Which would lose their Deal feed first: Shepherd, Bancroft, or Lafayette?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMHO, the first to go will be Crestwood's super-grandfather legacy status. After that, it should be Shepherd next, but they currently have the political muscle to block it, so they would throw Bancroft under the bus. However, if any half-credible challenger can appear, then Bowser will be out after one term, which means Shepherd loses a big part of its political clout.

If I were in your shoes and thinking about where to buy in DC to ensure access to Deal, I'd pick the Lafayette or AU Park area. They seem safest. Alternatively, continue to live wherever you want and build equity now, and then just plan to move when future kid approaches school age.

You think Shepherd has political clout? I thought the hill was getting the clout these days.

Nah, Bowser is in Shepherd Park's pocket, and she gives them favors. As long as she remains in power, Shepherd is safe. But once she is gone, Shepherd makes sense to get realigned.

Shepherd did just fine under Williams, Fenty and Grey. It's an important neighborhood politically for any mayor.

Is it possible you might be a little biased in your analysis?

I don't live in Shepherd Park and my kids aren't in a Deal feeder. But we live near SP and the level of political engagement and involvement is really high there. They are kind of a swing district within the city (roughly akin to Ohio in a presidential campaign) and that's what makes them politically important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMHO, the first to go will be Crestwood's super-grandfather legacy status. After that, it should be Shepherd next, but they currently have the political muscle to block it, so they would throw Bancroft under the bus. However, if any half-credible challenger can appear, then Bowser will be out after one term, which means Shepherd loses a big part of its political clout.

If I were in your shoes and thinking about where to buy in DC to ensure access to Deal, I'd pick the Lafayette or AU Park area. They seem safest. Alternatively, continue to live wherever you want and build equity now, and then just plan to move when future kid approaches school age.

You think Shepherd has political clout? I thought the hill was getting the clout these days.

Nah, Bowser is in Shepherd Park's pocket, and she gives them favors. As long as she remains in power, Shepherd is safe. But once she is gone, Shepherd makes sense to get realigned.

Shepherd did just fine under Williams, Fenty and Grey. It's an important neighborhood politically for any mayor.

This. Bowser had lived there for a few months. Shepherd Park's political clout is generations old.

[Anonymous]

Bowser also represented Ward 4 on the Council, so her relationship and fealty go a lot further back than just the 6 month she has lived in an adjacent neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMHO, the first to go will be Crestwood's super-grandfather legacy status. After that, it should be Shepherd next, but they currently have the political muscle to block it, so they would throw Bancroft under the bus. However, if any half-credible challenger can appear, then Bowser will be out after one term, which means Shepherd loses a big part of its political clout.

If I were in your shoes and thinking about where to buy in DC to ensure access to Deal, I'd pick the Lafayette or AU Park area. They seem safest. Alternatively, continue to live wherever you want and build equity now, and then just plan to move when future kid approaches school age.

You think Shepherd has political clout? I thought the hill was getting the clout these days.

Nah, Bowser is in Shepherd Park's pocket, and she gives them favors. As long as she remains in power, Shepherd is safe. But once she is gone, Shepherd makes sense to get realigned.

Shepherd did just fine under Williams, Fenty and Grey. It's an important neighborhood politically for any mayor.

This. Bowser had lived there for a few months. Shepherd Park's political clout is generations old.

Bowser still lives there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMHO, the first to go will be Crestwood's super-grandfather legacy status. After that, it should be Shepherd next, but they currently have the political muscle to block it, so they would throw Bancroft under the bus. However, if any half-credible challenger can appear, then Bowser will be out after one term, which means Shepherd loses a big part of its political clout.

If I were in your shoes and thinking about where to buy in DC to ensure access to Deal, I'd pick the Lafayette or AU Park area. They seem safest. Alternatively, continue to live wherever you want and build equity now, and then just plan to move when future kid approaches school age.

You think Shepherd has political clout? I thought the hill was getting the clout these days.

Nah, Bowser is in Shepherd Park's pocket, and she gives them favors. As long as she remains in power, Shepherd is safe. But once she is gone, Shepherd makes sense to get realigned.

Shepherd did just fine under Williams, Fenty and Grey. It's an important neighborhood politically for any mayor.

This. Bowser had lived there for a few months. Shepherd Park's political clout is generations old.

Bowser still lives there.

Meant she has only lived in SP for a few months.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another option would be to get rid of the automatic right of OOB students at feeders to attend Deal.

Sadly, I am starting to come around to this conclusion. I was vehemently opposed to it before...but this does seem like the most viable option.

I agree with this route too. I've been saying it for years.

+100. I would hate to see any neighborhood be changed before this happens. Otherwise I agree, removing one of these schools isn't enough. Bancroft and Shepherd send about 30-50 kids a year. OOB feeders are more than that combined.

Yes, definitely makes sense to put the OOB kids from feeders at a lower order of priority than the in-bounds kids at feeders (although they'd remain at higher priority than OOB not at feeders). And obviously part of this is to cap enrollment at school capacity, and not allow overflow.

But given the numbers coming up the grades, I'm not sure that's enough to get the enrollment down to capacity. Removal of other feeders may be necessary. But that's a good thing because those removed feeders will help support a different middle school.

Deal is over 30% OOB that's a good amount. That should be removed before any feeder. Otherwise I would say Lafayette and Shepherd would have to move. Lafayette is ward 4 and accounts for about 1/2 to 1/3 of the feeder students.

[Anonymous]

Shepherd is currently only 1/3 IB, so presumably a lot of OOB come from there too, at least for now (the lower grades are a lot more IB, so overcrowding could return in a few years as they matriculate unless there's significant attrition btwn now and then).

[Anonymous]

I think that talking about current OOB students at feeder schools is a bit misleading. If you look at OOB enrollment at Deal feeders kindergarten and below, I think you will see that the trend is fizzling. I suspect that the OOB feeder students issue will resolve itself in the next 5 years.

Meanwhile, while I understand that Deal and Shepherd are not sending large numbers of kids to Deal, I think that logical school feeder patterns are necessary. There are schools that are closer to Deal and Shepherd. CHEC and MacFarland are both dual language - why doesn't Bancroft feed into one of these two schools. I partially agree with the poster who mentioned that Shepherd's IB curriculum makes it a good feeder to Deal. My child is at H.D. Cooke. We are also an IB school. Should we also feed to Deal, instead of CHEC, which is dual language (while we're not)?

The feeder patterns as they're currently established demonstrate that Mt. Pleasant and Shepard Park were able to exercise political power to prevent their children from being rezoned to less desirable public schools. That's it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Shepherd is currently only 1/3 IB, so presumably a lot of OOB come from there too, at least for now (the lower grades are a lot more IB, so overcrowding could return in a few years as they matriculate unless there's significant attrition btwn now and then).

Even at full capacity they'd send about 40 kids a year. You would need to remove another school from feeder for any impact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that talking about current OOB students at feeder schools is a bit misleading. If you look at OOB enrollment at Deal feeders kindergarten and below, I think you will see that the trend is fizzling. I suspect that the OOB feeder students issue will resolve itself in the next 5 years.

Meanwhile, while I understand that Deal and Shepherd are not sending large numbers of kids to Deal, I think that logical school feeder patterns are necessary. There are schools that are closer to Deal and Shepherd. CHEC and MacFarland are both dual language - why doesn't Bancroft feed into one of these two schools. I partially agree with the poster who mentioned that Shepherd's IB curriculum makes it a good feeder to Deal. My child is at H.D. Cooke. We are also an IB school. Should we also feed to Deal, instead of CHEC, which is dual language (while we're not)?

The feeder patterns as they're currently established demonstrate that Mt. Pleasant and Shepard Park were able to exercise political power to prevent their children from being rezoned to less desirable public schools. That's it.

I thought I saw a diversity-related lawsuit mentioned here as the reason Bancroft and Shepherd are not likely to get zoned out of Deal/Wilson--maybe someone has more info on that they can post.

[Anonymous]

-I think that Bancroft is starting to nudge some graduates towards McFarland, so the numbers from that feeder may drop a little.
-Even if you didn't allow OOB Bancroft graduates to attend Deal, that would still leave plenty of Latino kids who live IB in apartments along 16th and others parts of the neighborhood (eg from the Woodner).

[Anonymous]

That diversity lawsuit card is a BS red herring, in my view. It's based on the lawsuits from the 1960s and 1970s which dealt with actual disparate treatment among students and schools. None of it said Shepherd Park is required to be zoned forever to Deal Middle. That's just an item one SP poster likes to trot out to threaten a civil rights lawsuit if SP is ever re-zoned away from Deal. It's part of SP's impressive ability to wield political muscle to gain it benefits over other neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

The Smith vs Kaya Henderson court ruling from 2014 is a good read, because it describes the history of race and school operations in DC, and also because it shows that courts understand that just pointing to how things were done in the 60s and 70s cannot control how things are handled today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That diversity lawsuit card is a BS red herring, in my view. It's based on the lawsuits from the 1960s and 1970s which dealt with actual disparate treatment among students and schools. None of it said Shepherd Park is required to be zoned forever to Deal Middle. That's just an item one SP poster likes to trot out to threaten a civil rights lawsuit if SP is ever re-zoned away from Deal. It's part of SP's impressive ability to wield political muscle to gain it benefits over other neighborhoods.

If you look at it all of NW has been exercising its political muscle over SW, SE, and NE for the longest. You all are the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Honestly I think that Hearst is more likely to be routed to Hardy before Shepherd, Bancroft or Lafayette are changed.

Like Eaton was?

Yep

I agree - Hearst is small and has a lot of OOP kids, so less political muscle. And since it is in upper northwest, it's less politically problematic to change it to Hardy than to change Bancroft or Shepard. But that is just my guess, based on what happened with Eaton and (to a lesser degree) Oyster.

If DCPS would put out the waitlist results, you would know that in the PK lottery, all 39 seats went to IB kids. Sure, some of those turned them down and a handful of OOB w/sibling got in. But every year for the past few years, more and more IB kids are enrolling at our school, from which we can practically spit on Deal. Hearst won't be moving to Hardy anytime soon.