Low In Boundary at Hearst?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| People, vote in the mayoral race to make your voice heard. Support Catania, will get you further than complaining on this board. |
Anonymous
| Hearst was also historically low for in-bounds because the facility was so small -- no gym, no cafeteria, and until a few years ago, I believe that it only went to 3rd grade. So in addition to sub-par facilities, your kid would have to go to a new elementary school for 4th and 5th grades, and then switch again for middle school -- definitely something that would make in-bounds families hesitate before sending their kids there. Now that the school goes through 5th grade, has had a new renovation and a strong principal it is attracting more in-bounds families. |
Anonymous
You're totally full of it. We live in a Victorian house in Cleveland Park and our kids went to Eaton. |
Anonymous
But, you rent the basement of that $3.7 million house. |
Anonymous
|
The DCPS data shows only about 150 elementary age kids who attend DCPS schools. This seems like an absurdly small number and is due to overall small size of boundary and that thee is a lot of non-residential space in the boundary. Of the 150 about 50 +/- currently attend Hearst. The school's capacity is about 300 and that will remain the same even after the renovation. Given the fact other nearby schools are bursting at the seams with primarily IB kids it makes sense to me to expand the Hearst boundaries to better serve the overall neighborhood. I certainly understand the Murch posters point about having made plans around a specific school and I would expect them to make a strong case for grandfathering of all current Murch families , I would likely do the same in her shoes.
As for the current overall low IB % there is a bit of the law of small numbers at play here. First 18% is an average across PK - 5. The IB % at the lower grades is meaningfully higher. And is overall such a small school - a relatively small number of additional kids will move the IB % quite a bit. For example if all 50 current IB kids are still at Hearst plus the 25 IB PK 4s that jumps the % to 26 in 1 year (75 IB as a % of total enrollment Another point which I actually don't know the answer to is whether or not the Autism class is included in the numbers used to calculate IB. These kids are on IEPs so they can come from all over the city - I think it's about 20 or less kids. So all of the IB discussion is interesting but the thing I find more compelling about the school is that everyone - principal, teachers, parents - I have encountered there over the last two years is fully committee and engaged and focused on continuing the schools momentum 'up and to the right'. |
Anonymous
|
Thank you PP for giving a full description of the situ.
If anything they should expand the boundaries more than is planned, but maybe not include families that could walk to Murch? And yes, anyone currently enrolled will surely be grandfathered. |
Anonymous
Nah, basement rentals are basically prohibited in the neighborhood. But the reality is that CP contains an array of housing types -- from small apartments to historic houses -- and Eaton kids come from all them. |
Anonymous
i agree anyone currently enrolled is likely to be grandfathered but what about those families with kids too young to be currently enrolled yet bought a house in the boundary? |
Anonymous
|
My guess is that this is one boundary change that will go through. Reducing overcrowding at the upper NW schools was one of the motivations for redrawing the boundaries in the first place. It's necessary.
I also don't understand this sniffing at Hearst. Any child who would have gotten high test scores at Murch will get them at Hearst, which is obviously on an upward trajectory with respect to scores. The OOB parents I know there are well-educated professionals. |
Anonymous
| I am wondering about the comments re: Hardy. The only proposal I've seen that would have Hearst students going to Hardy is in the proposal in which students would enter a lottery to attend one of their 2 closest middle schools, thus Deal or Hardy. But this applies to all the elem schools in the area. Please let me know if I am missing some piece of the story. |
Anonymous
Actually the number is only 103 school-aged public school students. Hearst's boundaries are extraordinarily small. Even if every one of those kids went to the school the school would only be 1/3 inbounds. That its PK4 class is over 50% IB suggests that is capturing a large percentage if not almost all of the younger aged kids. Moreover, who cares? Hearst is an incredibly close-knit community that values all of the folks that come to it from all over the city. |
Anonymous
| The ranting poster above should recognize that 1) her kids will do just as well in life whether they go to M or H 2) H is growing very quickly in popularity like Ross did and it is good city planning to expand the boundaries. 3) everyone knows that school boundaries can be changed and they have been postulating moving Hearst boundaries for years now. No surprise there. |
Anonymous
Me too. As far as I can tell, there has been a troll on DCUM for MONTHS trying to push the idea of switching Hearst to Hardy. Hardy is a fine school and looks to be on an upward trajectory, but nothing in the proposals suggests that the DME or Committee is contemplating such a shift outside of scenarios where all schools in the area would have multiple options. |
Anonymous
| I really believe there is one Murch poster coming on to any thread that even mentions Hearst to complain about the boundary switch. If your kids already to to Murch you won't have to switch them. |
Anonymous
|
There is no real prospect of Hearst going to Hardy, it is very close to Deal.
|