MD kids lying to get into DC Schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I bet the same parents who sneak, connive an steal from the DC children to place their children in DC schools are the same parents who talk poorly about the crappy DC streets and services. These parents are also the same parents who are vehemently opposed to commuter taxes.

You know this? Really?

Defensive are we

[Anonymous]

I personally know of one family who is "cheating". They live in MD and have been living there for some years, but they own an apartment on CT. Ave which is an investment property (I think they lived there in their college days), anyway their child just started at the zoned school in NW DC. Do I think it fair, no, but I understand why they do it and would not consider turning them in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I bet the same parents who sneak, connive an steal from the DC children to place their children in DC schools are the same parents who talk poorly about the crappy DC streets and services. These parents are also the same parents who are vehemently opposed to commuter taxes.

You know this? Really?

Defensive are we

Huh? Just asking for proof of this bald assertion. Which you are avoiding offering, apparently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except that you might be wasting taxpayer money on a pointless investigation, not to mention embarrassing the families in question and the school?

I fail to see how this type of investigation might be "embarassing."

"Mrs. Smith, this is a message from your school administrator. The DC School Residency Investigation office is looking into whether your family is attending our school legitimately. You may wonder why your family has been singled out: individual investigations are generally sparked by a call to the tip line. I know you filled out the forms at the beginning of the year, but peoples' living situations change. Please contact our office as soon as possible to verify that you are either a DC resident, or paying your $10K out-of-state bill."

And why do you want to do this to somebody, when you could answer the question yourself just by asking the school administration a quick question or two?

This scenario is unrealistic. The waitlists for out-of-boundary spots at DC's top public schools are never empty, and I imagine that the waitlists for pre-K spots are never empty at any school. Non-residents cannot take spots that residents covet, even if the non-residents are willing to pay 10K a year. So the likelihood that the MD family in the desirous DC school is paying out-of-state tuition is almost nil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe a better word is "insulting".

Put yourself in Mrs. Smith's place, and think about the checks you wrote to cover that $10K. Then imagine discovering that your fellow parents believe, incorrectly, that you are a scofflaw, and that some of them even tried to get you kicked out of the school that you are rightfully a part of.

Then consider that this could all have been avoided (and taxpayer money saved) if the concerned parents had just asked the school administrators a question or two. Simple, reduces the risk of offending the innocent, and all at no cost to the taxpayer.

Which begs the question:

and your approach is OK, how?

Why on earth would it be OK for a school administrator to give out information on one family to another family?

There are procedures in place to address out-of-District students - I think it is highly improper for parents to conduct their own private investigations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except that you might be wasting taxpayer money on a pointless investigation, not to mention embarrassing the families in question and the school?

I fail to see how this type of investigation might be "embarassing."

"Mrs. Smith, this is a message from your school administrator. The DC School Residency Investigation office is looking into whether your family is attending our school legitimately. You may wonder why your family has been singled out: individual investigations are generally sparked by a call to the tip line. I know you filled out the forms at the beginning of the year, but peoples' living situations change. Please contact our office as soon as possible to verify that you are either a DC resident, or paying your $10K out-of-state bill."

And why do you want to do this to somebody, when you could answer the question yourself just by asking the school administration a quick question or two?

This scenario is unrealistic. The waitlists for out-of-boundary spots at DC's top public schools are never empty, and I imagine that the waitlists for pre-K spots are never empty at any school. Non-residents cannot take spots that residents covet, even if the non-residents are willing to pay 10K a year. So the likelihood that the MD family in the desirous DC school is paying out-of-state tuition is almost nil.

My understanding is that as some of the Charter schools start up, there are open spaces as many parents are cautious about the program. For example, there were spaces available at Latin the 1st year. As the school starts to develop a solid track record, word gets out and the waitlist is created. But - for parents who got in for MD or VA during that 1st year, they will not be kicked out and can continue with the program through whatever grade it ends - paying the stated tuition.

[Anonymous]

11:24 describes our situation perfectly. We got in on the ground at a charter that had openings in the first two years, but is now highly desirable. Then they let you stay.

So to 19:59, the likelihood isn't nil -- it's 100%. Sorry to disappoint you, you just seem to eager to see the wrongdoing in everybody else's actions....

[Anonymous]

So if you are an admitted MD resident do you pay tuition?

[Anonymous]

Absolutely. DC has a single tuition fee for all out-of-state kids, and the charters all charge the same amount without any leeway to charge more or less. Last year it was about $10K.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:11:24 describes our situation perfectly. We got in on the ground at a charter that had openings in the first two years, but is now highly desirable. Then they let you stay.

So to 19:59, the likelihood isn't nil -- it's 100%. Sorry to disappoint you, you just seem to eager to see the wrongdoing in everybody else's actions....

"so eager," not "to eager".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:11:24 describes our situation perfectly. We got in on the ground at a charter that had openings in the first two years, but is now highly desirable. Then they let you stay.

So to 19:59, the likelihood isn't nil -- it's 100%. Sorry to disappoint you, you just seem to eager to see the wrongdoing in everybody else's actions....

19:59 here. I am disappointed. At least to the extent that this possibility appears to exist for charter schools, but not neighborhood schools.

Suppose a non-resident secures a spot in a neighborhood school when the school is unpopular. If the school subsequently increases in popularity, the non-resident could loose the spot. All neighborhood kids seeking enrollment in a neighborhood school must be accommodated, and the principal would not have the authority to "grandfather" the non-resident if it results in turning away a neighborhood kid. At best, the principal could expand class sizes to accommodate the grandfathered non-resident while accommodating all of the neighborhood kids, but there's a limit there.

As your situation demonstrates, charter schools have the luxury of grandfathering non-residents without being forced to accept all interested residents. The principal of a charter school has the privilege of determining which seats are available for enrollment every year. The principal of a neighborhood school must make all seats available every year -- at least for in-boundary kids. This difference strikes me as unfair.

Charter schools are meant to offer residents alternatives to failing neighborhood schools. They are not meant to offer early-adopting non-residents access to educational continuity. A resident who is unwilling to take a chance on an unproven charter school during its nascent stages should not loose access once the school proves itself because non-residents got in on the ground floor.

So, if your charter has turned away interested residents for lack of space while allowing your kid(s) to remain, then I am disappointed.

As for my "almost nil" comment, your situation not withstanding, I still agree with the PP's who claim that the vast majority of non-residents enrolled in neighborhood schools and charter schools are not paying non-resident tuition. Rather, they are fraudulently claiming DC residency.

[Anonymous]

Yes but without the non residents who took a chance and sent their kids the first year would the school have been as poular?

[Anonymous]

Stupid question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Charter schools are meant to offer residents alternatives to failing neighborhood schools. They are not meant to offer early-adopting non-residents access to educational continuity. A resident who is unwilling to take a chance on an unproven charter school during its nascent stages should not loose access once the school proves itself because non-residents got in on the ground floor.

So, if your charter has turned away interested residents for lack of space while allowing your kid(s) to remain, then I am disappointed.

I agree with your statement "Charter schools are meant to offer residents alternatives to failing neighborhood schools". But you also need to think about the finances of charters. The non-residents who took a chance (and paid tuition) enabled the charter to gain traction. Without the spaces filled, the charter might not have been able to afford to be around the next year. The parent's (and child) who took the risk and enrolled in a charter year in the early years and are a part of what the charter may become. The number of children who are in this position throughout all of our charter schools are few - and as each charter matures there will be fewer and fewer of these situations as these children graduate from the school.



Question - any one who knows a non-resident family attending a DC school decide to report them based on this post - or are we all just content to complain about the problem on DCUM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Charter schools are meant to offer residents alternatives to failing neighborhood schools. They are not meant to offer early-adopting non-residents access to educational continuity. A resident who is unwilling to take a chance on an unproven charter school during its nascent stages should not loose access once the school proves itself because non-residents got in on the ground floor.

So, if your charter has turned away interested residents for lack of space while allowing your kid(s) to remain, then I am disappointed.

I agree with your statement "Charter schools are meant to offer residents alternatives to failing neighborhood schools". But you also need to think about the finances of charters. The non-residents who took a chance (and paid tuition) enabled the charter to gain traction. Without the spaces filled, the charter might not have been able to afford to be around the next year. The parent's (and child) who took the risk and enrolled in a charter year in the early years and are a part of what the charter may become. The number of children who are in this position throughout all of our charter schools are few - and as each charter matures there will be fewer and fewer of these situations as these children graduate from the school.



Question - any one who knows a non-resident family attending a DC school decide to report them based on this post - or are we all just content to complain about the problem on DCUM?

19:59 here. You raise a valid point, PP. Non-residents probably should be rewarded for taking a chance on unproven charter schools. I worry, however, that those rewards can be extended for so long as to become unfair to residents in failing schools. Is the following scenario possible? Non-resident family with three children secures a spot in Kindergarten for their oldest in a newly minted K-8 charter school that ultimately proves very successful. Can that family, through continuous enrollment and sibling preferences, lay claim to -- at various times -- one, two or three spots for anywhere from 9 to 15 years? Such a scenario strikes me as extremely unfair.

Contributing to the injustice is the fact that non-residents appear to have a "put option" on nascent dc charter schools. If they enroll early and the school succeeds, they reap the rewards. If they enroll early and the school proves mediocre, they withdraw and enroll in a neighborhood or charter school in their state of residency. Residents who enroll in the same charter, on the other hand, must settle for the mediocrity of the school if their neighborhood school is also failing. The chances of getting into a desirable established charter school or desirable (non-local) neighborhood school are very low.