Reply to Are we fools not to play lottery for our 3 y o?

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Are we fools not to play lottery for our 3 y o?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I was the charter parent who proposed the startover lottery at K. Let me reiterate that I am IN the system at a desirable charter school, so this is not a selfish proposal on my part. I agree strongly with the "stressed" poster (who I think had a reasonable reaction to the turn that the thread was taking) that there should be options that:

1) provide PS3 and PS4 for low-income and working families
2) AND provide a reasonable entry point for K families

I never suggested that we screw over "working class families who need PS and PK. What I suggested was that we provide a reasonable entry point for K families that don't require people to force their kids in at 3. A K lottery would mean that the big "do or die" year for the lottery would be K instead of PS3 and PS4. What would be the big deal about that? Everyone could send their kid to Appletree or their local Ludlow-Taylor or Miner or whatever works for them in PS3 and PK4, and then start the lottery for their "forever" schools at K.

This would eliminate the crush at PS3 since there seem to be more than a few of us who'd like to keep their kids home that year and push the lottery to K, which is already a year in which there is a ton of movement as families leave the city for the suburbs, move their kids to private schools, or leave their daycare for their inbounds schools.

The only people who would be "losers" in this group, would be people like me, whose kids already lotteried into a coveted charter or OOB school. I think we all agree that this is small group.

[/quote]

Right, those would be the only losers!  Oh,  except also the MAJORITY of famolies who need pre-s/pre-k would have their lids lottery into, settle in, and connect/form relationships with their school and then have to start all over again for K.  But heck, if doing that provides a "reasonable entry point" for advantaged families who don't need/want K, we won't count them as losers cuz hey, we're winning!

Nope, no losers worth mentionong in that scenario...

PP you are the epitome of "entitled".  That reasoning right there is the definition in action.  And it's disgusting.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics