Zoning Lafayette out of Deal/Wilson - is this real?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused why Lafayette is a Ward 4 school. We are IB for Lafayette and live in Ward 3. The schools boundaries are not by ward!

Lafayette is IN Ward 4. Not that deep.

It may be in Ward 4, but remember, the line down Broad Branch Road was arbitrarily created not that long ago strictly to balance voters. It was never intended to have ANYTHING to do with schools. To imply otherwise is just somebody making stuff up.

I would say there's a much better case that school attendance boundaries are arbitrary than ward boundaries. What's so magical about Massachusetts Avenue that one side of it goes to Deal and the other to Hardy?

In outlook, Chevy Chase DC is very much oriented toward Ward 3, not Ward 4 - most of which lies east of the Park.

Outlook meaning pretentious bigot-y folks???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since everyone is just making stuff up with absolutely no grounds whatsoever (or shamelessly advancing solutions that benefit them), I figured why not. So here is how I think DCPS will "solve" overcrowding. Not what I think they should do, or even what makes sense, but what they might do.

Unlikely that Bowser will screw Ward 4. Either she is running, in which case why. Or she is not, in which case she still won't screw over her allies. Either way Shepherd and Lafayette sleep soundly.

She wouldn't screw Jack Evans either, but he is likely toast now, so what the hell. And Hyde has already been shoved off to Meyer for swing space. And who in the city will weep for Georgetown. So Hyde loses gets sent to SWWFS and Cardozo. And out of spite to the Save Old Hardy folks, she redraws the boundaries to put them in Hyde too. Old Hardy stays with Lab.

Brianne Nadeau isn't an ally of the mayor either so Bancroft goes to MacFarland and Roosevelt.

Even with Bancroft gone, Deal needs a big school to leave. One that can take 100 kids a year out. Cheh isn't exactly a supporter of the Mayor so Janney is off to Hardy. Yes Janney. Janney moms lose their minds and scream, but in the boundary review look so clueless and out of touch with the rest of the city that they undermine themselves.

OOB feeder policy doesn't get changed. But it doesn't matter because OOB has been squeezed out at the elementary level and will be at middle and high soon. Why take flack for changing the policy when demographics will do the job for you?

But none of this solves the elementary school problem. So PK is gone in Ward 3. Again not an official policy, but DCPS just lets it happen because they don't do anything. Class sizes rise to 30 kids. Gardens and bee hives get trailers on top of them. Art, music, science, and foreign languages are taught out of a cart. Parents start turning to other options (private, move). Add to this minor tweaks to the elementary school boundaries to move kids across the park. It doesn't do much, but it makes the rest of the city feel better. Again, Ward 3 and 4 parents who are affected flip out, but DCPS conducts lots of focus groups, surveys, and listening sessions, and then declares victory.

Also barely solved is overcrowding at Wilson (Bancroft and Hyde do a little but not much). For that we have expanded citywide schools. Duke Ellington, a newly-renovated Banneker (sorry Save Shaw), and maybe even McKinley Tech expand their seats. DCPS tries desperately to convince white parents to send their kids to them. They fail, and post anonymously on DCUM that it would have worked if parents weren't racist (which might very well be true in most cases).

I don’t think most Janney parents would actually have a problem with this outcome. When you combine their cohort with that of Key, Eaton, and a handful from Mann, it’s a pretty attractive package. At a much smaller size than the Frankenschool that Deal has become.

But a renovated John Eaton effectively will have a guaranteed floor of OOB spaces. They may not go to Deal, but virtually all eventually will go to Wilson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what crazy people (and agree with the PP, this is a total fantasy thread), here's the real story:

- Our kids shouldn't be used as a social engineering experiment because they are UMC and live in stable homes. Call that elitist, privileged, whatever, but no kid should have to deal with it because some social justice warrior deems it so.

- Of course we are going to scream when you ship our kids out of our neighborhood to an unproven school with abysmal test scores. NOBODY would want that to happen.

- The schools you are talking about sending us to, while smaller, do not have the same sort of extra curriculars (sports, arts) what have you that Deal and Wilson already have.

I think if Lafayette parents are convinced that the experience would be the same wherever else than it would be at Deal and Wilson, we would be OK with it. Contrary to what this thread suggests, I don't think Chevy Chase is full of racists. It is, however, full of families who want what's best for their kids, and Wells and Cardozo are just not going to cut it now. The expectations are just higher.

And, finally, for all the Deal bashers here, it IS a great place. The team approach keeps it small, and I can say especially over the last two years DD has had uniformly amazing teachers. I don't know who you've had. I'm sorry your snowflake can't handle the size, I'm sure when you pick their classes for them in college it will be better.

I occasionally see this term thrown around by the same sorts of folks who use the term 'SJW.' What exactly does this mean? How would this play out, in terms of outcomes?

Also, Wells isn't even open yet, so how can you remark about the extracurricular options or test scores there? What are you basing your predictions on? DCPS PARCC data, along with other research, suggests that kids from affluent, educated families tend to do well even in lower-performing schools, so your alarm at the prospect of redistricting is somewhat puzzling.

That's precisely the point - there AREN'T any, and it will take years to develop them. And what it means is that people are so blinded by "social justice" that they fail to see how it can actually impact real people. It doesn't make you a bad person to not want to send your kid to a shitty school on a the theory that your smart, UMC kid is going to suddenly solve all of the inherent problems of urban poverty by just sitting next to some kid in a classroom.

There might be an ounce of sympathy if there was any concern whatsoever for the so-called "shitty schools." Some of us don't think anyone should have to send their kids to a "shitty school" regardless of address. The solution for Ward 3 families is not enrolling charters or OOB and traveling across town -- that's only required of families in Wards 7 & 8.

I think folks ARE concerned about the shitty schools. But remember, a lot of those problems are not just the schools, but the problems the kids at those schools bring with them. Redrawing school boundaries won't solve that issue.

I agree that redrawing boundaries won't solve generational poverty, but that doesn't mean that schools dealing with the greatest burdens of poverty should be denied additional resources to effectively support higher needs students.

There are three main persistent elitism themes on DCUM -- 1) talking about "shitty schools" like they exist in a vacuum and fail the children who need them most, or 2) denigrating kids and their care givers who come to school with a heavy load of stuff to deal with. . . maybe 3) combination of 1) and 2) above

Not to paint too broadly but I fail to see any meaningful concern about the plight of students and communities with higher needs than their entitled families from anyone who would call any legitimate school "shitty"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what crazy people (and agree with the PP, this is a total fantasy thread), here's the real story:

- Our kids shouldn't be used as a social engineering experiment because they are UMC and live in stable homes. Call that elitist, privileged, whatever, but no kid should have to deal with it because some social justice warrior deems it so.

- Of course we are going to scream when you ship our kids out of our neighborhood to an unproven school with abysmal test scores. NOBODY would want that to happen.

- The schools you are talking about sending us to, while smaller, do not have the same sort of extra curriculars (sports, arts) what have you that Deal and Wilson already have.

I think if Lafayette parents are convinced that the experience would be the same wherever else than it would be at Deal and Wilson, we would be OK with it. Contrary to what this thread suggests, I don't think Chevy Chase is full of racists. It is, however, full of families who want what's best for their kids, and Wells and Cardozo are just not going to cut it now. The expectations are just higher.

And, finally, for all the Deal bashers here, it IS a great place. The team approach keeps it small, and I can say especially over the last two years DD has had uniformly amazing teachers. I don't know who you've had. I'm sorry your snowflake can't handle the size, I'm sure when you pick their classes for them in college it will be better.

I occasionally see this term thrown around by the same sorts of folks who use the term 'SJW.' What exactly does this mean? How would this play out, in terms of outcomes?

Also, Wells isn't even open yet, so how can you remark about the extracurricular options or test scores there? What are you basing your predictions on? DCPS PARCC data, along with other research, suggests that kids from affluent, educated families tend to do well even in lower-performing schools, so your alarm at the prospect of redistricting is somewhat puzzling.

That's precisely the point - there AREN'T any, and it will take years to develop them. And what it means is that people are so blinded by "social justice" that they fail to see how it can actually impact real people. It doesn't make you a bad person to not want to send your kid to a shitty school on a the theory that your smart, UMC kid is going to suddenly solve all of the inherent problems of urban poverty by just sitting next to some kid in a classroom.

Exactly! The PP you're responding to is full of shit with pretending she's so puzzled by resistance to being rezoned to Wells.

PP here, I think we know exactly why the Lafayette poster is screeching so loudly about being rezoned and whining about "shitty schools" that haven't even been created yet. It's ugly, but not surprising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what crazy people (and agree with the PP, this is a total fantasy thread), here's the real story:

- Our kids shouldn't be used as a social engineering experiment because they are UMC and live in stable homes. Call that elitist, privileged, whatever, but no kid should have to deal with it because some social justice warrior deems it so.

- Of course we are going to scream when you ship our kids out of our neighborhood to an unproven school with abysmal test scores. NOBODY would want that to happen.

- The schools you are talking about sending us to, while smaller, do not have the same sort of extra curriculars (sports, arts) what have you that Deal and Wilson already have.

I think if Lafayette parents are convinced that the experience would be the same wherever else than it would be at Deal and Wilson, we would be OK with it. Contrary to what this thread suggests, I don't think Chevy Chase is full of racists. It is, however, full of families who want what's best for their kids, and Wells and Cardozo are just not going to cut it now. The expectations are just higher.

And, finally, for all the Deal bashers here, it IS a great place. The team approach keeps it small, and I can say especially over the last two years DD has had uniformly amazing teachers. I don't know who you've had. I'm sorry your snowflake can't handle the size, I'm sure when you pick their classes for them in college it will be better.

I occasionally see this term thrown around by the same sorts of folks who use the term 'SJW.' What exactly does this mean? How would this play out, in terms of outcomes?

Also, Wells isn't even open yet, so how can you remark about the extracurricular options or test scores there? What are you basing your predictions on? DCPS PARCC data, along with other research, suggests that kids from affluent, educated families tend to do well even in lower-performing schools, so your alarm at the prospect of redistricting is somewhat puzzling.

That's precisely the point - there AREN'T any, and it will take years to develop them. And what it means is that people are so blinded by "social justice" that they fail to see how it can actually impact real people. It doesn't make you a bad person to not want to send your kid to a shitty school on a the theory that your smart, UMC kid is going to suddenly solve all of the inherent problems of urban poverty by just sitting next to some kid in a classroom.

There might be an ounce of sympathy if there was any concern whatsoever for the so-called "shitty schools." Some of us don't think anyone should have to send their kids to a "shitty school" regardless of address. The solution for Ward 3 families is not enrolling charters or OOB and traveling across town -- that's only required of families in Wards 7 & 8.

I think folks ARE concerned about the shitty schools. But remember, a lot of those problems are not just the schools, but the problems the kids at those schools bring with them. Redrawing school boundaries won't solve that issue.

I agree that redrawing boundaries won't solve generational poverty, but that doesn't mean that schools dealing with the greatest burdens of poverty should be denied additional resources to effectively support higher needs students.

There are three main persistent elitism themes on DCUM -- 1) talking about "shitty schools" like they exist in a vacuum and fail the children who need them most, or 2) denigrating kids and their care givers who come to school with a heavy load of stuff to deal with. . . maybe 3) combination of 1) and 2) above

Not to paint too broadly but I fail to see any meaningful concern about the plight of students and communities with higher needs than their entitled families from anyone who would call any legitimate school "shitty"

The poorest schools DO get the most money per student. In some cases, twice as much as Ward 3 schools. Money is not the problem. The problem is not student resources, it’s student home life. The schools are being asked to solve problems they are not equipped to solve. It’s a sad conundrum, but one that no one has been able to solve on a large scale anywhere in this country. And overcrowding Ward 3 schools is a spiteful response that hurts more kids that it helps.

Here’s some sobering reading:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/04/08/can_we_fix_the_schools_maybe_not_139978.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what crazy people (and agree with the PP, this is a total fantasy thread), here's the real story:

- Our kids shouldn't be used as a social engineering experiment because they are UMC and live in stable homes. Call that elitist, privileged, whatever, but no kid should have to deal with it because some social justice warrior deems it so.

- Of course we are going to scream when you ship our kids out of our neighborhood to an unproven school with abysmal test scores. NOBODY would want that to happen.

- The schools you are talking about sending us to, while smaller, do not have the same sort of extra curriculars (sports, arts) what have you that Deal and Wilson already have.

I think if Lafayette parents are convinced that the experience would be the same wherever else than it would be at Deal and Wilson, we would be OK with it. Contrary to what this thread suggests, I don't think Chevy Chase is full of racists. It is, however, full of families who want what's best for their kids, and Wells and Cardozo are just not going to cut it now. The expectations are just higher.

And, finally, for all the Deal bashers here, it IS a great place. The team approach keeps it small, and I can say especially over the last two years DD has had uniformly amazing teachers. I don't know who you've had. I'm sorry your snowflake can't handle the size, I'm sure when you pick their classes for them in college it will be better.

I occasionally see this term thrown around by the same sorts of folks who use the term 'SJW.' What exactly does this mean? How would this play out, in terms of outcomes?

Also, Wells isn't even open yet, so how can you remark about the extracurricular options or test scores there? What are you basing your predictions on? DCPS PARCC data, along with other research, suggests that kids from affluent, educated families tend to do well even in lower-performing schools, so your alarm at the prospect of redistricting is somewhat puzzling.

That's precisely the point - there AREN'T any, and it will take years to develop them. And what it means is that people are so blinded by "social justice" that they fail to see how it can actually impact real people. It doesn't make you a bad person to not want to send your kid to a shitty school on a the theory that your smart, UMC kid is going to suddenly solve all of the inherent problems of urban poverty by just sitting next to some kid in a classroom.

There might be an ounce of sympathy if there was any concern whatsoever for the so-called "shitty schools." Some of us don't think anyone should have to send their kids to a "shitty school" regardless of address. The solution for Ward 3 families is not enrolling charters or OOB and traveling across town -- that's only required of families in Wards 7 & 8.

I think folks ARE concerned about the shitty schools. But remember, a lot of those problems are not just the schools, but the problems the kids at those schools bring with them. Redrawing school boundaries won't solve that issue.

I agree that redrawing boundaries won't solve generational poverty, but that doesn't mean that schools dealing with the greatest burdens of poverty should be denied additional resources to effectively support higher needs students.

There are three main persistent elitism themes on DCUM -- 1) talking about "shitty schools" like they exist in a vacuum and fail the children who need them most, or 2) denigrating kids and their care givers who come to school with a heavy load of stuff to deal with. . . maybe 3) combination of 1) and 2) above

Not to paint too broadly but I fail to see any meaningful concern about the plight of students and communities with higher needs than their entitled families from anyone who would call any legitimate school "shitty"

The poorest schools DO get the most money per student. In some cases, twice as much as Ward 3 schools. Money is not the problem. The problem is not student resources, it’s student home life. The schools are being asked to solve problems they are not equipped to solve. It’s a sad conundrum, but one that no one has been able to solve on a large scale anywhere in this country. And overcrowding Ward 3 schools is a spiteful response that hurts more kids that it helps.

Here’s some sobering reading:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/04/08/can_we_fix_the_schools_maybe_not_139978.html

Totes, Plessy v. F. sitch. Let those poor unfortunate souls thrive over yonder in Ward 4, CC is more unincorporated North Bethesda in “outlook.” We’ve got the right (white) privilege. Deal forever!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what crazy people (and agree with the PP, this is a total fantasy thread), here's the real story:

- Our kids shouldn't be used as a social engineering experiment because they are UMC and live in stable homes. Call that elitist, privileged, whatever, but no kid should have to deal with it because some social justice warrior deems it so.

- Of course we are going to scream when you ship our kids out of our neighborhood to an unproven school with abysmal test scores. NOBODY would want that to happen.

- The schools you are talking about sending us to, while smaller, do not have the same sort of extra curriculars (sports, arts) what have you that Deal and Wilson already have.

I think if Lafayette parents are convinced that the experience would be the same wherever else than it would be at Deal and Wilson, we would be OK with it. Contrary to what this thread suggests, I don't think Chevy Chase is full of racists. It is, however, full of families who want what's best for their kids, and Wells and Cardozo are just not going to cut it now. The expectations are just higher.

And, finally, for all the Deal bashers here, it IS a great place. The team approach keeps it small, and I can say especially over the last two years DD has had uniformly amazing teachers. I don't know who you've had. I'm sorry your snowflake can't handle the size, I'm sure when you pick their classes for them in college it will be better.

I occasionally see this term thrown around by the same sorts of folks who use the term 'SJW.' What exactly does this mean? How would this play out, in terms of outcomes?

Also, Wells isn't even open yet, so how can you remark about the extracurricular options or test scores there? What are you basing your predictions on? DCPS PARCC data, along with other research, suggests that kids from affluent, educated families tend to do well even in lower-performing schools, so your alarm at the prospect of redistricting is somewhat puzzling.

That's precisely the point - there AREN'T any, and it will take years to develop them. And what it means is that people are so blinded by "social justice" that they fail to see how it can actually impact real people. It doesn't make you a bad person to not want to send your kid to a shitty school on a the theory that your smart, UMC kid is going to suddenly solve all of the inherent problems of urban poverty by just sitting next to some kid in a classroom.

There might be an ounce of sympathy if there was any concern whatsoever for the so-called "shitty schools." Some of us don't think anyone should have to send their kids to a "shitty school" regardless of address. The solution for Ward 3 families is not enrolling charters or OOB and traveling across town -- that's only required of families in Wards 7 & 8.

I think folks ARE concerned about the shitty schools. But remember, a lot of those problems are not just the schools, but the problems the kids at those schools bring with them. Redrawing school boundaries won't solve that issue.

I agree that redrawing boundaries won't solve generational poverty, but that doesn't mean that schools dealing with the greatest burdens of poverty should be denied additional resources to effectively support higher needs students.

There are three main persistent elitism themes on DCUM -- 1) talking about "shitty schools" like they exist in a vacuum and fail the children who need them most, or 2) denigrating kids and their care givers who come to school with a heavy load of stuff to deal with. . . maybe 3) combination of 1) and 2) above

Not to paint too broadly but I fail to see any meaningful concern about the plight of students and communities with higher needs than their entitled families from anyone who would call any legitimate school "shitty"

The poorest schools DO get the most money per student. In some cases, twice as much as Ward 3 schools. Money is not the problem. The problem is not student resources, it’s student home life. The schools are being asked to solve problems they are not equipped to solve. It’s a sad conundrum, but one that no one has been able to solve on a large scale anywhere in this country. And overcrowding Ward 3 schools is a spiteful response that hurts more kids that it helps.

Here’s some sobering reading:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/04/08/can_we_fix_the_schools_maybe_not_139978.html

Totes, Plessy v. F. sitch. Let those poor unfortunate souls thrive over yonder in Ward 4, CC is more unincorporated North Bethesda in “outlook.” We’ve got the right (white) privilege. Deal forever!

Sweetheart, Brown v. Board was decided 3 generations ago. Since that time trillions of dollars have been directed to closing the achievement gap. To absolutely no meaningful avail. I don’t know what the solution is either. But I do know that a 2000 student Deal is not the answer. And you know it too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what crazy people (and agree with the PP, this is a total fantasy thread), here's the real story:

- Our kids shouldn't be used as a social engineering experiment because they are UMC and live in stable homes. Call that elitist, privileged, whatever, but no kid should have to deal with it because some social justice warrior deems it so.

- Of course we are going to scream when you ship our kids out of our neighborhood to an unproven school with abysmal test scores. NOBODY would want that to happen.

- The schools you are talking about sending us to, while smaller, do not have the same sort of extra curriculars (sports, arts) what have you that Deal and Wilson already have.

I think if Lafayette parents are convinced that the experience would be the same wherever else than it would be at Deal and Wilson, we would be OK with it. Contrary to what this thread suggests, I don't think Chevy Chase is full of racists. It is, however, full of families who want what's best for their kids, and Wells and Cardozo are just not going to cut it now. The expectations are just higher.

And, finally, for all the Deal bashers here, it IS a great place. The team approach keeps it small, and I can say especially over the last two years DD has had uniformly amazing teachers. I don't know who you've had. I'm sorry your snowflake can't handle the size, I'm sure when you pick their classes for them in college it will be better.

I occasionally see this term thrown around by the same sorts of folks who use the term 'SJW.' What exactly does this mean? How would this play out, in terms of outcomes?

Also, Wells isn't even open yet, so how can you remark about the extracurricular options or test scores there? What are you basing your predictions on? DCPS PARCC data, along with other research, suggests that kids from affluent, educated families tend to do well even in lower-performing schools, so your alarm at the prospect of redistricting is somewhat puzzling.

That's precisely the point - there AREN'T any, and it will take years to develop them. And what it means is that people are so blinded by "social justice" that they fail to see how it can actually impact real people. It doesn't make you a bad person to not want to send your kid to a shitty school on a the theory that your smart, UMC kid is going to suddenly solve all of the inherent problems of urban poverty by just sitting next to some kid in a classroom.

There might be an ounce of sympathy if there was any concern whatsoever for the so-called "shitty schools." Some of us don't think anyone should have to send their kids to a "shitty school" regardless of address. The solution for Ward 3 families is not enrolling charters or OOB and traveling across town -- that's only required of families in Wards 7 & 8.

I think folks ARE concerned about the shitty schools. But remember, a lot of those problems are not just the schools, but the problems the kids at those schools bring with them. Redrawing school boundaries won't solve that issue.

I agree that redrawing boundaries won't solve generational poverty, but that doesn't mean that schools dealing with the greatest burdens of poverty should be denied additional resources to effectively support higher needs students.

There are three main persistent elitism themes on DCUM -- 1) talking about "shitty schools" like they exist in a vacuum and fail the children who need them most, or 2) denigrating kids and their care givers who come to school with a heavy load of stuff to deal with. . . maybe 3) combination of 1) and 2) above

Not to paint too broadly but I fail to see any meaningful concern about the plight of students and communities with higher needs than their entitled families from anyone who would call any legitimate school "shitty"

The poorest schools DO get the most money per student. In some cases, twice as much as Ward 3 schools. Money is not the problem. The problem is not student resources, it’s student home life. The schools are being asked to solve problems they are not equipped to solve. It’s a sad conundrum, but one that no one has been able to solve on a large scale anywhere in this country. And overcrowding Ward 3 schools is a spiteful response that hurts more kids that it helps.

Here’s some sobering reading:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/04/08/can_we_fix_the_schools_maybe_not_139978.html

Totes, Plessy v. F. sitch. Let those poor unfortunate souls thrive over yonder in Ward 4, CC is more unincorporated North Bethesda in “outlook.” We’ve got the right (white) privilege. Deal forever!

Sweetheart, Brown v. Board was decided 3 generations ago. Since that time trillions of dollars have been directed to closing the achievement gap. To absolutely no meaningful avail. I don’t know what the solution is either. But I do know that a 2000 student Deal is not the answer. And you know it too.

Right, which is why we’re suggesting moving some of the feeders to other MS and HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what crazy people (and agree with the PP, this is a total fantasy thread), here's the real story:

- Our kids shouldn't be used as a social engineering experiment because they are UMC and live in stable homes. Call that elitist, privileged, whatever, but no kid should have to deal with it because some social justice warrior deems it so.

- Of course we are going to scream when you ship our kids out of our neighborhood to an unproven school with abysmal test scores. NOBODY would want that to happen.

- The schools you are talking about sending us to, while smaller, do not have the same sort of extra curriculars (sports, arts) what have you that Deal and Wilson already have.

I think if Lafayette parents are convinced that the experience would be the same wherever else than it would be at Deal and Wilson, we would be OK with it. Contrary to what this thread suggests, I don't think Chevy Chase is full of racists. It is, however, full of families who want what's best for their kids, and Wells and Cardozo are just not going to cut it now. The expectations are just higher.

And, finally, for all the Deal bashers here, it IS a great place. The team approach keeps it small, and I can say especially over the last two years DD has had uniformly amazing teachers. I don't know who you've had. I'm sorry your snowflake can't handle the size, I'm sure when you pick their classes for them in college it will be better.

I occasionally see this term thrown around by the same sorts of folks who use the term 'SJW.' What exactly does this mean? How would this play out, in terms of outcomes?

Also, Wells isn't even open yet, so how can you remark about the extracurricular options or test scores there? What are you basing your predictions on? DCPS PARCC data, along with other research, suggests that kids from affluent, educated families tend to do well even in lower-performing schools, so your alarm at the prospect of redistricting is somewhat puzzling.

That's precisely the point - there AREN'T any, and it will take years to develop them. And what it means is that people are so blinded by "social justice" that they fail to see how it can actually impact real people. It doesn't make you a bad person to not want to send your kid to a shitty school on a the theory that your smart, UMC kid is going to suddenly solve all of the inherent problems of urban poverty by just sitting next to some kid in a classroom.

There might be an ounce of sympathy if there was any concern whatsoever for the so-called "shitty schools." Some of us don't think anyone should have to send their kids to a "shitty school" regardless of address. The solution for Ward 3 families is not enrolling charters or OOB and traveling across town -- that's only required of families in Wards 7 & 8.

I think folks ARE concerned about the shitty schools. But remember, a lot of those problems are not just the schools, but the problems the kids at those schools bring with them. Redrawing school boundaries won't solve that issue.

I agree that redrawing boundaries won't solve generational poverty, but that doesn't mean that schools dealing with the greatest burdens of poverty should be denied additional resources to effectively support higher needs students.

There are three main persistent elitism themes on DCUM -- 1) talking about "shitty schools" like they exist in a vacuum and fail the children who need them most, or 2) denigrating kids and their care givers who come to school with a heavy load of stuff to deal with. . . maybe 3) combination of 1) and 2) above

Not to paint too broadly but I fail to see any meaningful concern about the plight of students and communities with higher needs than their entitled families from anyone who would call any legitimate school "shitty"

The poorest schools DO get the most money per student. In some cases, twice as much as Ward 3 schools. Money is not the problem. The problem is not student resources, it’s student home life. The schools are being asked to solve problems they are not equipped to solve. It’s a sad conundrum, but one that no one has been able to solve on a large scale anywhere in this country. And overcrowding Ward 3 schools is a spiteful response that hurts more kids that it helps.

Here’s some sobering reading:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/04/08/can_we_fix_the_schools_maybe_not_139978.html

Totes, Plessy v. F. sitch. Let those poor unfortunate souls thrive over yonder in Ward 4, CC is more unincorporated North Bethesda in “outlook.” We’ve got the right (white) privilege. Deal forever!

Sweetheart, Brown v. Board was decided 3 generations ago. Since that time trillions of dollars have been directed to closing the achievement gap. To absolutely no meaningful avail. I don’t know what the solution is either. But I do know that a 2000 student Deal is not the answer. And you know it too.

Right, which is why we’re suggesting moving some of the feeders to other MS and HS.

Start with the two feeder schools that have 800 kids.

[Anonymous]

Riiiiiight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what crazy people (and agree with the PP, this is a total fantasy thread), here's the real story:

- Our kids shouldn't be used as a social engineering experiment because they are UMC and live in stable homes. Call that elitist, privileged, whatever, but no kid should have to deal with it because some social justice warrior deems it so.

- Of course we are going to scream when you ship our kids out of our neighborhood to an unproven school with abysmal test scores. NOBODY would want that to happen.

- The schools you are talking about sending us to, while smaller, do not have the same sort of extra curriculars (sports, arts) what have you that Deal and Wilson already have.

I think if Lafayette parents are convinced that the experience would be the same wherever else than it would be at Deal and Wilson, we would be OK with it. Contrary to what this thread suggests, I don't think Chevy Chase is full of racists. It is, however, full of families who want what's best for their kids, and Wells and Cardozo are just not going to cut it now. The expectations are just higher.

And, finally, for all the Deal bashers here, it IS a great place. The team approach keeps it small, and I can say especially over the last two years DD has had uniformly amazing teachers. I don't know who you've had. I'm sorry your snowflake can't handle the size, I'm sure when you pick their classes for them in college it will be better.

I occasionally see this term thrown around by the same sorts of folks who use the term 'SJW.' What exactly does this mean? How would this play out, in terms of outcomes?

Also, Wells isn't even open yet, so how can you remark about the extracurricular options or test scores there? What are you basing your predictions on? DCPS PARCC data, along with other research, suggests that kids from affluent, educated families tend to do well even in lower-performing schools, so your alarm at the prospect of redistricting is somewhat puzzling.

That's precisely the point - there AREN'T any, and it will take years to develop them. And what it means is that people are so blinded by "social justice" that they fail to see how it can actually impact real people. It doesn't make you a bad person to not want to send your kid to a shitty school on a the theory that your smart, UMC kid is going to suddenly solve all of the inherent problems of urban poverty by just sitting next to some kid in a classroom.

There might be an ounce of sympathy if there was any concern whatsoever for the so-called "shitty schools." Some of us don't think anyone should have to send their kids to a "shitty school" regardless of address. The solution for Ward 3 families is not enrolling charters or OOB and traveling across town -- that's only required of families in Wards 7 & 8.

I think folks ARE concerned about the shitty schools. But remember, a lot of those problems are not just the schools, but the problems the kids at those schools bring with them. Redrawing school boundaries won't solve that issue.

I agree that redrawing boundaries won't solve generational poverty, but that doesn't mean that schools dealing with the greatest burdens of poverty should be denied additional resources to effectively support higher needs students.

There are three main persistent elitism themes on DCUM -- 1) talking about "shitty schools" like they exist in a vacuum and fail the children who need them most, or 2) denigrating kids and their care givers who come to school with a heavy load of stuff to deal with. . . maybe 3) combination of 1) and 2) above

Not to paint too broadly but I fail to see any meaningful concern about the plight of students and communities with higher needs than their entitled families from anyone who would call any legitimate school "shitty"

Not the pp you're responding to, but it's possible to care about children living in poverty and simultaneously not be willing to send your own children to a school rife with generational poverty. The fact is that Deal and Wilson are higher performing schools precisely because of the student body, specifically the fact that many of the kids come from families not entrenched in the sufferings of generational poverty. I wish there was a way to help some without hurting others. We haven't seemed to figure that out in DCPS yet.

Of course parents are very concerned about potentially losing access to Deal and Wilson. I think the poster was reacting to other posters' duplicity in trying to force some families into accepting Wells, Coolidge, and other schools as a viable alternative to Deal and Wilson. It's unfortunate that there aren't enough good choices today and it's pitting parents against each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what crazy people (and agree with the PP, this is a total fantasy thread), here's the real story:

- Our kids shouldn't be used as a social engineering experiment because they are UMC and live in stable homes. Call that elitist, privileged, whatever, but no kid should have to deal with it because some social justice warrior deems it so.

- Of course we are going to scream when you ship our kids out of our neighborhood to an unproven school with abysmal test scores. NOBODY would want that to happen.

- The schools you are talking about sending us to, while smaller, do not have the same sort of extra curriculars (sports, arts) what have you that Deal and Wilson already have.

I think if Lafayette parents are convinced that the experience would be the same wherever else than it would be at Deal and Wilson, we would be OK with it. Contrary to what this thread suggests, I don't think Chevy Chase is full of racists. It is, however, full of families who want what's best for their kids, and Wells and Cardozo are just not going to cut it now. The expectations are just higher.

And, finally, for all the Deal bashers here, it IS a great place. The team approach keeps it small, and I can say especially over the last two years DD has had uniformly amazing teachers. I don't know who you've had. I'm sorry your snowflake can't handle the size, I'm sure when you pick their classes for them in college it will be better.

I occasionally see this term thrown around by the same sorts of folks who use the term 'SJW.' What exactly does this mean? How would this play out, in terms of outcomes?

Also, Wells isn't even open yet, so how can you remark about the extracurricular options or test scores there? What are you basing your predictions on? DCPS PARCC data, along with other research, suggests that kids from affluent, educated families tend to do well even in lower-performing schools, so your alarm at the prospect of redistricting is somewhat puzzling.

That's precisely the point - there AREN'T any, and it will take years to develop them. And what it means is that people are so blinded by "social justice" that they fail to see how it can actually impact real people. It doesn't make you a bad person to not want to send your kid to a shitty school on a the theory that your smart, UMC kid is going to suddenly solve all of the inherent problems of urban poverty by just sitting next to some kid in a classroom.

There might be an ounce of sympathy if there was any concern whatsoever for the so-called "shitty schools." Some of us don't think anyone should have to send their kids to a "shitty school" regardless of address. The solution for Ward 3 families is not enrolling charters or OOB and traveling across town -- that's only required of families in Wards 7 & 8.

I think folks ARE concerned about the shitty schools. But remember, a lot of those problems are not just the schools, but the problems the kids at those schools bring with them. Redrawing school boundaries won't solve that issue.

I agree that redrawing boundaries won't solve generational poverty, but that doesn't mean that schools dealing with the greatest burdens of poverty should be denied additional resources to effectively support higher needs students.

There are three main persistent elitism themes on DCUM -- 1) talking about "shitty schools" like they exist in a vacuum and fail the children who need them most, or 2) denigrating kids and their care givers who come to school with a heavy load of stuff to deal with. . . maybe 3) combination of 1) and 2) above

Not to paint too broadly but I fail to see any meaningful concern about the plight of students and communities with higher needs than their entitled families from anyone who would call any legitimate school "shitty"

The poorest schools DO get the most money per student. In some cases, twice as much as Ward 3 schools. Money is not the problem. The problem is not student resources, it’s student home life. The schools are being asked to solve problems they are not equipped to solve. It’s a sad conundrum, but one that no one has been able to solve on a large scale anywhere in this country. And overcrowding Ward 3 schools is a spiteful response that hurts more kids that it helps.

Here’s some sobering reading:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/04/08/can_we_fix_the_schools_maybe_not_139978.html

Totes, Plessy v. F. sitch. Let those poor unfortunate souls thrive over yonder in Ward 4, CC is more unincorporated North Bethesda in “outlook.” We’ve got the right (white) privilege. Deal forever!

Sweetheart, Brown v. Board was decided 3 generations ago. Since that time trillions of dollars have been directed to closing the achievement gap. To absolutely no meaningful avail. I don’t know what the solution is either. But I do know that a 2000 student Deal is not the answer. And you know it too.

Right, which is why we’re suggesting moving some of the feeders to other MS and HS.

That’s basically busing. And it’s failed everywhere it’s been tried. It didn’t work in blue collar Boston 40 years ago. And it certainly won’t work in white color DC. There are limits to what government can do. People will live where they want to live based on the neighborhood school. DCPS will have to find another way.

[Anonymous]

"Busing" would be sending LaFayette graduates to Ward 7 or 8. We're not talking about busing, but rezoning: sending LaFayette grads to a new middle school that's essentially the same distance from LaFayette as Deal. Along with couple of other decently-performing elementary schools. It would probably work out just fine. See: Hardy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what crazy people (and agree with the PP, this is a total fantasy thread), here's the real story:

- Our kids shouldn't be used as a social engineering experiment because they are UMC and live in stable homes. Call that elitist, privileged, whatever, but no kid should have to deal with it because some social justice warrior deems it so.

- Of course we are going to scream when you ship our kids out of our neighborhood to an unproven school with abysmal test scores. NOBODY would want that to happen.

- The schools you are talking about sending us to, while smaller, do not have the same sort of extra curriculars (sports, arts) what have you that Deal and Wilson already have.

I think if Lafayette parents are convinced that the experience would be the same wherever else than it would be at Deal and Wilson, we would be OK with it. Contrary to what this thread suggests, I don't think Chevy Chase is full of racists. It is, however, full of families who want what's best for their kids, and Wells and Cardozo are just not going to cut it now. The expectations are just higher.

And, finally, for all the Deal bashers here, it IS a great place. The team approach keeps it small, and I can say especially over the last two years DD has had uniformly amazing teachers. I don't know who you've had. I'm sorry your snowflake can't handle the size, I'm sure when you pick their classes for them in college it will be better.

I occasionally see this term thrown around by the same sorts of folks who use the term 'SJW.' What exactly does this mean? How would this play out, in terms of outcomes?

Also, Wells isn't even open yet, so how can you remark about the extracurricular options or test scores there? What are you basing your predictions on? DCPS PARCC data, along with other research, suggests that kids from affluent, educated families tend to do well even in lower-performing schools, so your alarm at the prospect of redistricting is somewhat puzzling.

That's precisely the point - there AREN'T any, and it will take years to develop them. And what it means is that people are so blinded by "social justice" that they fail to see how it can actually impact real people. It doesn't make you a bad person to not want to send your kid to a shitty school on a the theory that your smart, UMC kid is going to suddenly solve all of the inherent problems of urban poverty by just sitting next to some kid in a classroom.

There might be an ounce of sympathy if there was any concern whatsoever for the so-called "shitty schools." Some of us don't think anyone should have to send their kids to a "shitty school" regardless of address. The solution for Ward 3 families is not enrolling charters or OOB and traveling across town -- that's only required of families in Wards 7 & 8.

I think folks ARE concerned about the shitty schools. But remember, a lot of those problems are not just the schools, but the problems the kids at those schools bring with them. Redrawing school boundaries won't solve that issue.

I agree that redrawing boundaries won't solve generational poverty, but that doesn't mean that schools dealing with the greatest burdens of poverty should be denied additional resources to effectively support higher needs students.

There are three main persistent elitism themes on DCUM -- 1) talking about "shitty schools" like they exist in a vacuum and fail the children who need them most, or 2) denigrating kids and their care givers who come to school with a heavy load of stuff to deal with. . . maybe 3) combination of 1) and 2) above

Not to paint too broadly but I fail to see any meaningful concern about the plight of students and communities with higher needs than their entitled families from anyone who would call any legitimate school "shitty"

Not the pp you're responding to, but it's possible to care about children living in poverty and simultaneously not be willing to send your own children to a school rife with generational poverty. The fact is that Deal and Wilson are higher performing schools precisely because of the student body, specifically the fact that many of the kids come from families not entrenched in the sufferings of generational poverty. I wish there was a way to help some without hurting others. We haven't seemed to figure that out in DCPS yet.

Of course parents are very concerned about potentially losing access to Deal and Wilson. I think the poster was reacting to other posters' duplicity in trying to force some families into accepting Wells, Coolidge, and other schools as a viable alternative to Deal and Wilson. It's unfortunate that there aren't enough good choices today and it's pitting parents against each other.

Not PP but someone could be reacting to your duplicity in suggesting that that parents EOTP send their kids to Macfarland and IBW but insisting your kids are somehow to the Deal Manor Borne or your casual racism....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what crazy people (and agree with the PP, this is a total fantasy thread), here's the real story:

- Our kids shouldn't be used as a social engineering experiment because they are UMC and live in stable homes. Call that elitist, privileged, whatever, but no kid should have to deal with it because some social justice warrior deems it so.

- Of course we are going to scream when you ship our kids out of our neighborhood to an unproven school with abysmal test scores. NOBODY would want that to happen.

- The schools you are talking about sending us to, while smaller, do not have the same sort of extra curriculars (sports, arts) what have you that Deal and Wilson already have.

I think if Lafayette parents are convinced that the experience would be the same wherever else than it would be at Deal and Wilson, we would be OK with it. Contrary to what this thread suggests, I don't think Chevy Chase is full of racists. It is, however, full of families who want what's best for their kids, and Wells and Cardozo are just not going to cut it now. The expectations are just higher.

And, finally, for all the Deal bashers here, it IS a great place. The team approach keeps it small, and I can say especially over the last two years DD has had uniformly amazing teachers. I don't know who you've had. I'm sorry your snowflake can't handle the size, I'm sure when you pick their classes for them in college it will be better.

I occasionally see this term thrown around by the same sorts of folks who use the term 'SJW.' What exactly does this mean? How would this play out, in terms of outcomes?

Also, Wells isn't even open yet, so how can you remark about the extracurricular options or test scores there? What are you basing your predictions on? DCPS PARCC data, along with other research, suggests that kids from affluent, educated families tend to do well even in lower-performing schools, so your alarm at the prospect of redistricting is somewhat puzzling.

That's precisely the point - there AREN'T any, and it will take years to develop them. And what it means is that people are so blinded by "social justice" that they fail to see how it can actually impact real people. It doesn't make you a bad person to not want to send your kid to a shitty school on a the theory that your smart, UMC kid is going to suddenly solve all of the inherent problems of urban poverty by just sitting next to some kid in a classroom.

There might be an ounce of sympathy if there was any concern whatsoever for the so-called "shitty schools." Some of us don't think anyone should have to send their kids to a "shitty school" regardless of address. The solution for Ward 3 families is not enrolling charters or OOB and traveling across town -- that's only required of families in Wards 7 & 8.

I think folks ARE concerned about the shitty schools. But remember, a lot of those problems are not just the schools, but the problems the kids at those schools bring with them. Redrawing school boundaries won't solve that issue.

I agree that redrawing boundaries won't solve generational poverty, but that doesn't mean that schools dealing with the greatest burdens of poverty should be denied additional resources to effectively support higher needs students.

There are three main persistent elitism themes on DCUM -- 1) talking about "shitty schools" like they exist in a vacuum and fail the children who need them most, or 2) denigrating kids and their care givers who come to school with a heavy load of stuff to deal with. . . maybe 3) combination of 1) and 2) above

Not to paint too broadly but I fail to see any meaningful concern about the plight of students and communities with higher needs than their entitled families from anyone who would call any legitimate school "shitty"

The poorest schools DO get the most money per student. In some cases, twice as much as Ward 3 schools. Money is not the problem. The problem is not student resources, it’s student home life. The schools are being asked to solve problems they are not equipped to solve. It’s a sad conundrum, but one that no one has been able to solve on a large scale anywhere in this country. And overcrowding Ward 3 schools is a spiteful response that hurts more kids that it helps.

Here’s some sobering reading:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/04/08/can_we_fix_the_schools_maybe_not_139978.html

Totes, Plessy v. F. sitch. Let those poor unfortunate souls thrive over yonder in Ward 4, CC is more unincorporated North Bethesda in “outlook.” We’ve got the right (white) privilege. Deal forever!

Sweetheart, Brown v. Board was decided 3 generations ago. Since that time trillions of dollars have been directed to closing the achievement gap. To absolutely no meaningful avail. I don’t know what the solution is either. But I do know that a 2000 student Deal is not the answer. And you know it too.

Right, which is why we’re suggesting moving some of the feeders to other MS and HS.

That’s basically busing. And it’s failed everywhere it’s been tried. It didn’t work in blue collar Boston 40 years ago. And it certainly won’t work in white color DC. There are limits to what government can do. People will live where they want to live based on the neighborhood school. DCPS will have to find another way.

Gotcha - not for white COLOR, your (Freudian) slip is showing.