Boundary Focus Groups

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Overcrowding at Deal and Wilson is not coming from all the OOB kids who have feeder preference because they came from Deal or an ES that feeds to Deal. The big overcrowding problem is that families WotP are keeping their kids in ES- not pulling out in 3rd to go elsewhere (move to the suburbs or go private) and sending their kids to Deal, then Wilson. Just look at the size of schools like Janney & Murch. They have a couple hundred more students than they did 5 years ago and these are not OOB students- they are IB.

You are incorrect. Deal is 30% OOB, all of those kids are OOB via feeder ES.

I'll see if I can find a breakdown by grade, but the real problem is the ES feeder schools. There are very few OOB students at Janney and Lafayette for example, so the overcrowding will likely still continue even if you get rid of OOB rights. You have to model it out into the future, not only look at the current stats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Overcrowding at Deal and Wilson is not coming from all the OOB kids who have feeder preference because they came from Deal or an ES that feeds to Deal. The big overcrowding problem is that families WotP are keeping their kids in ES- not pulling out in 3rd to go elsewhere (move to the suburbs or go private) and sending their kids to Deal, then Wilson. Just look at the size of schools like Janney & Murch. They have a couple hundred more students than they did 5 years ago and these are not OOB students- they are IB.

You are incorrect. Deal is 30% OOB, all of those kids are OOB via feeder ES.

I'll see if I can find a breakdown by grade, but the real problem is the ES feeder schools. There are very few OOB students at Janney and Lafayette for example, so the overcrowding will likely still continue even if you get rid of OOB rights. You have to model it out into the future, not only look at the current stats.

They're all coming up through Hearst (80% OOB?) and eaton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By the way, talking about "cutting ALL DIVERSITY" is playing the boogeyman here. Unless by diversity you mean black. Because that's all the diversity that comes from Shephard Park and Colonial Village (again, same website). I'm not trying to say black-white diversity is worthless. But making all diversity only a matter of black or white is short-sighted to an almost unimaginable degree.

Regardless, this is stupid. Many people want diversity but they are unwilling to sacrifice the education of their children for the sake of some stupid quotas. If it's ever a matter of preparation for later academic success versus greater exposure to more cultures, I don't think you get to even finish the question before you receive an answer. (Yes, I acknowledge that diversity can help provide "life skills," but value is determined at the margin, and the marginal benefit is probably quite small.)

No worries darling, you're not going to sacrifice your kid's education by keeping the black kids that are currently there via IB. Chances are they are on par with your little one.

You're an ignorant know-nothing. What's my ethnicity?

I couldn't care less about the race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, etc., of the children attending school with my children. I care about whether they're prepared.

But this is not about that. Not in the least. What you don't understand is that adjusting boundaries is not about getting the blacks kids out of my school. Until you realize that this is not the ulterior motive lurking just beneath the surface, you will have nothing of substance to contribute to the conversation.

This is about resolving the problem that there are too many students going to Deal and (maybe) Wilson. Something needs to be done. From my vantage point, the only feasible solutions are to do something with OOB students and adjust feeder rights at the farthest schools. This suggests, to me, that EOTP schools and Eaton should be first on the chopping block. Next comes Hearst. If that still doesn't solve the problem, I think Janney would be the next to go, based purely on a logistical calculation. The distance from Janney to the next MS is less than from Murch or Lafayette. THERE IS NO WAY ANY OF THIS IS RELEVANT, SO DON'T BOTHER GETTING YOUR PANTIES IN A BUNCH THAT JANNEY MAY BE CUT. IT WILL NOT. NO CHANCE. I'm just explaining how I'd approach the problem.

[Anonymous]

If Deal OOB is mainly coming from a few ES that are still predominantly OOB, it seems likely that with Hearst (an example of high% OOB school) being remodeled this most likely will increase the number of IB students there. Murch has not even been remodeled and it's enrollment has skyrocketed. Just cutting the OOB students in feeder schools is not the way to go. It seems it would be better to change the feeder of the whole school. Hardy is very under enrolled, and it should be a strong MS option. DCPS should bring Melissa Kim back and have her oversee MS. She knows how to turn a MS around.

[Anonymous]

I love that Wilson is nearly 50% out-of-boundary when it's boundaries already cover like 50% of the City.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love that Wilson is nearly 50% out-of-boundary when it's boundaries already cover like 50% of the City.

It seems the boundary isn't the problem, it's the access expanded to OOB feeder school students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Deal OOB is mainly coming from a few ES that are still predominantly OOB, it seems likely that with Hearst (an example of high% OOB school) being remodeled this most likely will increase the number of IB students there. Murch has not even been remodeled and it's enrollment has skyrocketed. Just cutting the OOB students in feeder schools is not the way to go. It seems it would be better to change the feeder of the whole school. Hardy is very under enrolled, and it should be a strong MS option. DCPS should bring Melissa Kim back and have her oversee MS. She knows how to turn a MS around.

Hardy is not a good option because:

1) There's no culture of meeting the needs of high-achieving students. Deal has enough that it can aim it's instruction toward the high middle and is organized enough to provide some reasonable opportunities for those who can to do more.

2) It has no Metro access. This makes it a poor choice for kids who live near Red Line stations and are now able to simply hop trains to Deal independently. Bus service is unacceptably thin beyond the urban core, and Hardy sits outside of this.

[Anonymous]

*its*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Deal OOB is mainly coming from a few ES that are still predominantly OOB, it seems likely that with Hearst (an example of high% OOB school) being remodeled this most likely will increase the number of IB students there. Murch has not even been remodeled and it's enrollment has skyrocketed. Just cutting the OOB students in feeder schools is not the way to go. It seems it would be better to change the feeder of the whole school. Hardy is very under enrolled, and it should be a strong MS option. DCPS should bring Melissa Kim back and have her oversee MS. She knows how to turn a MS around.

Hardy is not a good option because:

1) There's no culture of meeting the needs of high-achieving students. Deal has enough that it can aim it's instruction toward the high middle and is organized enough to provide some reasonable opportunities for those who can to do more.

2) It has no Metro access. This makes it a poor choice for kids who live near Red Line stations and are now able to simply hop trains to Deal independently. Bus service is unacceptably thin beyond the urban core, and Hardy sits outside of this.

There isn't a MS for Shepherd Park, Crestwood et al, for residents to attend. The logical choice is for Janney to feed to Hardy. Most families who attend Janney have a car.

[Anonymous]

In the next two years the IB population at Hearst is going to increase. My two children along with 4 others in their daycare plan to enroll. I suspect others in the neighborhood are similarly inclined because the modernization of the current building is very nice and the new addition scheduled for next year is going to be awesome. The principal is no nonsense and very engaged and test scores are rising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Deal OOB is mainly coming from a few ES that are still predominantly OOB, it seems likely that with Hearst (an example of high% OOB school) being remodeled this most likely will increase the number of IB students there. Murch has not even been remodeled and it's enrollment has skyrocketed. Just cutting the OOB students in feeder schools is not the way to go. It seems it would be better to change the feeder of the whole school. Hardy is very under enrolled, and it should be a strong MS option. DCPS should bring Melissa Kim back and have her oversee MS. She knows how to turn a MS around.

Hardy is not a good option because:

1) There's no culture of meeting the needs of high-achieving students. Deal has enough that it can aim it's instruction toward the high middle and is organized enough to provide some reasonable opportunities for those who can to do more.

2) It has no Metro access. This makes it a poor choice for kids who live near Red Line stations and are now able to simply hop trains to Deal independently. Bus service is unacceptably thin beyond the urban core, and Hardy sits outside of this.

There isn't a MS for Shepherd Park, Crestwood et al, for residents to attend. The logical choice is for Janney to feed to Hardy. Most families who attend Janney have a car.

I can see a certain sense in simply sending kids down Wisconsin Ave., and if their parents decline to drive them they won't mind waiting 20+ minutes for buses as they simply don't know any better up there.

But although I reject mere proximity arguments when they fail to take families' actual transportation plans into effect, I do think that Janney is too close to Deal to drop.

It's poor urban planning to require families who manage without driving on a daily basis to suddenly start doing it after withdrawing rights to the transit-accessible schools their neighborhoods have enjoyed for decades. It would be a step backward for a city that's trying to correct decades of lousy thinking about how people move around.

I note that Shepherd Park and Crestwood are essentially suburban neighborhoods, and their residents are already cocooned in their (sometimes multiple) cars every day. They can take their SUVs anywhere, really.

[Anonymous]

Heck, I'd like to see Melissa Kim running a few other things in DCPS as well in addition to MS! I'd trust her to execute a smart plan that is inclusive while setting a high bar.

[Anonymous]

Melissa Kim for Chancellor!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many people want diversity but they are unwilling to sacrifice the education of their children for the sake of some stupid quotas.

Another way to say this is, people are so invested in their own children's success that they're willing to let it happen at the expense of other kids.

This is presented all the time as a reasonable justification for de facto segregation in public schools.

You know what? No. No, it's not reasonable. It is NOT ok to say, "Screw all those other kids, I need to worry about MY kid." That is a regrettable attitude. It pits parents against each other, instead of making us allies trying to improve schools for ALL children.

An 'every man for himself' approach INEVITABLY will foster greater inequality in education, because the folks with the wherewithal to influence the system are those with greater resources -- the ones who, ironically, are least dependent on a strong public school system, because they possess the resources & education to supplement their child's schooling (or pull out entirely and go private).

[Anonymous]

When did taking responsibility for your own children become considered "Every man for himself"? We would have liked to have 4 kids, but we knew we could only properly support and educate two. I have neither the time nor inclination to educate somebody else's kids.