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][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Also worth noting that Capital City Lower School (one of the top 4 charter elementaries in all of DC) went from 38.1% low income in 2010-2011 to 48.1% low income in 2011-2012.  That 48.1% is lower than what was reported to me when I interviewed them about it, but obviously I'd go with what they publicly state it to be.

The main point being: the idea that these schools are DECREASINGLY low income makes sense in theory (given the INcreasing numbers of middle/upper income families choosing to put their kids in), but several of the most popular charters are showing the opposite trend:  the numbers of low income students are INCREASING.

EL Haynes: 48.9% low income in 2010-2011
EL Haynes: 58.7% low income in 2011-2012

So you hold K slots back or make families start the lottery all over again, and yes, odds are, you are negatively impacting a low income family already in P-K who would have had that slot.[/quote]

Well, how about this. We'll give the low income families priority. :)
[/quote]

Fat chance, cuz then your whole goal of reserved K slots at the best charters would never go to you.  Unless you had "low income priority slots" (2) and "middle/ upper income priority slots" (20), which would also conveniently wipe out most slots for rising pre-k-ers.

Although, why am I pretty sure you'd be just fine with that?  :wink:  :mrgreen: 
[/quote]

Funny how you completely misunderstand my entire goal and the fact that I am not middle or upper income. I wouldn't qualify for low-income at my salary. That's okay with me because I'd prefer to see the program used the way it was intended. For low income kids. If only low income kids could get into the program at the PK / PS level, then they'd reserve remaining spots for people like you and me to duke it out. That sounds okay with me. I don't mind competing fairly with you while leaving a program geared toward REALLY low income kids to serve those kids who need it most instead of wealthy pricks with a "me first" attitude like yours. [/quote]

Btw, the irony of you calling me a "wealthy prick with a me first attitude" is not lost here.  Riiiiight, brilliant, coming from someone who can't see her own "me first prick" attitude in suggesting changing a system set up NOT to serve her in a way that ONLY serves her/parents like her (keep kids home til K but don't miss out on K slots).  You would take a K slot away from a child already in Pre-K ready to rise into that slot - who statistics show is likel to be a child of a low-income family (I know, you couldn't follow along.  But that's what the low income enrollment shows) - just to give you a better chance to get it.

Well, if trying to protect the class that this was meant to serve means I'm a "wealthy me first prick", I would probably get kicked off of DCUM for using accurate language to paint which type of me first prick that clearly makes you.  And remember, you are doing the namecalling, not me.

You're a piece or work PP!  The good news though is, your argument is so blatantly self-serving and goes so counter to the interests/goals of the whole DCPS and DCPCS systems, your idea will never fly.  At least, not unless you and your "Me First but framed as It's All About You!" selfish advantaged parents take over either or both systems (as opposed to the advantaged parents like me who are grateful we are allowed to participate, and play by the rules, but also support any and all efforts to expand access to low income families, even if it means I get shut out (which is entirely possible - my childbearing years aren't over yet!).  Fortunately, you're too selfish to probably put that effort in so I think we're all safe.  For now.[/quote]

Thank you for providing a good writing sample to prove my point! LOL. [/quote]

The beautiful part is though, I'd rather have made my point accurately and get criticized for typos than be unwilling to see that my point is wrong.  I realize you don't get that either and think your insults have an impact, but no matter hwo perfect your grammar is, you're idea still sucks for the people these schools were intended to help.  Actually, you show so much more about your character by trying to hammer my point with insults of my writing, that's pretty beautiful too, the way those with nothing more to show than insults highlight both the weakness of their argument and the weakness in their character all by themselves.  Don't even have to lift a grammatically-incorrect finger to assist.[/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