Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the DCPS definition of "at risk"? I support giving access to at risk kids, but what is DCPS going to do to make it work beyond just providing the slot in the school. Is DCPS going to provide transportation and the kinds of wrap around services mentioned above? If part of "at risk" is challenging at home situations such as homelessness, who is going to keep an eye on and/or advocate for individual children when their parents cannot?

At risk = homeless, receiving TANF or food stamps, in foster care, or a high school student at least one year behind on progress to graduation

DCPS would be doing the same thing to try and support the students as they do at the school they attend now. Except the staff doing that work would have smaller caseloads and the students would be in class with a more diverse (in every way) peer group.

Anonymous wrote:What is the DCPS definition of "at risk"? I support giving access to at risk kids, but what is DCPS going to do to make it work beyond just providing the slot in the school. Is DCPS going to provide transportation and the kinds of wrap around services mentioned above? If part of "at risk" is challenging at home situations such as homelessness, who is going to keep an eye on and/or advocate for individual children when their parents cannot?

At risk = homeless, receiving TANF or food stamps, in foster care, or a high school student at least one year behind on progress to graduation

DC could do a lot more to get low-income families to live IB for more resourced schools. That's not something OSSE or DCPS can do, but it would help some families. I was able to help a low-income family move to Upper NW and now their kids have the right to a JKLMM through Wilson. Not everyone wants to move away from job/family/familiar neighborhood or have their kid be one of the few AA kids in a school but some people would move.

However, not having PK3 at all schools is a challenge for encouraging families to live IB for Wilson. I wish all DCPS offered PK3, and guaranteed admission for all at-risk kids to the IB DCPS school or a school the family listed higher in the lottery.

What is the DCPS definition of "at risk"? I support giving access to at risk kids, but what is DCPS going to do to make it work beyond just providing the slot in the school. Is DCPS going to provide transportation and the kinds of wrap around services mentioned above? If part of "at risk" is challenging at home situations such as homelessness, who is going to keep an eye on and/or advocate for individual children when their parents cannot?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly think a better option than finagling an already overcrowded system where lots of families lottery for a smaller and smaller number of seats is to 1) offer parenting classes and counseling to teen mothers 2) provide wrap around services at the local school that provide care, counseling and nourishment at no cost and 3) ensure that people are paid a living wage. Thinking a very poor child living in SE can make it to Lafayette on time each day is a pipe dream.

This. You’re not going to send an at risk kid to a “great” school and get anything other than a kid at the bottom of the class, probably in trouble all the time, etc. Don’t even do this unless you’re serious about addressing the real causes of the achievement gap.

This is so wrong. Studies have shown many times that placing an "at-risk" kid into a higher performing peer group in a heavily resourced school WILL help that kid. If nothing else, that school will actually have resources. My kids goes to a JKLM school and we have a 10 person team of interventionalists, etc. The administrative assistant at my job sends her son (with learning differences) to a poorly performing DCPS and there isn't even a single person managing IEPs, etc. Well, they had one but she left on leave 4 months ago and nothing has been done since. This kid would do so much better in a school like my kids attend. He would get all sorts of help.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is “hefty analytical shit” MAYBE to someone who looks at box scores for fantasy baseball, but even then at a very low level.

It may not be heavy or advanced statistical research but is useful.

First section is an overview of what is being done in other jurisdictions to solve some of the same issues DCPS is facing, especially school segregation due to housing segregation in a neighborhood school system

It also explains DCPS’ goals (quality feeder patterns throughout the city, combatting segregation, keeping students from enrolling in or leaving DCPS for charters)) and strategies to reach those goals (more specialized programming such as Montessori, dual language at the elementary level and more career training and early college at the high school level).
.

This is the dumbest part of this entire DC school system. WHY on earth are we pitting charters against DCPS like they're something separate? They are not. They are still part of the public school system. Why on earth isn't there a strategic approach to support charter schools alongside DCPS, or any type of end game such as pairing up charters/failing DCPS, or maybe hybridizing, or even adopting some aspects of charter management into DCPS? Charters are essentially treated here as some kind of experiment gone awry, or as though they are private schools completely outside the public system. Something is seriously wrong if they are merely competing for students. A comprehensive approach should be possible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is “hefty analytical shit” MAYBE to someone who looks at box scores for fantasy baseball, but even then at a very low level.

It may not be heavy or advanced statistical research but is useful.

First section is an overview of what is being done in other jurisdictions to solve some of the same issues DCPS is facing, especially school segregation due to housing segregation in a neighborhood school system

It also explains DCPS’ goals (quality feeder patterns throughout the city, combatting segregation, keeping students from enrolling in or leaving DCPS for charters)) and strategies to reach those goals (more specialized programming such as Montessori, dual language at the elementary level and more career training and early college at the high school level).
.

Their pretend goals, which bear no relationship to their actions.

The thing they need to start taking into account is that no one is locked into this city. Parents with resources (money, education) can and will move rather than sending their kids to sub-par schools.

The school district needs more high-resource students, not fewer.

How about we try to make the schools better, more attractive and fully resource them.

Anonymous wrote:This is “hefty analytical shit” MAYBE to someone who looks at box scores for fantasy baseball, but even then at a very low level.

It may not be heavy or advanced statistical research but is useful.

First section is an overview of what is being done in other jurisdictions to solve some of the same issues DCPS is facing, especially school segregation due to housing segregation in a neighborhood school system

It also explains DCPS’ goals (quality feeder patterns throughout the city, combatting segregation, keeping students from enrolling in or leaving DCPS for charters)) and strategies to reach those goals (more specialized programming such as Montessori, dual language at the elementary level and more career training and early college at the high school level).
.

This is “hefty analytical shit” MAYBE to someone who looks at box scores for fantasy baseball, but even then at a very low level.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly think a better option than finagling an already overcrowded system where lots of families lottery for a smaller and smaller number of seats is to 1) offer parenting classes and counseling to teen mothers 2) provide wrap around services at the local school that provide care, counseling and nourishment at no cost and 3) ensure that people are paid a living wage. Thinking a very poor child living in SE can make it to Lafayette on time each day is a pipe dream.

This. You’re not going to send an at risk kid to a “great” school and get anything other than a kid at the bottom of the class, probably in trouble all the time, etc. Don’t even do this unless you’re serious about addressing the real causes of the achievement gap.

At-risk is not synonymous with behavioral problems and poor academic performance. Some at-risk kids have those issues, but not all. Perhaps if some had more opportunities earlier they would be better off. Sweeping generalizations undercut your point. Integrated schools - economically and racially is the goal of the discussed reforms.

If you don’t share that goal you probably have some decisions to make.

“Probably in trouble all the time”. Wtf? Is it because he’s bebatboxxing to much?

Anonymous wrote:I honestly think a better option than finagling an already overcrowded system where lots of families lottery for a smaller and smaller number of seats is to 1) offer parenting classes and counseling to teen mothers 2) provide wrap around services at the local school that provide care, counseling and nourishment at no cost and 3) ensure that people are paid a living wage. Thinking a very poor child living in SE can make it to Lafayette on time each day is a pipe dream.

This. You’re not going to send an at risk kid to a “great” school and get anything other than a kid at the bottom of the class, probably in trouble all the time, etc. Don’t even do this unless you’re serious about addressing the real causes of the achievement gap.

I honestly think a better option than finagling an already overcrowded system where lots of families lottery for a smaller and smaller number of seats is to 1) offer parenting classes and counseling to teen mothers 2) provide wrap around services at the local school that provide care, counseling and nourishment at no cost and 3) ensure that people are paid a living wage. Thinking a very poor child living in SE can make it to Lafayette on time each day is a pipe dream.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be all for the described lottery changes, making an at-risk preference the "heaviest-weight" preference, even above siblings.

I do not think it will happen because it clearly takes something away from non-at risk students, whose parents would make a lot of noise. There are only so many seats after all and this would be a zero-sum game.

It will also affect charters as well as the city-wide and DCPS application schools the most.

+1000. It is the right thing to do, it will balance school demographics and remedy a world of problems. My precious little sibling will be just fine waiting it out for preschool. As long as siblings get in for K, preschool elsewhere is normal and not a problem.

“As long as siblings get in for K.” LMAO

I know right? lol. such generosity. This at risk thing will never happen, because, I think now you see why. I am not a fan either and I think this utopianism is stupid. My lily white ass would move out of town before driving to two schools or going to my IB.

sorry but there is a right to K and up in a way that there is not for preschool. And having kids in separate schools indefinitely will cause people to leave DC.

That’s my point. PP is supporting at risk over sibling only until K. That’s not really support. Sibling has to be the priority.