Moving from DCPS to Charter but commute is terrible

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Equity efforts are bound to fail.

+1. Pretty obvious

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity efforts are bound to fail.

+1. Pretty obvious

Not necessarily obvious, but true all the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity goals can’t inconvenience people. It’s that simple.

It would crater the tax base and the schools would suffer for your made uo equity goal.

Pfft. Half the kids in this city already participate in a school lottery. There's nothing magical about the other half.

Except that other half has chosen not to participate.

You wanted choice, you got choice. Now you want to deny everyone else choice by forcing your choice on them. Lovely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity goals can’t inconvenience people. It’s that simple.

It would crater the tax base and the schools would suffer for your made uo equity goal.

Pfft. Half the kids in this city already participate in a school lottery. There's nothing magical about the other half.

Except that other half has chosen not to participate.

You wanted choice, you got choice. Now you want to deny everyone else choice by forcing your choice on them. Lovely.

Let's be real. Only the wealthy get real "choices." The rest of us scramble for scraps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity goals can’t inconvenience people. It’s that simple.

It would crater the tax base and the schools would suffer for your made uo equity goal.

Pfft. Half the kids in this city already participate in a school lottery. There's nothing magical about the other half.

Except that other half has chosen not to participate.

You wanted choice, you got choice. Now you want to deny everyone else choice by forcing your choice on them. Lovely.

The city imposes a de facto wealth test on those who want to go to school in Ward 3. That's what this would address. If you think we should be auctioning off seats in some schools to the highest bidders, you should just say so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Equity efforts are bound to fail.

Getting rid of neighborhood preferences/feeders for high school would be equal opportunity not equity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing you may not realize when your kids are very young is that there's tons of good options when it comes to elementary schools, but as the child ages, the options get much, much worse. DCI is a massive improvement over MacFarland and Roosevelt, and a 20 minute commute seems fairly normal. And there's not a huge price difference between living in Petworth and living in Brightwood/Takoma/Shepherd Park, and you could end up moving closer to DCI eventually.

So true. Everyone is fighting for access to OOB schools, not because that school is much better than the neighborhood school, but because the guaranteed Middle is superior. The lottery here is infuriating. Maybe this could be fixed by getting rid of all guaranteed spots and having every middle be lottery.

You're frustrated by your little scramble in elementary school and your solution is to burn down the city.

making all spots in all dcps schools subject to the lottery would be a whole lot fairer than what we do now, where we auction off spaces in the most desirable schools via housing prices while the least desirable schools are half empty. some of these schools are extremely underenrolled.

It works for charters, of course, and has for many years, but somehow, someway it would be just impossible for DCPS too.

That’s not how charters work. Parents have to opt in to lottery into a charter. The parent has to be knowledgeable enough about the due dates, platforms, etc. A large portion of DC children do not live with parents who do that, for many different reasons.

What PP is suggesting is automatic lottery for every enrolled kid at any school. People would move out of DC in that scenario.

The only people who would move would be Janney and Deal and JR parents worried that undesirables (ie poor black kids) would be joining their schools.

They would move because they would lottery into schools across town and that's not what they signed up for. This has happened in other cities.

Yikes. You have literally no clue how the lottery works, do you? That's not how it works at all.

The lottery is modeled after the system that's used to place doctors in residencies. You name your top 12 choices, in your order of preference. If you match with your number one school, then you're in. If not, you go to your No. 2 school. If you don't match there, you go to your No. 3 school. You can't match to a school that you didn't pick, and most people pick schools that are near them. This notion that people are going to get stuck in schools they didnt pick that are way across town is not even possible.

Yes it is possible. Look up how the San Francisco lottery worked. I assume DC would do the same. The problem with this lottery versus the current one or your residency example is that you can strike out at all of your choices. If DC goes full lottery system, they must place a kid at a school. So if your top 12 are full based on other criteria (which usually takes into account SES and then sibling preference) you can end up at a random school with spots available.

But every kid has a guarantee spot k-12 at their neighborhood DCPS. (Don't count PK but it is an extra that is it's own thing).

Not in a full lottery you wouldn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity goals can’t inconvenience people. It’s that simple.

It would crater the tax base and the schools would suffer for your made uo equity goal.

Pfft. Half the kids in this city already participate in a school lottery. There's nothing magical about the other half.

Except that other half has chosen not to participate.

You wanted choice, you got choice. Now you want to deny everyone else choice by forcing your choice on them. Lovely.

The city imposes a de facto wealth test on those who want to go to school in Ward 3. That's what this would address. If you think we should be auctioning off seats in some schools to the highest bidders, you should just say so.

The entire landscape is entirely unfair, but your solution would not bring about the intended result because folks won’t play along. And so you’ll have imposed a logistical nightmare on the city with nothing to show for it. San Fran tried it and it was a disaster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity goals can’t inconvenience people. It’s that simple.

It would crater the tax base and the schools would suffer for your made uo equity goal.

Pfft. Half the kids in this city already participate in a school lottery. There's nothing magical about the other half.

Except that other half has chosen not to participate.

You wanted choice, you got choice. Now you want to deny everyone else choice by forcing your choice on them. Lovely.

The city imposes a de facto wealth test on those who want to go to school in Ward 3. That's what this would address. If you think we should be auctioning off seats in some schools to the highest bidders, you should just say so.

The entire landscape is entirely unfair, but your solution would not bring about the intended result because folks won’t play along. And so you’ll have imposed a logistical nightmare on the city with nothing to show for it. San Fran tried it and it was a disaster.

+1. Those with options will flee the city to the burbs. People just don’t get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity goals can’t inconvenience people. It’s that simple.

It would crater the tax base and the schools would suffer for your made uo equity goal.

Pfft. Half the kids in this city already participate in a school lottery. There's nothing magical about the other half.

Except that other half has chosen not to participate.

You wanted choice, you got choice. Now you want to deny everyone else choice by forcing your choice on them. Lovely.

The city imposes a de facto wealth test on those who want to go to school in Ward 3. That's what this would address. If you think we should be auctioning off seats in some schools to the highest bidders, you should just say so.

The entire landscape is entirely unfair, but your solution would not bring about the intended result because folks won’t play along. And so you’ll have imposed a logistical nightmare on the city with nothing to show for it. San Fran tried it and it was a disaster.

+1. Those with options will flee the city to the burbs. People just don’t get it.

Is this like how if we raise taxes on the rich by even a dollar, they'll all move away?

[Anonymous]

School lotteries are a foreign concept to people in Ward 3 because almost no one there goes to charters. But in the rest of the city, charters and school lotteries are a normal part of life. Also, Ward 3 doesn't have very many children to begin with so maybe another reason to take their opinions with a grain of salt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity goals can’t inconvenience people. It’s that simple.

It would crater the tax base and the schools would suffer for your made uo equity goal.

Pfft. Half the kids in this city already participate in a school lottery. There's nothing magical about the other half.

Except that other half has chosen not to participate.

You wanted choice, you got choice. Now you want to deny everyone else choice by forcing your choice on them. Lovely.

The city imposes a de facto wealth test on those who want to go to school in Ward 3. That's what this would address. If you think we should be auctioning off seats in some schools to the highest bidders, you should just say so.

The entire landscape is entirely unfair, but your solution would not bring about the intended result because folks won’t play along. And so you’ll have imposed a logistical nightmare on the city with nothing to show for it. San Fran tried it and it was a disaster.

+1. Those with options will flee the city to the burbs. People just don’t get it.

Is this like how if we raise taxes on the rich by even a dollar, they'll all move away?

The rich can pay taxes but their lives don't really change, they just find it annoying.

But people who have options and want the best for their kids will not compromise on their kids futures and send them to failing schools. They just won't do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity goals can’t inconvenience people. It’s that simple.

It would crater the tax base and the schools would suffer for your made uo equity goal.

Pfft. Half the kids in this city already participate in a school lottery. There's nothing magical about the other half.

Except that other half has chosen not to participate.

You wanted choice, you got choice. Now you want to deny everyone else choice by forcing your choice on them. Lovely.

The city imposes a de facto wealth test on those who want to go to school in Ward 3. That's what this would address. If you think we should be auctioning off seats in some schools to the highest bidders, you should just say so.

The entire landscape is entirely unfair, but your solution would not bring about the intended result because folks won’t play along. And so you’ll have imposed a logistical nightmare on the city with nothing to show for it. San Fran tried it and it was a disaster.

+1. Those with options will flee the city to the burbs. People just don’t get it.

Is this like how if we raise taxes on the rich by even a dollar, they'll all move away?

The rich can pay taxes but their lives don't really change, they just find it annoying.

But people who have options and want the best for their kids will not compromise on their kids futures and send them to failing schools. They just won't do it.

No, because there little evidence that taxation cause large scale “moving” by the rich, while there is plenty of evidence that people of means (including mere middle class folks) will move (or exit public schools) to avoid intolerable school situations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Prek4 & 3 going into K & Prek4. We love our DCPS elementary school but feeder pattern is not great (MacFarland). We just accepted a spot at a charter school that feeds into DCI.

Now having regrets because our commute went from walking our kids to school to a 40 minute drive (20 each way). Am I crazy that I am already regretting our decision. We only switched because the current feeder pattern is not great and we can't afford to move to another part of the city and we are undecided if we may move down the line to the burbs.

I assume I could try the lottery when the kids are in upper years and switch the kids back if the commute this year sucks.. but who knows how that will go.. looking for advice

https://enrollbasis.com/washington-dc/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity goals can’t inconvenience people. It’s that simple.

It would crater the tax base and the schools would suffer for your made uo equity goal.

Pfft. Half the kids in this city already participate in a school lottery. There's nothing magical about the other half.

Except that other half has chosen not to participate.

You wanted choice, you got choice. Now you want to deny everyone else choice by forcing your choice on them. Lovely.

The city imposes a de facto wealth test on those who want to go to school in Ward 3. That's what this would address. If you think we should be auctioning off seats in some schools to the highest bidders, you should just say so.

The entire landscape is entirely unfair, but your solution would not bring about the intended result because folks won’t play along. And so you’ll have imposed a logistical nightmare on the city with nothing to show for it. San Fran tried it and it was a disaster.

Why is the landscape unfair? The schools in Ward 3 are not “good” inherently. They’re good because a high percent of kids there are academically on grade level and of higher SES.