Petition to keep School-Within-School (SWS) a true neighborhood school!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It just makes me very sad that my son has vitually no chance of attending a good school that is next to our house. If the only option is L-T he will be going to private school instead...

Well, you are lucky that you can afford private. Many of us have crappy DCPS options and can't afford private. Having SWS be city-wide gives everyone a chance to get in. Your argument is the same that I hear from people who live near sought-after charters.

+1

+2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reverse ghetto argument is ridiculous. The schools close to Goding are already very expensive.

Really? I mean, I do think that 500-800k is expensive, but it isn't compared to a lot of houses in bounds for Brent. Our house, close to Goding, would sell now for $650k, max. And it's 3 beds, 2 baths, good condition. And a big yard and a basement. There is no way you'd find a house like that, for that price, in bounds for Brent, or Janney, or Murch, or any other very strong DC school. If we could suddenly pin a guaranteed admission to SWS on our house, it would probably add 150k to the price.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of you who are trying to compare this situation to charters or other citywide schools are off-base. This is the first time that DCPS has taken away the neighborhood status of a school and made it citywide. There's no reason that giving SWS neighborhood preference would create some sort of precedent. This school has already been treated differently than every other school in the city.

As a Hill resident, I think it's unfair that one of our good options was essentially removed from our neighborhood. You may choose not to cry for Hill school options, but there's ample evidence (see: wait lists at Maury, Peabody, Brent) that the neighborhood is still short of good preschool and elementary school options. There's no good reason that SWS should have been removed as a neighborhood school. Yes, there are other areas of the city that underserved. But making the 12 open seats in preschool citywide really isn't going to solve that problem.

Somebody call the WAHMBULANCE. Peabody INCREASED its capacity with SWS gone. So you haven't lost total number of seats at good schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we make all the schools west of the Park neighborhood-only please? Thank you!

They already are. The only citywide DCPS schools (NOT charter) are on the Hill - Montessori @ Logan and SWS. Every other DCPS school has an inbounds catchment with an additional preference for those within 1500 feet from the school.

But for some reason Hill dwellers should have no problem with this.

Possibly because Hill dwellers have more IB schools than can be filled with IB students, ergo there's no justification for the Hill to have yet another one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you who are trying to compare this situation to charters or other citywide schools are off-base. This is the first time that DCPS has taken away the neighborhood status of a school and made it citywide. There's no reason that giving SWS neighborhood preference would create some sort of precedent. This school has already been treated differently than every other school in the city.

As a Hill resident, I think it's unfair that one of our good options was essentially removed from our neighborhood. You may choose not to cry for Hill school options, but there's ample evidence (see: wait lists at Maury, Peabody, Brent) that the neighborhood is still short of good preschool and elementary school options. There's no good reason that SWS should have been removed as a neighborhood school. Yes, there are other areas of the city that underserved. But making the 12 open seats in preschool citywide really isn't going to solve that problem.

Somebody call the WAHMBULANCE. Peabody INCREASED its capacity with SWS gone. So you haven't lost total number of seats at good schools.

Exactly.

Could someone refresh my memory what happened with seats at Watkins?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm an SWS parent and love the neighborhood feeling of the school. And by chance, we own a house that would be given neighborhood preference, so it would probably increase the value of our property. But I just can't imagine a single reason that neighborhood preference is good public policy. It would create a bizarre reverse-ghetto of very high-priced houses right around the school. And it would seriously harm L-T, which seems to be a promising school.

Is there a "bizarre reverse-ghetto" on the line between, say, Brent and Tyler? I hadn't noticed.

You haven't noticed that houses inbounds for Brent sell for a premium? Because all the realtors seem to have. Do you really believe that neighborhood preference wouldn't affect property values?

That's not entirely due to the school situation; houses around Brent were more expensive than those around Tyler long before Brent became impossible to get into OOB. (I'm talking since the '70s.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm an SWS parent and love the neighborhood feeling of the school. And by chance, we own a house that would be given neighborhood preference, so it would probably increase the value of our property. But I just can't imagine a single reason that neighborhood preference is good public policy. It would create a bizarre reverse-ghetto of very high-priced houses right around the school. And it would seriously harm L-T, which seems to be a promising school.

Is there a "bizarre reverse-ghetto" on the line between, say, Brent and Tyler? I hadn't noticed.

You haven't noticed that houses inbounds for Brent sell for a premium? Because all the realtors seem to have. Do you really believe that neighborhood preference wouldn't affect property values?

That's not entirely due to the school situation; houses around Brent were more expensive than those around Tyler long before Brent became impossible to get into OOB. (I'm talking since the '70s.)

Is "bizarre reverse-ghetto" code for gentrification?

[Anonymous]

I'm 15:32, and I have no idea what a "bizarre reverse-ghetto" is, it wasn't me who wrote that.

[Anonymous]

Has the decision about SWS proximity been tabled along with the rest of the DCPS boundary decisions?

[Anonymous]

You know what, SWS is an excellent option. My kids are too old, but when my oldest was little I tried to get her in and I would have schlepped her across the city had we somehow won a lottery spot. And I am and was in-boundary for a JKLM with which I am very happy. But what a fabulous early years program. I thought at the time it was a shame such a unique offerrng was a neighborhood school when it was really only the preschool years.

In concept (even thought I recognize it is a different time in a child's life), it comparable to some of the magnet type high schools and my opinion (no dog in this fight) is that it is great to open this up city wide.

So no, not signing your petition to keep this gem exclusive. All the parents that are trying to get their kids in will support the school and it has tremendous potential to be a city-wide success, something we need more of in DC. My experience with OOB parents that schlep their kids across the city for superior educational opportunities is that they care A LOT and will contribute to the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reverse ghetto argument is ridiculous. The schools close to Goding are already very expensive.

Really? I mean, I do think that 500-800k is expensive, but it isn't compared to a lot of houses in bounds for Brent. Our house, close to Goding, would sell now for $650k, max. And it's 3 beds, 2 baths, good condition. And a big yard and a basement. There is no way you'd find a house like that, for that price, in bounds for Brent, or Janney, or Murch, or any other very strong DC school. If we could suddenly pin a guaranteed admission to SWS on our house, it would probably add 150k to the price.

That's scientifically proven colossal load of dung. Look at CLUSTER IB houses which are every bit as absurdly priced at the Brent IB

[Anonymous]

Hill real estate is all over the place due to the incredible variation in houses. Where else do teeny 2BRs abut million-dollar corner Victorians? However, there is no doubt that school boundaries are among the many factors that influence price.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You know what, SWS is an excellent option. My kids are too old, but when my oldest was little I tried to get her in and I would have schlepped her across the city had we somehow won a lottery spot. And I am and was in-boundary for a JKLM with which I am very happy. But what a fabulous early years program. I thought at the time it was a shame such a unique offerrng was a neighborhood school when it was really only the preschool years.

In concept (even thought I recognize it is a different time in a child's life), it comparable to some of the magnet type high schools and my opinion (no dog in this fight) is that it is great to open this up city wide.

So no, not signing your petition to keep this gem exclusive. All the parents that are trying to get their kids in will support the school and it has tremendous potential to be a city-wide success, something we need more of in DC. My experience with OOB parents that schlep their kids across the city for superior educational opportunities is that they care A LOT and will contribute to the school.

Excellent point. For all the talk about the Hill and its boundaries, there are ample SWS families who never lived within the Cluster boundary but lotteried or waitlisted in at some point when they had the opportunity. Some of the most dedicated families do not live within the prior boundaries. As an SWS parent who lives within the old Cluster boundary, the proximity issue is totally overblown for its value to the school (which has officially remained neutral on the matter). The value is to the sliver of families who would benefit from proximity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You know what, SWS is an excellent option. My kids are too old, but when my oldest was little I tried to get her in and I would have schlepped her across the city had we somehow won a lottery spot. And I am and was in-boundary for a JKLM with which I am very happy. But what a fabulous early years program. I thought at the time it was a shame such a unique offerrng was a neighborhood school when it was really only the preschool years.

In concept (even thought I recognize it is a different time in a child's life), it comparable to some of the magnet type high schools and my opinion (no dog in this fight) is that it is great to open this up city wide.

So no, not signing your petition to keep this gem exclusive. All the parents that are trying to get their kids in will support the school and it has tremendous potential to be a city-wide success, something we need more of in DC. My experience with OOB parents that schlep their kids across the city for superior educational opportunities is that they care A LOT and will contribute to the school.

EXACTLY. So sick of this coded language on so many threads about OOB kids, and assumptions that "city wide" or OOB means inferior or uninvolved.

-involved, active Ward 4 schlepping charter parent

[Anonymous]

So if so many of you want to keep this "gem" citywide, why not make all DCPS citywide? If you schlep your kids across town from NW to go to this gem, why shouldn't the same opportunity be offered to Hill parents? Let's get rid of IB completely. That would be fair.