DME Kicks Off DCPS Boundary Review; Changes Expected for 2015-16 School Year

[Anonymous]

Deputy Mayor for Education Launches Process to Revise Student Assignment Policies and DCPS School Boundaries

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – Today, Deputy Mayor for Education (DME) Abigail Smith formally kicked off the citywide process to revise student-assignment policies, including D.C. Public Schools (DCPS) school boundaries and feeder patterns. The goal of this process is to develop school choice and assignment policies that will result in clarity, predictability and continuity for families across the District.

The District has not undertaken a comprehensive review of its student-assignment policies, including school attendance boundaries and feeder patterns, in over three decades. Meanwhile, during that same period, both DCPS and the District’s public charter schools have opened and closed, and the city’s population has grown and shifted considerably.

“We need to have clear school boundaries and feeder patterns that give families peace of mind and that allow us to plan effectively across sectors to ensure that we are providing each and every child with the opportunity to gain access to a high-quality education close to home,” said Mayor Vincent C. Gray.

Over the next eleven months, Deputy Mayor Smith will lead the efforts to review current student-assignment policies and practices, identify challenges, analyze data, seek public input, and recommend solutions. As part of this process, the DME has established a D.C. Advisory Committee on Student Assignment, which will be co-chaired by Deputy Mayor Smith and long-time District leader John Hill. The Advisory Committee, which includes members of varied perspectives who are strongly invested in the success of the public education system and the future of our city, will incorporate public discussion, research, and analysis to provide fair-minded, thoughtful, and informed recommendations to the DME in May 2014.

The DME will release a final plan in September 2014. Changes will begin to take effect for the 2015-16 school year. However, in an effort to ensure a smooth transition for families, “grandfathering” provisions will be included to buffer the immediate impact on many current students and their families.

“I look forward to working with the advisory committee, parents and the community at large to make sure that this process is as inclusive and transparent as possible,” said Deputy Mayor Smith. “There is a lot of hard work ahead, and I am committed to ensuring that this process results in a plan that makes sense for families and supports the growth of our city.”

Critical to the success of this process is a comprehensive community-engagement plan. District residents will have multiple opportunities to get involved and provide input throughout the process. Opportunities to provide input will include focus groups, online forum and surveys, and small-group meetings with parent s and stakeholders.

For more information on the process and how to get involved please visit dme.dc.gov.

[jsteele]

More information is available here, including the list of committee members:

http://dme.dc.gov/DC/DME/Initiatives+and+Priorities/Statewide+Commission+on+Children+Youth+and+Their+Families/Student+Assignment+and+School+Boundaries+Review+Process

[Anonymous]

Let the fun begin! Who chimes in first, Lafayette or Brent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let the fun begin! Who chimes in first, Lafayette or Brent?

Or, "we need to stay IB for Deal" from the Bancroft and Sheperd addresses

[Anonymous]

What, specifically, does "grandfathering provisions will buffer the immediate impact on many current students and their families mean?" The lack of clarity on this point alone does not inspire confidence right out of the gate.

[Anonymous]

Wait until the Wilson and deal boundaries start shrinking!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What, specifically, does "grandfathering provisions will buffer the immediate impact on many current students and their families mean?" The lack of clarity on this point alone does not inspire confidence right out of the gate.

Intentionally vague of course. They want to make sure out of bounds kids think they will be grandfathered in while actually leaving open the option to boot them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let the fun begin! Who chimes in first, Lafayette or Brent?

Or, "we need to stay IB for Deal" from the Bancroft and Sheperd addresses

That's why I won't buy in the Shepherd Park, or Crestwood neighborhoods right now. Too unpredictable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let the fun begin! Who chimes in first, Lafayette or Brent?

Or, "we need to stay IB for Deal" from the Bancroft and Sheperd addresses

That's why I won't buy in the Shepherd Park, or Crestwood neighborhoods right now. Too unpredictable.

I would agree that Crestwood is on the chopping block.

are there any DCPS families there?

[Anonymous]

I don't buy that DCPS will listen to stakeholders- look at the school closings. I think Kaya will do what she wants.

[Anonymous]

I know I will get flamed for asking, but here goes. Many kids outside upper NW face enough challenges as it is. So instead of further burdening them with 2+ hours daily commutes to the upper NW schools, why can't the City devote enough resources to raising the neighborhood schools in NE, SW, and SE? The kids could spend the found time on academics and enrichment instead of on the Metro and crowding would be reduced in the upper NW schools that are bursting at the seams. I know this is a touchy subject, but let's have an adult conversation here.

[Anonymous]

I think the kids that are in OOB schools now are fine. beginning in 15-16 those entering will not be able to move forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't buy that DCPS will listen to stakeholders- look at the school closings. I think Kaya will do what she wants.

Well it depends on who shouts the loudest. Garrison got to stay open because they got their community involved. Lafyette are a bunch of overacheivers and have already formed committees to keep their boundaries the same, never mind that was basically no chance of their boundaries changing anyway.

anyway this was the most updated coolection of boundary maps but it doesn't relfect the school closings at the end of 2013. http://dc.gov/DCPS/Learn+About+Schools/Prepare+to+Enroll/Find+Your+Assigned+Schools/Find+Your+Assigned+Schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know I will get flamed for asking, but here goes. Many kids outside upper NW face enough challenges as it is. So instead of further burdening them with 2+ hours daily commutes to the upper NW schools, why can't the City devote enough resources to raising the neighborhood schools in NE, SW, and SE? The kids could spend the found time on academics and enrichment instead of on the Metro and crowding would be reduced in the upper NW schools that are bursting at the seams. I know this is a touchy subject, but let's have an adult conversation here.

I agree but hasn't this been a goal of DCPS already?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know I will get flamed for asking, but here goes. Many kids outside upper NW face enough challenges as it is. So instead of further burdening them with 2+ hours daily commutes to the upper NW schools, why can't the City devote enough resources to raising the neighborhood schools in NE, SW, and SE? The kids could spend the found time on academics and enrichment instead of on the Metro and crowding would be reduced in the upper NW schools that are bursting at the seams. I know this is a touchy subject, but let's have an adult conversation here.

You can't create a 'high performing school' simply by throwing money into it. The crucial issue, imo, is getting a high enough percentage of students with motivation. I personally believe that Wilson's boundaries look like the scribblings of a drunk person. The vague language about grandfathering is necessarily vague; isn't the process supposedly just beginning? Anything 'concrete' would draw criticism that residents hadn't been consulted. Even if the board already has firm plans, there is a need to create the illusion that voters have been heard.