Couldn't you just build a strong proximity preference to get the advantages of choice sets?

[Anonymous]

OP, you didn't specify that people kept their inbounds rights, so I think that confused a lot of the following posters. I think your idea is interesting and worthy of consideration. On Capitol Hill, I don't think it would make much difference, though, except if there was a proximity preference for charters. The popular DCPSs are filled with inboundary kids, and the unpopular DCPSs aren't that hard to get into. But it might make a difference in other areas of the city.

[Anonymous]

The topic of this thread is about replacing "choice sets" with a proximity preference. As I understand OP's proposal, everyone would have their school by right based on their boundary. They would ALSO have priority in a lottery based on proximity.

The question is whether this REPLACEMENT of choice sets with proximity preference would create what are held out as the benefits of choice sets. I am not speaking to whether there are benefits to choice sets.

[Anonymous]

Here's why choice sets are a solution in search of a problem:

There are 139 schools in DCPS. At 127 (give or take) of them, every student who wishes to attend may attend. Boundaries don't matter. There are 12 schools that don't take every student that applies. Of those, seven take no students at all in the OOB lottery.

"Choice sets" are only about divvying up seats at those 12 schools. At every other school, everyone who wants to can go.

If the problem were that seats were currently allocated inefficiently, then choice sets would be a good solution. It's always a good strategy to get people to make their own choices to get higher utilization of assets. But seats aren't allocated inefficiently now. At those 12 schools, every seat is full.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's why choice sets are a solution in search of a problem:

There are 139 schools in DCPS. At 127 (give or take) of them, every student who wishes to attend may attend. Boundaries don't matter. There are 12 schools that don't take every student that applies. Of those, seven take no students at all in the OOB lottery.

"Choice sets" are only about divvying up seats at those 12 schools. At every other school, everyone who wants to can go.

If the problem were that seats were currently allocated inefficiently, then choice sets would be a good solution. It's always a good strategy to get people to make their own choices to get higher utilization of assets. But seats aren't allocated inefficiently now. At those 12 schools, every seat is full.

True and correct. I tried to have a confrontation about the same line with Mary Filardo - the chief of the 21 Century Fund advising the DME - on Tuesday night but she could not understand the point, she repeated as if she was in a tranche that "diversity improves academic outcomes" , "not everybody are happy with their neighborhood school".. I gave up.

[Anonymous]

I think this is the best solution, you get rights to your inbounds school in addition to proximity preference to everything nearby. It will lessen commutes, not force kids to go to a worse school than they already have rights too, but give you options if there are multiple desirable schools in your neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Let's not forget there is a rezoning going on as well. In the popular school neighborhood of Murch and Janney the school zone borders will change. This concerns a significant group of parents / families. These people are the among the closest to Murch or Janney respectively, like literally 2- 3 blocks away. Their newly assigned school would be Hearst, which is one mile away. Say goodbye to walkability

In the choice set their schools would be: Hearst (at 1 mile), Eaton (at 1.4 miles) and Oyster (at 2.7 miles)!!!! what on earth can this mean in terms of proximity, walkability, neighborhood preference??

Furthermore, these families are a stone's throw away from Deal as middle school. Because of the rezoning to Hearst at one block away, their middle school would be Hardy at 2.7 miles!!

What kind of urban planning disaster is this?

[Anonymous]

I totally agree. Even if nothing changes, all of this uncertainty, inefficiency, and lack of practical thinking has spooked us, and we will go private after one year of K in DCPS. Our family is African-American and high SES, and we moved WOTP three years ago to be IB for better schools. We have an older DS who is now in private after going K-8 at Oyster/Deal. We cannot take a risk with our (younger) DD's education. Whose to say that these fools might not decide to tinker with the boundaries and feeder patterns down the road. In the words of Sweet Brown, "Ain't nobody got time for that!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

In the choice set their schools would be: Hearst (at 1 mile), Eaton (at 1.4 miles) and Oyster (at 2.7 miles)!!!! what on earth can this mean in terms of proximity, walkability, neighborhood preference??

Furthermore, these families are a stone's throw away from Deal as middle school. Because of the rezoning to Hearst at one block away, their middle school would be Hardy at 2.7 miles!!

What kind of urban planning disaster is this?

This proximity and accessibility question is very important and ought not be discounted. Certainly for those who live a stone's throw to Deal and are zoned into Hearst, the middle/high school option should be obvious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's not forget there is a rezoning going on as well. In the popular school neighborhood of Murch and Janney the school zone borders will change. This concerns a significant group of parents / families. These people are the among the closest to Murch or Janney respectively, like literally 2- 3 blocks away. Their newly assigned school would be Hearst, which is one mile away. Say goodbye to walkability

In the choice set their schools would be: Hearst (at 1 mile), Eaton (at 1.4 miles) and Oyster (at 2.7 miles)!!!! what on earth can this mean in terms of proximity, walkability, neighborhood preference??

Furthermore, these families are a stone's throw away from Deal as middle school. Because of the rezoning to Hearst at one block away, their middle school would be Hardy at 2.7 miles!!

What kind of urban planning disaster is this?

In which option is Hearst rezoned for Deal? Eaton is, but not Hearst.

Also, I agree this is very upsetting for these families (and the schools whom these families are a part of) and, at least at Janney, the school is not currently overcrowded with the renovation that is happening and the DME paperwork acknowledged that. That said, there are many, many houses within the Hearst boundary that are very close to Janney, walkable to Janney and much farther away to Hearst. That is the nature of how the schools were placed. They are in a cluster with houses moving outward from them. The families in the middle are closer to all three than the families on the outer edges of the boundaries. There is, however, no way to move the schools or assign the families farther away to Hearst without having those families pass Janney on their way to Hearst, which is even more ridiculous. And those families moved to Hearst are no farther than many families within the boundaries. Given that the DME states in its paperwork that it is trying to further walkability with the changes it needs to acknowledge that it is actually taking walkable homes within boundaries and making them unwalkable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's not forget there is a rezoning going on as well. In the popular school neighborhood of Murch and Janney the school zone borders will change. This concerns a significant group of parents / families. These people are the among the closest to Murch or Janney respectively, like literally 2- 3 blocks away. Their newly assigned school would be Hearst, which is one mile away. Say goodbye to walkability

In the choice set their schools would be: Hearst (at 1 mile), Eaton (at 1.4 miles) and Oyster (at 2.7 miles)!!!! what on earth can this mean in terms of proximity, walkability, neighborhood preference??

Furthermore, these families are a stone's throw away from Deal as middle school. Because of the rezoning to Hearst at one block away, their middle school would be Hardy at 2.7 miles!!

What kind of urban planning disaster is this?

In which option is Hearst rezoned for Deal? Eaton is, but not Hearst.

Also, I agree this is very upsetting for these families (and the schools whom these families are a part of) and, at least at Janney, the school is not currently overcrowded with the renovation that is happening and the DME paperwork acknowledged that. That said, there are many, many houses within the Hearst boundary that are very close to Janney, walkable to Janney and much farther away to Hearst. That is the nature of how the schools were placed. They are in a cluster with houses moving outward from them. The families in the middle are closer to all three than the families on the outer edges of the boundaries. There is, however, no way to move the schools or assign the families farther away to Hearst without having those families pass Janney on their way to Hearst, which is even more ridiculous. And those families moved to Hearst are no farther than many families within the boundaries. Given that the DME states in its paperwork that it is trying to further walkability with the changes it needs to acknowledge that it is actually taking walkable homes within boundaries and making them unwalkable.

Two out of the three proposals create a middle school lottery in which students of the rezoned Murch / Janney to Hearst block would be placed at Hardy or Deal. No guarantee it will be Deal, whereas these kids live 2 to 4 blocks from Deal!!
The choice set for this group for elementary will be Hearst, Oyster or Eaton - again they now are at walkable, few blocks distance to their original schools. The re zoning to a different school changes that whole dynamic, and it could have big consequences if especially the far-reaching reforms of the middle school feeder pattern also take place.
Yes, Murch is a crowded school, but it just got a major budget allocation from the city to renovate and upgrade. Improvements will be done next year already, and the big renovation is planned for 2016. That is not taking into account in these plans, just like the latest Janney renovation isn't either. And even despite its crowds, Murch is a very well- functioning and tight-knit school, and it shows again how important parental involvement is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's not forget there is a rezoning going on as well. In the popular school neighborhood of Murch and Janney the school zone borders will change. This concerns a significant group of parents / families. These people are the among the closest to Murch or Janney respectively, like literally 2- 3 blocks away. Their newly assigned school would be Hearst, which is one mile away. Say goodbye to walkability

In the choice set their schools would be: Hearst (at 1 mile), Eaton (at 1.4 miles) and Oyster (at 2.7 miles)!!!! what on earth can this mean in terms of proximity, walkability, neighborhood preference??

Furthermore, these families are a stone's throw away from Deal as middle school. Because of the rezoning to Hearst at one block away, their middle school would be Hardy at 2.7 miles!!

What kind of urban planning disaster is this?

In which option is Hearst rezoned for Deal? Eaton is, but not Hearst.

Also, I agree this is very upsetting for these families (and the schools whom these families are a part of) and, at least at Janney, the school is not currently overcrowded with the renovation that is happening and the DME paperwork acknowledged that. That said, there are many, many houses within the Hearst boundary that are very close to Janney, walkable to Janney and much farther away to Hearst. That is the nature of how the schools were placed. They are in a cluster with houses moving outward from them. The families in the middle are closer to all three than the families on the outer edges of the boundaries. There is, however, no way to move the schools or assign the families farther away to Hearst without having those families pass Janney on their way to Hearst, which is even more ridiculous. And those families moved to Hearst are no farther than many families within the boundaries. Given that the DME states in its paperwork that it is trying to further walkability with the changes it needs to acknowledge that it is actually taking walkable homes within boundaries and making them unwalkable.

Two out of the three proposals create a middle school lottery in which students of the rezoned Murch / Janney to Hearst block would be placed at Hardy or Deal. No guarantee it will be Deal, whereas these kids live 2 to 4 blocks from Deal!!
The choice set for this group for elementary will be Hearst, Oyster or Eaton - again they now are at walkable, few blocks distance to their original schools. The re zoning to a different school changes that whole dynamic, and it could have big consequences if especially the far-reaching reforms of the middle school feeder pattern also take place.
Yes, Murch is a crowded school, but it just got a major budget allocation from the city to renovate and upgrade. Improvements will be done next year already, and the big renovation is planned for 2016. That is not taking into account in these plans, just like the latest Janney renovation isn't either. And even despite its crowds, Murch is a very well- functioning and tight-knit school, and it shows again how important parental involvement is.

Well, to the extent there is a choice of deal or hardy for the families moved to Hearst, that is the same choice they would have if that option is chosen had they stayed at Murch and Janney. I am not saying that is a good plan, I am just saying that it is not a function of the boundary redraw. The biggest downside to the redraw I see is the elementary school choice sets. Nonetheless no current families will be moved and if there need to be a redraw (I am not assuming that it is needed) those are the locations that make as much sense as any geographically. There are currently many homes in bound for Hearst that are walkable to Janney and Murch, it is the nature of how close the schools are to each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's not forget there is a rezoning going on as well. In the popular school neighborhood of Murch and Janney the school zone borders will change. This concerns a significant group of parents / families. These people are the among the closest to Murch or Janney respectively, like literally 2- 3 blocks away. Their newly assigned school would be Hearst, which is one mile away. Say goodbye to walkability

In the choice set their schools would be: Hearst (at 1 mile), Eaton (at 1.4 miles) and Oyster (at 2.7 miles)!!!! what on earth can this mean in terms of proximity, walkability, neighborhood preference??

Furthermore, these families are a stone's throw away from Deal as middle school. Because of the rezoning to Hearst at one block away, their middle school would be Hardy at 2.7 miles!!

What kind of urban planning disaster is this?

Also, I agree this is very upsetting for these families (and the schools whom these families are a part of) and, at least at Janney, the school is not currently overcrowded with the renovation that is happening and the DME paperwork acknowledged that. That said, there are many, many houses within the Hearst boundary that are very close to Janney, walkable to Janney and much farther away to Hearst. That is the nature of how the schools were placed. They are in a cluster with houses moving outward from them. The families in the middle are closer to all three than the families on the outer edges of the boundaries. There is, however, no way to move the schools or assign the families farther away to Hearst without having those families pass Janney on their way to Hearst, which is even more ridiculous. And those families moved to Hearst are no farther than many families within the boundaries. Given that the DME states in its paperwork that it is trying to further walkability with the changes it needs to acknowledge that it is actually taking walkable homes within boundaries and making them unwalkable.

I agree that change and potential change is upsetting. and agree with your comment that because all 3 of hearst, janney and murch are actually quite close together the blocks around where the 3 boundaries meet are in a tricky spot. However the comment about ALL potential janney homes who could be rezoned to hearst would have to pass janney, i think it overstates -

the small group of houses between nebraska on the west and wisconsin on the east from Yuma to van ness are already south of janney, they would just keep going south to van ness and then head a couple blocks east - would not pass Janney

the blocks west of wisconsin avenue to 38th street between yuma and chesapeake could walk south on 38th until Upton and then head 1 block west to 37th. so sure on south/north axis they go further south than Janney is located but they would not actually pass janney on their walk

So, yes for the 'furthest' murch houses it is a potential 12 block max walk vs what is currently 4 or 5 , yes it is further but still walkable or bikeable. and if grandfathering is set up for all existing families - or geez - even all existing homeowners - why not make the change to end up with another strong neighborhood school in the N Cleveland Park/Tenley/AU area? our neighborhood has plenty of kids to fill 3 great elementary schools and if we can agree to this in exchange for tossing out the choice set concept or the crazy lottery ideas for MS and HS well that's a bargain I'd be willing to agree too.

[Anonymous]

I agree -- choice sets for middle school or lottery for high school are the real deal breakers here. Even Cambridge, mass, which is held out as the model of controlled choice, has clear feeder patterns from elementary to middle to high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's not forget there is a rezoning going on as well. In the popular school neighborhood of Murch and Janney the school zone borders will change. This concerns a significant group of parents / families. These people are the among the closest to Murch or Janney respectively, like literally 2- 3 blocks away. Their newly assigned school would be Hearst, which is one mile away. Say goodbye to walkability

In the choice set their schools would be: Hearst (at 1 mile), Eaton (at 1.4 miles) and Oyster (at 2.7 miles)!!!! what on earth can this mean in terms of proximity, walkability, neighborhood preference??

Furthermore, these families are a stone's throw away from Deal as middle school. Because of the rezoning to Hearst at one block away, their middle school would be Hardy at 2.7 miles!!

What kind of urban planning disaster is this?

Also, I agree this is very upsetting for these families (and the schools whom these families are a part of) and, at least at Janney, the school is not currently overcrowded with the renovation that is happening and the DME paperwork acknowledged that. That said, there are many, many houses within the Hearst boundary that are very close to Janney, walkable to Janney and much farther away to Hearst. That is the nature of how the schools were placed. They are in a cluster with houses moving outward from them. The families in the middle are closer to all three than the families on the outer edges of the boundaries. There is, however, no way to move the schools or assign the families farther away to Hearst without having those families pass Janney on their way to Hearst, which is even more ridiculous. And those families moved to Hearst are no farther than many families within the boundaries. Given that the DME states in its paperwork that it is trying to further walkability with the changes it needs to acknowledge that it is actually taking walkable homes within boundaries and making them unwalkable.

I agree that change and potential change is upsetting. and agree with your comment that because all 3 of hearst, janney and murch are actually quite close together the blocks around where the 3 boundaries meet are in a tricky spot. However the comment about ALL potential janney homes who could be rezoned to hearst would have to pass janney, i think it overstates -

the small group of houses between nebraska on the west and wisconsin on the east from Yuma to van ness are already south of janney, they would just keep going south to van ness and then head a couple blocks east - would not pass Janney

the blocks west of wisconsin avenue to 38th street between yuma and chesapeake could walk south on 38th until Upton and then head 1 block west to 37th. so sure on south/north axis they go further south than Janney is located but they would not actually pass janney on their walk

So, yes for the 'furthest' murch houses it is a potential 12 block max walk vs what is currently 4 or 5 , yes it is further but still walkable or bikeable. and if grandfathering is set up for all existing families - or geez - even all existing homeowners - why not make the change to end up with another strong neighborhood school in the N Cleveland Park/Tenley/AU area? our neighborhood has plenty of kids to fill 3 great elementary schools and if we can agree to this in exchange for tossing out the choice set concept or the crazy lottery ideas for MS and HS well that's a bargain I'd be willing to agree too.

PP here. Yes, I can live with that. If the choice set in the neighborhood described above would be Murch, Janney or Hearst; that would be acceptable. However, one proposal creates a lottery between Hearst, Oyster or Eaton! The latter two are surely not walkable anymore from that Janney / Murch axis described above. Oyster is in a different neighborhood altogether.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's not forget there is a rezoning going on as well. In the popular school neighborhood of Murch and Janney the school zone borders will change. This concerns a significant group of parents / families. These people are the among the closest to Murch or Janney respectively, like literally 2- 3 blocks away. Their newly assigned school would be Hearst, which is one mile away. Say goodbye to walkability

In the choice set their schools would be: Hearst (at 1 mile), Eaton (at 1.4 miles) and Oyster (at 2.7 miles)!!!! what on earth can this mean in terms of proximity, walkability, neighborhood preference??

Furthermore, these families are a stone's throw away from Deal as middle school. Because of the rezoning to Hearst at one block away, their middle school would be Hardy at 2.7 miles!!

What kind of urban planning disaster is this?

Also, I agree this is very upsetting for these families (and the schools whom these families are a part of) and, at least at Janney, the school is not currently overcrowded with the renovation that is happening and the DME paperwork acknowledged that. That said, there are many, many houses within the Hearst boundary that are very close to Janney, walkable to Janney and much farther away to Hearst. That is the nature of how the schools were placed. They are in a cluster with houses moving outward from them. The families in the middle are closer to all three than the families on the outer edges of the boundaries. There is, however, no way to move the schools or assign the families farther away to Hearst without having those families pass Janney on their way to Hearst, which is even more ridiculous. And those families moved to Hearst are no farther than many families within the boundaries. Given that the DME states in its paperwork that it is trying to further walkability with the changes it needs to acknowledge that it is actually taking walkable homes within boundaries and making them unwalkable.

I agree that change and potential change is upsetting. and agree with your comment that because all 3 of hearst, janney and murch are actually quite close together the blocks around where the 3 boundaries meet are in a tricky spot. However the comment about ALL potential janney homes who could be rezoned to hearst would have to pass janney, i think it overstates -

the small group of houses between nebraska on the west and wisconsin on the east from Yuma to van ness are already south of janney, they would just keep going south to van ness and then head a couple blocks east - would not pass Janney

the blocks west of wisconsin avenue to 38th street between yuma and chesapeake could walk south on 38th until Upton and then head 1 block west to 37th. so sure on south/north axis they go further south than Janney is located but they would not actually pass janney on their walk

So, yes for the 'furthest' murch houses it is a potential 12 block max walk vs what is currently 4 or 5 , yes it is further but still walkable or bikeable. and if grandfathering is set up for all existing families - or geez - even all existing homeowners - why not make the change to end up with another strong neighborhood school in the N Cleveland Park/Tenley/AU area? our neighborhood has plenty of kids to fill 3 great elementary schools and if we can agree to this in exchange for tossing out the choice set concept or the crazy lottery ideas for MS and HS well that's a bargain I'd be willing to agree too.

+1