Wilson is 50% over enrolled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not just do what San Francisco does, where being inbounds is a preference, not a right? DCI does that. DCPS does it for pre K. That would end IB and OOB overcrowding city wide. In fact every reason touted for ending OOB feeder rights is also a reason for making IB a preference, rather than a right.

SF school system is notorioualy one of the worst in the nation due to this disastrous policy

This. Home values would plummet if buying IB doesn't guarantee that your kids can go to the schools.

It’s based in racism. If people could get over the racist beliefs perpetuated by the segregationists that fought school integration, our country would improve considerably!

Tell us more about your kid’s successful academic experience in a high needs high school!

+1. The DCPS schools I don't want my kids to go to are the same schools that the families who live IB don't want to go to either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DC is under court order to allow OOB attendance. Until Brown v Board, DC had two public school systems, Black and white, with two superintendents, two sets of facilities and two faculties. When legal school segregation ended residential segregation was still the norm, and white Washington thought they would be clever and draw school boundaries where the white neighborhoods went to white schools and the non-white neighborhoods went to the Black schools, and made a rule that you had to attend your in-boundary school. It took another dozen years for the courts to straighten it out, but a series of court decisions in the late 1960's and early 1970's directed DCPS to draw boundaries without regard for race, and if there were available seats at any public school in the city those seats had to be made available to students who lived out-of-boundary. DCPS is still operating under those court decrees.

NP here, Thanks for the history lesson. I would like to learn more about this. If you have any resources that you can recommend I would be grateful.

[Anonymous]

the problem thereafter, of course, is that the schools continued to have boundaries, and DC has massive residential segregation and people lottery or move for "certainty" or away from schools that are "not an option" or other euphemisms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DC is under court order to allow OOB attendance. Until Brown v Board, DC had two public school systems, Black and white, with two superintendents, two sets of facilities and two faculties. When legal school segregation ended residential segregation was still the norm, and white Washington thought they would be clever and draw school boundaries where the white neighborhoods went to white schools and the non-white neighborhoods went to the Black schools, and made a rule that you had to attend your in-boundary school. It took another dozen years for the courts to straighten it out, but a series of court decisions in the late 1960's and early 1970's directed DCPS to draw boundaries without regard for race, and if there were available seats at any public school in the city those seats had to be made available to students who lived out-of-boundary. DCPS is still operating under those court decrees.

NP here, Thanks for the history lesson. I would like to learn more about this. If you have any resources that you can recommend I would be grateful.

Interesting. To be fair, across America the public school model is mostly a "neighborhood school" model . You may question where boundaries are drawn, and it is fascinating to imagine what census data or whatever they used in the end of segregation to draw lines around white or black neighnorgoods, but usually people of social economic classes flock together by financial access or are forced together by financial constraints - which often overlaps with racial identity groups. I would be hard pressed to see how today you would "draw a boundary" for a neighborhood school in DC with geographic access, that didn't also mirror socio economic (and by extension some racial makeups) fairly predictably without it being a nefarious, intentionally discriminatory thing. It would simply be a neighborhood school, like millions across America. That being said. I like OOB lottery. I think it lends a dynamism to the DC school system per space available. I also lie charters and vouchers. Feeder schools are none of the above though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DC is under court order to allow OOB attendance. Until Brown v Board, DC had two public school systems, Black and white, with two superintendents, two sets of facilities and two faculties. When legal school segregation ended residential segregation was still the norm, and white Washington thought they would be clever and draw school boundaries where the white neighborhoods went to white schools and the non-white neighborhoods went to the Black schools, and made a rule that you had to attend your in-boundary school. It took another dozen years for the courts to straighten it out, but a series of court decisions in the late 1960's and early 1970's directed DCPS to draw boundaries without regard for race, and if there were available seats at any public school in the city those seats had to be made available to students who lived out-of-boundary. DCPS is still operating under those court decrees.

NP here, Thanks for the history lesson. I would like to learn more about this. If you have any resources that you can recommend I would be grateful.

The key case was Hobson v Hansen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobson_v._Hansen

[Anonymous]

Let’s get back to the original point which is Wilson is way, way over-enrolled. What steps is the school taking to address this problem?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s get back to the original point which is Wilson is way, way over-enrolled. What steps is the school taking to address this problem?

Spending $100 million to open a new high school on Macarthur?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s get back to the original point which is Wilson is way, way over-enrolled. What steps is the school taking to address this problem?

Spending $100 million to open a new high school on Macarthur?

That’s not going to help next year or the following year. What specifically is the school going to do about it during this time?

Also, if you actually think the new school is going to come into existence to have its 1st class start in the next 1-2 years, you must not have much experience with DCPS and central office. Their deliverable rate is not the best to say the least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s get back to the original point which is Wilson is way, way over-enrolled. What steps is the school taking to address this problem?

Spending $100 million to open a new high school on Macarthur?

That’s not going to help next year or the following year. What specifically is the school going to do about it during this time?

Also, if you actually think the new school is going to come into existence to have its 1st class start in the next 1-2 years, you must not have much experience with DCPS and central office. Their deliverable rate is not the best to say the least.

It is going to help starting next year. 2023 is slated to open for rising 9th graders from Hardy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s get back to the original point which is Wilson is way, way over-enrolled. What steps is the school taking to address this problem?

Spending $100 million to open a new high school on Macarthur?

That’s not going to help next year or the following year. What specifically is the school going to do about it during this time?

Also, if you actually think the new school is going to come into existence to have its 1st class start in the next 1-2 years, you must not have much experience with DCPS and central office. Their deliverable rate is not the best to say the least.

There will be trailers next year at Wilson...probably not many but a 3-4 classrooms. It won't help a ton but maybe a bit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not just do what San Francisco does, where being inbounds is a preference, not a right? DCI does that. DCPS does it for pre K. That would end IB and OOB overcrowding city wide. In fact every reason touted for ending OOB feeder rights is also a reason for making IB a preference, rather than a right.

SF school system is notorioualy one of the worst in the nation due to this disastrous policy

This. Home values would plummet if buying IB doesn't guarantee that your kids can go to the schools.

Values wouldn’t plummet, they equalize throughout the city and lead to desegregation.

Nope, those with options will just move out of the city and go to the suburbs

Yes and then their AU Park home would sell for a little lower, more in line with Shepherd Park. Then people would revert back to paying only like $100k premium to live away from brown folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s get back to the original point which is Wilson is way, way over-enrolled. What steps is the school taking to address this problem?

Spending $100 million to open a new high school on Macarthur?

That’s not going to help next year or the following year. What specifically is the school going to do about it during this time?

Also, if you actually think the new school is going to come into existence to have its 1st class start in the next 1-2 years, you must not have much experience with DCPS and central office. Their deliverable rate is not the best to say the least.

Even if it took 3 years to get a class at new HS, it’s faster than any alternative (other than trailers).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not just do what San Francisco does, where being inbounds is a preference, not a right? DCI does that. DCPS does it for pre K. That would end IB and OOB overcrowding city wide. In fact every reason touted for ending OOB feeder rights is also a reason for making IB a preference, rather than a right.

SF school system is notorioualy one of the worst in the nation due to this disastrous policy

This. Home values would plummet if buying IB doesn't guarantee that your kids can go to the schools.

Values wouldn’t plummet, they equalize throughout the city and lead to desegregation.

Nope, those with options will just move out of the city and go to the suburbs

Yes and then their AU Park home would sell for a little lower, more in line with Shepherd Park. Then people would revert back to paying only like $100k premium to live away from brown folks.

Let’s look again at San Francisco.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not just do what San Francisco does, where being inbounds is a preference, not a right? DCI does that. DCPS does it for pre K. That would end IB and OOB overcrowding city wide. In fact every reason touted for ending OOB feeder rights is also a reason for making IB a preference, rather than a right.

SF school system is notorioualy one of the worst in the nation due to this disastrous policy

This. Home values would plummet if buying IB doesn't guarantee that your kids can go to the schools.

Values wouldn’t plummet, they equalize throughout the city and lead to desegregation.

Nope, those with options will just move out of the city and go to the suburbs

Yes and then their AU Park home would sell for a little lower, more in line with Shepherd Park. Then people would revert back to paying only like $100k premium to live away from brown folks.

Let’s look again at San Francisco.

Care to state your point/prediction?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not just do what San Francisco does, where being inbounds is a preference, not a right? DCI does that. DCPS does it for pre K. That would end IB and OOB overcrowding city wide. In fact every reason touted for ending OOB feeder rights is also a reason for making IB a preference, rather than a right.

SF school system is notorioualy one of the worst in the nation due to this disastrous policy

This. Home values would plummet if buying IB doesn't guarantee that your kids can go to the schools.

Values wouldn’t plummet, they equalize throughout the city and lead to desegregation.

Nope, those with options will just move out of the city and go to the suburbs

Yes and then their AU Park home would sell for a little lower, more in line with Shepherd Park. Then people would revert back to paying only like $100k premium to live away from brown folks.

Let’s look again at San Francisco.

Care to state your point/prediction?

Ending IB rights in San Francisco has driven middle class families out of the city, but it has not harmed housing prices, which are through the roof.