Is it like this every year?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
DCPS knows that without preschool parents they would lose a lot of PTA energy and $. Sorry but it's the truth. |
Anonymous
|
I'm guessing Bancroft Title 1/PK3 disappear in 2-3 years. It will essentially be a WOTP school unless DCPS does something about it.
I'm also going to guess more WOTP will start losing PK4. Stoddert has almost ended it, matter of time for Key, Mann, Janney, etc. |
Anonymous
Ludlow Taylor was at 40% in February. This is the time when the DCPS Federal Programs Team reviews data from OSSE and makes a determination about whether schools will experience a change in Title I status. Notification letter are usually sent to principals and instructional superintendents in late February or early March. |
Anonymous
free PK has been the biggest driver of getting UMC families into underperforming title 1 Schools. Once there they are more likely to stick around a little more each year. Before that parents just moved before K. DCPS knows this and can’t take away PK now. All kids beenfit from good preschool! |
Anonymous
It is a transient area and any school in the area will some people leave for a wide variety of reasons. But let's not pretend that different schools will have very different movement patterns. Some have lots of movement after the very early years, others have relative stability through elementary, and others keep relative stability throughout. There can also be a difference between city and suburb. Even schools WOTP that are pretty stable have, on the whole, less stability than schools in the close-in suburbs. Though it is happening less these days, there are still plenty of families who move out of the city (or choose private) for middle or high school. |
Anonymous
DP. But how many of these affluent families would have the women stay home if there wasn't free PK? Almost all of them would choose to pay for a couple of years of preschool if it was really finances that were leading someone to say home. |
Anonymous
Huh? The affluent families in our EotP DCPS beat down the door to access high quality public school PK3. My own children benefited greatly from it. The reason our school has PK3 is because Tommy Wells supported its introduction 15 years ago, to try to keep families across the socioeconomic spectrum from running off to Two Rivers, one of the City's first charters and the only charter in the immediate neighborhood. With Two Rivers offering PK3 to affluent families but not traditional public schools, DCPS programs nearby couldn't compete in attracting the youngest students. Parents complained and the city council took note. |
Anonymous
|
Re: affluent women and the workforce, here's the recent study from the Center American Progress looking specifically at the maternal labor force effects of DC's preschool program: https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/early-childhood/reports/2018/09/26/458208/effects-universal-preschool-washington-d-c/
Key takeaways: In the years since Washington, D.C., began offering two years of universal preschool, the city’s maternal labor force participation rate has increased by about 12 percentage points, with 10 percentage points attributable to preschool expansion. District of Columbia mothers with young children now participate in the labor force at about the same rate as District of Columbia mothers whose children are in elementary school. Maternal labor force participation increased among both low-income and high-income families. Maternal labor force participation was unchanged for middle-income families during the study period and is examined below. Women with young children also saw large increases in employment, with boosts to full-time work for married women and part-time work for unmarried women. |
Anonymous
No, I don’t believe this is true with regard to L-T. I believe they originally lost their Title 1 and appealed in some way. It was just announced to parents in the last week or two that they managed to keep it. A meeting re: how to spend the T1 funds was added to the schedule because they originally assumed it wouldn’t be needed. |
Anonymous
Ludlow Taylor did not lose their Title I status and there was not an appeal. Student enrollment data from OSSE determined that LT was still eligible for Title I status in February. Title I funds were included in their initial budget allocation in February. It is required that all Title I schools inform parents about the Title I Program. Just ask the DCPS Federal Programs Team instead of assuming.., |
Anonymous
| I would be surprised if schools like Garrison, Marie Reed and Bancroft still have a CEP of 93% when the next Title I eligibility reveiw happens in February 2020. Some of my colleagues assigned to these schools to work with ECE teachers were amazed by the lack of diversity in a majority of the classrooms. DCPS is heading in the wrong direction if a PK classroom has 14 affluent/white students and 3 black students. |
Anonymous
|
There’s some chatter that DCPS will only be providing Head Start at schools in wards 7, 8, and a portion of ward 5 next year. They will also possibly have it at 6 or 7 other schools outside of those wards. My guesses for the other 7 schools are Tubman ES, Walker Jones EC, Dorothy Height ES, Raymond EC, Brightwood EC, Barnard ES and LaSalle Backus EC. Everything else will most likely be cut.
Title I Schools that will probably be cut based on low Head Start eligibility. Van Ness Ludlow Taylor Bancroft Marie Reed HD Cooke Garrison Seaton Thomson Whittier Takoma Miner Payne JO Wilson Amidon Bowen Tyler Powell Bruce Monroe West |