Northwest current article on school boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Setting aside the diversity discussion for a moment...Purely from a numbers-crunching perspective (16:05) would limiting Deal to Janney, Murch and Layfayette solve the overcrowding there?
16:05 "I will say this though - and it will not be popular with friends: If geographic logic entered the conversation, the only schools that should feed to Deal are Janney, Murch and Layfayette. "

You must be new here, we don't let facts cloud our opinions on DCUM.

Once again:
Here is the latest available information for the schools that feed Deal. The columns are current enrollment, reported in-boundary percentage, and number of in-boundary students based on that percentage:
Eaton 457 32% 146.24
Bancroft 463 49% 226.87
Lafayette 707 90% 636.3
Murch 556 56% 311.36
Janney 558 87% 485.46
Shepherd 331 28% 92.68
Hearst 257 19% 48.83

Total 3329 59% 1947.74

The current rated capacity of Deal is 910, or 303 per grade, not counting the expansion that is underway. Current enrollment is 1014 or 338 per grade. Enrollment of the feeder schools is 3329, or 475 per grade.

I'll throw out two scenarios, the truth is somewhere between them:
Scenario 1: Let's assume that school population isn't growing, that the reason class size is smaller in elementary than in middle school is that only 71% of in-boundary elementary school kids go on to Deal. To get Deal to capacity you need to cut 35 kids per grade, or 11.5% of kids. Cutting 11.5% out of the feeder school means taking out 385 kids.

Scenario 2: Let's assume school population is growing, that today's 338 per grade will grow to 475 per grade when all the current elementary school kids reach middle school. To get Deal to capacity you'd need to cut 172 kids per grade, or 36%, or 1205 kids out of the feeder schools.

So the answer is somewhere between 385 and 1205 kids. Look at that list and decide where you would cut. To answer the original question, Janney, Murch and Lafayette come to about 1800, a cut of over 1500. That would be far more than necessary unless you wanted to turn Deal into a de facto city-wide school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^ And note that those who live in boundary for Hardy go elsewhere. Some manage to get into Deal. I wonder how that happened...

Deal is over 40% OOB, those kids must be coming from somewhere. Is there a rule they can't come from a Hardy feeder?

[Anonymous]

I don't agree that we hold on to our segregation tightly. The nation's made great strides. But yes, the segregation today is not about race, it's about income level. And a lot of that started in the 1980s with "trickle down economics", which gave us stagnant wages while the rich got richer, and has since then been decimating the middle class more and more. DC is fairly unique in that a lot of people from outside come to DC - and bring with them advanced degrees and high powered resumes. In less-dynamic communities around the nation you will find plenty of locales where a majority of the poor folks are white. Mere fact of one's skin color does NOT bring "privilege".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nothing in this thread was informative except for the fact that there are people in this town who would love to dig a moat around Ward 3 schools and pull up the draw bridge to anyone outside of the neighborhood. Good luck with that.

BTW, it was the OOB families that kept some of these schools viable for years. That was certainly true at Deal.

I will say this though - and it will not be popular with friends: If geographic logic entered the conversation, the only schools that should feed to Deal are Janney, Murch and Layfayette. Mann, Key, Hyde and Hearst should feed to Hardy. Oyster children should stay at Oyster until HS. Shepherd should feed to Takoma EC. Crestwood to West or MacFarland. Bancroft should feed to Lincoln.

The above will not provide any diversity at Deal, but didn't you buy your house so that you wouldn't have to rub shoulders with certain people?

I largely agree with your breakdown. However, McFarland is on the closure list so that's not an option. And, Takoma is an EC, not a real MS, so it's not really fair to pull that rug out from under Shepherd unless and until there's a viable MS they can attend. Also, Crestwood is a neighborhood, not an ES. I think you're right about all the others. Janney, Murch, Lafayette definitely to Deal. Hearst to Deal. Shepherd to Deal. Mann, Key, Hyde, Stoddert, Eaton definitely to Hardy. Oyster stay at Oyster. Bancroft to either Oyster or Lincoln.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't agree that we hold on to our segregation tightly. The nation's made great strides. But yes, the segregation today is not about race, it's about income level. And a lot of that started in the 1980s with "trickle down economics", which gave us stagnant wages while the rich got richer, and has since then been decimating the middle class more and more. DC is fairly unique in that a lot of people from outside come to DC - and bring with them advanced degrees and high powered resumes. In less-dynamic communities around the nation you will find plenty of locales where a majority of the poor folks are white. Mere fact of one's skin color does NOT bring "privilege".

As opposed to the booming '70s?? When the term "stagflation" entered the lexicon? The '80s really were a great decade economically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing in this thread was informative except for the fact that there are people in this town who would love to dig a moat around Ward 3 schools and pull up the draw bridge to anyone outside of the neighborhood. Good luck with that.

BTW, it was the OOB families that kept some of these schools viable for years. That was certainly true at Deal.

I will say this though - and it will not be popular with friends: If geographic logic entered the conversation, the only schools that should feed to Deal are Janney, Murch and Layfayette. Mann, Key, Hyde and Hearst should feed to Hardy. Oyster children should stay at Oyster until HS. Shepherd should feed to Takoma EC. Crestwood to West or MacFarland. Bancroft should feed to Lincoln.

The above will not provide any diversity at Deal, but didn't you buy your house so that you wouldn't have to rub shoulders with certain people?

I largely agree with your breakdown. However, McFarland is on the closure list so that's not an option. And, Takoma is an EC, not a real MS, so it's not really fair to pull that rug out from under Shepherd unless and until there's a viable MS they can attend. Also, Crestwood is a neighborhood, not an ES. I think you're right about all the others. Janney, Murch, Lafayette definitely to Deal. Hearst to Deal. Shepherd to Deal. Mann, Key, Hyde, Stoddert, Eaton definitely to Hardy. Oyster stay at Oyster. Bancroft to either Oyster or Lincoln.

So what about all those that go to deal and wilson by right and not by feeder? do those get changed too? My guess is you cant change BOTH

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
The current rated capacity of Deal is 910, or 303 per grade, not counting the expansion that is underway. Current enrollment is 1014 or 338 per grade. Enrollment of the feeder schools is 3329, or 475 per grade.

I'll throw out two scenarios, the truth is somewhere between them:
Scenario 1: Let's assume that school population isn't growing, that the reason class size is smaller in elementary than in middle school is that only 71% of in-boundary elementary school kids go on to Deal. To get Deal to capacity you need to cut 35 kids per grade, or 11.5% of kids. Cutting 11.5% out of the feeder school means taking out 385 kids.

Scenario 2: Let's assume school population is growing, that today's 338 per grade will grow to 475 per grade when all the current elementary school kids reach middle school. To get Deal to capacity you'd need to cut 172 kids per grade, or 36%, or 1205 kids out of the feeder schools.

So the answer is somewhere between 385 and 1205 kids. Look at that list and decide where you would cut. To answer the original question, Janney, Murch and Lafayette come to about 1800, a cut of over 1500. That would be far more than necessary unless you wanted to turn Deal into a de facto city-wide school.

Yesterday I had a long meeting with Mathew Frumin who is running for an At Large seat on the DC Council. We discussed the boundary issue, particularly as it pertains to Deal and Wilson, in great detail. He cited numbers showing that grade sizes at Deal would grow to about 450 (this is from my memory, it could have been slightly less or slightly more), but that with the added capacity coming as a result of the Reno School renovation, Deal would have room for nearly that many. He felt that Deal could handle the expected number of students, though perhaps with a minor overcrowding. As a result, he didn't think that Deal required much in the way of boundary modification. I'd be interested to hear what other think about his analysis.

[Anonymous]

That sounds right, Jeff. I think the bigger issue is expanding capacity and "viability" beyond the Wilson cluster. In this sense, the idea of moving Ellington to U Street or Cardozo/Roosevelt and co-locating would then make the re-launch of Western High School in a renovated former Ellington/former Western space viable. This new school could draw from SW (as Wilson does now), Georgetown, southern Ward 3 and Mt. Pleasant, Adams Morgan, DuPont etc.

It makes eminent sense, and I believe may have come from the same candidate.

[Anonymous]

oyster can't really even hold its current preK-8 in the two campuses; it will need significant expansion to hold students for 4 more years; there is barely a playground, much less space for high school sports
also the financial issues with such a small class would mean they had few options for AP, etc...

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:
Yesterday I had a long meeting with Mathew Frumin who is running for an At Large seat on the DC Council. We discussed the boundary issue, particularly as it pertains to Deal and Wilson, in great detail. He cited numbers showing that grade sizes at Deal would grow to about 450 (this is from my memory, it could have been slightly less or slightly more), but that with the added capacity coming as a result of the Reno School renovation, Deal would have room for nearly that many. He felt that Deal could handle the expected number of students, though perhaps with a minor overcrowding. As a result, he didn't think that Deal required much in the way of boundary modification. I'd be interested to hear what other think about his analysis.

I was the 13:24 PP. I'm sure DCPS knows (a) the capacity of the new addition at Deal and (b) how the feeder school population breaks down by grade and (c) the historical tendency of feeder school kids to continue to Deal, which together should give a very good picture. Certainly if the current feeder schools average 475 per grade and the new addition gives 450 per grade it's in the right ballpark. We're unlikely to see meaningful growth in the feeder schools: the feeder schools are all essentially full, but in aggregate have over 40% out-of-boundary, so any growth in the in-boundary population is likely to just reduce the OOB population through attrition.

We may even end up with more OOB spots at Deal, it may be possible for OOB kids who didn't go to a Deal feeder to get in, which I think is a good thing. I don't understand why a fifth-grader who won a spot in the OOB lottery for pre-K at a Deal feeder in 2006 is more deserving of a scarce spot at Deal than a fifth-grader who went to his neighborhood school.

Of course enlarging Deal does nothing to help crowding at Wilson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:
Yesterday I had a long meeting with Mathew Frumin who is running for an At Large seat on the DC Council. We discussed the boundary issue, particularly as it pertains to Deal and Wilson, in great detail. He cited numbers showing that grade sizes at Deal would grow to about 450 (this is from my memory, it could have been slightly less or slightly more), but that with the added capacity coming as a result of the Reno School renovation, Deal would have room for nearly that many. He felt that Deal could handle the expected number of students, though perhaps with a minor overcrowding. As a result, he didn't think that Deal required much in the way of boundary modification. I'd be interested to hear what other think about his analysis.

I was the 13:24 PP. I'm sure DCPS knows (a) the capacity of the new addition at Deal and (b) how the feeder school population breaks down by grade and (c) the historical tendency of feeder school kids to continue to Deal, which together should give a very good picture. Certainly if the current feeder schools average 475 per grade and the new addition gives 450 per grade it's in the right ballpark. We're unlikely to see meaningful growth in the feeder schools: the feeder schools are all essentially full, but in aggregate have over 40% out-of-boundary, so any growth in the in-boundary population is likely to just reduce the OOB population through attrition.

We may even end up with more OOB spots at Deal, it may be possible for OOB kids who didn't go to a Deal feeder to get in, which I think is a good thing. I don't understand why a fifth-grader who won a spot in the OOB lottery for pre-K at a Deal feeder in 2006 is more deserving of a scarce spot at Deal than a fifth-grader who went to his neighborhood school.

Of course enlarging Deal does nothing to help crowding at Wilson.

If the PreK student was there for 7 years (5 grades + PK & K) then his entire social cohort is at that school. It would be more disruptive to move him to another school, than to bring a new student in.

[Anonymous]

I'll add that the redistricting issue is really only about Deal and Wilson, if the expansion solves Deal then it's only about Wilson. Wilson actually seems like a much less thorny issue -- although the expansion of Deal could change that as the number of by-right kids for Wilson surges.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone have any thoughts on OP's original question, which is whether Janney's boundaries would be redrawn? Would it be likely for Janney and/or Murch boundaries be shrunk and Hearst's expanded in light of Hearst's extremely low in-boundary admissions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have any thoughts on OP's original question, which is whether Janney's boundaries would be redrawn? Would it be likely for Janney and/or Murch boundaries be shrunk and Hearst's expanded in light of Hearst's extremely low in-boundary admissions?

If it's true that Deal's capacity with the expansion is 450 per grade any redrawing of boundaries is unlikely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have any thoughts on OP's original question, which is whether Janney's boundaries would be redrawn? Would it be likely for Janney and/or Murch boundaries be shrunk and Hearst's expanded in light of Hearst's extremely low in-boundary admissions?

Tough call. If I were at Janney, I might be okay with the western end being re-zoned into Mann - it's not quite as packed to the gills. In general, I think anyone would prefer Mann to Hearst (although it would be different parts of the boundary that would move). However, getting moved to Mann would mean giving up Deal for Hardy, which would send me running to Latin/Basis/DCI/etc.