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

[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....

Where is this data available? It's not on the DCPS profile page for the school.

[Anonymous]

The Hearst data is available by race from previously released DCPS data, but not in the school profiles.

[Anonymous]

That's absolutely true. They didn't post on DCUM as much because everybody jumped down their throat.

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.

[Anonymous]

The Janney parents were incensed for one reason: property values.
Their own kids and their siblings were going to be grandfathered in. They were just concerned about falling property values.

[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....

Where is this data available? It's not on the DCPS profile page for the school.

But are there 110 PK-5 kids on the 5 residential blocks not zoned for Hearst already that are between the schools? And remember that those 5 blocks are the five blocks closest to Janney and Murch. That is why fussing with the triangle in the middle of these three schools didn't really help. So DCPS shifted the other rend of the Murch boundary to Lafayette. They should shift the other end of Janney to Mann.

[Anonymous]

And then shift Mann to Deal where it rightfully belongs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Janney parents were incensed for one reason: property values.
Their own kids and their siblings were going to be grandfathered in. They were just concerned about falling property values.

Why isn't that a legitimate concern? Access to Janney very much drives property values. Why do you think people overpay so much for tiny Side-hall Pre WW II brick "colonials"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Janney parents were incensed for one reason: property values.
Their own kids and their siblings were going to be grandfathered in. They were just concerned about falling property values.

Not everyone, i would love to get re-zoned - being in Mann will lead to even higher property values. Think they will move the line between Spring Valley and AU Park to Yuma - its only one block.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I am sure that works well for Murch and families are free to choose that model by choosing Murch. A lot of families have chosen the Janney model and like it, who are you to say this is not a valid choice when you do not know the details?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So the kids living in au park near western ave go to Westbrook? Count me in!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And then shift Mann to Deal where it rightfully belongs.

And Key!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I am sure that works well for Murch and families are free to choose that model by choosing Murch. A lot of families have chosen the Janney model and like it, who are you to say this is not a valid choice when you do not know the details?

I think you missed the point. If the class is too big for only 4 sections, you can do "the Janney model" with 5 sections. It's just about the logistics of the rotation. Just saying you don't have to accept classes with 32 kids in order to rotate to 4 core subjects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Hearst data is available by race from previously released DCPS data, but not in the school profiles.

OK. We'll just take your word for it then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And then shift Mann to Deal where it rightfully belongs.

And Key!!!!!

Certainly the top JKLM group schools deserves Deal. The rest can make do with Hardy.

[Anonymous]

Written by a mom who lives in the area that would be re-zoned for Hearst. "See, the other parents want to be moved."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Janney parents were incensed for one reason: property values.
Their own kids and their siblings were going to be grandfathered in. They were just concerned about falling property values.

Not everyone, i would love to get re-zoned - being in Mann will lead to even higher property values. Think they will move the line between Spring Valley and AU Park to Yuma - its only one block.