Why Does Van Ness Elementary School Not Have a Boundary

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Having South Capitol Street be the border for Van Ness Elementary School and Amidon-Bowen benefits both schools. It allows Amidon-Bowen to retain a lot of in-bound kids, and it allows Van Ness Elementary to not become overcrowded as more and more new housing is built in the Capitol Riverfront.

Southwest now has a lot of kids who live in townhouses that used to be occupied by adults only, and I expect this trend will continue. Plus a lot of new housing will be built on the Southwest waterfront. In short, I don't think it's safe to assume that the child population of Southeast will grow at a higher rate than that of Southwest over the next several years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Having South Capitol Street be the border for Van Ness Elementary School and Amidon-Bowen benefits both schools. It allows Amidon-Bowen to retain a lot of in-bound kids, and it allows Van Ness Elementary to not become overcrowded as more and more new housing is built in the Capitol Riverfront.

Southwest now has a lot of kids who live in townhouses that used to be occupied by adults only, and I expect this trend will continue. Plus a lot of new housing will be built on the Southwest waterfront. In short, I don't think it's safe to assume that the child population of Southeast will grow at a higher rate than that of Southwest over the next several years.

Indeed, to the contrary, I think it may grow faster in SW than SE because I don't see that much of the new construction in SE slated to be family-sized, so I think the number of households with kids in SE is closer to stable than in SW.

[Anonymous]

Also, as someone in the Amidon-Bowen thread points out, DCPS plans say that Van Ness "shall" not "may" take some portion of the students from the old Bowen ES catchment area. So, I'm not sure they ever contemplated setting the western boundary for Van Ness at So. Capitol st.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, as someone in the Amidon-Bowen thread points out, DCPS plans say that Van Ness "shall" not "may" take some portion of the students from the old Bowen ES catchment area. So, I'm not sure they ever contemplated setting the western boundary for Van Ness at So. Capitol st.

Does anyone know what the old Bowen boundaries were? Or for that matter, does anyone know what the old Van Ness boundaries were?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Having South Capitol Street be the border for Van Ness Elementary School and Amidon-Bowen benefits both schools. It allows Amidon-Bowen to retain a lot of in-bound kids, and it allows Van Ness Elementary to not become overcrowded as more and more new housing is built in the Capitol Riverfront.

Southwest now has a lot of kids who live in townhouses that used to be occupied by adults only, and I expect this trend will continue. Plus a lot of new housing will be built on the Southwest waterfront. In short, I don't think it's safe to assume that the child population of Southeast will grow at a higher rate than that of Southwest over the next several years.

Indeed, to the contrary, I think it may grow faster in SW than SE because I don't see that much of the new construction in SE slated to be family-sized, so I think the number of households with kids in SE is closer to stable than in SW.

I recall soemthing from the Urban Institute stating that 100 single-family residences will produce 40 students whereas 100 condos will produce only 7 students.

[Anonymous]

I will say that I tried for a long time to believe the the van ness parents were a good group. I tried to buy into their 'boundary' fight as something other than protectionist. But the group actually disgusts me know. It's out and out protectionist all under the guise of not wanting to cross south Capitol street. If they get their way- I will be so disappointed in DCPS. And that's saying a lot, as I try to have very low expectations.

[Anonymous]

^ You blame the Van Ness organizer parents for being turf conscious when most don't have a lot of choice if they want to stay in the city. Other big US cities--Chicago, Boston, Miami, NYC--run a variety of programs and offerings for advanced/gifted learners. Even DC charter offers better options for advanced learners, e.g. the best language immersion programs and extensive math tracking at BASIS. DCPS offers no such programs, leaving upper middle income parents with little choice but to fight to keep the schools they get involved in from becoming majority low SES. The city generally leaves it up to parent organizations to raise funds to pay for support staff to run pullout groups for advanced learners. Future Van Ness parents can't close the achievement gap in SW, but they may be able to support the opening of a viable school for their own children and a good many low SES kids, too. Give em a break.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^ You blame the Van Ness organizer parents for being turf conscious when most don't have a lot of choice if they want to stay in the city. Other big US cities--Chicago, Boston, Miami, NYC--run a variety of programs and offerings for advanced/gifted learners. Even DC charter offers better options for advanced learners, e.g. the best language immersion programs and extensive math tracking at BASIS. DCPS offers no such programs, leaving upper middle income parents with little choice but to fight to keep the schools they get involved in from becoming majority low SES. The city generally leaves it up to parent organizations to raise funds to pay for support staff to run pullout groups for advanced learners. Future Van Ness parents can't close the achievement gap in SW, but they may be able to support the opening of a viable school for their own children and a good many low SES kids, too. Give em a break.

Agreed. we all want good schools city wide but at the end of the day, as a parent, I have to fight the hardest to to whats best for my kid. I don't live in this area but I do't blame any parent for trying to maintain an appropriate balance of high to low SES in order to facilitate learning at the school and mitigate behavioral issues. the overwhelming majority of kids in SW and at Amidon live in low income housing, if you move them to Van Ness then you bascially lose the need to even keep Amidon open. There are no row houses proposed in SW, all multifamily. Some of the units might be 2 or 3 bedroom but those will be in public housing.

[Anonymous]

I do blame them. Move to the burbs! A rising tide floats all boats. By 'advocating' for you kids you are trapping others in educational poverty. Was a VNPG meeting where a lower SES (James creek) parent showed up. After she left many were talking about how that's the parent type they want to keep out. That's not advocating, that's being a dick.

[Anonymous]

Immediate pp, but I'm not worried. You all will have you poor kids at your school. Gasp!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do blame them. Move to the burbs! A rising tide floats all boats. By 'advocating' for you kids you are trapping others in educational poverty. Was a VNPG meeting where a lower SES (James creek) parent showed up. After she left many were talking about how that's the parent type they want to keep out. That's not advocating, that's being a dick.

And where do your kids go to school?

[Anonymous]

A rising tide lifts all boats? Show me the data that bears this out (unless FARMs rate is less than 20 percent). No doubt that the VNPG wants to replicate nearby Brent in most respects, and do so virtually overnight. However, they need sufficient IB numbers to do this and start from the ground up. Why any of them want to stir the pot by voicing their isolationist agenda on DCUM is baffling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A rising tide lifts all boats? Show me the data that bears this out (unless FARMs rate is less than 20 percent). No doubt that the VNPG wants to replicate nearby Brent in most respects, and do so virtually overnight. However, they need sufficient IB numbers to do this and start from the ground up. Why any of them want to stir the pot by voicing their isolationist agenda on DCUM is baffling.

Can't see how poor kids in SW benefit from the Capitol Quarter/Navy Yard high SES families running off to charters, privates (Waterfront Academy bilingual Montessori opening in June anyone?) the burbs, Brent, Tyler etc. This is what they do now, and will continue to do if VanNess is more than around 1/4 low SES. They would be a real asset to the new school as a group. So suck it up DCPS, and bleeding DCUM hearts, given them a school they're happy with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A rising tide lifts all boats? Show me the data that bears this out (unless FARMs rate is less than 20 percent). No doubt that the VNPG wants to replicate nearby Brent in most respects, and do so virtually overnight. However, they need sufficient IB numbers to do this and start from the ground up. Why any of them want to stir the pot by voicing their isolationist agenda on DCUM is baffling.

Can't see how poor kids in SW benefit from the Capitol Quarter/Navy Yard high SES families running off to charters, privates (Waterfront Academy bilingual Montessori opening in June anyone?) the burbs, Brent, Tyler etc. This is what they do now, and will continue to do if VanNess is more than around 1/4 low SES. They would be a real asset to the new school as a group. So suck it up DCPS, and bleeding DCUM hearts, given them a school they're happy with.

You are gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A rising tide lifts all boats? Show me the data that bears this out (unless FARMs rate is less than 20 percent). No doubt that the VNPG wants to replicate nearby Brent in most respects, and do so virtually overnight. However, they need sufficient IB numbers to do this and start from the ground up. Why any of them want to stir the pot by voicing their isolationist agenda on DCUM is baffling.

Can't see how poor kids in SW benefit from the Capitol Quarter/Navy Yard high SES families running off to charters, privates (Waterfront Academy bilingual Montessori opening in June anyone?) the burbs, Brent, Tyler etc. This is what they do now, and will continue to do if VanNess is more than around 1/4 low SES. They would be a real asset to the new school as a group. So suck it up DCPS, and bleeding DCUM hearts, given them a school they're happy with.

Van Ness families with sibling preference can't even get into Brent any longer, at least for PS and PK. Tyler is a band-aid at best for those grades. FWIW, i predict many will stay invested in Van Ness irrespective of FARMs rate as it will take several years for the school to reach equilibrium in terms of its population. And if they bail, all the batter for OOB students who will stand to benefit from a modernized facility with no institutional interests such as those being discussed in the Ludlow-Taylor and Watkins threads.