Wilson is 50% over enrolled.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Because when Bowser said “Deal for All” she literally meant that she would stuff more kids into Deal and Wilson


They are literally building a new high school to divert kids from Wilson.


Which they wouldn’t need to do if they filled the empty seats in under-enrolled schools by re-drawing and enforcing boundaries.


Or people WOTP who are dissatisfied with the size of the enrollment at Jackson-Reed could simply enroll their kids at one of the under-enrolled EOTP schools. That would seem to be quicker solution for those folks than redrawing boundaries.





Why would someone travel to go to schools that even the people who live in the school neighborhood refuse to go to?
Anonymous
The name is Jackson-Reed
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Because when Bowser said “Deal for All” she literally meant that she would stuff more kids into Deal and Wilson


They are literally building a new high school to divert kids from Wilson.


Which they wouldn’t need to do if they filled the empty seats in under-enrolled schools by re-drawing and enforcing boundaries.


Or people WOTP who are dissatisfied with the size of the enrollment at Jackson-Reed could simply enroll their kids at one of the under-enrolled EOTP schools. That would seem to be quicker solution for those folks than redrawing boundaries.


Why do you bother? To be cute? You know full well why there are multiple under-enrolled DCPS middle and high schools EOTP. These schools are dysfunctional, either moderately or extremely. What, exactly, do you get out making such an asinine statement?
Anonymous
Ending feeder rights would solve a lot of problems both east and west of the park, honestly.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Ending feeder rights would solve a lot of problems both east and west of the park, honestly.



This
Anonymous
Check the enrollments of other middle and high schools before you say the others are under enrolled though. Ward 4 is filling up.

But I’d agree with those who’d prefer we limited Wilson access, build up other DCPS high schools, not put a new school in a random corner west of Georgetown. It’s a clear statement of the mayor’s belief that we can’t make schools achieve more east of Rock Creek, so we have to build more west of it to accommodate historical uh let’s call it “preferences.”
Anonymous
Wilson’s current enrollment is 2521.

They’re trying to find trailers to house students.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Because when Bowser said “Deal for All” she literally meant that she would stuff more kids into Deal and Wilson


They are literally building a new high school to divert kids from Wilson.


Which they wouldn’t need to do if they filled the empty seats in under-enrolled schools by re-drawing and enforcing boundaries.


Or people WOTP who are dissatisfied with the size of the enrollment at Jackson-Reed could simply enroll their kids at one of the under-enrolled EOTP schools. That would seem to be quicker solution for those folks than redrawing boundaries.


Why do you bother? To be cute? You know full well why there are multiple under-enrolled DCPS middle and high schools EOTP. These schools are dysfunctional, either moderately or extremely. What, exactly, do you get out making such an asinine statement?


Read carefully. I was responding to someone who suggested that boundaries should be redrawn. Presumably that would mean that some WOTP kids who are currently zoned for Jackson-Reed would be shifted elsewhere. My suggestion is that these folks could just enroll in these other schools now if they aren’t satisfied with Jackson-Reed. Wouldn’t that be more efficient than redrawing boundaries?

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Wilson’s current enrollment is 2521.

They’re trying to find trailers to house students.


The OSSE audited enrollment for 2021-22 is 2061.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Ending feeder rights would solve a lot of problems both east and west of the park, honestly.



This


I’ve said this multiple times on this site but added that one should have to lottery again for the next school level. For instance if you got into Murch via lottery, you’ll need to lottery for Deal (if you get in) and then Wilson.

Some parents may not be happy but this is the risk you’ll be taking when your child is OOB. And I saw this as an OOB parent at Bancroft who wanted Deal over MacFarland.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Ending feeder rights would solve a lot of problems both east and west of the park, honestly.



This


I’ve said this multiple times on this site but added that one should have to lottery again for the next school level. For instance if you got into Murch via lottery, you’ll need to lottery for Deal (if you get in) and then Wilson.

Some parents may not be happy but this is the risk you’ll be taking when your child is OOB. And I saw this as an OOB parent at Bancroft who wanted Deal over MacFarland.


The problem with your plan isn’t that “some parents might not be happy.” It’s that revising the feeder patterns will take longer than renovating the old GDS school. And Jackson Reed needs an outlet now.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Because when Bowser said “Deal for All” she literally meant that she would stuff more kids into Deal and Wilson


They are literally building a new high school to divert kids from Wilson.


Which they wouldn’t need to do if they filled the empty seats in under-enrolled schools by re-drawing and enforcing boundaries.


Or people WOTP who are dissatisfied with the size of the enrollment at Jackson-Reed could simply enroll their kids at one of the under-enrolled EOTP schools. That would seem to be quicker solution for those folks than redrawing boundaries.


Why do you bother? To be cute? You know full well why there are multiple under-enrolled DCPS middle and high schools EOTP. These schools are dysfunctional, either moderately or extremely. What, exactly, do you get out making such an asinine statement?


Read carefully. I was responding to someone who suggested that boundaries should be redrawn. Presumably that would mean that some WOTP kids who are currently zoned for Jackson-Reed would be shifted elsewhere. My suggestion is that these folks could just enroll in these other schools now if they aren’t satisfied with Jackson-Reed. Wouldn’t that be more efficient than redrawing boundaries?



The problem with your plan is that no one will choose to travel for a school that parents in that school’s neighborhood refuse to send their kids to. And you know that.

An overenrolled school is a problem for every student enrolled and the school system should be able to adjust enrollments so that existing empty seats are filled and no new building is done until that happens.

The solution is to redraw boundaries and require people to enroll in their IB school just like most school districts in the country. The per pupil funding will stay with those students and allow those schools to offer more programming for those students. Of course, this is problematic in this city for political reasons.

So they are going to open a new school with new seats so that more people have to travel and the now-empty seats remain empty and those under-enrolled schools continue to see funding per student drop and move to another ward. And of course, people will complain that W3 is getting another new school because people who live there are rich and white.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Because when Bowser said “Deal for All” she literally meant that she would stuff more kids into Deal and Wilson


They are literally building a new high school to divert kids from Wilson.


Which they wouldn’t need to do if they filled the empty seats in under-enrolled schools by re-drawing and enforcing boundaries.


Or people WOTP who are dissatisfied with the size of the enrollment at Jackson-Reed could simply enroll their kids at one of the under-enrolled EOTP schools. That would seem to be quicker solution for those folks than redrawing boundaries.


Why do you bother? To be cute? You know full well why there are multiple under-enrolled DCPS middle and high schools EOTP. These schools are dysfunctional, either moderately or extremely. What, exactly, do you get out making such an asinine statement?


Read carefully. I was responding to someone who suggested that boundaries should be redrawn. Presumably that would mean that some WOTP kids who are currently zoned for Jackson-Reed would be shifted elsewhere. My suggestion is that these folks could just enroll in these other schools now if they aren’t satisfied with Jackson-Reed. Wouldn’t that be more efficient than redrawing boundaries?



The problem with your plan is that no one will choose to travel for a school that parents in that school’s neighborhood refuse to send their kids to. And you know that.

An overenrolled school is a problem for every student enrolled and the school system should be able to adjust enrollments so that existing empty seats are filled and no new building is done until that happens.

The solution is to redraw boundaries and require people to enroll in their IB school just like most school districts in the country. The per pupil funding will stay with those students and allow those schools to offer more programming for those students. Of course, this is problematic in this city for political reasons.

So they are going to open a new school with new seats so that more people have to travel and the now-empty seats remain empty and those under-enrolled schools continue to see funding per student drop and move to another ward. And of course, people will complain that W3 is getting another new school because people who live there are rich and white.


Please identify the US school district where charter, private, Catholic and all other religious schools are illegal. No one anywhere in the is country is required to send their children to a government school.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Because when Bowser said “Deal for All” she literally meant that she would stuff more kids into Deal and Wilson


They are literally building a new high school to divert kids from Wilson.


Which they wouldn’t need to do if they filled the empty seats in under-enrolled schools by re-drawing and enforcing boundaries.


Or people WOTP who are dissatisfied with the size of the enrollment at Jackson-Reed could simply enroll their kids at one of the under-enrolled EOTP schools. That would seem to be quicker solution for those folks than redrawing boundaries.


Why do you bother? To be cute? You know full well why there are multiple under-enrolled DCPS middle and high schools EOTP. These schools are dysfunctional, either moderately or extremely. What, exactly, do you get out making such an asinine statement?


Read carefully. I was responding to someone who suggested that boundaries should be redrawn. Presumably that would mean that some WOTP kids who are currently zoned for Jackson-Reed would be shifted elsewhere. My suggestion is that these folks could just enroll in these other schools now if they aren’t satisfied with Jackson-Reed. Wouldn’t that be more efficient than redrawing boundaries?



The problem with your plan is that no one will choose to travel for a school that parents in that school’s neighborhood refuse to send their kids to. And you know that.

An overenrolled school is a problem for every student enrolled and the school system should be able to adjust enrollments so that existing empty seats are filled and no new building is done until that happens.

The solution is to redraw boundaries and require people to enroll in their IB school just like most school districts in the country. The per pupil funding will stay with those students and allow those schools to offer more programming for those students. Of course, this is problematic in this city for political reasons.

So they are going to open a new school with new seats so that more people have to travel and the now-empty seats remain empty and those under-enrolled schools continue to see funding per student drop and move to another ward. And of course, people will complain that W3 is getting another new school because people who live there are rich and white.


Please identify the US school district where charter, private, Catholic and all other religious schools are illegal. No one anywhere in the is country is required to send their children to a government school.


Of course that is not what PP meant. There are zillions of school districts that don’t permit students to choose an OOB school in the same system.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Because when Bowser said “Deal for All” she literally meant that she would stuff more kids into Deal and Wilson


They are literally building a new high school to divert kids from Wilson.


Which they wouldn’t need to do if they filled the empty seats in under-enrolled schools by re-drawing and enforcing boundaries.


Or people WOTP who are dissatisfied with the size of the enrollment at Jackson-Reed could simply enroll their kids at one of the under-enrolled EOTP schools. That would seem to be quicker solution for those folks than redrawing boundaries.


Why do you bother? To be cute? You know full well why there are multiple under-enrolled DCPS middle and high schools EOTP. These schools are dysfunctional, either moderately or extremely. What, exactly, do you get out making such an asinine statement?


Read carefully. I was responding to someone who suggested that boundaries should be redrawn. Presumably that would mean that some WOTP kids who are currently zoned for Jackson-Reed would be shifted elsewhere. My suggestion is that these folks could just enroll in these other schools now if they aren’t satisfied with Jackson-Reed. Wouldn’t that be more efficient than redrawing boundaries?



The problem with your plan is that no one will choose to travel for a school that parents in that school’s neighborhood refuse to send their kids to. And you know that.

An overenrolled school is a problem for every student enrolled and the school system should be able to adjust enrollments so that existing empty seats are filled and no new building is done until that happens.

The solution is to redraw boundaries and require people to enroll in their IB school just like most school districts in the country. The per pupil funding will stay with those students and allow those schools to offer more programming for those students. Of course, this is problematic in this city for political reasons.

So they are going to open a new school with new seats so that more people have to travel and the now-empty seats remain empty and those under-enrolled schools continue to see funding per student drop and move to another ward. And of course, people will complain that W3 is getting another new school because people who live there are rich and white.


Please identify the US school district where charter, private, Catholic and all other religious schools are illegal. No one anywhere in the is country is required to send their children to a government school.


Of course that is not what PP meant. There are zillions of school districts that don’t permit students to choose an OOB school in the same system.


I think it is what PP means. PP is arguing that taking that away OOB rights will cause students to enroll in their IB DCPS schools. That conclusion only follows from that premise if you also ban charter, Catholic, and other religious schools.
post reply Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools
Message Quick Reply
Go to: