Overcrowding and lack of space in Ward 3 Schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Most of the people that attend school in W3 do not live outside of ward 3.

These are the numbers I got from Mary Cheh's office:

Percent in Ward 3
Deal MS 37%
Eaton ES 32%
Hearst ES 21%
Janney ES 89%
Key ES 93%
Mann ES 94%
Murch ES 77%
Oyster-Adams BS 26%
Stoddert ES 66%
Wilson HS 21%

Overall 48% live in Ward 3. They're not necessarily OOB, many school boundaries cross ward boundaries. A lot of Ward 3 kids go to SWW in Ward 2 or Lafayette in Ward 4.

There are not that many people that live in ward 3 that go to SWS. The important part of the "most" part should be how many public school kids in ward 3 attend school in ward 3. I think that number would be close to 80%

That is misleading because some of these schools include other Wards in their boundaries. In other words, "not in Ward 3 =/= OOB. I know you were specifically responding to the Ward 3 statement, but others reading may not realize that the boundaries of Wilson, Deal, Lafayette (missing for the list), and Murch (until the boundary change, but has Ward 4 students grandfathered), and Oyster Adams include other Wards.

Some of those numbers also seem off -- Key & Mann are about 85% IB (basically all kids not in Ward 3)... But Wilson's feeders includes the Ward 2 kids at Stoddert & Hyde (and much of Eaton is also not in Ward 3), Ward 4 kids Lafayette, (and the current classes at Wilson do not have many IB kids from Mann & Key for instance (that dynamic is changing the future IB/OOB patterns in the coming classes via Hardy) so that lower # shouldn't be that surprising

If you look at the Fact Sheet Appendix that someone posted upthread, you can see the percentage of IB public school students who are using their IB school, and also the percentage of IB vs OOB students at each school.
https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https://dme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dme/publication/attachments/SY15-16_Citywide%20School%20Fact%20Sheets%20Appendices_10.14.16.xlsx

For example, for Deal, 78% of the public school students who live IB for Deal are attending Deal. As a whole, Deal is 63% IB, and 37% OOB. 68% of the public school students living IB for Wilson are attending Wilson. As a whole, Wilson is 50% IB, and 50% OOB. For Murch, 88% of the IB public school students attend Murch, yet 39% of Murch is OOB students.

Interestingly, Appendix 2 seems to say that 57% of students in Ward 3 attend private school. That seems off to me, but if you trust it, you can do some math that combines this result with the other tables (at least for schools that do not straddle two or more wards).

Murch is 86% in boundary according to the Principal. http://murchschool.org/prospective-parents/faqs/
Murch is not 39% OOB, unless they are counting the kids who are grandfathered in the boundary change as OOB.

That spreadsheet (appendix 4) -- boundary participation is the # of kids in the boundary area for the school who attend that school (ie. 88% of kids who live in the boundary for Murch who go to public schools go to Murch (the other presumably go to charters or other schools OOB or other situations like a special service/ed program). The next column is the IB % of the school's enrollment. The school profiles still also say Murch is 61% IB for last year - that could be counting the new boundaries: http://profiles.dcps.dc.gov/Murch+Elementary+School

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:l

The original PP is NOT quoting IB% but rather % of kids who live IB that opt for their ward 3 assigned school. That being said, I have a hard time believing only 37% of ward 3 students are attending Deal.

Original PP here. That is NOT what I'm saying at all. What I'm quoting is the percentage of enrolled students at each school who reside in Ward 3. So 37% of students enrolled at Deal have a Ward 3 address. That says nothing about whether they are IB or OOB, whether they got there through feeder rights, or whether they live EOTP or WOTP. The ward boundary is an invisible line on the ground, 37% of the kids live on one side of it.

My original point is that it's a staple of DC politics to demonize Ward 3, and by extension Wilson and Deal, even though a pretty substantial majority of the kids in both schools live elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:l

The original PP is NOT quoting IB% but rather % of kids who live IB that opt for their ward 3 assigned school. That being said, I have a hard time believing only 37% of ward 3 students are attending Deal.

Original PP here. That is NOT what I'm saying at all. What I'm quoting is the percentage of enrolled students at each school who reside in Ward 3. So 37% of students enrolled at Deal have a Ward 3 address. That says nothing about whether they are IB or OOB, whether they got there through feeder rights, or whether they live EOTP or WOTP. The ward boundary is an invisible line on the ground, 37% of the kids live on one side of it.

My original point is that it's a staple of DC politics to demonize Ward 3, and by extension Wilson and Deal, even though a pretty substantial majority of the kids in both schools live elsewhere.

I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you just dug your hole deeper. You said "most kids that live in ward 3 go to school outside of DC." Please show your math. You cannot get it by seeing how many kids at Deal live in ward 3. You have to do it by participation method as another PP is alluding to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:l

The original PP is NOT quoting IB% but rather % of kids who live IB that opt for their ward 3 assigned school. That being said, I have a hard time believing only 37% of ward 3 students are attending Deal.

Original PP here. That is NOT what I'm saying at all. What I'm quoting is the percentage of enrolled students at each school who reside in Ward 3. So 37% of students enrolled at Deal have a Ward 3 address. That says nothing about whether they are IB or OOB, whether they got there through feeder rights, or whether they live EOTP or WOTP. The ward boundary is an invisible line on the ground, 37% of the kids live on one side of it.

My original point is that it's a staple of DC politics to demonize Ward 3, and by extension Wilson and Deal, even though a pretty substantial majority of the kids in both schools live elsewhere.

I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you just dug your hole deeper. You said "most kids that live in ward 3 go to school outside of DC." Please show your math. You cannot get it by seeing how many kids at Deal live in ward 3. You have to do it by participation method as another PP is alluding to.

Mean outside of ward 3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:l

The original PP is NOT quoting IB% but rather % of kids who live IB that opt for their ward 3 assigned school. That being said, I have a hard time believing only 37% of ward 3 students are attending Deal.

Original PP here. That is NOT what I'm saying at all. What I'm quoting is the percentage of enrolled students at each school who reside in Ward 3. So 37% of students enrolled at Deal have a Ward 3 address. That says nothing about whether they are IB or OOB, whether they got there through feeder rights, or whether they live EOTP or WOTP. The ward boundary is an invisible line on the ground, 37% of the kids live on one side of it.

My original point is that it's a staple of DC politics to demonize Ward 3, and by extension Wilson and Deal, even though a pretty substantial majority of the kids in both schools live elsewhere.

I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you just dug your hole deeper. You said "most kids that live in ward 3 go to school outside of DC." Please show your math. You cannot get it by seeing how many kids at Deal live in ward 3. You have to do it by participation method as another PP is alluding to.

Mean outside of ward 3.

And even if you use participation rate, I don't think you can measure that at any school like Deal or Wilson that has boundaries outside of ward 3. You can do the math and see that your %s you quoted earlier are incorrect by using participation rate at elementary schools. But even then, you'd have to control for the ward 3 kids that go to private school in ward 3. You see why it is illogical to make a blanket statement by saying "most students that live in ward 3 go to school outside of ward 3" when you don't have the data to back it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:l

The original PP is NOT quoting IB% but rather % of kids who live IB that opt for their ward 3 assigned school. That being said, I have a hard time believing only 37% of ward 3 students are attending Deal.

Original PP here. That is NOT what I'm saying at all. What I'm quoting is the percentage of enrolled students at each school who reside in Ward 3. So 37% of students enrolled at Deal have a Ward 3 address. That says nothing about whether they are IB or OOB, whether they got there through feeder rights, or whether they live EOTP or WOTP. The ward boundary is an invisible line on the ground, 37% of the kids live on one side of it.

My original point is that it's a staple of DC politics to demonize Ward 3, and by extension Wilson and Deal, even though a pretty substantial majority of the kids in both schools live elsewhere.

I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you just dug your hole deeper. You said "most kids that live in ward 3 go to school outside of DC." Please show your math. You cannot get it by seeing how many kids at Deal live in ward 3. You have to do it by participation method as another PP is alluding to.

No, I said the exact opposite. I said most kids who go to school in Ward 3 live outside the ward. Then I showed my math. What you have to take on faith are the numbers I got from CM Cheh, I've never seen them publicly released.

[Anonymous]

PP doesn't know what she's talking about nor does she now how percentages work.

Participation Rate (meaning % of kids that live in these neighborhoods that use their neighborhood school):

Janney 95%
Key 91%
Mann 96%
Murch 88%
Stoddert 89%
Eaton 72%
Hearst 59%
Oyster 78%
Adams 65%
*Deal 78%
*Wilson 68%

*Deal and Wilson boundaries span across more than ward 3.

Conclusion: most of the kids that live in ward 3 go to school IN ward 3.
Addendum: I think maybe 3-4 kids may go to SWS, not enough to even mention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:l

The original PP is NOT quoting IB% but rather % of kids who live IB that opt for their ward 3 assigned school. That being said, I have a hard time believing only 37% of ward 3 students are attending Deal.

Original PP here. That is NOT what I'm saying at all. What I'm quoting is the percentage of enrolled students at each school who reside in Ward 3. So 37% of students enrolled at Deal have a Ward 3 address. That says nothing about whether they are IB or OOB, whether they got there through feeder rights, or whether they live EOTP or WOTP. The ward boundary is an invisible line on the ground, 37% of the kids live on one side of it.

My original point is that it's a staple of DC politics to demonize Ward 3, and by extension Wilson and Deal, even though a pretty substantial majority of the kids in both schools live elsewhere.

So only 37% percent of Deal students live in Ward 3, which is located in Ward 3. Yet a substantial number of Ward 3 students can no longer attend Deal. Something's messed up with this picture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP doesn't know what she's talking about nor does she now how percentages work.

Participation Rate (meaning % of kids that live in these neighborhoods that use their neighborhood school):

Janney 95%
Key 91%
Mann 96%
Murch 88%
Stoddert 89%
Eaton 72%
Hearst 59%
Oyster 78%
Adams 65%
*Deal 78%
*Wilson 68%

*Deal and Wilson boundaries span across more than ward 3.

Conclusion: most of the kids that live in ward 3 go to school IN ward 3.
Addendum: I think maybe 3-4 kids may go to SWS, not enough to even mention.

Go back and read the last three pages of the thread. No one except for you ever said anything about a majority of Ward 3 kids going to school outside of Ward 3.

The original claim -- which I made on Page 13 at 22:06 -- was "People in the rest of the city hate that good schools are concentrated in Ward 3 --but most of the kids who attend public school in Ward 3 live in the rest of the city. "


At 0:57, also on Page 13, another poster rebutted me: "Most of the people that attend school in W3 do not live outside of ward 3."

At 1:48 I presented my data: Ward 3 percentages for each of the Ward 3 schools, as presented by Mary Cheh, showing that overall only 48% of the kids who go to school in Ward 3 live in Ward 3.

I never said anything about participation rate (which is a bogus statistic anyway).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP doesn't know what she's talking about nor does she now how percentages work.

Participation Rate (meaning % of kids that live in these neighborhoods that use their neighborhood school):

Janney 95%
Key 91%
Mann 96%
Murch 88%
Stoddert 89%
Eaton 72%
Hearst 59%
Oyster 78%
Adams 65%
*Deal 78%
*Wilson 68%

*Deal and Wilson boundaries span across more than ward 3.

Conclusion: most of the kids that live in ward 3 go to school IN ward 3.
Addendum: I think maybe 3-4 kids may go to SWS, not enough to even mention.

Go back and read the last three pages of the thread. No one except for you ever said anything about a majority of Ward 3 kids going to school outside of Ward 3.

The original claim -- which I made on Page 13 at 22:06 -- was "People in the rest of the city hate that good schools are concentrated in Ward 3 --but most of the kids who attend public school in Ward 3 live in the rest of the city. "


At 0:57, also on Page 13, another poster rebutted me: "Most of the people that attend school in W3 do not live outside of ward 3."

At 1:48 I presented my data: Ward 3 percentages for each of the Ward 3 schools, as presented by Mary Cheh, showing that overall only 48% of the kids who go to school in Ward 3 live in Ward 3.

I never said anything about participation rate (which is a bogus statistic anyway).

1. This quote is still wrong.
2. Cheh's numbers are clearly wrong if you use participation rate, IB % or OOB %
3. How is participation rate bogus?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP doesn't know what she's talking about nor does she now how percentages work.

Participation Rate (meaning % of kids that live in these neighborhoods that use their neighborhood school):

Janney 95%
Key 91%
Mann 96%
Murch 88%
Stoddert 89%
Eaton 72%
Hearst 59%
Oyster 78%
Adams 65%
*Deal 78%
*Wilson 68%

*Deal and Wilson boundaries span across more than ward 3.

Conclusion: most of the kids that live in ward 3 go to school IN ward 3.
Addendum: I think maybe 3-4 kids may go to SWS, not enough to even mention.

Go back and read the last three pages of the thread. No one except for you ever said anything about a majority of Ward 3 kids going to school outside of Ward 3.

The original claim -- which I made on Page 13 at 22:06 -- was "People in the rest of the city hate that good schools are concentrated in Ward 3 --but most of the kids who attend public school in Ward 3 live in the rest of the city. "


At 0:57, also on Page 13, another poster rebutted me: "Most of the people that attend school in W3 do not live outside of ward 3."

At 1:48 I presented my data: Ward 3 percentages for each of the Ward 3 schools, as presented by Mary Cheh, showing that overall only 48% of the kids who go to school in Ward 3 live in Ward 3.

I never said anything about participation rate (which is a bogus statistic anyway).

1. This quote is still wrong.
2. Cheh's numbers are clearly wrong if you use participation rate, IB % or OOB %
3. How is participation rate bogus?

Participation rate does not mean what you claim it means. Participation rate is the percentage of PUBLIC SCHOOL students who go to their boundary school. So for Wilson, 68% of student who live in the Wilson boundary AND attend PUBLIC school, attend Wilson. The other 32%of public school students who live in Wilson's boundary attend other DC public/charter schools, like Walls, Banneker, Latin, McKinley, etc. These numbers do not account for DC students in independent schools or home schooled at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

1. This quote is still wrong.

Show your work then.

Anonymous wrote:2. Cheh's numbers are clearly wrong if you use participation rate, IB % or OOB %

Who said I was using any of those numbers? DCPS has numbers they don't release to the public. Councilmembers can get them.

Anonymous wrote:3. How isen participation rate bogus?

It doesn't include kids who don't attend public school, which according to DME is 56% of kids in Ward 3.

[Anonymous]

I've gotten lost -- can you guys tell me what question you are trying to answer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

1. This quote is still wrong.

Show your work then.

Anonymous wrote:2. Cheh's numbers are clearly wrong if you use participation rate, IB % or OOB %

Who said I was using any of those numbers? DCPS has numbers they don't release to the public. Councilmembers can get them.

Anonymous wrote:3. How isen participation rate bogus?

It doesn't include kids who don't attend public school, which according to DME is 56% of kids in Ward 3.

Please show your work where you say that most of the kids that go to school in ward 3 live outside of ward 3.

[Anonymous]

NP to 14:45 - Not the person you are arguing with, but the PP said that Cheh's office reports the following:

Percent in Ward 3:

Deal MS 37%
Eaton ES 32%
Hearst ES 21%
Janney ES 89%
Key ES 93%
Mann ES 94%
Murch ES 77%
Oyster-Adams BS 26%
Stoddert ES 66%
Wilson HS 21%

So using the enrollment numbers from DCPS Profiles:

Deal 496 of 1341 (845 not W3)
Eaton 153 of 478 (325 not W3)
Hearst 66 of 316 (250 not W3)
Janney 651 of 731 (80 not W3)
Key 359 of 386 (27 not W3)
Mann 338 of 360 (22 not W3)
Murch 481 or 625 (144 not W3)
Oyster-Adams 172 of 663 (491 not W3)
Stoddert 285 of 432 (147 not W3)
Wilson 376 of 1791 (1415 not W3)

Total: 3377 of 7123 (3746 not W3)

So, if these figures are accurately reported by DCPS and Cheh's office, then it is true that most kids who attend school in Ward 3 do not live in Ward 3. That is true collectively and individually in all but five Ward 3 elementary schools.