Janney third grade parents--what do you think of the giant class sizes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on the boundary line between Murch and Janney (currently zoned for Janney). The only reason I don't want to be rezoned to Murch is because the building sucks. once it is renovated, what's the difference? All the Murch families I know are happy there except for size, which is an issue with J, L, and M schools. Likewise, there were families rezoned from Murch to Lafayette. Other than the fact that Lafayette was farther, not much noise about being moved from M to L.

I do think it's a valid concern to be rezoned to a school that has worse test-scores. I may not care about test scores personally, but it's not crazy.

There was just an article in the NYT about a similar fight happening in Brooklyn. One neighborhood has one overcrowded elementary school (so crowded that IB kids can't even get in, under the rules in NYC). So they want to redraw the lines to zone part of the neighborhood to another school (also in the same neighborhood) but also includes a housing project and (unsurprisingly) the test scores are much worse. Parents would rather their kids attend the overcrowded school than be zoned for a failing school.

I did not read the NYT article but if the schools being referenced is in Park Slope (PS 351), I will tell you that the fight is really about SES and to a lesser extent race. Frankly the same dynamics are present in DC only worse.

except none of the schools being discussed here are "failing" by any measure. You can talk pecking order, but even Hearst can objectively be labeled a "successful" school

In fact, as has been noted on prior threads, if you look at the Hearst test score data by ethnic/racial subgroup - you see the White kids - which often but not always correlates with high SES in DC - score in the same bracket - e.g., 90s - as the "JKLM" scores. Ergo - if the whole school at Hearst were IB (i.e., if parts of Murch and Janney were rzoned to Hearst) and Hearsts' demographics suddenly looked like Janneys and Murchs' - poof - test scores would in all likelihood look similar too. interesting to think about just how quickly that could happen from a numbers perspective - i.e., Hearst was +/- 30% IB. with capacity 300 kids, i.e., 210 kids at Hearst were OOB. IB numbers are expected to be higher this year - say it's up to 35% IB - then 225 OOB. Rezoning roughly 110 kids from both Murch and Janney would be about 15% of current Janney population (700) and 18% of current Murch population (620) - would alleviate their crowding issues some and would turn Hearst into nearly 100% IB school with - most likely - test scores that look like every other Ward 3 nearly 100% IB school... I'm not necessarily advocating for that - I'm just surprised that some folks seem to be unable to anticipate that as the likely result of resetting the boundaries....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As I recall those threads, they were mostly Murch families that were upset about being rezoned to Hearst.

Actually at the community meetings, the Janney parents were about as insane as the Murch ones, if not more. They just didn't vent on DCUM as much.

There is definitely an academic and social pecking order. Janney parents look down on Murch as not being at Janney's level (pointing out that JKLM means Mann). Murch parents view Hearst as an EOTP school that happens to be located WOTP.

From my experience that hasn't been true. Rather, parents get invested in their kids school (or specifically buy in a neighborhood thinking they will go to a certain school) and don't want it changed. Whether it is from going from Janney to Murch, Murch to Hearst or Murch to Lafayette.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on the boundary line between Murch and Janney (currently zoned for Janney). The only reason I don't want to be rezoned to Murch is because the building sucks. once it is renovated, what's the difference? All the Murch families I know are happy there except for size, which is an issue with J, L, and M schools. Likewise, there were families rezoned from Murch to Lafayette. Other than the fact that Lafayette was farther, not much noise about being moved from M to L.

I do think it's a valid concern to be rezoned to a school that has worse test-scores. I may not care about test scores personally, but it's not crazy.

There was just an article in the NYT about a similar fight happening in Brooklyn. One neighborhood has one overcrowded elementary school (so crowded that IB kids can't even get in, under the rules in NYC). So they want to redraw the lines to zone part of the neighborhood to another school (also in the same neighborhood) but also includes a housing project and (unsurprisingly) the test scores are much worse. Parents would rather their kids attend the overcrowded school than be zoned for a failing school.

I did not read the NYT article but if the schools being referenced is in Park Slope (PS 351), I will tell you that the fight is really about SES and to a lesser extent race. Frankly the same dynamics are present in DC only worse.

except none of the schools being discussed here are "failing" by any measure. You can talk pecking order, but even Hearst can objectively be labeled a "successful" school

In fact, as has been noted on prior threads, if you look at the Hearst test score data by ethnic/racial subgroup - you see the White kids - which often but not always correlates with high SES in DC - score in the same bracket - e.g., 90s - as the "JKLM" scores. Ergo - if the whole school at Hearst were IB (i.e., if parts of Murch and Janney were rzoned to Hearst) and Hearsts' demographics suddenly looked like Janneys and Murchs' - poof - test scores would in all likelihood look similar too. interesting to think about just how quickly that could happen from a numbers perspective - i.e., Hearst was +/- 30% IB. with capacity 300 kids, i.e., 210 kids at Hearst were OOB. IB numbers are expected to be higher this year - say it's up to 35% IB - then 225 OOB. Rezoning roughly 110 kids from both Murch and Janney would be about 15% of current Janney population (700) and 18% of current Murch population (620) - would alleviate their crowding issues some and would turn Hearst into nearly 100% IB school with - most likely - test scores that look like every other Ward 3 nearly 100% IB school... I'm not necessarily advocating for that - I'm just surprised that some folks seem to be unable to anticipate that as the likely result of resetting the boundaries....

I would advocate for that, because it would strengthen a system of neighborhood schools while alleviating overcrowding in some schools while other, modernized schools have small, antiquated boundary areas and still have so much excess capacity that they have to fill that capacity by transporting kids from across the city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As I recall those threads, they were mostly Murch families that were upset about being rezoned to Hearst.

Actually at the community meetings, the Janney parents were about as insane as the Murch ones, if not more. They just didn't vent on DCUM as much.

There is definitely an academic and social pecking order. Janney parents look down on Murch as not being at Janney's level (pointing out that JKLM means Mann). Murch parents view Hearst as an EOTP school that happens to be located WOTP.

From my experience that hasn't been true. Rather, parents get invested in their kids school (or specifically buy in a neighborhood thinking they will go to a certain school) and don't want it changed. Whether it is from going from Janney to Murch, Murch to Hearst or Murch to Lafayette.

Perhaps because busy Wisconsin Ave. seems like such a barrier (at least from a kid's perspective), I think of Janney's neighborhood as being more the west side of Wisconsin, what most would call American University Park. Current IB areas east of Wisconsin have a more natural geographical orientation to Murch or Hearst.

[Anonymous]

The former principal explained to parents that part of the reason for the 4 large classes vs. 5 smaller is that in 4th and 5th grades they go to 4 core subjects and rotate throughout the day. It was easier for them to get used to being in 4 classes now rather than next year.

[Anonymous]

But next year will be just as crowded, I don't like the current setup.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As I recall those threads, they were mostly Murch families that were upset about being rezoned to Hearst.

Actually at the community meetings, the Janney parents were about as insane as the Murch ones, if not more. They just didn't vent on DCUM as much.

There is definitely an academic and social pecking order. Janney parents look down on Murch as not being at Janney's level (pointing out that JKLM means Mann). Murch parents view Hearst as an EOTP school that happens to be located WOTP.

From my experience that hasn't been true. Rather, parents get invested in their kids school (or specifically buy in a neighborhood thinking they will go to a certain school) and don't want it changed. Whether it is from going from Janney to Murch, Murch to Hearst or Murch to Lafayette.

Perhaps because busy Wisconsin Ave. seems like such a barrier (at least from a kid's perspective), I think of Janney's neighborhood as being more the west side of Wisconsin, what most would call American University Park. Current IB areas east of Wisconsin have a more natural geographical orientation to Murch or Hearst.

It is ridiculous to use a "busy street" as a cutoff. I'm pretty sure Janney families manage to cross Wisconsin on foot to go to Whole Foods or CVS, I think it can be managed. Perhaps a crossing guard would help you feel more comfortable?

And this from families that brag that they stay in DC for an urban lifestyle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But next year will be just as crowded, I don't like the current setup.

So move, or go to a charter or private - no one is forcing you to stay at Janney. Frankly if the parents who hate the class size self select out we may actually easy the overcrowding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As I recall those threads, they were mostly Murch families that were upset about being rezoned to Hearst.

Actually at the community meetings, the Janney parents were about as insane as the Murch ones, if not more. They just didn't vent on DCUM as much.

There is definitely an academic and social pecking order. Janney parents look down on Murch as not being at Janney's level (pointing out that JKLM means Mann). Murch parents view Hearst as an EOTP school that happens to be located WOTP.

From my experience that hasn't been true. Rather, parents get invested in their kids school (or specifically buy in a neighborhood thinking they will go to a certain school) and don't want it changed. Whether it is from going from Janney to Murch, Murch to Hearst or Murch to Lafayette.

Perhaps because busy Wisconsin Ave. seems like such a barrier (at least from a kid's perspective), I think of Janney's neighborhood as being more the west side of Wisconsin, what most would call American University Park. Current IB areas east of Wisconsin have a more natural geographical orientation to Murch or Hearst.

It is ridiculous to use a "busy street" as a cutoff. I'm pretty sure Janney families manage to cross Wisconsin on foot to go to Whole Foods or CVS, I think it can be managed. Perhaps a crossing guard would help you feel more comfortable?

And this from families that brag that they stay in DC for an urban lifestyle.

let's not forget the part of the Janney boundary extending to the east of Wisconsin towards Friendship Hghts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As I recall those threads, they were mostly Murch families that were upset about being rezoned to Hearst.

Actually at the community meetings, the Janney parents were about as insane as the Murch ones, if not more. They just didn't vent on DCUM as much.

There is definitely an academic and social pecking order. Janney parents look down on Murch as not being at Janney's level (pointing out that JKLM means Mann). Murch parents view Hearst as an EOTP school that happens to be located WOTP.

From my experience that hasn't been true. Rather, parents get invested in their kids school (or specifically buy in a neighborhood thinking they will go to a certain school) and don't want it changed. Whether it is from going from Janney to Murch, Murch to Hearst or Murch to Lafayette.

Perhaps because busy Wisconsin Ave. seems like such a barrier (at least from a kid's perspective), I think of Janney's neighborhood as being more the west side of Wisconsin, what most would call American University Park. Current IB areas east of Wisconsin have a more natural geographical orientation to Murch or Hearst.

It is ridiculous to use a "busy street" as a cutoff. I'm pretty sure Janney families manage to cross Wisconsin on foot to go to Whole Foods or CVS, I think it can be managed. Perhaps a crossing guard would help you feel more comfortable?

And this from families that brag that they stay in DC for an urban lifestyle.

Agreed. Also there are house that are west of wisconsin that are much closer to Janney than houses closer to the Mass Ave side of AU park. I think the fairest way to draw the boundaries is to pick a certain # of miles and using 4130 Albermarle as the center draw a big circle and anything within that circle is IB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on the boundary line between Murch and Janney (currently zoned for Janney). The only reason I don't want to be rezoned to Murch is because the building sucks. once it is renovated, what's the difference? All the Murch families I know are happy there except for size, which is an issue with J, L, and M schools. Likewise, there were families rezoned from Murch to Lafayette. Other than the fact that Lafayette was farther, not much noise about being moved from M to L.

I do think it's a valid concern to be rezoned to a school that has worse test-scores. I may not care about test scores personally, but it's not crazy.

There was just an article in the NYT about a similar fight happening in Brooklyn. One neighborhood has one overcrowded elementary school (so crowded that IB kids can't even get in, under the rules in NYC). So they want to redraw the lines to zone part of the neighborhood to another school (also in the same neighborhood) but also includes a housing project and (unsurprisingly) the test scores are much worse. Parents would rather their kids attend the overcrowded school than be zoned for a failing school.

I did not read the NYT article but if the schools being referenced is in Park Slope (PS 351), I will tell you that the fight is really about SES and to a lesser extent race. Frankly the same dynamics are present in DC only worse.

Correction, PS 321.

DH went to 321 and his parents still live in that zone. Even 30 years ago it was the elementary school to be in!

[Anonymous]

The 321 issue was a handful of years ago. The NYT just did a story last week on Brooklyn Heights and moving the wait list to a local majority-black school with lower scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As I recall those threads, they were mostly Murch families that were upset about being rezoned to Hearst.

Actually at the community meetings, the Janney parents were about as insane as the Murch ones, if not more. They just didn't vent on DCUM as much.

There is definitely an academic and social pecking order. Janney parents look down on Murch as not being at Janney's level (pointing out that JKLM means Mann). Murch parents view Hearst as an EOTP school that happens to be located WOTP.

From my experience that hasn't been true. Rather, parents get invested in their kids school (or specifically buy in a neighborhood thinking they will go to a certain school) and don't want it changed. Whether it is from going from Janney to Murch, Murch to Hearst or Murch to Lafayette.

Perhaps because busy Wisconsin Ave. seems like such a barrier (at least from a kid's perspective), I think of Janney's neighborhood as being more the west side of Wisconsin, what most would call American University Park. Current IB areas east of Wisconsin have a more natural geographical orientation to Murch or Hearst.

It is ridiculous to use a "busy street" as a cutoff. I'm pretty sure Janney families manage to cross Wisconsin on foot to go to Whole Foods or CVS, I think it can be managed. Perhaps a crossing guard would help you feel more comfortable?

And this from families that brag that they stay in DC for an urban lifestyle.

I think that AU Park values its suburb-in-the-city lifestyle!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The former principal explained to parents that part of the reason for the 4 large classes vs. 5 smaller is that in 4th and 5th grades they go to 4 core subjects and rotate throughout the day. It was easier for them to get used to being in 4 classes now rather than next year.

You can rotate with 5 classes too. Murch does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on the boundary line between Murch and Janney (currently zoned for Janney). The only reason I don't want to be rezoned to Murch is because the building sucks. once it is renovated, what's the difference? All the Murch families I know are happy there except for size, which is an issue with J, L, and M schools. Likewise, there were families rezoned from Murch to Lafayette. Other than the fact that Lafayette was farther, not much noise about being moved from M to L.

I do think it's a valid concern to be rezoned to a school that has worse test-scores. I may not care about test scores personally, but it's not crazy.

There was just an article in the NYT about a similar fight happening in Brooklyn. One neighborhood has one overcrowded elementary school (so crowded that IB kids can't even get in, under the rules in NYC). So they want to redraw the lines to zone part of the neighborhood to another school (also in the same neighborhood) but also includes a housing project and (unsurprisingly) the test scores are much worse. Parents would rather their kids attend the overcrowded school than be zoned for a failing school.

I did not read the NYT article but if the schools being referenced is in Park Slope (PS 351), I will tell you that the fight is really about SES and to a lesser extent race. Frankly the same dynamics are present in DC only worse.

except none of the schools being discussed here are "failing" by any measure. You can talk pecking order, but even Hearst can objectively be labeled a "successful" school

In fact, as has been noted on prior threads, if you look at the Hearst test score data by ethnic/racial subgroup - you see the White kids - which often but not always correlates with high SES in DC - score in the same bracket - e.g., 90s - as the "JKLM" scores. Ergo - if the whole school at Hearst were IB (i.e., if parts of Murch and Janney were rzoned to Hearst) and Hearsts' demographics suddenly looked like Janneys and Murchs' - poof - test scores would in all likelihood look similar too. interesting to think about just how quickly that could happen from a numbers perspective - i.e., Hearst was +/- 30% IB. with capacity 300 kids, i.e., 210 kids at Hearst were OOB. IB numbers are expected to be higher this year - say it's up to 35% IB - then 225 OOB. Rezoning roughly 110 kids from both Murch and Janney would be about 15% of current Janney population (700) and 18% of current Murch population (620) - would alleviate their crowding issues some and would turn Hearst into nearly 100% IB school with - most likely - test scores that look like every other Ward 3 nearly 100% IB school... I'm not necessarily advocating for that - I'm just surprised that some folks seem to be unable to anticipate that as the likely result of resetting the boundaries....

I would advocate for that, because it would strengthen a system of neighborhood schools while alleviating overcrowding in some schools while other, modernized schools have small, antiquated boundary areas and still have so much excess capacity that they have to fill that capacity by transporting kids from across the city.

but Hearst does reasonably well with it's less affluent population as well. Its success is not predicated on its whiteness or affluence.