Couldn't you just build a strong proximity preference to get the advantages of choice sets?

[Anonymous]

I think if you build a system of neighborhood schools with a proximity preference for a school within 2 miles that comes right after siblings, you'll get more people admitted to neighboring schools they would likely consider but might not choose otherwise. Couple that with a failing schools preference, automatic lottery-free entry for poor students at pk3 and setasides at and you take out much of the sting and give much of the benefits of what we have all been discussing. Seem reasonable?

[Anonymous]

No, introducing uncertainty into which ES your child will go to will undermine the great success stories of functional DCPS elementary schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, introducing uncertainty into which ES your child will go to will undermine the great success stories of functional DCPS elementary schools.

Wait where's the uncertainty? You would get inboundary preference.

[Anonymous]

DME should have been better at sticking to existing terms and policies. A system of preferences that simply expanded the proximity preference further would do quite a lot. Everyone already submits rank ordered lists. What they could do is automatically put you on the waitlists for your inbound school and the two nearest other schools (but not match you/cut you off waitlists) beyond your list even if you do not select them in the lottery. That means geniuses who selected only Mundo Verde, Two Rivers, and Brent and JKLM schools OOB and mourn being "shut out" will have a chance to consider their inbounds school and others very close and know others are. People are often surprised by differences between expectations and reality at DCPS schools.

Then you do cohort outreach, try to get people to join together, i.e., every school has a meeting to which all people reasonably likely to be admitted so people can take the plunge together. DCPS is trying to do by policy some things people should do by direct prosocial agreement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, introducing uncertainty into which ES your child will go to will undermine the great success stories of functional DCPS elementary schools.

Wait where's the uncertainty? You would get inboundary preference.

"Choice sets." See the title of this thread. Uncertainty is the death knell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, introducing uncertainty into which ES your child will go to will undermine the great success stories of functional DCPS elementary schools.

Wait where's the uncertainty? You would get inboundary preference.

"Choice sets." See the title of this thread. Uncertainty is the death knell.

+1. if the proximity preference is so strong that you get the close school for sure, than is the same system we have now, where kids get a spot at their IB school. if you are not certain anymore, than it's a big problem. I leave one block from Lafayette and the schools in the choice set are lafatette, Murch and Janney. they are equivalent, so is not that I would get a better school by not getting into our IB school. so instead of having my kids walk 100 yeards to school with all the other kids in the block, we may have to drive them to Janney in Tenleytown every day, with kids that live as far as Mass avenue. and for what, since our IB school works great. apparently the choice set system does not even help people with crappy schools becausd it seems that there are people with three crappy schools in their set. and people with a good school and a crappy one would probably go private or charter if they can. I am going to vote for Catania over Bowser just for this reason. she said choice set is a good thing. REALLY???

[Anonymous]

The "controlled choice" term is misleading.
I use "controlled uncertainty" when trying to explain to parents from my school this madness.

Again, we have no car in Glover Park. We walk the kids to school (Stoddert), next year the eldest daughter will walk to school by herself (Hardy). Then at 8:50 we take the Circulator and go to work. We walk to Whole Food and Safeway, and to Georgetwon Hospital for our routinary visit. We walk to playground and to Jalleff pool in the summer. Walk to the library. All is within 10 mins walk.

We planned this carefully, and waited for 2 year before our perfect house came on the market in our planned location , near to our planned schools.

No way this bunch of incompetent advisors and a delegitimated deputy major are going to destroy what we have achieved with hard work, and intelligent planning.

[Anonymous]

I think you guys are overreacting to the use of the term choice sets at all. A proximity preference that gives a leg up and allows parents to consider nearby schools is reasonable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think you guys are overreacting to the use of the term choice sets at all. A proximity preference that gives a leg up and allows parents to consider nearby schools is reasonable.

Says the person with absolutely no connection to their in-bound school.

Introducing uncertainty into the working schools will relegate them to the "formerly working" category. I'm not exaggerrating. If you don't understand the dynamic of how these schools work (and why they work), I can see how you would think a lottery between {Janney, Murch and Lafayette} or {Key, Mann and Stoddert} would leave no one worse off. The schools are all (mostly) comparable, after all. But this is dead wrong, and such a lottery would cripple these schools. I'm happy to explain further, but hopefully someone else will chime in instead.

And, as a side note: what's accomplished by making a lottery b/w {Janney, Murch and Lafayette} or {Key, Mann and Stoddert}? NOTHING. You destroy the incredibly strong parental involvement in these schools for absolutely no gain. The talking point of "everybody else is doing it, even NWNW" is not worth it. Foolish and dangerous.

[Anonymous]

I mean this all in keeping with inboundary rights - what upsets the apple cart if you keep your inboundary preference to Hearst or Murch or Janney? It has more effect where the direct inbounds school might not be the one you want but a nearby one is reasonable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think you guys are overreacting to the use of the term choice sets at all. A proximity preference that gives a leg up and allows parents to consider nearby schools is reasonable.

No, it is not, even if it gives me just a 5% chance that I will have to buy again a car to drive my kids to school every morning.

You do not make a success story worse. The trade-off situation (you cannot improve a situation without making it worse for some) was just created by the DME and her incompetent advisors.
1. You can and must (with all the money we give you in taxes) improve the situation, at the right time not when it too late, without creating trade-off.
2. You should not pursue a change when there's apparent and large chances that the end results will be, instead, make the situation worse for some, and not significantly better for others.

Remember, Ward 3 is full of families who would just turn back to the private schools in a snap. We desperately need them to stay in DCPS. We need their volonteering time, their money to our PTAs, their human capital, and their good kids. You like it or not.

Expelling those families from DCPS (they will not accept chances) will harm us all. Stoddert, Key, Mann etc parents know what I am talking about.

[Anonymous]

I can see this conversation is pointless. But whoever reads this next, consider the positive effect of a proximity preference without taking away inbounds rights.

[Anonymous]

Remember, Ward 3 is full of families who would just turn back to the private schools in a snap. We desperately need them to stay in DCPS. We need their volonteering time, their money to our PTAs, their human capital, and their good kids. You like it or not.

ahem, WE don't need you. Murch, Lafayette, and Janney need you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Remember, Ward 3 is full of families who would just turn back to the private schools in a snap. We desperately need them to stay in DCPS. We need their volonteering time, their money to our PTAs, their human capital, and their good kids. You like it or not.

ahem, WE don't need you. Murch, Lafayette, and Janney need you.

Not clear what you mean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Remember, Ward 3 is full of families who would just turn back to the private schools in a snap. We desperately need them to stay in DCPS. We need their volonteering time, their money to our PTAs, their human capital, and their good kids. You like it or not.

ahem, WE don't need you. Murch, Lafayette, and Janney need you.

Can you please explain what you mean? I also have not understood what you mean. Wealthy families has given a lot to us, and we missed them when they went private (see David Gregory for instance).

Mann Mom