This practice of sibling preference abuse is common and I'm surprised MySchool actually enforced it. Families re-enroll in School A) for child 1) in the spring and at the same time use sib priority to exercise offer to child 2) for School A), then delay enrollment of child 1) at School B) until the latest possible moment, hoping no one will revisit the sib priority already exercised which should no longer rightfully apply for child 2).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously, OP? It's spelled out in their policies.

https://www.myschooldc.org/node/116

Sibling attending preference

Preference for a student who has a sibling currently attending the school. There is a place on the application to enter the name of a sibling(s) currently attending the school. Before the lottery, the school will verify eligibility for that preference. The definition of "sibling" may vary by school. Please note that at most schools, this preference is meant to allow siblings to attend the same school at the same time. If you end up withdrawing the "attending" student for the following school year, it is possible that your sibling preference, and subsequent enrollment, match or waitlist offer, will be revoked. Please contact the school directly for information about their sibling policies. DCPS's sibling information can be found in their Enrollment and Lottery Handbook.

The definition of "sibling" may vary by school. Please contact the school directly for this information.

Maybe I'm missing something, but this says that the SCHOOL decides, not myschooldc.

Yes that's right - the school decides. Think of myschooldc as the tech platform for communicating about lottery in this situation.

Anonymous wrote:Seriously, OP? It's spelled out in their policies.

https://www.myschooldc.org/node/116

Sibling attending preference

Preference for a student who has a sibling currently attending the school. There is a place on the application to enter the name of a sibling(s) currently attending the school. Before the lottery, the school will verify eligibility for that preference. The definition of "sibling" may vary by school. Please note that at most schools, this preference is meant to allow siblings to attend the same school at the same time. If you end up withdrawing the "attending" student for the following school year, it is possible that your sibling preference, and subsequent enrollment, match or waitlist offer, will be revoked. Please contact the school directly for information about their sibling policies. DCPS's sibling information can be found in their Enrollment and Lottery Handbook.

The definition of "sibling" may vary by school. Please contact the school directly for this information.

Maybe I'm missing something, but this says that the SCHOOL decides, not myschooldc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although OP sounds entitled, I'm actually with her here. School acceptances should not be revoked for the year based on things like loss of a sibling preference. That's just too disruptive in cases like this one. The only reason to revoke an enrollment once it has been done should be for the child moving out of DC. Yes, this means there might be people who appear to game the system on the margins, but if we're going to have a "choice" system, it can't be totally disruptive and arbitrary.

Let me guess -- and in a situation like this, the younger child should get to keep the spot next year, because it would be too disruptive to move after he already knew everyone?

Right.

Rules are there because people push further and further without boundaries.

Yes, I think that's fine. Children shouldn't be disenrolled once they are enrolled, unless they move out of DC or their paperwork was fraudulent (boundary fraud). I mean, what if the older child had to move schools due to a disability? Then the younger sibs get kicked out? Doesn't make any sense.

And this is exactly why the rules should be clear and enforced from the beginning. It's on the website, it's fair, and you should know the rules if you are going to engage. Sorry -- the rules do apply to everyone. That's why they are there.

I think it's far from clear that Myschooldc (which is a website!) has ANY authority to disenroll children once they are enrolled.

Seems like you are out of policy. I have a friend in the Atlanta suburbs with a similar situation, but she spoke to the principal first and was advised to keep her older sibling in school for a week before transferring him to a different school but keeping the younger one there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although OP sounds entitled, I'm actually with her here. School acceptances should not be revoked for the year based on things like loss of a sibling preference. That's just too disruptive in cases like this one. The only reason to revoke an enrollment once it has been done should be for the child moving out of DC. Yes, this means there might be people who appear to game the system on the margins, but if we're going to have a "choice" system, it can't be totally disruptive and arbitrary.

Let me guess -- and in a situation like this, the younger child should get to keep the spot next year, because it would be too disruptive to move after he already knew everyone?

Right.

Rules are there because people push further and further without boundaries.

Yes, I think that's fine. Children shouldn't be disenrolled once they are enrolled, unless they move out of DC or their paperwork was fraudulent (boundary fraud). I mean, what if the older child had to move schools due to a disability? Then the younger sibs get kicked out? Doesn't make any sense.

And this is exactly why the rules should be clear and enforced from the beginning. It's on the website, it's fair, and you should know the rules if you are going to engage. Sorry -- the rules do apply to everyone. That's why they are there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although OP sounds entitled, I'm actually with her here. School acceptances should not be revoked for the year based on things like loss of a sibling preference. That's just too disruptive in cases like this one. The only reason to revoke an enrollment once it has been done should be for the child moving out of DC. Yes, this means there might be people who appear to game the system on the margins, but if we're going to have a "choice" system, it can't be totally disruptive and arbitrary.

Let me guess -- and in a situation like this, the younger child should get to keep the spot next year, because it would be too disruptive to move after he already knew everyone?

Right.

Rules are there because people push further and further without boundaries.

Yes, I think that's fine. Children shouldn't be disenrolled once they are enrolled, unless they move out of DC or their paperwork was fraudulent (boundary fraud). I mean, what if the older child had to move schools due to a disability? Then the younger sibs get kicked out? Doesn't make any sense.

OP, this is a hard situation. One detail I don't think you shared: when did you start hearing from MSDC that you had to remove your younger? If they've been telling you this for weeks and you've kept your younger one without talking to the school or responding to MSDC, you're making this likely move harder for your kid as he stays there longer and longer. If they didn't realize it until this week, I think the delay is on their part and they're creating the harder upheaval for your kid.

Everyone has good reasons and well-loved kids for whom they want to see best outcomes. Everyone. That's why there are waitlist.

If the specific pull you are using is a desire to keep your two kids together and the same school, but they aren't going to be together anymore -- than the other reasons which other people have take precedence.

The system isn't rejecting your kid; it's assessing reasons and prioritizing them.

Anonymous wrote:Although OP sounds entitled, I'm actually with her here. School acceptances should not be revoked for the year based on things like loss of a sibling preference. That's just too disruptive in cases like this one. The only reason to revoke an enrollment once it has been done should be for the child moving out of DC. Yes, this means there might be people who appear to game the system on the margins, but if we're going to have a "choice" system, it can't be totally disruptive and arbitrary.

I'm the pp upthread who went through something similar but younger DC had the lottery number to stay when older DC disenrolled. I agree with this post, possibly with some limitations. While we were waiting for myschool to determine younger DC's lottery position without sibling preference, we were very afraid of having to choose between accepting the spot for older DC which would be better for the special needs, or younger DC's education path and learning the target language. Luckily for us we got both, but it's a very tough spot for a lot of families who have kids with different educational needs.

Anonymous wrote:Although OP sounds entitled, I'm actually with her here. School acceptances should not be revoked for the year based on things like loss of a sibling preference. That's just too disruptive in cases like this one. The only reason to revoke an enrollment once it has been done should be for the child moving out of DC. Yes, this means there might be people who appear to game the system on the margins, but if we're going to have a "choice" system, it can't be totally disruptive and arbitrary.

Let me guess -- and in a situation like this, the younger child should get to keep the spot next year, because it would be too disruptive to move after he already knew everyone?

Right.

Rules are there because people push further and further without boundaries.

Although OP sounds entitled, I'm actually with her here. School acceptances should not be revoked for the year based on things like loss of a sibling preference. That's just too disruptive in cases like this one. The only reason to revoke an enrollment once it has been done should be for the child moving out of DC. Yes, this means there might be people who appear to game the system on the margins, but if we're going to have a "choice" system, it can't be totally disruptive and arbitrary.

Anonymous wrote:OP, the system is working the way it should. You only moved your older child the day before school started in hopes of avoiding this by thinking they wouldn’t notice and you know it. There’s nothing to fight. Move along and play by the rules.

Well I disagree. My child should have preferential treatment.

It seems weird to me that this is going through myschooldc and not the school?

If it were a required grade, I think you’d have a shot getting principal approval but it’s for a highly coveted P3 spot and as another PP pointed out, you’re ready to bounce when and if the new school offers him a spot.