Asking for Advice - Rejection from Oyster-Adams Preschool

[Anonymous]

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.

I do see the point of screening the nanny-kids out, as you say, though just two points: (1) Even kids from Spanish-speaking households tend to eventually become English dominant, because they live in this country and eventually will and should become English-dominant in order to function well here. I come from an immigrant household and have seen this happen in myself, as well as in friends who immigrated here as children and refuse to speak anything but English to their parents, though they understand the native language when spoken to. However, I take the point that those kids will bring the benefit of continued input and practice from home; (2) such screening may walk precariously close to a national origin preference, at least in effect. Which might be okay and justifiable, but I would prefer that DCPS say that out loud (and I can't imagine that they will) and be prepared to justify that, possibly in court.

And apart from Oyster, I wish DCPS would consider a middle road for foreign language learning between immersion requiring a critical mass of native speakers (that, in Oyster's case, can lead to confusion and discord) and 45-minutes-a-week foreign language instruction that seems to be the norm (too little). Something like, perhaps, 45 minutes every day at least. As of now, that frequency of instruction happens starting in middle school, but little kids learn language best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
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.

The point is neither you nor anyone else know the personal circumstances of a given family. It could be the "nanny" is an aunt or grandmother who will continue to live with the family. Could be the family continues to employee the nanny for another 18 years. You are making value judgements that have little to do with whether that child is actually Spanish dominant at the time they take the test. It is more than reasonable for parents to want clear and consistent standards that are applied across all dual language schools. It is also reasonable to expect that these standards are not based on socio-economic status or cultural background or any criteria other than actual language ability ("dominance"). It is especially important to have them since the test is administered after parents school lottery results are already set in stone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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.

The point is neither you nor anyone else know the personal circumstances of a given family. It could be the "nanny" is an aunt or grandmother who will continue to live with the family. Could be the family continues to employee the nanny for another 18 years. You are making value judgements that have little to do with whether that child is actually Spanish dominant at the time they take the test. It is more than reasonable for parents to want clear and consistent standards that are applied across all dual language schools. It is also reasonable to expect that these standards are not based on socio-economic status or cultural background or any criteria other than actual language ability ("dominance"). It is especially important to have them since the test is administered after parents school lottery results are already set in stone.

There is a clear and consistent standard at Oyster, under the current principal: Spanish dominance, for purposes of lottery admission, must not be derived from nanny (aunt/grandma/play cousin) or preschool care. You don’t have to like it, but that’s the standard.

Btw, life is all about imposed value judgments, both official and implied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

There is a clear and consistent standard at Oyster, under the current principal: Spanish dominance, for purposes of lottery admission, must not be derived from nanny (aunt/grandma/play cousin) or preschool care. You don’t have to like it, but that’s the standard.

Btw, life is all about imposed value judgments, both official and implied.

The DC school enrollment handbook says otherwise and has done so for many years. So, if your statement is correct, the principal is applying a standard contrary to what parents are told to expect from the handbook. In addition, as others have pointed out, the standard comes very close to a national original test as well as being inconsistent across dual language schools. You haven't addressed any of these issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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.

The point is neither you nor anyone else know the personal circumstances of a given family. It could be the "nanny" is an aunt or grandmother who will continue to live with the family. Could be the family continues to employee the nanny for another 18 years. You are making value judgements that have little to do with whether that child is actually Spanish dominant at the time they take the test. It is more than reasonable for parents to want clear and consistent standards that are applied across all dual language schools. It is also reasonable to expect that these standards are not based on socio-economic status or cultural background or any criteria other than actual language ability ("dominance"). It is especially important to have them since the test is administered after parents school lottery results are already set in stone.

There is a clear and consistent standard at Oyster, under the current principal: Spanish dominance, for purposes of lottery admission, must not be derived from nanny (aunt/grandma/play cousin) or preschool care. You don’t have to like it, but that’s the standard.

Btw, life is all about imposed value judgments, both official and implied.

But the question is whether the kid is dominant (or fluent depending on what policy you look at). How someone gets that dominance/fluency is irrelevant. In fact, if she were excluding kids because they had Anglo parent(s) that would be blatant national origin discrimination. A principal does not have leeway to break the law in setting policy and parents don't have to accept that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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.

The point is neither you nor anyone else know the personal circumstances of a given family. It could be the "nanny" is an aunt or grandmother who will continue to live with the family. Could be the family continues to employee the nanny for another 18 years. You are making value judgements that have little to do with whether that child is actually Spanish dominant at the time they take the test. It is more than reasonable for parents to want clear and consistent standards that are applied across all dual language schools. It is also reasonable to expect that these standards are not based on socio-economic status or cultural background or any criteria other than actual language ability ("dominance"). It is especially important to have them since the test is administered after parents school lottery results are already set in stone.

There is a clear and consistent standard at Oyster, under the current principal: Spanish dominance, for purposes of lottery admission, must not be derived from nanny (aunt/grandma/play cousin) or preschool care. You don’t have to like it, but that’s the standard.

Btw, life is all about imposed value judgments, both official and implied.

I don't think anyone cares about where the kid's Spanish derives from, what matters is that it is the primary language in the household, and therefore the main language in which the kid thinks/ speaks/ responds.

You don't get there by having a nanny or a grandma speaking Spanish. You get there when both parents predominantly speak Spanish to the kid and between themselves, and most friends and relatives around also speak it.

That's what justifies the "Spanish dominant" preference in the OA model.

[Anonymous]

Here is the DCPS policy on language skills for a child seeking a Spanish dominant seat at one of its schools. This applies to all of them, from Tyler to Oyster. https://enrolldcps.dc.gov/sites/dcpsenrollment/files/page_content/attachments/SY19-20%20DCPS%20Enrollment%20and%20Lottery%20Handbook_FINAL_Nov%202018%20%28English%29.pdf

"Language Dominance (PK3-1 Grades)
To support dual language learning in grades PK3-1, many schools strive to create linguistically balanced classrooms. As such, schools request that applicants identify as “English-dominant” or “Spanish-dominant ” on their lottery application. Language-dominance is defined as the primary language of communication for the applying student.

After the release of lottery results and prior to enrollment, schools may require students claiming Spanish dominant to be assessed for language proficiency. If the student does not pass the assessment, he or she may be required to forfeit their match in that school's dual language program. In these cases, the applicant will be placed on the school’s non-Spanish dominant waitlist.

Spanish Proficiency Screening (2-12 Grades)
In grades 2-12, students who attend dual language programs are expected to learn grade-level content in Spanish. If the applicant is not currently enrolled in a DCPS or DC public charter school dual language program, he or she will be required to take a Spanish-proficiency test. Testing occurs after lottery matches are released, at the school to which the student was matched. If the student does not pass the assessment, he or she may be required to forfeit their match in that school's dual language program. In these cases, at the parent’s request, the applicant will be placed back on the waitlist of all schools where the student was “not waitlisted.” This request must be made to My School DC by the parent and can only be made once the family has failed the proficiency test.

Note: If one school finds the student does not meet the language requirements, the student is ineligible for ALL DCPS dual language programs in that grade, if applicable."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is the DCPS policy on language skills for a child seeking a Spanish dominant seat at one of its schools. This applies to all of them, from Tyler to Oyster. https://enrolldcps.dc.gov/sites/dcpsenrollment/files/page_content/attachments/SY19-20%20DCPS%20Enrollment%20and%20Lottery%20Handbook_FINAL_Nov%202018%20%28English%29.pdf

"Language Dominance (PK3-1 Grades)
To support dual language learning in grades PK3-1, many schools strive to create linguistically balanced classrooms. As such, schools request that applicants identify as “English-dominant” or “Spanish-dominant ” on their lottery application. Language-dominance is defined as the primary language of communication for the applying student.

After the release of lottery results and prior to enrollment, schools may require students claiming Spanish dominant to be assessed for language proficiency. If the student does not pass the assessment, he or she may be required to forfeit their match in that school's dual language program. In these cases, the applicant will be placed on the school’s non-Spanish dominant waitlist.

Spanish Proficiency Screening (2-12 Grades)
In grades 2-12, students who attend dual language programs are expected to learn grade-level content in Spanish. If the applicant is not currently enrolled in a DCPS or DC public charter school dual language program, he or she will be required to take a Spanish-proficiency test. Testing occurs after lottery matches are released, at the school to which the student was matched. If the student does not pass the assessment, he or she may be required to forfeit their match in that school's dual language program. In these cases, at the parent’s request, the applicant will be placed back on the waitlist of all schools where the student was “not waitlisted.” This request must be made to My School DC by the parent and can only be made once the family has failed the proficiency test.

Note: If one school finds the student does not meet the language requirements, the student is ineligible for ALL DCPS dual language programs in that grade, if applicable."

The problem is that no matter how hard one tries, one lives in an English country and therefore the child WILL be bilingual if they spend any time out of the house (in daycare say). By the time they are entering PK4, they also socialize with English speakers regularly. So, in my view if the schools really want this, they should make it an ELL preference. Clearly they already have a way to classify people as ELL. I certainly wish our immersion charter could have an ELL preference! I don't really see why instead they have this slippery and open to testing bias classification which is separate from the ELL designation.

I also agree that there is no way a kid with a Spanish speaking nanny can be Spanish dominant if both parents speak English, sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There is a clear and consistent standard at Oyster, under the current principal: Spanish dominance, for purposes of lottery admission, must not be derived from nanny (aunt/grandma/play cousin) or preschool care. You don’t have to like it, but that’s the standard.

Btw, life is all about imposed value judgments, both official and implied.

The DC school enrollment handbook says otherwise and has done so for many years. So, if your statement is correct, the principal is applying a standard contrary to what parents are told to expect from the handbook. In addition, as others have pointed out, the standard comes very close to a national original test as well as being inconsistent across dual language schools. You haven't addressed any of these issues.

If your child's primary language of communication is English, then your child isn’t Spanish dominant. It is impossible to have a Spanish dominant child, living in these United States, with parents who are native English speakers. A Spanish speaking nanny or preschool *may* get your preschool child to fluency, but NOT dominance. Full stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't think anyone cares about where the kid's Spanish derives from, what matters is that it is the primary language in the household, and therefore the main language in which the kid thinks/ speaks/ responds.

You don't get there by having a nanny or a grandma speaking Spanish. You get there when both parents predominantly speak Spanish to the kid and between themselves, and most friends and relatives around also speak it.

That's what justifies the "Spanish dominant" preference in the OA model.

I'm sorry, but the DC Handbook defines Spanish dominance as "the primary language of communication for the applying student." Contrary to your claim, that is the case when the child's primary caretaker (nanny, grandmother, cousin, whatever), who spends more time with the child than anyone else, is solely a Spanish speaker. That child will in most cases be a Spanish speaker first and foremost. And I'm not sure how parents in that situation, or any fair outside judge, could reasonably pinpoint anything other than Spanish as "the primary language of communication for the applying student."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't think anyone cares about where the kid's Spanish derives from, what matters is that it is the primary language in the household, and therefore the main language in which the kid thinks/ speaks/ responds.

You don't get there by having a nanny or a grandma speaking Spanish. You get there when both parents predominantly speak Spanish to the kid and between themselves, and most friends and relatives around also speak it.

That's what justifies the "Spanish dominant" preference in the OA model.

I'm sorry, but the DC Handbook defines Spanish dominance as "the primary language of communication for the applying student." Contrary to your claim, that is the case when the child's primary caretaker (nanny, grandmother, cousin, whatever), who spends more time with the child than anyone else, is solely a Spanish speaker. That child will in most cases be a Spanish speaker first and foremost. And I'm not sure how parents in that situation, or any fair outside judge, could reasonably pinpoint anything other than Spanish as "the primary language of communication for the applying student."

Nope. There are 24 hours in a day. A nanny, grandmother, cousin, or bff is spending 8-10 hours a day with that child, unless they are raising him/her (which is a different story). That NON-Spanish dominant child spends mornings, evenings (middle of the night wake-ups), weekends and vacations with his/her English speaking parents in this English dominant country. That’s why that child is English dominant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't think anyone cares about where the kid's Spanish derives from, what matters is that it is the primary language in the household, and therefore the main language in which the kid thinks/ speaks/ responds.

You don't get there by having a nanny or a grandma speaking Spanish. You get there when both parents predominantly speak Spanish to the kid and between themselves, and most friends and relatives around also speak it.

That's what justifies the "Spanish dominant" preference in the OA model.

I'm sorry, but the DC Handbook defines Spanish dominance as "the primary language of communication for the applying student." Contrary to your claim, that is the case when the child's primary caretaker (nanny, grandmother, cousin, whatever), who spends more time with the child than anyone else, is solely a Spanish speaker. That child will in most cases be a Spanish speaker first and foremost. And I'm not sure how parents in that situation, or any fair outside judge, could reasonably pinpoint anything other than Spanish as "the primary language of communication for the applying student."

You are confused on one key point: a kid's primary caretaker is his/ her parents.

No Spanish-speaking nanny supercedes an English-speaking family, sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You are confused on one key point: a kid's primary caretaker is his/ her parents.

No Spanish-speaking nanny supercedes an English-speaking family, sorry.

No, you are being pedantic while failing to address the points raised. "Primary caretaker" was clearly defined as the person who spends the most time with the child. If you prefer different wording that's fine, but to pretend to not understand the argument is disingenuous. The child in that example speaks Spanish as their primary form of communication, regardless of how it was acquired.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You are confused on one key point: a kid's primary caretaker is his/ her parents.

No Spanish-speaking nanny supercedes an English-speaking family, sorry.

No, you are being pedantic while failing to address the points raised. "Primary caretaker" was clearly defined as the person who spends the most time with the child. If you prefer different wording that's fine, but to pretend to not understand the argument is disingenuous. The child in that example speaks Spanish as their primary form of communication, regardless of how it was acquired.

Obviously the OP’s child doesn’t speak Spanish as her primary form of communication—or at least she didn’t on testing day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You are confused on one key point: a kid's primary caretaker is his/ her parents.

No Spanish-speaking nanny supercedes an English-speaking family, sorry.

No, you are being pedantic while failing to address the points raised. "Primary caretaker" was clearly defined as the person who spends the most time with the child. If you prefer different wording that's fine, but to pretend to not understand the argument is disingenuous. The child in that example speaks Spanish as their primary form of communication, regardless of how it was acquired.

Obviously the OP’s child doesn’t speak Spanish as her primary form of communication—or at least she didn’t on testing day.

That's not obvious; we know absolutely nothing about the test. All we know is that the OP was presumed to be not a native speaker, or the child was presumed to be English only by the principal.