Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Lottery for all will only destroy what gains have been made in DC schools.
JKLM school, Brent and similar schools improve based on parent effort in the PTA and at home with their kids. Making every school in DC look like the average school in DC will drive people out. People invest in their neighborhood school in large part because they are vested in the neighborhood. Without a strong connection why bother.
I am OOB at a JKLM and I would not want to see IB preference eliminated. I would rather a few OOB slots held while the other schools in the city improve slowly as they are (i.e. Brent, Shepard Park etc etc.)
I suppose its silly to even respond to the idea since it is such a non starter.
In DC only the poor suffer with bad schools. The poor are also predominantly AA/black. Why should they get stuck with the craptastic aspects of DCPS? And by "they" I mean the kids who didn't have a say in who their parents are.
I think they should go for it. Force everyone into the same boat.
I would love to meet the kids who *did* have a say in who their parents are--I'm sure they are remarkable!
you are so witty.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Lottery for all will only destroy what gains have been made in DC schools.
JKLM school, Brent and similar schools improve based on parent effort in the PTA and at home with their kids. Making every school in DC look like the average school in DC will drive people out. People invest in their neighborhood school in large part because they are vested in the neighborhood. Without a strong connection why bother.
I am OOB at a JKLM and I would not want to see IB preference eliminated. I would rather a few OOB slots held while the other schools in the city improve slowly as they are (i.e. Brent, Shepard Park etc etc.)
I suppose its silly to even respond to the idea since it is such a non starter.
In DC only the poor suffer with bad schools. The poor are also predominantly AA/black. Why should they get stuck with the craptastic aspects of DCPS? And by "they" I mean the kids who didn't have a say in who their parents are.
I think they should go for it. Force everyone into the same boat.
I would love to meet the kids who *did* have a say in who their parents are--I'm sure they are remarkable!
you are so witty.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Lottery for all will only destroy what gains have been made in DC schools.
JKLM school, Brent and similar schools improve based on parent effort in the PTA and at home with their kids. Making every school in DC look like the average school in DC will drive people out. People invest in their neighborhood school in large part because they are vested in the neighborhood. Without a strong connection why bother.
I am OOB at a JKLM and I would not want to see IB preference eliminated. I would rather a few OOB slots held while the other schools in the city improve slowly as they are (i.e. Brent, Shepard Park etc etc.)
I suppose its silly to even respond to the idea since it is such a non starter.
In DC only the poor suffer with bad schools. The poor are also predominantly AA/black. Why should they get stuck with the craptastic aspects of DCPS? And by "they" I mean the kids who didn't have a say in who their parents are.
I think they should go for it. Force everyone into the same boat.
Anonymous wrote:Lottery for all will only destroy what gains have been made in DC schools.
JKLM school, Brent and similar schools improve based on parent effort in the PTA and at home with their kids. Making every school in DC look like the average school in DC will drive people out. People invest in their neighborhood school in large part because they are vested in the neighborhood. Without a strong connection why bother.
I am OOB at a JKLM and I would not want to see IB preference eliminated. I would rather a few OOB slots held while the other schools in the city improve slowly as they are (i.e. Brent, Shepard Park etc etc.)
I suppose its silly to even respond to the idea since it is such a non starter.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:In the 2010 democratic primary, 80% of Ward 3 Ds voted for Adrian Fenty. You think a lot of these folks would tolerate any attempt to water down their rights to Deal/Wilson with some sort of open boundary scheme?
They don't have to tolerate it. They don't make the decisions. Yuppies here still don't have the numbers to affect political outcomes. It's still Chocolate City with the numbers at the poll booth. Unhappy families can leave if they're unhappy. Others will take their place. Or families can go private. They still pay taxes, which funds education. Win-win for the city either way.
Very insightful thinking. That is, assuming you want DC to become Detroit.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The press release implies that they are going to look at options for charters, such as creating a neighborhood preference. Would they be able to do this given that the charter law is a federal law? Wouldn't that require action by congress?
I think it would be great if language immersion charters could reserve a certain portion of the seats to true native household speakers (as opposed to, say, a child who goes to a bilingual daycare but speaks English at home), verified by a written and/or oral test. (My child would not benefit from this directly, as we are an English-speaking family, but I think it would make the language immersion schools much better for everyone.)
I agree that language preference would be better for the school, but seems unfair from the point of view of students applying. Under your scenario, a child from a Spanish speaking household would have preference at Mundo Verde, Oyster-Adams, LAMB, Tyler SI, (others I'm likely missing), and still have the option of their in-boundary school, along with the same lottery access to all the other DCPS and charter schools, while a mono-lingual child would have the latter but not the former. That sort of unequal access seems against the spirit of public education and school choice. Of course at the secondary level, SWW, Banneker, Ellington all have selective admissions. Clearly, I have mixed feelings about the subject.
Anonymous wrote:Lottery for all will only destroy what gains have been made in DC schools.
JKLM school, Brent and similar schools improve based on parent effort in the PTA and at home with their kids. Making every school in DC look like the average school in DC will drive people out. People invest in their neighborhood school in large part because they are vested in the neighborhood. Without a strong connection why bother.
I am OOB at a JKLM and I would not want to see IB preference eliminated. I would rather a few OOB slots held while the other schools in the city improve slowly as they are (i.e. Brent, Shepard Park etc etc.)
I suppose its silly to even respond to the idea since it is such a non starter.
Anonymous wrote:Lottery for all school is just silly. So will they do away with rights to your IB school? I don't get the idea.
Anonymous wrote:Lottery for all school is just silly. So will they do away with rights to your IB school? I don't get the idea.