Ludlow-Taylor principal made permanent!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would add, however, that I definitely wouldn't count on a waitlist spot opening up unless maybe there's some lottery-based shuffling in ECE. 1st through 5th could all stand to have class sizes shrink, so even kids dropping out would not lead to additional waiting list spots.

Thanks, that's helpful.

Regarding class sizes, I think you need to check your expectations. We are at a Title 1 and we've had our kids in class sizes over 22 the last 3 years. Especially with the recent budget cuts, your expectations that you are going to be able to shrink class sizes at all, or resist pressure to add lottery spots, comes off as entitled to me. Especially on the Hill where elementary schools are very much a study of haves and have nots.

The WTU contract has 22 as the target size and 25 as the cap. Teachers are entitled to certain extra pay, etc for going over the cap. It is not entitled to say that additional children should not be added to classes that are already over target size. Instead, that is exactly DCPS’ written policy. It is one thing when you are trying to guess at class sizes before the fact. It is another when your classes already have 23-25 kids; if one leaves, you should not be replacing them under the WTU contract terms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would add, however, that I definitely wouldn't count on a waitlist spot opening up unless maybe there's some lottery-based shuffling in ECE. 1st through 5th could all stand to have class sizes shrink, so even kids dropping out would not lead to additional waiting list spots.

Thanks, that's helpful.

Regarding class sizes, I think you need to check your expectations. We are at a Title 1 and we've had our kids in class sizes over 22 the last 3 years. Especially with the recent budget cuts, your expectations that you are going to be able to shrink class sizes at all, or resist pressure to add lottery spots, comes off as entitled to me. Especially on the Hill where elementary schools are very much a study of haves and have nots.

The WTU contract has 22 as the target size and 25 as the cap. Teachers are entitled to certain extra pay, etc for going over the cap. It is not entitled to say that additional children should not be added to classes that are already over target size. Instead, that is exactly DCPS’ written policy. It is one thing when you are trying to guess at class sizes before the fact. It is another when your classes already have 23-25 kids; if one leaves, you should not be replacing them under the WTU contract terms.

No one suggested adding kids over the cap or replacing kids who leave if the class is already over the cap. Rather, the complaint about DCPS pushing the school to add more lottery seats because this pushes class sizes over 22 (when even Title 1 schools are exceeding 22 in some classes and the entire district is facing budget shortfalls) is entitled.

There was a post up thread alleging L-T's administration had let the 1st grade class get over-enrolled by 20 kids. The reality is there is one 1st grade class with 26 kids and the others are at 25. Sounds like 3rd grade is full but not over-enrolled. The post also alleged that the school failed to process enrollments and u enrollments over the summer, but wait-lists in other grades moves steadily over the summer so this cannot be the case.

These complaints do come off as ticky-tacky and entitled when you are at other schools that are dealing with similar class size issues, losing paras and teachers, AND dealing with larger at-risk percentages and the issues that accompany that. I wouldn't be psyched if my kid was in that 26-kid class. But with a good teacher and some parental support, it's fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would add, however, that I definitely wouldn't count on a waitlist spot opening up unless maybe there's some lottery-based shuffling in ECE. 1st through 5th could all stand to have class sizes shrink, so even kids dropping out would not lead to additional waiting list spots.

Thanks, that's helpful.

Regarding class sizes, I think you need to check your expectations. We are at a Title 1 and we've had our kids in class sizes over 22 the last 3 years. Especially with the recent budget cuts, your expectations that you are going to be able to shrink class sizes at all, or resist pressure to add lottery spots, comes off as entitled to me. Especially on the Hill where elementary schools are very much a study of haves and have nots.

The WTU contract has 22 as the target size and 25 as the cap. Teachers are entitled to certain extra pay, etc for going over the cap. It is not entitled to say that additional children should not be added to classes that are already over target size. Instead, that is exactly DCPS’ written policy. It is one thing when you are trying to guess at class sizes before the fact. It is another when your classes already have 23-25 kids; if one leaves, you should not be replacing them under the WTU contract terms.

No one suggested adding kids over the cap or replacing kids who leave if the class is already over the cap. Rather, the complaint about DCPS pushing the school to add more lottery seats because this pushes class sizes over 22 (when even Title 1 schools are exceeding 22 in some classes and the entire district is facing budget shortfalls) is entitled.

There was a post up thread alleging L-T's administration had let the 1st grade class get over-enrolled by 20 kids. The reality is there is one 1st grade class with 26 kids and the others are at 25. Sounds like 3rd grade is full but not over-enrolled. The post also alleged that the school failed to process enrollments and u enrollments over the summer, but wait-lists in other grades moves steadily over the summer so this cannot be the case.

These complaints do come off as ticky-tacky and entitled when you are at other schools that are dealing with similar class size issues, losing paras and teachers, AND dealing with larger at-risk percentages and the issues that accompany that. I wouldn't be psyched if my kid was in that 26-kid class. But with a good teacher and some parental support, it's fine.

You were responding to a post that said there was unlikely to be movement because class sizes could stand to shrink (because they are over 22). I read your reply to that post as calling that poster entitled, which I think is unfair. If classes are over 22, new kids shouldn't be added to make them bigger on purpose. If I misread your post, apologies. I agree that class sizes over 22 are not a crisis and are very likely to become the new norm; that said, what keeps happening at L-T is admin mismanaging enrollment in various ways (last year they had to open a 3rd 5th grade classroom the week before school started because they over-pulled from the waitlist accidentally). The principal emailed first grade families the day before school started saying that she intended to hire an extra first grade teacher so everything is a bit up in the air right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would add, however, that I definitely wouldn't count on a waitlist spot opening up unless maybe there's some lottery-based shuffling in ECE. 1st through 5th could all stand to have class sizes shrink, so even kids dropping out would not lead to additional waiting list spots.

Thanks, that's helpful.

Regarding class sizes, I think you need to check your expectations. We are at a Title 1 and we've had our kids in class sizes over 22 the last 3 years. Especially with the recent budget cuts, your expectations that you are going to be able to shrink class sizes at all, or resist pressure to add lottery spots, comes off as entitled to me. Especially on the Hill where elementary schools are very much a study of haves and have nots.

The WTU contract has 22 as the target size and 25 as the cap. Teachers are entitled to certain extra pay, etc for going over the cap. It is not entitled to say that additional children should not be added to classes that are already over target size. Instead, that is exactly DCPS’ written policy. It is one thing when you are trying to guess at class sizes before the fact. It is another when your classes already have 23-25 kids; if one leaves, you should not be replacing them under the WTU contract terms.

No one suggested adding kids over the cap or replacing kids who leave if the class is already over the cap. Rather, the complaint about DCPS pushing the school to add more lottery seats because this pushes class sizes over 22 (when even Title 1 schools are exceeding 22 in some classes and the entire district is facing budget shortfalls) is entitled.

There was a post up thread alleging L-T's administration had let the 1st grade class get over-enrolled by 20 kids. The reality is there is one 1st grade class with 26 kids and the others are at 25. Sounds like 3rd grade is full but not over-enrolled. The post also alleged that the school failed to process enrollments and u enrollments over the summer, but wait-lists in other grades moves steadily over the summer so this cannot be the case.

These complaints do come off as ticky-tacky and entitled when you are at other schools that are dealing with similar class size issues, losing paras and teachers, AND dealing with larger at-risk percentages and the issues that accompany that. I wouldn't be psyched if my kid was in that 26-kid class. But with a good teacher and some parental support, it's fine.

You were responding to a post that said there was unlikely to be movement because class sizes could stand to shrink (because they are over 22). I read your reply to that post as calling that poster entitled, which I think is unfair. If classes are over 22, new kids shouldn't be added to make them bigger on purpose. If I misread your post, apologies. I agree that class sizes over 22 are not a crisis and are very likely to become the new norm; that said, what keeps happening at L-T is admin mismanaging enrollment in various ways (last year they had to open a 3rd 5th grade classroom the week before school started because they over-pulled from the waitlist accidentally). The principal emailed first grade families the day before school started saying that she intended to hire an extra first grade teacher so everything is a bit up in the air right now.

Managing enrollment is very difficult and parents can get very entitled about it. No, the principal cannot hire an extra teacher because you want your child to be in a class of 17 instead of 25.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would add, however, that I definitely wouldn't count on a waitlist spot opening up unless maybe there's some lottery-based shuffling in ECE. 1st through 5th could all stand to have class sizes shrink, so even kids dropping out would not lead to additional waiting list spots.

Thanks, that's helpful.

Regarding class sizes, I think you need to check your expectations. We are at a Title 1 and we've had our kids in class sizes over 22 the last 3 years. Especially with the recent budget cuts, your expectations that you are going to be able to shrink class sizes at all, or resist pressure to add lottery spots, comes off as entitled to me. Especially on the Hill where elementary schools are very much a study of haves and have nots.

The WTU contract has 22 as the target size and 25 as the cap. Teachers are entitled to certain extra pay, etc for going over the cap. It is not entitled to say that additional children should not be added to classes that are already over target size. Instead, that is exactly DCPS’ written policy. It is one thing when you are trying to guess at class sizes before the fact. It is another when your classes already have 23-25 kids; if one leaves, you should not be replacing them under the WTU contract terms.

No one suggested adding kids over the cap or replacing kids who leave if the class is already over the cap. Rather, the complaint about DCPS pushing the school to add more lottery seats because this pushes class sizes over 22 (when even Title 1 schools are exceeding 22 in some classes and the entire district is facing budget shortfalls) is entitled.

There was a post up thread alleging L-T's administration had let the 1st grade class get over-enrolled by 20 kids. The reality is there is one 1st grade class with 26 kids and the others are at 25. Sounds like 3rd grade is full but not over-enrolled. The post also alleged that the school failed to process enrollments and u enrollments over the summer, but wait-lists in other grades moves steadily over the summer so this cannot be the case.

These complaints do come off as ticky-tacky and entitled when you are at other schools that are dealing with similar class size issues, losing paras and teachers, AND dealing with larger at-risk percentages and the issues that accompany that. I wouldn't be psyched if my kid was in that 26-kid class. But with a good teacher and some parental support, it's fine.

You were responding to a post that said there was unlikely to be movement because class sizes could stand to shrink (because they are over 22). I read your reply to that post as calling that poster entitled, which I think is unfair. If classes are over 22, new kids shouldn't be added to make them bigger on purpose. If I misread your post, apologies. I agree that class sizes over 22 are not a crisis and are very likely to become the new norm; that said, what keeps happening at L-T is admin mismanaging enrollment in various ways (last year they had to open a 3rd 5th grade classroom the week before school started because they over-pulled from the waitlist accidentally). The principal emailed first grade families the day before school started saying that she intended to hire an extra first grade teacher so everything is a bit up in the air right now.

Managing enrollment is very difficult and parents can get very entitled about it. No, the principal cannot hire an extra teacher because you want your child to be in a class of 17 instead of 25.

No, I mean the principal emailed the entire first grade and said she is going to repurpose available funds to hire another first grade teacher. It wasn't something "entitled" parents asked for. In fact, most parents found out about the over-enrolled class sizes from the same message in which she said she'd be hiring another teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would add, however, that I definitely wouldn't count on a waitlist spot opening up unless maybe there's some lottery-based shuffling in ECE. 1st through 5th could all stand to have class sizes shrink, so even kids dropping out would not lead to additional waiting list spots.

Thanks, that's helpful.

Regarding class sizes, I think you need to check your expectations. We are at a Title 1 and we've had our kids in class sizes over 22 the last 3 years. Especially with the recent budget cuts, your expectations that you are going to be able to shrink class sizes at all, or resist pressure to add lottery spots, comes off as entitled to me. Especially on the Hill where elementary schools are very much a study of haves and have nots.

The WTU contract has 22 as the target size and 25 as the cap. Teachers are entitled to certain extra pay, etc for going over the cap. It is not entitled to say that additional children should not be added to classes that are already over target size. Instead, that is exactly DCPS’ written policy. It is one thing when you are trying to guess at class sizes before the fact. It is another when your classes already have 23-25 kids; if one leaves, you should not be replacing them under the WTU contract terms.

No one suggested adding kids over the cap or replacing kids who leave if the class is already over the cap. Rather, the complaint about DCPS pushing the school to add more lottery seats because this pushes class sizes over 22 (when even Title 1 schools are exceeding 22 in some classes and the entire district is facing budget shortfalls) is entitled.

There was a post up thread alleging L-T's administration had let the 1st grade class get over-enrolled by 20 kids. The reality is there is one 1st grade class with 26 kids and the others are at 25. Sounds like 3rd grade is full but not over-enrolled. The post also alleged that the school failed to process enrollments and u enrollments over the summer, but wait-lists in other grades moves steadily over the summer so this cannot be the case.

These complaints do come off as ticky-tacky and entitled when you are at other schools that are dealing with similar class size issues, losing paras and teachers, AND dealing with larger at-risk percentages and the issues that accompany that. I wouldn't be psyched if my kid was in that 26-kid class. But with a good teacher and some parental support, it's fine.

You were responding to a post that said there was unlikely to be movement because class sizes could stand to shrink (because they are over 22). I read your reply to that post as calling that poster entitled, which I think is unfair. If classes are over 22, new kids shouldn't be added to make them bigger on purpose. If I misread your post, apologies. I agree that class sizes over 22 are not a crisis and are very likely to become the new norm; that said, what keeps happening at L-T is admin mismanaging enrollment in various ways (last year they had to open a 3rd 5th grade classroom the week before school started because they over-pulled from the waitlist accidentally). The principal emailed first grade families the day before school started saying that she intended to hire an extra first grade teacher so everything is a bit up in the air right now.

Managing enrollment is very difficult and parents can get very entitled about it. No, the principal cannot hire an extra teacher because you want your child to be in a class of 17 instead of 25.

This thread is interesting because I have been a public school parent for almost a decade and I didn't realize there were schools that had class sizes smaller than the low 20s (except for ECE).
I've heard stories of overcrowded schools with classes near 30, and that it's happened once or twice in our experience due to unexpected last minute in-boundary enrollment which schools cannot account for ahead of time. It is understandable to hire new teachers if the classes are up to 30, but class sizes in the twenties is normal.
Separately and maybe related -- I am not specifically singling out LT here, but I have heard parents from multiple schools over the years griping about out of boundary students getting added to the rosters in older grades. Which sure, it may mean a few more kids and bit of adjustment/catching up depending on where the student was enrolled prior, but in my opinion that cannot and should not be a reason to limit OOB students. Not to mention that with all the budget cuts it makes sense for admin to want to fill each class as much as possible so they can get funding and not have to cut staff/programs.

[Anonymous]

The situation at LT is not good. Enrollment was a disaster over the summer - in addition to 1st grade being overenrolled, many kids in the ECE were not on the class lists when they were sent out a week prior to school, despite matching in the lottery and having sent in (and received confirmation) via paperwork that their child was enrolled. There is at least one family who has a prek4 child who was disenrolled and not able to be accommodated because the family was told that there was no room - despite the child matching and having the right paperwork. The first grade situation is bad - overenrollment and class lists that were changing until the day that school started. The construction which was supposed to have begun over the summer just started and their are nails and debris in the playground right near the ECE area (which is a real risk for the kids). Instead of looking to partner with parents, the Principal choose to no show at the first PTO meeting.

I don't think it's entitled of parents to want to know that their child is enrolled in school and that they have a teacher and not be at risk of getting stabbed by a rusty nail in the playground. I am not an LT parent by the way, my child attends another Hill elementary but Hill is a small community. LT has great teachers and families, it's a shame that the principal is doing such a bad job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would add, however, that I definitely wouldn't count on a waitlist spot opening up unless maybe there's some lottery-based shuffling in ECE. 1st through 5th could all stand to have class sizes shrink, so even kids dropping out would not lead to additional waiting list spots.

Thanks, that's helpful.

Regarding class sizes, I think you need to check your expectations. We are at a Title 1 and we've had our kids in class sizes over 22 the last 3 years. Especially with the recent budget cuts, your expectations that you are going to be able to shrink class sizes at all, or resist pressure to add lottery spots, comes off as entitled to me. Especially on the Hill where elementary schools are very much a study of haves and have nots.

The WTU contract has 22 as the target size and 25 as the cap. Teachers are entitled to certain extra pay, etc for going over the cap. It is not entitled to say that additional children should not be added to classes that are already over target size. Instead, that is exactly DCPS’ written policy. It is one thing when you are trying to guess at class sizes before the fact. It is another when your classes already have 23-25 kids; if one leaves, you should not be replacing them under the WTU contract terms.

No one suggested adding kids over the cap or replacing kids who leave if the class is already over the cap. Rather, the complaint about DCPS pushing the school to add more lottery seats because this pushes class sizes over 22 (when even Title 1 schools are exceeding 22 in some classes and the entire district is facing budget shortfalls) is entitled.

There was a post up thread alleging L-T's administration had let the 1st grade class get over-enrolled by 20 kids. The reality is there is one 1st grade class with 26 kids and the others are at 25. Sounds like 3rd grade is full but not over-enrolled. The post also alleged that the school failed to process enrollments and u enrollments over the summer, but wait-lists in other grades moves steadily over the summer so this cannot be the case.

These complaints do come off as ticky-tacky and entitled when you are at other schools that are dealing with similar class size issues, losing paras and teachers, AND dealing with larger at-risk percentages and the issues that accompany that. I wouldn't be psyched if my kid was in that 26-kid class. But with a good teacher and some parental support, it's fine.

You were responding to a post that said there was unlikely to be movement because class sizes could stand to shrink (because they are over 22). I read your reply to that post as calling that poster entitled, which I think is unfair. If classes are over 22, new kids shouldn't be added to make them bigger on purpose. If I misread your post, apologies. I agree that class sizes over 22 are not a crisis and are very likely to become the new norm; that said, what keeps happening at L-T is admin mismanaging enrollment in various ways (last year they had to open a 3rd 5th grade classroom the week before school started because they over-pulled from the waitlist accidentally). The principal emailed first grade families the day before school started saying that she intended to hire an extra first grade teacher so everything is a bit up in the air right now.

Managing enrollment is very difficult and parents can get very entitled about it. No, the principal cannot hire an extra teacher because you want your child to be in a class of 17 instead of 25.

This thread is interesting because I have been a public school parent for almost a decade and I didn't realize there were schools that had class sizes smaller than the low 20s (except for ECE).
I've heard stories of overcrowded schools with classes near 30, and that it's happened once or twice in our experience due to unexpected last minute in-boundary enrollment which schools cannot account for ahead of time. It is understandable to hire new teachers if the classes are up to 30, but class sizes in the twenties is normal.
Separately and maybe related -- I am not specifically singling out LT here, but I have heard parents from multiple schools over the years griping about out of boundary students getting added to the rosters in older grades. Which sure, it may mean a few more kids and bit of adjustment/catching up depending on where the student was enrolled prior, but in my opinion that cannot and should not be a reason to limit OOB students. Not to mention that with all the budget cuts it makes sense for admin to want to fill each class as much as possible so they can get funding and not have to cut staff/programs.

LT takes quite a few kids via the lottery in later grades. It's only about 60% IB. This isn't like NW schools or even Maury where lottery seats are few and far between. The problem is that if you get more kids than you budget for, so you need to hire another teacher (as has happened two weeks in a row the week before school started), you actually cut programs in order to provide the requisite number of teachers. For instance, last year, we lost science as a special the week before school started because that teacher became an extra classroom teacher to account for the over-enrollment of 5th grade. Last year the school was so far above the expected enrollment that DCPS came through with extra funds in November -- when it was much too late to maximize their use. I don't know where the extra money is coming from this year, I don't think she's said. But it's clearly coming from somewhere it was agreed to be spent and now won't be. This is definitely not about maximizing DCPS funding or, if it is, the administration is doing it completely backwards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The situation at LT is not good. Enrollment was a disaster over the summer - in addition to 1st grade being overenrolled, many kids in the ECE were not on the class lists when they were sent out a week prior to school, despite matching in the lottery and having sent in (and received confirmation) via paperwork that their child was enrolled. There is at least one family who has a prek4 child who was disenrolled and not able to be accommodated because the family was told that there was no room - despite the child matching and having the right paperwork. The first grade situation is bad - overenrollment and class lists that were changing until the day that school started. The construction which was supposed to have begun over the summer just started and their are nails and debris in the playground right near the ECE area (which is a real risk for the kids). Instead of looking to partner with parents, the Principal choose to no show at the first PTO meeting.

I don't think it's entitled of parents to want to know that their child is enrolled in school and that they have a teacher and not be at risk of getting stabbed by a rusty nail in the playground. I am not an LT parent by the way, my child attends another Hill elementary but Hill is a small community. LT has great teachers and families, it's a shame that the principal is doing such a bad job.

Gently I'd like to suggest that you are going off the comments of a very small number of people and including a lot of rumor in the mix. Almost none of this is accurate (I cannot speak to the enrollment experience of a specific PK4 student). Even some of what is accurate is not evidence of anything-- it is not unusual for class lists to shift in the week before school due to the surprise arrival of IB students. This happens at many if not most DCPS schools. You're talking about an overenrollment *of one* in 1st which is not a big deal given the transient nature of DC's population and the difficulty of estimating lottery spots based on prior year numbers (and contrary to what a PP said no one is forcing LT to offer lottery spots as though it's 2018-- if that were true they would be over-enrolled in every grade and by way more than 1). The construction situation sucks but actually it WAS started over the summer, it's just not done yet. And school administration has little control over that-- it's other agencies as supervised by DCPS. All the school can do is ask for new estimates for completion and hound the contractor about cleanup and safety (and even that isn't direct!).

You aren't describing a dire situation. You are describing a DCPS school in a better situation than most. Which yes means a host of problems. It's DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The situation at LT is not good. Enrollment was a disaster over the summer - in addition to 1st grade being overenrolled, many kids in the ECE were not on the class lists when they were sent out a week prior to school, despite matching in the lottery and having sent in (and received confirmation) via paperwork that their child was enrolled. There is at least one family who has a prek4 child who was disenrolled and not able to be accommodated because the family was told that there was no room - despite the child matching and having the right paperwork. The first grade situation is bad - overenrollment and class lists that were changing until the day that school started. The construction which was supposed to have begun over the summer just started and their are nails and debris in the playground right near the ECE area (which is a real risk for the kids). Instead of looking to partner with parents, the Principal choose to no show at the first PTO meeting.

I don't think it's entitled of parents to want to know that their child is enrolled in school and that they have a teacher and not be at risk of getting stabbed by a rusty nail in the playground. I am not an LT parent by the way, my child attends another Hill elementary but Hill is a small community. LT has great teachers and families, it's a shame that the principal is doing such a bad job.

Gently I'd like to suggest that you are going off the comments of a very small number of people and including a lot of rumor in the mix. Almost none of this is accurate (I cannot speak to the enrollment experience of a specific PK4 student). Even some of what is accurate is not evidence of anything-- it is not unusual for class lists to shift in the week before school due to the surprise arrival of IB students. This happens at many if not most DCPS schools. You're talking about an overenrollment *of one* in 1st which is not a big deal given the transient nature of DC's population and the difficulty of estimating lottery spots based on prior year numbers (and contrary to what a PP said no one is forcing LT to offer lottery spots as though it's 2018-- if that were true they would be over-enrolled in every grade and by way more than 1). The construction situation sucks but actually it WAS started over the summer, it's just not done yet. And school administration has little control over that-- it's other agencies as supervised by DCPS. All the school can do is ask for new estimates for completion and hound the contractor about cleanup and safety (and even that isn't direct!).

You aren't describing a dire situation. You are describing a DCPS school in a better situation than most. Which yes means a host of problems. It's DCPS.

Also meant to say that I don't know what happened with the PTO meeting as I wasn't there (and neither were you! You don't even have kids at L-T!) but I've heard differing accounts. I tend to think they should have waited until this week for the meeting as having it the 2nd week of school (especially when there is so much going on with the construction and the higher-than-expected enrollment) is just a lot. At least wait until the 11th day of school when administrators have a better sense of true enrollment (no shows are considered merely absent until Day 11 so there may be students in the roster who have not yet shown up to school).

Anyway, you sure have a lot of opinions about a school your kids don't attend and a lot of it is based on rumors and false narratives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The situation at LT is not good. Enrollment was a disaster over the summer - in addition to 1st grade being overenrolled, many kids in the ECE were not on the class lists when they were sent out a week prior to school, despite matching in the lottery and having sent in (and received confirmation) via paperwork that their child was enrolled. There is at least one family who has a prek4 child who was disenrolled and not able to be accommodated because the family was told that there was no room - despite the child matching and having the right paperwork. The first grade situation is bad - overenrollment and class lists that were changing until the day that school started. The construction which was supposed to have begun over the summer just started and their are nails and debris in the playground right near the ECE area (which is a real risk for the kids). Instead of looking to partner with parents, the Principal choose to no show at the first PTO meeting.

I don't think it's entitled of parents to want to know that their child is enrolled in school and that they have a teacher and not be at risk of getting stabbed by a rusty nail in the playground. I am not an LT parent by the way, my child attends another Hill elementary but Hill is a small community. LT has great teachers and families, it's a shame that the principal is doing such a bad job.

We should ignore everything that you wrote, got it. Thanks for the head's up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The situation at LT is not good. Enrollment was a disaster over the summer - in addition to 1st grade being overenrolled, many kids in the ECE were not on the class lists when they were sent out a week prior to school, despite matching in the lottery and having sent in (and received confirmation) via paperwork that their child was enrolled. There is at least one family who has a prek4 child who was disenrolled and not able to be accommodated because the family was told that there was no room - despite the child matching and having the right paperwork. The first grade situation is bad - overenrollment and class lists that were changing until the day that school started. The construction which was supposed to have begun over the summer just started and their are nails and debris in the playground right near the ECE area (which is a real risk for the kids). Instead of looking to partner with parents, the Principal choose to no show at the first PTO meeting.

I don't think it's entitled of parents to want to know that their child is enrolled in school and that they have a teacher and not be at risk of getting stabbed by a rusty nail in the playground. I am not an LT parent by the way, my child attends another Hill elementary but Hill is a small community. LT has great teachers and families, it's a shame that the principal is doing such a bad job.

Gently I'd like to suggest that you are going off the comments of a very small number of people and including a lot of rumor in the mix. Almost none of this is accurate (I cannot speak to the enrollment experience of a specific PK4 student). Even some of what is accurate is not evidence of anything-- it is not unusual for class lists to shift in the week before school due to the surprise arrival of IB students. This happens at many if not most DCPS schools. You're talking about an overenrollment *of one* in 1st which is not a big deal given the transient nature of DC's population and the difficulty of estimating lottery spots based on prior year numbers (and contrary to what a PP said no one is forcing LT to offer lottery spots as though it's 2018-- if that were true they would be over-enrolled in every grade and by way more than 1). The construction situation sucks but actually it WAS started over the summer, it's just not done yet. And school administration has little control over that-- it's other agencies as supervised by DCPS. All the school can do is ask for new estimates for completion and hound the contractor about cleanup and safety (and even that isn't direct!).

You aren't describing a dire situation. You are describing a DCPS school in a better situation than most. Which yes means a host of problems. It's DCPS.

Also meant to say that I don't know what happened with the PTO meeting as I wasn't there (and neither were you! You don't even have kids at L-T!) but I've heard differing accounts. I tend to think they should have waited until this week for the meeting as having it the 2nd week of school (especially when there is so much going on with the construction and the higher-than-expected enrollment) is just a lot. At least wait until the 11th day of school when administrators have a better sense of true enrollment (no shows are considered merely absent until Day 11 so there may be students in the roster who have not yet shown up to school).

Anyway, you sure have a lot of opinions about a school your kids don't attend and a lot of it is based on rumors and false narratives.

I like how patronizingly you address PP for a parent who didn't bother to show up at the PTO meeting or find out what happened there, but apparently has a lot of thoughts on when and how the PTO should run its meetings. (You heard "differing accounts"? What? There were 200 people there, including lots of teachers. You must not have tried very hard.) The administration and teachers know how many kids are in the first grade. There aren't no shows being marked absent/who are unaccounted for at this point (nor were there after the first week/at the time of the PTO meeting), so I'm not quite sure what you're talking about.

Also, "rumors and false narratives"? The construction was supposed to start at the beginning of summer. Instead, it started the week before students came back. Enrollment was a mess and I know multiple 1st graders who switched classes over the weekend. I also know of a 3rd grade student who was randomly unenrolled, so apparently this was actually happening across grade levels.

Also, Ludlow-Taylor offered (from PK3-5th): 44, 19, 15, 5, 7, 10, 10 and 6 spots in the lottery. In 2018, it offered 43, 11, 3, 3, 0, 4, 0 and 0, so you're right, they don't offer lottery spots like it's 2018, they offer WAY WAY more than that. It is also clear that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The situation at LT is not good. Enrollment was a disaster over the summer - in addition to 1st grade being overenrolled, many kids in the ECE were not on the class lists when they were sent out a week prior to school, despite matching in the lottery and having sent in (and received confirmation) via paperwork that their child was enrolled. There is at least one family who has a prek4 child who was disenrolled and not able to be accommodated because the family was told that there was no room - despite the child matching and having the right paperwork. The first grade situation is bad - overenrollment and class lists that were changing until the day that school started. The construction which was supposed to have begun over the summer just started and their are nails and debris in the playground right near the ECE area (which is a real risk for the kids). Instead of looking to partner with parents, the Principal choose to no show at the first PTO meeting.

I don't think it's entitled of parents to want to know that their child is enrolled in school and that they have a teacher and not be at risk of getting stabbed by a rusty nail in the playground. I am not an LT parent by the way, my child attends another Hill elementary but Hill is a small community. LT has great teachers and families, it's a shame that the principal is doing such a bad job.

Gently I'd like to suggest that you are going off the comments of a very small number of people and including a lot of rumor in the mix. Almost none of this is accurate (I cannot speak to the enrollment experience of a specific PK4 student). Even some of what is accurate is not evidence of anything-- it is not unusual for class lists to shift in the week before school due to the surprise arrival of IB students. This happens at many if not most DCPS schools. You're talking about an overenrollment *of one* in 1st which is not a big deal given the transient nature of DC's population and the difficulty of estimating lottery spots based on prior year numbers (and contrary to what a PP said no one is forcing LT to offer lottery spots as though it's 2018-- if that were true they would be over-enrolled in every grade and by way more than 1). The construction situation sucks but actually it WAS started over the summer, it's just not done yet. And school administration has little control over that-- it's other agencies as supervised by DCPS. All the school can do is ask for new estimates for completion and hound the contractor about cleanup and safety (and even that isn't direct!).

You aren't describing a dire situation. You are describing a DCPS school in a better situation than most. Which yes means a host of problems. It's DCPS.

Also meant to say that I don't know what happened with the PTO meeting as I wasn't there (and neither were you! You don't even have kids at L-T!) but I've heard differing accounts. I tend to think they should have waited until this week for the meeting as having it the 2nd week of school (especially when there is so much going on with the construction and the higher-than-expected enrollment) is just a lot. At least wait until the 11th day of school when administrators have a better sense of true enrollment (no shows are considered merely absent until Day 11 so there may be students in the roster who have not yet shown up to school).

Anyway, you sure have a lot of opinions about a school your kids don't attend and a lot of it is based on rumors and false narratives.

I like how patronizingly you address PP for a parent who didn't bother to show up at the PTO meeting or find out what happened there, but apparently has a lot of thoughts on when and how the PTO should run its meetings. (You heard "differing accounts"? What? There were 200 people there, including lots of teachers. You must not have tried very hard.) The administration and teachers know how many kids are in the first grade. There aren't no shows being marked absent/who are unaccounted for at this point (nor were there after the first week/at the time of the PTO meeting), so I'm not quite sure what you're talking about.

Also, "rumors and false narratives"? The construction was supposed to start at the beginning of summer. Instead, it started the week before students came back. Enrollment was a mess and I know multiple 1st graders who switched classes over the weekend. I also know of a 3rd grade student who was randomly unenrolled, so apparently this was actually happening across grade levels.

Also, Ludlow-Taylor offered (from PK3-5th): 44, 19, 15, 5, 7, 10, 10 and 6 spots in the lottery. In 2018, it offered 43, 11, 3, 3, 0, 4, 0 and 0, so you're right, they don't offer lottery spots like it's 2018, they offer WAY WAY more than that. It is also clear that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

From one L-T parent to another: people like you make raising kids in the Hill so much harder than it needs to be. I am already trying to figure out which of the nightmare overzealous hyper-vigilant judgmental people you might be from the many, many options.

Of course there are "differing accounts" from a meeting attended by 200 people. Do you assume everyone sees things exactly the way you do? They don't. If you think everyone is in agreement about this situation then it is you who needs to try harder.

But do go on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The situation at LT is not good. Enrollment was a disaster over the summer - in addition to 1st grade being overenrolled, many kids in the ECE were not on the class lists when they were sent out a week prior to school, despite matching in the lottery and having sent in (and received confirmation) via paperwork that their child was enrolled. There is at least one family who has a prek4 child who was disenrolled and not able to be accommodated because the family was told that there was no room - despite the child matching and having the right paperwork. The first grade situation is bad - overenrollment and class lists that were changing until the day that school started. The construction which was supposed to have begun over the summer just started and their are nails and debris in the playground right near the ECE area (which is a real risk for the kids). Instead of looking to partner with parents, the Principal choose to no show at the first PTO meeting.

I don't think it's entitled of parents to want to know that their child is enrolled in school and that they have a teacher and not be at risk of getting stabbed by a rusty nail in the playground. I am not an LT parent by the way, my child attends another Hill elementary but Hill is a small community. LT has great teachers and families, it's a shame that the principal is doing such a bad job.

Gently I'd like to suggest that you are going off the comments of a very small number of people and including a lot of rumor in the mix. Almost none of this is accurate (I cannot speak to the enrollment experience of a specific PK4 student). Even some of what is accurate is not evidence of anything-- it is not unusual for class lists to shift in the week before school due to the surprise arrival of IB students. This happens at many if not most DCPS schools. You're talking about an overenrollment *of one* in 1st which is not a big deal given the transient nature of DC's population and the difficulty of estimating lottery spots based on prior year numbers (and contrary to what a PP said no one is forcing LT to offer lottery spots as though it's 2018-- if that were true they would be over-enrolled in every grade and by way more than 1). The construction situation sucks but actually it WAS started over the summer, it's just not done yet. And school administration has little control over that-- it's other agencies as supervised by DCPS. All the school can do is ask for new estimates for completion and hound the contractor about cleanup and safety (and even that isn't direct!).

You aren't describing a dire situation. You are describing a DCPS school in a better situation than most. Which yes means a host of problems. It's DCPS.

Also meant to say that I don't know what happened with the PTO meeting as I wasn't there (and neither were you! You don't even have kids at L-T!) but I've heard differing accounts. I tend to think they should have waited until this week for the meeting as having it the 2nd week of school (especially when there is so much going on with the construction and the higher-than-expected enrollment) is just a lot. At least wait until the 11th day of school when administrators have a better sense of true enrollment (no shows are considered merely absent until Day 11 so there may be students in the roster who have not yet shown up to school).

Anyway, you sure have a lot of opinions about a school your kids don't attend and a lot of it is based on rumors and false narratives.

I like how patronizingly you address PP for a parent who didn't bother to show up at the PTO meeting or find out what happened there, but apparently has a lot of thoughts on when and how the PTO should run its meetings. (You heard "differing accounts"? What? There were 200 people there, including lots of teachers. You must not have tried very hard.) The administration and teachers know how many kids are in the first grade. There aren't no shows being marked absent/who are unaccounted for at this point (nor were there after the first week/at the time of the PTO meeting), so I'm not quite sure what you're talking about.

Also, "rumors and false narratives"? The construction was supposed to start at the beginning of summer. Instead, it started the week before students came back. Enrollment was a mess and I know multiple 1st graders who switched classes over the weekend. I also know of a 3rd grade student who was randomly unenrolled, so apparently this was actually happening across grade levels.

Also, Ludlow-Taylor offered (from PK3-5th): 44, 19, 15, 5, 7, 10, 10 and 6 spots in the lottery. In 2018, it offered 43, 11, 3, 3, 0, 4, 0 and 0, so you're right, they don't offer lottery spots like it's 2018, they offer WAY WAY more than that. It is also clear that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

The PP doesn't even have kids at L-T. "Patronizing" is exactly what she deserves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The situation at LT is not good. Enrollment was a disaster over the summer - in addition to 1st grade being overenrolled, many kids in the ECE were not on the class lists when they were sent out a week prior to school, despite matching in the lottery and having sent in (and received confirmation) via paperwork that their child was enrolled. There is at least one family who has a prek4 child who was disenrolled and not able to be accommodated because the family was told that there was no room - despite the child matching and having the right paperwork. The first grade situation is bad - overenrollment and class lists that were changing until the day that school started. The construction which was supposed to have begun over the summer just started and their are nails and debris in the playground right near the ECE area (which is a real risk for the kids). Instead of looking to partner with parents, the Principal choose to no show at the first PTO meeting.

I don't think it's entitled of parents to want to know that their child is enrolled in school and that they have a teacher and not be at risk of getting stabbed by a rusty nail in the playground. I am not an LT parent by the way, my child attends another Hill elementary but Hill is a small community. LT has great teachers and families, it's a shame that the principal is doing such a bad job.

Gently I'd like to suggest that you are going off the comments of a very small number of people and including a lot of rumor in the mix. Almost none of this is accurate (I cannot speak to the enrollment experience of a specific PK4 student). Even some of what is accurate is not evidence of anything-- it is not unusual for class lists to shift in the week before school due to the surprise arrival of IB students. This happens at many if not most DCPS schools. You're talking about an overenrollment *of one* in 1st which is not a big deal given the transient nature of DC's population and the difficulty of estimating lottery spots based on prior year numbers (and contrary to what a PP said no one is forcing LT to offer lottery spots as though it's 2018-- if that were true they would be over-enrolled in every grade and by way more than 1). The construction situation sucks but actually it WAS started over the summer, it's just not done yet. And school administration has little control over that-- it's other agencies as supervised by DCPS. All the school can do is ask for new estimates for completion and hound the contractor about cleanup and safety (and even that isn't direct!).

You aren't describing a dire situation. You are describing a DCPS school in a better situation than most. Which yes means a host of problems. It's DCPS.

Also meant to say that I don't know what happened with the PTO meeting as I wasn't there (and neither were you! You don't even have kids at L-T!) but I've heard differing accounts. I tend to think they should have waited until this week for the meeting as having it the 2nd week of school (especially when there is so much going on with the construction and the higher-than-expected enrollment) is just a lot. At least wait until the 11th day of school when administrators have a better sense of true enrollment (no shows are considered merely absent until Day 11 so there may be students in the roster who have not yet shown up to school).

Anyway, you sure have a lot of opinions about a school your kids don't attend and a lot of it is based on rumors and false narratives.

I like how patronizingly you address PP for a parent who didn't bother to show up at the PTO meeting or find out what happened there, but apparently has a lot of thoughts on when and how the PTO should run its meetings. (You heard "differing accounts"? What? There were 200 people there, including lots of teachers. You must not have tried very hard.) The administration and teachers know how many kids are in the first grade. There aren't no shows being marked absent/who are unaccounted for at this point (nor were there after the first week/at the time of the PTO meeting), so I'm not quite sure what you're talking about.

Also, "rumors and false narratives"? The construction was supposed to start at the beginning of summer. Instead, it started the week before students came back. Enrollment was a mess and I know multiple 1st graders who switched classes over the weekend. I also know of a 3rd grade student who was randomly unenrolled, so apparently this was actually happening across grade levels.

Also, Ludlow-Taylor offered (from PK3-5th): 44, 19, 15, 5, 7, 10, 10 and 6 spots in the lottery. In 2018, it offered 43, 11, 3, 3, 0, 4, 0 and 0, so you're right, they don't offer lottery spots like it's 2018, they offer WAY WAY more than that. It is also clear that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

This was the most lottery seats L-T has ever offered. The next most was the year before. The current principal and/or DCPS is stuffing L-T to the gills even as attrition drops. There's a reason L-T gained 50 students last year. The PP who said "and contrary to what a PP said no one is forcing LT to offer lottery spots as though it's 2018" could not be more wrong.