Big GDS news

[Anonymous]

Maybe they will retain the lower school location for lower school and just move the middle school?

[Anonymous]

THS- Tenleytown High School. Mascot becomes a towering broadcast antenna.

[Anonymous]

I'm a GDS family who is really excited about the new campus plan. I think there is so much benefit to having the school on one campus and I think they can reduce the school's physical footprint by sharing resources. As to the poster saying parents don't want to drop their kids off in a garage - that wouldn't bother me at all.

[Anonymous]

Don’t underestimate how much the consolidated campus will be more efficient for GDS operations and enhance campus security in a way that never could be addressed today at the Palisades site or with a public supermarket across the driveway from the Upper School. Of course, a secure and private campus is important for all students and staff, but it is vital in Washington for any school that serves the children of top elected officials. For some parents, it still rankles that the Obamas were forced for security reasons to pass on GDS. GDS was probably the best fit – as the first integrated independent school in D.C. and with lots of ties to Obama insiders. (David Brooks wrote in 2008 in the NY Times that “So many of them send their kids to Georgetown Day School, the posh leftish private school in D.C., that they’ll be able to hold White House staff meetings in the carpool line.”). While families know the superior value of a GDS education, there’s a sense of frustration that the school hasn’t received the same recognition that has been accorded to St. Albans and Sidwell because those schools have educated prominent political offspring. By controlling access to basically an entire city block, GDS will be able to address past security concerns and ensure that when a future POTUS or VP wants to select GDS, there will be no veto by the Secret Service.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don’t underestimate how much the consolidated campus will be more efficient for GDS operations and enhance campus security in a way that never could be addressed today at the Palisades site or with a public supermarket across the driveway from the Upper School. Of course, a secure and private campus is important for all students and staff, but it is vital in Washington for any school that serves the children of top elected officials. For some parents, it still rankles that the Obamas were forced for security reasons to pass on GDS. GDS was probably the best fit – as the first integrated independent school in D.C. and with lots of ties to Obama insiders. (David Brooks wrote in 2008 in the NY Times that “So many of them send their kids to Georgetown Day School, the posh leftish private school in D.C., that they’ll be able to hold White House staff meetings in the carpool line.”). While families know the superior value of a GDS education, there’s a sense of frustration that the school hasn’t received the same recognition that has been accorded to St. Albans and Sidwell because those schools have educated prominent political offspring. By controlling access to basically an entire city block, GDS will be able to address past security concerns and ensure that when a future POTUS or VP wants to select GDS, there will be no veto by the Secret Service.

Wow. this is the stupidest post on so many levels. (Obama's - get over it, nothing to do with security). But previous posters citing GDS' open campus, now this poster is claiming security concerns as a reason people pass on the school. Maybe they passed on the school because of the crappy campus, lack of cafetaria, informal atmosphere and failure to get enough kids in to Harvard.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous]The GDS proposal is super greedy, super inappropriate for the site and way too dense and high. It should be and, as currently proposed, will be, vigorously opposed by the surrounding community.[/quote]

Shouldn't Wisconsin Ave have denser and higher development? How is this different than what is being constructed at the Babe's Billiards site next door or the upscale Cathedral Commons just down the road? Why shouldn't GDS get a piece of the action, if it chooses to do so? And it's for a good cause, which is generating funds for financial aid and keeping tuition increases reasonable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t underestimate how much the consolidated campus will be more efficient for GDS operations and enhance campus security in a way that never could be addressed today at the Palisades site or with a public supermarket across the driveway from the Upper School. Of course, a secure and private campus is important for all students and staff, but it is vital in Washington for any school that serves the children of top elected officials. For some parents, it still rankles that the Obamas were forced for security reasons to pass on GDS. GDS was probably the best fit – as the first integrated independent school in D.C. and with lots of ties to Obama insiders. (David Brooks wrote in 2008 in the NY Times that “So many of them send their kids to Georgetown Day School, the posh leftish private school in D.C., that they’ll be able to hold White House staff meetings in the carpool line.”). While families know the superior value of a GDS education, there’s a sense of frustration that the school hasn’t received the same recognition that has been accorded to St. Albans and Sidwell because those schools have educated prominent political offspring. By controlling access to basically an entire city block, GDS will be able to address past security concerns and ensure that when a future POTUS or VP wants to select GDS, there will be no veto by the Secret Service.

Wow. this is the stupidest post on so many levels. (Obama's - get over it, nothing to do with security). But previous posters citing GDS' open campus, now this poster is claiming security concerns as a reason people pass on the school. Maybe they passed on the school because of the crappy campus, lack of cafetaria, informal atmosphere and failure to get enough kids in to Harvard.

GDS may lack a cafeteria but apparently doesn't lack in admissions to Harvard!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they will retain the lower school location for lower school and just move the middle school?

I hope so. That would make more sense.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The GDS proposal is super greedy, super inappropriate for the site and way too dense and high. It should be and, as currently proposed, will be, vigorously opposed by the surrounding community.[/quote]

Shouldn't Wisconsin Ave have denser and higher development? How is this different than what is being constructed at the Babe's Billiards site next door or the upscale Cathedral Commons just down the road? Why shouldn't GDS get a piece of the action, if it chooses to do so? And it's for a good cause, which is generating funds for financial aid and keeping tuition increases reasonable.[/quote]

Because it needs the land for school facilities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There must be some GDS-affiliated developers associated with this plan, but I still can't see how the trustees can approve it with so much expense for little/no extra space.

Every one I talk to is very excited about the new, state-of-the art combined campus. One person even described the deal as "brilliant." I trust the Trustees.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The GDS proposal is super greedy, super inappropriate for the site and way too dense and high. It should be and, as currently proposed, will be, vigorously opposed by the surrounding community.[/quote]

Shouldn't Wisconsin Ave have denser and higher development? How is this different than what is being constructed at the Babe's Billiards site next door or the upscale Cathedral Commons just down the road? [b]Why shouldn't GDS get a piece of the action, if it chooses to do so? [/b] And it's for a good cause, which is generating funds for financial aid and keeping tuition increases reasonable.[/quote]


Is GDS a non-profit with a mission to educate?

[Anonymous]

Generating funds for Tuition... Those are talking points developed for the developer who is going to profit from the project but gets to hide behind the skirt of financial aid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they will retain the lower school location for lower school and just move the middle school?

I hope so. That would make more sense.

I hope not. It makes so much more sense (for working parents, faculty, resources, finances, transit, etc.) to have a unified campus, which is the plan anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There must be some GDS-affiliated developers associated with this plan, but I still can't see how the trustees can approve it with so much expense for little/no extra space.

Every one I talk to is very excited about the new, state-of-the art combined campus. One person even described the deal as "brilliant." I trust the Trustees.

And one person I talk to called it "idiocy."

It's depressing to keep hearing "trust the Trustees." Critical thinking, rather than mindless deference to authority, used to be a core GDS value.

[Anonymous]

That was before GDS became over run by families from Potomac.