Low In Boundary at Hearst?

[Anonymous]

I guess one of the things that I don't get is how is it in anyone's interest to have elementary schools as large as Murch and Janney are projected to be. Both schools are well over 600 this year, and likely to be close to 700 next year. And projections just go up from there for a little while. At what point is it just too much? Or physically impossible to fit in any more students? Who would want their 4 year old in a school with 800, 900, 1000 kids?

[Anonymous]

NP here, that dcps is moving families that are currently two blocks away from Murch might be a little surprising, however, there are definitely families who could walk to Janney now that are zoned for Hearst or Murch. Those boundaries are just screaming to be balanced out and frankly unless you bought your house 5 years ago you shouldn't be shocked the boundaries are being adjusted Murch families. Murch is bursting at the seams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The DCPS data shows only about 150 elementary age kids who attend DCPS schools. This seems like an absurdly small number and is due to overall small size of boundary and that thee is a lot of non-residential space in the boundary. Of the 150 about 50 +/- currently attend Hearst. The school's capacity is about 300 and that will remain the same even after the renovation. Given the fact other nearby schools are bursting at the seams with primarily IB kids it makes sense to me to expand the Hearst boundaries to better serve the overall neighborhood. I certainly understand the Murch posters point about having made plans around a specific school and I would expect them to make a strong case for grandfathering of all current Murch families , I would likely do the same in her shoes.

As for the current overall low IB % there is a bit of the law of small numbers at play here. First 18% is an average across PK - 5. The IB % at the lower grades is meaningfully higher. And is overall such a small school - a relatively small number of additional kids will move the IB % quite a bit. For example if all 50 current IB kids are still at Hearst plus the 25 IB PK 4s that jumps the % to 26 in 1 year (75 IB as a % of total enrollment

Another point which I actually don't know the answer to is whether or not the Autism class is included in the numbers used to calculate IB. These kids are on IEPs so they can come from all over the city - I think it's about 20 or less kids.

So all of the IB discussion is interesting but the thing I find more compelling about the school is that everyone - principal, teachers, parents - I have encountered there over the last two years is fully committee and engaged and focused on continuing the schools momentum 'up and to the right'.

Actually the number is only 103 school-aged public school students. Hearst's boundaries are extraordinarily small. Even if every one of those kids went to the school the school would only be 1/3 inbounds. That its PK4 class is over 50% IB suggests that is capturing a large percentage if not almost all of the younger aged kids.

Moreover, who cares? Hearst is an incredibly close-knit community that values all of the folks that come to it from all over the city.

The number that is missing is how many in-boundary kids there are total. I'm sure DCPS has that number but they seem loathe to reveal it. Without that number we can't judge which of two competing hypotheses is true:
A) The number of IB kids is low because there is a small number of kids living IB.
B) The number of IB kids is low because there is a higher than average number not going to public school.

[Anonymous]

Isn't that the 103 number??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering about the comments re: Hardy. The only proposal I've seen that would have Hearst students going to Hardy is in the proposal in which students would enter a lottery to attend one of their 2 closest middle schools, thus Deal or Hardy. But this applies to all the elem schools in the area. Please let me know if I am missing some piece of the story.

Me too. As far as I can tell, there has been a troll on DCUM for MONTHS trying to push the idea of switching Hearst to Hardy. Hardy is a fine school and looks to be on an upward trajectory, but nothing in the proposals suggests that the DME or Committee is contemplating such a shift outside of scenarios where all schools in the area would have multiple options.

I did the ourdcschools app with maps with a Hearst address and it lists Hardy/Deal as a proposed choice set. Is their info wrong?

[Anonymous]

How do parents deal with having to pass by their PUBLIC neighborhood school every day in order to get to a school a bureaucratic exercise has said is your neighborhood school that is farther away? I think the boundary discussion is a serious issue. Is there an organized group of families working on this issue? How can families design sensible boundaries, or shoot down these proposals?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Got it. But 18% is really low compared to the nearby schools (whose families also live in multi-million dollar homes). Eaton has 36%-- also low but double Hearst. And Janney 92%!

And I see from the new proposed borders that the boundary is not expanding that much for Hearst in the proposal. Just seems interesting and I was wondering if anyone had any insight.

To be blunt, the IB homes for Janney do not rival the IB homes for Hearst. Between a map (location, location!) and even the most minimal appreciation of architecture, this should be obvious. Nobody moves to Janney because they love the beauty and history of the neighborhood.

I am not sure what you mean by location but one of the reasons we bought into the Janney disctrict is location. Public transportation is great there and the school is located next to a metro stop which saves a lot of time.
As for the beauty, I often get compliments, from my friends who come visit us, about how beautiful my neighborhood is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering about the comments re: Hardy. The only proposal I've seen that would have Hearst students going to Hardy is in the proposal in which students would enter a lottery to attend one of their 2 closest middle schools, thus Deal or Hardy. But this applies to all the elem schools in the area. Please let me know if I am missing some piece of the story.

Me too. As far as I can tell, there has been a troll on DCUM for MONTHS trying to push the idea of switching Hearst to Hardy. Hardy is a fine school and looks to be on an upward trajectory, but nothing in the proposals suggests that the DME or Committee is contemplating such a shift outside of scenarios where all schools in the area would have multiple options.

I did the ourdcschools app with maps with a Hearst address and it lists Hardy/Deal as a proposed choice set. Is their info wrong?

this is consistent with what the PP said. Unlike Eaton, where there is a proposed feeder change from Deal to Hardy as part of the rezoning, Hearst is treated the same as Janney and Murch in terms of middle school feeder patterns, in option B it feeds to Deal, in the choice set option it's choices are Deal or Hardy, nothing about the rezoning of homes to Hearst from Murch or Janney for some homes changes the middle school options on the table for those homes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The number that is missing is how many in-boundary kids there are total. I'm sure DCPS has that number but they seem loathe to reveal it. Without that number we can't judge which of two competing hypotheses is true:
A) The number of IB kids is low because there is a small number of kids living IB.
B) The number of IB kids is low because there is a higher than average number not going to public school.

Yes, right - it would be interesting to know this number. From living in the neighborhood I suspect it is a bit of both A and B at work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here, that dcps is moving families that are currently two blocks away from Murch might be a little surprising, however, there are definitely families who could walk to Janney now that are zoned for Hearst or Murch. Those boundaries are just screaming to be balanced out and frankly unless you bought your house 5 years ago you shouldn't be shocked the boundaries are being adjusted Murch families. Murch is bursting at the seams.

+1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hearst was also historically low for in-bounds because the facility was so small -- no gym, no cafeteria, and until a few years ago, I believe that it only went to 3rd grade. So in addition to sub-par facilities, your kid would have to go to a new elementary school for 4th and 5th grades, and then switch again for middle school -- definitely something that would make in-bounds families hesitate before sending their kids there. Now that the school goes through 5th grade, has had a new renovation and a strong principal it is attracting more in-bounds families.

I'm the OP-- thanks-- this was the kind of information I was looking for (not just "well the houses are expensive in that area.") That's helpful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess one of the things that I don't get is how is it in anyone's interest to have elementary schools as large as Murch and Janney are projected to be. Both schools are well over 600 this year, and likely to be close to 700 next year. And projections just go up from there for a little while. At what point is it just too much? Or physically impossible to fit in any more students? Who would want their 4 year old in a school with 800, 900, 1000 kids?

This. Especially when there is another school in the neighborhood which has the space to relieve some of the overcrowding. I get it that many people are afraid of change but at some point it becomes necessary. I think we are at that point

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess one of the things that I don't get is how is it in anyone's interest to have elementary schools as large as Murch and Janney are projected to be. Both schools are well over 600 this year, and likely to be close to 700 next year. And projections just go up from there for a little while. At what point is it just too much? Or physically impossible to fit in any more students? Who would want their 4 year old in a school with 800, 900, 1000 kids?

There are lots of fcps schools with 600 to 800 kids and a few with 900 or more. However Fcps is more organized and the schoohave more room to expand and add trailers.

Generally the preschool programs aren't affected by the size of the school. They tend to eat meals in the classroom and still get playground time and enrichment/ specials time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My guess is that this is one boundary change that will go through. Reducing overcrowding at the upper NW schools was one of the motivations for redrawing the boundaries in the first place. It's necessary.

I also don't understand this sniffing at Hearst. Any child who would have gotten high test scores at Murch will get them at Hearst, which is obviously on an upward trajectory with respect to scores. The OOB parents I know there are well-educated professionals.

This. We will see how this years scores turn out. When you look into the details of last years scores - we all know one single %age can be misleading- there are some really interesting data points in Hearst's performance. For example last year's 4th grade scored in the 90s for reading and math. Again the number of kids at Hearst is so small that improvement in just a few kids scores will make a big impact. There were just over 100 kids in last years CAS group at Hearst. 10 or 12 add'l kids scoring proficient or advanced and Hearst would look an awful lot like Murch

At the opposite end there were actually a lower % of kids scorning below basic at Hearst than at Murch last year. These data are on the DCPS site

So all of that is interesting but I really believe a school can't be accurately summarized by a single or even a couple numbers. Hearst is a terrific place that welcomes all (even the 'sniffers' !) . If anyone out there is intersted to hear more directly please join us at the Open House tomorrow morning 9 am.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My guess is that this is one boundary change that will go through. Reducing overcrowding at the upper NW schools was one of the motivations for redrawing the boundaries in the first place. It's necessary.

I also don't understand this sniffing at Hearst. Any child who would have gotten high test scores at Murch will get them at Hearst, which is obviously on an upward trajectory with respect to scores. The OOB parents I know there are well-educated professionals.

This. We will see how this years scores turn out. When you look into the details of last years scores - we all know one single %age can be misleading- there are some really interesting data points in Hearst's performance. For example last year's 4th grade scored in the 90s for reading and math. Again the number of kids at Hearst is so small that improvement in just a few kids scores will make a big impact. There were just over 100 kids in last years CAS group at Hearst. 10 or 12 add'l kids scoring proficient or advanced and Hearst would look an awful lot like Murch

At the opposite end there were actually a lower % of kids scorning below basic at Hearst than at Murch last year. These data are on the DCPS site

So all of that is interesting but I really believe a school can't be accurately summarized by a single or even a couple numbers. Hearst is a terrific place that welcomes all (even the 'sniffers' !) . If anyone out there is intersted to hear more directly please join us at the Open House tomorrow morning 9 am.

Can someone please explain what "This" means?!?