The Lists are In...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not only is OP all over the map in terms of location, there does not seem to be any rhyme or reason when it comes to teaching philosophy, language immersion/no language, etc. I'm sure OP had his/her own criteria, but I don't see a pattern.

Not OP, but her list is similar to mine. Most schools are inquiry-based and student-centered. Her schools include expeditionary learning, Reggio, international baccalaureate, and Montessori programs. Bridges uses an inquiry-based model that is a lot like the International Baccalaureate PYP, although more locally-focused. I'd say the schools she lists are actually pretty similar in their student-centered approach to learning. The ones that don't seem to follow this are Haynes (still not sure what they do) and Walls@F-S (Tools for PS, which definitely has some element of choice but also has some structure to it).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For K:

Hearst
Eaton
Murch
Lafayette
Mundo Verde
Janney
Mann
Inspired Teaching School
Cap City
Stoddert
Hyde-Addison
EL Haynes

IB for Powell, and probably would rank it below ITS.

Wow - and Powell is nowhere on your list. What will you do if you (likely) get shut out and not into a single one of these schools?!?

it's for K, therefore he/she will have the right to show up the first day of school (assume her child may be there already).

This example seems to support an argument that families who eschew their local DCPS in the lottery, should not have the continued right to show up and enroll whenever they want. This sort of lottery playing, where your local school remains your back-up plan, but the school isn't aware, will only cause havoc on the school's budget and enrollment projections. I imagine this poster's child is already at Powell. They know they can stay, but will jump if they get a spot at any school above IT. OK, that's cool. But if you get a spot, accept it but then decide after a month or two that the commute is terrible and the school isn't all that you had hoped and you want to go back to Powell, I don't think you should be able to. That's completely unfair to school, the budget, the families who already committed, etc. These are the sort of things the boundary, feeder pattern committee is looking at.

Completely with you. I think if you give up your IB preference after K, you should lose your right to attend the school. No DCPS should be a "back up plan" but a place you invest in. It's not fair for the other children and families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For K:

Hearst
Eaton
Murch
Lafayette
Mundo Verde
Janney
Mann
Inspired Teaching School
Cap City
Stoddert
Hyde-Addison
EL Haynes

IB for Powell, and probably would rank it below ITS.

Wow - and Powell is nowhere on your list. What will you do if you (likely) get shut out and not into a single one of these schools?!?

it's for K, therefore he/she will have the right to show up the first day of school (assume her child may be there already).

This example seems to support an argument that families who eschew their local DCPS in the lottery, should not have the continued right to show up and enroll whenever they want. This sort of lottery playing, where your local school remains your back-up plan, but the school isn't aware, will only cause havoc on the school's budget and enrollment projections. I imagine this poster's child is already at Powell. They know they can stay, but will jump if they get a spot at any school above IT. OK, that's cool. But if you get a spot, accept it but then decide after a month or two that the commute is terrible and the school isn't all that you had hoped and you want to go back to Powell, I don't think you should be able to. That's completely unfair to school, the budget, the families who already committed, etc. These are the sort of things the boundary, feeder pattern committee is looking at.

Completely with you. I think if you give up your IB preference after K, you should lose your right to attend the school. No DCPS should be a "back up plan" but a place you invest in. It's not fair for the other children and families.

Agreed. And I'm not picking on this particular poster...particularly since she clarified that she's not at Powell now. As she rightly pointed out, inboundary families can't "lottery" for K and above because they get in as a matter of right. But once you do make the decision to not exercise that right by enrolling in and attending another public school (DCPS or charter) you should not just be able to show up whenever you want. If you want to get back into your old local school, you should have to lottery for it as if you were OOB.

[Anonymous]

For 5th:

Latin PCS
BASIS

In private school now that is no longer affordable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For K:

Hearst
Eaton
Murch
Lafayette
Mundo Verde
Janney
Mann
Inspired Teaching School
Cap City
Stoddert
Hyde-Addison
EL Haynes

IB for Powell, and probably would rank it below ITS.

Wow - and Powell is nowhere on your list. What will you do if you (likely) get shut out and not into a single one of these schools?!?

it's for K, therefore he/she will have the right to show up the first day of school (assume her child may be there already).

This example seems to support an argument that families who eschew their local DCPS in the lottery, should not have the continued right to show up and enroll whenever they want. This sort of lottery playing, where your local school remains your back-up plan, but the school isn't aware, will only cause havoc on the school's budget and enrollment projections. I imagine this poster's child is already at Powell. They know they can stay, but will jump if they get a spot at any school above IT. OK, that's cool. But if you get a spot, accept it but then decide after a month or two that the commute is terrible and the school isn't all that you had hoped and you want to go back to Powell, I don't think you should be able to. That's completely unfair to school, the budget, the families who already committed, etc. These are the sort of things the boundary, feeder pattern committee is looking at.

Completely with you. I think if you give up your IB preference after K, you should lose your right to attend the school. No DCPS should be a "back up plan" but a place you invest in. It's not fair for the other children and families.

Agreed. And I'm not picking on this particular poster...particularly since she clarified that she's not at Powell now. As she rightly pointed out, inboundary families can't "lottery" for K and above because they get in as a matter of right. But once you do make the decision to not exercise that right by enrolling in and attending another public school (DCPS or charter) you should not just be able to show up whenever you want. If you want to get back into your old local school, you should have to lottery for it as if you were OOB.

Jeez, folks. I can't put Powell down for K! We are not at Powell. My example does not support your argument. Pick on someone else, please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For K:

Hearst
Eaton
Murch
Lafayette
Mundo Verde
Janney
Mann
Inspired Teaching School
Cap City
Stoddert
Hyde-Addison
EL Haynes

IB for Powell, and probably would rank it below ITS.

Wow - and Powell is nowhere on your list. What will you do if you (likely) get shut out and not into a single one of these schools?!?

it's for K, therefore he/she will have the right to show up the first day of school (assume her child may be there already).

This example seems to support an argument that families who eschew their local DCPS in the lottery, should not have the continued right to show up and enroll whenever they want. This sort of lottery playing, where your local school remains your back-up plan, but the school isn't aware, will only cause havoc on the school's budget and enrollment projections. I imagine this poster's child is already at Powell. They know they can stay, but will jump if they get a spot at any school above IT. OK, that's cool. But if you get a spot, accept it but then decide after a month or two that the commute is terrible and the school isn't all that you had hoped and you want to go back to Powell, I don't think you should be able to. That's completely unfair to school, the budget, the families who already committed, etc. These are the sort of things the boundary, feeder pattern committee is looking at.

Completely with you. I think if you give up your IB preference after K, you should lose your right to attend the school. No DCPS should be a "back up plan" but a place you invest in. It's not fair for the other children and families.

Agreed. And I'm not picking on this particular poster...particularly since she clarified that she's not at Powell now. As she rightly pointed out, inboundary families can't "lottery" for K and above because they get in as a matter of right. But once you do make the decision to not exercise that right by enrolling in and attending another public school (DCPS or charter) you should not just be able to show up whenever you want. If you want to get back into your old local school, you should have to lottery for it as if you were OOB.

Jeez, folks. I can't put Powell down for K! We are not at Powell. My example does not support your argument. Pick on someone else, please.

They are simply stating that if you get in any one of the 12 schools above, you should lose your IB status.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For K:

Hearst
Eaton
Murch
Lafayette
Mundo Verde
Janney
Mann
Inspired Teaching School
Cap City
Stoddert
Hyde-Addison
EL Haynes

IB for Powell, and probably would rank it below ITS.

Wow - and Powell is nowhere on your list. What will you do if you (likely) get shut out and not into a single one of these schools?!?

it's for K, therefore he/she will have the right to show up the first day of school (assume her child may be there already).

This example seems to support an argument that families who eschew their local DCPS in the lottery, should not have the continued right to show up and enroll whenever they want. This sort of lottery playing, where your local school remains your back-up plan, but the school isn't aware, will only cause havoc on the school's budget and enrollment projections. I imagine this poster's child is already at Powell. They know they can stay, but will jump if they get a spot at any school above IT. OK, that's cool. But if you get a spot, accept it but then decide after a month or two that the commute is terrible and the school isn't all that you had hoped and you want to go back to Powell, I don't think you should be able to. That's completely unfair to school, the budget, the families who already committed, etc. These are the sort of things the boundary, feeder pattern committee is looking at.

Completely with you. I think if you give up your IB preference after K, you should lose your right to attend the school. No DCPS should be a "back up plan" but a place you invest in. It's not fair for the other children and families.

Agreed. And I'm not picking on this particular poster...particularly since she clarified that she's not at Powell now. As she rightly pointed out, inboundary families can't "lottery" for K and above because they get in as a matter of right. But once you do make the decision to not exercise that right by enrolling in and attending another public school (DCPS or charter) you should not just be able to show up whenever you want. If you want to get back into your old local school, you should have to lottery for it as if you were OOB.

Jeez, folks. I can't put Powell down for K! We are not at Powell. My example does not support your argument. Pick on someone else, please.

She said she was not picking on you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For K:

Hearst
Eaton
Murch
Lafayette
Mundo Verde
Janney
Mann
Inspired Teaching School
Cap City
Stoddert
Hyde-Addison
EL Haynes

IB for Powell, and probably would rank it below ITS.

Wow - and Powell is nowhere on your list. What will you do if you (likely) get shut out and not into a single one of these schools?!?

it's for K, therefore he/she will have the right to show up the first day of school (assume her child may be there already).

This example seems to support an argument that families who eschew their local DCPS in the lottery, should not have the continued right to show up and enroll whenever they want. This sort of lottery playing, where your local school remains your back-up plan, but the school isn't aware, will only cause havoc on the school's budget and enrollment projections. I imagine this poster's child is already at Powell. They know they can stay, but will jump if they get a spot at any school above IT. OK, that's cool. But if you get a spot, accept it but then decide after a month or two that the commute is terrible and the school isn't all that you had hoped and you want to go back to Powell, I don't think you should be able to. That's completely unfair to school, the budget, the families who already committed, etc. These are the sort of things the boundary, feeder pattern committee is looking at.

Completely with you. I think if you give up your IB preference after K, you should lose your right to attend the school. No DCPS should be a "back up plan" but a place you invest in. It's not fair for the other children and families.

Agreed. And I'm not picking on this particular poster...particularly since she clarified that she's not at Powell now. As she rightly pointed out, inboundary families can't "lottery" for K and above because they get in as a matter of right. But once you do make the decision to not exercise that right by enrolling in and attending another public school (DCPS or charter) you should not just be able to show up whenever you want. If you want to get back into your old local school, you should have to lottery for it as if you were OOB.

Jeez, folks. I can't put Powell down for K! We are not at Powell. My example does not support your argument. Pick on someone else, please.

They are simply stating that if you get in any one of the 12 schools above, you should lose your IB status.

Agreed.

[Anonymous]

Losing your IB status makes no sense. What if the school you choose doesn't work for your child? Our children change as they grow and something that works for PK might not work for the later grades.

[Anonymous]

For 5th:
1) Basis
2) WL
3) homeschool, then try again next year for 6th with Hardy in #3

[Anonymous]

NP and not picking--I swear--just curious why Powell would be at the bottom of your list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Losing your IB status makes no sense. What if the school you choose doesn't work for your child? Our children change as they grow and something that works for PK might not work for the later grades.

Then they can get IB status the flowing school year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Losing your IB status makes no sense. What if the school you choose doesn't work for your child? Our children change as they grow and something that works for PK might not work for the later grades.

Then they can get IB status the flowing school year.

But they should have to lottery in for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For K:

Hearst
Eaton
Murch
Lafayette
Mundo Verde
Janney
Mann
Inspired Teaching School
Cap City
Stoddert
Hyde-Addison
EL Haynes

IB for Powell, and probably would rank it below ITS.

Wow - and Powell is nowhere on your list. What will you do if you (likely) get shut out and not into a single one of these schools?!?

it's for K, therefore he/she will have the right to show up the first day of school (assume her child may be there already).

This example seems to support an argument that families who eschew their local DCPS in the lottery, should not have the continued right to show up and enroll whenever they want. This sort of lottery playing, where your local school remains your back-up plan, but the school isn't aware, will only cause havoc on the school's budget and enrollment projections. I imagine this poster's child is already at Powell. They know they can stay, but will jump if they get a spot at any school above IT. OK, that's cool. But if you get a spot, accept it but then decide after a month or two that the commute is terrible and the school isn't all that you had hoped and you want to go back to Powell, I don't think you should be able to. That's completely unfair to school, the budget, the families who already committed, etc. These are the sort of things the boundary, feeder pattern committee is looking at.

Completely with you. I think if you give up your IB preference after K, you should lose your right to attend the school. No DCPS should be a "back up plan" but a place you invest in. It's not fair for the other children and families.

Agreed. And I'm not picking on this particular poster...particularly since she clarified that she's not at Powell now. As she rightly pointed out, inboundary families can't "lottery" for K and above because they get in as a matter of right. But once you do make the decision to not exercise that right by enrolling in and attending another public school (DCPS or charter) you should not just be able to show up whenever you want. If you want to get back into your old local school, you should have to lottery for it as if you were OOB.

Jeez, folks. I can't put Powell down for K! We are not at Powell. My example does not support your argument. Pick on someone else, please.

They are simply stating that if you get in any one of the 12 schools above, you should lose your IB status.

Actually, what I was saying is that if she gets in and "accepts and enrolls" in any of those 12, then she should lose IB status. Play the lottery all you want...cash in and you've made your choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not only is OP all over the map in terms of location, there does not seem to be any rhyme or reason when it comes to teaching philosophy, language immersion/no language, etc. I'm sure OP had his/her own criteria, but I don't see a pattern.

Everyone has their reasons for what they do and so it does not need to make sense to you.