Erroneous info or big enrollment loophole?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:i think this applies only if you were admitted OOB to begin with, and move, still OOB. If you are IB and move OOB, you lose your spot and you lose your feeder rights.

That's nuts. Why should OOB students be perpetually protected and grandfathered in, no matter where they live, while neighborhood kids would lose their rights to attend their community school if they move OOB? It should be consistent across the board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is more of a thing here and the rules are
1) if you got into a feeder school as an OOB kid, your rights are permanent - you get Lafayette Deal Wilson
2) if you are at at JKLM and move OOB after they have checked residency you have the right to remain for the rest of the year, but not afterwards, and you lose all feeder rights you had by being at whatever school you just got out of

Kind of seems like the OOB kids have a bit of an advantage - like Charter school kids, their parents can move anywhere in the city, although I guess there is no OOB sibling preference?

Keep telling yourself that

Agree. Also can we stop using JKLM when we really mean WOTP? Only half of JKLM feeds to Deal which is the real problem, and we've already seen that all schools WOTP are pretty much he same.

SHLaBaMJa?
LaBaMSHeJ?
JaMLaBaSH?
LaMBaJaSH?
JLaMBaSH?

Oh, never mind -- Deal Boundary Schools. DBS?

I don't see any Es after your first one. Also no Ross? No shepherd? Maybe just stick to Wilson feeders, or if you don't want to leave out Ross and Brent you say HRDCPS?

The schools you listed PP don't feed to Deal. The prior PP created a list of Deal feeders, hence Bancroft and Shepherd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i think this applies only if you were admitted OOB to begin with, and move, still OOB. If you are IB and move OOB, you lose your spot and you lose your feeder rights.

That's nuts. Why should OOB students be perpetually protected and grandfathered in, no matter where they live, while neighborhood kids would lose their rights to attend their community school if they move OOB? It should be consistent across the board.

The whole OOB feeder system is nuts. There should be a fresh lottery at each transition year. But politics won't allow it to change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i think this applies only if you were admitted OOB to begin with, and move, still OOB. If you are IB and move OOB, you lose your spot and you lose your feeder rights.

That's nuts. Why should OOB students be perpetually protected and grandfathered in, no matter where they live, while neighborhood kids would lose their rights to attend their community school if they move OOB? It should be consistent across the board.

Because it's not their community school anymore if they move OOB. Classroom projections are based on surveys of the neighborhood. If you could spend one year, or even just a few months, at an IB address and then move with impunity, it renders boundaries almost meaningless. Everyone would rent IB at the best school and move to a cheaper location as soon as they're enrolled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i think this applies only if you were admitted OOB to begin with, and move, still OOB. If you are IB and move OOB, you lose your spot and you lose your feeder rights.

That's nuts. Why should OOB students be perpetually protected and grandfathered in, no matter where they live, while neighborhood kids would lose their rights to attend their community school if they move OOB? It should be consistent across the board.

Because it's not their community school anymore if they move OOB. Classroom projections are based on surveys of the neighborhood. If you could spend one year, or even just a few months, at an IB address and then move with impunity, it renders boundaries almost meaningless. Everyone would rent IB at the best school and move to a cheaper location as soon as they're enrolled.

Boundaries are already meaningless -- 75% of kids in DC don't go to an in-boundary school.

The classroom projection argument is an even bigger argument against perpetual protection for OOB kids. How does the system have any ability to plan if a kid who wins the pre-k lottery this year is guaranteed a seat at specific schools until 2028?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i think this applies only if you were admitted OOB to begin with, and move, still OOB. If you are IB and move OOB, you lose your spot and you lose your feeder rights.

That's nuts. Why should OOB students be perpetually protected and grandfathered in, no matter where they live, while neighborhood kids would lose their rights to attend their community school if they move OOB? It should be consistent across the board.

Because it's not their community school anymore if they move OOB. Classroom projections are based on surveys of the neighborhood. If you could spend one year, or even just a few months, at an IB address and then move with impunity, it renders boundaries almost meaningless. Everyone would rent IB at the best school and move to a cheaper location as soon as they're enrolled.

Boundaries are already meaningless -- 75% of kids in DC don't go to an in-boundary school.

The classroom projection argument is an even bigger argument against perpetual protection for OOB kids. How does the system have any ability to plan if a kid who wins the pre-k lottery this year is guaranteed a seat at specific schools until 2028?

I'm not sure how you figure that. The school determines how many seats are available in the PS/PK lottery; once kids are in, ongoing feeder rights make their path MORE predictable than if they had to relottery at key transition points.

And as transient as DC is, IB kids are not as predictable as you might think. My daughter's classroom last year was more crowded than expected because of IB kids -- it just happened that several kids in her grade moved into the neighborhood. One of them is gone already (moved overseas), and another likely will move overseas next year. So it's not like the IB population of any given school is a perfect model of predictability.

[Anonymous]

Janney is an example of why this is a problem. The school is bursting at the seams and has about 10% of the population that no longer lives IB but once did - and some for only 3 months.

Why should the families who have the means to game the system have rights to J, D and W?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i think this applies only if you were admitted OOB to begin with, and move, still OOB. If you are IB and move OOB, you lose your spot and you lose your feeder rights.

That's nuts. Why should OOB students be perpetually protected and grandfathered in, no matter where they live, while neighborhood kids would lose their rights to attend their community school if they move OOB? It should be consistent across the board.

Because it's not their community school anymore if they move OOB. Classroom projections are based on surveys of the neighborhood. If you could spend one year, or even just a few months, at an IB address and then move with impunity, it renders boundaries almost meaningless. Everyone would rent IB at the best school and move to a cheaper location as soon as they're enrolled.

Boundaries are already meaningless -- 75% of kids in DC don't go to an in-boundary school.

The classroom projection argument is an even bigger argument against perpetual protection for OOB kids. How does the system have any ability to plan if a kid who wins the pre-k lottery this year is guaranteed a seat at specific schools until 2028?

I'm not sure how you figure that. The school determines how many seats are available in the PS/PK lottery; once kids are in, ongoing feeder rights make their path MORE predictable than if they had to relottery at key transition points.

And as transient as DC is, IB kids are not as predictable as you might think. My daughter's classroom last year was more crowded than expected because of IB kids -- it just happened that several kids in her grade moved into the neighborhood. One of them is gone already (moved overseas), and another likely will move overseas next year. So it's not like the IB population of any given school is a perfect model of predictability.

How can survey adjust for my family? Not using our IB elementary (our spot will presumably be given to an OOB kid). But we plan to go to our IB middle and high school, as will the OOB kid that took our Elementary spot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is more of a thing here and the rules are
1) if you got into a feeder school as an OOB kid, your rights are permanent - you get Lafayette Deal Wilson
2) if you are at at JKLM and move OOB after they have checked residency you have the right to remain for the rest of the year, but not afterwards, and you lose all feeder rights you had by being at whatever school you just got out of

Kind of seems like the OOB kids have a bit of an advantage - like Charter school kids, their parents can move anywhere in the city, although I guess there is no OOB sibling preference?

Keep telling yourself that

Agree. Also can we stop using JKLM when we really mean WOTP? Only half of JKLM feeds to Deal which is the real problem, and we've already seen that all schools WOTP are pretty much he same.

SHLaBaMJa?
LaBaMSHeJ?
JaMLaBaSH?
LaMBaJaSH?
JLaMBaSH?

Oh, never mind -- Deal Boundary Schools. DBS?

I don't see any Es after your first one. Also no Ross? No shepherd? Maybe just stick to Wilson feeders, or if you don't want to leave out Ross and Brent you say HRDCPS?

I think Highly Regarded Public School is better. Then we can argument over who has HRPS and which strain of HRPS is better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i think this applies only if you were admitted OOB to begin with, and move, still OOB. If you are IB and move OOB, you lose your spot and you lose your feeder rights.

That's nuts. Why should OOB students be perpetually protected and grandfathered in, no matter where they live, while neighborhood kids would lose their rights to attend their community school if they move OOB? It should be consistent across the board.

Because it's not their community school anymore if they move OOB. Classroom projections are based on surveys of the neighborhood. If you could spend one year, or even just a few months, at an IB address and then move with impunity, it renders boundaries almost meaningless. Everyone would rent IB at the best school and move to a cheaper location as soon as they're enrolled.

Boundaries are already meaningless -- 75% of kids in DC don't go to an in-boundary school.

The classroom projection argument is an even bigger argument against perpetual protection for OOB kids. How does the system have any ability to plan if a kid who wins the pre-k lottery this year is guaranteed a seat at specific schools until 2028?

I'm not sure how you figure that. The school determines how many seats are available in the PS/PK lottery; once kids are in, ongoing feeder rights make their path MORE predictable than if they had to relottery at key transition points.

And as transient as DC is, IB kids are not as predictable as you might think. My daughter's classroom last year was more crowded than expected because of IB kids -- it just happened that several kids in her grade moved into the neighborhood. One of them is gone already (moved overseas), and another likely will move overseas next year. So it's not like the IB population of any given school is a perfect model of predictability.

How can survey adjust for my family? Not using our IB elementary (our spot will presumably be given to an OOB kid). But we plan to go to our IB middle and high school, as will the OOB kid that took our Elementary spot.

Or that OOB student may move or go to a charter or private for middle school.

Demographers build all of that into their models. But they cannot make the political leadership redraw the lines, which is really what is needed to address overcrowding.

[Anonymous]

I personally don't think people should be able to remain at a school they got into IB after moving but I can see the arguments for it. For those who asked why the OOB kids get to stay and the IB kids who move don't, the OOB kids got their spots through a competitive lottery. the IB kids had rights based on address - so why should those rights continue once the person moves vs opening that spot up to all residents? That said, I can see the arguments for continuity, etc. What seems harder to justify is why that formerly IB kid gets to stay at the feeder pattern schools after graduating from the current school.

Also, I think if principals want to allow kids who move to stay in the school, this shgould have to be a blanket policy and not just something they do at their choice for the kids they want to keep.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: For those who asked why the OOB kids get to stay and the IB kids who move don't, the OOB kids got their spots through a competitive lottery.

You're never going to convince me that someone who won a lottery is deserving. Lucky, yes, deserving, no.

In a similar vein, someone born with rich enough parents to buy into a better school district is lucky too. Is one kind of luck better than another? I don't think so.

The problem with the way school assignments are done now is that luck is paramount, and the differences in outcomes is stark. Win the lottery in pre-K, you're on the most desirable path for thirteen years. No one else in the entire system has that certainty.

A new OOB lottery at each admission year would spread the luck more evenly, which is fairer. It would have a practical benefit as well. The current OOB system is highly destabilizing to feeder schools which feed the less than "high regarded" schools. Parents know that if they transfer into the feeder pattern of a more desirable school they are set. So they bail, even though the school they are bailing for may not itself be any more desirable than their current school. If there were no feeder rights families would be more likely to stay, which stabilizes the entire system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is more of a thing here and the rules are
1) if you got into a feeder school as an OOB kid, your rights are permanent - you get Lafayette Deal Wilson
2) if you are at at JKLM and move OOB after they have checked residency you have the right to remain for the rest of the year, but not afterwards, and you lose all feeder rights you had by being at whatever school you just got out of

Kind of seems like the OOB kids have a bit of an advantage - like Charter school kids, their parents can move anywhere in the city, although I guess there is no OOB sibling preference?

Keep telling yourself that

Agree. Also can we stop using JKLM when we really mean WOTP? Only half of JKLM feeds to Deal which is the real problem, and we've already seen that all schools WOTP are pretty much he same.

SHLaBaMJa?
LaBaMSHeJ?
JaMLaBaSH?
LaMBaJaSH?
JLaMBaSH?

Oh, never mind -- Deal Boundary Schools. DBS?

I don't see any Es after your first one. Also no Ross? No shepherd? Maybe just stick to Wilson feeders, or if you don't want to leave out Ross and Brent you say HRDCPS?

I think Highly Regarded Public School is better. Then we can argument over who has HRPS and which strain of HRPS is better.

It was just a naming of Deal feeders, signifying nothing other than which schools feed Deal.

[Anonymous]

We were at the Ward 2 common lottery info session at Ross this last weekend and both the presenters and the Ross principal were emphatic that you retain your spot at a school and inherit that school's feeder pattern even in you move out of boundary.

They said the boundary group advised changing this but for the moment that's how it stands.

This flies in the face of info we have read here.

For the record the dcps presenters were named Graves and Boquet, guessing folks will know the Ross
official.

It sounds like the famous "principal discretion" is in effect for Ross, which as many people pointed out, starts to lose kids in upper grades because of the lousy feeder pattern. I'd be surprised if that were true for PK. I know a lot of families in the Ross PK classes and there are a lot of complaints on how restrictive it is to look within the Ross boundary for a bigger home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i think this applies only if you were admitted OOB to begin with, and move, still OOB. If you are IB and move OOB, you lose your spot and you lose your feeder rights.

That's nuts. Why should OOB students be perpetually protected and grandfathered in, no matter where they live, while neighborhood kids would lose their rights to attend their community school if they move OOB? It should be consistent across the board.

Because it's not their community school anymore if they move OOB. Classroom projections are based on surveys of the neighborhood. If you could spend one year, or even just a few months, at an IB address and then move with impunity, it renders boundaries almost meaningless. Everyone would rent IB at the best school and move to a cheaper location as soon as they're enrolled.

Boundaries are already meaningless -- 75% of kids in DC don't go to an in-boundary school.

The classroom projection argument is an even bigger argument against perpetual protection for OOB kids. How does the system have any ability to plan if a kid who wins the pre-k lottery this year is guaranteed a seat at specific schools until 2028?

I'm not sure how you figure that. The school determines how many seats are available in the PS/PK lottery; once kids are in, ongoing feeder rights make their path MORE predictable than if they had to relottery at key transition points.

And as transient as DC is, IB kids are not as predictable as you might think. My daughter's classroom last year was more crowded than expected because of IB kids -- it just happened that several kids in her grade moved into the neighborhood. One of them is gone already (moved overseas), and another likely will move overseas next year. So it's not like the IB population of any given school is a perfect model of predictability.

How can survey adjust for my family? Not using our IB elementary (our spot will presumably be given to an OOB kid). But we plan to go to our IB middle and high school, as will the OOB kid that took our Elementary spot.

Or that OOB student may move or go to a charter or private for middle school.

Demographers build all of that into their models. But they cannot make the political leadership redraw the lines, which is really what is needed to address overcrowding.

Disagree. Deal is what 20-25% over cap, they have 30% OOB. They should not think about redrawing until they stop feeder rights. And it doesn't matter if that OOB goes charter. That's why each entry year should have new lottery.