Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP is only looking at PK, they will be fine at a DCPS or TR or MV8. Btw, my kid went to JO Wilson for PK and there was virtually no screen use. I am sure they use screens a lot in upper grades (one of the reasons we left) but it's not a thing in PK. The occasional dance video, that's it. No kids on tablets, no academics taught via app, etc. It was just songs and play and art and recess, plus like 15 minutes a day if small group time to work on pre-literacy and early math skills as prep for K. It was great. I have high standards for schools and we loved JO for PK.

Past PK, the picture is more complicated. I will note that when I toured TR4, I saw multiple classrooms of 2nd and 3rd graders all in devices wearing headphones. It was an immediate no for me. And they were classes with subs. I thought it was crazy that this is what they were doing on a tour day, but at least it's honest.

Your past experience does not portray the current. Central has recently passed down mandatory academic requirements in ECE which includes the use of screens. Lots of title 1 ECE uses screens already for math and ELA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally I would rank Two Rivers quite low. Have you seen their little playground right up against the main road there? No thanks.

We ended up at Langley over Two Rivers and have no regrets.

How do you like Langley? From the open house it seems they use a lot of screens. Although the limited students means more attention to my child. We are thinking short term after PK we are considering private.

If you're the private school type, you won't like Langley. I like it just fine and I don't mind about the screens. It has nicer outdoor space than Two Rivers, and the ECE teachers are great. I really don't go for the Two Rivers vibe. Their short waitlist speaks for itself-- they used to have multiple hundreds of kids waitlisted so I don't know what happened to crater it.

I tend to judge school performance relative to demographics, and Two Rivers is certainly not over performing when looked at in that light!

Anonymous wrote:Personally I would rank Two Rivers quite low. Have you seen their little playground right up against the main road there? No thanks.

We ended up at Langley over Two Rivers and have no regrets.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP is only looking at PK, they will be fine at a DCPS or TR or MV8. Btw, my kid went to JO Wilson for PK and there was virtually no screen use. I am sure they use screens a lot in upper grades (one of the reasons we left) but it's not a thing in PK. The occasional dance video, that's it. No kids on tablets, no academics taught via app, etc. It was just songs and play and art and recess, plus like 15 minutes a day if small group time to work on pre-literacy and early math skills as prep for K. It was great. I have high standards for schools and we loved JO for PK.

Past PK, the picture is more complicated. I will note that when I toured TR4, I saw multiple classrooms of 2nd and 3rd graders all in devices wearing headphones. It was an immediate no for me. And they were classes with subs. I thought it was crazy that this is what they were doing on a tour day, but at least it's honest.

Your past experience does not portray the current. Central has recently passed down mandatory academic requirements in ECE which includes the use of screens. Lots of title 1 ECE uses screens already for math and ELA.

How about people's current experience? Which you also continue to discount in every thread ...

How about people just answer OP’s question instead of all the posters on here who have no kids at either school, trying to convince her to consider DCPS schools.

People are trying to tell her that TR stinks, to the point where nearby DCPS are more popular despite using more screens.

There you go. This.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP is only looking at PK, they will be fine at a DCPS or TR or MV8. Btw, my kid went to JO Wilson for PK and there was virtually no screen use. I am sure they use screens a lot in upper grades (one of the reasons we left) but it's not a thing in PK. The occasional dance video, that's it. No kids on tablets, no academics taught via app, etc. It was just songs and play and art and recess, plus like 15 minutes a day if small group time to work on pre-literacy and early math skills as prep for K. It was great. I have high standards for schools and we loved JO for PK.

Past PK, the picture is more complicated. I will note that when I toured TR4, I saw multiple classrooms of 2nd and 3rd graders all in devices wearing headphones. It was an immediate no for me. And they were classes with subs. I thought it was crazy that this is what they were doing on a tour day, but at least it's honest.

Your past experience does not portray the current. Central has recently passed down mandatory academic requirements in ECE which includes the use of screens. Lots of title 1 ECE uses screens already for math and ELA.

How about people's current experience? Which you also continue to discount in every thread ...

How about people just answer OP’s question instead of all the posters on here who have no kids at either school, trying to convince her to consider DCPS schools.

People are trying to tell her that TR stinks, to the point where nearby DCPS are more popular despite using more screens.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP is only looking at PK, they will be fine at a DCPS or TR or MV8. Btw, my kid went to JO Wilson for PK and there was virtually no screen use. I am sure they use screens a lot in upper grades (one of the reasons we left) but it's not a thing in PK. The occasional dance video, that's it. No kids on tablets, no academics taught via app, etc. It was just songs and play and art and recess, plus like 15 minutes a day if small group time to work on pre-literacy and early math skills as prep for K. It was great. I have high standards for schools and we loved JO for PK.

Past PK, the picture is more complicated. I will note that when I toured TR4, I saw multiple classrooms of 2nd and 3rd graders all in devices wearing headphones. It was an immediate no for me. And they were classes with subs. I thought it was crazy that this is what they were doing on a tour day, but at least it's honest.

Your past experience does not portray the current. Central has recently passed down mandatory academic requirements in ECE which includes the use of screens. Lots of title 1 ECE uses screens already for math and ELA.

How about people's current experience? Which you also continue to discount in every thread ...

How about people just answer OP’s question instead of all the posters on here who have no kids at either school, trying to convince her to consider DCPS schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP is only looking at PK, they will be fine at a DCPS or TR or MV8. Btw, my kid went to JO Wilson for PK and there was virtually no screen use. I am sure they use screens a lot in upper grades (one of the reasons we left) but it's not a thing in PK. The occasional dance video, that's it. No kids on tablets, no academics taught via app, etc. It was just songs and play and art and recess, plus like 15 minutes a day if small group time to work on pre-literacy and early math skills as prep for K. It was great. I have high standards for schools and we loved JO for PK.

Past PK, the picture is more complicated. I will note that when I toured TR4, I saw multiple classrooms of 2nd and 3rd graders all in devices wearing headphones. It was an immediate no for me. And they were classes with subs. I thought it was crazy that this is what they were doing on a tour day, but at least it's honest.

Your past experience does not portray the current. Central has recently passed down mandatory academic requirements in ECE which includes the use of screens. Lots of title 1 ECE uses screens already for math and ELA.

How about people's current experience? Which you also continue to discount in every thread ...

How about people just answer OP’s question instead of all the posters on here who have no kids at either school, trying to convince her to consider DCPS schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP is only looking at PK, they will be fine at a DCPS or TR or MV8. Btw, my kid went to JO Wilson for PK and there was virtually no screen use. I am sure they use screens a lot in upper grades (one of the reasons we left) but it's not a thing in PK. The occasional dance video, that's it. No kids on tablets, no academics taught via app, etc. It was just songs and play and art and recess, plus like 15 minutes a day if small group time to work on pre-literacy and early math skills as prep for K. It was great. I have high standards for schools and we loved JO for PK.

Past PK, the picture is more complicated. I will note that when I toured TR4, I saw multiple classrooms of 2nd and 3rd graders all in devices wearing headphones. It was an immediate no for me. And they were classes with subs. I thought it was crazy that this is what they were doing on a tour day, but at least it's honest.

Your past experience does not portray the current. Central has recently passed down mandatory academic requirements in ECE which includes the use of screens. Lots of title 1 ECE uses screens already for math and ELA.

How about people's current experience? Which you also continue to discount in every thread ...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP is only looking at PK, they will be fine at a DCPS or TR or MV8. Btw, my kid went to JO Wilson for PK and there was virtually no screen use. I am sure they use screens a lot in upper grades (one of the reasons we left) but it's not a thing in PK. The occasional dance video, that's it. No kids on tablets, no academics taught via app, etc. It was just songs and play and art and recess, plus like 15 minutes a day if small group time to work on pre-literacy and early math skills as prep for K. It was great. I have high standards for schools and we loved JO for PK.

Past PK, the picture is more complicated. I will note that when I toured TR4, I saw multiple classrooms of 2nd and 3rd graders all in devices wearing headphones. It was an immediate no for me. And they were classes with subs. I thought it was crazy that this is what they were doing on a tour day, but at least it's honest.

Your past experience does not portray the current. Central has recently passed down mandatory academic requirements in ECE which includes the use of screens. Lots of title 1 ECE uses screens already for math and ELA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering these two schools for PK3 and would like inputs from parents who have kids in either of these.

We live walking distance from both and like that there is minimal to no technology use. Thank you

Above makes no sense. Either you prioritize spanish and immersion or you don’t.

If you don’t prioritize spanish, don’t choose MV. Of all the immersion charters, MV has the strongest spanish and many non-hispanics families are either proficient or fluent in spanish.

Go with TR. I hear the ECE is pretty good.

As to some posters saying poor DCPS schools like JO or Langley, no way. Read the post about DCPS and screens in ECE. Total disaster and developmental inappropriate. And so easy to get into either schools if you want later anyway because families leave.

OP would hate Langley. But that's beside the point. OP needs to really think about why Two Rivers made so many waitlist offers. TR4 admitted 42 kids and waitlisted 49 (from 359 total applicants). Then made 36 waitlist offers, so probably got through their list. And you can add the Equitable Access data to that. Langley had 132 applicants, matched 42 and had a wait-list of 44, and then made just 4 waitlist offers. So Langley seems to have been the harder school to get into, and matched or waitlisted a higher proportion of its applicant pool than TR4 did. And this is *despite* TR4 having better CAPE scores than Langley, and *despite* TR4 having arguably a more appealing middle school than Langley feeds to, and *despite* having all the unappealing things about DCPS like too much screen time. What could account for Langley being overall more appealing than TR4? Really ponder this, OP.

Who cares about the waitlist? Langley is not hard to get into at all.

All DCPS schools are out because OP does not want screens.

She is asking about MV and TR. There is no Langely and your desperation in trying to convince her is showing.

I would be very interested to see the basis for this week's brand-new DCUM truism that there are no screens in DCPCS. What?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering these two schools for PK3 and would like inputs from parents who have kids in either of these.

We live walking distance from both and like that there is minimal to no technology use. Thank you

Above makes no sense. Either you prioritize spanish and immersion or you don’t.

If you don’t prioritize spanish, don’t choose MV. Of all the immersion charters, MV has the strongest spanish and many non-hispanics families are either proficient or fluent in spanish.

Go with TR. I hear the ECE is pretty good.

As to some posters saying poor DCPS schools like JO or Langley, no way. Read the post about DCPS and screens in ECE. Total disaster and developmental inappropriate. And so easy to get into either schools if you want later anyway because families leave.

OP would hate Langley. But that's beside the point. OP needs to really think about why Two Rivers made so many waitlist offers. TR4 admitted 42 kids and waitlisted 49 (from 359 total applicants). Then made 36 waitlist offers, so probably got through their list. And you can add the Equitable Access data to that. Langley had 132 applicants, matched 42 and had a wait-list of 44, and then made just 4 waitlist offers. So Langley seems to have been the harder school to get into, and matched or waitlisted a higher proportion of its applicant pool than TR4 did. And this is *despite* TR4 having better CAPE scores than Langley, and *despite* TR4 having arguably a more appealing middle school than Langley feeds to, and *despite* having all the unappealing things about DCPS like too much screen time. What could account for Langley being overall more appealing than TR4? Really ponder this, OP.

Who cares about the waitlist? Langley is not hard to get into at all.

All DCPS schools are out because OP does not want screens.

She is asking about MV and TR. There is no Langely and your desperation in trying to convince her is showing.

Anonymous wrote:If OP is only looking at PK, they will be fine at a DCPS or TR or MV8. Btw, my kid went to JO Wilson for PK and there was virtually no screen use. I am sure they use screens a lot in upper grades (one of the reasons we left) but it's not a thing in PK. The occasional dance video, that's it. No kids on tablets, no academics taught via app, etc. It was just songs and play and art and recess, plus like 15 minutes a day if small group time to work on pre-literacy and early math skills as prep for K. It was great. I have high standards for schools and we loved JO for PK.

Past PK, the picture is more complicated. I will note that when I toured TR4, I saw multiple classrooms of 2nd and 3rd graders all in devices wearing headphones. It was an immediate no for me. And they were classes with subs. I thought it was crazy that this is what they were doing on a tour day, but at least it's honest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering these two schools for PK3 and would like inputs from parents who have kids in either of these.

We live walking distance from both and like that there is minimal to no technology use. Thank you

Above makes no sense. Either you prioritize spanish and immersion or you don’t.

If you don’t prioritize spanish, don’t choose MV. Of all the immersion charters, MV has the strongest spanish and many non-hispanics families are either proficient or fluent in spanish.

Go with TR. I hear the ECE is pretty good.

As to some posters saying poor DCPS schools like JO or Langley, no way. Read the post about DCPS and screens in ECE. Total disaster and developmental inappropriate. And so easy to get into either schools if you want later anyway because families leave.

OP would hate Langley. But that's beside the point. OP needs to really think about why Two Rivers made so many waitlist offers. TR4 admitted 42 kids and waitlisted 49 (from 359 total applicants). Then made 36 waitlist offers, so probably got through their list. And you can add the Equitable Access data to that. Langley had 132 applicants, matched 42 and had a wait-list of 44, and then made just 4 waitlist offers. So Langley seems to have been the harder school to get into, and matched or waitlisted a higher proportion of its applicant pool than TR4 did. And this is *despite* TR4 having better CAPE scores than Langley, and *despite* TR4 having arguably a more appealing middle school than Langley feeds to, and *despite* having all the unappealing things about DCPS like too much screen time. What could account for Langley being overall more appealing than TR4? Really ponder this, OP.

Who cares about the waitlist? Langley is not hard to get into at all.

All DCPS schools are out because OP does not want screens.

She is asking about MV and TR. There is no Langely and your desperation in trying to convince her is showing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering these two schools for PK3 and would like inputs from parents who have kids in either of these.

We live walking distance from both and like that there is minimal to no technology use. Thank you

Above makes no sense. Either you prioritize spanish and immersion or you don’t.

If you don’t prioritize spanish, don’t choose MV. Of all the immersion charters, MV has the strongest spanish and many non-hispanics families are either proficient or fluent in spanish.

Go with TR. I hear the ECE is pretty good.

As to some posters saying poor DCPS schools like JO or Langley, no way. Read the post about DCPS and screens in ECE. Total disaster and developmental inappropriate. And so easy to get into either schools if you want later anyway because families leave.

OP would hate Langley. But that's beside the point. OP needs to really think about why Two Rivers made so many waitlist offers. TR4 admitted 42 kids and waitlisted 49 (from 359 total applicants). Then made 36 waitlist offers, so probably got through their list. And you can add the Equitable Access data to that. Langley had 132 applicants, matched 42 and had a wait-list of 44, and then made just 4 waitlist offers. So Langley seems to have been the harder school to get into, and matched or waitlisted a higher proportion of its applicant pool than TR4 did. And this is *despite* TR4 having better CAPE scores than Langley, and *despite* TR4 having arguably a more appealing middle school than Langley feeds to, and *despite* having all the unappealing things about DCPS like too much screen time. What could account for Langley being overall more appealing than TR4? Really ponder this, OP.