Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did you or your wife take your child to the test?

It is not unheard of for people who trying to game the system for Spanish dominance lottery spot as these are easier to get.

If your wife was there and consoling your child in English, it could be a flag as the spot is "Spanish Dominant"

+1.

If your kid was being consoled in English...by definition that's not being Spanish dominant.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The DC school handbook used to say "if a student resides in a home in which Spanish is spoken regularly, it is likely the student will pass assessment." Now the handbook is conspicuously silent on what "Spanish dominant" actually means. There is a complete lack of consistent standards across schools and drastically different interpretations and enforcement policies. This, coupled with the timing of the test (post-lottery), means parents like the OP who have every reason to believe their child is Spanish dominant, will find themselves not only denied entry to their matched school, but at the end of the waitlist of every other school they might otherwise have chosen. This is a a lawsuit waiting to happen. Of course, it's really only a problem at Oyster where the principal seems determined to use the test to push a political agenda rather than a reasonable or commonsense understanding of the child's Spanish proficiency.

What do you mean she is pushing a political agenda? Of what sort? I am not disagreeing with you, I am just trying to understand more of what you mean.

You don't have to read very far between the lines to see she is applying a socio-economic and cultural standard to the Spanish dominant slots. Just attend the open house or ask her directly. "There will be a test, parents attend, but your Spanish speaking nanny is not welcome, no matter how much time they spend with your child." You may or may not agree with her position from a social justice standpoint, but the fact is, these types of statements have nothing to do with the child's language proficiency. She's very clear that her passion is closing the achievement gap for low income Hispanic families and preserving their cultural heritage. I'm not arguing for or against these goals, but applying them for a test clearly intended and defined as a measure of a child's spoken language ability seems wrong. Even if you dismiss this as speculation, it is a fact that the standards applied to determining Spanish dominance and completely and wildly inconsistent across dual language schools, meaning there is no way a parent can reasonably try to gauge whether their child will pass the test. The story of the OP is a particularly egregious example.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The DC school handbook used to say "if a student resides in a home in which Spanish is spoken regularly, it is likely the student will pass assessment." Now the handbook is conspicuously silent on what "Spanish dominant" actually means. There is a complete lack of consistent standards across schools and drastically different interpretations and enforcement policies. This, coupled with the timing of the test (post-lottery), means parents like the OP who have every reason to believe their child is Spanish dominant, will find themselves not only denied entry to their matched school, but at the end of the waitlist of every other school they might otherwise have chosen. This is a a lawsuit waiting to happen. Of course, it's really only a problem at Oyster where the principal seems determined to use the test to push a political agenda rather than a reasonable or commonsense understanding of the child's Spanish proficiency.

What do you mean she is pushing a political agenda? Of what sort? I am not disagreeing with you, I am just trying to understand more of what you mean.

You don't have to read very far between the lines to see she is applying a socio-economic and cultural standard to the Spanish dominant slots. Just attend the open house or ask her directly. "There will be a test, parents attend, but your Spanish speaking nanny is not welcome, no matter how much time they spend with your child." You may or may not agree with her position from a social justice standpoint, but the fact is, these types of statements have nothing to do with the child's language proficiency. She's very clear that her passion is closing the achievement gap for low income Hispanic families and preserving their cultural heritage. I'm not arguing for or against these goals, but applying them for a test clearly intended and defined as a measure of a child's spoken language ability seems wrong. Even if you dismiss this as speculation, it is a fact that the standards applied to determining Spanish dominance and completely and wildly inconsistent across dual language schools, meaning there is no way a parent can reasonably try to gauge whether their child will pass the test. The story of the OP is a particularly egregious example.

I think this is a good goal but agree it’s hard to apply fairly. She should test for proficiency not dominance. I don’t think there is a dominance test that is not based on interpretation of things like heritage, which cannot be a fair grounds.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The DC school handbook used to say "if a student resides in a home in which Spanish is spoken regularly, it is likely the student will pass assessment." Now the handbook is conspicuously silent on what "Spanish dominant" actually means. There is a complete lack of consistent standards across schools and drastically different interpretations and enforcement policies. This, coupled with the timing of the test (post-lottery), means parents like the OP who have every reason to believe their child is Spanish dominant, will find themselves not only denied entry to their matched school, but at the end of the waitlist of every other school they might otherwise have chosen. This is a a lawsuit waiting to happen. Of course, it's really only a problem at Oyster where the principal seems determined to use the test to push a political agenda rather than a reasonable or commonsense understanding of the child's Spanish proficiency.

What do you mean she is pushing a political agenda? Of what sort? I am not disagreeing with you, I am just trying to understand more of what you mean.

You don't have to read very far between the lines to see she is applying a socio-economic and cultural standard to the Spanish dominant slots. Just attend the open house or ask her directly. "There will be a test, parents attend, but your Spanish speaking nanny is not welcome, no matter how much time they spend with your child." You may or may not agree with her position from a social justice standpoint, but the fact is, these types of statements have nothing to do with the child's language proficiency. She's very clear that her passion is closing the achievement gap for low income Hispanic families and preserving their cultural heritage. I'm not arguing for or against these goals, but applying them for a test clearly intended and defined as a measure of a child's spoken language ability seems wrong. Even if you dismiss this as speculation, it is a fact that the standards applied to determining Spanish dominance and completely and wildly inconsistent across dual language schools, meaning there is no way a parent can reasonably try to gauge whether their child will pass the test. The story of the OP is a particularly egregious example.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The DC school handbook used to say "if a student resides in a home in which Spanish is spoken regularly, it is likely the student will pass assessment." Now the handbook is conspicuously silent on what "Spanish dominant" actually means. There is a complete lack of consistent standards across schools and drastically different interpretations and enforcement policies. This, coupled with the timing of the test (post-lottery), means parents like the OP who have every reason to believe their child is Spanish dominant, will find themselves not only denied entry to their matched school, but at the end of the waitlist of every other school they might otherwise have chosen. This is a a lawsuit waiting to happen. Of course, it's really only a problem at Oyster where the principal seems determined to use the test to push a political agenda rather than a reasonable or commonsense understanding of the child's Spanish proficiency.

What do you mean she is pushing a political agenda? Of what sort? I am not disagreeing with you, I am just trying to understand more of what you mean.

You don't have to read very far between the lines to see she is applying a socio-economic and cultural standard to the Spanish dominant slots. Just attend the open house or ask her directly. "There will be a test, parents attend, but your Spanish speaking nanny is not welcome, no matter how much time they spend with your child." You may or may not agree with her position from a social justice standpoint, but the fact is, these types of statements have nothing to do with the child's language proficiency. She's very clear that her passion is closing the achievement gap for low income Hispanic families and preserving their cultural heritage. I'm not arguing for or against these goals, but applying them for a test clearly intended and defined as a measure of a child's spoken language ability seems wrong. Even if you dismiss this as speculation, it is a fact that the standards applied to determining Spanish dominance and completely and wildly inconsistent across dual language schools, meaning there is no way a parent can reasonably try to gauge whether their child will pass the test. The story of the OP is a particularly egregious example.

Anonymous wrote:OP is what I would call an entitled parent. By your own admission, your child really isn’t Spanish-dominant; she’s bilingual.

Anonymous wrote:Did you or your wife take your child to the test?

It is not unheard of for people who trying to game the system for Spanish dominance lottery spot as these are easier to get.

If your wife was there and consoling your child in English, it could be a flag as the spot is "Spanish Dominant"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is mean, but your post was only about you and where you lived. Does your child actually speak Spanish BACK to you? If not, that's obviously what showed during testing.

Obviously,s he responds in Spanish. Of course, she often mixes English and Spanish as it is expected with bilingual kids who are learning. Her comprehension is 100% and she can even translate from one language to another.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The DC school handbook used to say "if a student resides in a home in which Spanish is spoken regularly, it is likely the student will pass assessment." Now the handbook is conspicuously silent on what "Spanish dominant" actually means. There is a complete lack of consistent standards across schools and drastically different interpretations and enforcement policies. This, coupled with the timing of the test (post-lottery), means parents like the OP who have every reason to believe their child is Spanish dominant, will find themselves not only denied entry to their matched school, but at the end of the waitlist of every other school they might otherwise have chosen. This is a a lawsuit waiting to happen. Of course, it's really only a problem at Oyster where the principal seems determined to use the test to push a political agenda rather than a reasonable or commonsense understanding of the child's Spanish proficiency.

What do you mean she is pushing a political agenda? Of what sort? I am not disagreeing with you, I am just trying to understand more of what you mean.

Anonymous wrote:The DC school handbook used to say "if a student resides in a home in which Spanish is spoken regularly, it is likely the student will pass assessment." Now the handbook is conspicuously silent on what "Spanish dominant" actually means. There is a complete lack of consistent standards across schools and drastically different interpretations and enforcement policies. This, coupled with the timing of the test (post-lottery), means parents like the OP who have every reason to believe their child is Spanish dominant, will find themselves not only denied entry to their matched school, but at the end of the waitlist of every other school they might otherwise have chosen. This is a a lawsuit waiting to happen. Of course, it's really only a problem at Oyster where the principal seems determined to use the test to push a political agenda rather than a reasonable or commonsense understanding of the child's Spanish proficiency.

Anonymous wrote:
This part is crazy, but also confirms the feeling I got after I heard Ms. Cruz's presentation at an open house earlier this year. She said that the parent(s) have to be in the interview (which differs from Diego's experience, but that's what I heard), that kids who learned their Spanish from nannies are not who they want, and that these Spanish-dominant spots are meant for English language learners (so, I suppose, disqualifying bilingual kids). Not going to debate the merits of what she said, as these points have been debated ad nauseam and with much vitriol on other threads, but the overall vibe I got from her is that ethnic/national origin, and not language ability, is the test, even though she can't say so. I found it very off-putting, especially as the parent of non-Hispanic kids who wake up screaming in Spanish from their nightmares and have meltdowns in Spanish, and as such have a good faith belief that they are, in the commonsensical sense of the term, Spanish dominant.

Anyhow, I agree with whoever said in another thread that DCPS should define the term more clearly, and legally. I have a feeling that this would only affect Oyster, though, since every other DCPS immersion starts at PK3, and it may be hard to test at PK3 because many kids still don't talk all that much when they're 3 in any language.

Good luck, Diego. At least you're IB, so you have that option at K if that's still what you want.