tired of "diversity for Deal and Wilson" as an argument

[Anonymous]

Deal and Wilson are located in the core of residentially segregated upper northwest. I am tired of the idea that the rest of the City is here to benefit Deal and Wilson by providing local children with a multiracial, multiclass learning experience. We offer them diversity?

And I like it even less when people from schools with more diverse populations or from other areas of the City cite Deal and Wilson's interest in diversity to allow their family, their school to feed to them.

Arguments like "Hearst is full of out boundary black students so it has to be allowed to feed to Deal to provide them diversity.". Or Eaton or Shepherd or Ward 6 to Wilson for that matter.

Upper northwest residents and those who just want to go to school there jump on this when diversity is icing for the cake for Upper Northwest and losing these students into this single feeder pattern is a detriment to the rest of the City.

[Anonymous]

Stop trying to come up with seemingly sensitive and rational arguments just to try and convince others and yourself that OOB minority students should be cut out of Deal and Wilson. Or that certain (although I'm sure not your child's) should be removed as a feeder. Glad I'm on a focus group.

[Anonymous]

I'm sick of people that overpaid for their homes in Ward 3 trying to kick out anyone that doesn't look like their little snowflake. Let's be real, historically whites have never wanted to go to Deal or Wilson. You can't go house poor and decide you can no longer afford private and want to kick out the kids that have been there for generations. Especially when there is another perfectly fine middle school in Ward 3 that is severely under enrolled.

[Anonymous]

A public MS or HS with Janney / Lafayette demographics in DC is politically and ethically unacceptable. Don't like it, leave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm sick of people that overpaid for their homes in Ward 3 trying to kick out anyone that doesn't look like their little snowflake. Let's be real, historically whites have never wanted to go to Deal or Wilson. You can't go house poor and decide you can no longer afford private and want to kick out the kids that have been there for generations. Especially when there is another perfectly fine middle school in Ward 3 that is severely under enrolled.

No kid has been at Deal or Wilson for "generations." Their FAMILIES may have been there for generations - but that doesn't give the current students any rights. Are you seriously suggesting that an OOB student whos mother went to Deal and Wilson has a greater "right" to go there than a kid who lives IB?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A public MS or HS with Janney / Lafayette demographics in DC is politically and ethically unacceptable. Don't like it, leave.

I get why it's politically unacceptable. Why ethically? You believe that neighborhood schools are unethical?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Deal and Wilson are located in the core of residentially segregated upper northwest. I am tired of the idea that the rest of the City is here to benefit Deal and Wilson by providing local children with a multiracial, multiclass learning experience. We offer them diversity?

And I like it even less when people from schools with more diverse populations or from other areas of the City cite Deal and Wilson's interest in diversity to allow their family, their school to feed to them.

Arguments like "Hearst is full of out boundary black students so it has to be allowed to feed to Deal to provide them diversity.". Or Eaton or Shepherd or Ward 6 to Wilson for that matter.

Upper northwest residents and those who just want to go to school there jump on this when diversity is icing for the cake for Upper Northwest and losing these students into this single feeder pattern is a detriment to the rest of the City.

You can be as tired of the argument as you like, but you had better get used to it. It is a simple fact that boundaries that have the effect of eliminating minorities from Deal or Wilson will result in an instant lawsuit -- and a very winnable one at that.

[Anonymous]

A geographical system in a residentially segregated city is going to be segregated in effect. My problem is what clinging to the fringes of that system does to the rest of the City. Clearly it brings it down. Lawsuit based arguments are BS. In a 90% Democrat city the motivation is a reasonable citywide system rather than one working feeder.

[Anonymous]

But shouldn't kids all get to go to a good neighborhood school that isn't so overcrowded that no one gets a good education? Are we just abandoning the schools east of the park?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm sick of people that overpaid for their homes in Ward 3 trying to kick out anyone that doesn't look like their little snowflake. Let's be real, historically whites have never wanted to go to Deal or Wilson. You can't go house poor and decide you can no longer afford private and want to kick out the kids that have been there for generations. Especially when there is another perfectly fine middle school in Ward 3 that is severely under enrolled.

we did not overpay, we paid market value. we never even considered private, regardless of whether we can afford it or not. if YOU want YOUR little snowflake to go to Deal/Wilson, buy or rent (we did the latter for a good amount of years) in boundary for it. the current system in DC is based on preference for IB residents. if you live OOB for a school, just deal with the reality that there might not be space for your kid since IB (whatever the boundaries are now and will be in the future) kids have the right to go there first. after all, as you point out, there is another perfectly fine Ward 3 MS that is severely under enrolled, so your OOB snowflake can find a spot there.

and as a side note, if your kid has been at Deal "for generations", maybe it's time to pay for some extra tutoring

[Anonymous]

How would it be winnable? Isn't limiting a school to those that live in the immediate area, unless there is space for OOB, illegal? Isn't that the way it is done in 99.9% of the US? I live on Capitol Hill and I think it is damaging to the rest of the city schools to have so many schools feed into Deal and Wilson. If you are truely concerned about keeping Deal and Wilson racially and economically diverse, focus on increasing the housing stock that will create a more diverse population of people that reside in that neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Sorry-- isn't it LEGAL to limit a school to the immeidate neighborhood, unless there is space for OOB.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deal and Wilson are located in the core of residentially segregated upper northwest. I am tired of the idea that the rest of the City is here to benefit Deal and Wilson by providing local children with a multiracial, multiclass learning experience. We offer them diversity?

And I like it even less when people from schools with more diverse populations or from other areas of the City cite Deal and Wilson's interest in diversity to allow their family, their school to feed to them.

Arguments like "Hearst is full of out boundary black students so it has to be allowed to feed to Deal to provide them diversity.". Or Eaton or Shepherd or Ward 6 to Wilson for that matter.

Upper northwest residents and those who just want to go to school there jump on this when diversity is icing for the cake for Upper Northwest and losing these students into this single feeder pattern is a detriment to the rest of the City.

You can be as tired of the argument as you like, but you had better get used to it. It is a simple fact that boundaries that have the effect of eliminating minorities from Deal or Wilson will result in an instant lawsuit -- and a very winnable one at that.

Cite your arguments. Saying it's a very winnable lawsuit without any appeal to legal precedent or even legalistic arguments contributes little to the discussion. Saying it so matter-of-factly when you have limited legal background is yet worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Cite your arguments. Saying it's a very winnable lawsuit without any appeal to legal precedent or even legalistic arguments contributes little to the discussion. Saying it so matter-of-factly when you have limited legal background is yet worse.

In 1970, Deal was redistricted to include Mann and Hearst, and the redistricting was challenged in court. Judge Skelley Wright ordered the redistricting reversed, and writing that:

any action by the Board itself which further imperils the integrated status of one of the few remaining District schools where real integration is possible ... must be treated by this court as a violation of its 1967 decree.

(see http://www.leagle.com/decision/19701040320FSupp720_1890)

The "1967 decree" was the ruling in Hobson vs. Hansen, which abolished tracking and any other school organizational schemes which were discriminatory in effect.


This ruling has governed DCPS ever since, that no redistricting can reduce the diversity of an integrated school. Note that intent is not a consideration, just the outcome.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the reference-- so DC needs to integrate the population of upper northwest. what is DC doing to entice African-Americans to live in upper northwest? I know this will sound racist, but the decree is fundamentally racist, but maybe DC could increase public housing in upper northwest as a way to encourage black families EOTP to move into Deal's boundary. Then the city can limit Deal to only those that live in the neighborhood without violating the decree.