DC Begins School Boundary Study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should absolutely get rid of OOB feeder rights. There's no reason lottering into a school in K should give you an automatic path to that school's feeders till 12th.

I disagree. The bonds formed in cohorts and communities are valuable and it would be harmful to pull a child out of their cohort and community once established. If feeder rights were removed, there would be mass exodus from DCPS.

Luckily, nobody would be forced to do so. Kids would still have rights to their IB schools, in their communities, from K-12, and more of their entering cohort would stay with them. Those whose families chose to enter the OOB elementary lottery could get a preference for their destination middle and high school if they did want to stay.

There is so much mixing and transition at 6th and 9th grades anyway that those are natural points for kids to make new friends. The current situation, where lottery winners peel off in each of the upper elementary grades (often not because they have a problem with their current school, but for the feeder pattern) is worse for cohorts than this change would be.

This change would actually be a reversion to the status quo ante--Michelle Rhee was the chancellor when PK-12 feeder rights were granted. It's not something that always existed.

In a theory, yes, but in reality families will leave DCPS rather than send their kids to less successful IB schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should absolutely get rid of OOB feeder rights. There's no reason lottering into a school in K should give you an automatic path to that school's feeders till 12th.

I disagree. The bonds formed in cohorts and communities are valuable and it would be harmful to pull a child out of their cohort and community once established. If feeder rights were removed, there would be mass exodus from DCPS.

It is also harmful for kids to be pulled out of elementary school for the hope of a better feeder pattern. It harms the schools kids leave, their classmates, and maybe the kids themselves. It definitely creates more traffic and it overcrowded deal and hardy. Allowing a feeder preference, with a percentage of seats for at-risk, would be a better idea.

The kids will leave those schools regardless

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should absolutely get rid of OOB feeder rights. There's no reason lottering into a school in K should give you an automatic path to that school's feeders till 12th.

I disagree. The bonds formed in cohorts and communities are valuable and it would be harmful to pull a child out of their cohort and community once established. If feeder rights were removed, there would be mass exodus from DCPS.

You mean an exodus from the schools that feed to JR. The rest of the schools have exactly the same incentives, but maybe some of the exodus from JR feeder schools would go to those schools instead of the burbs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should absolutely get rid of OOB feeder rights. There's no reason lottering into a school in K should give you an automatic path to that school's feeders till 12th.

I disagree. The bonds formed in cohorts and communities are valuable and it would be harmful to pull a child out of their cohort and community once established. If feeder rights were removed, there would be mass exodus from DCPS.

You mean an exodus from the schools that feed to JR. The rest of the schools have exactly the same incentives, but maybe some of the exodus from JR feeder schools would go to those schools instead of the burbs.

No, they won’t. They will go charter, private or move.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should absolutely get rid of OOB feeder rights. There's no reason lottering into a school in K should give you an automatic path to that school's feeders till 12th.

I disagree. The bonds formed in cohorts and communities are valuable and it would be harmful to pull a child out of their cohort and community once established. If feeder rights were removed, there would be mass exodus from DCPS.

Luckily, nobody would be forced to do so. Kids would still have rights to their IB schools, in their communities, from K-12, and more of their entering cohort would stay with them. Those whose families chose to enter the OOB elementary lottery could get a preference for their destination middle and high school if they did want to stay.

There is so much mixing and transition at 6th and 9th grades anyway that those are natural points for kids to make new friends. The current situation, where lottery winners peel off in each of the upper elementary grades (often not because they have a problem with their current school, but for the feeder pattern) is worse for cohorts than this change would be.

This change would actually be a reversion to the status quo ante--Michelle Rhee was the chancellor when PK-12 feeder rights were granted. It's not something that always existed.

In a theory, yes, but in reality families will leave DCPS rather than send their kids to less successful IB schools.

Some will. But in the past few years, there are a lot of elementary schools that I hear more people on here willing to try--and stay with for longer. If you look at the boundary study from 2013-14, there are a ton of schools that have increased enrollment, test scores, and economic diversity since then. Look at Amidon-Bowen (and note that Van Ness didn't exist at the time, took some of the Amidon boundary, and is now also full), Seaton, Garrison, Langley, Bunker Hill, Bruce-Monroe, Marie Reed, Cooke, Lewis (then called West), Payne, Miner, Ludlow-Taylor, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should absolutely get rid of OOB feeder rights. There's no reason lottering into a school in K should give you an automatic path to that school's feeders till 12th.

I disagree. The bonds formed in cohorts and communities are valuable and it would be harmful to pull a child out of their cohort and community once established. If feeder rights were removed, there would be mass exodus from DCPS.

Luckily, nobody would be forced to do so. Kids would still have rights to their IB schools, in their communities, from K-12, and more of their entering cohort would stay with them. Those whose families chose to enter the OOB elementary lottery could get a preference for their destination middle and high school if they did want to stay.

There is so much mixing and transition at 6th and 9th grades anyway that those are natural points for kids to make new friends. The current situation, where lottery winners peel off in each of the upper elementary grades (often not because they have a problem with their current school, but for the feeder pattern) is worse for cohorts than this change would be.

This change would actually be a reversion to the status quo ante--Michelle Rhee was the chancellor when PK-12 feeder rights were granted. It's not something that always existed.

In a theory, yes, but in reality families will leave DCPS rather than send their kids to less successful IB schools.

Some will. But in the past few years, there are a lot of elementary schools that I hear more people on here willing to try--and stay with for longer. If you look at the boundary study from 2013-14, there are a ton of schools that have increased enrollment, test scores, and economic diversity since then. Look at Amidon-Bowen (and note that Van Ness didn't exist at the time, took some of the Amidon boundary, and is now also full), Seaton, Garrison, Langley, Bunker Hill, Bruce-Monroe, Marie Reed, Cooke, Lewis (then called West), Payne, Miner, Ludlow-Taylor, etc.

But we are talking about feeder pattern. The problem is MS/HS, not ES

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should absolutely get rid of OOB feeder rights. There's no reason lottering into a school in K should give you an automatic path to that school's feeders till 12th.

I disagree. The bonds formed in cohorts and communities are valuable and it would be harmful to pull a child out of their cohort and community once established. If feeder rights were removed, there would be mass exodus from DCPS.

Luckily, nobody would be forced to do so. Kids would still have rights to their IB schools, in their communities, from K-12, and more of their entering cohort would stay with them. Those whose families chose to enter the OOB elementary lottery could get a preference for their destination middle and high school if they did want to stay.

There is so much mixing and transition at 6th and 9th grades anyway that those are natural points for kids to make new friends. The current situation, where lottery winners peel off in each of the upper elementary grades (often not because they have a problem with their current school, but for the feeder pattern) is worse for cohorts than this change would be.

This change would actually be a reversion to the status quo ante--Michelle Rhee was the chancellor when PK-12 feeder rights were granted. It's not something that always existed.

In a theory, yes, but in reality families will leave DCPS rather than send their kids to less successful IB schools.

Some will. But in the past few years, there are a lot of elementary schools that I hear more people on here willing to try--and stay with for longer. If you look at the boundary study from 2013-14, there are a ton of schools that have increased enrollment, test scores, and economic diversity since then. Look at Amidon-Bowen (and note that Van Ness didn't exist at the time, took some of the Amidon boundary, and is now also full), Seaton, Garrison, Langley, Bunker Hill, Bruce-Monroe, Marie Reed, Cooke, Lewis (then called West), Payne, Miner, Ludlow-Taylor, etc.

But we are talking about feeder pattern. The problem is MS/HS, not ES

And compare Stuart-Hobson, Hardy, Jefferson, Wells, and others now to the 2013 boundary study. More IB families are using them. More families overall are using them--enrollment is up. It does not take long for a school's reputation to change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should absolutely get rid of OOB feeder rights. There's no reason lottering into a school in K should give you an automatic path to that school's feeders till 12th.

I disagree. The bonds formed in cohorts and communities are valuable and it would be harmful to pull a child out of their cohort and community once established. If feeder rights were removed, there would be mass exodus from DCPS.

Luckily, nobody would be forced to do so. Kids would still have rights to their IB schools, in their communities, from K-12, and more of their entering cohort would stay with them. Those whose families chose to enter the OOB elementary lottery could get a preference for their destination middle and high school if they did want to stay.

There is so much mixing and transition at 6th and 9th grades anyway that those are natural points for kids to make new friends. The current situation, where lottery winners peel off in each of the upper elementary grades (often not because they have a problem with their current school, but for the feeder pattern) is worse for cohorts than this change would be.

This change would actually be a reversion to the status quo ante--Michelle Rhee was the chancellor when PK-12 feeder rights were granted. It's not something that always existed.

In a theory, yes, but in reality families will leave DCPS rather than send their kids to less successful IB schools.

Some will. But in the past few years, there are a lot of elementary schools that I hear more people on here willing to try--and stay with for longer. If you look at the boundary study from 2013-14, there are a ton of schools that have increased enrollment, test scores, and economic diversity since then. Look at Amidon-Bowen (and note that Van Ness didn't exist at the time, took some of the Amidon boundary, and is now also full), Seaton, Garrison, Langley, Bunker Hill, Bruce-Monroe, Marie Reed, Cooke, Lewis (then called West), Payne, Miner, Ludlow-Taylor, etc.

But we are talking about feeder pattern. The problem is MS/HS, not ES

And compare Stuart-Hobson, Hardy, Jefferson, Wells, and others now to the 2013 boundary study. More IB families are using them. More families overall are using them--enrollment is up. It does not take long for a school's reputation to change.

Has any high school's reputation changed yet?

[Anonymous]

You almost need two threads on this topic — JR and its feeders and what political fights to have, and everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should absolutely get rid of OOB feeder rights. There's no reason lottering into a school in K should give you an automatic path to that school's feeders till 12th.

I disagree. The bonds formed in cohorts and communities are valuable and it would be harmful to pull a child out of their cohort and community once established. If feeder rights were removed, there would be mass exodus from DCPS.

Luckily, nobody would be forced to do so. Kids would still have rights to their IB schools, in their communities, from K-12, and more of their entering cohort would stay with them. Those whose families chose to enter the OOB elementary lottery could get a preference for their destination middle and high school if they did want to stay.

There is so much mixing and transition at 6th and 9th grades anyway that those are natural points for kids to make new friends. The current situation, where lottery winners peel off in each of the upper elementary grades (often not because they have a problem with their current school, but for the feeder pattern) is worse for cohorts than this change would be.

This change would actually be a reversion to the status quo ante--Michelle Rhee was the chancellor when PK-12 feeder rights were granted. It's not something that always existed.

In a theory, yes, but in reality families will leave DCPS rather than send their kids to less successful IB schools.

Some will. But in the past few years, there are a lot of elementary schools that I hear more people on here willing to try--and stay with for longer. If you look at the boundary study from 2013-14, there are a ton of schools that have increased enrollment, test scores, and economic diversity since then. Look at Amidon-Bowen (and note that Van Ness didn't exist at the time, took some of the Amidon boundary, and is now also full), Seaton, Garrison, Langley, Bunker Hill, Bruce-Monroe, Marie Reed, Cooke, Lewis (then called West), Payne, Miner, Ludlow-Taylor, etc.

But we are talking about feeder pattern. The problem is MS/HS, not ES

And compare Stuart-Hobson, Hardy, Jefferson, Wells, and others now to the 2013 boundary study. More IB families are using them. More families overall are using them--enrollment is up. It does not take long for a school's reputation to change.

Has any high school's reputation changed yet?

Coolidge has grown from under 300 to over 1100 (projected) from 2016 to 2023 so I'd say its reputation has improved considerably, if not with the DCUM crowd (and also why you can't just move Wells 8th grade down the hall).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should absolutely get rid of OOB feeder rights. There's no reason lottering into a school in K should give you an automatic path to that school's feeders till 12th.

I disagree. The bonds formed in cohorts and communities are valuable and it would be harmful to pull a child out of their cohort and community once established. If feeder rights were removed, there would be mass exodus from DCPS.

Luckily, nobody would be forced to do so. Kids would still have rights to their IB schools, in their communities, from K-12, and more of their entering cohort would stay with them. Those whose families chose to enter the OOB elementary lottery could get a preference for their destination middle and high school if they did want to stay.

There is so much mixing and transition at 6th and 9th grades anyway that those are natural points for kids to make new friends. The current situation, where lottery winners peel off in each of the upper elementary grades (often not because they have a problem with their current school, but for the feeder pattern) is worse for cohorts than this change would be.

This change would actually be a reversion to the status quo ante--Michelle Rhee was the chancellor when PK-12 feeder rights were granted. It's not something that always existed.

In a theory, yes, but in reality families will leave DCPS rather than send their kids to less successful IB schools.

Some will. But in the past few years, there are a lot of elementary schools that I hear more people on here willing to try--and stay with for longer. If you look at the boundary study from 2013-14, there are a ton of schools that have increased enrollment, test scores, and economic diversity since then. Look at Amidon-Bowen (and note that Van Ness didn't exist at the time, took some of the Amidon boundary, and is now also full), Seaton, Garrison, Langley, Bunker Hill, Bruce-Monroe, Marie Reed, Cooke, Lewis (then called West), Payne, Miner, Ludlow-Taylor, etc.

But we are talking about feeder pattern. The problem is MS/HS, not ES

And compare Stuart-Hobson, Hardy, Jefferson, Wells, and others now to the 2013 boundary study. More IB families are using them. More families overall are using them--enrollment is up. It does not take long for a school's reputation to change.

Has any high school's reputation changed yet?

I think JR's reputation has gotten worse. As a PP noted, Coolidge has increased enrollment since then. McKinley Tech and Banneker have both attracted families that wouldn't have considered them before. There are also high schools that didn't exist at the 2013-14 boundary process: Ron Brown, DCI, Bard Early College, Washington Leadership Academy, probably more. BASIS only opened in 2012. So the HS landscape has changed considerably.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should absolutely get rid of OOB feeder rights. There's no reason lottering into a school in K should give you an automatic path to that school's feeders till 12th.

I disagree. The bonds formed in cohorts and communities are valuable and it would be harmful to pull a child out of their cohort and community once established. If feeder rights were removed, there would be mass exodus from DCPS.

Luckily, nobody would be forced to do so. Kids would still have rights to their IB schools, in their communities, from K-12, and more of their entering cohort would stay with them. Those whose families chose to enter the OOB elementary lottery could get a preference for their destination middle and high school if they did want to stay.

There is so much mixing and transition at 6th and 9th grades anyway that those are natural points for kids to make new friends. The current situation, where lottery winners peel off in each of the upper elementary grades (often not because they have a problem with their current school, but for the feeder pattern) is worse for cohorts than this change would be.

This change would actually be a reversion to the status quo ante--Michelle Rhee was the chancellor when PK-12 feeder rights were granted. It's not something that always existed.

In a theory, yes, but in reality families will leave DCPS rather than send their kids to less successful IB schools.

Some will. But in the past few years, there are a lot of elementary schools that I hear more people on here willing to try--and stay with for longer. If you look at the boundary study from 2013-14, there are a ton of schools that have increased enrollment, test scores, and economic diversity since then. Look at Amidon-Bowen (and note that Van Ness didn't exist at the time, took some of the Amidon boundary, and is now also full), Seaton, Garrison, Langley, Bunker Hill, Bruce-Monroe, Marie Reed, Cooke, Lewis (then called West), Payne, Miner, Ludlow-Taylor, etc.

But we are talking about feeder pattern. The problem is MS/HS, not ES

And compare Stuart-Hobson, Hardy, Jefferson, Wells, and others now to the 2013 boundary study. More IB families are using them. More families overall are using them--enrollment is up. It does not take long for a school's reputation to change.

I call BS. Four or five years ago there were more in-boundary parents sending their Brent students to Jefferson than there are now. The reality is that Latin Cooper is the hot new MS option from the Hill, not Jefferson. There's been a small uptick in in-boundary enrollment at Stuart Hobson in the last four or five years, but nothing to shout about. Neighborhood buy-in for Eliot Hine hasn't been any more robust. Yes, Hardy's attracting more in-boundary families, but look where the school is, how insanely crowded Deal has become, and how JR has been a fairly solid by-right high school option for decades (vs. Eastern or Dunbar from the Hill). Reputation means little when charter middle schools offer far more serious academics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should absolutely get rid of OOB feeder rights. There's no reason lottering into a school in K should give you an automatic path to that school's feeders till 12th.

I disagree. The bonds formed in cohorts and communities are valuable and it would be harmful to pull a child out of their cohort and community once established. If feeder rights were removed, there would be mass exodus from DCPS.

Luckily, nobody would be forced to do so. Kids would still have rights to their IB schools, in their communities, from K-12, and more of their entering cohort would stay with them. Those whose families chose to enter the OOB elementary lottery could get a preference for their destination middle and high school if they did want to stay.

There is so much mixing and transition at 6th and 9th grades anyway that those are natural points for kids to make new friends. The current situation, where lottery winners peel off in each of the upper elementary grades (often not because they have a problem with their current school, but for the feeder pattern) is worse for cohorts than this change would be.

This change would actually be a reversion to the status quo ante--Michelle Rhee was the chancellor when PK-12 feeder rights were granted. It's not something that always existed.

In a theory, yes, but in reality families will leave DCPS rather than send their kids to less successful IB schools.

Some will. But in the past few years, there are a lot of elementary schools that I hear more people on here willing to try--and stay with for longer. If you look at the boundary study from 2013-14, there are a ton of schools that have increased enrollment, test scores, and economic diversity since then. Look at Amidon-Bowen (and note that Van Ness didn't exist at the time, took some of the Amidon boundary, and is now also full), Seaton, Garrison, Langley, Bunker Hill, Bruce-Monroe, Marie Reed, Cooke, Lewis (then called West), Payne, Miner, Ludlow-Taylor, etc.

But we are talking about feeder pattern. The problem is MS/HS, not ES

And compare Stuart-Hobson, Hardy, Jefferson, Wells, and others now to the 2013 boundary study. More IB families are using them. More families overall are using them--enrollment is up. It does not take long for a school's reputation to change.

I call BS. Four or five years ago there were more in-boundary parents sending their Brent students to Jefferson than there are now. The reality is that Latin Cooper is the hot new MS option from the Hill, not Jefferson. There's been a small uptick in in-boundary enrollment at Stuart Hobson in the last four or five years, but nothing to shout about. Neighborhood buy-in for Eliot Hine hasn't been any more robust. Yes, Hardy's attracting more in-boundary families, but look where the school is, how insanely crowded Deal has become, and how JR has been a fairly solid by-right high school option for decades (vs. Eastern or Dunbar from the Hill). Reputation means little when charter middle schools offer far more serious academics.

What do you think the boundary and assignment process should do to change the problems you see?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should absolutely get rid of OOB feeder rights. There's no reason lottering into a school in K should give you an automatic path to that school's feeders till 12th.

I disagree. The bonds formed in cohorts and communities are valuable and it would be harmful to pull a child out of their cohort and community once established. If feeder rights were removed, there would be mass exodus from DCPS.

Luckily, nobody would be forced to do so. Kids would still have rights to their IB schools, in their communities, from K-12, and more of their entering cohort would stay with them. Those whose families chose to enter the OOB elementary lottery could get a preference for their destination middle and high school if they did want to stay.

There is so much mixing and transition at 6th and 9th grades anyway that those are natural points for kids to make new friends. The current situation, where lottery winners peel off in each of the upper elementary grades (often not because they have a problem with their current school, but for the feeder pattern) is worse for cohorts than this change would be.

This change would actually be a reversion to the status quo ante--Michelle Rhee was the chancellor when PK-12 feeder rights were granted. It's not something that always existed.

In a theory, yes, but in reality families will leave DCPS rather than send their kids to less successful IB schools.

Some will. But in the past few years, there are a lot of elementary schools that I hear more people on here willing to try--and stay with for longer. If you look at the boundary study from 2013-14, there are a ton of schools that have increased enrollment, test scores, and economic diversity since then. Look at Amidon-Bowen (and note that Van Ness didn't exist at the time, took some of the Amidon boundary, and is now also full), Seaton, Garrison, Langley, Bunker Hill, Bruce-Monroe, Marie Reed, Cooke, Lewis (then called West), Payne, Miner, Ludlow-Taylor, etc.

But we are talking about feeder pattern. The problem is MS/HS, not ES

And compare Stuart-Hobson, Hardy, Jefferson, Wells, and others now to the 2013 boundary study. More IB families are using them. More families overall are using them--enrollment is up. It does not take long for a school's reputation to change.

I call BS. Four or five years ago there were more in-boundary parents sending their Brent students to Jefferson than there are now. The reality is that Latin Cooper is the hot new MS option from the Hill, not Jefferson. There's been a small uptick in in-boundary enrollment at Stuart Hobson in the last four or five years, but nothing to shout about. Neighborhood buy-in for Eliot Hine hasn't been any more robust. Yes, Hardy's attracting more in-boundary families, but look where the school is, how insanely crowded Deal has become, and how JR has been a fairly solid by-right high school option for decades (vs. Eastern or Dunbar from the Hill). Reputation means little when charter middle schools offer far more serious academics.

there has been increasing EH buy-in. The Latin Cooper seats are a small blip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow creating an all-city high school lottery would be a big deal. But TR families will never allow it.

I actually have a tweak to suggest in our neighborhood though -- thanks for flagging this OP so I can reach out to suggest my idea.

school wide lottery will decimate the progress DC has made in retaining upper middle class familiies and getting them to commit to Title 1 schools. it was a disaster in San Fran. UMC will definitely move for school certainty

Maybe driving out the 'wrong' UMC families is the whole point...