Mary Cheh's letter about school boundaries

[Anonymous]

As others have noted, there are only two schools in the city where over-crowding is seriously an issue, and that's Deal and Wilson. Both have substantial out-of-boundary populations -- Deal is at 35% and Wilson 48%. I believe that the crowding at both schools could be solved in a politically palatable way by adjusting the out-of-boundary feeder school preference -- make it a preference, not a right. It has only existed as a right since 2008.

Currently Deal has 1165 students, capacity is 900 and 35% are OOB. That means currently there are roughly 410 OOB and 755 IB kids there. Deal has not admitted any OOB kids at sixth grade for several years, so presumably all of the OOB kids there now came through feeder schools. If you had a lottery at sixth grade for OOB kids and limited it to actual available seats, you'd end up with about 145 OOB kids, which means about 35% of the OOB kids in feeder schools would get in. There would be about 90 kids a year who wouldn't get into Deal, but I can't see them forming a cohesive political force. The lottery would create a possibility of getting in which would keep people off balance, and those who did get in would become powerful supporters of the status quo. You see this already with the lottery.

With anxiety about shrinking Deal and Wilson taken out of the picture, you could get down to the real business of redistricting, which is rationalizing the number and location of schools. For that you wouldn't have any grandfathering, once a school is closed it's closed. DCPS would be able to act much more quickly, and achieve the goal of being able to react to demographic shift in a timely manner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
In boundary Hardy families don't go to Hardy. Well, only 14% of them do. So no amount of boundary shifting will affect them, they make choices outside of the feeder pattern. Unless, of course, Mary Cheh wants to feed them to Deal. At whose expense?

actually you have no idea what % of inboundary families go to Hardy. 14% is calculated based on Hardy population - not what the possible population is.

It may be 2 very different numbers.

[Anonymous]

I see your point. Two different sets of numbers. There may not be enough in boundary students to fill all available seats, but of the available seats, 14% are filled with IB students. I get it.

In contrast to those numbers. The ib percentages for the ward 3 elementary schools that feed Hardy are: Mann-83%, Stoddert 76%, Key 87%.

The numbers seem to indicate that the in boundary families send their kids to the ib DCPS elementary schools but not to the ib DCPS middle school.

[Anonymous]

Mann and another school down that way need to feed into Hardy. Don't go after Bancroft and Shepherd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I see your point. Two different sets of numbers. There may not be enough in boundary students to fill all available seats, but of the available seats, 14% are filled with IB students. I get it.

In contrast to those numbers. The ib percentages for the ward 3 elementary schools that feed Hardy are: Mann-83%, Stoddert 76%, Key 87%.

The numbers seem to indicate that the in boundary families send their kids to the ib DCPS elementary schools but not to the ib DCPS middle school.

You've hit onto something, but it's not what you think you've hit onto.

Compare Hardy with Deal. Deal has an official capacity of 980. It has eight feeder schools -- Eaton, Hearst, Janney, Oyster, Bancroft, Lafayette, Shepherd -- that had a combined population of 3,837 in 2010-2011. That's almost four students in the feeder schools for each slot in the middle school. Hardy has official capacity of 540 and four feeder schools -- Key, Mann, Stoddert and Hyde-Addison -- with a combined population of 911 -- about 1.7 kids in the feeder school for each space in middle school.

Deal has about two and half times as many kids in its feeder schools relative to its size as Hardy does. Deal is 35% OOB. If Hardy had the same percentage of IB kids attend as Deal it would be about 25% IB. There is no room for growth in the Hardy feeder schools -- Key was 14% over capacity last year, Stoddert 8% and Mann 30%. It's numerically impossible for Hardy to become a neighborhood school.

[Anonymous]

It's numerically impossible for Hardy to become a neighborhood school.



Please give us your definition of "neighborhood school", I always thought it meant "the school in your neighborhood".

Does it have to be at least 75% ib for KSM to deem it acceptable?

[Anonymous]

Any thoughts on why Cheh specifically mentioned Lafayette and Deal in the letter? Is it because there was another article written about these 2 schools in the same paper? Or because the parents at Lafayette are already getting feisty/motivated over the discussion?

From Cheh: "My bill does not propose any substantive changes to boundaries or feeders for any school, including Lafayette Elementary School and Deal Middle School."

[Anonymous]

The attempt is the only valiant thing that will be accomplished. Don't you think that each and every superintendent/chancellor attempted but it is the IMPLEMENTATION that will be the cat's meow. This is more political that public school hoopla. We all know a good school board rep of a large school boundary is destined to be a councilmember and/or Mayor.

The web of deceit.

[Anonymous]

"The real mystery is, what is DCPS going to do about it? What are the boundary options? How can overcrowding be alleviated? The same NW Current ran an article about how successful Lafayette and Deal have been despite having large numbers of children."

It's not a secret where they are heading. Janney will be re-zoned, likely some kids into the extra space that Mann will have and some into Hearst. Deal will be mostly WOTP kids.

[Anonymous]

I am just thinking out loud, wouldn't this start a dominoe effect?

[Anonymous]

I think Cheh is setting up a study to tell us all what we already know - that the system we have of sending as many kids as possible to the too-few successful middle schools from all corners of the District is not a great long-term strategy.

Then, study in hand, she can move forward toward rationalizing the boundaries in a way that best suits her Ward, pointing toward the study, not her Ward's preferences, as justification. This ain't new. Anybody here ever work on the Hill?

Perhaps this is a move toward a more rational, logical policy for the District, but I doubt it is best for the kids at the time it is implemented. I know Ms. Cheh might feel sorry for the kids who don't get to go to high-functioning middle schools, but in the end she is looking out for the Ward she represents.

My alternative is this: once there's a comparably successful middle school for kids to attend, you can change the feeder patterns. Until then, we continue with the ugly-looking system we've got. Keep the pressure on the west-of-the-Park wards to have them participate in development of a better system. Don't just allow them to opt into their own self-contained school ecosystem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any thoughts on why Cheh specifically mentioned Lafayette and Deal in the letter? Is it because there was another article written about these 2 schools in the same paper? Or because the parents at Lafayette are already getting feisty/motivated over the discussion?

From Cheh: "My bill does not propose any substantive changes to boundaries or feeders for any school, including Lafayette Elementary School and Deal Middle School."

Yes, Lafayette families who might be rezoned are worried about where their kids would go and the impact on home values. Bowser mostly represents those that would be affected and she has indicated that she will fight to keep the feeder. Bowsers ward (4) ends at Lafayette (broad branch rd) but includes a large part east of the park.

[Anonymous]

Just curious. Has anyone discussed the over crowding problems with any teachers or administrators off the record? My DC attends Wilson and much of her DCPS education, she has been in classes ranging from 22 to 35 students per class. She has done well so far. Those that are concerned about the over crowding situation in a urban school system, I empathize with your plight. But, being from NYC, my experience with large class sizes was normal. Of course, by the time I attended college(1984), most of my classes were held in auditorium size classrooms. I'm sure if this was a perfect DCPS world, there would be 10:1 student to teacher ratio. That dog won't hunt. As the population of DC increases, DC school enrollment will increase. I do see a dilemma with the establish DC residents that live in Upper NW and the new residents that live in Adams Morgan, Petworth, U st or Trinidad. That is going to cause friction with some folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As others have noted, there are only two schools in the city where over-crowding is seriously an issue, and that's Deal and Wilson. Both have substantial out-of-boundary populations -- Deal is at 35% and Wilson 48%. I believe that the crowding at both schools could be solved in a politically palatable way by adjusting the out-of-boundary feeder school preference -- make it a preference, not a right. It has only existed as a right since 2008.

Currently Deal has 1165 students, capacity is 900 and 35% are OOB. That means currently there are roughly 410 OOB and 755 IB kids there. Deal has not admitted any OOB kids at sixth grade for several years, so presumably all of the OOB kids there now came through feeder schools. If you had a lottery at sixth grade for OOB kids and limited it to actual available seats, you'd end up with about 145 OOB kids, which means about 35% of the OOB kids in feeder schools would get in. There would be about 90 kids a year who wouldn't get into Deal, but I can't see them forming a cohesive political force. The lottery would create a possibility of getting in which would keep people off balance, and those who did get in would become powerful supporters of the status quo. You see this already with the lottery.

With anxiety about shrinking Deal and Wilson taken out of the picture, you could get down to the real business of redistricting, which is rationalizing the number and location of schools. For that you wouldn't have any grandfathering, once a school is closed it's closed. DCPS would be able to act much more quickly, and achieve the goal of being able to react to demographic shift in a timely manner.

Excellent idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just curious. Has anyone discussed the over crowding problems with any teachers or administrators off the record? My DC attends Wilson and much of her DCPS education, she has been in classes ranging from 22 to 35 students per class. She has done well so far. Those that are concerned about the over crowding situation in a urban school system, I empathize with your plight. But, being from NYC, my experience with large class sizes was normal. Of course, by the time I attended college(1984), most of my classes were held in auditorium size classrooms. I'm sure if this was a perfect DCPS world, there would be 10:1 student to teacher ratio. That dog won't hunt. As the population of DC increases, DC school enrollment will increase. I do see a dilemma with the establish DC residents that live in Upper NW and the new residents that live in Adams Morgan, Petworth, U st or Trinidad. That is going to cause friction with some folks.

I think there does need to be more information shared about the overcrowding situation at Wilson. We've experienced classes on the larger side during our time at DCPS too. But what gives me pause about Wilson is the size of the AP classes and more generally the ability of Wilson's administration to handle large numbers of students. There is some benefit to having more students simply that it equals more money, but how is that money put to use? I'm not expecting a 10:1 ratio just class sizes that are reasonable. I've heard there are classes with 40+ kids in them.