Cardozo Feeder Pattern Middle School

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of times, if you want someone to change, you have to make them uncomfortable. Pointing out the reasons why there is a lack of trust made the DCPS people very uncomfortable- it was obvious. Pointing out the conflict of interest for one of the members of the team was totally appropriate and reasonable. So perhaps some nuggets got through to them. Perhaps they will think twice and/or change something about their ways.

That being said, I do agree that the constant pivot to mistrust, wrongdoings, conspiracy, etc, could derail any actual progress. Some of the problems that are occurring are so systemic, and above DCPS. Discussing potential FOIA conspiracies will not get solved in one community meeting about Middle Schools. It is important to think about the right time and place to make the arguments, the right person to drag through the coals for the right thing, etc. You cant throw every possible argument at the wall and hope one sticks.

I was really surprised that Gene Pinkard would say there is no plan for the current Banneker site. Does he not know people are FOIA-ing it? This is what I mean by habitual lying. If they are not ready to share they can say they are not ready to share, and that isn't a lie. But to say there is no plan is a lie.

There was a plan floated and discussed with the Cardozo feeder school to make the Banneker site a city wide magnet middle school. This is s dumb idea, but it was PUBLIC information. They have since changed their mind No FOIA needed to know that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Save Shaw folks are preoccupied with having been wronged. Prevents them from talking about any other solution than clawing the Shaw site back from Banneker. It’s a shame because a lot of effort has been wasted on a hopeless cause.

I think it is about time downtown and the mayor's office faced some blowback for their habit of treating families and schools like crap. Hopefully this results in some real improvements at Cardozo. But that is the compromise result and Save Shaw should keep the pressure on, not fold.

Save Shaw would be able to apply more pressure if they had a viable demand. As seen from this weeks oversight hearings their leverage is minimal.

Why is their demand not viable? Banneker should be allowed to take whatever they want, is that why?

Banneker did not even 'want it" it landed in their lap during the modernization process. Obviously they want it now and even have become to feel entitled to it.

Nonetheless I agree with others who are noting the pure acrimony and little else of the SaveShaw MS twitter feed and ardent supporters. Such a waste of energy which could have been put to better use to get a good deal, and now all you have is a ungraded Cardozo as predicted. It is a shame that the "stand alone middle school" was either used as a strategy to get attention or a genuine demand, because it stoped you all from getting early political buy in for a compromise. And the politicians were looking for a compromise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Save Shaw folks are preoccupied with having been wronged. Prevents them from talking about any other solution than clawing the Shaw site back from Banneker. It’s a shame because a lot of effort has been wasted on a hopeless cause.

I think it is about time downtown and the mayor's office faced some blowback for their habit of treating families and schools like crap. Hopefully this results in some real improvements at Cardozo. But that is the compromise result and Save Shaw should keep the pressure on, not fold.

Save Shaw would be able to apply more pressure if they had a viable demand. As seen from this weeks oversight hearings their leverage is minimal.

Why is their demand not viable? Banneker should be allowed to take whatever they want, is that why?

Banneker did not even 'want it" it landed in their lap during the modernization process. Obviously they want it now and even have become to feel entitled to it.

Nonetheless I agree with others who are noting the pure acrimony and little else of the SaveShaw MS twitter feed and ardent supporters. Such a waste of energy which could have been put to better use to get a good deal, and now all you have is a ungraded Cardozo as predicted. It is a shame that the "stand alone middle school" was either used as a strategy to get attention or a genuine demand, because it stoped you all from getting early political buy in for a compromise. And the politicians were looking for a compromise.

Why can't it still happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting engaged and being heard does not mean getting what you want. I have seen some movement on this issue- it hasn’t been much and not nearly enough for most people, but I do think the engagement is working. Keep trying, keep engaging, keep getting your voice heard. But remember that successful engagement doesn’t necessarily mean only one thing.

I agree but I do expect to be treated with honesty and good faith. Downtown and the mayor's office are fillijg this process with their usual lies and incompetence.

With that sort of disdain and attitude toward them, you are surprised you have no support from elected officials or the government?

I get it. It feels personal to you. It isn’t. It is their job and they have more stakeholders to manage than you realize. Treat this as a business discussion and atop the angry live tweeting (to your 200 followers) and personal attacks.

I'm not the person with that account (or any twitter account at all) and I don't know why you would think I am. More than one person can believe them to be dishonest and in bad faith. It is not personal to me, but it is wrong and it is having bad results.

The acct represents the Save Shaw group. No one said you were responsible for it personally. But publicly calling people who disagree with you and your neighbors liars, repeated, isn’t going to work.

Where have they ever called anyone liars? I certainly haven't seen that.

[Anonymous]

Budget mark up is next week. Grosso and Allen told you six months ago that they were looking for a compromise. You offered them nothing. If you had a compromise position in your hands now you could feed it into the budget process. But you have nothing. This is what happens in politics when your demands for outreach your political strength.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Budget mark up is next week. Grosso and Allen told you six months ago that they were looking for a compromise. You offered them nothing. If you had a compromise position in your hands now you could feed it into the budget process. But you have nothing. This is what happens in politics when your demands for outreach your political strength.

Save Shaw is not organized enough to make a formal offer. It isn't that kind of entity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Save Shaw folks are preoccupied with having been wronged. Prevents them from talking about any other solution than clawing the Shaw site back from Banneker. It’s a shame because a lot of effort has been wasted on a hopeless cause.

I think it is about time downtown and the mayor's office faced some blowback for their habit of treating families and schools like crap. Hopefully this results in some real improvements at Cardozo. But that is the compromise result and Save Shaw should keep the pressure on, not fold.

Save Shaw would be able to apply more pressure if they had a viable demand. As seen from this weeks oversight hearings their leverage is minimal.

Why is their demand not viable? Banneker should be allowed to take whatever they want, is that why?

Banneker did not even 'want it" it landed in their lap during the modernization process. Obviously they want it now and even have become to feel entitled to it.

Nonetheless I agree with others who are noting the pure acrimony and little else of the SaveShaw MS twitter feed and ardent supporters. Such a waste of energy which could have been put to better use to get a good deal, and now all you have is a ungraded Cardozo as predicted. It is a shame that the "stand alone middle school" was either used as a strategy to get attention or a genuine demand, because it stoped you all from getting early political buy in for a compromise. And the politicians were looking for a compromise.

Why can't it still happen?

+1. Seems like based on the meeting handout, DCPS is acknowledging the need for improvements and we will likely see some.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Budget mark up is next week. Grosso and Allen told you six months ago that they were looking for a compromise. You offered them nothing. If you had a compromise position in your hands now you could feed it into the budget process. But you have nothing. This is what happens in politics when your demands for outreach your political strength.

Save Shaw is not organized enough to make a formal offer. It isn't that kind of entity.

Actually there was a published plan for both schools to share the site. Looked like a compromise to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Budget mark up is next week. Grosso and Allen told you six months ago that they were looking for a compromise. You offered them nothing. If you had a compromise position in your hands now you could feed it into the budget process. But you have nothing. This is what happens in politics when your demands for outreach your political strength.

Save Shaw is not organized enough to make a formal offer. It isn't that kind of entity.

Actually there was a published plan for both schools to share the site. Looked like a compromise to me.

Organized enough to get thousand of signatures on paper, a change dot org petition, ANC and citizen association buy in for the "stand alone" middle school, and to moan all day long, and to attack compromise positions. Energy misspent on an amateur strategy is the main observation.

I agree with the other poster, the politicians were on the side of Save Shaw in the beginning but did the most vocal people give them anything to work with? No. And those vocal voices kinda screw it for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because that decision is made. So negotiate the best Plan B you can.

Or keep venting your collective spleens and wind up with nothing or another option you hate.

I think it is important to have public accountability for their poor treatment of Cardozo and its feeders, both in their taking away a promised building, and the years of neglect that got us to this place. Letting them walk all over us may be convenient for Banneker but it will not be healthy for the school district as a whole. We have to stand up for ourselves even if we may not end up with a freestanding MS. It is about the principle of how DCPS treats families.

Oh my god. Get over yourself. Use your energy in a more productive, and helpful way. All you stand for is a "stand alone" middle school which the neighborhood numbers and DCPS don't support. Keep standing, off you go. Please, and let more reasonable and savvy people be the voice for the neighbourhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can the Shaw MS folks explain to me the separate principal issue? I'm in a McKinley MS feeder, and the principal there is also the principal of McKinley Tech. My kid is still little so I know very little about MS issues, just starting to follow these threads. Thanks!

It is a focus thing and whether one admin can deal with everything going on at the school and all the central office BS.

From a social-emotional perspective, there is more uniformity of needs in an elementary school -- than there is between 6th-8th graders and high school students.

McKinley Tech has to manage an outreach and marketing program to try to get students to apply, and then get them into college. The IB MS population, at least now, should be getting significant academic support to bring them up to grade level proficiency or at least keep moving toward it.

The McKinley principal is good. But it is a lot to ask of one person.

The principal of Cardozo actually said in the public meeting that she did not have time for the middle school. She seems to be running three programs there and did not want of ask for this middle school business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because that decision is made. So negotiate the best Plan B you can.

Or keep venting your collective spleens and wind up with nothing or another option you hate.

I think it is important to have public accountability for their poor treatment of Cardozo and its feeders, both in their taking away a promised building, and the years of neglect that got us to this place. Letting them walk all over us may be convenient for Banneker but it will not be healthy for the school district as a whole. We have to stand up for ourselves even if we may not end up with a freestanding MS. It is about the principle of how DCPS treats families.

Oh my god. Get over yourself. Use your energy in a more productive, and helpful way. All you stand for is a "stand alone" middle school which the neighborhood numbers and DCPS don't support. Keep standing, off you go. Please, and let more reasonable and savvy people be the voice for the neighbourhood.

Some day they may treat you like crap too, you know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can the Shaw MS folks explain to me the separate principal issue? I'm in a McKinley MS feeder, and the principal there is also the principal of McKinley Tech. My kid is still little so I know very little about MS issues, just starting to follow these threads. Thanks!

It is a focus thing and whether one admin can deal with everything going on at the school and all the central office BS.

From a social-emotional perspective, there is more uniformity of needs in an elementary school -- than there is between 6th-8th graders and high school students.

McKinley Tech has to manage an outreach and marketing program to try to get students to apply, and then get them into college. The IB MS population, at least now, should be getting significant academic support to bring them up to grade level proficiency or at least keep moving toward it.

The McKinley principal is good. But it is a lot to ask of one person.

The principal of Cardozo actually said in the public meeting that she did not have time for the middle school. She seems to be running three programs there and did not want of ask for this middle school business.

This. Is it too much to hope for that a school.be wanted and cared for by its own principal? No wonder the feeder capture rate is so low.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because that decision is made. So negotiate the best Plan B you can.

Or keep venting your collective spleens and wind up with nothing or another option you hate.

I think it is important to have public accountability for their poor treatment of Cardozo and its feeders, both in their taking away a promised building, and the years of neglect that got us to this place. Letting them walk all over us may be convenient for Banneker but it will not be healthy for the school district as a whole. We have to stand up for ourselves even if we may not end up with a freestanding MS. It is about the principle of how DCPS treats families.

Oh my god. Get over yourself. Use your energy in a more productive, and helpful way. All you stand for is a "stand alone" middle school which the neighborhood numbers and DCPS don't support. Keep standing, off you go. Please, and let more reasonable and savvy people be the voice for the neighbourhood.

Some day they may treat you like crap too, you know.

I am part of Shaw, and I do feel like DCPS treatment me, and you like crap. But it was a make lemonade situation and unfortunately that moment has passed. Part of the dynamic was everyone who thought they saved garrision and francis stevens thought they could do a repeat, but the merits of the case for "stand alone" this time were not on their side, or the politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can the Shaw MS folks explain to me the separate principal issue? I'm in a McKinley MS feeder, and the principal there is also the principal of McKinley Tech. My kid is still little so I know very little about MS issues, just starting to follow these threads. Thanks!

It is a focus thing and whether one admin can deal with everything going on at the school and all the central office BS.

From a social-emotional perspective, there is more uniformity of needs in an elementary school -- than there is between 6th-8th graders and high school students.

McKinley Tech has to manage an outreach and marketing program to try to get students to apply, and then get them into college. The IB MS population, at least now, should be getting significant academic support to bring them up to grade level proficiency or at least keep moving toward it.

The McKinley principal is good. But it is a lot to ask of one person.

The principal of Cardozo actually said in the public meeting that she did not have time for the middle school. She seems to be running three programs there and did not want of ask for this middle school business.

This. Is it too much to hope for that a school.be wanted and cared for by its own principal? No wonder the feeder capture rate is so low.

It is a mess, at least they are clear about fixing that now as the explained at last nights meeting. Maybe capture rates will go up. Hard to imagine that is all it takes to make the middle school there appealing, situated as it is next to a school with such a poor academic record, and a pregnant teen program. Or is that pregnant teen program a myth?