Option B best for Ward 3?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Ward 3 parents on here aren't doing themselves any favors. I was sympathetic to their concerns because they have the most to lose. But it doesn't take hipster glasses to see that very few posters from Ward 3 see themselves as part of a collective system and they clearly dislike other parents and kids outside their ward, either because of their choices or circumstances. Studies show allotting 20% of seats to low-income kids helps those kids, but doesn't hurt the other 80%. That's not a tipping point, so why not help those needy kids?

As this public debate continues, don't expect the other 7 wards to care about your concerns when you show such disregard for theirs.

sounds like you're looking for an excuse to disregard ward 3 parents.

I bet there's nothing in those studies that show that moving kids away from their good neighborhood schools helps them in any way -- or that such a system would even work. It wouldn't be long before families moved out of the neighborhood that was using their kids for this experiment. Besides who says it would be the needy kids who gets the spots-- it could just as easily be high SES kids from hipster neighborhoods who won the lottery.

I am a Ward 3 parent and I am absolutely devastated about Oyster and think that they contribute a lot to Wilson and want to fight for them. Ward 3 is not a monolithic place. It is full of many different people, some of whom are renting to get their kids into Deal/Wilson. I don't think it really matters where higher SES kids go to elementary school within ward 3 because we can supplement at home. What I cannot do is create a chemistry class...........

I agree. Oyster's changes don't affect me, but it really it awful. I'll do what I can to help them continue going to Wilson.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the lecture, but I HAVE read the proposals. And under two of the three options, my "choice set" for middle school now includes a compulsory choice that I would not otherwise have had to make, forcing my kids into a 50% chance of a school nearly 4 CITY MILES from my home with no established public transportation route. In rush hour traffic, this commute is likely to run close to an hour. I'm not threatening to leave the city, but I'd like to hear a thoughtful, evidence-based and data-driven response that tells me how this will not negatively affect my kid, my household, hell even my employer when we run late schlepping across town to school every day. That's at least a part of *my* input.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't seem to be aware that your school is part of a school system and that that school system is part of a political system. If the only issue was crowding at a small set of schools wotp you would be right, but it's not.

I am aware of that. Making our schools worse, isn't the answer. The problems in Ward 3 schools aren't the same as the problems at Ward 8 schools, so why try to fix both of them with the same solution? It's not going to work.

the fix requires some pain WOTP because the solutions for the WOTP schools (a mix of expansions, boundary reductions and reductions in OOB admissions) are not politically palitable outside Ward 3.

The fix doesn't require pain to ward 3 schools. Thinking that is just mean spirited. That's one of the things that's bothering me. Some of this feels like a mean spirited chipping away at our neighborhood schools. We have OOB lotteries. Great. OOB kids are welcomed as long as their is space. Not a problem. But as soon as neighborhood kids start filling the schools, there's an outcry. Now we have to be forced into having 10-20% of the seats at schools set aside for kids from failing schools. Where does it end?

Mean spirited or not, people have been chipping away at neighborhood schools since the first charter came to town. Those families who win the lottery and live near the "sought-after charter" are OK. Those who can afford to live where there are already good neighborhood schools are OK. Everyone else is not OK, but remember -- it's not the fault of those other families -- it's the fault of the system. Go after the system -- not other parents.

Families who decided to go charter weren't forced out of schools they contributed to and wanted their kids to attend. They chose charters for various reasons, and for many these charters were Better than their IB school. What's happening in ward 3 feels like we are being forced into schools that are worse than the ones we bought houses to be IB for ---at the request of families who are not happy with their IB schools.

But remember, it's not the families who are requesting it -- it's the school system that is proposing it. the families just want better education for their kids. I'm suggesting that all families should pull together against a system that is trying to pitt you against each other.

Read some of the other threads that show what some EOTP families think about Ward 3 families. Not warm and fuzzy. And this was before any of these debates began. We're all entitled to try to do the best for our kids. I'm not okay with anyone who wants to take something away from my kid so their kid can benefit. I don't care what ward they live in.

wow. entitled much? you just showed why some (lots?) EOTP families feel the way they do about Ward 3. heck, i live in Ward 3 and i definitely don't like this attitude.

How is it entitled to want to stay IB for the school's boundaries you bought a house in? If I'm entitled for wanting to stay in my current IB school, then what do you think about OOB families who think they should take my kid's spot?

There is no entitlement to attend a particular school. Real estate agents like to tout school boundaries, but they can be changed at any time, and the city has no obligation to you in this respect. In Fairfax County, they redraw boundaries all the time. They sometimes don't even let kids stay in the school they are currently attending.

[Anonymous]

^^FFX hasnt redrawn boundaries in 30 years. It was in the paper a couple months ago. I still think minor boundary changes are in order, and the B suggestion could work, but wholesale lotterying education is not a good idea. The lottery thing has nothing to do with feeling entitled, it just doesn't make sense.

You are correct that boundaries changes and people should not be allowed to sue over boundary changes, but city-wide lotteries? That makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

"You are correct that boundary changes are NEEDED"...sorry

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't seem to be aware that your school is part of a school system and that that school system is part of a political system. If the only issue was crowding at a small set of schools wotp you would be right, but it's not.

I am aware of that. Making our schools worse, isn't the answer. The problems in Ward 3 schools aren't the same as the problems at Ward 8 schools, so why try to fix both of them with the same solution? It's not going to work.

the fix requires some pain WOTP because the solutions for the WOTP schools (a mix of expansions, boundary reductions and reductions in OOB admissions) are not politically palitable outside Ward 3.

The fix doesn't require pain to ward 3 schools. Thinking that is just mean spirited. That's one of the things that's bothering me. Some of this feels like a mean spirited chipping away at our neighborhood schools. We have OOB lotteries. Great. OOB kids are welcomed as long as their is space. Not a problem. But as soon as neighborhood kids start filling the schools, there's an outcry. Now we have to be forced into having 10-20% of the seats at schools set aside for kids from failing schools. Where does it end?

Mean spirited or not, people have been chipping away at neighborhood schools since the first charter came to town. Those families who win the lottery and live near the "sought-after charter" are OK. Those who can afford to live where there are already good neighborhood schools are OK. Everyone else is not OK, but remember -- it's not the fault of those other families -- it's the fault of the system. Go after the system -- not other parents.

Families who decided to go charter weren't forced out of schools they contributed to and wanted their kids to attend. They chose charters for various reasons, and for many these charters were Better than their IB school. What's happening in ward 3 feels like we are being forced into schools that are worse than the ones we bought houses to be IB for ---at the request of families who are not happy with their IB schools.

But remember, it's not the families who are requesting it -- it's the school system that is proposing it. the families just want better education for their kids. I'm suggesting that all families should pull together against a system that is trying to pitt you against each other.

Read some of the other threads that show what some EOTP families think about Ward 3 families. Not warm and fuzzy. And this was before any of these debates began. We're all entitled to try to do the best for our kids. I'm not okay with anyone who wants to take something away from my kid so their kid can benefit. I don't care what ward they live in.

wow. entitled much? you just showed why some (lots?) EOTP families feel the way they do about Ward 3. heck, i live in Ward 3 and i definitely don't like this attitude.

How is it entitled to want to stay IB for the school's boundaries you bought a house in? If I'm entitled for wanting to stay in my current IB school, then what do you think about OOB families who think they should take my kid's spot?

There is no entitlement to attend a particular school. Real estate agents like to tout school boundaries, but they can be changed at any time, and the city has no obligation to you in this respect. In Fairfax County, they redraw boundaries all the time. They sometimes don't even let kids stay in the school they are currently attending.

Fairfax neither has the big disparity in school quality that exists in DC nor the apparent Robin Hood ideology that seems to be taking over DCPS

[Anonymous]

Do you think people would accept a county-wide lottery in FFX? They will accept boundary changes --they are coming soon as a matter of fact, it was in the washpo as the PP mentioned.

[Anonymous]

Later they say those students will also have to compete with siblings first, then twins or "multiples" admitted to the school, and it would seem that whatever is left over after that goes to the low performing refugees.

Since when did twins or multiples (no need for quote marks here) cease to be siblings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the lecture, but I HAVE read the proposals. And under two of the three options, my "choice set" for middle school now includes a compulsory choice that I would not otherwise have had to make, forcing my kids into a 50% chance of a school nearly 4 CITY MILES from my home with no established public transportation route. In rush hour traffic, this commute is likely to run close to an hour. I'm not threatening to leave the city, but I'd like to hear a thoughtful, evidence-based and data-driven response that tells me how this will not negatively affect my kid, my household, hell even my employer when we run late schlepping across town to school every day. That's at least a part of *my* input.

If you're talking about options A and C, then I wonder if you've read the thread header.

The scenario you're opposed to is just an example of how they might address other problems like overcrowding, lack of specialization, distribution of resources. It's not final and in the end there will likely be some combination of the three based on different needs in different parts of the city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Ward 3 parents on here aren't doing themselves any favors. I was sympathetic to their concerns because they have the most to lose. But it doesn't take hipster glasses to see that very few posters from Ward 3 see themselves as part of a collective system and they clearly dislike other parents and kids outside their ward, either because of their choices or circumstances. Studies show allotting 20% of seats to low-income kids helps those kids, but doesn't hurt the other 80%. That's not a tipping point, so why not help those needy kids?

As this public debate continues, don't expect the other 7 wards to care about your concerns when you show such disregard for theirs.

What about key and Stoddert parents who would be IB for a school with only 38% IB families? That's past the tipping point.

What school is that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Ward 3 parents on here aren't doing themselves any favors. I was sympathetic to their concerns because they have the most to lose. But it doesn't take hipster glasses to see that very few posters from Ward 3 see themselves as part of a collective system and they clearly dislike other parents and kids outside their ward, either because of their choices or circumstances. Studies show allotting 20% of seats to low-income kids helps those kids, but doesn't hurt the other 80%. That's not a tipping point, so why not help those needy kids?

As this public debate continues, don't expect the other 7 wards to care about your concerns when you show such disregard for theirs.

What about key and Stoddert parents who would be IB for a school with only 38% IB families? That's past the tipping point.

So, you do understand that by going to the school the tipping point will shift, yes? That you would likely then make it 80% IB, if you go to the school? Just like Hardy. You just need to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Ward 3 parents on here aren't doing themselves any favors. I was sympathetic to their concerns because they have the most to lose. But it doesn't take hipster glasses to see that very few posters from Ward 3 see themselves as part of a collective system and they clearly dislike other parents and kids outside their ward, either because of their choices or circumstances. Studies show allotting 20% of seats to low-income kids helps those kids, but doesn't hurt the other 80%. That's not a tipping point, so why not help those needy kids?

As this public debate continues, don't expect the other 7 wards to care about your concerns when you show such disregard for theirs.

What about key and Stoddert parents who would be IB for a school with only 38% IB families? That's past the tipping point.

Roll up your sleeves and pitch in! I bet Hyde (am assuming) will be fantastic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I say let's split DCPS into several different districts, devolve decisions to the individual communities and let them set priorities. Give each the same per pupil funding and set up a mechanism for capital improvements, much as states assist individual districts with those needs. If DCPS east decides that the highest priority of the public schools is preserving jobs for the community, let them If a different section of the city wants to set higher, more rigorous academic standards, go to it But it does seem wrong for a bloated bureaucratic system to rely on one part of the city not only as the cash cow, but free ride on the sweat equity of parents and now salt higher performing students around the city to boost test scores in underperforming schools. Seems kinda' socialist, no?

Not even socialist, because it's not being done with the (misguided) intention of helping the kids -- it would be just to raise the scores -- which is to make the administrators look good

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not that Ward 3 parents purchased expensive houses and thus should be entitled to their neighborhood schools. Many, many of us have devoted blood, sweat and tears over recent years to improving these neighborhood schools. And that's why the possibility of losing access to them (either through shifting boundaries at ES or citywide lotteries in older grades) is so unpalatable. Ward 3 parents have done the hard work of building community. We get it. And we do support other wards in their efforts to improve their neighborhood schools.

Just get over it. You have the privilege of living in the District of Columbia, life changes, and majority rules. To the victors go the spoils. Just pay up and shut up and get out of the way. ONE CITY, baby!

kidding right? just trying to stir up trouble and don't have kids in school here? who are the victors? the administrators who invented this mess? And what are the spoils -- forcing some kids to leave their neighborhood schools? sick, sick, sick.

One city could mean parents uniting against stupid ideas, instead of one DME screwing the system for everyone.

[Anonymous]

You are all lifelong Democrats, but you can't stand the idea of your kid at a school with minorities. Or, even worse, minorities being bused in to your kids school.