Ludlow-Taylor getting a new a new Principal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are not talking about temporarily homeless. I went to DCPS and there were TONS of kids in my school who lived in PG. I didn't think anything of it because I was a kid, but it was a not insubstantial number. And I'm sure their parents weren't paying tuition because these kids had no money. I went to their houses/apartments and saw their bedrooms so I know where they lived.

My neighbors' grandchildren both attend DC schools (1 charter, 1 public) that they got into years ago when they were iving with the grandparents. They now live in MD with their Mom (no fathers in picture) who drives a car with MD plates. They absolutely do not live in DC. They are great kids, but technically they are cheating.

I'm sure there are many exceptions, but let's not assume that no one is cheating because that would simply not be the case. Look at Miner and the reason the principal left.

Nothing technical about it--they are absolutely cheating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are not talking about temporarily homeless. I went to DCPS and there were TONS of kids in my school who lived in PG. I didn't think anything of it because I was a kid, but it was a not insubstantial number. And I'm sure their parents weren't paying tuition because these kids had no money. I went to their houses/apartments and saw their bedrooms so I know where they lived.

My neighbors' grandchildren both attend DC schools (1 charter, 1 public) that they got into years ago when they were iving with the grandparents. They now live in MD with their Mom (no fathers in picture) who drives a car with MD plates. They absolutely do not live in DC. They are great kids, but technically they are cheating.

I'm sure there are many exceptions, but let's not assume that no one is cheating because that would simply not be the case. Look at Miner and the reason the principal left.

WHy did the principal leave?

[Anonymous]

If the new principal doesn't ferret out the cheaters immediately, she ought to get fired. The new sheriff in town has to lay down the law, NOW. Cheaters get lost!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Nothing technical about it--they are absolutely cheating.

Yes, they are cheating.

Plenty of the in-boundary cheaters are not desperate cases. Far from it. The grandmothers in the "immediate family" generally own in-boundary houses worth a great deal, 600, 700, 800K. They paid off their 10-20K mortgages long ago and pay 1/3 the nornal property tax. They know how to work the system so that their suburban-based descendents can continue to use L-T, for the sake of convenience.

So one set of DCPS residency rules governs the gentrifiers and another applies to longtime neighborhood residents. Perfect.

[Anonymous]

You're putting the cart before the horse. The children you're referring to are filling spots that would likely have remained empty or gone to other OOB children.

Until IB families send their children to L-T in droves, it's pointless fighting against "cheaters."

[Anonymous]

^^^ That's one of the dumbest responses I've heard so far.

[Anonymous]

^^^ I'd say the same about your desire to kick these kids out of a school that they've been going to since PS. Really? Can't your energy be spent doing something useful?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^^ I'd say the same about your desire to kick these kids out of a school that they've been going to since PS. Really? Can't your energy be spent doing something useful?

Yeah, like being legally compliant????? Really.

[Anonymous]

Are you a woman? There use to be laws about keeping you out of the workforce, from voting, etc. Just because something is a law, doesn't mean it's right.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand why everyone gets so up in arms about residency cheaters. From a city-wide budgeting standpoint, of course -- the kids cost the city money & their parents aren't paying taxes. The are breaking the rules, absolutely.

But how does the presence of a kid (or multiple kids) who lives in PG adversely affect the learning environment within a classroom, or the overall school atmosphere?

The top privates in DC are full of kids from Maryland and Virginia, but no one argues that they are detrimental to the school environment.

[Anonymous]

^^^ You are killing me. You don't expect that people follow the law? Really???? And if they're non-residents not paying tuition (i.e. stealing), that's okay? Wow. Your neighborhood will stay the pits and never get better. I'd like to wish you good luck, but not really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why everyone gets so up in arms about residency cheaters. From a city-wide budgeting standpoint, of course -- the kids cost the city money & their parents aren't paying taxes. The are breaking the rules, absolutely.

But how does the presence of a kid (or multiple kids) who lives in PG adversely affect the learning environment within a classroom, or the overall school atmosphere?

The top privates in DC are full of kids from Maryland and Virginia, but no one argues that they are detrimental to the school environment.

The objective is to make the school attractive to high-SES whites by cutting down on the number of low-SES blacks. A crackdown on residency is a quick and legal shortcut.

If it causes more tension of the variety that can be called "race-baiting at PTA meetings", oh well, it's for the good of the school.

And if any "good" black families who happen to live in the neighborhood are made uncomfortable by any of this, one of these good white parents has the name of a good black realtor in Brookland that you can call.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why everyone gets so up in arms about residency cheaters. From a city-wide budgeting standpoint, of course -- the kids cost the city money & their parents aren't paying taxes. The are breaking the rules, absolutely.

But how does the presence of a kid (or multiple kids) who lives in PG adversely affect the learning environment within a classroom, or the overall school atmosphere?

The top privates in DC are full of kids from Maryland and Virginia, but no one argues that they are detrimental to the school environment.

The objective is to make the school attractive to high-SES whites by cutting down on the number of low-SES blacks. A crackdown on residency is a quick and legal shortcut.

If it causes more tension of the variety that can be called "race-baiting at PTA meetings", oh well, it's for the good of the school.

And if any "good" black families who happen to live in the neighborhood are made uncomfortable by any of this, one of these good white parents has the name of a good black realtor in Brookland that you can call.

Telling it like it is!
+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^^ You are killing me. You don't expect that people follow the law? Really???? And if they're non-residents not paying tuition (i.e. stealing), that's okay? Wow. Your neighborhood will stay the pits and never get better. I'd like to wish you good luck, but not really.

No, no, I get the objections to law-breaking and stealing, I understand why those things aren't OK -- but in this forum, at least, people talk about cracking down on residency cheating as a way to make an immediate, short-term improvement in specific schools, and it isn't clear to me how it achieves that particular goal (unless, as the poster above suggests, "improve" is a euphemism for "sharply reduce the black student population").

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are you a woman? There use to be laws about keeping you out of the workforce, from voting, etc. Just because something is a law, doesn't mean it's right.

I live in NoVa. We knew someone who sent their kid to ellington. They paid tuition to the DC govt. Was it wrong that they had to do so?

I mean there are a million people here would like to send their kids to Langley. They can't. Is cheating on residency really civil disobedience?