Thoughts about sibling preference in lottery

[Anonymous]

Dealing with the school lottery over the years, I am conflicted about the sibling preference option. (I have one kid).

I get it for preschool/elementary school--it's easier for the family.

But for middle and high school? Seriously? The goose keeps laying the golden eggs for these people.

What opinions do you have about it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dealing with the school lottery over the years, I am conflicted about the sibling preference option. (I have one kid).

I get it for preschool/elementary school--it's easier for the family.

But for middle and high school? Seriously? The goose keeps laying the golden eggs for these people.

What opinions do you have about it?

The first child in every family has the same odds.

And then there are a bunch of miscellaneous dynamics at play. For example, what about the younger siblings who don’t apply widely because their family wants them to go where their older sibling got in?

The sibling preference exists for good reasons and you are not disadvantaged by it as much as you want to believe.

[Anonymous]

I’m glad there is a sibling preference. I’m also glad there isn't one at the application high schools.

[Anonymous]

I have three kids, so I have certainly benefited personally from sibling preference, but I do generally agree with the OP. I wish that DC had more routes into specialized schools than a random lottery with unearned preferences. We need more true test-in/audition magnets in the older grades that give all kids more tailored possibilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dealing with the school lottery over the years, I am conflicted about the sibling preference option. (I have one kid).

I get it for preschool/elementary school--it's easier for the family.

But for middle and high school? Seriously? The goose keeps laying the golden eggs for these people.

What opinions do you have about it?

The first child in every family has the same odds.

And then there are a bunch of miscellaneous dynamics at play. For example, what about the younger siblings who don’t apply widely because their family wants them to go where their older sibling got in?

The sibling preference exists for good reasons and you are not disadvantaged by it as much as you want to believe.

This. I have foregone spots at both Yu Ying and LAMB because siblings would never get in.

Without sibling preference, I would have had to spend all my time commuting and would not have been able to do anywhere near as much volunteering, and try to divide my volunteering across two schools. That would preclude any significant role.

The real problem, obviously, is not enough good schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The goose keeps laying the golden eggs for these people.

LMAO

This is DCUM's version of Does Pete Rose Belong In the Hall of Fame?

As has been said, every first entering child has the same chances with, I guess, a distinct advantage for twins/triplets and families with multiple children moving to DC.

I suspect most people against sibling preference aren't families with one child who misguidedly consider it unfair, but IB boosters who recognize it would drive people from even considering charters since they'd mostly likely be headed to their IB once their second child reached school age.

[Anonymous]

I think some sibling preference is important, but for preschool (since it is not an entitlement) I would place at-risk preference above it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The goose keeps laying the golden eggs for these people.

LMAO

This is DCUM's version of Does Pete Rose Belong In the Hall of Fame?

As has been said, every first entering child has the same chances with, I guess, a distinct advantage for twins/triplets and families with multiple children moving to DC.

I suspect most people against sibling preference aren't families with one child who misguidedly consider it unfair, but IB boosters who recognize it would drive people from even considering charters since they'd mostly likely be headed to their IB once their second child reached school age.

From a fairness perspective there are problems both with sibling preference and OOB-feeder rights.

A kid who wins a seat in the lottery for a Deal feeder this spring has the right to attend Deal and Wilson through 2032. His siblings have a leg up to get in the same position.

The gulf between those who win the prize and those who miss out is enormous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The goose keeps laying the golden eggs for these people.

LMAO

This is DCUM's version of Does Pete Rose Belong In the Hall of Fame?

As has been said, every first entering child has the same chances with, I guess, a distinct advantage for twins/triplets and families with multiple children moving to DC.

I suspect most people against sibling preference aren't families with one child who misguidedly consider it unfair, but IB boosters who recognize it would drive people from even considering charters since they'd mostly likely be headed to their IB once their second child reached school age.

From a fairness perspective there are problems both with sibling preference and OOB-feeder rights.

A kid who wins a seat in the lottery for a Deal feeder this spring has the right to attend Deal and Wilson through 2032. His siblings have a leg up to get in the same position.

The gulf between those who win the prize and those who miss out is enormous.

This is a sibling preference thread, not OOB feeder rights thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The goose keeps laying the golden eggs for these people.

LMAO

This is DCUM's version of Does Pete Rose Belong In the Hall of Fame?

As has been said, every first entering child has the same chances with, I guess, a distinct advantage for twins/triplets and families with multiple children moving to DC.

I suspect most people against sibling preference aren't families with one child who misguidedly consider it unfair, but IB boosters who recognize it would drive people from even considering charters since they'd mostly likely be headed to their IB once their second child reached school age.

Well, even an oldest child has a distinct advantage as soon as one of his/her younger siblings enters the system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dealing with the school lottery over the years, I am conflicted about the sibling preference option. (I have one kid).

I get it for preschool/elementary school--it's easier for the family.

But for middle and high school? Seriously? The goose keeps laying the golden eggs for these people.

What opinions do you have about it?

The first child in every family has the same odds.

And then there are a bunch of miscellaneous dynamics at play. For example, what about the younger siblings who don’t apply widely because their family wants them to go where their older sibling got in?

The sibling preference exists for good reasons and you are not disadvantaged by it as much as you want to believe.

This. I have foregone spots at both Yu Ying and LAMB because siblings would never get in.

Without sibling preference, I would have had to spend all my time commuting and would not have been able to do anywhere near as much volunteering, and try to divide my volunteering across two schools. That would preclude any significant role.

The real problem, obviously, is not enough good schools.

If sibling preference was restricted to elementary school, as OP suggested, the would not be any commuting impacts since MS/HS kids can get around on their own in DC. So it would not impact your total amount of volunteering time.

[Anonymous]

I agree with sibling preference at citywide schools and charters, but not at neighborhood schools for ECE. I think an at risk preference should be on top and every 3 or 4 year old IB should otherwise have an equal chance getting in at PK3 or PK4. For IB schools the commuting arguments are different, and PK is not mandatory.

I also think the sibling preference at neighborhood schools with PK3 operates inequitably when it comes to families whose kids are only one year apart. Kid 2 is at a real disadvantage as compared to a peer whose older sibling is more than a year older.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: I have three kids, so I have certainly benefited personally from sibling preference, but I do generally agree with the OP. I wish that DC had more routes into specialized schools than a random lottery with unearned preferences. We need more true test-in/audition magnets in the older grades that give all kids more tailored possibilities.

What? All the DCPS specialized schools are application based with no preferences. There are only a small number of high-performing charter high schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If sibling preference was restricted to elementary school, as OP suggested, the would not be any commuting impacts since MS/HS kids can get around on their own in DC. So it would not impact your total amount of volunteering time.

You are thinking about your own middle class experience and not the experience of families with at-risk students (and those are the families that a public school system needs to be designed to serve).

If you want to encourage parent engagement at school and at home and have parents with few resources (time, money, etc.) you can't make it so hard for them. Two, three, kids at different schools, especially if those schools are across the city from one another, doesn't work for the majority of families.

That said, obviously preferences for at-risk kids would also be helpful as would high quality neighborhood schools across the city.

[Anonymous]

Actually, I don't think older kids had the same odds. Wait lists in many neighborhoods across the city are much longer now than they were 5 years ago.