Proposal is up!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too bad I have to walk out the door now. So far, so good on the maps though. Cap Hill is a big winner with Eastern.

Deal's gerrymandering to capture Mt. Pleasant is odd ball.

Save some observations for me!!!

Deal's always had Mt. Pleasant. Why would that be odd ball?

Odd by it's shape on the map.

That's Crestwood that was neatly cut out of Deal and Wilson boundaries. Biggest loser under this proposal (w/ 16th St H).

Well we knew this was going to be proposed eventually, but the promise of a new MacFarland is not comforting without some additional commitment from DCPS. I think there are enough parents to make it work, but we need a lot from DCPS too.
Jeff, did that list of ideas for how to make MacFarland and Jefferson ever go anywhere?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The whole report is pretty tame -- and strikes me as reasonably related to what a "boundary review" should have been from the very beginning. All of the weird, risky, contested stuff is out.

The only problem being, as others have mentioned, the OOB set-asides. But that only affects schools that are overcrowded, and there really aren't that many. If DCPS is serious about set asides for those schools, it is going to have to be REALLY serious about "setting aside" a serious amount of money to add square footage to those schools.

DO you suppose they are actually giving up on weird, risky contested stuff?

[Anonymous]

I like the cap hill feeder patterns. I think the JO, Peabody/Watkins, and Ludlow taylor feed is especially appealing (if, and a big if, these schools can keep attracting and attaining neighborhood families).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Would Shepherd Elementary eventually feed to new north W4 middle school or stay at Deal with Lafayette?

Never mind. I see the map. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Yes, the whole thing strikes me as pretty reasonable. Not perfect, but close enough and probably should go forward despite some people still being unhappy.

But I have to say that it makes me wonder again if all of the craziest stuff was all a screen for us to be happy with these changes. If this version was the first version, folks would be fighting hard over small changes and maybe even that wouldn't get through. This way we get to be relieved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too bad I have to walk out the door now. So far, so good on the maps though. Cap Hill is a big winner with Eastern.

Deal's gerrymandering to capture Mt. Pleasant is odd ball.

Save some observations for me!!!

Deal's always had Mt. Pleasant. Why would that be odd ball?

Odd by it's shape on the map.

That's Crestwood that was neatly cut out of Deal and Wilson boundaries. Biggest loser under this proposal (w/ 16th St H).

Well we knew this was going to be proposed eventually, but the promise of a new MacFarland is not comforting without some additional commitment from DCPS. I think there are enough parents to make it work, but we need a lot from DCPS too.
Jeff, did that list of ideas for how to make MacFarland and Jefferson ever go anywhere?

Being that they can contine at Deal for immediate future, it's hard to say they are losers. Who know what will happen will MacFarland opens?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, the whole thing strikes me as pretty reasonable. Not perfect, but close enough and probably should go forward despite some people still being unhappy.

But I have to say that it makes me wonder again if all of the craziest stuff was all a screen for us to be happy with these changes. If this version was the first version, folks would be fighting hard over small changes and maybe even that wouldn't get through. This way we get to be relieved.

Not relieved here. Panties are quite bunched.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like the cap hill feeder patterns. I think the JO, Peabody/Watkins, and Ludlow taylor feed is especially appealing (if, and a big if, these schools can keep attracting and attaining neighborhood families).

Absolutely none of them retain neighborhood families now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looks like a huge expansion of SH boundary, but Brent still missed out. Of course, many of the kids with proposed new rights could have gotten there through Watkins.

It looks to me like the only addition to SH is JO Wilson, but I can't tell where JO Wilson feeds now, so it could already be SH. If this is a new feed, it makes a lot more sense than a Brent feed, since JO Wilson is very walkable to SH. I walk by both schools (from my home IB for LT) every weekend on my way to Union Market. They are very close together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like the cap hill feeder patterns. I think the JO, Peabody/Watkins, and Ludlow taylor feed is especially appealing (if, and a big if, these schools can keep attracting and attaining neighborhood families).

Are you being sarcastic? That is exactly how it is now. Nothing new there

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like the cap hill feeder patterns. I think the JO, Peabody/Watkins, and Ludlow taylor feed is especially appealing (if, and a big if, these schools can keep attracting and attaining neighborhood families).

Absolutely none of them retain neighborhood families now.

But isn't the point that they are trying to make them do just this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like a huge expansion of SH boundary, but Brent still missed out. Of course, many of the kids with proposed new rights could have gotten there through Watkins.

It looks to me like the only addition to SH is JO Wilson, but I can't tell where JO Wilson feeds now, so it could already be SH. If this is a new feed, it makes a lot more sense than a Brent feed, since JO Wilson is very walkable to SH. I walk by both schools (from my home IB for LT) every weekend on my way to Union Market. They are very close together.

JO Wilson already feeds to SH. So no actual change. I think the subtext is that the Cluster is being broken up - Peabody/Watkins is listed as one school, SH another. No mention of the CH Cluster anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like a huge expansion of SH boundary, but Brent still missed out. Of course, many of the kids with proposed new rights could have gotten there through Watkins.

It looks to me like the only addition to SH is JO Wilson, but I can't tell where JO Wilson feeds now, so it could already be SH. If this is a new feed, it makes a lot more sense than a Brent feed, since JO Wilson is very walkable to SH. I walk by both schools (from my home IB for LT) every weekend on my way to Union Market. They are very close together.

JO Wilson already feeds to SH. So no actual change. I think the subtext is that the Cluster is being broken up - Peabody/Watkins is listed as one school, SH another. No mention of the CH Cluster anymore.

It looks to me like the proposal says just the opposite. Instead of thinking of them as two boundaries clustered together, they are simply reclassifying them as one boundary zone. It is a semantic change but not a real change from the perspective of what kids go where. In that case, the SH boundary didn't change at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, the whole thing strikes me as pretty reasonable. Not perfect, but close enough and probably should go forward despite some people still being unhappy.

But I have to say that it makes me wonder again if all of the craziest stuff was all a screen for us to be happy with these changes. If this version was the first version, folks would be fighting hard over small changes and maybe even that wouldn't get through. This way we get to be relieved.

+1 Three dimensional chess!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like a huge expansion of SH boundary, but Brent still missed out. Of course, many of the kids with proposed new rights could have gotten there through Watkins.

It looks to me like the only addition to SH is JO Wilson, but I can't tell where JO Wilson feeds now, so it could already be SH. If this is a new feed, it makes a lot more sense than a Brent feed, since JO Wilson is very walkable to SH. I walk by both schools (from my home IB for LT) every weekend on my way to Union Market. They are very close together.

JO Wilson already feeds to SH. So no actual change. I think the subtext is that the Cluster is being broken up - Peabody/Watkins is listed as one school, SH another. No mention of the CH Cluster anymore.

It looks to me like the proposal says just the opposite. Instead of thinking of them as two boundaries clustered together, they are simply reclassifying them as one boundary zone. It is a semantic change but not a real change from the perspective of what kids go where. In that case, the SH boundary didn't change at all.

I think that is true for Peabody/Watkins, but not so sure about SH still being part of a singular school with the other two. The semantic change indicates less about the feeder than about the structure of SH as a stand-alone MS.