What would an at-risk preference do? New MSDC research paper out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So would anyone be supportive of giving at-risk preference over IB students for Pk3 and Pk4 at DCPS, and at every grade for charters and city-wide schools?

I would. Any loss of opportunity to my kids would be small compared to the benefits to the at-risk kids and the system being more equitable overall. Free preschool for the affluent should not be a thing we spend money on.

PK3 and PK4 are the major entry years for all the top charters. So you would be boxing out all other families from a chance to get into a charter school.

The preference would be capped. And remember, this would help at-risk families get into the schools that they rank highest. That might not mean HRCS, or it might.

But also, I am fine with this. Maybe then Ward 5 neighborhood schools would stand a chance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You're right. It is not a solution. But will help and its benefits have been studied and demonstrated to be effective (at best) and not harmful (at worst), so it's already a lot better than much of what DC has tried.

Yes. Implement the at risk preference immediately, and also work to strengthen the neighborhood schools as PPs discussed. Obviously, the latter is a better solution, but it is also an elusive one. The at risk preference is a help for a smaller group of kids right now. That is worth something, while we continue to work on strengthening the neighborhood schools, which no jurisdiction has been able to accomplish quickly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT THE BEST SCHOOLS BE FILLED WITH AT-RISK STUDENTS. Argh.

DC es exploring (at most) an at-risk preference for 10% of seats at school with small numbers of at-risk students.

And for the last time are you going to tell someone that plopped $1 million plus on their house that they can't attend their neighborhood school

All the best schools are completely filled with inbound

Bunch of liberals with no critical thinking skills on here

[Anonymous]

I know most of you saw this from the NYT

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/05/02/nyregion/new-study-school-choice-increases-school-segregation.html?rref=collection/sectioncollection/nyregion&action=click&contentCollection=nyregion®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront

Big difference in DC all the good public schools don't have any lottery spots period

Upper middle class and up People who are going lottery are looking to get into a few specific charters only. If they miss they go private or leave DC

So you might have an argument for forcing charters to have at-risk set asides. But on that the at-risk kids have no desire to be around most of those schools that UMC+ people are playing the lottery for. They are fine with DC PREP/KIPP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT THE BEST SCHOOLS BE FILLED WITH AT-RISK STUDENTS. Argh.

DC es exploring (at most) an at-risk preference for 10% of seats at school with small numbers of at-risk students.

And for the last time are you going to tell someone that plopped $1 million plus on their house that they can't attend their neighborhood school

All the best schools are completely filled with inbound

Bunch of liberals with no critical thinking skills on here

There is no DCPS school that is completely filled with IB students. None. No IB families will be shut out for a compulsory grade.

Deal - 70% IB
Lafayette - 88% IB
Brent - 65% IB

All we are talking about is trying to ensure that 10% of total students in the school are at risk.

The folks who would be affected by this are the OOB students from higher SES families who lottery to secure a seat in a desirable school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So would anyone be supportive of giving at-risk preference over IB students for Pk3 and Pk4 at DCPS, and at every grade for charters and city-wide schools?

I would. Any loss of opportunity to my kids would be small compared to the benefits to the at-risk kids and the system being more equitable overall. Free preschool for the affluent should not be a thing we spend money on.

I would as well! I sent my kids to private preK because I could afford it. I wished back then I could sponsor an at risk kid for my IB spot! Including help with transportation!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT THE BEST SCHOOLS BE FILLED WITH AT-RISK STUDENTS. Argh.

DC es exploring (at most) an at-risk preference for 10% of seats at school with small numbers of at-risk students.

And for the last time are you going to tell someone that plopped $1 million plus on their house that they can't attend their neighborhood school

All the best schools are completely filled with inbound

Bunch of liberals with no critical thinking skills on here

There is no DCPS school that is completely filled with IB students. None. No IB families will be shut out for a compulsory grade.

Deal - 70% IB
Lafayette - 88% IB
Brent - 65% IB

All we are talking about is trying to ensure that 10% of total students in the school are at risk.

The folks who would be affected by this are the OOB students from higher SES families who lottery to secure a seat in a desirable school.

I only have direct knowledge of Brent. There is enough inbound demand for two additional pre-k classes and there is a huge drop off in 5th. I would argue the vast majority are OOB from that year because no one wants to go to Jefferson for middle school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT THE BEST SCHOOLS BE FILLED WITH AT-RISK STUDENTS. Argh.

DC es exploring (at most) an at-risk preference for 10% of seats at school with small numbers of at-risk students.

And for the last time are you going to tell someone that plopped $1 million plus on their house that they can't attend their neighborhood school

All the best schools are completely filled with inbound

Bunch of liberals with no critical thinking skills on here

There is no DCPS school that is completely filled with IB students. None. No IB families will be shut out for a compulsory grade.

Deal - 70% IB
Lafayette - 88% IB
Brent - 65% IB

All we are talking about is trying to ensure that 10% of total students in the school are at risk.

The folks who would be affected by this are the OOB students from higher SES families who lottery to secure a seat in a desirable school.

Deal is 12% already over the 10% threshold

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT THE BEST SCHOOLS BE FILLED WITH AT-RISK STUDENTS. Argh.

DC es exploring (at most) an at-risk preference for 10% of seats at school with small numbers of at-risk students.

And for the last time are you going to tell someone that plopped $1 million plus on their house that they can't attend their neighborhood school

All the best schools are completely filled with inbound

Bunch of liberals with no critical thinking skills on here

There is no DCPS school that is completely filled with IB students. None. No IB families will be shut out for a compulsory grade.

Deal - 70% IB
Lafayette - 88% IB
Brent - 65% IB

All we are talking about is trying to ensure that 10% of total students in the school are at risk.

The folks who would be affected by this are the OOB students from higher SES families who lottery to secure a seat in a desirable school.

Deal is 12% already over the 10% threshold

So Deal wouldn't take any more. But its percentage of at-risk is dropping, so if it drops under 10% they'd have to add some.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT THE BEST SCHOOLS BE FILLED WITH AT-RISK STUDENTS. Argh.

DC es exploring (at most) an at-risk preference for 10% of seats at school with small numbers of at-risk students.

And for the last time are you going to tell someone that plopped $1 million plus on their house that they can't attend their neighborhood school

All the best schools are completely filled with inbound

Bunch of liberals with no critical thinking skills on here

There is no DCPS school that is completely filled with IB students. None. No IB families will be shut out for a compulsory grade.

Deal - 70% IB
Lafayette - 88% IB
Brent - 65% IB

All we are talking about is trying to ensure that 10% of total students in the school are at risk.

The folks who would be affected by this are the OOB students from higher SES families who lottery to secure a seat in a desirable school.

Deal is 12% already over the 10% threshold

No it isn't. Only 100 of Deal's 1474 tudents this year are at-risk (note - receiving FARMS =/= at-risk).

See this spreadsheet and go to the tab labelled "School UPSFF Enrollment by Spl Need" -- https://osse.dc.gov/node/1306796

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is all really wonky stuff. I would say after working at one of the worst performing elementary schools in the District that the children with motivated parents and capable children were participating in the lottery. There are buses that idled in the morning in front of my school taking children to J.O Wilson across the river.

The ones that aren't participating in the lottery process are truly at-risk families that would not be able to access a school in a different community anyways. Thinking back to my Pre-K classroom - there was a father of 6 that was interviewing for shift-work. How is he going to have the time to travel across town picking up his kids and pay for himself to commute back and forth. I had a student that was taken into the foster system away from their parents. The foster family brought her daily from MD because the child was having such severe behavior problems being taken out of her community and away from cousins and friends. Children in kinder and first grade were regularily getting their siblings in pre-k to school because the parents weren't at home.

How is taking at-risk funding away from these schools and communities going to address the conditions as to why these families and students are at-risk.

Educationally at-risk students might be behind 3 or 4 years in reading and math levels. No matter how great or rich your school is - they are not going to snap their fingers and get results. Children need to be met where they are emotionally and educationally and stop all this non-sense high-stake testing of students that can barely read themselves. I was in on meeting where administrators said not to focus on the lowest achievers because they would not ever be able to contribute to showing growth in the averages.

I think stregthening neighborhood schools would stregthen the communities. Schools can be a powerful community instutitions.

Thank you for your actually well informed response which no one seems to have read. This idea is not going to work for the families who need it most. And, would take away some of the extra funding for at-risk students. That said, I'm all for making it easier for those you mention who already do the lottery to have some type of priority. It's just that putting them above IB PK preference isn't super useful. And wouldn't affect charter access at all.

This whole thread is ridiculous. Posters who have strongly held views on social-engineering theories but not much thinking about implementation or reality. It's just a lot of hot air.

Except this thread is about an ACTUAL implementation that could exist in ACTUAL reality. That's what the paper is analyzing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is all really wonky stuff. I would say after working at one of the worst performing elementary schools in the District that the children with motivated parents and capable children were participating in the lottery. There are buses that idled in the morning in front of my school taking children to J.O Wilson across the river.

The ones that aren't participating in the lottery process are truly at-risk families that would not be able to access a school in a different community anyways. Thinking back to my Pre-K classroom - there was a father of 6 that was interviewing for shift-work. How is he going to have the time to travel across town picking up his kids and pay for himself to commute back and forth. I had a student that was taken into the foster system away from their parents. The foster family brought her daily from MD because the child was having such severe behavior problems being taken out of her community and away from cousins and friends. Children in kinder and first grade were regularily getting their siblings in pre-k to school because the parents weren't at home.

How is taking at-risk funding away from these schools and communities going to address the conditions as to why these families and students are at-risk.

Educationally at-risk students might be behind 3 or 4 years in reading and math levels. No matter how great or rich your school is - they are not going to snap their fingers and get results. Children need to be met where they are emotionally and educationally and stop all this non-sense high-stake testing of students that can barely read themselves. I was in on meeting where administrators said not to focus on the lowest achievers because they would not ever be able to contribute to showing growth in the averages.

I think stregthening neighborhood schools would stregthen the communities. Schools can be a powerful community instutitions.

Thank you for your actually well informed response which no one seems to have read. This idea is not going to work for the families who need it most. And, would take away some of the extra funding for at-risk students. That said, I'm all for making it easier for those you mention who already do the lottery to have some type of priority. It's just that putting them above IB PK preference isn't super useful. And wouldn't affect charter access at all.

This whole thread is ridiculous. Posters who have strongly held views on social-engineering theories but not much thinking about implementation or reality. It's just a lot of hot air.

I'm the 100% poster and grew up in a Boston suburb with a court-mandated Metco population. I've also sent my kids to Watkins and SH with relatively large at-risk proportions (kids went on to Walls). I have plenty of real skin in the game.

[Anonymous]

The schools are not the reason the at-risk students are at risk, and sending them to a different school is not going to solve their at-risk-ness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The schools are not the reason the at-risk students are at risk, and sending them to a different school is not going to solve their at-risk-ness.

No. But it might improve their educational outcomes. Sheesh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The schools are not the reason the at-risk students are at risk, and sending them to a different school is not going to solve their at-risk-ness.

No. But it might improve their educational outcomes. Sheesh.

Maybe a little? First, the at-risk kids are unlikely to stay in a particular school pattern over many years, as their at-risk lives have transience built-in.

The point is that money and time and thought could have higher impact if concentrated on the sources of the problems, not on an after-the-fact band-aid.

If you are here going on about what a great solution an at-risk preference would be, but are not doing something to help families in need, then you are off-track. Sheesh.