Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 22:58     Subject: Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
For the early ed grades most schools are required to set aside one or two spots for Early Stages children (children assessed for special accommodation). So some of the seemingly hand picked children could be the result of this policy. But as others have said, principals are given a fair amount of discretion. And we're obviously only tailing about early ed here since inboundary children can attend their schools as a matter of right starting in K.
Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 22:53     Subject: Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Someone posted on MOTH that there are (to paraphrase) sketchy things going on with the wait lists at some schools. For example, this person said that there have been waivers approved for non-inbound children without enrolled siblings ahead of inbound children with or without enrolled siblings on the wait list. And that some of these children were accepted outside the lottery (their parents didn't participate in the lottery).

This person also said that children of DCPS staff who wouldn't otherwise receive preference have been accepted ahead of children of the general public with inbound preference and who have a valid wait list number.

Anyone know if there is any truth to this?



In DCPS? Absolutely.

Definitely doesn't happen in our HRCS though. Considering how much people want in, I almost wish there was a preference system.

Everyone knows DCPS gets to cheat and charters don't.


Because everyone knows that charters would never enroll PG residents to reap the benefits of per pupil funding. Spare us the sanctimony.
Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 22:50     Subject: Re:Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:what is MOTH?

Didn't Fenty's kids get into Lafayette this way?


I thought Fenty's kids got into Lafayette b/c they were twins and the IB school could not accomodate them in separate classrooms.


Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 22:50     Subject: Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
MOTH is moms on the hill listserv. You can only get on it if you have an address in CH.
Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 22:49     Subject: Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
Anonymous wrote:The lottery did not get rid of Principal discretion. It still exists - as you just described.

The new boundary / DME recommendations were suppose to reduce Principal discretion. Not sure if that part stuck.


As I understand the DME proposal, principals supposedly will be stripped of discretion to allow families who move OOB to return the following year other than through the lottery process starting in 2015-16. As a practical matter, most will continue to do whatever they think they can get away with in the names of best interst of the school.
Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 22:48     Subject: Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
I guess Fenty doen't see much of his kids anymore.
Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 22:44     Subject: Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
Anonymous wrote:Someone posted on MOTH that there are (to paraphrase) sketchy things going on with the wait lists at some schools. For example, this person said that there have been waivers approved for non-inbound children without enrolled siblings ahead of inbound children with or without enrolled siblings on the wait list. And that some of these children were accepted outside the lottery (their parents didn't participate in the lottery).

This person also said that children of DCPS staff who wouldn't otherwise receive preference have been accepted ahead of children of the general public with inbound preference and who have a valid wait list number.

Anyone know if there is any truth to this?



In DCPS? Absolutely.

Definitely doesn't happen in our HRCS though. Considering how much people want in, I almost wish there was a preference system.

Everyone knows DCPS gets to cheat and charters don't.
Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 22:28     Subject: Re:Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
Anonymous wrote:what is MOTH?

Didn't Fenty's kids get into Lafayette this way?


I thought Fenty's kids got into Lafayette b/c they were twins and the IB school could not accomodate them in separate classrooms.
Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 22:27     Subject: Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
The lottery did not get rid of Principal discretion. It still exists - as you just described.

The new boundary / DME recommendations were suppose to reduce Principal discretion. Not sure if that part stuck.
Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 22:16     Subject: Re:Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
what is MOTH?

Didn't Fenty's kids get into Lafayette this way?
Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 22:09     Subject: Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
Anonymous wrote:Someone posted on MOTH that there are (to paraphrase) sketchy things going on with the wait lists at some schools. For example, this person said that there have been waivers approved for non-inbound children without enrolled siblings ahead of inbound children with or without enrolled siblings on the wait list. And that some of these children were accepted outside the lottery (their parents didn't participate in the lottery).

This person also said that children of DCPS staff who wouldn't otherwise receive preference have been accepted ahead of children of the general public with inbound preference and who have a valid wait list number.

Anyone know if there is any truth to this?


I am not the MOTH poster but I am a CH resident. This is definitely true for some CH in-demand schools for this year's lottery. I don't think it was general dcps staff but instead children of teachers. Since it was posted on moth, which is not an anonymous forum, why don't you send poster a private email to ask more information. If she put herself out there on MOTH, I'm sure she'd be willing to answer your questions.
Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 22:05     Subject: Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
Anonymous wrote:This solicited ZERO interest on MotH so you're now trying to peddle it here? Yes, principals have a fair amount of discretion and therefore some junky shit sometimes goes on at DCPS


This is OP. I feel like I need to say that I'm not the person who posted it on MOTH. But I am interested because my understanding was that the new lottery was supposed to eliminate principal discretion.
Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 22:04     Subject: Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
Yeah, life is unfair.
Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 22:03     Subject: Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
This solicited ZERO interest on MotH so you're now trying to peddle it here? Yes, principals have a fair amount of discretion and therefore some junky shit sometimes goes on at DCPS
Anonymous
Post 09/02/2014 21:55     Subject: Waitlist transparency (or lack thereof)
Someone posted on MOTH that there are (to paraphrase) sketchy things going on with the wait lists at some schools. For example, this person said that there have been waivers approved for non-inbound children without enrolled siblings ahead of inbound children with or without enrolled siblings on the wait list. And that some of these children were accepted outside the lottery (their parents didn't participate in the lottery).

This person also said that children of DCPS staff who wouldn't otherwise receive preference have been accepted ahead of children of the general public with inbound preference and who have a valid wait list number.

Anyone know if there is any truth to this?