Does anyone know what the demographics of Van Ness Elementary School is like this school year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a kid in PK4 at Van Ness. We saw a lot of engaged parents at Back To School night. About half of the kids are in bound, other half are out of bound. My thinking is that the school is not a Title I school.

that is a loaded statement. By engaged you mean white? and thats how you know its not title 1?

Why would you assume engaged means white? Back to School night had many parents of different races.

NP. Why use the term "engaged" in a thread asking about demographics?

Who cares? If it's that important to stay on topic (a first for this board) then the thread should have ended at the under age 5 response because that's all that be confirmed at this point.

NP. I'll admit that I do. I don't want my kid at a school where they are an "only". Only white kid, only black kid, only non-FARMS or non-trust fund kid, only native English speaker or non-native English speaker, etc. OP's mistake was dancing around the issue instead of asking it straight out: "Did there appear to be a even distribution of black, white, latino, low income, high income, etc.?" Yes, some close minded people associate income with race, some people assess that based on the manner of dress, the manner in which people interact and interact with their kids, etc. The fact that some people are closed minded bigots doesn't make the everyone who asks a closed minded bigot.

Your assertion that some closed minded people associate income with race confirms that you're hopelessly out of touch. Every discussion of Van Ness eventually devolves into the correlation between the two in DC. Correct me if I'm wrong, but where are the large numbers of poor white families living in-bound for Van Ness. OP opened the door for the umpteenth time by inquiring about "demographics." It's tried and true dog whistle terminology. Again, if you're asking about demographics youbhave more than a passing familiarity with the economic disparities between families living east of S. Capitol (mostly white) and families living west of S. Capitol (mostly black). Spare us the piety.

You are missing my point (and that made by others). But that says a great deal about you, not us. We're not pious. We're honest. We care about racial makeup as we don't want to be an only one. I also care about SES diversity. And that doesn't necessarily track with race. The fact that YOU think it does says something about you, not me. I'm guessing your faux liberalism can't grasp that concept - that's ok, you're forgiven (THAT's piety my friend, ironic and sarcastic as it may be). And you actually don't know much about the area around Van Ness if you think the areas "East of S Cap" are predominantly black. There's almost no original housing stock there. Its all new townhouses and mixed use and condos. The townhouses sell for a million bucks on the open market, and some percentage were reserved for low income and can't be sold above some capped rate. But there's no original housing stock...unless someone is camping out in Nat's Park. And the sample size at Van Ness is too small to extrapolate broader stats from DC. If I used my HRCS as a model for the broader population then 25% of all black women would be corporate lawyers.

But let me be clear: My liberalism isn't faux, it's real, it's sincere and I don't apologize for it. I see color. I see SES. I see differences. To pretend like those things don't exist, or to conflate the concepts and pretend like you're just taking the position of bigots exposes you as a faux liberal.

NP. You may want to get off your high horse for a minute and re-read their statements about east and west. Read first. Then respond.

Guilty as charged, but my point stands. The holier than though faux liberals who asked "who cares" are either existing on an etherial plane beyond mere mortals, or faux liberals. My point is and was this: I care. And if you and they think it is wrong to ask about the distribution of race, SES, class and other demographic concepts then that's your right. But don't go getting all high and mighty about others who care and don't apologize for it.

You're acting like a crazy person who argues for the sake of arguing. Since you seem to know that some whites live in SE and some blacks in SW and the whites live in million dollar townhouses, there's no issue of being an only white kid, black kid, upper middle class kid, low income kid, etc. You can also assume there aren't many Korean-Americans, Haitians, Somalis or Hasidim. Now please go take your meds.

[Anonymous]

PP seems like a perfect match for Yu Ying.

[Anonymous]

Are the people who keep saying that they don't want their child to be the "only one" really worried that will TRULY BE the "only one"? Face it, you wouldn't be comfortable if your child was one of two, or one of three ... of the only whatever you are. Stop staying that you don't want your child to be "the only" unless you're live in Ward 7 or 8, where that may actually be a possibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a kid in PK4 at Van Ness. We saw a lot of engaged parents at Back To School night. About half of the kids are in bound, other half are out of bound. My thinking is that the school is not a Title I school.

that is a loaded statement. By engaged you mean white? and thats how you know its not title 1?

Why would you assume engaged means white? Back to School night had many parents of different races.

NP. Why use the term "engaged" in a thread asking about demographics?

Who cares? If it's that important to stay on topic (a first for this board) then the thread should have ended at the under age 5 response because that's all that be confirmed at this point.

NP. I'll admit that I do. I don't want my kid at a school where they are an "only". Only white kid, only black kid, only non-FARMS or non-trust fund kid, only native English speaker or non-native English speaker, etc. OP's mistake was dancing around the issue instead of asking it straight out: "Did there appear to be a even distribution of black, white, latino, low income, high income, etc.?" Yes, some close minded people associate income with race, some people assess that based on the manner of dress, the manner in which people interact and interact with their kids, etc. The fact that some people are closed minded bigots doesn't make the everyone who asks a closed minded bigot.

Your assertion that some closed minded people associate income with race confirms that you're hopelessly out of touch. Every discussion of Van Ness eventually devolves into the correlation between the two in DC. Correct me if I'm wrong, but where are the large numbers of poor white families living in-bound for Van Ness. OP opened the door for the umpteenth time by inquiring about "demographics." It's tried and true dog whistle terminology. Again, if you're asking about demographics youbhave more than a passing familiarity with the economic disparities between families living east of S. Capitol (mostly white) and families living west of S. Capitol (mostly black). Spare us the piety.

You are missing my point (and that made by others). But that says a great deal about you, not us. We're not pious. We're honest. We care about racial makeup as we don't want to be an only one. I also care about SES diversity. And that doesn't necessarily track with race. The fact that YOU think it does says something about you, not me. I'm guessing your faux liberalism can't grasp that concept - that's ok, you're forgiven (THAT's piety my friend, ironic and sarcastic as it may be). And you actually don't know much about the area around Van Ness if you think the areas "East of S Cap" are predominantly black. There's almost no original housing stock there. Its all new townhouses and mixed use and condos. The townhouses sell for a million bucks on the open market, and some percentage were reserved for low income and can't be sold above some capped rate. But there's no original housing stock...unless someone is camping out in Nat's Park. And the sample size at Van Ness is too small to extrapolate broader stats from DC. If I used my HRCS as a model for the broader population then 25% of all black women would be corporate lawyers.

But let me be clear: My liberalism isn't faux, it's real, it's sincere and I don't apologize for it. I see color. I see SES. I see differences. To pretend like those things don't exist, or to conflate the concepts and pretend like you're just taking the position of bigots exposes you as a faux liberal.

NP. You may want to get off your high horse for a minute and re-read their statements about east and west. Read first. Then respond.

Guilty as charged, but my point stands. The holier than though faux liberals who asked "who cares" are either existing on an etherial plane beyond mere mortals, or faux liberals. My point is and was this: I care. And if you and they think it is wrong to ask about the distribution of race, SES, class and other demographic concepts then that's your right. But don't go getting all high and mighty about others who care and don't apologize for it.

You're acting like a crazy person who argues for the sake of arguing. Since you seem to know that some whites live in SE and some blacks in SW and the whites live in million dollar townhouses, there's no issue of being an only white kid, black kid, upper middle class kid, low income kid, etc. You can also assume there aren't many Korean-Americans, Haitians, Somalis or Hasidim. Now please go take your meds.

You...continue...to...miss...the...point. Living there and attending a school there do not necessarily correlate. And with a brand new school it's even more unknown. Which makes a question about the demographics of the school a reasonable question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP seems like a perfect match for Yu Ying.

Nope. Too many asians.

[Anonymous]

I think it is 100% children. Human children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP seems like a perfect match for Yu Ying.

Nope. Too many asians.

HAAAAAAA! That made me laugh!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a kid in PK4 at Van Ness. We saw a lot of engaged parents at Back To School night. About half of the kids are in bound, other half are out of bound. My thinking is that the school is not a Title I school.

that is a loaded statement. By engaged you mean white? and thats how you know its not title 1?

Why would you assume engaged means white? Back to School night had many parents of different races.

NP. Why use the term "engaged" in a thread asking about demographics?

Who cares? If it's that important to stay on topic (a first for this board) then the thread should have ended at the under age 5 response because that's all that be confirmed at this point.

NP. I'll admit that I do. I don't want my kid at a school where they are an "only". Only white kid, only black kid, only non-FARMS or non-trust fund kid, only native English speaker or non-native English speaker, etc. OP's mistake was dancing around the issue instead of asking it straight out: "Did there appear to be a even distribution of black, white, latino, low income, high income, etc.?" Yes, some close minded people associate income with race, some people assess that based on the manner of dress, the manner in which people interact and interact with their kids, etc. The fact that some people are closed minded bigots doesn't make the everyone who asks a closed minded bigot.

Your assertion that some closed minded people associate income with race confirms that you're hopelessly out of touch. Every discussion of Van Ness eventually devolves into the correlation between the two in DC. Correct me if I'm wrong, but where are the large numbers of poor white families living in-bound for Van Ness. OP opened the door for the umpteenth time by inquiring about "demographics." It's tried and true dog whistle terminology. Again, if you're asking about demographics youbhave more than a passing familiarity with the economic disparities between families living east of S. Capitol (mostly white) and families living west of S. Capitol (mostly black). Spare us the piety.

You are missing my point (and that made by others). But that says a great deal about you, not us. We're not pious. We're honest. We care about racial makeup as we don't want to be an only one. I also care about SES diversity. And that doesn't necessarily track with race. The fact that YOU think it does says something about you, not me. I'm guessing your faux liberalism can't grasp that concept - that's ok, you're forgiven (THAT's piety my friend, ironic and sarcastic as it may be). And you actually don't know much about the area around Van Ness if you think the areas "East of S Cap" are predominantly black. There's almost no original housing stock there. Its all new townhouses and mixed use and condos. The townhouses sell for a million bucks on the open market, and some percentage were reserved for low income and can't be sold above some capped rate. But there's no original housing stock...unless someone is camping out in Nat's Park. And the sample size at Van Ness is too small to extrapolate broader stats from DC. If I used my HRCS as a model for the broader population then 25% of all black women would be corporate lawyers.

But let me be clear: My liberalism isn't faux, it's real, it's sincere and I don't apologize for it. I see color. I see SES. I see differences. To pretend like those things don't exist, or to conflate the concepts and pretend like you're just taking the position of bigots exposes you as a faux liberal.

NP. You may want to get off your high horse for a minute and re-read their statements about east and west. Read first. Then respond.

Guilty as charged, but my point stands. The holier than though faux liberals who asked "who cares" are either existing on an etherial plane beyond mere mortals, or faux liberals. My point is and was this: I care. And if you and they think it is wrong to ask about the distribution of race, SES, class and other demographic concepts then that's your right. But don't go getting all high and mighty about others who care and don't apologize for it.

You're acting like a crazy person who argues for the sake of arguing. Since you seem to know that some whites live in SE and some blacks in SW and the whites live in million dollar townhouses, there's no issue of being an only white kid, black kid, upper middle class kid, low income kid, etc. You can also assume there aren't many Korean-Americans, Haitians, Somalis or Hasidim. Now please go take your meds.

You...continue...to...miss...the...point. Living there and attending a school there do not necessarily correlate. And with a brand new school it's even more unknown. Which makes a question about the demographics of the school a reasonable question.

Why? What compelling and legitimate need for "demographic" ingormation could you possibly possess? If it's so damn important to you go that you not be an "only" then set up a meeting with the Principal, as opposed to trolling on DCUM. I don't think you're cut out for public school in DC if you think parents go to BTSN to spend their time counting the number of liitle black kids in each class (i realize it's harder to count the poors when you can't see if they took the bus or subway and there are terrific knockoffs of designer shoes and handbags).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP seems like a perfect match for Yu Ying.

Nope. Too many asians.

Nope. Given a choice, most Asians will not live in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a kid in PK4 at Van Ness. We saw a lot of engaged parents at Back To School night. About half of the kids are in bound, other half are out of bound. My thinking is that the school is not a Title I school.

that is a loaded statement. By engaged you mean white? and thats how you know its not title 1?

Why would you assume engaged means white? Back to School night had many parents of different races.

NP. Why use the term "engaged" in a thread asking about demographics?

Who cares? If it's that important to stay on topic (a first for this board) then the thread should have ended at the under age 5 response because that's all that be confirmed at this point.

NP. I'll admit that I do. I don't want my kid at a school where they are an "only". Only white kid, only black kid, only non-FARMS or non-trust fund kid, only native English speaker or non-native English speaker, etc. OP's mistake was dancing around the issue instead of asking it straight out: "Did there appear to be a even distribution of black, white, latino, low income, high income, etc.?" Yes, some close minded people associate income with race, some people assess that based on the manner of dress, the manner in which people interact and interact with their kids, etc. The fact that some people are closed minded bigots doesn't make the everyone who asks a closed minded bigot.

Your assertion that some closed minded people associate income with race confirms that you're hopelessly out of touch. Every discussion of Van Ness eventually devolves into the correlation between the two in DC. Correct me if I'm wrong, but where are the large numbers of poor white families living in-bound for Van Ness. OP opened the door for the umpteenth time by inquiring about "demographics." It's tried and true dog whistle terminology. Again, if you're asking about demographics youbhave more than a passing familiarity with the economic disparities between families living east of S. Capitol (mostly white) and families living west of S. Capitol (mostly black). Spare us the piety.

You are missing my point (and that made by others). But that says a great deal about you, not us. We're not pious. We're honest. We care about racial makeup as we don't want to be an only one. I also care about SES diversity. And that doesn't necessarily track with race. The fact that YOU think it does says something about you, not me. I'm guessing your faux liberalism can't grasp that concept - that's ok, you're forgiven (THAT's piety my friend, ironic and sarcastic as it may be). And you actually don't know much about the area around Van Ness if you think the areas "East of S Cap" are predominantly black. There's almost no original housing stock there. Its all new townhouses and mixed use and condos. The townhouses sell for a million bucks on the open market, and some percentage were reserved for low income and can't be sold above some capped rate. But there's no original housing stock...unless someone is camping out in Nat's Park. And the sample size at Van Ness is too small to extrapolate broader stats from DC. If I used my HRCS as a model for the broader population then 25% of all black women would be corporate lawyers.

But let me be clear: My liberalism isn't faux, it's real, it's sincere and I don't apologize for it. I see color. I see SES. I see differences. To pretend like those things don't exist, or to conflate the concepts and pretend like you're just taking the position of bigots exposes you as a faux liberal.

NP. You may want to get off your high horse for a minute and re-read their statements about east and west. Read first. Then respond.

Guilty as charged, but my point stands. The holier than though faux liberals who asked "who cares" are either existing on an etherial plane beyond mere mortals, or faux liberals. My point is and was this: I care. And if you and they think it is wrong to ask about the distribution of race, SES, class and other demographic concepts then that's your right. But don't go getting all high and mighty about others who care and don't apologize for it.

You're acting like a crazy person who argues for the sake of arguing. Since you seem to know that some whites live in SE and some blacks in SW and the whites live in million dollar townhouses, there's no issue of being an only white kid, black kid, upper middle class kid, low income kid, etc. You can also assume there aren't many Korean-Americans, Haitians, Somalis or Hasidim. Now please go take your meds.

You...continue...to...miss...the...point. Living there and attending a school there do not necessarily correlate. And with a brand new school it's even more unknown. Which makes a question about the demographics of the school a reasonable question.

Why? What compelling and legitimate need for "demographic" ingormation could you possibly possess? If it's so damn important to you go that you not be an "only" then set up a meeting with the Principal, as opposed to trolling on DCUM. I don't think you're cut out for public school in DC if you think parents go to BTSN to spend their time counting the number of liitle black kids in each class (i realize it's harder to count the poors when you can't see if they took the bus or subway and there are terrific knockoffs of designer shoes and handbags).

I answered that question above. See, post about only anything. I will say it slowly, in deference to your apparent reading comprehension issues. I...don't...want...my...kid...being...the...only...anything. And the fall back of the weak minded that information can be gleaned by asking the school is the rough equivalent of, "oh year, well your mom is ugly." That can be said about almost anything on DCUM. Don't lower yourself to that level. When you do so you draw even more attention to yourself.

[Anonymous]

I take it things aren't working out for your kid as s/he's the only one with a mom who's a f*cking nut job? No one is going to participate in your little freak show. You're lazy, obnoxious and toxic, so please go away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I take it things aren't working out for your kid as s/he's the only one with a mom who's a f*cking nut job? No one is going to participate in your little freak show. You're lazy, obnoxious and toxic, so please go away.

Reading comprehension, again. Other posters also don't want to be the "only". What I find amusing is that you're confusing a difference of opinion (you apparently don't ind being an only - allegedly) with fact and fiction and truth. This isn't up for discussion, my single minded, closed off friend. I don't want my kid being an only, and because of that I want to know what demographics are at play. If that makes me a nutjob then I am sorry to say you're surrounded by nutjobs. And did you know one of the highly regarded principals on the Hill actually says "no one wants to be an only" in her speeches to prospective parents? She's an educator who works in the school system; you going to discount her opinion too because you don't agree?

P.S. Where's "lazy" come in? The ad homonym attacks aren't sexy my dear. They make you look small and draw attention to the weakness of your arguments. As does how quick you are to anger.

[Anonymous]

Does this highly regarded principal talk about the etymology of homonym and hominem? You seem terribly insecure, but in the positive side it's good to see you're owning obnoxious and toxic. If you ever bothered to pull your head out of your ass you'd realize that the "only" status that you claim to very much dread disappeared from Hill elementary schools a while ago. It may be hard to believe but there are real, live white kids whi attend JO Wilson, LT, Miner, Payne, Tyler and Warkins. There's even some sr Jefferson and Eliot-Hine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How the hell did this suddenly become a race issue?!?!?! This world is over sensitive to everything.

Yes, how dare we read and consider what the poster actually said. We're atrocious people.


demographics [plural] : the qualities of a specific group of people.

So do you think they were asking about how old the kids were? Male/female ratio? Save your faux indignation and false liberalism for people who care. You know what the difference between me and you is? I'm not pretending to be liberal and open minded.

Ew. Please move far far away.

[Anonymous]

This is the craziest thread. What's wrong with asking about the demographics of who turned up to attend the school? It's of valid sociological interest. Who made what decisions about schools to apply for in the lottery and actually attend? If the school is entirely African American, why? If it's entirely Caucasisn, why? Is it IB kids? Is it OoB kids? Is it pulling from Wards 7 and 8? Navy families? Tyler and Brent?

The OP didn't make value judgements. They asked for information.