I don't think "political strategy" should factor into a mandated reporter's decision about whether or not to report suspected abuse or neglect. |
It’s educational neglect. |
You need a good reason, what’s yours. |
So, to you experts are those you agree with. Ny cutoff would be great. |
Let’s do it. 1/3 of kids in kindergarten would be 4, and DCPS would struggle even more. Race to the bottom in the name of equity. In fact, let’s introduce it as federal law. There’s no science behind the cutoff or research. But it will definitely even the playing field. Survival of the fittest! |
Sweetie, don’t use big words you don’t understand. There was no educational neglect, the kids were in school. |
Ok lemme see. People vote the mayor, a political office, who hires the chancellor, which would make him a political appointment. Said chancellor is becoming politically radioactive, antagonizing parents, errr voters, by calling child protective services on them and kicking their kids out of kindergarten. The reporting is retaliatory, at least according to Mr. Goulet, another political figure who is representing the parents on the school board. If you read the public letter it’s pretty damming Yeah, I think political strategy is pretty apt here. The chancellor the his DEI hires blundered badly. |
No, your kids were not in s hook and I know exactly what it means. |
My friend had CPS threatened on her. Her child had not missed a day of school. Spending resources this way while some children are actually neglected is morally repugnant. |
He says principals have discretion, but this principal decided not to use it. The parents tried to elevate and get the principal in trouble and got a very different reaction. Good. You can’t say you favor principal’s discretion and then try to get the principal fired for not doing what you want. |
My understanding is that the kid of the family that moved from Florida was not in school at all despite being older than the DC mandatory cut off. Possible they genuinely didn’t realize because of the differing cut offs… but still illegal. |
CPS was threatened multiple times. |
It is neglect. |
Our principal would not allow testing for early entrance. So, we went private fr a few years ago they make the rules. You either follow them or figure it out. |
I know others have already responded to you, but I think it's important for you to understand how off base this comment is. Here's the CPS reports in DC by Ward for 2022 (the most recent year for with data is available at the Annie E. Casey Foundation in collaboration with DC Action): City District of Columbia 2022 Number 939 Ward Ward 1 2022 Number 56 Ward Ward 2 2022 Number 20 Ward Ward 3 2022 Number 23 Ward Ward 4 2022 Number 76 Ward Ward 5 2022 Number 136 Ward Ward 6 2022 Number 50 Ward Ward 7 2022 Number 228 Ward Ward 8 2022 Number 338 Wards are balanced to have roughly similar populations, and Wards 7 and 8 actually have the smallest populations in the district (even more so in 2022 prior to redistricting). Ward 7 has an 11x higher rate of CPS reports than Ward 3. Ward 8 has a 17x higher rate. Educational neglect is one of the most common reasons for CPS reports because DC uses the public school system as a way to identify kids at risk for abuse or neglect -- kids who are not being sent to school on time are also more likely to experience other forms of neglect and abuse, including failure to obtain needed medical or dental treatment, inadequate nutrition, housing insecurity, etc. So families that fail to enroll their children in kindergarten on time are highly likely to be investigated by CPS if the problem is identified. Whether that's because a neighbor reports it or because the parents go on the local news to explain that they didn't enroll their kids in kindergarten by age 5. Now you might say, yeah but these kids aren't experiencing other forms of neglect! In fact the reason these parents didn't enroll their kids in kindergarten on time was because they care so much about their kids that they wanted to optimize their educational experience. Well, I'm glad you mentioned this because guess what, that is also what parents in other wards say when they are investigated by CPS for failure to enroll on time. "He isn't ready for kindergarten, we decided he's better off at home with grandma until he's 6." How receptive do you think CPS is to these arguments for parents in Wards 7 and 8? I can assure you: not very. The idea that DCPS, or CPS, is somehow *targeting* Ward 3 families on this issue is laughable. As a general matter, families in Ward 3 who are wealthy and white are given much broader latitude by CPS than families of other races and lower socioeconomic levels. However, these Ward 3 families chose to advertise their behavior on television and announce it on list serves, which puts the city in a situation where they pretty much have to enforce these rules and investigate these families just as they would a low income black or Hispanic family in another ward. The Ward 3 families gave the city no real other choice. If they wanted to change the rules about enrollment for the whole city, they should have lobbied for that but also followed the same rules that every other family in the city is expected to follow. The idea that a handful of wealthy white schools in upper NW get to violate these rules because.... reasons is just ridiculous on its face. And now that those handful of schools are being forced to comply the way everyone else in the city has been complying for years, NOW they are arguing the entire system should be changed? So brave. |