Why Isn’t Marie Reed in Boundary for Deal or Hardy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A good way to keep diversity at Hardy, deal, and JR while reducing overcrowding would be to end feeder rights. If you get in to hyde-addison for Pre-K, it shouldn't guarantee you a space through 12th grade. There are families that can't get a little kid across town but would enter the middle school or HS lottery.

That would be a good way to end diversity at Hardy, Deal, and JR.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A good way to keep diversity at Hardy, deal, and JR while reducing overcrowding would be to end feeder rights. If you get in to hyde-addison for Pre-K, it shouldn't guarantee you a space through 12th grade. There are families that can't get a little kid across town but would enter the middle school or HS lottery.

I would agree and it would also allow Deal and JR to be able to take kids in from lottery using at risk preference and the kids would largely be old enough to take metro to school. You end OOB rights, you automatically make almost all the kids that come in through literary diverse both racially and economically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good way to keep diversity at Hardy, deal, and JR while reducing overcrowding would be to end feeder rights. If you get in to hyde-addison for Pre-K, it shouldn't guarantee you a space through 12th grade. There are families that can't get a little kid across town but would enter the middle school or HS lottery.

I would agree and it would also allow Deal and JR to be able to take kids in from lottery using at risk preference and the kids would largely be old enough to take metro to school. You end OOB rights, you automatically make almost all the kids that come in through literary diverse both racially and economically.

What? That doesn't make any sense. The lottery is a lottery, not a quota system. In no way would it "automatically make almost all the kids" that win economically and racially diverse.

There are some deeply unserious people on this board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is why is Bancroft.

yes. Both Oyster and Bancroft should feed to MacFarland and Roosevelt.MacFarland would easily have PARCC scores on par with Stuart-Hobson: not amazing, but able to get more in-bounds buy-in, and the school would get big enough to offer more courses and extracurriculars. By having Oyster and Adams only serve PK3-5, there would be a lot more ECE slots.

Yes, eliminate a very successful bilingual middle school for… more ECE slots. Great idea.

The demand is for ECE. The way to create more kids who are prepared for middle school and will lift middle school proficiency rates is to get them in at ECE. Having a tiny middle school does not allow for the courses and extracurriculars that provide a full middle school experience. It also makes no sense to dump a small group of Adams grads in at JR where they can't continue on their bilingual path. DCPS needs to plan centrally and not be beholden to a few hundred parents. If Oyster families want to have everything their way, they should create a bilingual PK-8 charter.

This a deeply ridiculous post. Adams is an enormously successful middle school - both academically and in extracurriculars (e.g. some sports teams competitive with Deal at a fraction of the size and lots of students that go on to excel in sports in high school). And graduates tend to get 5s on AP Spanish language and literature tests, and many go on to use Spanish in college and after. The fact that you don’t seem to know any of this illustrates that you really aren’t qualified to comment on this subject.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good way to keep diversity at Hardy, deal, and JR while reducing overcrowding would be to end feeder rights. If you get in to hyde-addison for Pre-K, it shouldn't guarantee you a space through 12th grade. There are families that can't get a little kid across town but would enter the middle school or HS lottery.

I would agree and it would also allow Deal and JR to be able to take kids in from lottery using at risk preference and the kids would largely be old enough to take metro to school. You end OOB rights, you automatically make almost all the kids that come in through literary diverse both racially and economically.

What? That doesn't make any sense. The lottery is a lottery, not a quota system. In no way would it "automatically make almost all the kids" that win economically and racially diverse.

There are some deeply unserious people on this board.

You clearly don’t know how the at risk set aside rule works.

Deal is currently 22% OOB. Fair to say since only 1-2 kids a week come in from the lottery, all of those OOB kids are coming from having feeder rights.

I’d Deal ended their OOB feeder rights today, they would then have 300 lottery spots they could make available next year. If they have at risk preference, they could do it where 100% of those spots go to at risk kids.

[Anonymous]

1-2 kids a year get in through lottery (not a week)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is why is Bancroft.

yes. Both Oyster and Bancroft should feed to MacFarland and Roosevelt.MacFarland would easily have PARCC scores on par with Stuart-Hobson: not amazing, but able to get more in-bounds buy-in, and the school would get big enough to offer more courses and extracurriculars. By having Oyster and Adams only serve PK3-5, there would be a lot more ECE slots.

Yes, eliminate a very successful bilingual middle school for… more ECE slots. Great idea.

The demand is for ECE. The way to create more kids who are prepared for middle school and will lift middle school proficiency rates is to get them in at ECE. Having a tiny middle school does not allow for the courses and extracurriculars that provide a full middle school experience. It also makes no sense to dump a small group of Adams grads in at JR where they can't continue on their bilingual path. DCPS needs to plan centrally and not be beholden to a few hundred parents. If Oyster families want to have everything their way, they should create a bilingual PK-8 charter.

This a deeply ridiculous post. Adams is an enormously successful middle school - both academically and in extracurriculars (e.g. some sports teams competitive with Deal at a fraction of the size and lots of students that go on to excel in sports in high school). And graduates tend to get 5s on AP Spanish language and literature tests, and many go on to use Spanish in college and after. The fact that you don’t seem to know any of this illustrates that you really aren’t qualified to comment on this subject.

What sports does Adams compete with on with Deal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is why is Bancroft.

yes. Both Oyster and Bancroft should feed to MacFarland and Roosevelt.MacFarland would easily have PARCC scores on par with Stuart-Hobson: not amazing, but able to get more in-bounds buy-in, and the school would get big enough to offer more courses and extracurriculars. By having Oyster and Adams only serve PK3-5, there would be a lot more ECE slots.

Yes, eliminate a very successful bilingual middle school for… more ECE slots. Great idea.

The demand is for ECE. The way to create more kids who are prepared for middle school and will lift middle school proficiency rates is to get them in at ECE. Having a tiny middle school does not allow for the courses and extracurriculars that provide a full middle school experience. It also makes no sense to dump a small group of Adams grads in at JR where they can't continue on their bilingual path. DCPS needs to plan centrally and not be beholden to a few hundred parents. If Oyster families want to have everything their way, they should create a bilingual PK-8 charter.

This a deeply ridiculous post. Adams is an enormously successful middle school - both academically and in extracurriculars (e.g. some sports teams competitive with Deal at a fraction of the size and lots of students that go on to excel in sports in high school). And graduates tend to get 5s on AP Spanish language and literature tests, and many go on to use Spanish in college and after. The fact that you don’t seem to know any of this illustrates that you really aren’t qualified to comment on this subject.

The kids who are doing well at Adams won't get dumber or worse at sports if their feeder becomes MacFarland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is why is Bancroft.

yes. Both Oyster and Bancroft should feed to MacFarland and Roosevelt.MacFarland would easily have PARCC scores on par with Stuart-Hobson: not amazing, but able to get more in-bounds buy-in, and the school would get big enough to offer more courses and extracurriculars. By having Oyster and Adams only serve PK3-5, there would be a lot more ECE slots.

Yes, eliminate a very successful bilingual middle school for… more ECE slots. Great idea.

The demand is for ECE. The way to create more kids who are prepared for middle school and will lift middle school proficiency rates is to get them in at ECE. Having a tiny middle school does not allow for the courses and extracurriculars that provide a full middle school experience. It also makes no sense to dump a small group of Adams grads in at JR where they can't continue on their bilingual path. DCPS needs to plan centrally and not be beholden to a few hundred parents. If Oyster families want to have everything their way, they should create a bilingual PK-8 charter.

This a deeply ridiculous post. Adams is an enormously successful middle school - both academically and in extracurriculars (e.g. some sports teams competitive with Deal at a fraction of the size and lots of students that go on to excel in sports in high school). And graduates tend to get 5s on AP Spanish language and literature tests, and many go on to use Spanish in college and after. The fact that you don’t seem to know any of this illustrates that you really aren’t qualified to comment on this subject.

The kids who are doing well at Adams won't get dumber or worse at sports if their feeder becomes MacFarland.

It would be pretty difficult for that to happen since they won't be going there!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A good way to keep diversity at Hardy, deal, and JR while reducing overcrowding would be to end feeder rights. If you get in to hyde-addison for Pre-K, it shouldn't guarantee you a space through 12th grade. There are families that can't get a little kid across town but would enter the middle school or HS lottery.

This would be terrible for school community and the kids who have attended the feeders since PK or whatever. “Sorry little Timmy, it’s sixth grade, time for a new oob poor kid!”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good way to keep diversity at Hardy, deal, and JR while reducing overcrowding would be to end feeder rights. If you get in to hyde-addison for Pre-K, it shouldn't guarantee you a space through 12th grade. There are families that can't get a little kid across town but would enter the middle school or HS lottery.

This would be terrible for school community and the kids who have attended the feeders since PK or whatever. “Sorry little Timmy, it’s sixth grade, time for a new oob poor kid!”

True. But half of them cone in 4th or 5th grade *because of* the feeder rights. I'm not saying that's wrong of them -- that's what the system offers.

However, a rule created with the goal of not separating kids from their long-time friends has had the unintended consequence of driving overcrowding at Deal and J-R.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good way to keep diversity at Hardy, deal, and JR while reducing overcrowding would be to end feeder rights. If you get in to hyde-addison for Pre-K, it shouldn't guarantee you a space through 12th grade. There are families that can't get a little kid across town but would enter the middle school or HS lottery.

This would be terrible for school community and the kids who have attended the feeders since PK or whatever. “Sorry little Timmy, it’s sixth grade, time for a new oob poor kid!”

True. But half of them cone in 4th or 5th grade *because of* the feeder rights. I'm not saying that's wrong of them -- that's what the system offers.

However, a rule created with the goal of not separating kids from their long-time friends has had the unintended consequence of driving overcrowding at Deal and J-R.

My bad. I thought someone was suggesting booting feeder rights only to replace those kids with a separate cohort of at-risk kids through the lottery for deal/JR.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good way to keep diversity at Hardy, deal, and JR while reducing overcrowding would be to end feeder rights. If you get in to hyde-addison for Pre-K, it shouldn't guarantee you a space through 12th grade. There are families that can't get a little kid across town but would enter the middle school or HS lottery.

I would agree and it would also allow Deal and JR to be able to take kids in from lottery using at risk preference and the kids would largely be old enough to take metro to school. You end OOB rights, you automatically make almost all the kids that come in through literary diverse both racially and economically.

What? That doesn't make any sense. The lottery is a lottery, not a quota system. In no way would it "automatically make almost all the kids" that win economically and racially diverse.

There are some deeply unserious people on this board.

You clearly don’t know how the at risk set aside rule works.

Deal is currently 22% OOB. Fair to say since only 1-2 kids a week come in from the lottery, all of those OOB kids are coming from having feeder rights.

I’d Deal ended their OOB feeder rights today, they would then have 300 lottery spots they could make available next year. If they have at risk preference, they could do it where 100% of those spots go to at risk kids.

Deal's building capacity is 1200 and it sits around 1450-1475 enrolled. Removing OOB feeder rights would not open up 300 lottery spots, it would simply remove 250-275 kids from attendance. And even if you did not realize that Deal is overcrowded, then you should know that the at-risk preference is not 100 percent of the lottery seats offered. Anywhere. Like I said, deeply unserious people posting here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good way to keep diversity at Hardy, deal, and JR while reducing overcrowding would be to end feeder rights. If you get in to hyde-addison for Pre-K, it shouldn't guarantee you a space through 12th grade. There are families that can't get a little kid across town but would enter the middle school or HS lottery.

This would be terrible for school community and the kids who have attended the feeders since PK or whatever. “Sorry little Timmy, it’s sixth grade, time for a new oob poor kid!”

True. But half of them cone in 4th or 5th grade *because of* the feeder rights. I'm not saying that's wrong of them -- that's what the system offers.

However, a rule created with the goal of not separating kids from their long-time friends has had the unintended consequence of driving overcrowding at Deal and J-R.

My bad. I thought someone was suggesting booting feeder rights only to replace those kids with a separate cohort of at-risk kids through the lottery for deal/JR.

You're right. I forgot to pay attention to the prior posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good way to keep diversity at Hardy, deal, and JR while reducing overcrowding would be to end feeder rights. If you get in to hyde-addison for Pre-K, it shouldn't guarantee you a space through 12th grade. There are families that can't get a little kid across town but would enter the middle school or HS lottery.

I would agree and it would also allow Deal and JR to be able to take kids in from lottery using at risk preference and the kids would largely be old enough to take metro to school. You end OOB rights, you automatically make almost all the kids that come in through literary diverse both racially and economically.

What? That doesn't make any sense. The lottery is a lottery, not a quota system. In no way would it "automatically make almost all the kids" that win economically and racially diverse.

There are some deeply unserious people on this board.

You clearly don’t know how the at risk set aside rule works.

Deal is currently 22% OOB. Fair to say since only 1-2 kids a week come in from the lottery, all of those OOB kids are coming from having feeder rights.

I’d Deal ended their OOB feeder rights today, they would then have 300 lottery spots they could make available next year. If they have at risk preference, they could do it where 100% of those spots go to at risk kids.

Deal's building capacity is 1200 and it sits around 1450-1475 enrolled. Removing OOB feeder rights would not open up 300 lottery spots, it would simply remove 250-275 kids from attendance. And even if you did not realize that Deal is overcrowded, then you should know that the at-risk preference is not 100 percent of the lottery seats offered. Anywhere. Like I said, deeply unserious people posting here.

Deal’s permanent building capacity is 1370. With trailers it’s 1645.

If you remove the 307 OOB students (largely non at-risk students based on feeder schools’ at risk #s), you’d have 1089 IB students left at Deal.

Just using permanent space open that leaves 281 open spots to put in the lottery.

If Deal lottery has 25% at risk set aside, you’d now have 70 at risk kids that can get in from lottery. The remaining 211 lottery spots will be a mix of at risk and non at risk students. If DCPS added another status preference of “feeder school” some could get to Deal that went to a feeder school.

So you removed 307 kids to guarantee at least 70 at risk kids.

This sceenioe doesn’t even account for the kids that move OOB after starting Deal and look on paper as IB when they’re not.

So…who’s not being serious??