Anonymous wrote:The jealousy and pettiness and sense of victimhood on this thread is something to behold. A gentle reminder that DC public schools are not very good. Standardized testing suggests your kids would get a better education if they went to any random public school in Iowa. So the idea that if a kid "reshirts" or, put more directly, repeats a grade at a mediocre school, that he or she will get some amazing benefit and be transformed into a math whiz or something seems disconnected from reality.
Anonymous wrote:The jealousy and pettiness and sense of victimhood on this thread is something to behold. A gentle reminder that DC public schools are not very good. Standardized testing suggests your kids would get a better education if they went to any random public school in Iowa. So the idea that if a kid "reshirts" or, put more directly, repeats a grade at a mediocre school, that he or she will get some amazing benefit and be transformed into a math whiz or something seems disconnected from reality.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was held back when I was little. No one called it redshirting then. I won't go into the reasons for privacy's sake. But the idea that this gave me some advantage over my classmates is just bizarre and ridiculous and kinda paranoid. I know everyone here is in high dudgeon and luxuriating in their own sense of self-righteousness, but you're really making a very big mountain out of a very small molehill. It's really not that big of deal.
Think of it this way: It gave you an advantage over yourself that was not red-shirted, right? That's what your parents wanted to do it? So, imagine the you whose parents don't go to the news... you're getting, at the very least, an advantage over them. There are some aspects of school that are zero-sum, including selective admissions later on, and PPs have eloquently explained how a culture of red-shirting changes the bar for everyone in problematic ways.
You must really, really hate affirmative action.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was held back when I was little. No one called it redshirting then. I won't go into the reasons for privacy's sake. But the idea that this gave me some advantage over my classmates is just bizarre and ridiculous and kinda paranoid. I know everyone here is in high dudgeon and luxuriating in their own sense of self-righteousness, but you're really making a very big mountain out of a very small molehill. It's really not that big of deal.
Think of it this way: It gave you an advantage over yourself that was not red-shirted, right? That's what your parents wanted to do it? So, imagine the you whose parents don't go to the news... you're getting, at the very least, an advantage over them. There are some aspects of school that are zero-sum, including selective admissions later on, and PPs have eloquently explained how a culture of red-shirting changes the bar for everyone in problematic ways.
That's absurd. That's like saying no student should ever be allowed to have a math tutor because it's unfair to all the other kids who didnt have the same math tutor. And no, no one has explained why any of this is "problematic" for everyone else. They've only complied a list of tortured scenarios, build on questionable assumptions, that, in a million years, will never become reality.
Way to move the goalposts. This person was asking why redshirting is considered an advantage. I explained why. Tutoring *is* an advantage. Obviously not everything that gives an advantage should be banned (e.g., studying), but similarly, some things that give an advantage should obviously be banned (e.g. cheating). That said, whether to ban something because it provides an advantage is a totally different question than PP’s dopey why’s it an advantage question.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Here is another question- if these parents are allowed to just enroll their kids in whatever grade they want, why cant a parent who misses a grade cut off by a few days enroll their kid too young? Ex my child’s birthday is October 5th and I don’t want to pay for another year of daycare. Let them enroll in PK3.
People really don’t see where all of this leads if we don’t stick to the birthday cutoffs?
Pre-K 3 and 4 are different. They’re not compulsory and DCPS doesn’t need to provide them.
Tried to do this for our October child and was told there is no flexibility in DCPS for this. Didn't occur to me to call the news! Maybe next time.
Anonymous wrote:Policies like this explains why no one ever responds DCPS has the best schools: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/1279885.page
What do parents think are the goal for these kids? To start companies? Solve global warming? What education do kids need for the future?
Or yes, argue over phonics for September vs October birthdays.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Going strictly by the age guidelines, you could have the following situation:
Kid A could have been a micro preemie who was due at the beginning of January, but was born on September 30th.
Kid B could have been due on September 23rd, but instead was 8 days overdue and born on October 1st.
According to DCPS guidelines, Kid A has to enroll in kindergarten this fall, but Kid B can enroll next year. Does that seem right to you?
There should be a little flexibility. I was born early, which made me eligible to enroll for kindergarten a year earlier than if I’d been born on my due date. I’m glad my parents held me back. I feel like I was in the correct grade and my classmates were peers.
There is flexibility. There’s a process. And as stated before, for things like developmental delays, ESL, traumatic history, neurodivergence, etc. If these parents fell into an any of these categories, they’d make sure that was the headline. If their kid was a micropreemie, they’d have put it up on billboards during this ridiculous campaign. That’s not the case. They’re naturally and normally near the end of DCPS’ cutoff (and not all are late September…) and have just always thought they were special. They are legitimately making this harder for people who do need this process and it’s EMBARRASSING.
Wait - you know of a “process”? A clear, legitimate process? Can you share more?
How do you go about doing this?
I’ll wait…..
The whole issue here is that there isn’t a process or consistency for any of this or anything DCPS does. DCPS created this disaster but failing to have any real procedures in place. They caused this by allowing the lottery and enrollment site to allow enrollment for kids past the “cut off” without question.
What they should do now, is walk it back - cooperate and then put in place clear rules going forward.
So give these parents exactly what they demand but then every parent after gets a no? Squeaky wheel and all. And those squeaky wheels sure do seem to be concentrated in one part of DC.
There are different types of squeaky wheels from all over the city.
Thanks for confirming that there was/is no process
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was held back when I was little. No one called it redshirting then. I won't go into the reasons for privacy's sake. But the idea that this gave me some advantage over my classmates is just bizarre and ridiculous and kinda paranoid. I know everyone here is in high dudgeon and luxuriating in their own sense of self-righteousness, but you're really making a very big mountain out of a very small molehill. It's really not that big of deal.
Think of it this way: It gave you an advantage over yourself that was not red-shirted, right? That's what your parents wanted to do it? So, imagine the you whose parents don't go to the news... you're getting, at the very least, an advantage over them. There are some aspects of school that are zero-sum, including selective admissions later on, and PPs have eloquently explained how a culture of red-shirting changes the bar for everyone in problematic ways.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Going strictly by the age guidelines, you could have the following situation:
Kid A could have been a micro preemie who was due at the beginning of January, but was born on September 30th.
Kid B could have been due on September 23rd, but instead was 8 days overdue and born on October 1st.
According to DCPS guidelines, Kid A has to enroll in kindergarten this fall, but Kid B can enroll next year. Does that seem right to you?
There should be a little flexibility. I was born early, which made me eligible to enroll for kindergarten a year earlier than if I’d been born on my due date. I’m glad my parents held me back. I feel like I was in the correct grade and my classmates were peers.
There is flexibility. There’s a process. And as stated before, for things like developmental delays, ESL, traumatic history, neurodivergence, etc. If these parents fell into an any of these categories, they’d make sure that was the headline. If their kid was a micropreemie, they’d have put it up on billboards during this ridiculous campaign. That’s not the case. They’re naturally and normally near the end of DCPS’ cutoff (and not all are late September…) and have just always thought they were special. They are legitimately making this harder for people who do need this process and it’s EMBARRASSING.
Wait - you know of a “process”? A clear, legitimate process? Can you share more?
How do you go about doing this?
I’ll wait…..
The whole issue here is that there isn’t a process or consistency for any of this or anything DCPS does. DCPS created this disaster but failing to have any real procedures in place. They caused this by allowing the lottery and enrollment site to allow enrollment for kids past the “cut off” without question.
What they should do now, is walk it back - cooperate and then put in place clear rules going forward.
The rules are that your kid can't redshirt without the principal's signoff. That's always been the rule. At most, what has changed is the amount of discretion the principal has now that Lafayette moms screwed this up for kids with actual issues so very badly by causing DCPS to focus on what standards/process principals themselves are utilizing. (FWIW the MySchool lottery actually prompts you to confirm your intent if you try to misregister your child.)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Here is another question- if these parents are allowed to just enroll their kids in whatever grade they want, why cant a parent who misses a grade cut off by a few days enroll their kid too young? Ex my child’s birthday is October 5th and I don’t want to pay for another year of daycare. Let them enroll in PK3.
People really don’t see where all of this leads if we don’t stick to the birthday cutoffs?
Pre-K 3 and 4 are different. They’re not compulsory and DCPS doesn’t need to provide them.
Tried to do this for our October child and was told there is no flexibility in DCPS for this. Didn't occur to me to call the news! Maybe next time.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Going strictly by the age guidelines, you could have the following situation:
Kid A could have been a micro preemie who was due at the beginning of January, but was born on September 30th.
Kid B could have been due on September 23rd, but instead was 8 days overdue and born on October 1st.
According to DCPS guidelines, Kid A has to enroll in kindergarten this fall, but Kid B can enroll next year. Does that seem right to you?
There should be a little flexibility. I was born early, which made me eligible to enroll for kindergarten a year earlier than if I’d been born on my due date. I’m glad my parents held me back. I feel like I was in the correct grade and my classmates were peers.
There is flexibility. There’s a process. And as stated before, for things like developmental delays, ESL, traumatic history, neurodivergence, etc. If these parents fell into an any of these categories, they’d make sure that was the headline. If their kid was a micropreemie, they’d have put it up on billboards during this ridiculous campaign. That’s not the case. They’re naturally and normally near the end of DCPS’ cutoff (and not all are late September…) and have just always thought they were special. They are legitimately making this harder for people who do need this process and it’s EMBARRASSING.
Wait - you know of a “process”? A clear, legitimate process? Can you share more?
How do you go about doing this?
I’ll wait…..
The whole issue here is that there isn’t a process or consistency for any of this or anything DCPS does. DCPS created this disaster but failing to have any real procedures in place. They caused this by allowing the lottery and enrollment site to allow enrollment for kids past the “cut off” without question.
What they should do now, is walk it back - cooperate and then put in place clear rules going forward.
So give these parents exactly what they demand but then every parent after gets a no? Squeaky wheel and all. And those squeaky wheels sure do seem to be concentrated in one part of DC.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Here is another question- if these parents are allowed to just enroll their kids in whatever grade they want, why cant a parent who misses a grade cut off by a few days enroll their kid too young? Ex my child’s birthday is October 5th and I don’t want to pay for another year of daycare. Let them enroll in PK3.
People really don’t see where all of this leads if we don’t stick to the birthday cutoffs?
Tried to do this for our October child and was told there is no flexibility in DCPS for this. Didn't occur to me to call the news! Maybe next time.