Anonymous wrote:SWS is a pretty bad offender about using discretion rather than the wait list.

Brent too.

SWS is a pretty bad offender about using discretion rather than the wait list.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LAMB indicated that they were trying to balance the number of 3 year olds and 4 year olds in the classroom. So most likely no new 4 year olds, period.

Insert sad face.

Does their charter allow them to handpick 3 year-olds? Is there a provision that allows them to skip over 4 year-olds on the top of the waitlist?

A charter can definitely set exact counts for each age that it admits. Each age has it's own waitlist. So they can decide to admit say, 5 four year olds and 20 three year olds if that's how they want to set up their classes. Since each age has it's own waitlist it's easy to make it work. This is the way that charters control enrollment, and they are very careful about it.

DCPS principals can also determine how they want to allocate their mixed 3/4 year old classes too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LAMB indicated that they were trying to balance the number of 3 year olds and 4 year olds in the classroom. So most likely no new 4 year olds, period.

Insert sad face.

Does their charter allow them to handpick 3 year-olds? Is there a provision that allows them to skip over 4 year-olds on the top of the waitlist?

A charter can definitely set exact counts for each age that it admits. Each age has it's own waitlist. So they can decide to admit say, 5 four year olds and 20 three year olds if that's how they want to set up their classes. Since each age has it's own waitlist it's easy to make it work. This is the way that charters control enrollment, and they are very careful about it.

They have mixed classrooms- Primary- that are of PS3/PK4/K students.

Anonymous wrote:LAMB indicated that they were trying to balance the number of 3 year olds and 4 year olds in the classroom. So most likely no new 4 year olds, period.

Insert sad face.

Does their charter allow them to handpick 3 year-olds? Is there a provision that allows them to skip over 4 year-olds on the top of the waitlist?

LAMB indicated that they were trying to balance the number of 3 year olds and 4 year olds in the classroom. So most likely no new 4 year olds, period.

Insert sad face.

Curious about LAMB since at least one DCUM poster released a preK 4 spot due to a move.

^^ I am also top 5 for LAMB pre-k 4 and was told that we would never get in. I have called several times and consistently get the same response. I am not sure why they opted to hold a lottery if they have absolutely no spots for pre-k 4.

I'm in the top 10 at LAMB for PK4 as well ... and have only heard that it hasn't moved. So I definitely feel your pain!

Wish there was more clarity, or that there really has been no movement this year for PK4.

Anonymous wrote:Central office has no interest in removing Principal discretion. To think they will continuously get reports from MSDC about waitlist # and then check enrollment # is laughable.

Agreed. Adding more levels of bureaucracy that will slow down schools that are trying to be fully enrolled by count day is just not happening.

Central office has no interest in removing Principal discretion. To think they will continuously get reports from MSDC about waitlist # and then check enrollment # is laughable.

I have not gotten clarify from LAMB for Pre-k 4 either. we are in the top 5 on the waitlist, and I've learned from another thread that at least one slot was vacated, but I get no response to my emails and when I call I'm told that there is no movement for Pre-K 4. I then mentioned that I knew someone left and the woman responded "oh, who's that? sometimes its filled with siblings" but basically I cannot get an updated number. Am I #3? still #4? is anyone getting calls to replace that slot ? .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know two parents who got into K off the waitlist in recent days - mid 20s.

Stokes?

Yes

Anonymous wrote:I know two parents who got into K off the waitlist in recent days - mid 20s.

Stokes?