Boundary question

[Anonymous]

Murch will not be "grandfathered" PPs. That's the wrong use of that word.

"Grandfather" means a change will occur but that ____ won't be subject to that change for a specific period of time.

Murch will never, ever, ever be assigned to a MS other than Deal or a high school other than Wilson.* It shares a contiguous piece of property with Deal. Think.

This has nothing to do with white people and brown people and lawsuits.


*** so long as assignments persist and dcps doesn't switch to a random lottery system for all addresses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pushing Hearst & Eaton out does not really solve the long term issue of the neighborhood demographics. The problem is that schools like Janey & Murch are expected to grow so much that you are in the same over crowding mess. You have to address the whole distribution, meaning you have to spread those kids to the schools that have large oob populations now. My guess is that Hearst and Eaton stay but with Janey kids at least pulled into their school boundaries. It is the only way you deal with the underlying numbers problem.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pushing Hearst & Eaton out does not really solve the long term issue of the neighborhood demographics. The problem is that schools like Janey & Murch are expected to grow so much that you are in the same over crowding mess. You have to address the whole distribution, meaning you have to spread those kids to the schools that have large oob populations now. My guess is that Hearst and Eaton stay but with Janey kids at least pulled into their school boundaries. It is the only way you deal with the underlying numbers problem.

How would that help with the Deal crowding issue if they still feed into Deal?

For the Hearst posters, if more IB students are attending Hearst, how is that different in regards to the diversity issue (which is a Hearst claim for keeping Hearst as a feeder) than having Heast feed into Hardy. Won't Deal be becoming higher SES (ie, white) either way-- if Hearst goes to Hardy OR if IB kids choose Hearst?

If they keep Desl boundaries by geography, Hearst would stay in Deal boundaries. But it remains to be seen what the priorities will be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Back to OP, Murch feeder pattern looks solid. So long as your child is in K or higher next fall, you will be able to grandfather into Deal and Wilson in the next 5-10 years. The good news for your child is that there will be more high-performing charter options in the coming years. Your child will not be locked into just Deal/Wilson. More than 40% of public school students are in charters now and stricter accountability measures than DCPS moving forward, it's highly likely that secondary students will have more high quality options across out relatively small city than today.

You bring up a question I've been wondering about. If there is to be any progress in changing boundaries (in terms of overcrowding), wouldn't DCPS have to do away with grandfathering and/or sibling preferences? It seems to me that if one or both of those preferences are not cut, then nothing will really change in the next 10-15 years.

Is there something I'm missing in this?

Sadly, you're missing nothing. In fact, sadly you are more perceptive than the people who study this for a living seem to be.

[Anonymous]

We are IB for Hearst and live in the northern part of the zone and east of Connecticut Avenue. So much closer to Deal than Hardy and just one metro stop away. It would be ridiculous for us to be rezoned for Hardy. We would definitely move, not even a tough decision. We are getting the house painted in March and doing repairs now in case we need to pull the rip cord when the maps come out in May.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are IB for Hearst and live in the northern part of the zone and east of Connecticut Avenue. So much closer to Deal than Hardy and just one metro stop away. It would be ridiculous for us to be rezoned for Hardy. We would definitely move, not even a tough decision. We are getting the house painted in March and doing repairs now in case we need to pull the rip cord when the maps come out in May.

Are the boundary maps supposed to come out in May? TIA!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Back to OP, Murch feeder pattern looks solid. So long as your child is in K or higher next fall, you will be able to grandfather into Deal and Wilson in the next 5-10 years. The good news for your child is that there will be more high-performing charter options in the coming years. Your child will not be locked into just Deal/Wilson. More than 40% of public school students are in charters now and stricter accountability measures than DCPS moving forward, it's highly likely that secondary students will have more high quality options across out relatively small city than today.

You bring up a question I've been wondering about. If there is to be any progress in changing boundaries (in terms of overcrowding), wouldn't DCPS have to do away with grandfathering and/or sibling preferences? It seems to me that if one or both of those preferences are not cut, then nothing will really change in the next 10-15 years.

Is there something I'm missing in this?

Sadly, you're missing nothing. In fact, sadly you are more perceptive than the people who study this for a living seem to be.

Agree with these posters, grandfathering would not be practical if it was in perpetuity, otherwise why bother? We can't keep adding on additions to overcrowded schools, like Janney getting second addition. They need to make tough choices and really change the boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pushing Hearst & Eaton out does not really solve the long term issue of the neighborhood demographics. The problem is that schools like Janey & Murch are expected to grow so much that you are in the same over crowding mess. You have to address the whole distribution, meaning you have to spread those kids to the schools that have large oob populations now. My guess is that Hearst and Eaton stay but with Janey kids at least pulled into their school boundaries. It is the only way you deal with the underlying numbers problem.

How would that help with the Deal crowding issue if they still feed into Deal?

For the Hearst posters, if more IB students are attending Hearst, how is that different in regards to the diversity issue (which is a Hearst claim for keeping Hearst as a feeder) than having Heast feed into Hardy. Won't Deal be becoming higher SES (ie, white) either way-- if Hearst goes to Hardy OR if IB kids choose Hearst?

It helps deal by redistributing Janey kids & displacing oob kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are IB for Hearst and live in the northern part of the zone and east of Connecticut Avenue. So much closer to Deal than Hardy and just one metro stop away. It would be ridiculous for us to be rezoned for Hardy. We would definitely move, not even a tough decision. We are getting the house painted in March and doing repairs now in case we need to pull the rip cord when the maps come out in May.

Dramatic much?

Regardless, your house will sell quickly just like the other houses in the area. Good news right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pushing Hearst & Eaton out does not really solve the long term issue of the neighborhood demographics. The problem is that schools like Janey & Murch are expected to grow so much that you are in the same over crowding mess. You have to address the whole distribution, meaning you have to spread those kids to the schools that have large oob populations now. My guess is that Hearst and Eaton stay but with Janey kids at least pulled into their school boundaries. It is the only way you deal with the underlying numbers problem.

How would that help with the Deal crowding issue if they still feed into Deal?

For the Hearst posters, if more IB students are attending Hearst, how is that different in regards to the diversity issue (which is a Hearst claim for keeping Hearst as a feeder) than having Heast feed into Hardy. Won't Deal be becoming higher SES (ie, white) either way-- if Hearst goes to Hardy OR if IB kids choose Hearst?

It helps deal by redistributing Janey kids & displacing oob kids.

Wait, so it would help Janney not Deal? Ha ok. The world does not revolve around Janney. Do Janney people know this?

[Anonymous]

Move Bancroft, Hearst, Eaton, and kids not wanting to Attend O-A to Hardy. Shrink the Janney boundary so less kids to Deal. Horace Mann kids on the south side of Nebraska should go to Hardy.

[Anonymous]

And no grandfathering unless entering grade 8

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And no grandfathering unless entering grade 8

That will never happen. I guarantee you 100% that they will not make children already in a school move to a different school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pushing Hearst & Eaton out does not really solve the long term issue of the neighborhood demographics. The problem is that schools like Janey & Murch are expected to grow so much that you are in the same over crowding mess. You have to address the whole distribution, meaning you have to spread those kids to the schools that have large oob populations now. My guess is that Hearst and Eaton stay but with Janey kids at least pulled into their school boundaries. It is the only way you deal with the underlying numbers problem.

How would that help with the Deal crowding issue if they still feed into Deal?

For the Hearst posters, if more IB students are attending Hearst, how is that different in regards to the diversity issue (which is a Hearst claim for keeping Hearst as a feeder) than having Heast feed into Hardy. Won't Deal be becoming higher SES (ie, white) either way-- if Hearst goes to Hardy OR if IB kids choose Hearst?

It helps deal by redistributing Janey kids & displacing oob kids.

Wait, so it would help Janney not Deal? Ha ok. The world does not revolve around Janney. Do Janney people know this?

It does help Deal because under the prior scenario you would have all the Janney kids plus the OOB kids going to Deal. Under the new scenario, you wouldn't have as many OOB students because the Janney kids now attending Hearst have absorbed the spaces previously allocated to those OOB students.

[Anonymous]

If you start with Janney kicking out children who are there by "Principal discretion" you would not need the renovation.

Across the board if DC got serious about checking residency, confirming IB, following up with children who start IB but move OOB this whole conversation would change.