Mundo Verde and CReative Minds

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

We approached the ED privately and asked and she said that the new early childhood building will not have been built and therefore the early childhood program will be in the main building with 28 spots total for PK3, 20 of which are expected to go to sibs.

I swear if I get into a program I love I am going to have to have another kid just to go sibling preference. Only half kidding.

I was the PP who said I was 99% sure that there would be 28 non-sib spots for PS3. Sorry about the confusion, and thanks for getting clarification.

There will likely be a lot more PK4 spots the next year as the early childhood building opens up. There's no shadiness here, just projections that aren't exactly right. If you think you can be that exact about these things 10 months before a new building opens (the charter amendment was dated October 31) , then you have very unrealistic expectations about these processes. It's a difference of 12 kids, not 100.

[Anonymous]

I have to say that I was very impressed by th dual language program at Marie-Reed. The principal seems great too. We are not in-boundary and do not have proximity, but we live nearby and it would be convenient. It seems loot heir early childhood program is excellent. We are going to apply. I am realizing as I go to more open houses for far-away schools how hard the logistics would be, especially with two full-time working parents. The thought of going across town with a three year old, by car or bus, is really not appealing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ask the CM folk at their open house. They should be forthcoming. Ask how the budget operates.

LOL CM forthcoming, we are talking about the same school that had a private lottery drawing, correct?

LOL. To paraphrase the Yu Ying waitlist defenders, if it's legal, stop mocking us, hmphh.

Stuff it, these are not the same situations at all. YY's process has been reviewed over and over again - the waitlist based on application timestamp is allowed. You don't like it, get the rules changed, but otherwise, shut up. CM is NOT supposed to have a private lottery. The PP who asked to go was not the only one who called and asked last year - I did as well, and I know one other. We were told we could not attend. That is against the rules. They also didn't publicize their waitlist, which while that part part isn't specifically against the rules, after a private lottery it just added to the shadiness and lack of transparency that the private lottery started. Then the rumors about late-added founding members (i.e. not really founders) getting their kids in...

Is CM saying they'll have a private lottery again this year, or will the public be allowed to attend? YY's lottery is public, and they publish the waitlist.

Do not put them in the same category, these situations are not comparable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ask the CM folk at their open house. They should be forthcoming. Ask how the budget operates.

LOL CM forthcoming, we are talking about the same school that had a private lottery drawing, correct?

Of course, no one actually asked to attend. Does that make it private? Or just unattended?

I asked to attend, and I'm not the other PP who said that. I know another parent who asked to attend too. So yes, private. No, not "unattended", because those who asked to attend were turned away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ask the CM folk at their open house. They should be forthcoming. Ask how the budget operates.

LOL CM forthcoming, we are talking about the same school that had a private lottery drawing, correct?

LOL. To paraphrase the Yu Ying waitlist defenders, if it's legal, stop mocking us, hmphh.

Stuff it, these are not the same situations at all. YY's process has been reviewed over and over again - the waitlist based on application timestamp is allowed. You don't like it, get the rules changed, but otherwise, shut up. CM is NOT supposed to have a private lottery. The PP who asked to go was not the only one who called and asked last year - I did as well, and I know one other. We were told we could not attend. That is against the rules. They also didn't publicize their waitlist, which while that part part isn't specifically against the rules, after a private lottery it just added to the shadiness and lack of transparency that the private lottery started. Then the rumors about late-added founding members (i.e. not really founders) getting their kids in...

Is CM saying they'll have a private lottery again this year, or will the public be allowed to attend? YY's lottery is public, and they publish the waitlist.

Do not put them in the same category, these situations are not comparable.

Just wondering how you know YYs process has been reviewed "over and over again" do you work for YY? How do you know CMs process hasn't been reviewed "over and over again"?

What makes you think that the PCSB reviews one schools lottery but not another?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ask the CM folk at their open house. They should be forthcoming. Ask how the budget operates.

LOL CM forthcoming, we are talking about the same school that had a private lottery drawing, correct?

LOL. To paraphrase the Yu Ying waitlist defenders, if it's legal, stop mocking us, hmphh.

Stuff it, these are not the same situations at all. YY's process has been reviewed over and over again - the waitlist based on application timestamp is allowed. You don't like it, get the rules changed, but otherwise, shut up. CM is NOT supposed to have a private lottery. The PP who asked to go was not the only one who called and asked last year - I did as well, and I know one other. We were told we could not attend. That is against the rules. They also didn't publicize their waitlist, which while that part part isn't specifically against the rules, after a private lottery it just added to the shadiness and lack of transparency that the private lottery started. Then the rumors about late-added founding members (i.e. not really founders) getting their kids in...

Is CM saying they'll have a private lottery again this year, or will the public be allowed to attend? YY's lottery is public, and they publish the waitlist.

Do not put them in the same category, these situations are not comparable.

Just wondering how you know YYs process has been reviewed "over and over again" do you work for YY? How do you know CMs process hasn't been reviewed "over and over again"?

What makes you think that the PCSB reviews one schools lottery but not another?

I should have been more specific. I did not mean PCSB has reviewed YY's waitlist process over and over. I meant that there have been PLENTY of people who have accused YY of having an unfair practice or not going by the books, and they've never been able to make their case. And they have seriously tried! CM, I have no idea who has brought what concerns to PCSB about their process, but I DO know they don't do a public lottery, I know there have been many publicly and privately raised concerns questioning the "straighforwardness" or lack thereof of their process, and I know I have not heard yet whether they will do a public lottery or not this year.

Has anyone called this year? Will CM's lottery be public?