Northwest current article on school boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feeders are important to schools. Having feeders only come from similar profile neighborhoods is completely not cool. It is segregation--economic and otherwise.
What is one factor that makes Deal and Wilson so successful is that it IS diverse --both racially and by income. The thought that Wilson should be a school serving only ward 3 students is absurd. Especially in a city as diverse as DC is.

And yet with feeder patterns the schools manage to self-segregate at lower levels, even where families have choice. Don't know where you get "similar profile neighborhoods" -- draw a map around any given school and that's its neighborhood. It should just have greater weight than using the arcane feeders to achieve a social goal. The boundaries are skewed to accomodate feeders when it should be the other way around.

Let's flip that argument around. Eastern has diversity in its catchment neighborhood yet 100% AA kids. The successful and competitive Banneker and McKinnley are test in and still essentially segregated with virtually no white kids. It's not ok for one school to be de facto segregated based purely on neighborhood demographics but not ok for others? By your logic of creating diversity, shouldn't Ward 3 kids get bussed to other Wards too?

Regardless, some of the Ward 4 Wilson feeders are going to be changed whether some people like it or not. It didn't expand enough and it's bursting at the seams. Maybe Wards 3 & 4 will get another good HS option. Some of us would settle for one.

Your logic is flawed. Banneker and McKinley are segregated b/c white parents don't sent their kids there, not because something prevents them from going.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"white-like" people?

Seriously? I guess that would mean that being an AA, upper middle-class, double-ivy graduate makes me "white-like"?

Racist and highly-offensive, plain and simple.

Exactly, what the hell does that mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feeders are important to schools. Having feeders only come from similar profile neighborhoods is completely not cool. It is segregation--economic and otherwise.
What is one factor that makes Deal and Wilson so successful is that it IS diverse --both racially and by income. The thought that Wilson should be a school serving only ward 3 students is absurd. Especially in a city as diverse as DC is.

And yet with feeder patterns the schools manage to self-segregate at lower levels, even where families have choice. Don't know where you get "similar profile neighborhoods" -- draw a map around any given school and that's its neighborhood. It should just have greater weight than using the arcane feeders to achieve a social goal. The boundaries are skewed to accomodate feeders when it should be the other way around.

Let's flip that argument around. Eastern has diversity in its catchment neighborhood yet 100% AA kids. The successful and competitive Banneker and McKinnley are test in and still essentially segregated with virtually no white kids. It's not ok for one school to be de facto segregated based purely on neighborhood demographics but not ok for others? By your logic of creating diversity, shouldn't Ward 3 kids get bussed to other Wards too?

Regardless, some of the Ward 4 Wilson feeders are going to be changed whether some people like it or not. It didn't expand enough and it's bursting at the seams. Maybe Wards 3 & 4 will get another good HS option. Some of us would settle for one.

Your logic is flawed. Banneker and McKinley are segregated b/c white parents don't sent their kids there, not because something prevents them from going.

BS -- who prevents anyone from living IB for Wilson? Wilson's boundary already geographically covers 1/3 of the District, including all of SW. Some of that may be pricey, but who "prevents" anyone from living anywhere? This isn't South Boston in the 70s.

And that misses the point on Banneker and McKinley -- both are test-in and meritocritous, right? why is SWW the only test in that draws white kids? they're all self selecting in their own ways, kind of like choosing where you desire or can afford to live. It also doesn't begin to address Eastern. Cap Hill's high school doesn't enroll a single caucasion kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feeders are important to schools. Having feeders only come from similar profile neighborhoods is completely not cool. It is segregation--economic and otherwise.
What is one factor that makes Deal and Wilson so successful is that it IS diverse --both racially and by income. The thought that Wilson should be a school serving only ward 3 students is absurd. Especially in a city as diverse as DC is.

And yet with feeder patterns the schools manage to self-segregate at lower levels, even where families have choice. Don't know where you get "similar profile neighborhoods" -- draw a map around any given school and that's its neighborhood. It should just have greater weight than using the arcane feeders to achieve a social goal. The boundaries are skewed to accomodate feeders when it should be the other way around.

Let's flip that argument around. Eastern has diversity in its catchment neighborhood yet 100% AA kids. The successful and competitive Banneker and McKinnley are test in and still essentially segregated with virtually no white kids. It's not ok for one school to be de facto segregated based purely on neighborhood demographics but not ok for others? By your logic of creating diversity, shouldn't Ward 3 kids get bussed to other Wards too?

Regardless, some of the Ward 4 Wilson feeders are going to be changed whether some people like it or not. It didn't expand enough and it's bursting at the seams. Maybe Wards 3 & 4 will get another good HS option. Some of us would settle for one.

Your logic is flawed. Banneker and McKinley are segregated b/c white parents don't sent their kids there, not because something prevents them from going.

BS -- who prevents anyone from living IB for Wilson? Wilson's boundary already geographically covers 1/3 of the District, including all of SW. Some of that may be pricey, but who "prevents" anyone from living anywhere? This isn't South Boston in the 70s.

And that misses the point on Banneker and McKinley -- both are test-in and meritocritous, right? why is SWW the only test in that draws white kids? they're all self selecting in their own ways, kind of like choosing where you desire or can afford to live. It also doesn't begin to address Eastern. Cap Hill's high school doesn't enroll a single caucasion kid?

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Not really. Kill OOB feeders, retain neighborhood boundaries, and require lottery for OOB students at each school (ES, MS, HS). DCPS is so worried about cohorts, but with charter options the cohorts are scattering anyway. The feeders feel more like social engineering more than any practical solution.

Exactly. Plus, the only middle school that has meaningful cohorts anyway is Deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feeders are important to schools. Having feeders only come from similar profile neighborhoods is completely not cool. It is segregation--economic and otherwise.
What is one factor that makes Deal and Wilson so successful is that it IS diverse --both racially and by income. The thought that Wilson should be a school serving only ward 3 students is absurd. Especially in a city as diverse as DC is.

And yet with feeder patterns the schools manage to self-segregate at lower levels, even where families have choice. Don't know where you get "similar profile neighborhoods" -- draw a map around any given school and that's its neighborhood. It should just have greater weight than using the arcane feeders to achieve a social goal. The boundaries are skewed to accomodate feeders when it should be the other way around.

Let's flip that argument around. Eastern has diversity in its catchment neighborhood yet 100% AA kids. The successful and competitive Banneker and McKinnley are test in and still essentially segregated with virtually no white kids. It's not ok for one school to be de facto segregated based purely on neighborhood demographics but not ok for others? By your logic of creating diversity, shouldn't Ward 3 kids get bussed to other Wards too?

Regardless, some of the Ward 4 Wilson feeders are going to be changed whether some people like it or not. It didn't expand enough and it's bursting at the seams. Maybe Wards 3 & 4 will get another good HS option. Some of us would settle for one.

Your logic is flawed. Banneker and McKinley are segregated b/c white parents don't sent their kids there, not because something prevents them from going.

BS -- who prevents anyone from living IB for Wilson? Wilson's boundary already geographically covers 1/3 of the District, including all of SW. Some of that may be pricey, but who "prevents" anyone from living anywhere? This isn't South Boston in the 70s.

And that misses the point on Banneker and McKinley -- both are test-in and meritocritous, right? why is SWW the only test in that draws white kids? they're all self selecting in their own ways, kind of like choosing where you desire or can afford to live. It also doesn't begin to address Eastern. Cap Hill's high school doesn't enroll a single caucasion kid?

I don't know why SWW has white kids other than it is on GW's campus and Banneker is across the street from Howard. I guess that's a big deal for white parents. I think the white kids at Banneker are happy. My son's best friend at Banneker is white.

[Anonymous]

Nothing in this thread was informative except for the fact that there are people in this town who would love to dig a moat around Ward 3 schools and pull up the draw bridge to anyone outside of the neighborhood. Good luck with that.

BTW, it was the OOB families that kept some of these schools viable for years. That was certainly true at Deal.

I will say this though - and it will not be popular with friends: If geographic logic entered the conversation, the only schools that should feed to Deal are Janney, Murch and Layfayette. Mann, Key, Hyde and Hearst should feed to Hardy. Oyster children should stay at Oyster until HS. Shepherd should feed to Takoma EC. Crestwood to West or MacFarland. Bancroft should feed to Lincoln.

The above will not provide any diversity at Deal, but didn't you buy your house so that you wouldn't have to rub shoulders with certain people?

[Anonymous]

^ I forgot Eaton! Eaton should feed to Hardy too. The only swing school is maybe Hearst.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nothing in this thread was informative except for the fact that there are people in this town who would love to dig a moat around Ward 3 schools and pull up the draw bridge to anyone outside of the neighborhood. Good luck with that.

BTW, it was the OOB families that kept some of these schools viable for years. That was certainly true at Deal.

I will say this though - and it will not be popular with friends: If geographic logic entered the conversation, the only schools that should feed to Deal are Janney, Murch and Layfayette. Mann, Key, Hyde and Hearst should feed to Hardy. Oyster children should stay at Oyster until HS. Shepherd should feed to Takoma EC. Crestwood to West or MacFarland. Bancroft should feed to Lincoln.

The above will not provide any diversity at Deal, but didn't you buy your house so that you wouldn't have to rub shoulders with certain people?

Yes, but it's not the certain people who you think. You're thinking "skin tone" and I was thinking "school readiness" and "ambition" when we signed the loan docs. As long as those stay high, I personally don't care about which box gets checked on the census.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing in this thread was informative except for the fact that there are people in this town who would love to dig a moat around Ward 3 schools and pull up the draw bridge to anyone outside of the neighborhood. Good luck with that.

BTW, it was the OOB families that kept some of these schools viable for years. That was certainly true at Deal.

I will say this though - and it will not be popular with friends: If geographic logic entered the conversation, the only schools that should feed to Deal are Janney, Murch and Layfayette. Mann, Key, Hyde and Hearst should feed to Hardy. Oyster children should stay at Oyster until HS. Shepherd should feed to Takoma EC. Crestwood to West or MacFarland. Bancroft should feed to Lincoln.

The above will not provide any diversity at Deal, but didn't you buy your house so that you wouldn't have to rub shoulders with certain people?

Yes, but it's not the certain people who you think. You're thinking "skin tone" and I was thinking "school readiness" and "ambition" when we signed the loan docs. As long as those stay high, I personally don't care about which box gets checked on the census.

Except that is not how it plays in the end. We have parents in this town who will do back flips to avoid a school - even if it has a healthy number of students who are "ready" or high performing - if the wrong skin tone numbers tip over a certain percentage. I can name names if you want.

This city holds on to its segregation tightly, and I am almost at the point of not caring anymore. It may actually be a good thing to force people to embrace the schools that are geographically closest. I only hope that it won't result in what a PP posters predicted - White Flight II.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nothing in this thread was informative except for the fact that there are people in this town who would love to dig a moat around Ward 3 schools and pull up the draw bridge to anyone outside of the neighborhood. Good luck with that.

BTW, it was the OOB families that kept some of these schools viable for years. That was certainly true at Deal.

I will say this though - and it will not be popular with friends: If geographic logic entered the conversation, the only schools that should feed to Deal are Janney, Murch and Layfayette. Mann, Key, Hyde and Hearst should feed to Hardy. Oyster children should stay at Oyster until HS. Shepherd should feed to Takoma EC. Crestwood to West or MacFarland. Bancroft should feed to Lincoln.

The above will not provide any diversity at Deal, but didn't you buy your house so that you wouldn't have to rub shoulders with certain people?

PP here -- not only do I stand by my previous statement, but I fully support the idea of any or all of Mann, Key, Hyde, and/or Hearst feeding Hardy. The lines shoudl be drawn for the neighborhood catchments, whatever the resulting demographics.

I don't care if there's a moat around Ward 3 -- I'd be on the outside and still support that.

[Anonymous]

Note that Mann, Key and Hyde already feed Hardy.

[Anonymous]

^ And note that those who live in boundary for Hardy go elsewhere. Some manage to get into Deal. I wonder how that happened...

[Anonymous]

So, set aside the diversity discussion for a moment...Purely from a numbers-crunching perspective (16:05) would limiting Deal to Janney, Murch and Layfayette solve the overcrowding there?
16:05 "I will say this though - and it will not be popular with friends: If geographic logic entered the conversation, the only schools that should feed to Deal are Janney, Murch and Layfayette. "

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing in this thread was informative except for the fact that there are people in this town who would love to dig a moat around Ward 3 schools and pull up the draw bridge to anyone outside of the neighborhood. Good luck with that.

BTW, it was the OOB families that kept some of these schools viable for years. That was certainly true at Deal.

I will say this though - and it will not be popular with friends: If geographic logic entered the conversation, the only schools that should feed to Deal are Janney, Murch and Layfayette. Mann, Key, Hyde and Hearst should feed to Hardy. Oyster children should stay at Oyster until HS. Shepherd should feed to Takoma EC. Crestwood to West or MacFarland. Bancroft should feed to Lincoln.

The above will not provide any diversity at Deal, but didn't you buy your house so that you wouldn't have to rub shoulders with certain people?

Yes, but it's not the certain people who you think. You're thinking "skin tone" and I was thinking "school readiness" and "ambition" when we signed the loan docs. As long as those stay high, I personally don't care about which box gets checked on the census.

Except that is not how it plays in the end. We have parents in this town who will do back flips to avoid a school - even if it has a healthy number of students who are "ready" or high performing - if the wrong skin tone numbers tip over a certain percentage. I can name names if you want.

This city holds on to its segregation tightly, and I am almost at the point of not caring anymore. It may actually be a good thing to force people to embrace the schools that are geographically closest. I only hope that it won't result in what a PP posters predicted - White Flight II.

The only segregation we have in DC is segregation by income/education level. There's a mapping from SES class to color, but it only runs in one direction. All the poor people in DC are black, but all the middle-class and above are by no means white. The people who claim there's a racist dynamic at work are just trying to game the system.

And, just to be clear, it's America that holds on to its segregation tightly.