Boundary question

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you start with Janney kicking out children who are there by "Principal discretion" you would not need the renovation.

Across the board if DC got serious about checking residency, confirming IB, following up with children who start IB but move OOB this whole conversation would change.

you sound like the congressmen who would save 100B by cutting "waste, fraud and abuse"...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pushing Hearst & Eaton out does not really solve the long term issue of the neighborhood demographics. The problem is that schools like Janey & Murch are expected to grow so much that you are in the same over crowding mess. You have to address the whole distribution, meaning you have to spread those kids to the schools that have large oob populations now. My guess is that Hearst and Eaton stay but with Janey kids at least pulled into their school boundaries. It is the only way you deal with the underlying numbers problem.

How would that help with the Deal crowding issue if they still feed into Deal?

For the Hearst posters, if more IB students are attending Hearst, how is that different in regards to the diversity issue (which is a Hearst claim for keeping Hearst as a feeder) than having Heast feed into Hardy. Won't Deal be becoming higher SES (ie, white) either way-- if Hearst goes to Hardy OR if IB kids choose Hearst?

It helps deal by redistributing Janey kids & displacing oob kids.

Wait, so it would help Janney not Deal? Ha ok. The world does not revolve around Janney. Do Janney people know this?

It does help Deal because under the prior scenario you would have all the Janney kids plus the OOB kids going to Deal. Under the new scenario, you wouldn't have as many OOB students because the Janney kids now attending Hearst have absorbed the spaces previously allocated to those OOB students.

Agreed, even with new renovation clearly Janney needs to have smaller boundaries, so by shifting them around and putting boundary area available to be IB for Hearst, just makes sense. They need to solve the overcrowding by using the school buildings that exist here for the students that live here. Hearst will have a completely renovated space with gym and cafeteria, it has a large playground next to DCPS park space and an outdoor garden area. If Janney is overcrowded now --imagine 5 years from now the way the demographics are changing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:-- Pushing Hearst & Eaton out does not really solve the long term issue of the neighborhood demographics. The problem is that schools like Janey & Murch are expected to grow so much that you are in the same over crowding mess. You have to address the whole distribution, meaning you have to spread those kids to the schools that have large oob populations now. My guess is that Hearst and Eaton stay but with Janey kids at least pulled into their school boundaries. It is the only way you deal with the underlying numbers problem.

-- How would that help with the Deal crowding issue if they still feed into Deal? For the Hearst posters, if more IB students are attending Hearst, how is that different in regards to the diversity issue (which is a Hearst claim for keeping Hearst as a feeder) than having Heast feed into Hardy. Won't Deal be becoming higher SES (ie, white) either way-- if Hearst goes to Hardy OR if IB kids choose Hearst?

-- It helps deal by redistributing Janey kids & displacing oob kids.

-- Wait, so it would help Janney not Deal? Ha ok. The world does not revolve around Janney. Do Janney people know this?

-- It does help Deal because under the prior scenario you would have all the Janney kids plus the OOB kids going to Deal. Under the new scenario, you wouldn't have as many OOB students because the Janney kids now attending Hearst have absorbed the spaces previously allocated to those OOB students.

-- Agreed, even with new renovation clearly Janney needs to have smaller boundaries, so by shifting them around and putting boundary area available to be IB for Hearst, just makes sense. They need to solve the overcrowding by using the school buildings that exist here for the students that live here. Hearst will have a completely renovated space with gym and cafeteria, it has a large playground next to DCPS park space and an outdoor garden area. If Janney is overcrowded now --imagine 5 years from now the way the demographics are changing.

I guess I don't see Hearst getting switched for several, not necessarily consistent reasons. (Eaton and Oyster, though the latter on the other hand seem more likely.) First, Hearst is quite close to Deal geographically. In fact, the north boundary of Hearst is closer to Deal than even some of Janney or Murch and all of many other schools. Taking out Hearst without removing other schools, like Bancroft, would also create a pretty gerrymandered boundary for Deal. Second, if the feeder pattern is kept, moving Hearst would create some strange situations. Hearst has a large plurality of OB students from close in EOTP -- Crestwood, Shepherd Park, Mount Pleasant, etc. Moving Hearst to Hardy and leaving those other areas ID for Deal would still have a big chunk of the school moving on to Deal. (At the same time as much of the majority AA population of the school, many of which live farther away, would be switched to Hardy as would the close-to-Deal IB families.) Third, although the decision will be up the Mayor alone, Ward politics will likely enter the picture. Having only Ward 3 schools switched to Hardy strikes me as unlikely. More plausible is a scenario where is 3-4 schools have to switch, the so-called pain (because Hardy is not actually that bad of a school!) would be spread across Wards with Eaton and Oyster (though the latter runs through 8th grade) switching from Ward 3, and then a school or two from Ward 4 getting bumped as well. Finally, it strikes me as highly likely that some sections of Janney and Murch will be rezoned to Hearst to cut down on overcrowding at those schools. And I don't see a scenario where those families are told that they have to not only switch their elementary school, but their middle school as well. But, of course, I don't *know* anything, and lots of things could happen.

[Anonymous]

Where will Shephard kids go if not to DEAL?

[Anonymous]

"Finally, it strikes me as highly likely that some sections of Janney and Murch will be rezoned to Hearst to cut down on overcrowding at those schools. And I don't see a scenario where those families are told that they have to not only switch their elementary school, but their middle school as well."

This seems true. How can those schools think they will just get renovation after renovation in order to keep growing and maintain their boundaries? It's as true at the elementary as at the middle school level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where will Shephard kids go if not to DEAL?

Whittier is PK-8, right?

[Anonymous]

Takoma EC is closer

[Anonymous]

Shepherd to Deal: 4 miles
Shepherd to Takoma EC: 1.25 miles.

[Anonymous]

just because something is a K-8 does not make it's boundaries inviolable.

[Anonymous]

reposting from the Deal boundary thread.

I just don't see this happening.

Takoma (only option for Shepherd) K-8 is a D+/C- school
Deal Middle is an A- school
Hardy Middle is a B- school

They are not going to zone kids out of an A- school to a D+/C- school before they zone kids out of a A- school to a B- school. Sorry, it's just not going to happen. You can argue all you want about 1 mile vs 3 miles, it's not happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:reposting from the Deal boundary thread.

I just don't see this happening.

Takoma (only option for Shepherd) K-8 is a D+/C- school
Deal Middle is an A- school
Hardy Middle is a B- school

They are not going to zone kids out of an A- school to a D+/C- school before they zone kids out of a A- school to a B- school. Sorry, it's just not going to happen. You can argue all you want about 1 mile vs 3 miles, it's not happening.

doesn't make it more true to post it on more threads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:reposting from the Deal boundary thread.

I just don't see this happening.

Takoma (only option for Shepherd) K-8 is a D+/C- school
Deal Middle is an A- school
Hardy Middle is a B- school

They are not going to zone kids out of an A- school to a D+/C- school before they zone kids out of a A- school to a B- school. Sorry, it's just not going to happen. You can argue all you want about 1 mile vs 3 miles, it's not happening.

doesn't make it more true to post it on more threads.

So we'll see.

[Anonymous]

According to a neighbor who is an Eaton mom, the local school community in Cleveland Park is getting pretty engergized to fight any re-assignment to Hardy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:According to a neighbor who is an Eaton mom, the local school community in Cleveland Park is getting pretty engergized to fight any re-assignment to Hardy.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:According to a neighbor who is an Eaton mom, the local school community in Cleveland Park is getting pretty energized to fight any re-assignment to Hardy.

I'm sure that they are (though again, Hardy is a fine school). Someone will likely have to move though. Eaton already feeds both into Hardy and Deal. I was at a forum where David Catania (who doesn't get to decide, of course) flat out said to Ward 3 residents that it wasn't likely that Shepherd would be zoned out of Deal, but very likely that Eaton would.