DC Begins School Boundary Study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live in the Bancroft boundary and it is hard to imagine that the school won't stay majority Latino. There are tons of large apartment buildings on 16th street that house a lot of immigrant families. And they far outnumber the rowhouses in the neighborhood.

This is true, but when thinking about feeder patterns Bancroft doesn’t bring much diversity to Deal. Many of of Latino families living in the apartments in 16th send their kids to CHEC which is literally across the street rather than 4 miles away. Others head to McFarland.

Also, Bancroft is 4% African American. That is shocking for a Ward 1 school. Every Ward 3 school has a higher percentage except Oyster which is 3.7%.

Are you making the point to keep Bancroft as part of the Deal pyramid since it’s numbers are inconsequential? I agree there needs to be an option for kids who don’t want to continue in immersion. Bancroft makes sense as a dual language school given its demographics, but it is doesn’t make sense to force people into ongoing immersion based on their address.

What immersion school would they being forced into? There is no immersion MS in DC.

People meant bilingual. Macfarland is the bilingual feeder for DCPS bilingual schools-Powell and Bruce Monroe

So does Raymond. Show me where it mentions MacFarland being a bilingual school on their website or the DCPS profile.

https://profiles.dcps.dc.gov/MacFarland+Middle+School

https://www.macfarlandmsdc.org/home

All of the bilingual DCPS have a programmatic feed into MacFarland Spanish, except OA.

If MacFarland Spanish existed wouldn’t they mention it on their profile or website? Besides the links above, Here is their curriculum guide. No mention of a bilingual program.

https://dcps.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcps/publication/attachments/6th%20Grade%20Guide%202019-20.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i think it would be a huge long-term mistake not to zone the deal feeders that are closer to the new wells middle school to wells

Isn’t Shepherd the only one?

Lafayette is 10 minutes.

Dude, they’re not moving Lafayette.

They have talked about rerouting a percentage of Lafayette. Which, dude, is a sound idea.

People forget…Lafayette is the largest elementary in DC. Wherever you move it, you are taking in a huge amount of kids. At over 120 kids per grade, it could almost fill its own middle school.

Wells is not prepared to absorb Lafayette as a feeder. I can see taking in Shepard. I assume the new housing in Walter Reed that is just coming online now will feed Wells via Takoma Elem.

They can absorb Shepherd and 1/2 Lafayette.

They don’t split ESes to multiple MSes any more. That was a decision during the last review.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i think it would be a huge long-term mistake not to zone the deal feeders that are closer to the new wells middle school to wells

Isn’t Shepherd the only one?

Lafayette is 10 minutes.

Dude, they’re not moving Lafayette.

They have talked about rerouting a percentage of Lafayette. Which, dude, is a sound idea.

People forget…Lafayette is the largest elementary in DC. Wherever you move it, you are taking in a huge amount of kids. At over 120 kids per grade, it could almost fill its own middle school.

Wells is not prepared to absorb Lafayette as a feeder. I can see taking in Shepard. I assume the new housing in Walter Reed that is just coming online now will feed Wells via Takoma Elem.

They can absorb Shepherd and 1/2 Lafayette.

They don’t split ESes to multiple MSes any more. That was a decision during the last review.

Eh. Not true. They can do whatever they want to relieve overcrowding, including change boundaries of catchment for Lafayette. One think they looked at previously was the neighborhood on Military Road being rerouted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live in the Bancroft boundary and it is hard to imagine that the school won't stay majority Latino. There are tons of large apartment buildings on 16th street that house a lot of immigrant families. And they far outnumber the rowhouses in the neighborhood.

This is true, but when thinking about feeder patterns Bancroft doesn’t bring much diversity to Deal. Many of of Latino families living in the apartments in 16th send their kids to CHEC which is literally across the street rather than 4 miles away. Others head to McFarland.

Also, Bancroft is 4% African American. That is shocking for a Ward 1 school. Every Ward 3 school has a higher percentage except Oyster which is 3.7%.

Are you making the point to keep Bancroft as part of the Deal pyramid since it’s numbers are inconsequential? I agree there needs to be an option for kids who don’t want to continue in immersion. Bancroft makes sense as a dual language school given its demographics, but it is doesn’t make sense to force people into ongoing immersion based on their address.

What immersion school would they being forced into? There is no immersion MS in DC.

People meant bilingual. Macfarland is the bilingual feeder for DCPS bilingual schools-Powell and Bruce Monroe

So does Raymond. Show me where it mentions MacFarland being a bilingual school on their website or the DCPS profile.

https://profiles.dcps.dc.gov/MacFarland+Middle+School

https://www.macfarlandmsdc.org/home

All of the bilingual DCPS have a programmatic feed into MacFarland Spanish, except OA.

If MacFarland Spanish existed wouldn’t they mention it on their profile or website? Besides the links above, Here is their curriculum guide. No mention of a bilingual program.

https://dcps.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcps/publication/attachments/6th%20Grade%20Guide%202019-20.pdf

Here. Page 3. Under the heading “dual language programmatic feeder pattern.”

https://dcps.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcps/page_content/attachments/SY23-24%20School%20Feeder%20Patterns.pdf

[Anonymous]

We need inclusive citywide bilingual schools and not exclusive ones based on whether you live in the right neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We need inclusive citywide bilingual schools and not exclusive ones based on whether you live in the right neighborhood.

Yes, and we need to change the charter law so that kids coming from language programs con continue in language. For example, Stokes should be able to expand to a dedicated French MS, where other students studying French city-wide could get preference. Hardy kids in Mandarin program should be able to get preference at YY. Sela should be able to partner with another school and get feeder preference for continued Hebrew studies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need inclusive citywide bilingual schools and not exclusive ones based on whether you live in the right neighborhood.

Yes, and we need to change the charter law so that kids coming from language programs con continue in language. For example, Stokes should be able to expand to a dedicated French MS, where other students studying French city-wide could get preference. Hardy kids in Mandarin program should be able to get preference at YY. Sela should be able to partner with another school and get feeder preference for continued Hebrew studies.

YY is an elementary school so it's unclear why a Hardy kid would want to attend.

Stokes MS was found to be legally impossible due to Stokes' contract with DCI. It's not the charter law itself.

Nobody wants to partner with Sela and the demand for Hebrew isn't that high. That's why Sela's retention isn't good.

[Anonymous]

They're not pulling Shepherd out of the Deal/JR boundary without at least some Lafayette kids coming with them. It's a simple political fact, because the optics of removing POC kids from Deal/JR would be terrible. So it's either that or the status quo, and they'll choose the latter because it's just easier and less politically fraught.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need inclusive citywide bilingual schools and not exclusive ones based on whether you live in the right neighborhood.

Yes, and we need to change the charter law so that kids coming from language programs con continue in language. For example, Stokes should be able to expand to a dedicated French MS, where other students studying French city-wide could get preference. Hardy kids in Mandarin program should be able to get preference at YY. Sela should be able to partner with another school and get feeder preference for continued Hebrew studies.

YY is an elementary school so it's unclear why a Hardy kid would want to attend.

Stokes MS was found to be legally impossible due to Stokes' contract with DCI. It's not the charter law itself.

Nobody wants to partner with Sela and the demand for Hebrew isn't that high. That's why Sela's retention isn't good.

I think you got a lot of your facts wrong. 1) DCI has a Mandarin track; 2) It is the charter implementation law for DCI, which itself was an exception to the feeder rule for charters (can’t have any) which caused the problem for Stokes; 4) Sela’s retention is actually pretty good; 5) Latin/Sojourner Truth looked at partnering with Sela and were told that they couldn’t by the PCSB because of the feeder rule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They're not pulling Shepherd out of the Deal/JR boundary without at least some Lafayette kids coming with them. It's a simple political fact, because the optics of removing POC kids from Deal/JR would be terrible. So it's either that or the status quo, and they'll choose the latter because it's just easier and less politically fraught.

+1000 There is 0% chance the changes will include anything that is certain to decrease POC feeding into Deal/JR. What will be interesting is whether the published principles and explanations are open and honest about it. An example of this executed transparently is the recent redistricting exercise. They were transparent about the goal of not diminishing the political power of POC. Agree or not, at least the reasons for the decisions were explained. I doubt DCPS is going to be as honest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need inclusive citywide bilingual schools and not exclusive ones based on whether you live in the right neighborhood.

Yes, and we need to change the charter law so that kids coming from language programs con continue in language. For example, Stokes should be able to expand to a dedicated French MS, where other students studying French city-wide could get preference. Hardy kids in Mandarin program should be able to get preference at YY. Sela should be able to partner with another school and get feeder preference for continued Hebrew studies.

YY is an elementary school so it's unclear why a Hardy kid would want to attend.

Stokes MS was found to be legally impossible due to Stokes' contract with DCI. It's not the charter law itself.

Nobody wants to partner with Sela and the demand for Hebrew isn't that high. That's why Sela's retention isn't good.

I think you got a lot of your facts wrong. 1) DCI has a Mandarin track; 2) It is the charter implementation law for DCI, which itself was an exception to the feeder rule for charters (can’t have any) which caused the problem for Stokes; 4) Sela’s retention is actually pretty good; 5) Latin/Sojourner Truth looked at partnering with Sela and were told that they couldn’t by the PCSB because of the feeder rule.

But they nailed the fact that YY is an elementary school. So they have that going for them...!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live in the Bancroft boundary and it is hard to imagine that the school won't stay majority Latino. There are tons of large apartment buildings on 16th street that house a lot of immigrant families. And they far outnumber the rowhouses in the neighborhood.

This is true, but when thinking about feeder patterns Bancroft doesn’t bring much diversity to Deal. Many of of Latino families living in the apartments in 16th send their kids to CHEC which is literally across the street rather than 4 miles away. Others head to McFarland.

Also, Bancroft is 4% African American. That is shocking for a Ward 1 school. Every Ward 3 school has a higher percentage except Oyster which is 3.7%.

Are you making the point to keep Bancroft as part of the Deal pyramid since it’s numbers are inconsequential? I agree there needs to be an option for kids who don’t want to continue in immersion. Bancroft makes sense as a dual language school given its demographics, but it is doesn’t make sense to force people into ongoing immersion based on their address.

What immersion school would they being forced into? There is no immersion MS in DC.

People meant bilingual. Macfarland is the bilingual feeder for DCPS bilingual schools-Powell and Bruce Monroe

So does Raymond. Show me where it mentions MacFarland being a bilingual school on their website or the DCPS profile.

https://profiles.dcps.dc.gov/MacFarland+Middle+School

https://www.macfarlandmsdc.org/home

All of the bilingual DCPS have a programmatic feed into MacFarland Spanish, except OA.

If MacFarland Spanish existed wouldn’t they mention it on their profile or website? Besides the links above, Here is their curriculum guide. No mention of a bilingual program.

https://dcps.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcps/publication/attachments/6th%20Grade%20Guide%202019-20.pdf

Here. Page 3. Under the heading “dual language programmatic feeder pattern.”

https://dcps.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcps/page_content/attachments/SY23-24%20School%20Feeder%20Patterns.pdf

That is just DCPS bait and switch to keep kids in feeders with the hope of a bilingual middle school until it is too late. It is just aspirational. If you look at all MacFarland’s public information, you will see it doesn’t exist. Don’t you think they would mention it on their website or the school profile if it was an actual thing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i think it would be a huge long-term mistake not to zone the deal feeders that are closer to the new wells middle school to wells

Isn’t Shepherd the only one?

Lafayette is 10 minutes.

Dude, they’re not moving Lafayette.

They have talked about rerouting a percentage of Lafayette. Which, dude, is a sound idea.

People forget…Lafayette is the largest elementary in DC. Wherever you move it, you are taking in a huge amount of kids. At over 120 kids per grade, it could almost fill its own middle school.

Wells is not prepared to absorb Lafayette as a feeder. I can see taking in Shepard. I assume the new housing in Walter Reed that is just coming online now will feed Wells via Takoma Elem.

They can absorb Shepherd and 1/2 Lafayette.

They don’t split ESes to multiple MSes any more. That was a decision during the last review.

Eh. Not true. They can do whatever they want to relieve overcrowding, including change boundaries of catchment for Lafayette. One think they looked at previously was the neighborhood on Military Road being rerouted.

This is true. Yes, they can do whatever they want technically, but the decision to feed by ES and not by boundary was literally one of the principled outcomes of the last review. Changing the Lafayette boundaries would be an entirely different thing, but any minor changes there wouldn’t look anything like splitting the feed in half.

[Anonymous]

DD will be starting PreK 3 this fall and starting Kindergarten in Fall of 2025, which is when the new boundaries are expected to be implemented (assuming no delays in the process). If we are impacted by boundary changes, my understanding is that we will not be grandfathered into our former inbounds school. That aspect to the rule seems unfair because I completed my lottery rankings knowing that I was guaranteed entry into my inbounds school for Kindergarten. I would have thought through and ranked my list completely differently if I was in a different inbounds school district. For reference, I ranked my inbounds school first on my list, but it is near impossible to get into it w/out a sibling.

Anyone else in this boat? Not sure there is much I can do about it, but just feels extremely unfair given Prek3 is the best opportunity to get into schools outside of your "by right" school. I guess I'm hoping they will reconsider the policy on grandfathering to account for Prek3 families who didn't have the opportunity to participate in the lottery with knowledge of a different inbounds school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DD will be starting PreK 3 this fall and starting Kindergarten in Fall of 2025, which is when the new boundaries are expected to be implemented (assuming no delays in the process). If we are impacted by boundary changes, my understanding is that we will not be grandfathered into our former inbounds school. That aspect to the rule seems unfair because I completed my lottery rankings knowing that I was guaranteed entry into my inbounds school for Kindergarten. I would have thought through and ranked my list completely differently if I was in a different inbounds school district. For reference, I ranked my inbounds school first on my list, but it is near impossible to get into it w/out a sibling.

Anyone else in this boat? Not sure there is much I can do about it, but just feels extremely unfair given Prek3 is the best opportunity to get into schools outside of your "by right" school. I guess I'm hoping they will reconsider the policy on grandfathering to account for Prek3 families who didn't have the opportunity to participate in the lottery with knowledge of a different inbounds school.

Doesn't seem "extremely unfair" to me. PK is a luxury not a privilege. It's not a mandatory grade. There are wards in the city without PK programs at all. Buying a house based on a feeder pattern is not a particularly smart idea. Boundaries change. Schools close or going into an inconvenient swing space. Your kid might enter a lottery in an easier year because of a baby boom. Racial profiling is extremely unfair. Women not being able to control their reproductive healthcare is extremely unfair. Esme Blythe or Jagger Alix having to go to Key instead of Hearst is life in a major city.