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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We don't have to choose among Shepherd, Lafayette, Bancroft, and Oyster. They should ALL have different feeder patterns: the former two to Wells and Coolidge and the latter two to MacFarland and Roosevelt.

Agree. If they move schools out of Deal-Wilson, it will be a bunch of schools so none of them can say they were targeted.

Bancroft is an obvious choice, since it's gerrymandered into the Deal-Wilson catchment and just really far from the schools. Bancroft and O-A go to the dual language high schools, because duh. It's a waste of money to not send them there.

Shepherd and Lafayette will both be re-assigned at the same time for the purposes of political optics/CYA. They can't remove a school with UMC children of color (Shepherd) without removing a school filled with UMC white kids (Lafayette). Both or none.

And the sooner this happens the better.

I have a better suggestion: let’s split up DCPS into several autonomous local school districts. Then each one can decide how rigorous the curriculum needs to be, whether to track students academically or not, whether to spend funds on enrichment programs or instead on “esteem specialists,” and whether to have highly selective faculty hiring or rather to view the public schools as an employer of first resort and lifetime tenure for the “community.” Let’s devolve decision-making authority, and kids can go to their local schools where each such district makes its educational preferences heard through its elected school board. Then we can all give “DC political optics” a swift kick in the booty.

That's how DCPS operated until Brown vs. Board of Education. There were two school systems, each with its own superintendent, school board, facilities, staff and curriculum. As an easy mnemonic to keep them straight they were color-coded, one was called the "white" system and the other the "black" system.

Don’t you get tired of paying high taxes so that some two-bit councilmembers can use your kids’ schools as political pawns? Meanwhile the hacks and wannabe SJWs waste money on crony consultants and politically connected desk-riders, as opposed to putting more $$ directly into the classroom. Why not break up DCPS into smaller units that are more accountable to student needs and parent priorities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We don't have to choose among Shepherd, Lafayette, Bancroft, and Oyster. They should ALL have different feeder patterns: the former two to Wells and Coolidge and the latter two to MacFarland and Roosevelt.

Agree. If they move schools out of Deal-Wilson, it will be a bunch of schools so none of them can say they were targeted.

Bancroft is an obvious choice, since it's gerrymandered into the Deal-Wilson catchment and just really far from the schools. Bancroft and O-A go to the dual language high schools, because duh. It's a waste of money to not send them there.

Shepherd and Lafayette will both be re-assigned at the same time for the purposes of political optics/CYA. They can't remove a school with UMC children of color (Shepherd) without removing a school filled with UMC white kids (Lafayette). Both or none.

And the sooner this happens the better.

I have a better suggestion: let’s split up DCPS into several autonomous local school districts. Then each one can decide how rigorous the curriculum needs to be, whether to track students academically or not, whether to spend funds on enrichment programs or instead on “esteem specialists,” and whether to have highly selective faculty hiring or rather to view the public schools as an employer of first resort and lifetime tenure for the “community.” Let’s devolve decision-making authority, and kids can go to their local schools where each such district makes its educational preferences heard through its elected school board. Then we can all give “DC political optics” a swift kick in the booty.

That's how DCPS operated until Brown vs. Board of Education. There were two school systems, each with its own superintendent, school board, facilities, staff and curriculum. As an easy mnemonic to keep them straight they were color-coded, one was called the "white" system and the other the "black" system.

Don’t you get tired of paying high taxes so that some two-bit councilmembers can use your kids’ schools as political pawns? Meanwhile the hacks and wannabe SJWs waste money on crony consultants and politically connected desk-riders, as opposed to putting more $$ directly into the classroom. Why not break up DCPS into smaller units that are more accountable to student needs and parent priorities?

It would be separate but equal all over again.

I'm old enough to have seen DCPS run by a school board, a superintendent who reported to the Control Board, an elected school board, and a chancellor who reports to the mayor. When DCPS was run by a board the complaint was that responsibility was decentralized, when it was run by an appointed official the complaint has been that the leadership is too unresponsive. I don't believe that what ails DCPS is a question of how it is organized.

[Anonymous]

Why do Lafayette (or any other parent communities WoTP) feel that they have some special leverage? Those of us EoTP, who are already attending local MS’s, would buy your house if it were affordable (due to perceived decline in value) and gladly attend the new Wells MS. No different than what we’re doing now, just a nicer house/hood....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We don't have to choose among Shepherd, Lafayette, Bancroft, and Oyster. They should ALL have different feeder patterns: the former two to Wells and Coolidge and the latter two to MacFarland and Roosevelt.

Agree. If they move schools out of Deal-Wilson, it will be a bunch of schools so none of them can say they were targeted.

Bancroft is an obvious choice, since it's gerrymandered into the Deal-Wilson catchment and just really far from the schools. Bancroft and O-A go to the dual language high schools, because duh. It's a waste of money to not send them there.

Shepherd and Lafayette will both be re-assigned at the same time for the purposes of political optics/CYA. They can't remove a school with UMC children of color (Shepherd) without removing a school filled with UMC white kids (Lafayette). Both or none.

And the sooner this happens the better.

I have a better suggestion: let’s split up DCPS into several autonomous local school districts. Then each one can decide how rigorous the curriculum needs to be, whether to track students academically or not, whether to spend funds on enrichment programs or instead on “esteem specialists,” and whether to have highly selective faculty hiring or rather to view the public schools as an employer of first resort and lifetime tenure for the “community.” Let’s devolve decision-making authority, and kids can go to their local schools where each such district makes its educational preferences heard through its elected school board. Then we can all give “DC political optics” a swift kick in the booty.

That's how DCPS operated until Brown vs. Board of Education. There were two school systems, each with its own superintendent, school board, facilities, staff and curriculum. As an easy mnemonic to keep them straight they were color-coded, one was called the "white" system and the other the "black" system.

Don’t you get tired of paying high taxes so that some two-bit councilmembers can use your kids’ schools as political pawns? Meanwhile the hacks and wannabe SJWs waste money on crony consultants and politically connected desk-riders, as opposed to putting more $$ directly into the classroom. Why not break up DCPS into smaller units that are more accountable to student needs and parent priorities?

This is silly talk.

Deal & Wilson are over crowded because they are popular not because of some issues with two bit councilmembers.

Again how do you propose to deal with the over crowding at Deal & Wilson?

Breaking DCPS up into smaller units will not solve the over crowding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to chill. I’m a PP and I’ll repeat what I said. The review is not until ‘22 and won’t really begin until ,23. That means nothing will be finalized until ‘25 and there is always a lengthy grandfathering period. So no real changes will happen for 8-10 years. Won’t most of your kids be through Deal and onto Wilson? Why the angst for something that isn’t set in stone and is so far out?

Well then the angst should be due to City leaders not confronting and dealing with a crises for Wilson that is 2.5 years away.

This thread highlights why everyone is happy to kick the can down the road 5 more years (at best).

And maybe it won't be a crises when Wilson has over 3,000 kids in 5 years while other DCPS high schools struggle along with enrollments under 500 but somehow that would surprise me.

[Anonymous]

I love all the bitching on this thread from Lafayette parents who don't want their kids to be "social experiments" by being required to travel a couple of extra minutes by car to the next closest Middle School to where they live.

Those parents are going to be in shock when they find out how diverse and wild Deal actually is.

I am loathe to make this suggestion but how about this - the new Wells MS will be limited in its first 3 years to just the populations from Lafayette and Shepherd with no available OOB slots. Assuming that got a pretty high buy in from Lafayette and Shepherd that gets you classes of about 175 per grade and is enough to get Deal at least back under its capacity.

And then Wells is a school that is far whiter and far more UMC than Deal has ever been - would Lafayette parents deign to take their imported cars on Military Road for such a deal?

[Anonymous]

On a related note, how would decreasing enrollment at Deal affect its budget? The per pupil finding would decrease. What current specials and services would have to be cut?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love all the bitching on this thread from Lafayette parents who don't want their kids to be "social experiments" by being required to travel a couple of extra minutes by car to the next closest Middle School to where they live.

Those parents are going to be in shock when they find out how diverse and wild Deal actually is.

I am loathe to make this suggestion but how about this - the new Wells MS will be limited in its first 3 years to just the populations from Lafayette and Shepherd with no available OOB slots. Assuming that got a pretty high buy in from Lafayette and Shepherd that gets you classes of about 175 per grade and is enough to get Deal at least back under its capacity.

And then Wells is a school that is far whiter and far more UMC than Deal has ever been - would Lafayette parents deign to take their imported cars on Military Road for such a deal?

Ignoring other issues with this idea, there are other poorly performing schools that feed to Wells. I don't see how they could just be cut out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love all the bitching on this thread from Lafayette parents who don't want their kids to be "social experiments" by being required to travel a couple of extra minutes by car to the next closest Middle School to where they live.

Those parents are going to be in shock when they find out how diverse and wild Deal actually is.

I am loathe to make this suggestion but how about this - the new Wells MS will be limited in its first 3 years to just the populations from Lafayette and Shepherd with no available OOB slots. Assuming that got a pretty high buy in from Lafayette and Shepherd that gets you classes of about 175 per grade and is enough to get Deal at least back under its capacity.

And then Wells is a school that is far whiter and far more UMC than Deal has ever been - would Lafayette parents deign to take their imported cars on Military Road for such a deal?

Ignoring other issues with this idea, there are other poorly performing schools that feed to Wells. I don't see how they could just be cut out.

Exactly. Wells has 4 feeders with no other middle school (~250 students). The 6th grades at those schools will be at Wells next year. Their old classrooms at their ECs are being replaced with new PK classes. Wells is not there for wealthy white families to annex, no matter how crowded Deal is.

The reality is and will be that current Deal feeder students will not move en masse to one place.

[Anonymous]

So let’s assume Wells captures 2/3 of its current IB students.

Thats 180x3=540 total students.

Shepherd would add another ~100-120 and Lafayette another ~200.

So we have now exceeded the size of Hardy and are on the way to creating another Deal.

[Anonymous]

I don’t want my car to be a social experiment! Ban the Bikeshare and push the speed limits up! I don’t want my kid to be a social experiment - no curriculum changes! Segregation forever! No social experiments - never change tax rates! No social experiments - don’t change maternity leave or employers will all go broke! So much for liberal DC. Every complainer here about change or potential change is a conservative and against hope and change.

Schools are a key part of the community and don’t work well enough. I’m sick of the conservative haves who give lip service to social progress deciding they will try to veto anything that could change their lives and calling it a ‘social experiment.’

[Anonymous]

Again, this is not a conservative or racist view - I do not want my 9 year old to be on the front lines of tackling generational poverty. End of story. It is not their responsibility, and it seems like a lot of the SJWers on here are trying to make that so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Again, this is not a conservative or racist view - I do not want my 9 year old to be on the front lines of tackling generational poverty. End of story. It is not their responsibility, and it seems like a lot of the SJWers on here are trying to make that so.

"Front lines". Well then who will? This is not a great line of argument. You make it sound like it will be only them, alone. They'll be the Ruby Bridges of our day.

[Anonymous]

It really bothers me that people feel sending their kids to school with minorities is a “social experiment.” This all sounds like the same arguments from school integration. These are people we are talking about. They might be poor but they’re still people who are trying to get their kids through school too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, this is not a conservative or racist view - I do not want my 9 year old to be on the front lines of tackling generational poverty. End of story. It is not their responsibility, and it seems like a lot of the SJWers on here are trying to make that so.

"Front lines". Well then who will? This is not a great line of argument. You make it sound like it will be only them, alone. They'll be the Ruby Bridges of our day.

Front line?! We are going with war analogies now. Agree with PP you need to think more about the crap you’re posting.