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:

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.

What’s that real effect you’re talking about?

DP- most likely that the child would be top of their class and will graduate as a 19 year old valedictorian student with more scholarships and opportunities.

[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:

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.

What’s that real effect you’re talking about?

DP- most likely that the child would be top of their class and will graduate as a 19 year old valedictorian student with more scholarships and opportunities.

Oh please. 🙄

[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:

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.

What’s that real effect you’re talking about?

DP- most likely that the child would be top of their class and will graduate as a 19 year old valedictorian student with more scholarships and opportunities.

This is such a ridiculous statement.

1. Kids with July, August and September’s birthdays will still be 18 when they graduate.

2. By this logic you’re saying a child held back in the 4th grade (for example) is going to suddenly become ‘a 19 year old valedictorian with more scholarships and opportunities’ purely because of their age at graduation.

[Anonymous]

I unless there are medical reasons not to, but a 7 year old in a class full of 5/6 year olds has the potential to be top of their class, and thereafter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I unless there are medical reasons not to, but a 7 year old in a class full of 5/6 year olds has the potential to be top of their class, and thereafter.

And a 5 yo (based on a number of factors. Genetics, developmental milestones met etc) also has the potential to be the top of their class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I unless there are medical reasons not to, but a 7 year old in a class full of 5/6 year olds has the potential to be top of their class, and thereafter.

Except it’s not like that. Redshirted kids do slightly better in elementary school but the effect largely disappears after fourth grade and they are close to the average.

[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:

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.

What’s that real effect you’re talking about?

DP- most likely that the child would be top of their class and will graduate as a 19 year old valedictorian student with more scholarships and opportunities.

Your kid not getting the scholarship has nothing to do with the redshirted kids, don’t be silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I unless there are medical reasons not to, but a 7 year old in a class full of 5/6 year olds has the potential to be top of their class, and thereafter.

Except it’s not like that. Redshirted kids do slightly better in elementary school but the effect largely disappears after fourth grade and they are close to the average.

This.

Also most people redshirting their kids do so because their child is not ready for a large kindergarten class in DCPS and the parents truly believe it is better for them to wait a year so they can be their best selves and not be a disruption in the class (taking resources away from your 5 yo)…. Not so they end up being valedictorian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I unless there are medical reasons not to, but a 7 year old in a class full of 5/6 year olds has the potential to be top of their class, and thereafter.

Except it’s not like that. Redshirted kids do slightly better in elementary school but the effect largely disappears after fourth grade and they are close to the average.

Interesting. I am curious to see references on this. In the meantime, the parents can celebrate their child’s superior academic performance until 4th grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about letting parents decide whats best for their kids? Redshirt if you want to, instead of following some arbitrary rule and cut off. I dont really understand what the fuss is all about.

You realize schools and the district are not catering to one parent they have to balance an entire ecosystem of families. If every family wants to redshirt that's a nightmare for admin and at best leaves teachers with kids who could be possibly 18 months apart which is not how classes are equipped outside of Montessori.

Like public health and the idea of letting everyone make their own choices, we exist in a society and there are typically rules and systems to make society work for as many people as possible.

Oh no, the society will implode because some families want to send their kids to school when they are a bit more mature! A nightmare for school admins and teachers!

Of all the privilege in education you’re focusing on this, not on 50k a year private schools, expensive extracurriculars, tutors for everything, college admissions consultants, legacy admissions etc. The issue is the kid that couldn’t sit still more than 5 min in pre K and was held back a year by a worried parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I unless there are medical reasons not to, but a 7 year old in a class full of 5/6 year olds has the potential to be top of their class, and thereafter.

Except it’s not like that. Redshirted kids do slightly better in elementary school but the effect largely disappears after fourth grade and they are close to the average.

Interesting. I am curious to see references on this. In the meantime, the parents can celebrate their child’s superior academic performance until 4th grade.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/00028312037002509

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like some parents thought they could put their 6 year olds in kindergarten and are sad to realize they have first graders: https://wjla.com/news/local/dcps-parents-dc-public-schools-lafayette-elementary-school-kindergarten-jennifer-lilintahl-avra-siegel-age-cutoff-dcps-cheif-integrity-officer-advisory-neighbor-commissioner-anc

I'm not clear on whether the families enrolled their kids in DCPS/charter preschools even though they were supposed to be in K (one of the kids is shown wearing a Lafayette tshirt), if the kids went to private school, or if the parents just kept them home (which would technically be educational neglect in DC; curious if Lafayette would report that--they are mandatory reporters of abuse and neglect, though I don't expect CFSA would do much about it).

If Lafayette let the kids enroll in PK4 when they should have been in K, I can see an argument for letting them continue to progress with their class--and Lafayette should get a scolding and an audit from DCPS and OSSE. But if the parents just showed up and expected to enroll in a different grade than their kid's age would dictate, I have less sympathy. If the parents are worried that their kids won't succeed in first grade, maybe they should start the 504/IEP process.

This is why we need vouchers and charter schools. Then when burocrats and admins pull this on parents they can take their kid elsewhere and the money follows the student. Hopefully soon after, Cinthia Ruiz, the Chief Integrity Officer in DCPS is out of work with her worthless degree in Diversity Strategy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like some parents thought they could put their 6 year olds in kindergarten and are sad to realize they have first graders: https://wjla.com/news/local/dcps-parents-dc-public-schools-lafayette-elementary-school-kindergarten-jennifer-lilintahl-avra-siegel-age-cutoff-dcps-cheif-integrity-officer-advisory-neighbor-commissioner-anc

I'm not clear on whether the families enrolled their kids in DCPS/charter preschools even though they were supposed to be in K (one of the kids is shown wearing a Lafayette tshirt), if the kids went to private school, or if the parents just kept them home (which would technically be educational neglect in DC; curious if Lafayette would report that--they are mandatory reporters of abuse and neglect, though I don't expect CFSA would do much about it).

If Lafayette let the kids enroll in PK4 when they should have been in K, I can see an argument for letting them continue to progress with their class--and Lafayette should get a scolding and an audit from DCPS and OSSE. But if the parents just showed up and expected to enroll in a different grade than their kid's age would dictate, I have less sympathy. If the parents are worried that their kids won't succeed in first grade, maybe they should start the 504/IEP process.

This is why we need vouchers and charter schools. Then when burocrats and admins pull this on parents they can take their kid elsewhere and the money follows the student. Hopefully soon after, Cinthia Ruiz, the Chief Integrity Officer in DCPS is out of work with her worthless degree in Diversity Strategy.

We need inherently racist and classist structures to ensure that racism and classism remain a baked in piece of public education?

Sorry parents were told they had to follow the rules like everyone else and are having an absolute hissy fit over it but if they want to take their money and spend it on private school for a decade they are welcome to find one that will cater to their whims on their own dimes, not the taxpayer's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like some parents thought they could put their 6 year olds in kindergarten and are sad to realize they have first graders: https://wjla.com/news/local/dcps-parents-dc-public-schools-lafayette-elementary-school-kindergarten-jennifer-lilintahl-avra-siegel-age-cutoff-dcps-cheif-integrity-officer-advisory-neighbor-commissioner-anc

I'm not clear on whether the families enrolled their kids in DCPS/charter preschools even though they were supposed to be in K (one of the kids is shown wearing a Lafayette tshirt), if the kids went to private school, or if the parents just kept them home (which would technically be educational neglect in DC; curious if Lafayette would report that--they are mandatory reporters of abuse and neglect, though I don't expect CFSA would do much about it).

If Lafayette let the kids enroll in PK4 when they should have been in K, I can see an argument for letting them continue to progress with their class--and Lafayette should get a scolding and an audit from DCPS and OSSE. But if the parents just showed up and expected to enroll in a different grade than their kid's age would dictate, I have less sympathy. If the parents are worried that their kids won't succeed in first grade, maybe they should start the 504/IEP process.

This is why we need vouchers and charter schools. Then when burocrats and admins pull this on parents they can take their kid elsewhere and the money follows the student. Hopefully soon after, Cinthia Ruiz, the Chief Integrity Officer in DCPS is out of work with her worthless degree in Diversity Strategy.

We need inherently racist and classist structures to ensure that racism and classism remain a baked in piece of public education?

Sorry parents were told they had to follow the rules like everyone else and are having an absolute hissy fit over it but if they want to take their money and spend it on private school for a decade they are welcome to find one that will cater to their whims on their own dimes, not the taxpayer's.

These parents are the taxpayers, it is their own money supporting idiotic burocrats and bloated administrators that are are preventing their kids from getting the education they need.

The last thing we need is some moronic administrator who has never seen my child tell me exactly when he should start kindergarten in the name of anti racism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about letting parents decide whats best for their kids? Redshirt if you want to, instead of following some arbitrary rule and cut off. I dont really understand what the fuss is all about.

You realize schools and the district are not catering to one parent they have to balance an entire ecosystem of families. If every family wants to redshirt that's a nightmare for admin and at best leaves teachers with kids who could be possibly 18 months apart which is not how classes are equipped outside of Montessori.

Like public health and the idea of letting everyone make their own choices, we exist in a society and there are typically rules and systems to make society work for as many people as possible.

Oh no, the society will implode because some families want to send their kids to school when they are a bit more mature! A nightmare for school admins and teachers!

Of all the privilege in education you’re focusing on this, not on 50k a year private schools, expensive extracurriculars, tutors for everything, college admissions consultants, legacy admissions etc. The issue is the kid that couldn’t sit still more than 5 min in pre K and was held back a year by a worried parent.

Oh good grief. I see we're to the Lafayette parents are actually the civil rights trailblazers portion of this fight.