Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Op, I am confused. Are you asserting that the unprepared K kids result from IB students who don't get into ECE at their neighborhood schools? If they applied- they would beat out the OB kids, right? So the problem is that folks IB for your school don't want ECE. Your beef is not with OOB folks- but with your IB population.

This is exactly right. The OOB kids don't get in unless there are available slots after all the IB kids are placed. What OP really is arguing for is that her school's PS and PK classes remain under-enrolled rather that be filled with kids who are IB at JKLM. Which is, of course, ridiculous. She's also claiming that the presence is these children results in underprepared IB kindergarteners. Equally ridiculous.

Yes, OP, what schools are you talking about anyway? And which is the school with 25 percent Oyster IB at PK?

I wonder this, too. Maybe Francis-Stevens?

Bumping my question because I still don't see an answer. FS and Marie Reed are decent guesses but I would be surprised, because they are both popular with WLs, are they not? Certainly MR has a long WL. I thought FS did too. Also it's unusual to refer to Adams Morgan as "lower NW".

I am at an EOTP school and yes, I have seen JKLM/Oyster parents at our open houses hoping to use our school for PK3 or even PK4. I have never resented them for trying. We all gotta do what we gotta do in this city. We have so many IB on the WL that the JKLM/O applicants don't have a snowflake's chance, so it's academic anyway.

So OP or anyone else, can you tell us which are these schools that are simultaneously so attractive to JKLM/O that they choose it over private preschool, yet have a lot of space for OOB, so much space that one of them is even one quarter full of Oyster IB?

I am not saying I don't believe it but I am still scratching my head as to which schools fit this description. It must be schools that have very small geographic boundaries or small number of public school kids relative to PK class sizes? Which are these schools in lower NW? I know that Hearst fits this description in upper NW.

+100

Lower NW comprises the Cardozo Feeder schools for the most part from Tubman and Bruce Monroe in the north to Marie Reed in the West across to Marie Reed, Garrison, Seaton, Cleveland and Thompson. I don't think Ross or FS with their long WLs have lots of upper NW squatters at them for PK.

You are responding to my question. Really?? I have never heard this area referred to as "lower NW", on DCUM or anywhere. It's usually "EOTP" on DCUM, and if you are going as far east as Seaton and Cleveland in Shaw/Le Droit/Bloomingdale, then that's usually referred to as center city or near NW. If "lower NW" means anything, it would more logically refer to Georgetown.

Anyway OP has posted again since my question was repeated, and still hasn't answered, so he or she is obviously more interested in stirring the pot than having a real conversation about this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Op, I am confused. Are you asserting that the unprepared K kids result from IB students who don't get into ECE at their neighborhood schools? If they applied- they would beat out the OB kids, right? So the problem is that folks IB for your school don't want ECE. Your beef is not with OOB folks- but with your IB population.

This is exactly right. The OOB kids don't get in unless there are available slots after all the IB kids are placed. What OP really is arguing for is that her school's PS and PK classes remain under-enrolled rather that be filled with kids who are IB at JKLM. Which is, of course, ridiculous. She's also claiming that the presence is these children results in underprepared IB kindergarteners. Equally ridiculous.

Yes, OP, what schools are you talking about anyway? And which is the school with 25 percent Oyster IB at PK?

I wonder this, too. Maybe Francis-Stevens?

Bumping my question because I still don't see an answer. FS and Marie Reed are decent guesses but I would be surprised, because they are both popular with WLs, are they not? Certainly MR has a long WL. I thought FS did too. Also it's unusual to refer to Adams Morgan as "lower NW".

I am at an EOTP school and yes, I have seen JKLM/Oyster parents at our open houses hoping to use our school for PK3 or even PK4. I have never resented them for trying. We all gotta do what we gotta do in this city. We have so many IB on the WL that the JKLM/O applicants don't have a snowflake's chance, so it's academic anyway.

So OP or anyone else, can you tell us which are these schools that are simultaneously so attractive to JKLM/O that they choose it over private preschool, yet have a lot of space for OOB, so much space that one of them is even one quarter full of Oyster IB?

I am not saying I don't believe it but I am still scratching my head as to which schools fit this description. It must be schools that have very small geographic boundaries or small number of public school kids relative to PK class sizes? Which are these schools in lower NW? I know that Hearst fits this description in upper NW.

+100

Lower NW comprises the Cardozo Feeder schools for the most part from Tubman and Bruce Monroe in the north to Marie Reed in the West across to Marie Reed, Garrison, Seaton, Cleveland and Thompson. I don't think Ross or FS with their long WLs have lots of upper NW squatters at them for PK.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Op, I am confused. Are you asserting that the unprepared K kids result from IB students who don't get into ECE at their neighborhood schools? If they applied- they would beat out the OB kids, right? So the problem is that folks IB for your school don't want ECE. Your beef is not with OOB folks- but with your IB population.

This is exactly right. The OOB kids don't get in unless there are available slots after all the IB kids are placed. What OP really is arguing for is that her school's PS and PK classes remain under-enrolled rather that be filled with kids who are IB at JKLM. Which is, of course, ridiculous. She's also claiming that the presence is these children results in underprepared IB kindergarteners. Equally ridiculous.

No. OP here. We want our classes full. But at K we get OOB kids who are underprepared who could have been in our school since PK3 but were displaced by Ward 3 families who were space hogging for a year or two. Surely you remember what it feels like to have students who need a bit of a lift JKLM?

Seems like Ward 3's progressive values go out the window when they have can free daycare.

But most likely those students are at PK3 elsewhere or would not have chosen to go to PK at all. Not sure why you think they would be better prepared at your school than anywhere else.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:8:50 spells out the argument well.

Basicallh they are saying please don't take up our OOB spots if you dont want to commit long term. Leave those for families who really want to stay at the school.

I've never been at a DCPS but it's pretty clear to me.

This exactly. Join a school for the long term, not because you are only staying one year and will not join the community. This is a completely rational request. If you don't understand it then you don't understand what it takes to build s stable school community.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Op, I am confused. Are you asserting that the unprepared K kids result from IB students who don't get into ECE at their neighborhood schools? If they applied- they would beat out the OB kids, right? So the problem is that folks IB for your school don't want ECE. Your beef is not with OOB folks- but with your IB population.

This is exactly right. The OOB kids don't get in unless there are available slots after all the IB kids are placed. What OP really is arguing for is that her school's PS and PK classes remain under-enrolled rather that be filled with kids who are IB at JKLM. Which is, of course, ridiculous. She's also claiming that the presence is these children results in underprepared IB kindergarteners. Equally ridiculous.

No. OP here. We want our classes full. But at K we get OOB kids who are underprepared who could have been in our school since PK3 but were displaced by Ward 3 families who were space hogging for a year or two. Surely you remember what it feels like to have students who need a bit of a lift JKLM?

Seems like Ward 3's progressive values go out the window when they have can free daycare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Op, I am confused. Are you asserting that the unprepared K kids result from IB students who don't get into ECE at their neighborhood schools? If they applied- they would beat out the OB kids, right? So the problem is that folks IB for your school don't want ECE. Your beef is not with OOB folks- but with your IB population.

This is exactly right. The OOB kids don't get in unless there are available slots after all the IB kids are placed. What OP really is arguing for is that her school's PS and PK classes remain under-enrolled rather that be filled with kids who are IB at JKLM. Which is, of course, ridiculous. She's also claiming that the presence is these children results in underprepared IB kindergarteners. Equally ridiculous.

Yes, OP, what schools are you talking about anyway? And which is the school with 25 percent Oyster IB at PK?

I wonder this, too. Maybe Francis-Stevens?

Bumping my question because I still don't see an answer. FS and Marie Reed are decent guesses but I would be surprised, because they are both popular with WLs, are they not? Certainly MR has a long WL. I thought FS did too. Also it's unusual to refer to Adams Morgan as "lower NW".

I am at an EOTP school and yes, I have seen JKLM/Oyster parents at our open houses hoping to use our school for PK3 or even PK4. I have never resented them for trying. We all gotta do what we gotta do in this city. We have so many IB on the WL that the JKLM/O applicants don't have a snowflake's chance, so it's academic anyway.

So OP or anyone else, can you tell us which are these schools that are simultaneously so attractive to JKLM/O that they choose it over private preschool, yet have a lot of space for OOB, so much space that one of them is even one quarter full of Oyster IB?

I am not saying I don't believe it but I am still scratching my head as to which schools fit this description. It must be schools that have very small geographic boundaries or small number of public school kids relative to PK class sizes? Which are these schools in lower NW? I know that Hearst fits this description in upper NW.

+100

Just as an aside, this happens in other ways at JKLMs as well. At Lafayette a whole slew of PKers leave after PK to head to Blessed Sacrement. It happens - everyone survives.

I was just going to post this. It happens frequently yet life goes on.

Just as an aside, this happens in other ways at JKLMs as well. At Lafayette a whole slew of PKers leave after PK to head to Blessed Sacrement. It happens - everyone survives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Op, I am confused. Are you asserting that the unprepared K kids result from IB students who don't get into ECE at their neighborhood schools? If they applied- they would beat out the OB kids, right? So the problem is that folks IB for your school don't want ECE. Your beef is not with OOB folks- but with your IB population.

This is exactly right. The OOB kids don't get in unless there are available slots after all the IB kids are placed. What OP really is arguing for is that her school's PS and PK classes remain under-enrolled rather that be filled with kids who are IB at JKLM. Which is, of course, ridiculous. She's also claiming that the presence is these children results in underprepared IB kindergarteners. Equally ridiculous.

Yes, OP, what schools are you talking about anyway? And which is the school with 25 percent Oyster IB at PK?

I wonder this, too. Maybe Francis-Stevens?

Bumping my question because I still don't see an answer. FS and Marie Reed are decent guesses but I would be surprised, because they are both popular with WLs, are they not? Certainly MR has a long WL. I thought FS did too. Also it's unusual to refer to Adams Morgan as "lower NW".

I am at an EOTP school and yes, I have seen JKLM/Oyster parents at our open houses hoping to use our school for PK3 or even PK4. I have never resented them for trying. We all gotta do what we gotta do in this city. We have so many IB on the WL that the JKLM/O applicants don't have a snowflake's chance, so it's academic anyway.

So OP or anyone else, can you tell us which are these schools that are simultaneously so attractive to JKLM/O that they choose it over private preschool, yet have a lot of space for OOB, so much space that one of them is even one quarter full of Oyster IB?

I am not saying I don't believe it but I am still scratching my head as to which schools fit this description. It must be schools that have very small geographic boundaries or small number of public school kids relative to PK class sizes? Which are these schools in lower NW? I know that Hearst fits this description in upper NW.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:8:50 spells out the argument well.

Basicallh they are saying please don't take up our OOB spots if you dont want to commit long term. Leave those for families who really want to stay at the school.

I've never been at a DCPS but it's pretty clear to me.

This exactly. Join a school for the long term, not because you are only staying one year and will not join the community. This is a completely rational request. If you don't understand it then you don't understand what it takes to build s stable school community.

This is one of the reasons that we are paying for private this year (PK3) instead of sending our kid to the DCPS ECE OOB where we lotteried in. It seemed kind of wrong to take a spot in a school where we 100% knew we wouldn't stay past PK4.

IB families have preference in the lottery. Don't try to shift the blame to OOB families when it's the IB families who are electing not to send their kiddos to "lower NW schools."

BTW, it's Capitol Hill, which is located in the Nation's Capital. And I think the days of Brent or Peabody families parking kids at SWS, LT or Tyler SI for two years of PK are pretty much over. However, Van Ness may still be an option given the number of IB families and short waitlist this year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Op, I am confused. Are you asserting that the unprepared K kids result from IB students who don't get into ECE at their neighborhood schools? If they applied- they would beat out the OB kids, right? So the problem is that folks IB for your school don't want ECE. Your beef is not with OOB folks- but with your IB population.

This is exactly right. The OOB kids don't get in unless there are available slots after all the IB kids are placed. What OP really is arguing for is that her school's PS and PK classes remain under-enrolled rather that be filled with kids who are IB at JKLM. Which is, of course, ridiculous. She's also claiming that the presence is these children results in underprepared IB kindergarteners. Equally ridiculous.

Okay, I think you have completely misunderstood what some folks have been arguing. I'm not sure I buy their argument, but I don't think you should misrepresent it (I assume unintentionally). I think what they are arguing is that Upper NW families apply in droves to Lower NW school PK slots because they don't have PK3 and cannot get in to their own schools for PK4. These schools have slots because they do not have enough IB families to take all of the PK slots so they have OOB slots available. Because so many families apply, many of Upper NW families take the OOB slots at Lower NW schools for PK, but then leave the school at K when they have rights to there own school. The Lower NW schools then take new OOB children from other parts of the city at K. Some posters have suggested that these new OOB families are less well prepared -- why hasn't been said, but let's be charitable and say it is because the programs in their previous schools weren't as rigorous, were not as well funded or well run, or that the move from one school to another was disruptive to them. Also implied is that this churn is disruptive to the school. Friendships are broken, classroom dynamics shaken up, etc.. Finally, unsaid here, but definitely on other threads, is that the Upper NW families are not as invested in the school -- don't volunteer or give, because they know they are leaving. So I am skeptical of these arguments, but I wouldn't call them ridiculous. Why the OOB children coming in at K should be underprepared is not clear, but if they are coming from schools with substantially lower test scores, which is likely, it is at least plausible. Is shifting a bunch of children in and out of the school disruptive? Probably a little. Would the Upper NW families probably invest less because they are short-timers? Probably true too, though they might be able/willing to give more than other families with less means.

There are some things about this post that I agree with and other things I disagree with.

Firstly, it has not been my experience that the upper NW families at our lower NW Title 1 school are not invested in the school. What I have observed is that even the families who are not active participants in school activities (don't regularly attend PTA meetings, don't volunteer in the classroom, don't come to midday school events) contribute financially, which is frankly very helpful in a school where 50%+ kids are "at risk." We had people donating $100, $250 to the PTA at the beginning of the year who I have never seen again. I value those contributions, even if I know that I cannot count on them again next year. That $100 sponsors a kindergarten field trip. That $250 helps pay for pizza for evening school events, which we then do not charge for.

As for the disruption that occurs when families leave the school, I can't disagree with that, but frankly, this is a very transient city. People move around for a lot of reasons, so there will always be someone coming to school one year and not the next. I think the issue is not WOTP OOBers "taking seats from" (quotes because the WOTP OOBers have as much right to and chance of being offered those seats as any other OOB kid in the city) neighborhood kids that is the problem. It's those kids "taking seats from" kids in adjacent neighborhoods who are more likely to stay. That said, those kids also have an IB school that they might prefer. Unless you are entering the OOB lottery because you really and truly are not willing to attend your IB school, there's always the possibility that a 3/4yo student will not return for kindergarten.

I do not approve the resentment and feuds between families about school. It doesn't do right by any of our kids, regardless of whether you live in a housing project or a million dollar mansion. I personally believe that it is important to contribute as much as you are willing/able, for as long as you are around. If that's one school year, I really appreciate the families who show up for events and write checks for that year. If it's for more than one year, I am just as grateful every time. The contributions to our school made in PK3 and PK4 of the family who leaves to go to their IB WOTP school for kindergarten are not negated by their departure. Stop sniping at each other about this. There are better battles to fight.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:8:50 spells out the argument well.

Basicallh they are saying please don't take up our OOB spots if you dont want to commit long term. Leave those for families who really want to stay at the school.

I've never been at a DCPS but it's pretty clear to me.

This exactly. Join a school for the long term, not because you are only staying one year and will not join the community. This is a completely rational request. If you don't understand it then you don't understand what it takes to build s stable school community.

I agree too, although there's nothing you can do to legally prevent it. I think anyone suggesting that is just being silly. But it is a true phenomenon, and explains different attitudes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't most jklm do private preschool?

Yes, absolutely for age 3. I have never once met a person in my Murch boundary neighborhood who has cast about the city for a free spot in a DCPS for pk3.

For age four, I have met two household IB for Murch who sent their kids -- interestingly, both families had twins -- to Hearst for pk4. One of these families did this about 8 years ago, the other, more recently.

It's not a common thing in these parts, at all.

Fight by anecdote! I know several Upper NW families that used public schools for PK3, and many who sent their kids to other schools for PK4 because they couldn't get into their IB school. So by my limited experience it must be a very common thing!

"upper NW" isn't the same as Ward 3.

How many families do you know who own homes in 20015 or 20016 and send their kids across the city for pk3? Be honest.

I cannot comment on exactly zip codes or whether someone definitely owns their house or not. But I suspect my knowledge matches up with what you are getting at. About 10-15. To other schools for PK4? About 30-40. You might say those numbers are small, but it isn't like I know a 1000 people.

Anonymous wrote:8:50 spells out the argument well.

Basicallh they are saying please don't take up our OOB spots if you dont want to commit long term. Leave those for families who really want to stay at the school.

I've never been at a DCPS but it's pretty clear to me.

This exactly. Join a school for the long term, not because you are only staying one year and will not join the community. This is a completely rational request. If you don't understand it then you don't understand what it takes to build s stable school community.