Boundary Study Townhalls - first one starts now

[Anonymous]

Didn't moving Eaton to Hardy and then Hardy to MacArthur address overcrowding in at Jackson Reed? Is it projected to be over-enrolled after Hardy students lose their feeder rights to J-R? I thought that the whole reason for opening MacArthur in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All this Ward talk. I didn’t know DCPS was supposed to align its feeder patterns by wards. Seems like it should be by proximity, and that may or may not fall along arbitrary ward lines. But if staying in ward is the desired policy, shouldn’t Bancroft then be compelled to stay in their ward. They are ward 1, right? Also by proximity it would make sense not to cross the park to get to school.

And you know Ward 3 starts literally across the street from Lafayette, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All this Ward talk. I didn’t know DCPS was supposed to align its feeder patterns by wards. Seems like it should be by proximity, and that may or may not fall along arbitrary ward lines. But if staying in ward is the desired policy, shouldn’t Bancroft then be compelled to stay in their ward. They are ward 1, right? Also by proximity it would make sense not to cross the park to get to school.

It sucks for political representation. You think the Ward 1 council member gives a crap about assisting with an issue at the schools in Tenleytown?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Didn't moving Eaton to Hardy and then Hardy to MacArthur address overcrowding in at Jackson Reed? Is it projected to be over-enrolled after Hardy students lose their feeder rights to J-R? I thought that the whole reason for opening MacArthur in the first place.

This is correct. It's a non issue, but muscle memory continues to have people fighting for scraps. Even Deal is under enrollment from pre covid highs. JR will be under 1700 next year and will continue to drop

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think DC's mayor and her staff believe that she ignores the views of privilege hoarders to her peril. I think they are embarrassed to give in to segregationist views, but do so because they know how what these people really want.

The left-of-limousine liberals in DC say a lot, get listened to little, and I think DC government realizes they aren't here in big numbers, though they can vote in CMs like Lewis George.

What happens is that educated middle income parents who really need good public schools and can't afford private get shafted. Our needs don't ever rate because we're not important enough that we need to be satisfied and no politician gets virtue points for ensuring our children are stimulated and safe in school. We're the ones who get sent away with "your kids will be fine..."

Uh, doesn't nearly every parent in DC really need good public schools......whether or not they are educated and middle income or not? Do those parents (aka the typical DCUM poster) somehow need really good public schools more than all the lower income students? Don't all of these students deserve equal access to good public schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't moving Eaton to Hardy and then Hardy to MacArthur address overcrowding in at Jackson Reed? Is it projected to be over-enrolled after Hardy students lose their feeder rights to J-R? I thought that the whole reason for opening MacArthur in the first place.

This is correct. It's a non issue, but muscle memory continues to have people fighting for scraps. Even Deal is under enrollment from pre covid highs. JR will be under 1700 next year and will continue to drop

JR is at 2200 students this year. Hardy sent like 100-150 students to JR each year. Explain the math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think DC's mayor and her staff believe that she ignores the views of privilege hoarders to her peril. I think they are embarrassed to give in to segregationist views, but do so because they know how what these people really want.

The left-of-limousine liberals in DC say a lot, get listened to little, and I think DC government realizes they aren't here in big numbers, though they can vote in CMs like Lewis George.

What happens is that educated middle income parents who really need good public schools and can't afford private get shafted. Our needs don't ever rate because we're not important enough that we need to be satisfied and no politician gets virtue points for ensuring our children are stimulated and safe in school. We're the ones who get sent away with "your kids will be fine..."

Uh, doesn't nearly every parent in DC really need good public schools......whether or not they are educated and middle income or not? Do those parents (aka the typical DCUM poster) somehow need really good public schools more than all the lower income students? Don't all of these students deserve equal access to good public schools?

Yes but for some the definition of "good school" is not based on the characteristics of the school. It's based on the characteristics of the students. A "good school" is equivalent to having a "good cohort of kids" with with kids on or above grade level, already proficient.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't moving Eaton to Hardy and then Hardy to MacArthur address overcrowding in at Jackson Reed? Is it projected to be over-enrolled after Hardy students lose their feeder rights to J-R? I thought that the whole reason for opening MacArthur in the first place.

This is correct. It's a non issue, but muscle memory continues to have people fighting for scraps. Even Deal is under enrollment from pre covid highs. JR will be under 1700 next year and will continue to drop

JR is at 2200 students this year. Hardy sent like 100-150 students to JR each year. Explain the math.

Well, if Hardy typically sends 125 kids per year to JR, they feed about 500 of the 2200 total students there across all grades. In 4 years -- all else being equal -- there will be 1700 students at JR. And that doesn't account for the drop off of JR kids who went to Eaton and Deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think DC's mayor and her staff believe that she ignores the views of privilege hoarders to her peril. I think they are embarrassed to give in to segregationist views, but do so because they know how what these people really want.

The left-of-limousine liberals in DC say a lot, get listened to little, and I think DC government realizes they aren't here in big numbers, though they can vote in CMs like Lewis George.

What happens is that educated middle income parents who really need good public schools and can't afford private get shafted. Our needs don't ever rate because we're not important enough that we need to be satisfied and no politician gets virtue points for ensuring our children are stimulated and safe in school. We're the ones who get sent away with "your kids will be fine..."

Uh, doesn't nearly every parent in DC really need good public schools......whether or not they are educated and middle income or not? Do those parents (aka the typical DCUM poster) somehow need really good public schools more than all the lower income students? Don't all of these students deserve equal access to good public schools?

Yes but for some the definition of "good school" is not based on the characteristics of the school. It's based on the characteristics of the students. A "good school" is equivalent to having a "good cohort of kids" with with kids on or above grade level, already proficient.

Yes this circular definition based on kids who are already going to succeed largely because their parents are already successful can be dooming. I understand that parents don’t necessarily have a lot to go on, but current operating assumption of too many parents is a good school comes from good test scores rather than good teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't moving Eaton to Hardy and then Hardy to MacArthur address overcrowding in at Jackson Reed? Is it projected to be over-enrolled after Hardy students lose their feeder rights to J-R? I thought that the whole reason for opening MacArthur in the first place.

This is correct. It's a non issue, but muscle memory continues to have people fighting for scraps. Even Deal is under enrollment from pre covid highs. JR will be under 1700 next year and will continue to drop

JR is at 2200 students this year. Hardy sent like 100-150 students to JR each year. Explain the math.

Well, if Hardy typically sends 125 kids per year to JR, they feed about 500 of the 2200 total students there across all grades. In 4 years -- all else being equal -- there will be 1700 students at JR. And that doesn't account for the drop off of JR kids who went to Eaton and Deal.

But not next year, which was the original claim. Next year will be only year 2. And in year 1 of MacArthur, JR’s census went *up*.

[Anonymous]

In year one, MacArthur was optional, but Hardy kids still had rights to Deal. I agree the reduction won't be as fast as the earlier poster stated, but the long-term trend is that MacArthur will significantly reduce JR overcrowding. Why shift more boundaries if the problem will solve itself?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All this Ward talk. I didn’t know DCPS was supposed to align its feeder patterns by wards. Seems like it should be by proximity, and that may or may not fall along arbitrary ward lines. But if staying in ward is the desired policy, shouldn’t Bancroft then be compelled to stay in their ward. They are ward 1, right? Also by proximity it would make sense not to cross the park to get to school.

And you know Ward 3 starts literally across the street from Lafayette, right?

And Murch starts literally across the street from Crestwood. The catchment for Lafayette is big enough that they could send some of those kids to Ward 4 schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All this Ward talk. I didn’t know DCPS was supposed to align its feeder patterns by wards. Seems like it should be by proximity, and that may or may not fall along arbitrary ward lines. But if staying in ward is the desired policy, shouldn’t Bancroft then be compelled to stay in their ward. They are ward 1, right? Also by proximity it would make sense not to cross the park to get to school.

It sucks for political representation. You think the Ward 1 council member gives a crap about assisting with an issue at the schools in Tenleytown?

They also have educational alliances that support what is happening within the ward. In Ward 4, representatives from Shepherd routinely try to say that Deal and J-R should be considered Ward 4 schools since some Ward 4 students attend them, and the alliance is like, nope, not our purview to address your concerns with these schools, we have enough issues with trying to get actual Ward 4 schools functioning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't moving Eaton to Hardy and then Hardy to MacArthur address overcrowding in at Jackson Reed? Is it projected to be over-enrolled after Hardy students lose their feeder rights to J-R? I thought that the whole reason for opening MacArthur in the first place.

This is correct. It's a non issue, but muscle memory continues to have people fighting for scraps. Even Deal is under enrollment from pre covid highs. JR will be under 1700 next year and will continue to drop

JR is at 2200 students this year. Hardy sent like 100-150 students to JR each year. Explain the math.

Umm..... 150 per class for 4 classes is 600? 2200 - 600 is 1600.

The JR overcrowding will be solved, but the Deal overcrowding needs a solution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't moving Eaton to Hardy and then Hardy to MacArthur address overcrowding in at Jackson Reed? Is it projected to be over-enrolled after Hardy students lose their feeder rights to J-R? I thought that the whole reason for opening MacArthur in the first place.

This is correct. It's a non issue, but muscle memory continues to have people fighting for scraps. Even Deal is under enrollment from pre covid highs. JR will be under 1700 next year and will continue to drop

JR is at 2200 students this year. Hardy sent like 100-150 students to JR each year. Explain the math.

If JR is at 2200 and Hardy sends let's call it 125 students to JR each year...then after 4 years, JR total enrollment will drop by 2200 - 125*4 = 1700.

That said, this requires that they commit to JR dropping to 1700 and don't end up taking all kinds of people OOB in order to maintain 2000+ kids.