This year I thought it was insane that my son had to go through an exhausting and competitive process just to get a middle school placement. But now, to hear that it’s even worse at the PRE-K level??? People have to fight for slots in their own zoned school? What is going ON at the DOE???

Good luck to everyone (wish I could pass out Tylenol to all, I’m sure you need it!)

I’m a parent of a rejected Pre-K’er with a an older sibling. I agree that the system is flawed, and there needs to be more seats to service a growing number of children applying to Pre-K every year. The rules are not fair, not fairer than any other application system that the DOE has established so far (middle school, high school). We all have a right to a fair chance at a Pre-K seat for our young ones.
Nevertheless, if the DOE stipulates certain rules, and we do everything to follow, the DOE should correct their mistakes instead of sitting on their hands. I think what part the outcry is about is that if they mess up so terribly and we sit idly by and watch and say nothing, it makes it easier for other institutions to make even bigger mistakes and get away with murder.
They made up rules and guidelines for this year’s admissions process (and you know they will change next year, as they always do, to someone else’s benefit), we followed, they messed up badly all over the city, and nothing is being done!
And believe me when I tell you there are many parents out there with wrongfully rejected Pre-K applicants who don’t have a voice, or someone to speak up for them, because of language barriers, who are intimidated by the system and by making numerous phone calls to OSEPO. Who is going to speak up for them? Are they just going to disappear? Is that most convenient for everybody??

If a huge and embarrassing mistake has been made, as in this case, then the DOE needs step up and do something, and we, the parents, need to speak up and NOT suck it up!! The rules were set by the DOE - we play after them nicely. They don’t follow their own rules — we don’t wan to take it lying down!

That said, totally agree that there needs to be more pre-K slots. The educrats also all believe in the importance of early childhood education. Parents agree - if we all want this in NYC, we need to have it offered and need to figure out a way to pay for it.

The way the lottery was handled wasn’t any less fair than the way the rules were written. When there aren’t enough spots for everyone, why should an accident of geography, or of having older siblings, make you better than anyone else?

One way or another, kids were going to be left without spots. Kids who were all 100% equally deserving of spots. If you argue and argue for your “right,” then you’ll be taking a spot from someone else with the exact same right to an education.

Go private or move on. Spend your energy on fighting for enough seats for everyone, not in trying to prove your kid has more right than someone else. Yeah, I had to pinch and struggle to pay for private PreK last year, but I accept that the city doesn’t owe me a darn thing until 1st grade.

I say they should have 1 lottery, early in the year, that is for the right to a slot only (without saying for which school). Then they can have a second round within that lucky group, that takes in account sibling preference and zoning.

Meantime, buck up and realize your kid doesn’t deserve more than anyone else’s kid. I’m really sorry you didn’t get lucky this year, but no sorrier for those without the right sibs or zoning who didn’t get a slot.

It’s not a level playing field anymore, and I am so sick of the sense of entitlement everyone feels. Get over it, you didn’t get in, guess what there’s always next year! Sour grapes anyone??

Kids without an older sibling in school do not have a FAIR CHANCE. The way it is written right now, they only get an available seat AFTER all younger siblings are placed. The sword goes both ways here. There is this anger that people without sibs got a spot somewhere, and people with sibs got no spot…as if one category is more deserving of free Pre-K than another. Sibling preference was intended for convenience of location, not for giving more rights to one category of child.

The pre-K admissions were subcontracted out, supposedly to avoid confusion and be more equitable. So much of the work this administration has undertaken, all the testing and data entry and analysis, has been subcontracted to private companies. I hear these are no-bid contracts. This a huge investment of public funds, while schools are dealing with budget cuts. Will the extra money from the Campaign for Fiscal Equity ever reach the classroom?

With the obviously shabby work the company in PA has done, making a mess of the new pre-K admission policy, what confidence should we have in the quality of work done by the companies handling these ever-more-important tests and assessments? This testing is driving the philosophy and the work of education, even beyond what is required by No Child Left Behind.

Behind these decisions is a deeply held mistrust of schools and communities, an assumption of incompetence, inefficiency, and corruption. There is historical precedent to support this attitude. But there is also a history (hello, Halliburton!) of incompetence and corruption when private subcontractors are hired with no-bid contracts to perform the responsibilities of the public sector. Where is the accountability for the poor work done by the Willow Brook, PA data processing center, hired to place our 4-year olds in their first public school? Was this a no-bid contract? How much of our precious education money was spent on this “improvement?” The growth of charter schools is another mechanism by which private interests are entrusted with public money. These schools are not accountable to the DoE, are not overseen by the District Superintendent, the CEC, or any other public accountability mechanism. Should non-educators be entrusted to manage the education of our children?

As the DoE hopefully finds ways to address at least this most recent error, the automatic rejection of legitimate sibling preference in pre-K assignments, I hope it will illuminate the larger issues and restore a structure of accountability to the NYC education system.

Kate Yourke
(parent of pre-K child assigned to school other than zoned school where sibling attends, D14)