Forum Index
»
DC Public and Public Charter Schools
pre-K lottery
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
I've been thinking about the pre-K lottery system and the practice of giving out-of-boundary siblings preference over in-boundary students. Do individual schools determine these preferences, or is it a DCPS policy? I looked on the DCPS Pre-K page, but it doesn't say. I know that Murch (our neighborhood school) does give preference to out-of-boundary siblings, and I'm considering registering my concern about this approach but want to make sure I direct my letter to the right person. Is it Chancellor Rhee and/or someone on the system level? Or is it the principle of Murch?
Thanks.... |
Anonymous
| Oy, OP here, and obviously that should be "princiPAL of Murch." |
Anonymous
| It's DCPS policy. |
Anonymous
|
I am in the same situation as the OP and was prompted by the message to finally get to the bottom of this issue. I just spoke with someone at DCPS. She said it is NOT a DCPS policy and that there is not currently a written policy. However, things are changing. They are aware of the concern over the issue and they are trying to get a written policy in place early this year, prior to the lottery this coming spring. She indicated that if people felt strongly, one way or the other, they should contact Mayor Fenty and Chancellor Rhee. She also asked that any correspondence be cc'd to her, so I am taking the liberty of sharing her name and e-mail address (it is on the DCPS pre-K web page as well): Dr. Cheryl Roberts, cheryl.roberts at dc.gov.
|
Anonymous
|
OP here -- thanks so much! I will definitely send a note to Fenty and Rhee, cc'ing Dr. Roberts.
Did she say which direction they were leaning as they consider formalizing a policy? |
Anonymous
| She did not indicate if there was a favored position within DCPS. |
Anonymous
| OP again -- I wrote and almost immediately received a (very brief) response from Chancellor Rhee. Seemed mainly to be delegating to a subordinate, but it was clear she had read the e-mail. I encourage anyone else with a stake in this issue to send a note. Rhee and Fenty's e-mail addresses follow the same conventions as Dr. Roberts'.... |
Anonymous
|
Pretty much all Fenty admin reads and responds to emails quickly. Which is not a bad thing. But of course, responding to emails is not the same thing as being reponsive to individual parent priorities.
Things to consider. Pre-K is not currently legally required to be offered in DC. Which is why there is no official policy. Schools can set their own policies and number of slots for pre-K. However, DC is legally liable for NCLB results and school choice transfers for the 50,000 kids already in the system. Which would you focus on in her shoes? Like anything, there's strength in numbers. But it will be a hard sell to get policies changed that give the appearance of prioritizing home address over splitting up families. Who knows. Maybe it's an easy fix? |
Anonymous
I don't buy the "splitting up families" argument because most of these families have already been sending their kids to two different schools -- one an out-of-boundary public and one a pre-school. What the policy is doing in my neighborhood is driving people out of the neighborhood school. Families that can't get a spot in pre-K end up at another public, charter, or private school and decide to stay there instead of supporting the neighborhood school. |
Anonymous
This strikes me as too cynical by half. Let's step back and consider that the superintendent of a big-city school system answered an e-mail personally within one hour. It wasn't a form letter, and it included a cc and question to someone on her team who presumably knows the specific issue better than she does. I certainly don't expect to see a new policy written by tomorrow. But the fact that a PP has spoken with someone in the Pre-K office who says that the powers that be are aware of people's concerns and are considering formulating a policy on the topic, combined with Chancellor Rhee's acknowledgment, makes me somewhat optimistic that we could see movement on this. If we don't this year, I'll write again next year; my kid isn't in the lottery until 2010. |
Anonymous
| OP here, and one more update: Someone on Rhee's team replied to Rhee and me and explained that DCPS has allowed schools with more demand than supply to determine lottery preference, i.e., there is no central policy at this point. She said it's something they could reexamine. So, again, I'd suggest that anyone with an opinion e-mail Chancellor Rhee. |
Anonymous
| My kids went out-of-boundary before the sibling preference (you'd get a priority spot on the waitlist, but only after the in-boundary slots were filled). I have to say, I think it's unfair to give priority to out-of-boundary siblings. Priority should go to in-boundary kids first. And I think it's the school principal that sets the policy for pre-K. |
Anonymous
It would be WONDERFUL if you would send that message to Rhee and Fenty -- a brief e-mail is all it takes and I think it is important for them to hear from people who don't have a current stake. |
Anonymous
| Are Fenty's kids going to DCPS this fall? |
Anonymous
|
Sorry, I'm the person who said it was DCPS policy. I responded that way because when my kid was in the lottery, the order of preference was spelled out the same way for every school. (sibs, then kids who live within a certain number of blocks, then everyone else) Believe me I worried a lot about the out-of-boundaries lottery in those days so I still remember the details.
But that was not pre-K and it was also pre-Rhee. It's a different world now! Good luck! |