Will Janney eventually reduce or eliminate PK4
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
This has absolutely nothing to do with tax dollars. Universal PK is no panacea but maybe that figure is is even worse without it. When high quality like much of DC PK it provides great advantages over the alternatives for many families. I don't think Janney's or any of upper NW PK should be a high priority, but it absolutely does make a difference. Are you one of the hysterical fans of the Daily Caller writing screeds on the other threads? Feel free to just go away. |
Anonymous
2% of 693 students is about 13 kids. |
Anonymous
|
Long term Janney parent here again.
When my kids started there there were 400 students, everyone knew everyone and parents were super involved. This fall it will likely be 750+, lower grade parents are far less involved in school wide volunteering (a major concern raised by some in the PTA) and the school is overcrowded and out of room to add more classes. The new principal is very nice and approachable but doesn't seem to be the mover/shaker that the old one was in terms of standing to DCPS and conversely, getting money out of DCPS. DPPS is never going to change the boundaries or eliminate PK. The class sizes will just continue to creep up. Those who have issue with this or who can afford private will leave. It happens each year. Otherwise, life will continue as usual. |
Anonymous
|
This discussion comes up regularly, like clockwork. I suppose the time is here again. It's like those Brent ECE threads which keep coming around and around and around.
Chances of pre-K being eliminated in the near future are zero. Like it or not, but that's how it is. If the class size is unappealing (as it is to many), your best option is to move - staying and hoping Janney will get rid of pre-K and make other classes smaller is not a bet I'd be willing to take at all. |
Anonymous
| The over crowding at Janney can only be fixed by boundary changes (not just Janney but just about everywhere). |
Anonymous
+1, Janney boundaries should be tightened before Pre-K is either reduced or eliminated. |
Anonymous
I think you nailed it ... the new proposed GOP platform specifically comes out against PK as a "government intrusion"! |
Anonymous
Ditto. This discussion comes up on here every 3 months. Nothing is going to change regarding boundaries or number of PK classes. Your options are 1) move 2) attend Janney as is. |
Anonymous
This |
Anonymous
| We tried this, remember? There isn't any good answer except a new school in upper NW, and that is basically impossible. It does seem smart to cut out 3 or even 4 sections of pre-K given the space constraints post-renovation plus the lack of room for trailers, plus the overcrowding in older grades. Or maybe DCPS could rent a separate small facility for a Janney pre-K. |
Anonymous
|
We need a header in the schools forum:
Janney is overcrowded. It will remain overcrowded indefinitely because it's boundaries are never going to change. They will never eliminate PK. Deal with your child being in large classes or move/switch schools. The end. |
Anonymous
Congratulations once again for being a participant in Head Start as it was implemented in the District of Columbia. A program launched in the 1960s and offered exclusively to low-income children: "Head Start was designed to help break the cycle of poverty, providing preschool children of low-income families with a comprehensive program to meet their emotional, social, health, nutritional and psychological needs." Public "Pre-K" for non-impoverished kids was not present in DCPS in the 1970s. I too went to Murch, from 1974-1980. There was no "pre-K" at Murch for me or my neighbors in Forest Hills. |
Anonymous
|
PP here -- Funny I grew up in Forest Hills too. Big house, definitely not Head Start eligible and went to Murch prek in 1977. DC was one of the first school district implemented it. Your parents may have decdied it wasn't for you or perhaps you went to a private preschool which is what two of my older siblings did since it wasn't available to them.
Here you go: http://fcd-us.org/sites/default/files/Pre-K%20for%20All%20DC%20Case%20Study.pdf |
Anonymous
|
I should include the quote from the report since you seem so adamant to think you are right:
"In 1972, DC became one of the first jurisdictions in the country to offer pre-K in public school settings. The program, operated by the District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS), focused solely on four-year-olds and was funded through the school-funding formula on a per-pupil basis. Services were free and available citywide on a first-come first-served basis..." Chapter 3 if that helps you. |
Anonymous
|
We are an IB family currently on the waitlist for pre-k and I can tell you the waitlist was at least 35 IB kids when the results were announced. We are still pretty far down on the waitlist and are planning on private preK in the fall. However, I would be happy to also have my younger child attend private preK if it means Janney class sizes for K and above will be smaller. As someone who has to pay preK tuition next year I understand the huge cost savings that Janney preK provides. We are well off but it is still a stretch to pay for private preschool. I would much rather invest that money in my kids college fund! We would never be able to afford private elementary school and for that reason I would rather suck up one more year of private preK tuition for my younger child as well if it means my kids won't have 30 kids in their classes at Janney. I don't think the school will ever eliminate preK but it could certainly reduce the number of classes. Its not as if doing so will result in only some IB students not being able to attend because as it stands now, there are already 30+ IB students who didn't get in initially.
|