiver and Child Development Facility, regardless of the name by which the Facility is designated must be licensed to operate a child care facility in the District of Columbia." https://osse.dc.gov/node/446

Yes, many private pre k programs provide educational content. But at the end of the day, they are still childcare. Public, public charter, and even private elementary and secondary schools operate under total different requirements than childcare facilities.

So you’re saying the pre-k programs at GDS, sidwell, Beauvoir etc are daycares?

No. If you clicked on the OSSE link you would see that those programs fall under an exempted category.

I'm not sure why someone spending $45K+ at one of those schools would care about the kindergarten cut-off age for public school.

I am well aware these programs are exempt. I am making the point that most true pre-K programs are not daycare. We personally know of many families who went to schools that are part of the exempted category and later went on to public school (including K).

In that case, you can carry on at the private school (an "educational institution" in the compulsory school attendance law) or you can switch to DCPS and expect to comply with the DCPS policy very clearly laid out in the enrollment handbook.

As we tell young children “You need to focus on yourself and what you’re doing and worry less about what others are doing”

"don't worry when other people are breaking the rules! rules don't apply to them because they are loud and wealthy!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're planning to testify at the SBOE hearing next week presumably about how it's incredibly unfair that DCPS is enforcing its own policy. It is spearheaded by a Lafayette parent as I understand.

The letter they're circulating uses some pretty extreme language saying kindergarten access is being threatened if your child was born before September 30th and leads to a lot of confusion. It's actually pretty gross to try and scare parents about something that absolutely will not threaten their kid's access to kindergarten but they seem to be targeting UMC PTOs too which is equally gross.

If the SBOE or DCPS give any air to this I’m going to be so angry. There are kindergarteners in DCPS exposed to mold and lead in their dilapidated buildings but no lets focus on rich parents whining because they didn’t get their way.

Tell that outrage to the idiot DCPS person who referred child protective services to these parents. Taking time and resources away from families who really need it for a publicity stunt.

Please get facts straight, DCPS doesn’t have a policy. It’s a date at which children born before are entitled to kindergarten. Not that they must enter kindergarten.

It’s really amazing how easy it is for people to make up their own alternative facts.

It wasn't like these families were shying away from the cameras WRT being "found" for CPS.

But aren't these children in school- private pre-k?

"Private pre-k" is childcare, not school.

Mmmmm… not sure what pre k you are sending your kids to but lots of pre k programs are not daycares…..

"Unless specifically exempted, every Caregiver and Child Development Facility, regardless of the name by which the Facility is designated must be licensed to operate a child care facility in the District of Columbia." https://osse.dc.gov/node/446

Yes, many private pre k programs provide educational content. But at the end of the day, they are still childcare. Public, public charter, and even private elementary and secondary schools operate under total different requirements than childcare facilities.

So you’re saying the pre-k programs at GDS, sidwell, Beauvoir etc are daycares?

No. If you clicked on the OSSE link you would see that those programs fall under an exempted category.

I'm not sure why someone spending $45K+ at one of those schools would care about the kindergarten cut-off age for public school.

I am well aware these programs are exempt. I am making the point that most true pre-K programs are not daycare. We personally know of many families who went to schools that are part of the exempted category and later went on to public school (including K).

In that case, you can carry on at the private school (an "educational institution" in the compulsory school attendance law) or you can switch to DCPS and expect to comply with the DCPS policy very clearly laid out in the enrollment handbook.

As we tell young children “You need to focus on yourself and what you’re doing and worry less about what others are doing”

"don't worry when other people are breaking the rules! rules don't apply to them because they are loud and wealthy!"

Good grief. Focus on your own family.

[Anonymous]

Ok, but do we know what the latest updates are???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're planning to testify at the SBOE hearing next week presumably about how it's incredibly unfair that DCPS is enforcing its own policy. It is spearheaded by a Lafayette parent as I understand.

The letter they're circulating uses some pretty extreme language saying kindergarten access is being threatened if your child was born before September 30th and leads to a lot of confusion. It's actually pretty gross to try and scare parents about something that absolutely will not threaten their kid's access to kindergarten but they seem to be targeting UMC PTOs too which is equally gross.

If the SBOE or DCPS give any air to this I’m going to be so angry. There are kindergarteners in DCPS exposed to mold and lead in their dilapidated buildings but no lets focus on rich parents whining because they didn’t get their way.

Tell that outrage to the idiot DCPS person who referred child protective services to these parents. Taking time and resources away from families who really need it for a publicity stunt.

Please get facts straight, DCPS doesn’t have a policy. It’s a date at which children born before are entitled to kindergarten. Not that they must enter kindergarten.

It’s really amazing how easy it is for people to make up their own alternative facts.

It wasn't like these families were shying away from the cameras WRT being "found" for CPS.

But aren't these children in school- private pre-k?

"Private pre-k" is childcare, not school.

Mmmmm… not sure what pre k you are sending your kids to but lots of pre k programs are not daycares…..

"Unless specifically exempted, every Caregiver and Child Development Facility, regardless of the name by which the Facility is designated must be licensed to operate a child care facility in the District of Columbia." https://osse.dc.gov/node/446

Yes, many private pre k programs provide educational content. But at the end of the day, they are still childcare. Public, public charter, and even private elementary and secondary schools operate under total different requirements than childcare facilities.

So you’re saying the pre-k programs at GDS, sidwell, Beauvoir etc are daycares?

No. If you clicked on the OSSE link you would see that those programs fall under an exempted category.

I'm not sure why someone spending $45K+ at one of those schools would care about the kindergarten cut-off age for public school.

I am well aware these programs are exempt. I am making the point that most true pre-K programs are not daycare. We personally know of many families who went to schools that are part of the exempted category and later went on to public school (including K).

In that case, you can carry on at the private school (an "educational institution" in the compulsory school attendance law) or you can switch to DCPS and expect to comply with the DCPS policy very clearly laid out in the enrollment handbook.

As we tell young children “You need to focus on yourself and what you’re doing and worry less about what others are doing”

You're telling me everything these people have been doing, like going to the media, wasn't supposed to draw public attention to them? I wouldn't even know about this otherwise.

Including providing pictures of their kids!
The parents selected to be interviewed by the news.
The parents provided their names (which for some reason DCUM does not want to post even though it is in the News Article)
This isn't people being outed - they sought out the coverage.

I'm sure they've removed the post because you people appear to have an unhealthy obsession with this topic and these mothers- including looking up their home values on zillow and then posting about it?! Surely there is something more constructive you can be doing with ALL this free time you seem to have

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok, but do we know what the latest updates are???

If you're wondering because you anticipate being in a similar situation, I would suggest figuring out an alternate solution for your child ASAP. Even if these particular parents are ultimately able to enroll their children in kindergarten, I highly doubt this fight will result in a general change to long-standing DC regulations or DCPS policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're planning to testify at the SBOE hearing next week presumably about how it's incredibly unfair that DCPS is enforcing its own policy. It is spearheaded by a Lafayette parent as I understand.

The letter they're circulating uses some pretty extreme language saying kindergarten access is being threatened if your child was born before September 30th and leads to a lot of confusion. It's actually pretty gross to try and scare parents about something that absolutely will not threaten their kid's access to kindergarten but they seem to be targeting UMC PTOs too which is equally gross.

If the SBOE or DCPS give any air to this I’m going to be so angry. There are kindergarteners in DCPS exposed to mold and lead in their dilapidated buildings but no lets focus on rich parents whining because they didn’t get their way.

Tell that outrage to the idiot DCPS person who referred child protective services to these parents. Taking time and resources away from families who really need it for a publicity stunt.

Please get facts straight, DCPS doesn’t have a policy. It’s a date at which children born before are entitled to kindergarten. Not that they must enter kindergarten.

It’s really amazing how easy it is for people to make up their own alternative facts.

It wasn't like these families were shying away from the cameras WRT being "found" for CPS.

But aren't these children in school- private pre-k?

"Private pre-k" is childcare, not school.

Mmmmm… not sure what pre k you are sending your kids to but lots of pre k programs are not daycares…..

"Unless specifically exempted, every Caregiver and Child Development Facility, regardless of the name by which the Facility is designated must be licensed to operate a child care facility in the District of Columbia." https://osse.dc.gov/node/446

Yes, many private pre k programs provide educational content. But at the end of the day, they are still childcare. Public, public charter, and even private elementary and secondary schools operate under total different requirements than childcare facilities.

So you’re saying the pre-k programs at GDS, sidwell, Beauvoir etc are daycares?

No. If you clicked on the OSSE link you would see that those programs fall under an exempted category.

I'm not sure why someone spending $45K+ at one of those schools would care about the kindergarten cut-off age for public school.

I am well aware these programs are exempt. I am making the point that most true pre-K programs are not daycare. We personally know of many families who went to schools that are part of the exempted category and later went on to public school (including K).

In that case, you can carry on at the private school (an "educational institution" in the compulsory school attendance law) or you can switch to DCPS and expect to comply with the DCPS policy very clearly laid out in the enrollment handbook.

As we tell young children “You need to focus on yourself and what you’re doing and worry less about what others are doing”

These kids, if allowed to enroll in K rather than first, will be granted the "equitable access" preference for high school enrollment. So this affects their classmates and siblings for the next decade +.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're planning to testify at the SBOE hearing next week presumably about how it's incredibly unfair that DCPS is enforcing its own policy. It is spearheaded by a Lafayette parent as I understand.

The letter they're circulating uses some pretty extreme language saying kindergarten access is being threatened if your child was born before September 30th and leads to a lot of confusion. It's actually pretty gross to try and scare parents about something that absolutely will not threaten their kid's access to kindergarten but they seem to be targeting UMC PTOs too which is equally gross.

If the SBOE or DCPS give any air to this I’m going to be so angry. There are kindergarteners in DCPS exposed to mold and lead in their dilapidated buildings but no lets focus on rich parents whining because they didn’t get their way.

Tell that outrage to the idiot DCPS person who referred child protective services to these parents. Taking time and resources away from families who really need it for a publicity stunt.

Please get facts straight, DCPS doesn’t have a policy. It’s a date at which children born before are entitled to kindergarten. Not that they must enter kindergarten.

It’s really amazing how easy it is for people to make up their own alternative facts.

It wasn't like these families were shying away from the cameras WRT being "found" for CPS.

But aren't these children in school- private pre-k?

"Private pre-k" is childcare, not school.

Mmmmm… not sure what pre k you are sending your kids to but lots of pre k programs are not daycares…..

"Unless specifically exempted, every Caregiver and Child Development Facility, regardless of the name by which the Facility is designated must be licensed to operate a child care facility in the District of Columbia." https://osse.dc.gov/node/446

Yes, many private pre k programs provide educational content. But at the end of the day, they are still childcare. Public, public charter, and even private elementary and secondary schools operate under total different requirements than childcare facilities.

So you’re saying the pre-k programs at GDS, sidwell, Beauvoir etc are daycares?

No. If you clicked on the OSSE link you would see that those programs fall under an exempted category.

I'm not sure why someone spending $45K+ at one of those schools would care about the kindergarten cut-off age for public school.

I am well aware these programs are exempt. I am making the point that most true pre-K programs are not daycare. We personally know of many families who went to schools that are part of the exempted category and later went on to public school (including K).

In that case, you can carry on at the private school (an "educational institution" in the compulsory school attendance law) or you can switch to DCPS and expect to comply with the DCPS policy very clearly laid out in the enrollment handbook.

As we tell young children “You need to focus on yourself and what you’re doing and worry less about what others are doing”

These kids, if allowed to enroll in K rather than first, will be granted the "equitable access" preference for high school enrollment. So this affects their classmates and siblings for the next decade +.

We just found out that a UMC family at our school used this to get their kid into Latin for MS! I had no idea this was allowed and think that, irrespective of the outcome here, the EA policy should be adjusted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're planning to testify at the SBOE hearing next week presumably about how it's incredibly unfair that DCPS is enforcing its own policy. It is spearheaded by a Lafayette parent as I understand.

The letter they're circulating uses some pretty extreme language saying kindergarten access is being threatened if your child was born before September 30th and leads to a lot of confusion. It's actually pretty gross to try and scare parents about something that absolutely will not threaten their kid's access to kindergarten but they seem to be targeting UMC PTOs too which is equally gross.

If the SBOE or DCPS give any air to this I’m going to be so angry. There are kindergarteners in DCPS exposed to mold and lead in their dilapidated buildings but no lets focus on rich parents whining because they didn’t get their way.

Tell that outrage to the idiot DCPS person who referred child protective services to these parents. Taking time and resources away from families who really need it for a publicity stunt.

Please get facts straight, DCPS doesn’t have a policy. It’s a date at which children born before are entitled to kindergarten. Not that they must enter kindergarten.

It’s really amazing how easy it is for people to make up their own alternative facts.

It wasn't like these families were shying away from the cameras WRT being "found" for CPS.

But aren't these children in school- private pre-k?

"Private pre-k" is childcare, not school.

Mmmmm… not sure what pre k you are sending your kids to but lots of pre k programs are not daycares…..

"Unless specifically exempted, every Caregiver and Child Development Facility, regardless of the name by which the Facility is designated must be licensed to operate a child care facility in the District of Columbia." https://osse.dc.gov/node/446

Yes, many private pre k programs provide educational content. But at the end of the day, they are still childcare. Public, public charter, and even private elementary and secondary schools operate under total different requirements than childcare facilities.

So you’re saying the pre-k programs at GDS, sidwell, Beauvoir etc are daycares?

No. If you clicked on the OSSE link you would see that those programs fall under an exempted category.

I'm not sure why someone spending $45K+ at one of those schools would care about the kindergarten cut-off age for public school.

I am well aware these programs are exempt. I am making the point that most true pre-K programs are not daycare. We personally know of many families who went to schools that are part of the exempted category and later went on to public school (including K).

In that case, you can carry on at the private school (an "educational institution" in the compulsory school attendance law) or you can switch to DCPS and expect to comply with the DCPS policy very clearly laid out in the enrollment handbook.

As we tell young children “You need to focus on yourself and what you’re doing and worry less about what others are doing”

These kids, if allowed to enroll in K rather than first, will be granted the "equitable access" preference for high school enrollment. So this affects their classmates and siblings for the next decade +.

We just found out that a UMC family at our school used this to get their kid into Latin for MS! I had no idea this was allowed and think that, irrespective of the outcome here, the EA policy should be adjusted.

This is the most shocking thing. I can't believe that is allowed.

[Anonymous]

A vote on various "Let Students Attend Kindergarten" bills is on the agenda for Wednesday's meeting.

The goals of the bills are:

(1) to ensure minors attending prek-4 classes in public, private, or parochial pre-kindergarten educational program are not considered truant or victims of educational neglect;

(2) to ensure that if a minor living in another state turns five after that state’s kindergarten entrance-age date cutoff, but before September 30, and then the family moves into the District during the DC school year, that the child will not be considered truant; and

(3) to ensure students enrolled in private or parochial pre-k programs and students moving into the District of Columbia shall be permitted to be enrolled in kindergarten at the request of the minor’s parent or guardian.

Seems to me they have a good point regarding a child who moves to DC from another state, having missed their state's cut-off for K but made DC's (e.g., born on September 16 but moving from a state with a September 1 cut-off). If that family moves in January, it seems pretty unreasonable to require that child to enroll and get just half a year of kindergarten. (If they move in September, seems like they should have to enroll, but maybe can excuse it as they are trying to get their bearings.). I think this is better addressed by moving DC's cut-off to September 1, but ymmv.

The other provisions are to allow wealthy families to redshirt their kids at will. I don't think that's necessary or desirable. Specifically, they want to add a new section to the code as follows:

(1) For School Year 2025-2026, any minor who has not attended kindergarten, and who has not reached the age of 6 on or before May 31 shall be permitted to be enrolled in kindergarten at the request of the minor’s parent or guardian.

(2) For School Year 2026 - 2027 and beyond, any minor who has not attended kindergarten, and who has not reached the age of 6 on or before June 30 shall be permitted to be enrolled in kindergarten at the request of the minor’s parent or guardian.

it doesn't mention private or parochial schools specifically, but of course families attending public pre-K will have to abide by the existing cut-off, so I think in practice this would only allow for parents who can pay to redshirt (at least for a year of pk4).

I'm not sure why they want May 31 for next year and June 30 for the years after. Hopefully one of them can chime in.