Redshirting consequences at Lafayette
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
The statute is extremely clear and DCPS is well within its rights to set the policy. Maybe there’s some kind of case for arbitrary agency action but by the time the moms win (in theory) on that, their kids will be in HS. These moms need to give up and either enroll their snowflakes in KIPP (which has a June cutoff) or send them to 1st then ask that they be sent back to K or repeat 1st (per the policy). |
Anonymous
lol no. The policy & statute are pretty clear. What happened is that a school principal went ultra vires and now the parents want to enforce that. GL. |
Anonymous
They are not that clear to me and many others. “Shall be eligible to enroll” is not the same as “Shall enroll”. |
Anonymous
What’s the point of putting them in 1st then shuffling them around to get the same result in the end? The district would just do it out of spite. Not ok for someone paid from public money in my view. |
Anonymous
Funny how many people are reading in all sorts of extra words into the regs. "Shall be eligible" is only setting a minimum age for each class year. If the intent had been to set a strict requirement as to as age limit, the regulations would have stated as much and included language such as "is only eligible," "must enroll," "is ineligible for," etc. On their face, the regulations allow for a 6 year old to enroll in either K or 1st grade. That child would be eligible for both. And nothing in the regulations states that they could not enroll in one or the other. Agree with others that if this goes before a judge and DCPS argues that the regulations sets forth strict requirements as to what grade a child needs to be enrolled in, the families challenging that interpretation are going to win every time. |
Anonymous
|
I thought for sure this FAQ document at the bottom of this page must have been in response to this case, but it's from December 2022. https://dcps.dc.gov/ece
7. I don’t think my child is ready for Kindergarten. Can I wait to enroll them at age 6? Children must be enrolled in and attend an educational institution beginning the school year in which they are (or have become) age five by September 30. Under DC law, an educational institution means a DCPS school, a DC public charter school, an independent school, a parochial school, or a private instructor. DC Code § 38-201(2A). However, attending a child development center, private preschool, home daycare, or another early childhood program does not meet the compulsory education requirement. 9. My student attended DCPS Pre-K and I want them to repeat the grade. Can that happen? DCPS does not generally support retaining pre kindergarten students or permitting students to repeat Pre-K3 or Pre-K4. However, Pre-K3, Pre-K4, and Kindergarten students may be retained if they do not meet promotion requirements (DC Official Code § 38-781.01(a)) or may be provided an option to repeat Pre-K3, Pre-K4, or Kindergarten if they meet proficiency requirements in core subject areas but are not functioning at a skill level deemed ready for promotion in the areas of physical, social, or emotional development (5-E DCMR § 2201.6). In the rare instances where it may be appropriate, the decision that a Pre-K student should repeat a grade must be made by the student’s principal (DC Official Code § 38-781.01(b)(1)) and the parent must agree. Students will not be retained without parental consent and parental requests for retention will not be granted without the principal’s agreement. 12. My student attended Pre-K at a non-DCPS school and I want them to repeat the grade. Can that happen? Parental requests to repeat a Pre-Kindergarten grade that was attended at a non-DCPS school will not be granted by DCPS. Students will be enrolled based on the age requirements explained in question #2. |
Anonymous
That’s the difference between de jure and de facto. There’s the law as it’s written and then there’s the law as it’s actually applied. The fact that principals have discretion means that the law is not an absolute. By granting these delayed enrollments for years, the former Lafayette principal made that standard practice. Some of these same families already had permission to delay enrollment for an older child and did so. Therefore, no reasonable person would conclude that they should have understood that DCPS would make their younger child skip kindergarten if they delayed enrollment again. Your rabid pedantry doesn’t allow you to understand the situation fully. |
Anonymous
The intent is obvious to anyone reading the regulation or the policies set forth in the DCPS enrollment handbook. Can these parents argue for a different interpretation? Sure. But that's a risky gamble to make with your child's education. |
Anonymous
| It goes back to the entitlement. Even if you believe the arguments that the DC regs are unclear and the prior Lafayette principal had a practice of using their discretion to redshirt, these Lafayette parents think they are so entitled to the same discretionary decision that they bet Junior's kindergarten on it without asking the question or even shooting off an email to the principal around enrollment time. This isn't a situation where they asked the principal or made any advance efforts to confirm their belief (hope!) that Junior would get the same treatment as his older brother. The parents just felt so entitled to it that they acted accordingly and are now shocked by anything else. |
Anonymous
not sure why you are surprised this is established policy? That’s what we have been saying. |
Anonymous
You don’t buy the right to make DCPS policy because you pay taxes lady. |
Anonymous
Good luck arguing that to a judge. generally the rogue actions of one agency staff don’t create legally enforceable rights. |
Anonymous
You can hate these parents all you want, but none of that would matter in a court of law. Sorry. |
Anonymous
Excellent point. they had zero reason to rely on this belief other than that “we are NW families that pay taxes.” |
Anonymous
lol sure. You seem like you are really experienced in admin law and litigation. |