Which would lose their Deal feed first: Shepherd, Bancroft, or Lafayette?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol this should get good now! It's one thing to talk about the browns on the other side of the park, but you better not touch my Janney! You don't mind being overcrowded at Janney but don't want to be overcrowded at Deal (despite Deal having smaller class sizes than Janney).

I am one of the "browns" and I ask you to please not invoke me in your petty issues.

Freedom of speech

vs. basic decency and respect.

You choose.

I am a "brown" too and this is how I feel. Sorry we don't all feel the same way. The question is a valid one, to me.

You can of course say how YOU feel, but I believe it's counterproductive when you imply you know or represent the interests of all "browns" in order to make fun of others. You simply don't.

I didn't claim to nor do i think all Janney parents feel that way. Now can we get back to the valid question?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Deal is over capacity by what 15-20%? Aren't Janney, Lafayette and Murch over capacity by about the same amount? Why no outcry to address that issue? Redistrict those schools?

Are you new here? That is an old debate. DCPS's response was the shuffle kids between the schools and increase the capacity of Murch and Lafayette each by 100 over current enrollment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deal is over capacity by what 15-20%? Aren't Janney, Lafayette and Murch over capacity by about the same amount? Why no outcry to address that issue? Redistrict those schools?

Are you new here? That is an old debate. DCPS's response was the shuffle kids between the schools and increase the capacity of Murch and Lafayette each by 100 over current enrollment.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol this should get good now! It's one thing to talk about the browns on the other side of the park, but you better not touch my Janney! You don't mind being overcrowded at Janney but don't want to be overcrowded at Deal (despite Deal having smaller class sizes than Janney).

I am one of the "browns" and I ask you to please not invoke me in your petty issues.

Freedom of speech

vs. basic decency and respect.

You choose.

I am a "brown" too and this is how I feel. Sorry we don't all feel the same way. The question is a valid one, to me.

FWIW I seem to recall several threads protesting the crowding at Janney, particularly from 3rd grade parents.

Maybe the DME/mayor can make a "tweak" to Janney's boundaries to address overcrowding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deal is over capacity by what 15-20%? Aren't Janney, Lafayette and Murch over capacity by about the same amount? Why no outcry to address that issue? Redistrict those schools?

Are you new here? That is an old debate. DCPS's response was the shuffle kids between the schools and increase the capacity of Murch and Lafayette each by 100 over current enrollment.

Not new at all. If memory serves me correctly, it was Janney families that fought tooth and nail against any redistricting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deal is over capacity by what 15-20%? Aren't Janney, Lafayette and Murch over capacity by about the same amount? Why no outcry to address that issue? Redistrict those schools?

Are you new here? That is an old debate. DCPS's response was the shuffle kids between the schools and increase the capacity of Murch and Lafayette each by 100 over current enrollment.

Not new at all. If memory serves me correctly, it was Janney families that fought tooth and nail against any redistricting.

It doesn't. It was people in all 8 Wards who fought against random, bureaucratic, top-down social reengineering/ redistricting.

True, Janney families were no exception.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deal is over capacity by what 15-20%? Aren't Janney, Lafayette and Murch over capacity by about the same amount? Why no outcry to address that issue? Redistrict those schools?

Are you new here? That is an old debate. DCPS's response was the shuffle kids between the schools and increase the capacity of Murch and Lafayette each by 100 over current enrollment.

Not new at all. If memory serves me correctly, it was Janney families that fought tooth and nail against any redistricting.

It doesn't. It was people in all 8 Wards who fought against random, bureaucratic, top-down social reengineering/ redistricting.

True, Janney families were no exception.

Social reengineering? You don't think Janney is overcrowded and needs addressed? If your answer is no it doesn't need tweaked, do you think Deal boundaries need tweaked?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deal is over capacity by what 15-20%? Aren't Janney, Lafayette and Murch over capacity by about the same amount? Why no outcry to address that issue? Redistrict those schools?

Are you new here? That is an old debate. DCPS's response was the shuffle kids between the schools and increase the capacity of Murch and Lafayette each by 100 over current enrollment.

Not new at all. If memory serves me correctly, it was Janney families that fought tooth and nail against any redistricting.

It doesn't. It was people in all 8 Wards who fought against random, bureaucratic, top-down social reengineering/ redistricting.

True, Janney families were no exception.

Social reengineering? You don't think Janney is overcrowded and needs addressed? If your answer is no it doesn't need tweaked, do you think Deal boundaries need tweaked?

I was referring to the city-wide process a couple years ago, when some DC illuminati tried to kill the neighborhood system we have.

Yes, both Janney and Deal are overcrowded, and we'd all benefit from more attention to facts and less to optics.

[Anonymous]

It is a strange dynamic. Janney being overcrowded is somehow good (don't change the boundary) while Deal being overcrowded is a problem that needs to be solved (remove school x from the feeder pattern).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is a strange dynamic. Janney being overcrowded is somehow good (don't change the boundary) while Deal being overcrowded is a problem that needs to be solved (remove school x from the feeder pattern).

Welcome to DC!

If that sounds strange to you, what about this:

People in Ward 3 are entitled and horrible. Let's ship our kids over to Ward 3!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is a strange dynamic. Janney being overcrowded is somehow good (don't change the boundary) while Deal being overcrowded is a problem that needs to be solved (remove school x from the feeder pattern).

Good point. And it doesn't look good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deal is over capacity by what 15-20%? Aren't Janney, Lafayette and Murch over capacity by about the same amount? Why no outcry to address that issue? Redistrict those schools?

Janney may be. Murch isn't and Lafayette isn't.

From page 11:

Murch 86% in bounds / 14% OOB (620 students / 488 building capacity)
Janney 94% in bounds / 6% OOB (693 students / 570 building capacity)
Lafayette 87% in bounds / 13% OOB (697 students / 516 building capacity)

Doesn't look like Deal is any more overcrowded than Janney and Janney is the best in the city right?

Murch and Lafayette are both being rebuilt. Lafayette's building will hold up to 700. Not sure about Murch but I suspect the same.

Even if you only take Janney, they are 21% over capacity. Why is it ok for Janney but not Deal to be over capacity? While we're talking about Deal, we should address Janney at the same time right?

The crowding at Deal isn't that bad, and not worse than Janney. Everyone IB is willing to put up with it. I doubt that the most zealous posters in these threads are IB for Janney. One PP upthread said she's IB for CHEC. That's a stronger set of motivations than reducing minor crowding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deal is over capacity by what 15-20%? Aren't Janney, Lafayette and Murch over capacity by about the same amount? Why no outcry to address that issue? Redistrict those schools?

Janney may be. Murch isn't and Lafayette isn't.

From page 11:

Murch 86% in bounds / 14% OOB (620 students / 488 building capacity)
Janney 94% in bounds / 6% OOB (693 students / 570 building capacity)
Lafayette 87% in bounds / 13% OOB (697 students / 516 building capacity)

Doesn't look like Deal is any more overcrowded than Janney and Janney is the best in the city right?

Murch and Lafayette are both being rebuilt. Lafayette's building will hold up to 700. Not sure about Murch but I suspect the same.

Even if you only take Janney, they are 21% over capacity. Why is it ok for Janney but not Deal to be over capacity? While we're talking about Deal, we should address Janney at the same time right?

The crowding at Deal isn't that bad, and not worse than Janney. Everyone IB is willing to put up with it. I doubt that the most zealous posters in these threads are IB for Janney. One PP upthread said she's IB for CHEC. That's a stronger set of motivations than reducing minor crowding.

Maybe that one person, but historically (and at DME meetings) Janney parents have been the most vocal in both keeping Janney boundaries where they are as well as complaining about overcrowding at Deal.

[Anonymous]

Janney baiting. Again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Janney baiting. Again.

You have to admit it's a legitimate question. Why no 20 page thread about how to solve Janney's problem?