How many kids in Crestwood are going into middle school next year? How about the year after that?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But if families don't mind the lack of an acceptable local elementary and they're willing to go all over the city to OOB and charters, why should they mind doing the same for middle and high school?

The trend has been that families who are living elsewhere get into a charter or desirable DCPS elementary school. They then move to Crestwood, knowing that elementary is taken care of, in order to secure middle and high school. This trend will come to an abrupt halt.

More recently, even younger families have started moving to Crestwood because of Powell. Deal and Roosevelt may have also been part of their equation. This is the group for whom a new MacFarland and revitalized Roosevelt might make sense. The problem is that the proposed transition is much too short.

Seriously??? I have NEVER heard any one of my neighbors or friends' neighbors on other streets who mention Roosevelt in their equation for selecting Crestwood. I, for one, didn't even know that Roosevelt existed until this whole school thing started and it was mentioned on DCUM. I was like, "Ohhh, that's what that big football field by the library is about..."

Sorry, I confused presidents. I meant to write, "Deal and Wilson". But, I hope that you will take time to learn more about Roosevelt. A top notch high school three blocks from the edge of our neighborhood could only be good. It would certainly help property values far more than a tentative relationship with Wilson. We need a better understanding of how we get from where we are to where we need to be for Roosevelt to be realistic alternative to Wilson. Then, we will need time to see that DCPS is delivering on the promise. But, the day that happens will be a good day for Crestwood.

[Anonymous]

16th Street Heights resident here. We moved here two years ago after our daughter got into to an elementary school charter, and we felt safe moving but wanted to ensure access to Deal and Wilson. We had more than enough reason to expect that this access would continue, given that our neighborhood, along with Crestwood, Shepherd Park, Colonial Village, and Mount Pleasant, have been inbounds for Deal and feeder access to Wilson for decades. The proposal ignores this historic access for Crestwood and 16th Street Heights and the reasonable expectations of its neighbors, and simply carves us out.

This realignment also appears to lack any explanation other than the proposal's expressed desire to align middle and high school's boundaries with our in-bound elementary school, West Elementary. Whatever the virtue of aligning these boundaries, it's not an adequate basis to cancel our existing ability to attend a quality middle and high school. If aligning boundaries is the concern, the fairer solution would be to treat Crestwood and 16th Heights the same as SP and Mt P, and assign us to a higher performing elementary school, not downgrade our middle and high school access to D and W. Equal or better, as has been said.

Moreover, the proposal offers no alternative middle school option for us at all. McFarland is currently closed and would require renovations before it could even open. To our knowledge, the only resources currently available for this is $7 million in planning funds. The proposal acknowledges this in one line stating that where a student is assigned to a school that is not yet open, they keep their existing rights until it does. But it is insensitive at best for a proposal to recommend this reassignment to take effect the day that a hypothetical school opens, instead of when parents might get an opportunity to assess it in reality.

We decided to raise our children in the DC based on our reliance on existing DC public schools available to our family. The proposal should lay out a plan for expanding and improving those opportunities into equal or better ones, not cutting or downgrading them.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But if families don't mind the lack of an acceptable local elementary and they're willing to go all over the city to OOB and charters, why should they mind doing the same for middle and high school?

The trend has been that families who are living elsewhere get into a charter or desirable DCPS elementary school. They then move to Crestwood, knowing that elementary is taken care of, in order to secure middle and high school. This trend will come to an abrupt halt.

More recently, even younger families have started moving to Crestwood because of Powell. Deal and Roosevelt may have also been part of their equation. This is the group for whom a new MacFarland and revitalized Roosevelt might make sense. The problem is that the proposed transition is much too short.

Seriously??? I have NEVER heard any one of my neighbors or friends' neighbors on other streets who mention Roosevelt in their equation for selecting Crestwood. I, for one, didn't even know that Roosevelt existed until this whole school thing started and it was mentioned on DCUM. I was like, "Ohhh, that's what that big football field by the library is about..."

Sorry, I confused presidents. I meant to write, "Deal and Wilson". But, I hope that you will take time to learn more about Roosevelt. A top notch high school three blocks from the edge of our neighborhood could only be good. It would certainly help property values far more than a tentative relationship with Wilson. We need a better understanding of how we get from where we are to where we need to be for Roosevelt to be realistic alternative to Wilson. Then, we will need time to see that DCPS is delivering on the promise. But, the day that happens will be a good day for Crestwood.

Jeff, you are far more optimistic than I am. I wonder if folks in Crestwood had simply put their foot down in protest rather than walk this optimistic fine line spirit of cooperation crap whether we would be in a better situation now. City officials do not understand grey, they understand flat out NO WE WONT ACCEPT THIS! Anything less gives them room to wiggle, manipulate and maneuver, which is what has happened here.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But if families don't mind the lack of an acceptable local elementary and they're willing to go all over the city to OOB and charters, why should they mind doing the same for middle and high school?

The trend has been that families who are living elsewhere get into a charter or desirable DCPS elementary school. They then move to Crestwood, knowing that elementary is taken care of, in order to secure middle and high school. This trend will come to an abrupt halt.

More recently, even younger families have started moving to Crestwood because of Powell. Deal and Roosevelt may have also been part of their equation. This is the group for whom a new MacFarland and revitalized Roosevelt might make sense. The problem is that the proposed transition is much too short.

Seriously??? I have NEVER heard any one of my neighbors or friends' neighbors on other streets who mention Roosevelt in their equation for selecting Crestwood. I, for one, didn't even know that Roosevelt existed until this whole school thing started and it was mentioned on DCUM. I was like, "Ohhh, that's what that big football field by the library is about..."

Sorry, I confused presidents. I meant to write, "Deal and Wilson". But, I hope that you will take time to learn more about Roosevelt. A top notch high school three blocks from the edge of our neighborhood could only be good. It would certainly help property values far more than a tentative relationship with Wilson. We need a better understanding of how we get from where we are to where we need to be for Roosevelt to be realistic alternative to Wilson. Then, we will need time to see that DCPS is delivering on the promise. But, the day that happens will be a good day for Crestwood.

Jeff, you are far more optimistic than I am. I wonder if folks in Crestwood had simply put their foot down in protest rather than walk this optimistic fine line spirit of cooperation crap whether we would be in a better situation now. City officials do not understand grey, they understand flat out NO WE WONT ACCEPT THIS! Anything less gives them room to wiggle, manipulate and maneuver, which is what has happened here.

You are more than welcome to begin setting our strategy from here on out. But, I've seen no evidence that simply saying "no" would have had any impact. Who do you think would care if we threatened to scream and stomp our feet? We were screwed the minute the Committee decided to focus on feeder patterns. That was true no matter what we said. Do you really believe that our saying "NO WE WONT ACCEPT THIS" would cause the Committee to say, "okay, Crestwood will be the only neighborhood in the entire city to be exempt from feeder patterns"? I don't think so. The Committee did not find "wiggle room" in our reasonable proposal. It flat out ignored our proposal. There is no reason they wouldn't do the same to an unreasonable proposal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But if families don't mind the lack of an acceptable local elementary and they're willing to go all over the city to OOB and charters, why should they mind doing the same for middle and high school?

The trend has been that families who are living elsewhere get into a charter or desirable DCPS elementary school. They then move to Crestwood, knowing that elementary is taken care of, in order to secure middle and high school. This trend will come to an abrupt halt.

More recently, even younger families have started moving to Crestwood because of Powell. Deal and Roosevelt may have also been part of their equation. This is the group for whom a new MacFarland and revitalized Roosevelt might make sense. The problem is that the proposed transition is much too short.

Seriously??? I have NEVER heard any one of my neighbors or friends' neighbors on other streets who mention Roosevelt in their equation for selecting Crestwood. I, for one, didn't even know that Roosevelt existed until this whole school thing started and it was mentioned on DCUM. I was like, "Ohhh, that's what that big football field by the library is about..."

Sorry, I confused presidents. I meant to write, "Deal and Wilson". But, I hope that you will take time to learn more about Roosevelt. A top notch high school three blocks from the edge of our neighborhood could only be good. It would certainly help property values far more than a tentative relationship with Wilson. We need a better understanding of how we get from where we are to where we need to be for Roosevelt to be realistic alternative to Wilson. Then, we will need time to see that DCPS is delivering on the promise. But, the day that happens will be a good day for Crestwood.

Jeff, you are far more optimistic than I am. I wonder if folks in Crestwood had simply put their foot down in protest rather than walk this optimistic fine line spirit of cooperation crap whether we would be in a better situation now. City officials do not understand grey, they understand flat out NO WE WONT ACCEPT THIS! Anything less gives them room to wiggle, manipulate and maneuver, which is what has happened here.

perhaps DME saw the enthusiasm on the Roosevelt thread here and figured cutting Crestwood families out of Deal/Wislon would encourage them to get behind a quick transition to Mcfarland/Roosevelt.

[Anonymous]

NP here. I'm a CH mom with a kid in HRCS. I'm appalled that Crestwood children would be excluded from Deal/Wilson when the alternatives are inferior. This is unacceptable to, which is why I've put full stock towards getting David Catania as mayor. I spent all weekend working to get his name on the ballot. He rejects the idea that kids should be pushed towards mediocrity or inferiority. He has the plan to transform our schools and all concerned parents should get behind him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here. I'm a CH mom with a kid in HRCS. I'm appalled that Crestwood children would be excluded from Deal/Wilson when the alternatives are inferior. This is unacceptable to, which is why I've put full stock towards getting David Catania as mayor. I spent all weekend working to get his name on the ballot. He rejects the idea that kids should be pushed towards mediocrity or inferiority. He has the plan to transform our schools and all concerned parents should get behind him.

I'm behind Catania, but hope he doesn't use the mindset of a "plan to transform our schools" - we've seen where that's gotten us. What we need and what I hope he has is responsible implementation of reasonable plans to provide good public education to every child in the city.

[Anonymous]

Thank you for this well though out post. I too am in 16th Street Heights and am looking to work with other families in the neighborhood o this important and timely issue. I know you posted anonymously but feel free to email me at [e-mail]--I would love to connect you to come others that are strategizing.

Anonymous wrote:16th Street Heights resident here. We moved here two years ago after our daughter got into to an elementary school charter, and we felt safe moving but wanted to ensure access to Deal and Wilson. We had more than enough reason to expect that this access would continue, given that our neighborhood, along with Crestwood, Shepherd Park, Colonial Village, and Mount Pleasant, have been inbounds for Deal and feeder access to Wilson for decades. The proposal ignores this historic access for Crestwood and 16th Street Heights and the reasonable expectations of its neighbors, and simply carves us out.

This realignment also appears to lack any explanation other than the proposal's expressed desire to align middle and high school's boundaries with our in-bound elementary school, West Elementary. Whatever the virtue of aligning these boundaries, it's not an adequate basis to cancel our existing ability to attend a quality middle and high school. If aligning boundaries is the concern, the fairer solution would be to treat Crestwood and 16th Heights the same as SP and Mt P, and assign us to a higher performing elementary school, not downgrade our middle and high school access to D and W. Equal or better, as has been said.

Moreover, the proposal offers no alternative middle school option for us at all. McFarland is currently closed and would require renovations before it could even open. To our knowledge, the only resources currently available for this is $7 million in planning funds. The proposal acknowledges this in one line stating that where a student is assigned to a school that is not yet open, they keep their existing rights until it does. But it is insensitive at best for a proposal to recommend this reassignment to take effect the day that a hypothetical school opens, instead of when parents might get an opportunity to assess it in reality.

We decided to raise our children in the DC based on our reliance on existing DC public schools available to our family. The proposal should lay out a plan for expanding and improving those opportunities into equal or better ones, not cutting or downgrading them.

[Anonymous]

There is a large group of middle and high schoolers in Crestwood who go to various private schools (at least 25-30 kids). I think it's great that there are families with younger children moving in who are committed to the neighborhood and to ensuring that there is a high performing public middle and high school option. It will strengthen the community, and isn't that what we want for all our communities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:16th Street Heights resident here. We moved here two years ago after our daughter got into to an elementary school charter, and we felt safe moving but wanted to ensure access to Deal and Wilson. We had more than enough reason to expect that this access would continue, given that our neighborhood, along with Crestwood, Shepherd Park, Colonial Village, and Mount Pleasant, have been inbounds for Deal and feeder access to Wilson for decades. The proposal ignores this historic access for Crestwood and 16th Street Heights and the reasonable expectations of its neighbors, and simply carves us out.

This realignment also appears to lack any explanation other than the proposal's expressed desire to align middle and high school's boundaries with our in-bound elementary school, West Elementary. Whatever the virtue of aligning these boundaries, it's not an adequate basis to cancel our existing ability to attend a quality middle and high school. If aligning boundaries is the concern, the fairer solution would be to treat Crestwood and 16th Heights the same as SP and Mt P, and assign us to a higher performing elementary school, not downgrade our middle and high school access to D and W. Equal or better, as has been said.

Moreover, the proposal offers no alternative middle school option for us at all. McFarland is currently closed and would require renovations before it could even open. To our knowledge, the only resources currently available for this is $7 million in planning funds. The proposal acknowledges this in one line stating that where a student is assigned to a school that is not yet open, they keep their existing rights until it does. But it is insensitive at best for a proposal to recommend this reassignment to take effect the day that a hypothetical school opens, instead of when parents might get an opportunity to assess it in reality.

We decided to raise our children in the DC based on our reliance on existing DC public schools available to our family. The proposal should lay out a plan for expanding and improving those opportunities into equal or better ones, not cutting or downgrading them.

This is an interesting proposal, if you don't mind driving. Which school or schools would you propose?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But if families don't mind the lack of an acceptable local elementary and they're willing to go all over the city to OOB and charters, why should they mind doing the same for middle and high school?

The trend has been that families who are living elsewhere get into a charter or desirable DCPS elementary school. They then move to Crestwood, knowing that elementary is taken care of, in order to secure middle and high school. This trend will come to an abrupt halt.

More recently, even younger families have started moving to Crestwood because of Powell. Deal and Roosevelt may have also been part of their equation. This is the group for whom a new MacFarland and revitalized Roosevelt might make sense. The problem is that the proposed transition is much too short.

Seriously??? I have NEVER heard any one of my neighbors or friends' neighbors on other streets who mention Roosevelt in their equation for selecting Crestwood. I, for one, didn't even know that Roosevelt existed until this whole school thing started and it was mentioned on DCUM. I was like, "Ohhh, that's what that big football field by the library is about..."

Sorry, I confused presidents. I meant to write, "Deal and Wilson". But, I hope that you will take time to learn more about Roosevelt. A top notch high school three blocks from the edge of our neighborhood could only be good. It would certainly help property values far more than a tentative relationship with Wilson. We need a better understanding of how we get from where we are to where we need to be for Roosevelt to be realistic alternative to Wilson. Then, we will need time to see that DCPS is delivering on the promise. But, the day that happens will be a good day for Crestwood.

Jeff, you are far more optimistic than I am. I wonder if folks in Crestwood had simply put their foot down in protest rather than walk this optimistic fine line spirit of cooperation crap whether we would be in a better situation now. City officials do not understand grey, they understand flat out NO WE WONT ACCEPT THIS! Anything less gives them room to wiggle, manipulate and maneuver, which is what has happened here.

You are more than welcome to begin setting our strategy from here on out. But, I've seen no evidence that simply saying "no" would have had any impact. Who do you think would care if we threatened to scream and stomp our feet? We were screwed the minute the Committee decided to focus on feeder patterns. That was true no matter what we said. Do you really believe that our saying "NO WE WONT ACCEPT THIS" would cause the Committee to say, "okay, Crestwood will be the only neighborhood in the entire city to be exempt from feeder patterns"? I don't think so. The Committee did not find "wiggle room" in our reasonable proposal. It flat out ignored our proposal. There is no reason they wouldn't do the same to an unreasonable proposal.

It's my understanding there is a small group in 16th Street Heights that has made it their mission to reopen MacFarland (even though it was failing students) and add another middle school in NORTH Ward 4, even there is no community support. Good old DC politics-- fill the committee with people who have a personal agenda to fulfill rather get real input from the community. It 's baffling how the DME and DCPS think that everything will be great once there is a new, shiny building and everyone will rush send their kids there. It just will not happen.

[Anonymous]

I think Murch or Hearst would be the nearest WOTP elem schools for 16th street heights and crestwood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:16th Street Heights resident here. We moved here two years ago after our daughter got into to an elementary school charter, and we felt safe moving but wanted to ensure access to Deal and Wilson. We had more than enough reason to expect that this access would continue, given that our neighborhood, along with Crestwood, Shepherd Park, Colonial Village, and Mount Pleasant, have been inbounds for Deal and feeder access to Wilson for decades. The proposal ignores this historic access for Crestwood and 16th Street Heights and the reasonable expectations of its neighbors, and simply carves us out.

This realignment also appears to lack any explanation other than the proposal's expressed desire to align middle and high school's boundaries with our in-bound elementary school, West Elementary. Whatever the virtue of aligning these boundaries, it's not an adequate basis to cancel our existing ability to attend a quality middle and high school. If aligning boundaries is the concern, the fairer solution would be to treat Crestwood and 16th Heights the same as SP and Mt P, and assign us to a higher performing elementary school, not downgrade our middle and high school access to D and W. Equal or better, as has been said.

Moreover, the proposal offers no alternative middle school option for us at all. McFarland is currently closed and would require renovations before it could even open. To our knowledge, the only resources currently available for this is $7 million in planning funds. The proposal acknowledges this in one line stating that where a student is assigned to a school that is not yet open, they keep their existing rights until it does. But it is insensitive at best for a proposal to recommend this reassignment to take effect the day that a hypothetical school opens, instead of when parents might get an opportunity to assess it in reality.

We decided to raise our children in the DC based on our reliance on existing DC public schools available to our family. The proposal should lay out a plan for expanding and improving those opportunities into equal or better ones, not cutting or downgrading them.

This is an interesting proposal, if you don't mind driving. Which school or schools would you propose?

I'm not proposing it, just trying to point out that if the DME's proposal's goal is to turn the city's elem school boundaries into subsets of the middle school they feed, then it would be fairer to assign crestwood and 16th street to one of the deal feeding elementary schools (I suppose it could be Murch which borders us just to the west), rather than downgrading our MS and HS. I say this less to convince anyone to upgrade our elementary school, and more to point out that neatly organized school boundaries shouldn't overrule the principle of protecting a neighborhood's existing access to good schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But if families don't mind the lack of an acceptable local elementary and they're willing to go all over the city to OOB and charters, why should they mind doing the same for middle and high school?

The trend has been that families who are living elsewhere get into a charter or desirable DCPS elementary school. They then move to Crestwood, knowing that elementary is taken care of, in order to secure middle and high school. This trend will come to an abrupt halt.

More recently, even younger families have started moving to Crestwood because of Powell. Deal and Roosevelt may have also been part of their equation. This is the group for whom a new MacFarland and revitalized Roosevelt might make sense. The problem is that the proposed transition is much too short.

Seriously??? I have NEVER heard any one of my neighbors or friends' neighbors on other streets who mention Roosevelt in their equation for selecting Crestwood. I, for one, didn't even know that Roosevelt existed until this whole school thing started and it was mentioned on DCUM. I was like, "Ohhh, that's what that big football field by the library is about..."

Sorry, I confused presidents. I meant to write, "Deal and Wilson". But, I hope that you will take time to learn more about Roosevelt. A top notch high school three blocks from the edge of our neighborhood could only be good. It would certainly help property values far more than a tentative relationship with Wilson. We need a better understanding of how we get from where we are to where we need to be for Roosevelt to be realistic alternative to Wilson. Then, we will need time to see that DCPS is delivering on the promise. But, the day that happens will be a good day for Crestwood.

Jeff, you are far more optimistic than I am. I wonder if folks in Crestwood had simply put their foot down in protest rather than walk this optimistic fine line spirit of cooperation crap whether we would be in a better situation now. City officials do not understand grey, they understand flat out NO WE WONT ACCEPT THIS! Anything less gives them room to wiggle, manipulate and maneuver, which is what has happened here.

You are more than welcome to begin setting our strategy from here on out. But, I've seen no evidence that simply saying "no" would have had any impact. Who do you think would care if we threatened to scream and stomp our feet? We were screwed the minute the Committee decided to focus on feeder patterns. That was true no matter what we said. Do you really believe that our saying "NO WE WONT ACCEPT THIS" would cause the Committee to say, "okay, Crestwood will be the only neighborhood in the entire city to be exempt from feeder patterns"? I don't think so. The Committee did not find "wiggle room" in our reasonable proposal. It flat out ignored our proposal. There is no reason they wouldn't do the same to an unreasonable proposal.

It's my understanding there is a small group in 16th Street Heights that has made it their mission to reopen MacFarland (even though it was failing students) and add another middle school in NORTH Ward 4, even there is no community support. Good old DC politics-- fill the committee with people who have a personal agenda to fulfill rather get real input from the community. It 's baffling how the DME and DCPS think that everything will be great once there is a new, shiny building and everyone will rush send their kids there. It just will not happen.

Lets ne clear, McFarland wasn't failing the students. the parents were failing their kids. By and large, I think "success" of a school is 90% the parents. their involvement and their values and expectations of their kids. McFarland will fail only if it fails to attract gentrifiers basically. Pessimistic? Yes. But its a fact. I would not be in bounds for a reopened McFarland but its a non starter at this point unless they show real differentiated learning tracks, serious academics and more extracurriculars. No exceptions. And I need to see that more of my gentrifying neighbors are also buying in.

[Anonymous]

I find it interesting that this thread started with Crestwood folks complaining that they were being left to fend for themselves, but 4 pages in, they're strangely connecting themselves with 16th street heights people in the same boat.