Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's funny, is 20 years ago - none of you folks wanted to go to DC schools.

Remind me why this is such a big deal now?

So if totally different people don’t act the same as other people did two decades ago, it’s somehow hypocritical? That’s interesting. I can assume you’re commenting via a dial-up modem in order to stay consistent

You must have gone to DCPS, your grammar is fantastic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many teachers in the many underperforming DC schools want their kid to attend their school? Do they get a preference to send their kid to a better-performing school so they'll be happier?

How many DCPS teachers actually live in the city?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's funny, is 20 years ago - none of you folks wanted to go to DC schools.

Remind me why this is such a big deal now?

So if totally different people don’t act the same as other people did two decades ago, it’s somehow hypocritical? That’s interesting. I can assume you’re commenting via a dial-up modem in order to stay consistent

Anonymous wrote:What's funny, is 20 years ago - none of you folks wanted to go to DC schools.

Remind me why this is such a big deal now?

Anonymous wrote:You sort of missed my point... As has DCPS. Happy teachers make for happier, better schools. I know it sounds crazy but it's true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think children of teachers and administrators should be weighted for admission. Teachers take a LOT of work home. Shaving off any time in their commute logistics by having children at the same school allows there to be "more of them" for all the children. It's also a vote of confidence in the school, and teachers who are teaching their colleagues children have added incentive (though probably not needed) to do their very best.

This this should be examined and perhaps made a policy. But let's not continue with a practice based on not what, but who you know.

I understand what you are saying and completely agree. It should be completely transparent and lawful (he certainly changing current rules). Kayas actions were abysmal. However, if we weight siblings for public charter or geography for public I'd say we can weight teachers kids for both ... Perhaps just weight then in the lottery when the teacher makes their choices for their reasons. I can't tell you the impact of morale when a teacher is happy with their own child's placement.. Seems a weird thing to skimp on.

There are 4,025 teachers in DC, 115 principals and 3500 staff members (counselors, registrars, custodians). Probably another 200 APs.

Should they all get a preference? Where do you draw the line?

Would the preference be above IB with sibling enrolled? Higher than OOB with sibling?

I would start with teachers. They come early, leave late. They offer after school classes. They take planning and grading home. Having their child onsite, in pre or aftercare as well is a huge boon for their ability to do their best work. Private schools in the area grant admission to teachers' children unless there is a huge fit problem, and faculty morale and school climate appear to be very high. If we need more spots, perhaps we need more great schools--and it would behoove public schools to begin attacking that conundrum by realizing that great schools often have happy, invested teachers...which they surely would be if their children were in the same place. I've taught in both public and private in DC and I can tell you--public teachers are generally punished, scolded and squeezed to 'high performance', private school teachers earn less but are supported up to and including work/life balance. That has a return which is energy, loyalty, enthusiasm and creativity. I would definitely start with the teachers and give them a weight if they wanted their school age children (not every teacher will have a child who would be the right age for the school) to attend.

Anonymous wrote:How many teachers in the many underperforming DC schools want their kid to attend their school? Do they get a preference to send their kid to a better-performing school so they'll be happier?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think children of teachers and administrators should be weighted for admission. Teachers take a LOT of work home. Shaving off any time in their commute logistics by having children at the same school allows there to be "more of them" for all the children. It's also a vote of confidence in the school, and teachers who are teaching their colleagues children have added incentive (though probably not needed) to do their very best.

This this should be examined and perhaps made a policy. But let's not continue with a practice based on not what, but who you know.

I understand what you are saying and completely agree. It should be completely transparent and lawful (he certainly changing current rules). Kayas actions were abysmal. However, if we weight siblings for public charter or geography for public I'd say we can weight teachers kids for both ... Perhaps just weight then in the lottery when the teacher makes their choices for their reasons. I can't tell you the impact of morale when a teacher is happy with their own child's placement.. Seems a weird thing to skimp on.

There are 4,025 teachers in DC, 115 principals and 3500 staff members (counselors, registrars, custodians). Probably another 200 APs.

Should they all get a preference? Where do you draw the line?

Would the preference be above IB with sibling enrolled? Higher than OOB with sibling?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think children of teachers and administrators should be weighted for admission. Teachers take a LOT of work home. Shaving off any time in their commute logistics by having children at the same school allows there to be "more of them" for all the children. It's also a vote of confidence in the school, and teachers who are teaching their colleagues children have added incentive (though probably not needed) to do their very best.

This this should be examined and perhaps made a policy. But let's not continue with a practice based on not what, but who you know.

I understand what you are saying and completely agree. It should be completely transparent and lawful (he certainly changing current rules). Kayas actions were abysmal. However, if we weight siblings for public charter or geography for public I'd say we can weight teachers kids for both ... Perhaps just weight then in the lottery when the teacher makes their choices for their reasons. I can't tell you the impact of morale when a teacher is happy with their own child's placement.. Seems a weird thing to skimp on.

There are 4,025 teachers in DC, 115 principals and 3500 staff members (counselors, registrars, custodians). Probably another 200 APs.

Should they all get a preference? Where do you draw the line?

Would the preference be above IB with sibling enrolled? Higher than OOB with sibling?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think children of teachers and administrators should be weighted for admission. Teachers take a LOT of work home. Shaving off any time in their commute logistics by having children at the same school allows there to be "more of them" for all the children. It's also a vote of confidence in the school, and teachers who are teaching their colleagues children have added incentive (though probably not needed) to do their very best.

This this should be examined and perhaps made a policy. But let's not continue with a practice based on not what, but who you know.

I understand what you are saying and completely agree. It should be completely transparent and lawful (he certainly changing current rules). Kayas actions were abysmal. However, if we weight siblings for public charter or geography for public I'd say we can weight teachers kids for both ... Perhaps just weight then in the lottery when the teacher makes their choices for their reasons. I can't tell you the impact of morale when a teacher is happy with their own child's placement.. Seems a weird thing to skimp on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think children of teachers and administrators should be weighted for admission. Teachers take a LOT of work home. Shaving off any time in their commute logistics by having children at the same school allows there to be "more of them" for all the children. It's also a vote of confidence in the school, and teachers who are teaching their colleagues children have added incentive (though probably not needed) to do their very best.

This this should be examined and perhaps made a policy. But let's not continue with a practice based on not what, but who you know.