Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The thing that bothers me about the school hopping is that, at least during early childhood, the changes are not always based on the actual experience of the child. They're based on the preferences of the parent. I'm not talking about leaving English-only for dual language, because that is more understandable to me. Many of my friends are super concerned about getting their 3yo into a good feeder pattern, and since there is only one feeder pattern that is acceptable, they are all jockeying to get into some elementary school that feeds to Deal, without considering whether the elementary school is the best fit for their child or their family or whether DEAL is the best fit for their child or their family, 6 years down the road.
It is kind of crazy-making to hear the following over and over:
"Susie has had such a great year at EOTP school but we are transferring to WOTP school next year. Yes, we know that it'll take an hour and change to get there, then get to work, but it's worth it, because we really want her to go to Deal."
This won't change until the EOTP schools get better in the upper grades (beyond 2nd) and the EOTP middle/high schools improve. I really can't blame parents for thinking in the long-term, especially if they own their property and can't easily move.
I understand and agree with this logic, but I also think that the likelihood of these things happening all on their own without the families of high achieving students is small. Clearly throwing money at the problem and building fancy new buildings is not going to solve the problem. So how does it happen?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The thing that bothers me about the school hopping is that, at least during early childhood, the changes are not always based on the actual experience of the child. They're based on the preferences of the parent. I'm not talking about leaving English-only for dual language, because that is more understandable to me. Many of my friends are super concerned about getting their 3yo into a good feeder pattern, and since there is only one feeder pattern that is acceptable, they are all jockeying to get into some elementary school that feeds to Deal, without considering whether the elementary school is the best fit for their child or their family or whether DEAL is the best fit for their child or their family, 6 years down the road.
It is kind of crazy-making to hear the following over and over:
"Susie has had such a great year at EOTP school but we are transferring to WOTP school next year. Yes, we know that it'll take an hour and change to get there, then get to work, but it's worth it, because we really want her to go to Deal."
This won't change until the EOTP schools get better in the upper grades (beyond 2nd) and the EOTP middle/high schools improve. I really can't blame parents for thinking in the long-term, especially if they own their property and can't easily move.
I understand and agree with this logic, but I also think that the likelihood of these things happening all on their own without the families of high achieving students is small. Clearly throwing money at the problem and building fancy new buildings is not going to solve the problem. So how does it happen?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The thing that bothers me about the school hopping is that, at least during early childhood, the changes are not always based on the actual experience of the child. They're based on the preferences of the parent. I'm not talking about leaving English-only for dual language, because that is more understandable to me. Many of my friends are super concerned about getting their 3yo into a good feeder pattern, and since there is only one feeder pattern that is acceptable, they are all jockeying to get into some elementary school that feeds to Deal, without considering whether the elementary school is the best fit for their child or their family or whether DEAL is the best fit for their child or their family, 6 years down the road.
It is kind of crazy-making to hear the following over and over:
"Susie has had such a great year at EOTP school but we are transferring to WOTP school next year. Yes, we know that it'll take an hour and change to get there, then get to work, but it's worth it, because we really want her to go to Deal."
This won't change until the EOTP schools get better in the upper grades (beyond 2nd) and the EOTP middle/high schools improve. I really can't blame parents for thinking in the long-term, especially if they own their property and can't easily move.
Anonymous wrote:Just two studies cited, but it is food for thought
http://time.com/8854/study-switching-schools-may-make-your-kids-psychotic/
Anonymous wrote:The thing that bothers me about the school hopping is that, at least during early childhood, the changes are not always based on the actual experience of the child. They're based on the preferences of the parent. I'm not talking about leaving English-only for dual language, because that is more understandable to me. Many of my friends are super concerned about getting their 3yo into a good feeder pattern, and since there is only one feeder pattern that is acceptable, they are all jockeying to get into some elementary school that feeds to Deal, without considering whether the elementary school is the best fit for their child or their family or whether DEAL is the best fit for their child or their family, 6 years down the road.
It is kind of crazy-making to hear the following over and over:
"Susie has had such a great year at EOTP school but we are transferring to WOTP school next year. Yes, we know that it'll take an hour and change to get there, then get to work, but it's worth it, because we really want her to go to Deal."
Anonymous wrote:It seems to me what the JKLM vs. Lower NW and several other threads have in common is that some people object to 'school hopping', where parents 'trade-up' from year to year as they lottery into a better school or get into K in their own decent in-boundary DCPS.
I think limited school hopping is fine, especially when it can be justified as a better match or more suitable school for the student, but a lot of this churn is simply because parents are fickle and somehow believe the grass is greener. They somehow believe that by changing schools they're adding value to their child's education when in fact they're just slowing them down. And the people who are trading up every year are real disruptors.
From my experience, our DC's PK classes have seen 5 or 6 of the 15 leave every year to be replaced by new students. By the time we got to 1st we had only 4 kids left (out of 24) from the original group, and skills-wise all 4 are near the top of the class. With 80% of the school year done, the newcomers were still catching up and the classroom has had to deal with several disruptive students who didn't go through formal PK (instead coming from some of DC's daycare factories - which also get DCPS monies). We got through that and the classrooms operate great now. Later grades saw some turnover, but things look more solid now. Hopefully the churn is done.
So my unsolicited advice is this: If you're sure the school you'd like to switch to is better for your kid, then GO, but if you have doubts, stay where you are. The grass is rarely greener, and you might be surprised by how things work out.