open houses that didn't wow you?

[Anonymous]

I think all these points about the open houses are valid, and one of the reasons the new lottery system (where you have to pref your schools when entering the lottery), has done parents a disservice. In the past, you could attend open houses to get an initial sense of a school, and then once you got your lottery results, if you got into more than one school, you could do your due diligence and ask for private meetings or private tours, or talk more in depth to parents before making a final decision. Now, it's not reasonable to expect parents to research every school on their lottery list in such depth, nor is it realistic to expect principals to answer a bunch of questions from potential parents who have very little chance of actually getting a spot at a school. So parents are ultimately making choices about schools based on much less information than they would have had previously. I think now parents running open houses have a much greater responsibility for providing informative and accurate open houses than they did in the past. I know there were certain things said at our school's open house last year that are not true at our school, in reality. If we are going to have "school choice" parents should be in a position to make informed choices.

[Anonymous]

Well, even though I got a terrible draw in last year's lottery, I think the new lottery is great--does a better job at matching people in the schools that they really want to go to, and gets people to do some work up-front and make some decisions. Last year, we applied to YY because it was outside the common lottery and thought "why not?" Ended up submitting an application very early. We didn't get a spot, so I went to an open house this year to see what I actually thought of the school. Well, it's not on our list this year--just not something that is a good fit for my family. If we had gotten in last year, given our bad draw in the common lottery, we probably would have gone. It would have been a bad outcome for us and the school.

[Anonymous]

I think most non-private open houses are apt to underwhelm - they are staffed by volunteer parents and don't have slick marketing tools at their disposal. Take it with a grain of salt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think all these points about the open houses are valid, and one of the reasons the new lottery system (where you have to pref your schools when entering the lottery), has done parents a disservice. In the past, you could attend open houses to get an initial sense of a school, and then once you got your lottery results, if you got into more than one school, you could do your due diligence and ask for private meetings or private tours, or talk more in depth to parents before making a final decision. Now, it's not reasonable to expect parents to research every school on their lottery list in such depth, nor is it realistic to expect principals to answer a bunch of questions from potential parents who have very little chance of actually getting a spot at a school. So parents are ultimately making choices about schools based on much less information than they would have had previously. I think now parents running open houses have a much greater responsibility for providing informative and accurate open houses than they did in the past. I know there were certain things said at our school's open house last year that are not true at our school, in reality. If we are going to have "school choice" parents should be in a position to make informed choices.

I liked the old way better too. It may have taken longer because of the shuffling, but we felt confident in our final choice since we'd had enough time to determine if it'd be best for our child. The new system seems like such a whirlwind visiting and researching so many schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think all these points about the open houses are valid, and one of the reasons the new lottery system (where you have to pref your schools when entering the lottery), has done parents a disservice. In the past, you could attend open houses to get an initial sense of a school, and then once you got your lottery results, if you got into more than one school, you could do your due diligence and ask for private meetings or private tours, or talk more in depth to parents before making a final decision. Now, it's not reasonable to expect parents to research every school on their lottery list in such depth, nor is it realistic to expect principals to answer a bunch of questions from potential parents who have very little chance of actually getting a spot at a school. So parents are ultimately making choices about schools based on much less information than they would have had previously. I think now parents running open houses have a much greater responsibility for providing informative and accurate open houses than they did in the past. I know there were certain things said at our school's open house last year that are not true at our school, in reality. If we are going to have "school choice" parents should be in a position to make informed choices.

I understand what you're saying, but without a specific proposal for what you think would work as an alternative (including the TIMING of the process, because that's huge), it's really not helpful at all. If parents need more time to do research, what are you proposing about when the lottery opens and closes that still allows enough time for the craziness and then dust to settle after the lottery? If you're saying you prefer a system where you don't get dropped from your lower choices, you're basically saying you want a common lottery but all the same chaos about holding seats that was under the old system. Why would you want that?

If none of the above, then exactly what are you proposing as the alternative?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last year we were really unimpressed with:

LAMB
Mundo Verde

People love them so much that we applied anyway (didn't get in), but the open houses were very loud and very underwhelming. Perhaps they just don't have to even try?

By contrast, we had the opposite experience at 2 Rivers, very warm and seems a great environment.

About Montessori -- kids get to play but instead of playing with, for example, a play kitchen, they get to use a real kitchen. Have you observed a class? The kids LOVE it.

Montessori parent here. Maria Montessori didn't believe in "play for play's sake" so the "work" in Montessori is deliberate and not kid-driven. The kids are taught how to wash a table, for example. The teacher starts by showing the child the 8 steps in the process... first, take the sponge and dip it in the water... second, wring it out, etc.

In contrast, a kid-centric play program involves the kids drawing on prior knowledge and experience to play on their own. So, in the kitchen, they may choose to pretend it's a restaurant, or family dinner, or a grocery store or even a school teacher lunchroom if they are really creative. The teachers do not "direct" the play like they do in Montessori.

My child has been in both. I see value in both approaches as I saw a different type of growth in my child but they are VERY different approaches.

Tools of the mind has imaginary play that is directed by the teacher. I've seen one version where students were imaging they were working at a resteruant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very unimpressed by LAMB open house last year. I had heard such great things that I expected to be wow'ed but was totally underwhelmed.

We were accepted in April and then they wow'ed us with much more in-depth discussions, tours, and presentations. And DC is there now and happy....

Sum: I don't think LAMB tries very hard at the Open Houses. (I have seen better presentations at their PTA meetings.) I bet Mundo Verde is the same way.

I was impressed by LAMB's open house. It was refreshing that it was in both English and Spanish .

I believe this poster is a troll. If the only thing refreshing about a presentation was that it was offered in two languages, I feel sorry for you. What about the content, and information they had to offer?

Not a troll. Sincere. I feel sorry for you right back.
I thought it was refreshing to be at a presentation where the parents who speak Spanish as a first language were treated on an even playing field with everyone else . It felt like walking the walk on being dual language. It was also nice to hear the quality of the Spanish - since I have heard Spanish at some schools is not up to par. So what if it took a little longer. What would the alternative be? Segregated open houses? It is a dual language school it was nice to have a dual language open house.

The open house I went to last year also was informative about the curriculum about the professional development for teachers etc.

Just because someone has a different opinion from you does not make them a troll.

Your original post had no substance. Duh, it's a dual-language school.

I went to 5 open houses for dual language schools last year and LAMB was the only one that was in both languages.

[Anonymous]

CHML - Principal's presentation was meh, but I enjoyed the student led tour. SWS - to me it felt like rush week in college, but DH really liked the open house.

[Anonymous]

Did anyone make it to the Lee Montessori open house today? How was it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think most non-private open houses are apt to underwhelm - they are staffed by volunteer parents and don't have slick marketing tools at their disposal. Take it with a grain of salt.

Agreed, I think DC parents have unrealistic expectations of open houses of charter schools - and that's ok. They probably shouldn't be at charter schools if they expect fancy consistently updated websites, fancy marketing materials and large admin staffs. Charter schools don't have those kind of budgets.

Better to find out not now and be "underwhelmed" and "put-off" and don't apply so we don't have to deal with your complaints and not pitching into to make the school a better place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was expecting the wow-effect by vising the NW private middle schools last year in preparation for our son (currently in 5th grade, Ward 3) graduation from his elementary DCPS school.

None of the schools we visited (GDS, St Albans, St Patrick, Holy Trinity) impressed us, at all. We found several aspects which would have not worked for him or did not convince us (in addition to the $$$ tuition). We then went to take a look at Basis as some parents from our ES had great words about it, but almost immediately ran away (office style building, long commuting, no outdoor space, no creativity).

At the end of this process, we are unexpectedly but firmly convinced that the best available option for him is our feeder DCPS middle school, Hardy. We are trying to convince as many parents we can from our current 5th grade. I can see that there's still some prejudice around the school, albeit decreasing. All the families who went to visit and talked to Principal & teachers came back very impressed by it. I believe that more than 50% of families form our 5th grade class will attend Hardy.

This is great to hear!!

I thought I knew you are until I reread and saw your son is currently in 5th grade. Last week I was talking to another mom at our Hardy feeder who basically said the exact same thing you did about her son- but he is now in 7th grade at Hardy. they toured privates, not impressed. Checked out the charters, not impressed. Now thrilled to be at Hardy and having a great experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think most non-private open houses are apt to underwhelm - they are staffed by volunteer parents and don't have slick marketing tools at their disposal. Take it with a grain of salt.

Agreed, I think DC parents have unrealistic expectations of open houses of charter schools - and that's ok. They probably shouldn't be at charter schools if they expect fancy consistently updated websites, fancy marketing materials and large admin staffs. Charter schools don't have those kind of budgets.

Better to find out not now and be "underwhelmed" and "put-off" and don't apply so we don't have to deal with your complaints and not pitching into to make the school a better place.

Beg to difffer -- the charters' fancy marketing materials generally blow DCPS out of the water. It is only in touring the schools that you'll get the sense that they're all really just different sides of the same coin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think most non-private open houses are apt to underwhelm - they are staffed by volunteer parents and don't have slick marketing tools at their disposal. Take it with a grain of salt.

FYI, most private school tours are also staffed by volunteer parents. That's why they are just as underwhelming! In my experience (and I have a now 7th grader, so been thru it all!), initial impressions don't always do a school justice, you have to really do your research and talk to many parents...this goes for public and private.

I recall an open house on a dull, rainy day where a school seemed so depressing but a spring revisit was a totally different scene.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think most non-private open houses are apt to underwhelm - they are staffed by volunteer parents and don't have slick marketing tools at their disposal. Take it with a grain of salt.

Agreed, I think DC parents have unrealistic expectations of open houses of charter schools - and that's ok. They probably shouldn't be at charter schools if they expect fancy consistently updated websites, fancy marketing materials and large admin staffs. Charter schools don't have those kind of budgets.

Better to find out not now and be "underwhelmed" and "put-off" and don't apply so we don't have to deal with your complaints and not pitching into to make the school a better place.

Beg to difffer -- the charters' fancy marketing materials generally blow DCPS out of the water. It is only in touring the schools that you'll get the sense that they're all really just different sides of the same coin.

Er, have you never seen fancy marketing materials before? Because if you are calling color copies done at kinkos "fancy marketing materials" I've got a bridge in Brooklyn that I'd love to sell you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was expecting the wow-effect by vising the NW private middle schools last year in preparation for our son (currently in 5th grade, Ward 3) graduation from his elementary DCPS school.

None of the schools we visited (GDS, St Albans, St Patrick, Holy Trinity) impressed us, at all. We found several aspects which would have not worked for him or did not convince us (in addition to the $$$ tuition). We then went to take a look at Basis as some parents from our ES had great words about it, but almost immediately ran away (office style building, long commuting, no outdoor space, no creativity).

At the end of this process, we are unexpectedly but firmly convinced that the best available option for him is our feeder DCPS middle school, Hardy. We are trying to convince as many parents we can from our current 5th grade. I can see that there's still some prejudice around the school, albeit decreasing. All the families who went to visit and talked to Principal & teachers came back very impressed by it. I believe that more than 50% of families form our 5th grade class will attend Hardy.

This is great to hear!!

I thought I knew you are until I reread and saw your son is currently in 5th grade. Last week I was talking to another mom at our Hardy feeder who basically said the exact same thing you did about her son- but he is now in 7th grade at Hardy. they toured privates, not impressed. Checked out the charters, not impressed. Now thrilled to be at Hardy and having a great experience.

Hi, my son is in 6th grade at Hardy, we are IB and our story is basically the same as of the PP's (tour of the leading independent schools, a quick look at Basis and then... Hardy!). So it looks like this is a constant pattern. I hope a growing one!