Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know of at least 10 students in my child's class in elementary school who enrolled when they were renting IB - and then moved.

They were allowed to stay and even through POLICY is that they need to move back to their IB school at the truncating grade, this does not happen.

Also - the principal made space for their younger siblings. So the younger sibling got in through the lottery (OOB with sibling preference) and in theory now has "RIGHTS" to the full feeder path.

In my opinion, this loop hole is needs to be closed. It is used by those with means - and does not foster equity. (Why should this sibling have more rights to an OOB spot than a random person applying?)

Closing this loophole with reduce students coming from feeders to Deal. Think about it - out of a class of 500, this eases capacity by about 50 students. It does not sound like a lot - but it might be enough to give the school some breathing room.

AND - Deal should also be closed to OOB lottery until they are not complaining that they have too many students. How can they simultaneously say they are overcrowded AND take students off the lottery?

The people complaining are the parents. I've never had a teacher complain about class size due to overcrowding; it's always the parents. One of my kids has a science class at Deal this year with less than kids in it.

less than 10 kids.

Anonymous wrote:

The people complaining are the parents. I've never had a teacher complain about class size due to overcrowding; it's always the parents. One of my kids has a science class at Deal this year with less than 10 kids in it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know of at least 10 students in my child's class in elementary school who enrolled when they were renting IB - and then moved.

They were allowed to stay and even through POLICY is that they need to move back to their IB school at the truncating grade, this does not happen.

Also - the principal made space for their younger siblings. So the younger sibling got in through the lottery (OOB with sibling preference) and in theory now has "RIGHTS" to the full feeder path.

In my opinion, this loop hole is needs to be closed. It is used by those with means - and does not foster equity. (Why should this sibling have more rights to an OOB spot than a random person applying?)

Closing this loophole with reduce students coming from feeders to Deal. Think about it - out of a class of 500, this eases capacity by about 50 students. It does not sound like a lot - but it might be enough to give the school some breathing room.

AND - Deal should also be closed to OOB lottery until they are not complaining that they have too many students. How can they simultaneously say they are overcrowded AND take students off the lottery?

The people complaining are the parents. I've never had a teacher complain about class size due to overcrowding; it's always the parents. One of my kids has a science class at Deal this year with less than kids in it.

Anonymous wrote:I know of at least 10 students in my child's class in elementary school who enrolled when they were renting IB - and then moved.

They were allowed to stay and even through POLICY is that they need to move back to their IB school at the truncating grade, this does not happen.

Also - the principal made space for their younger siblings. So the younger sibling got in through the lottery (OOB with sibling preference) and in theory now has "RIGHTS" to the full feeder path.

In my opinion, this loop hole is needs to be closed. It is used by those with means - and does not foster equity. (Why should this sibling have more rights to an OOB spot than a random person applying?)

Closing this loophole with reduce students coming from feeders to Deal. Think about it - out of a class of 500, this eases capacity by about 50 students. It does not sound like a lot - but it might be enough to give the school some breathing room.

AND - Deal should also be closed to OOB lottery until they are not complaining that they have too many students. How can they simultaneously say they are overcrowded AND take students off the lottery?

Anonymous wrote:I know of at least 10 students in my child's class in elementary school who enrolled when they were renting IB - and then moved.

They were allowed to stay and even through POLICY is that they need to move back to their IB school at the truncating grade, this does not happen.

Also - the principal made space for their younger siblings. So the younger sibling got in through the lottery (OOB with sibling preference) and in theory now has "RIGHTS" to the full feeder path.

In my opinion, this loop hole is needs to be closed. It is used by those with means - and does not foster equity. (Why should this sibling have more rights to an OOB spot than a random person applying?)

Closing this loophole with reduce students coming from feeders to Deal. Think about it - out of a class of 500, this eases capacity by about 50 students. It does not sound like a lot - but it might be enough to give the school some breathing room.

AND - Deal should also be closed to OOB lottery until they are not complaining that they have too many students. How can they simultaneously say they are overcrowded AND take students off the lottery?

Anonymous wrote:Charters don't have feeder patterns.

Stop assuming the majority white school is the best option.

Anonymous wrote:Charters don't have feeder patterns.

Stop assuming the majority white school is the best option.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They could move Oyster and Bancroft to MacFarland and Roosevelt with the other bilingual programs (make Oyster a PK-5 program spread across the current Oyster and Adams campuses and you also get a lot more bilingual PK seats), and Shepherd and Lafayette to Wells and Coolidge. If you need to enlarge these schools, fine--you'll spend no more than you would enlarging Deal and Wilson, and you'll create more diverse and high-performing schools. Moving the early college magnet from Coolidge to Cardozo or Dunbar would also free up some space.

And yes to ending feeder rights--if you get in OOB to a school you get into that school, not the middle and high school it feeds into. If an MS or HS has extra space, people can lottery in for that. No reason why a family who won the lottery with a 3yo needs to be lucky for the next 15-20+ years (including siblings). It sucks for people who move to DC later or for whatever reason couldn't trek across town with a toddler. This would also help people stay at ESs that they like rather than lotterying every year for a chance at a better MS/HS feeder.

It's easy for people who live in-bounds for Deal and Wilson feeders to say this is the solution, but booting kids who currently expect to have feeder rights after lotterying in doesn't really seem fair. (And I say that as the parent of in-bound Janney kids.)

+1. We're in bounds too, but you can't just rip away their futures that they were given.

What is being ripped away exactly?

In any case what do you suggest as an alternative?

Isn't it "ripping away" more kids futures to have 40 kids in a class at Deal and Wilson in the near future?

NP but telling someone at the time of lottery it confers X benefits (feeder rights through high school) and then changing it on a whim to "nah, you need to find a new school" is ripping away the future that was promised. This is the whole point of grandfathering - if you bought your house on the premise that your kid was going to go to X school they normally let any kid already there stay and only new buyers get moved.

This. PP here who said it would be ripping away their futures that they were given. This is exactly what I meant. Families were told at the time of the lottery that if they lottery into Lafayette or another feeder school, then they could continue in the feeder pattern for MS and HS. Families made choices based on that, and might have chosen another path such as a charter with a feeder pattern otherwise. I just don't think it's fair to take that away years later.

If DCPS wanted to end OOB feeder pattern rights, then they should do this with notice before the lottery and grandfather anyone already OOB at these schools. Just my opinion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They could move Oyster and Bancroft to MacFarland and Roosevelt with the other bilingual programs (make Oyster a PK-5 program spread across the current Oyster and Adams campuses and you also get a lot more bilingual PK seats), and Shepherd and Lafayette to Wells and Coolidge. If you need to enlarge these schools, fine--you'll spend no more than you would enlarging Deal and Wilson, and you'll create more diverse and high-performing schools. Moving the early college magnet from Coolidge to Cardozo or Dunbar would also free up some space.

And yes to ending feeder rights--if you get in OOB to a school you get into that school, not the middle and high school it feeds into. If an MS or HS has extra space, people can lottery in for that. No reason why a family who won the lottery with a 3yo needs to be lucky for the next 15-20+ years (including siblings). It sucks for people who move to DC later or for whatever reason couldn't trek across town with a toddler. This would also help people stay at ESs that they like rather than lotterying every year for a chance at a better MS/HS feeder.

It's easy for people who live in-bounds for Deal and Wilson feeders to say this is the solution, but booting kids who currently expect to have feeder rights after lotterying in doesn't really seem fair. (And I say that as the parent of in-bound Janney kids.)

+1. We're in bounds too, but you can't just rip away their futures that they were given.

What is being ripped away exactly?

In any case what do you suggest as an alternative?

Isn't it "ripping away" more kids futures to have 40 kids in a class at Deal and Wilson in the near future?

NP but telling someone at the time of lottery it confers X benefits (feeder rights through high school) and then changing it on a whim to "nah, you need to find a new school" is ripping away the future that was promised. This is the whole point of grandfathering - if you bought your house on the premise that your kid was going to go to X school they normally let any kid already there stay and only new buyers get moved.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They could move Oyster and Bancroft to MacFarland and Roosevelt with the other bilingual programs (make Oyster a PK-5 program spread across the current Oyster and Adams campuses and you also get a lot more bilingual PK seats), and Shepherd and Lafayette to Wells and Coolidge. If you need to enlarge these schools, fine--you'll spend no more than you would enlarging Deal and Wilson, and you'll create more diverse and high-performing schools. Moving the early college magnet from Coolidge to Cardozo or Dunbar would also free up some space.

And yes to ending feeder rights--if you get in OOB to a school you get into that school, not the middle and high school it feeds into. If an MS or HS has extra space, people can lottery in for that. No reason why a family who won the lottery with a 3yo needs to be lucky for the next 15-20+ years (including siblings). It sucks for people who move to DC later or for whatever reason couldn't trek across town with a toddler. This would also help people stay at ESs that they like rather than lotterying every year for a chance at a better MS/HS feeder.

It's easy for people who live in-bounds for Deal and Wilson feeders to say this is the solution, but booting kids who currently expect to have feeder rights after lotterying in doesn't really seem fair. (And I say that as the parent of in-bound Janney kids.)

+1. We're in bounds too, but you can't just rip away their futures that they were given.

What is being ripped away exactly?

In any case what do you suggest as an alternative?

Isn't it "ripping away" more kids futures to have 40 kids in a class at Deal and Wilson in the near future?

Yup - in fact if it was just those 2 ES it would give you a higher performing cohort than the remaining cohort at Deal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They could move Oyster and Bancroft to MacFarland and Roosevelt with the other bilingual programs (make Oyster a PK-5 program spread across the current Oyster and Adams campuses and you also get a lot more bilingual PK seats), and Shepherd and Lafayette to Wells and Coolidge. If you need to enlarge these schools, fine--you'll spend no more than you would enlarging Deal and Wilson, and you'll create more diverse and high-performing schools. Moving the early college magnet from Coolidge to Cardozo or Dunbar would also free up some space.

And yes to ending feeder rights--if you get in OOB to a school you get into that school, not the middle and high school it feeds into. If an MS or HS has extra space, people can lottery in for that. No reason why a family who won the lottery with a 3yo needs to be lucky for the next 15-20+ years (including siblings). It sucks for people who move to DC later or for whatever reason couldn't trek across town with a toddler. This would also help people stay at ESs that they like rather than lotterying every year for a chance at a better MS/HS feeder.

It's easy for people who live in-bounds for Deal and Wilson feeders to say this is the solution, but booting kids who currently expect to have feeder rights after lotterying in doesn't really seem fair. (And I say that as the parent of in-bound Janney kids.)

+1. We're in bounds too, but you can't just rip away their futures that they were given.