Thursday, July 1, 2010

June 30 wait pool letters

Feel free to share your news...

56 comments:

  1. Any one get good news? We didn't.

    I'm considering switching wait pools to a smaller one, but I'm scared I'll feel like I wasted my whole summer on a small chance spot at my number 1 school. I'm wondering if it might be too late to switch to another school? Any advice?

    Has anyone seen the June wait pool list?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Our family did not receive any good news for Kindergarten. I'm having a hard time enjoying the Summer!

    ReplyDelete
  3. We also did not get our waitpool, and we are on a small list. I have not seen the new waitpool list- I thought they were posting it on June 30??

    ReplyDelete
  4. We also did not receive a K placement letter yesterday. We're in the same boat as 11:52. We were hoping for this round and then were going to rethink our plan. I want to see the revised waitlist list first, and then we'll see if we switch it up. It's a very disheartening situation.

    ReplyDelete
  5. No letter for us either, just the confirm that we'll remain in the waitpool if we notify EPC. I suspect very few spots were given out this round. We have good public for K but it is really far away so we will stay in the waitpool and change once school starts if we can. EPC still has not posted the June waitpools.

    ReplyDelete
  6. We, too, got a disappointing letter from EPC. I doubt there was much movement in latest round, and the letter suggested that the main event will be just before school starts and the first week of school. More waiting!

    Re: waitpool switching - a parent in an earlier thread said he/she got two kids into Commodore Sloat upper grades after switching waitpools

    ReplyDelete
  7. It is so insensitive for SFUSD not to post the June 30th wait pools. It is July 2nd...what is the problem. Folks without schools are scrutinizing every little bit of hope they can get and need to focus on whether to change their waitlist school. If there are still 10 0/7s then really, we deserve to know. The letters are out, I really do not understand the problem.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Are any of really surprised that the SFUSD did not publish the new waitpool lists? At what point in this (crazy) process has the SFUSD done anything for the families that it allegedly serves to make life easier? Why break the streak now?

    ReplyDelete
  9. 3:07 and 7:21: It's not a matter of insensitivity. It's a matter of a public agency blatantly displaying a lack of accountability to the population it serves. This public agency owes its existence to the taxpaying parents in the City. It has enjoyed an self-imposed bizarre position in deciding where literally thousands of young students will be educated. As parents, we are helpless since we cannot make the choice ourselves.EPC's repeated failures to comply with deadlines are a blatant violation of trust. There's no respectful relationship with parents; they decide where our children go; they treat us with total disrespect because they are aware that there is basically not much we can do.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Sflawyer, I couldn't agree more. The blatant disrespect for those at the school/community level -- families, students, but also teachers and staff, is really frustrating to me. Posting a PDF of wait lists really doesn't seem that complicated. Maybe it is, but a good explanation would be appreciated.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Who's in charge of EPC? Who can we even complain to? Has anyone talked to PPS?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Carlos Garcia and our BOE commissioners are ultimately responsible for setting admission policy to our schools and the EPC.

    In my experience, PPS are in the same camp with the EPC. Their main platform in the past was to encourage parents to enroll their kids in underenrolled SF public schools.

    The problem, as I see it, is that PPS has not responded to the recent (last two years) uptick in school enrollments.

    Out of one side of their mouth, they're still saying there are plenty of spots in SF schools, and out of the other side of their mouth, they're agreeing to radically reform or close 10 schools that sit in the bottom 5% of California schools (which sit at the bottom of schools in the US.)

    And it's true that about half of the "openings" that remain are at those 10 schools that need radical reform.

    The bottom line, all talk aside, is that there are not enough schools slots open that would meet a minimum academic standard.

    Because both the old and new admission policies put middle class applicant families at the bottom of the pile, it's always going to be middle class families that are stuck with those failing school slots. . . And poor families, from in and outside the city* [as long as they apply by August] will be put to the front of the line.

    That's an intentional SFUSD policy. Carlos Garcia, PPS and the school commissioners are ultimately responsible for that policy.

    That's the reason that many SF families that applied in January for kindergarten, are still shut out of the process.

    That's what needs to be addressed.

    ReplyDelete
  13. *And poor families, from in and outside the city*

    There is plenty of evidence to indicate that about 10% of students in San Francisco schools do not live in San Francisco. As we all know, parents need only show ID one time, for all of elementary school attendence. It is easy to show fraudulent documents. No other form of residency checking is ever done.

    That ultimately means that hundreds of schools slots at the best schools are stolen from San Francisco families.

    That's not the only problem, but it is certainly something that could easily be fixed.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Some parents for years have left with a big question about how fair the lottery process is. Has it been influenced by positions of power, money, etc. Pure anecdotes: Mme Speaker's grandchild ended up in Rooftop; children of very wealthy families in Lillienthal and Sherman...Any disagrements/agreements?

    ReplyDelete
  15. 4:50: The problem of fraud will not be resolved due to the permissive attitude of those in charge. Case in point: the principal of Sherman responded to the evidence of fraudulent activities of the parents at her school with so much empathy and understanding. What happened to the outrage at the lack of integrity, and the win- at- all -cost of those parents? To her, it probably would be ok to lie on the admissions application to Ivy League because "Hey, we understand why you desperately wanted to get in!" It's always easier to protect the interest of those VISIBLE perpetrators--aka victims of circumstances. That was really an insult to the INVISIBLE parents with integrity and a sense of fair play...

    ReplyDelete
  16. 4:55 I thought it was interesting when I toured Lillienthal a few years ago and the parent conducting the tour told us that he was the nephew (I think) of Ms. Lillienthal. Coincidence that his kids won the lottery?? I wonder . . .

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hmm, from a parent who could afford private easily (and have a private spot) but would prefer public. We have gotten nothing in the lottery so I am not so sure it is a wealthy thing.

    ReplyDelete
  18. 4:50, what form of residency checking do you think could be "easily" done given SFUSD's chronic shortage of resources?

    A young friend who's a Lowell student (and who is a legit SF resident) complained to me that someone from SFUSD followed her friend home to Daly City and then they kicked her out of Lowell. Obviously there are limited resources to do that kind of detective work. What specific ideas do you have?

    I think other posters have an exalted idea of PPS' role. PPS is a nonprofit and doesn't set district policy, or certainly state education policy such as creating the list of underperforming schools.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Do you think wealthy parents who want public schools might ONLY consider trophies near their million dollar homes and head to SF Day if they don't get in?

    Might THAT be why there are wealthy families at Rooftop and Lilienthal?

    Or because there is some crazy favoritism going on?


    And do folks really think Middle Class kids are more deserving of spots in the better schools than kids whose parents are less able to support their academics at home?

    REALLY?

    ReplyDelete
  20. "And do folks really think Middle Class kids are more deserving of spots in the better schools than kids whose parents are less able to support their academics at home?"

    Kids who live in the city are deserving of a spot at a San Francisco school that meets minimum academic standards.

    Kids who do not live in the city, regardless of their economic status, are not deserving of a spot at a San Francisco school.

    Really.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I can't believe EPC has not posted updated waitpools. Has anyone been able to get thru to them? I just keep leaving messages and no one callse me back.

    ReplyDelete
  22. 11:13am

    I agree with you! This is infuriating! How can they be so late on this? How can we return our wait pool letters if we can't see the updated wait pool numbers. What if we want to change wait pool schools? They better not be late on mailing the August 6 wait pool acceptances. Otherwise, people might not make it in time to their assigned school.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I've emailed an EPC employee and Rachel Norton to help us find out when the June 30 wait pool list will be posted. I'll let you know if I receive a response.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Hi Everyone,

    Got this and thought we'd share:

    http://rpnorton.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/wp_cohorts-for-web-6_30_10.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  25. 7:00PM-
    Thank you!!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Thank you! But ugh! My waitpool is bigger!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Very little movement in our mid-size weight pool, but more 0/7s moved into it. I think people are starting to move out of the really big ones into the mid/small size ones.

    ReplyDelete
  28. @ 7:00,

    Thanks a billion! I don't feel any better about my wp choice, but at least I can see my options.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Thank you 7:00pm and Rachel Norton! And thank goodness for this blog during this horrible process.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I am July 6, 1:32pm. I want to publicly thank Rachel Norton. When I emailed her that the June 30 wait pool list hadn't yet been posted, she got back to me right away with the list. She's the best!!

    ReplyDelete
  31. There are 333 0/7s on the June waitpool. This doesn't include siblings who could also be 0/7. I wonder how many 0/7s will be on the waitpool list in Aug? How many will have found a private school or moved?

    ReplyDelete
  32. Thanks, Rachel! How did she get it up so fast, and yet EPC still doesn't have it up.
    There are so many schools with wait pools.
    It doesn't seem likely that 333 children will go private or move, you know?
    Hope the district has some really good ideas.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I'm so grateful for this site! Thanks to the Anonymous who posted the link.

    ReplyDelete
  34. It's designated as a draft wait pool list.

    ReplyDelete
  35. All the waitpools lists are titled "Draft." The ones from April and May that are posted on EPC are all drafts. Apparently EPC is not capable of publishing Final lists or publishing on time.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Nothing over here and trying hard to not feel completely defeated. Looking into Edison Charter and maybe Catholic schools too. Anyone else have a good back up plan? Not sure if I should hold out for a spot in the school we really want which is a hard one to get into or the one of the others which we also like but have siblings or hardship appeals ahead of us in waitpool.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I feel like the K wait pool list didn't change much from last time. Do others agree?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Our waitpool change slightly, it increased by 3 people. Some late and other 0/7s transferring in.

    We are assigned to a school with about 15 people waiting to get in and on a waitlist for a school with about 15 people. The whole process is just so dumb. At least if we get into our waitpool school we'll make someone else happy and they'll get into theirs too.

    ReplyDelete
  39. "I am July 6, 1:32pm. I want to publicly thank Rachel Norton. When I emailed her that the June 30 wait pool list hadn't yet been posted, she got back to me right away with the list. She's the best!!"

    But...YOU didn't post the link to the list at all, 7:00 did!

    ReplyDelete
  40. Yes, July 6, 7:00pm had already posted the wait pool list by the time I had opened Rachel Norton's e-mail with the wait pool list file. Rachel had e-mailed me the file after I had shut my computer down for the day on the 6th. I didn't see the list until the morning of the 7th.

    ReplyDelete
  41. I haven't heard of more than 1 person who got anything in Round 3. Is that possibl? Hope there is a lot of movement on August 16th

    ReplyDelete
  42. "Looking into Edison Charter and maybe Catholic schools too."

    Edison "got their charter yanked" Charter? Run, run away.

    There's several great Catholic schools in the SE area: St. Paul's, St. Philip's, Mission Dolores, St. James, St. Elizabeth's, St. Finn Barr, and Epiphany or Corpus Christi if you want to go more south.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I added up all the people on the wait list. Its +/-953 kids for Kindergarden 2010-11. I wonder how many of these people are holding spots in school they don't want or like us have no school.

    It would also help to see/ look up the number of space in each class listed on the cohort. Sunny Side has two GE class rooms. It changed how I looked at the numbers.

    There are so many good schools I just want something that is not testing in the bottom precent. Having said that if there was a place at Paul Revere SE I would take it!

    ReplyDelete
  44. I added up all the people on the wait list. Its +/-953 kids for Kindergarden 2010-11. I wonder how many of these people are holding spots in school they don't want or like us have no school.

    It would also help to see/ look up the number of space in each class listed on the cohort. Sunny Side has two GE class rooms. It changed how I looked at the numbers.

    There are so many good schools I just want something that is not testing in the bottom precent. Having said that if there was a place at Paul Revere SE I would take it!

    ReplyDelete
  45. I wish there were a refundable deposit to hold public school spaces. First day of school, you show up and get your money back. If you release your spot before August 1, you get your money back. If you are a no-show, SFUSD gets to keep the deposit. There should be some dis-incentive for squatters who take up a coveted spot, with no intention of starting the school.

    Waiting until after school starts to see if you have a space is just too painful.

    ReplyDelete
  46. You know what would be helpful is if EPC posted how many no shows there were in each school in 2009, 2008 and 2007. How many spaces opened up in each school in August after the 3-day, 5-day or 10-day count (whatever count they were using at the time).

    ReplyDelete
  47. The June 30 wait pool lists have new classifications for Chinese immersion schools: (CE) Chinese Immersion Non-Target Language and (CN) Chinese Immersion Target Language.

    Are they splitting up the wait pool into children who speak Chinese and those who don't?

    ReplyDelete
  48. 4:45,

    Unfortunately, it will not happen. That would be work and we can't have SFUSD actually break a sweat trying to get timely information to interested parties!

    ReplyDelete
  49. Posted on the sfusd website:

    Re-activate your waiting pool request by July 23rd!

    The waiting pool process for students requesting enrollment into a requested school has been
    conducted in April and May. If your child has not received an offer to his/her waiting pool choice school, he/she may remain in the waiting pool throughout the entire process which will continue
    until the end of August. At that time all waiting pools are dissolved and there are no transfers allowed.

    We do not anticipate any further waiting pool runs until right before school commences again on
    August 16th. Once school begins, students who have registered for school must attend within the
    first three days. After three days, any student who have not contacted the school or are “no shows” will be dropped and those openings will be available for students in the waiting pool. At that time the EPC will attempt to fill any openings from the waiting pools as quickly and efficiently as possible.

    It can be very likely that your child will begin school at the school in which they have registered, and then receive an offer to their waiting pool school sometime in August. Please know that when your child is granted a waiting pool choice school, that he/she will be removed from their present assignment.

    A tear-off letter has been mailed to all students who are presently in a waiting pool. If you would
    like your child to remain active or if you want to be removed from the waiting pool, please notify the
    Educational Placement Center by mail, e-mail, or by fax by July 23, 2010.

    • Mail tear-off form to 555 Franklin, Room 100, SF, CA 94102

    • Fax to 415-241-6087

    • E-mail to WaitingPool@sfusd.edu
    Please refer to your child’s name, date of birth and HO# that is indicated on the top of this letter
    when contacting the EPC. Additionally, if you have registered for a school and do not intend to enroll in the fall, please contact the EPC so that the opening can be given to another student in the waiting pool.

    After August 1, we will remove any students from the wait pool who have not notified the district of
    their request to remain active in the process. We hope that this will help us run the waiting pool
    process more quickly and efficiently in order to assign students into their choice school as soon as possible.

    ReplyDelete
  50. I'm so sorry for everyone still waiting/stressing! I assume that there are a lot of people like us, who applied to K on the early side (child with Oct bday) who can wait a year but still show up in these wait pool numbers. We have chosen to stay in the wait pool even now (but we are not holding any registered spot), but expect that our child will go to pre-K at her preschool instead. Then I will feel your pain next year, I'm sure!

    ReplyDelete
  51. Does Edison Charter have a website yet? Google search brings up all the bad press for the previous management company, but nothing about the new management company, staff bios, or vision.

    ReplyDelete
  52. re: Edison. I met with the principal there last week and she gave me an impromptu tour and is totally willing to answer questions about anything to do with the school and it's past and future plans. She says the website is still under construction. YOu can reach her at 970-3330 ext 3050. They are also planning to start an immersion class for K this year.

    ReplyDelete
  53. to july 3 4:50 pm ("children from outside the city are "stealing spots from SF families" and to july 5 901 pm ("kids who do not live in the city... are not deserving of a spot"): SOME of us from outside the city go through the legit and agonizing process of requesting and being granted an interdistrict transfer by our resident district and SF. I really resent your implication that our children are not deserving. We are working above board, with full disclosure and in good faith with both disctricts involved. We are not stealing from SF families, as children thus enrolled count towards required attendance records in SF schools. Interdistrict transfer families get spots in SF schools that are "left over" -- because apparently some SF families on this list (from my reading mainly well educated middle and upper income families) would rather abandon public schools that have their children attend schools that are not in the "top five" like Lillienthal or Rooftop. FYI - If and when we enroll in SF it will be at a "less desireable" school that is not "good enough" for your kid. Our attendance will ensure that the school achives full attendance and full funding. Do I sound peeved by your statements? I am. Get over it.

    ReplyDelete
  54. "SOME of us from outside the city go through the legit and agonizing process of requesting and being granted an interdistrict transfer by our resident district and SF. I really resent your implication that our children are not deserving."

    No one is resenting the people who have legitimately obtained an interdistrict transfer. However, address fraud far exceeds the number of out of district transfers at sought after schools.

    You sound as if you are the only person who has struggled to get into a school. No one has forced you to live outside the city. It is unfortunate that the process of interdistrict transfer is agonizing. However, the process of school application is also agonizing.

    Judging by your comments, you seem to be not aware of the current crisis in lack of school availability in San Francisco.

    ReplyDelete
  55. hello,

    we recently submitted our wait pool confirmation at EPC to remain on a coveted school wait pool list, but have decided we want to withdraw. does anyone know if we can still go down there and get out of the wait pool, even after today's deadline? i'd hope so, since so many people would love a spot at this school.

    ReplyDelete
  56. July 23 9:50am

    Yes, you can always withdraw your wait pool request. I recommend that you do it before the next wait pool run which is on August 6. It's bound to help someone!

    ReplyDelete