Asking for Advice - Rejection from Oyster-Adams Preschool

[Anonymous]

Since you’re IB, I’d cut my losses and go next year. Swallow your pride for now, find a backup. I wonder if they’re more tough on IB SD applicants who would cut to the top of the list. They need to load up on OOB SD to avoid being super English dominant and they may also wish to avoid being too wealthy. Just a guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The DC school handbook used to say "if a student resides in a home in which Spanish is spoken regularly, it is likely the student will pass assessment." Now the handbook is conspicuously silent on what "Spanish dominant" actually means. There is a complete lack of consistent standards across schools and drastically different interpretations and enforcement policies. This, coupled with the timing of the test (post-lottery), means parents like the OP who have every reason to believe their child is Spanish dominant, will find themselves not only denied entry to their matched school, but at the end of the waitlist of every other school they might otherwise have chosen. This is a a lawsuit waiting to happen. Of course, it's really only a problem at Oyster where the principal seems determined to use the test to push a political agenda rather than a reasonable or commonsense understanding of the child's Spanish proficiency.

Anonymous wrote:
This part is crazy, but also confirms the feeling I got after I heard Ms. Cruz's presentation at an open house earlier this year. She said that the parent(s) have to be in the interview (which differs from Diego's experience, but that's what I heard), that kids who learned their Spanish from nannies are not who they want, and that these Spanish-dominant spots are meant for English language learners (so, I suppose, disqualifying bilingual kids). Not going to debate the merits of what she said, as these points have been debated ad nauseam and with much vitriol on other threads, but the overall vibe I got from her is that ethnic/national origin, and not language ability, is the test, even though she can't say so. I found it very off-putting, especially as the parent of non-Hispanic kids who wake up screaming in Spanish from their nightmares and have meltdowns in Spanish, and as such have a good faith belief that they are, in the commonsensical sense of the term, Spanish dominant.

Anyhow, I agree with whoever said in another thread that DCPS should define the term more clearly, and legally. I have a feeling that this would only affect Oyster, though, since every other DCPS immersion starts at PK3, and it may be hard to test at PK3 because many kids still don't talk all that much when they're 3 in any language.

Good luck, Diego. At least you're IB, so you have that option at K if that's still what you want.

What do you mean she is pushing a political agenda? Of what sort? I am not disagreeing with you, I am just trying to understand more of what you mean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The DC school handbook used to say "if a student resides in a home in which Spanish is spoken regularly, it is likely the student will pass assessment." Now the handbook is conspicuously silent on what "Spanish dominant" actually means. There is a complete lack of consistent standards across schools and drastically different interpretations and enforcement policies. This, coupled with the timing of the test (post-lottery), means parents like the OP who have every reason to believe their child is Spanish dominant, will find themselves not only denied entry to their matched school, but at the end of the waitlist of every other school they might otherwise have chosen. This is a a lawsuit waiting to happen. Of course, it's really only a problem at Oyster where the principal seems determined to use the test to push a political agenda rather than a reasonable or commonsense understanding of the child's Spanish proficiency.

What do you mean she is pushing a political agenda? Of what sort? I am not disagreeing with you, I am just trying to understand more of what you mean.

You don't have to read very far between the lines to see she is applying a socio-economic and cultural standard to the Spanish dominant slots. Just attend the open house or ask her directly. "There will be a test, parents attend, but your Spanish speaking nanny is not welcome, no matter how much time they spend with your child." You may or may not agree with her position from a social justice standpoint, but the fact is, these types of statements have nothing to do with the child's language proficiency. She's very clear that her passion is closing the achievement gap for low income Hispanic families and preserving their cultural heritage. I'm not arguing for or against these goals, but applying them for a test clearly intended and defined as a measure of a child's spoken language ability seems wrong. Even if you dismiss this as speculation, it is a fact that the standards applied to determining Spanish dominance and completely and wildly inconsistent across dual language schools, meaning there is no way a parent can reasonably try to gauge whether their child will pass the test. The story of the OP is a particularly egregious example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is mean, but your post was only about you and where you lived. Does your child actually speak Spanish BACK to you? If not, that's obviously what showed during testing.

Obviously,s he responds in Spanish. Of course, she often mixes English and Spanish as it is expected with bilingual kids who are learning. Her comprehension is 100% and she can even translate from one language to another.

It’s not that obvious because she clearly didn’t in the interview. So... obviously she doesn’t. The interview tests fit Spanish dominance- not Spanish knowledge. It’s not rigged just because she’s not a Spanish dominant speaker. As for taking her in another room- what do you think preschool will be? You standing next to her and helping her to switch from English to Spanish?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did you or your wife take your child to the test?

It is not unheard of for people who trying to game the system for Spanish dominance lottery spot as these are easier to get.

If your wife was there and consoling your child in English, it could be a flag as the spot is "Spanish Dominant"

+1.

If your kid was being consoled in English...by definition that's not being Spanish dominant.

[Anonymous]

We moved inbounds for Oyster at K despite having attended an immersion charter. The school has been very nurturing and supportive of all families who attend, English or Spanish dominant- and regardless of socioeconomic class.

The number of spaces available for ECE is minimal. Multiple siblings we know of didn’t get in over the years- even with Spanish dominance.

Tough to lose in the lottery, but condemning the school or slandering the Principal is not the solution.

In particular we love Sra. Berrocal, the lower school principal who truly meets kids (and families) where they are.

Wishing you luck.

[Anonymous]

OP is what I would call an entitled parent. By your own admission, your child really isn’t Spanish-dominant; she’s bilingual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP is what I would call an entitled parent. By your own admission, your child really isn’t Spanish-dominant; she’s bilingual.

So are bilingual students ineligible for Spanish and English dominant spots? Based on the D.C. policy cited above, a fluent Spanish speaker should be eligible even if he also speaks English. It is also troubling from a policy, ethical, maybe legal perspective to discriminate against bilingual students

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The DC school handbook used to say "if a student resides in a home in which Spanish is spoken regularly, it is likely the student will pass assessment." Now the handbook is conspicuously silent on what "Spanish dominant" actually means. There is a complete lack of consistent standards across schools and drastically different interpretations and enforcement policies. This, coupled with the timing of the test (post-lottery), means parents like the OP who have every reason to believe their child is Spanish dominant, will find themselves not only denied entry to their matched school, but at the end of the waitlist of every other school they might otherwise have chosen. This is a a lawsuit waiting to happen. Of course, it's really only a problem at Oyster where the principal seems determined to use the test to push a political agenda rather than a reasonable or commonsense understanding of the child's Spanish proficiency.

What do you mean she is pushing a political agenda? Of what sort? I am not disagreeing with you, I am just trying to understand more of what you mean.

You don't have to read very far between the lines to see she is applying a socio-economic and cultural standard to the Spanish dominant slots. Just attend the open house or ask her directly. "There will be a test, parents attend, but your Spanish speaking nanny is not welcome, no matter how much time they spend with your child." You may or may not agree with her position from a social justice standpoint, but the fact is, these types of statements have nothing to do with the child's language proficiency. She's very clear that her passion is closing the achievement gap for low income Hispanic families and preserving their cultural heritage. I'm not arguing for or against these goals, but applying them for a test clearly intended and defined as a measure of a child's spoken language ability seems wrong. Even if you dismiss this as speculation, it is a fact that the standards applied to determining Spanish dominance and completely and wildly inconsistent across dual language schools, meaning there is no way a parent can reasonably try to gauge whether their child will pass the test. The story of the OP is a particularly egregious example.

If the test was clearly intended to assess proficiency and not dominance wouldn’t it be called the Spanish proficiency test? It has always been clear to me that the goal of the test is to make sure that 1) both cultures are represented in the community, 2) to preserve the ideals of two way immersion in which there are both ELL and SLL’s in the classroom 3) improve the education we offer kids whose primary language is Spanish.

Giving priority based on proficiency and not dominance makes no sense in that context. It also opens up issues of discrimination, since many kids with disabilities, and kids in other at risk categories (e.g. low income, foster children, homeless children) don’t have proficiency in any language at 3.

Given all that, I always assumed that it was a test of language dominance.

[Anonymous]

^^ the enrollment handbook DCPS calls it a proficiency test (applying to all of its dual-language/immersion programs.

In practice it seems Oyster, and perhaps the others, are seeking native Spanish speakers who would, presumably, have weaker English skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The DC school handbook used to say "if a student resides in a home in which Spanish is spoken regularly, it is likely the student will pass assessment." Now the handbook is conspicuously silent on what "Spanish dominant" actually means. There is a complete lack of consistent standards across schools and drastically different interpretations and enforcement policies. This, coupled with the timing of the test (post-lottery), means parents like the OP who have every reason to believe their child is Spanish dominant, will find themselves not only denied entry to their matched school, but at the end of the waitlist of every other school they might otherwise have chosen. This is a a lawsuit waiting to happen. Of course, it's really only a problem at Oyster where the principal seems determined to use the test to push a political agenda rather than a reasonable or commonsense understanding of the child's Spanish proficiency.

What do you mean she is pushing a political agenda? Of what sort? I am not disagreeing with you, I am just trying to understand more of what you mean.

You don't have to read very far between the lines to see she is applying a socio-economic and cultural standard to the Spanish dominant slots. Just attend the open house or ask her directly. "There will be a test, parents attend, but your Spanish speaking nanny is not welcome, no matter how much time they spend with your child." You may or may not agree with her position from a social justice standpoint, but the fact is, these types of statements have nothing to do with the child's language proficiency. She's very clear that her passion is closing the achievement gap for low income Hispanic families and preserving their cultural heritage. I'm not arguing for or against these goals, but applying them for a test clearly intended and defined as a measure of a child's spoken language ability seems wrong. Even if you dismiss this as speculation, it is a fact that the standards applied to determining Spanish dominance and completely and wildly inconsistent across dual language schools, meaning there is no way a parent can reasonably try to gauge whether their child will pass the test. The story of the OP is a particularly egregious example.

I think this is a good goal but agree it’s hard to apply fairly. She should test for proficiency not dominance. I don’t think there is a dominance test that is not based on interpretation of things like heritage, which cannot be a fair grounds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The DC school handbook used to say "if a student resides in a home in which Spanish is spoken regularly, it is likely the student will pass assessment." Now the handbook is conspicuously silent on what "Spanish dominant" actually means. There is a complete lack of consistent standards across schools and drastically different interpretations and enforcement policies. This, coupled with the timing of the test (post-lottery), means parents like the OP who have every reason to believe their child is Spanish dominant, will find themselves not only denied entry to their matched school, but at the end of the waitlist of every other school they might otherwise have chosen. This is a a lawsuit waiting to happen. Of course, it's really only a problem at Oyster where the principal seems determined to use the test to push a political agenda rather than a reasonable or commonsense understanding of the child's Spanish proficiency.

What do you mean she is pushing a political agenda? Of what sort? I am not disagreeing with you, I am just trying to understand more of what you mean.

You don't have to read very far between the lines to see she is applying a socio-economic and cultural standard to the Spanish dominant slots. Just attend the open house or ask her directly. "There will be a test, parents attend, but your Spanish speaking nanny is not welcome, no matter how much time they spend with your child." You may or may not agree with her position from a social justice standpoint, but the fact is, these types of statements have nothing to do with the child's language proficiency. She's very clear that her passion is closing the achievement gap for low income Hispanic families and preserving their cultural heritage. I'm not arguing for or against these goals, but applying them for a test clearly intended and defined as a measure of a child's spoken language ability seems wrong. Even if you dismiss this as speculation, it is a fact that the standards applied to determining Spanish dominance and completely and wildly inconsistent across dual language schools, meaning there is no way a parent can reasonably try to gauge whether their child will pass the test. The story of the OP is a particularly egregious example.

I think this is a good goal but agree it’s hard to apply fairly. She should test for proficiency not dominance. I don’t think there is a dominance test that is not based on interpretation of things like heritage, which cannot be a fair grounds.

Or else call it an ELL preference but it’s not that right now.

[Anonymous]

Just want to say that this is the least hate-filled Oyster thread I've come across in a long time. Thanks and keep it up, guys.

(Cue the Oyster Troll and the screaming librarian story...)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The DC school handbook used to say "if a student resides in a home in which Spanish is spoken regularly, it is likely the student will pass assessment." Now the handbook is conspicuously silent on what "Spanish dominant" actually means. There is a complete lack of consistent standards across schools and drastically different interpretations and enforcement policies. This, coupled with the timing of the test (post-lottery), means parents like the OP who have every reason to believe their child is Spanish dominant, will find themselves not only denied entry to their matched school, but at the end of the waitlist of every other school they might otherwise have chosen. This is a a lawsuit waiting to happen. Of course, it's really only a problem at Oyster where the principal seems determined to use the test to push a political agenda rather than a reasonable or commonsense understanding of the child's Spanish proficiency.

What do you mean she is pushing a political agenda? Of what sort? I am not disagreeing with you, I am just trying to understand more of what you mean.

You don't have to read very far between the lines to see she is applying a socio-economic and cultural standard to the Spanish dominant slots. Just attend the open house or ask her directly. "There will be a test, parents attend, but your Spanish speaking nanny is not welcome, no matter how much time they spend with your child." You may or may not agree with her position from a social justice standpoint, but the fact is, these types of statements have nothing to do with the child's language proficiency. She's very clear that her passion is closing the achievement gap for low income Hispanic families and preserving their cultural heritage. I'm not arguing for or against these goals, but applying them for a test clearly intended and defined as a measure of a child's spoken language ability seems wrong. Even if you dismiss this as speculation, it is a fact that the standards applied to determining Spanish dominance and completely and wildly inconsistent across dual language schools, meaning there is no way a parent can reasonably try to gauge whether their child will pass the test. The story of the OP is a particularly egregious example.

I agree on the nanny thing. The point of wanting a certain percentage of Spanish dominant kids is that those kids will bring continuing Spanish fluency to the school. What happens when the kid ages out of the nanny and now no one at home speaks Spanish? Or the kid is now in school for most of the day and spends little time with that nanny? And frankly, I think it's BS that wealthier parents would be able to essentially buy their way in by hiring a Spanish-speaking nanny. I don't blame them for wanting to screen that out. OP's case seems unusual, in that the kid really does have a real connection to Spanish language. If I were OP, I'd contact the school and DCPS, explain the situation, and seek redress that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did you or your wife take your child to the test?

It is not unheard of for people who trying to game the system for Spanish dominance lottery spot as these are easier to get.

If your wife was there and consoling your child in English, it could be a flag as the spot is "Spanish Dominant"

+1.

If your kid was being consoled in English...by definition that's not being Spanish dominant.

+2

It's possible that the kid really does speak fluent Spanish, but did not demonstrate Spanish dominance during the test. If your wife was consoling her in English, they will take that into account. It's possible that the test did not accurately reflect your child's actual language abilities, but not because it was "rigged," but because of what actually transpired during the test.