Boundary question

[Anonymous]

When do we find out what the plan is?

[Anonymous]

Exactly there will be an uproar. And -I'm just guessing here- making Deal into a 75% white school will not many happy people outside of upper NW make...

[Anonymous]

I think we find out in Fall 2014, for changes to go into effect in fall 2015. I doubt it will remain on the timeline, just because what ever does and what ever does in DC.

Anyone have any more intel?

[Anonymous]

The reason that Eaton and Hearst may be on the Deal chopping block is because of their large out of bounds populations. DCPS calculates that it can push the schools out of Deal to Hardy and that most of the parents will react passively or swallow Hardy as 'good enough.'. The schools' relatively smaller neighborhood populations compared to other Ward 3 elem schools means fewer angry, energized a d organized parents to "deal" with. Cutting off Deal at a Rock Creek Park boundary is a political non-starter and would be mischaracterized in racial terms which means DCPS will not even consider it. Bowser's base considers access to Deal and Wilson as their"piece of the pie."

[Anonymous]

The only way that Hardy will become successful is when it c

[Anonymous]

The only way that Hardy will become an acceptable alternative to Deal is when it has more high achieving students and fewer OOB students. Rhee tried to spur this change but ran into a socio-political buzz saw. But change will come eventually.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason that Eaton and Hearst may be on the Deal chopping block is because of their large out of bounds populations. DCPS calculates that it can push the schools out of Deal to Hardy and that most of the parents will react passively or swallow Hardy as 'good enough.'. The schools' relatively smaller neighborhood populations compared to other Ward 3 elem schools means fewer angry, energized a d organized parents to "deal" with. Cutting off Deal at a Rock Creek Park boundary is a political non-starter and would be mischaracterized in racial terms which means DCPS will not even consider it. Bowser's base considers access to Deal and Wilson as their"piece of the pie."

There are those of us who do live in-bounds for Hearst and are less than a mile from Deal. At least Eaton is somewhat equidistant between Deal and Hardy. If Hearst got switched there would be a vocal group of local families (the IB percentage is getting bigger in each new PK class) that would protest, not because Hardy is a bad school, but because Deal is right in our neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

I think cutting Eaton and Hearst from Deal would also create a socio-political buzz saw. I think they would have to "deal" with angry parents from all over the city who have been trying to get their kids in those schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason that Eaton and Hearst may be on the Deal chopping block is because of their large out of bounds populations. DCPS calculates that it can push the schools out of Deal to Hardy and that most of the parents will react passively or swallow Hardy as 'good enough.'. The schools' relatively smaller neighborhood populations compared to other Ward 3 elem schools means fewer angry, energized a d organized parents to "deal" with. Cutting off Deal at a Rock Creek Park boundary is a political non-starter and would be mischaracterized in racial terms which means DCPS will not even consider it. Bowser's base considers access to Deal and Wilson as their"piece of the pie."

There are those of us who do live in-bounds for Hearst and are less than a mile from Deal. At least Eaton is somewhat equidistant between Deal and Hardy. If Hearst got switched there would be a vocal group of local families (the IB percentage is getting bigger in each new PK class) that would protest, not because Hardy is a bad school, but because Deal is right in our neighborhood.

+1 as an IB parent planning to send kids to Hearst, I think the IB % is growing. But either way, I don't see a reason Hearst should be moved from Deal feeder, no matter whether the kids are IB or OB for the elementary school. The goal of DCPS redrawing boundaries I can assure you is not to make Deal only high SES white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason that Eaton and Hearst may be on the Deal chopping block is because of their large out of bounds populations. DCPS calculates that it can push the schools out of Deal to Hardy and that most of the parents will react passively or swallow Hardy as 'good enough.'. The schools' relatively smaller neighborhood populations compared to other Ward 3 elem schools means fewer angry, energized a d organized parents to "deal" with. Cutting off Deal at a Rock Creek Park boundary is a political non-starter and would be mischaracterized in racial terms which means DCPS will not even consider it. Bowser's base considers access to Deal and Wilson as their"piece of the pie."

There are those of us who do live in-bounds for Hearst and are less than a mile from Deal. At least Eaton is somewhat equidistant between Deal and Hardy. If Hearst got switched there would be a vocal group of local families (the IB percentage is getting bigger in each new PK class) that would protest, not because Hardy is a bad school, but because Deal is right in our neighborhood.

But is that a strong enough argument? There is an "OOB with proximity" preference on the lottery, which basically means if you are within a quarter mile or so of a school you get a preference in the lottery. So it would seem there already is a precedent for your closest school not being your in-boundary school -- even when that school is just a couple of blocks away.

[Anonymous]

Back to OP, Murch feeder pattern looks solid. So long as your child is in K or higher next fall, you will be able to grandfather into Deal and Wilson in the next 5-10 years. The good news for your child is that there will be more high-performing charter options in the coming years. Your child will not be locked into just Deal/Wilson. More than 40% of public school students are in charters now and stricter accountability measures than DCPS moving forward, it's highly likely that secondary students will have more high quality options across out relatively small city than today.

[Anonymous]

Back to OP, Murch feeder pattern looks solid. So long as your child is in K or higher next fall, you will be able to grandfather into Deal and Wilson in the next 5-10 years. The good news for your child is that there will be more high-performing charter options in the coming years. Your child will not be locked into just Deal/Wilson. More than 40% of public school students are in charters now and stricter accountability measures than DCPS moving forward, it's highly likely that secondary students will have more high quality options across out relatively small city than today.

You bring up a question I've been wondering about. If there is to be any progress in changing boundaries (in terms of overcrowding), wouldn't DCPS have to do away with grandfathering and/or sibling preferences? It seems to me that if one or both of those preferences are not cut, then nothing will really change in the next 10-15 years.

Is there something I'm missing in this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Back to OP, Murch feeder pattern looks solid. So long as your child is in K or higher next fall, you will be able to grandfather into Deal and Wilson in the next 5-10 years. The good news for your child is that there will be more high-performing charter options in the coming years. Your child will not be locked into just Deal/Wilson. More than 40% of public school students are in charters now and stricter accountability measures than DCPS moving forward, it's highly likely that secondary students will have more high quality options across out relatively small city than today.

You bring up a question I've been wondering about. If there is to be any progress in changing boundaries (in terms of overcrowding), wouldn't DCPS have to do away with grandfathering and/or sibling preferences? It seems to me that if one or both of those preferences are not cut, then nothing will really change in the next 10-15 years.

Is there something I'm missing in this?

I think you are right. If both of these are kept it will be many years before any real changes are felt.

[Anonymous]

Pushing Hearst & Eaton out does not really solve the long term issue of the neighborhood demographics. The problem is that schools like Janey & Murch are expected to grow so much that you are in the same over crowding mess. You have to address the whole distribution, meaning you have to spread those kids to the schools that have large oob populations now. My guess is that Hearst and Eaton stay but with Janey kids at least pulled into their school boundaries. It is the only way you deal with the underlying numbers problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pushing Hearst & Eaton out does not really solve the long term issue of the neighborhood demographics. The problem is that schools like Janey & Murch are expected to grow so much that you are in the same over crowding mess. You have to address the whole distribution, meaning you have to spread those kids to the schools that have large oob populations now. My guess is that Hearst and Eaton stay but with Janey kids at least pulled into their school boundaries. It is the only way you deal with the underlying numbers problem.

How would that help with the Deal crowding issue if they still feed into Deal?

For the Hearst posters, if more IB students are attending Hearst, how is that different in regards to the diversity issue (which is a Hearst claim for keeping Hearst as a feeder) than having Heast feed into Hardy. Won't Deal be becoming higher SES (ie, white) either way-- if Hearst goes to Hardy OR if IB kids choose Hearst?