Eaton Thrown Under the Bus

[Anonymous]

Shoot. Sorry, clearly not a WoTP parent. I had Eaton and Hearst confused!

But I do think Eaton really isn't thrown under the bus. We would love to be at Hardy but since Pride is limiting OOB we don't have a shot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really think Eaton families have 1) a right to voice their frustration or disappointment 2) a responsibility to see that if they mobilize to make Hardy better they will likely be glad they didn't send their kids to Deal.

At this point it seem easier to make Hardy better than to fight these plans.

I'm going to fight them. It's my kid who will live through a transitional school that is not as solid as what she could have had, By the time Hardy is better, I'll be a grandparent.

Why don't you actually visit Hardy before railing against the plan. Talk to families that go there and are planning to. Try it. Then come back to DCUM and report on your findings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eaton does have a fair number of OOB kids - including a lot from Mt Pleasant who prefer something other than Bancroft. Getting to Hardy is harder for OOB than getting to Deal.

If they don't prefer close/inboundary and are willing to drive their kids west - so be it.

John Eaton is getting close to 50% in boundary, and I'll bet Cleveland Park families will not be thrilled about being forced to Hardy.

Eaton is 36% inbounds. Two of every three eaton students commute from (I'm sure) eotp.

And of those 1/3 IB kids, a good chunk of them are apartment renters who have only been "Cleveland park families" for a short while. So yes, they're families with a recent Cleveland park address but it's not quite the demographic you were hoping to put in everyone's mind with your word choices.

Excuse me, but you're saying that apartment renters are not really neighborhood families?! First someone suggests that the Hardy switch shouldn't matter because John Eaton is majority OOB students -- so they should just shut up and be happy, with what they're getting I guess. Next, the suggestion is that the in-bounds population is comprised of families who have only been apartment dwellers in Cleveland Park for a short while, so Hardy shouldn't matter to them either. Wow.

As an apartment dweller in Cleveland Park, I can assure you quite earnestly, that we are invested in the community and engaged. Let's try to keep these discussions civil and on topic. Would I be a "Cleveland park family" if I was born and raised here? Would that make it better for you? Or new to the area but living in a house? Better?

[Anonymous]

Eaton is CLOSER to Hardy than Deal-why wouldn't that be it's feeder?

[Anonymous]

AND Rhee tried to move it to Hardy years ago and they already had the option. This should not come as a surprise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Excuse me, but you're saying that apartment renters are not really neighborhood families?! First someone suggests that the Hardy switch shouldn't matter because John Eaton is majority OOB students -- so they should just shut up and be happy, with what they're getting I guess. Next, the suggestion is that the in-bounds population is comprised of families who have only been apartment dwellers in Cleveland Park for a short while, so Hardy shouldn't matter to them either. Wow.

As an apartment dweller in Cleveland Park, I can assure you quite earnestly, that we are invested in the community and engaged. Let's try to keep these discussions civil and on topic. Would I be a "Cleveland park family" if I was born and raised here? Would that make it better for you? Or new to the area but living in a house? Better?

I assumed the previous poster was saying the opposite of what you thought. I thought it was a statement of support for everyone who lives in ward 3, irrespective of situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Shoot. Sorry, clearly not a WoTP parent. I had Eaton and Hearst confused!

But I do think Eaton really isn't thrown under the bus. We would love to be at Hardy but since Pride is limiting OOB we don't have a shot.

The Deal / Hardy issue is one thing. The big issue is Wilson. It seems very opaque and contrived when the committee has been able to project that Deal is too full for Eaton, but can't figure out Wilson? They either have the math or they don't, and this seems like a way to get buy-in from Hardy (and potential Hardy) families and then pull the rug out from under them in a year or two when they "figure out" the numbers.

That's where Eaton families (and Hardy families) are thrown under the bus.

BTW: DCPS does not distinguish between IB renters and owners. There's no need to get into a discussion of which students "deserver" which school based on own vs rent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shoot. Sorry, clearly not a WoTP parent. I had Eaton and Hearst confused!

But I do think Eaton really isn't thrown under the bus. We would love to be at Hardy but since Pride is limiting OOB we don't have a shot.

The Deal / Hardy issue is one thing. The big issue is Wilson. It seems very opaque and contrived when the committee has been able to project that Deal is too full for Eaton, but can't figure out Wilson? They either have the math or they don't, and this seems like a way to get buy-in from Hardy (and potential Hardy) families and then pull the rug out from under them in a year or two when they "figure out" the numbers.

That's where Eaton families (and Hardy families) are thrown under the bus.

Not exactly true, they changed Oyster, which would be feeding to Cardozo instead of Wilson

[Anonymous]

I have every expectation that the experts who designed the alternatives envision a two or three step process as this all shakes out. For example, making PK 4 a matter of right would necessitate redrawing many school boundaries in just a year or two. Don't tell me the DME hasn't considered the repercussions of the policy proposals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shoot. Sorry, clearly not a WoTP parent. I had Eaton and Hearst confused!

But I do think Eaton really isn't thrown under the bus. We would love to be at Hardy but since Pride is limiting OOB we don't have a shot.

The Deal / Hardy issue is one thing. The big issue is Wilson. It seems very opaque and contrived when the committee has been able to project that Deal is too full for Eaton, but can't figure out Wilson? They either have the math or they don't, and this seems like a way to get buy-in from Hardy (and potential Hardy) families and then pull the rug out from under them in a year or two when they "figure out" the numbers.

That's where Eaton families (and Hardy families) are thrown under the bus.

BTW: DCPS does not distinguish between IB renters and owners. There's no need to get into a discussion of which students "deserver" which school based on own vs rent.

I understand where you're coming from, but let's keep things in perspective.

One of the 3 scenarios -- B -- mention the possibility of moving Hardy from Wilson if space dictates. Possibility. The wording says new HS, but that doesn't mean new construction high school. Although I am not worried about this possibility, I think we (Hardy parents) should pin DME down about what they envision with this new HS:

Would it be NEW CONSTRUCTION?
Where would it be located? In which wards are the possibilities? (As someone else mentioned, NW is large, and many areas are complete non-starters.)
What's the time horizon?

I actually think putting Hardy in a new HS (whether new construction or not) in either Wards 2 or 3 (where ALL of the Hardy feeders are located) could be great. I would much prefer that over Wilson, especially if new construction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shoot. Sorry, clearly not a WoTP parent. I had Eaton and Hearst confused!

But I do think Eaton really isn't thrown under the bus. We would love to be at Hardy but since Pride is limiting OOB we don't have a shot.

The Deal / Hardy issue is one thing. The big issue is Wilson. It seems very opaque and contrived when the committee has been able to project that Deal is too full for Eaton, but can't figure out Wilson? They either have the math or they don't, and this seems like a way to get buy-in from Hardy (and potential Hardy) families and then pull the rug out from under them in a year or two when they "figure out" the numbers.

That's where Eaton families (and Hardy families) are thrown under the bus.

BTW: DCPS does not distinguish between IB renters and owners. There's no need to get into a discussion of which students "deserver" which school based on own vs rent.

I understand where you're coming from, but let's keep things in perspective.

One of the 3 scenarios -- B -- mention the possibility of moving Hardy from Wilson if space dictates. Possibility. The wording says new HS, but that doesn't mean new construction high school. Although I am not worried about this possibility, I think we (Hardy parents) should pin DME down about what they envision with this new HS:

Would it be NEW CONSTRUCTION?
Where would it be located? In which wards are the possibilities? (As someone else mentioned, NW is large, and many areas are complete non-starters.)
What's the time horizon?

I actually think putting Hardy in a new HS (whether new construction or not) in either Wards 2 or 3 (where ALL of the Hardy feeders are located) could be great. I would much prefer that over Wilson, especially if new construction.

Don't you recall the political firestorm last year when Evans suggested restoring a Western High School in the present Ellington building? Or when Cheh proposed building another middle school in upper northwest? It is folly to think that Hardy would feed to a shiny new nearby high school.

George H.W. Bush has been in the news of late. As he might say about a new high school west of Rock Creek Park.

Nah. Gonna. Happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shoot. Sorry, clearly not a WoTP parent. I had Eaton and Hearst confused!

But I do think Eaton really isn't thrown under the bus. We would love to be at Hardy but since Pride is limiting OOB we don't have a shot.

The Deal / Hardy issue is one thing. The big issue is Wilson. It seems very opaque and contrived when the committee has been able to project that Deal is too full for Eaton, but can't figure out Wilson? They either have the math or they don't, and this seems like a way to get buy-in from Hardy (and potential Hardy) families and then pull the rug out from under them in a year or two when they "figure out" the numbers.

That's where Eaton families (and Hardy families) are thrown under the bus.

Not exactly true, they changed Oyster, which would be feeding to Cardozo instead of Wilson

Yeah, someone downtown must really have it in for Woodley (Oyster) and Cleveland Park (Easton). Guess they didn't show the mayor enough love.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Eaton is CLOSER to Hardy than Deal-why wouldn't that be it's feeder?

FWIW, there is no direct public transportation from east CP to upper Georgetown. Many Oyster/Eaton families can board the red line and pop directly to Deal in a few stops.

I live in neither CP nor Woodley but am intimately familiar with how difficult it is to get from Wisconsin Ave to Connecticut Ave and all points due east.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eaton is CLOSER to Hardy than Deal-why wouldn't that be it's feeder?

FWIW, there is no direct public transportation from east CP to upper Georgetown. Many Oyster/Eaton families can board the red line and pop directly to Deal in a few stops.

I live in neither CP nor Woodley but am intimately familiar with how difficult it is to get from Wisconsin Ave to Connecticut Ave and all points due east.

This is where the politics likely comes in. Shepherd students could probably travel on public transport to the east, but with Bowser in the mix now, that doesn't seem likely to be cut from Deal/ Wilson anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shoot. Sorry, clearly not a WoTP parent. I had Eaton and Hearst confused!

But I do think Eaton really isn't thrown under the bus. We would love to be at Hardy but since Pride is limiting OOB we don't have a shot.

The Deal / Hardy issue is one thing. The big issue is Wilson. It seems very opaque and contrived when the committee has been able to project that Deal is too full for Eaton, but can't figure out Wilson? They either have the math or they don't, and this seems like a way to get buy-in from Hardy (and potential Hardy) families and then pull the rug out from under them in a year or two when they "figure out" the numbers.

That's where Eaton families (and Hardy families) are thrown under the bus.

BTW: DCPS does not distinguish between IB renters and owners. There's no need to get into a discussion of which students "deserver" which school based on own vs rent.

I understand where you're coming from, but let's keep things in perspective.

One of the 3 scenarios -- B -- mention the possibility of moving Hardy from Wilson if space dictates. Possibility. The wording says new HS, but that doesn't mean new construction high school. Although I am not worried about this possibility, I think we (Hardy parents) should pin DME down about what they envision with this new HS:

Would it be NEW CONSTRUCTION?
Where would it be located? In which wards are the possibilities? (As someone else mentioned, NW is large, and many areas are complete non-starters.)
What's the time horizon?

I actually think putting Hardy in a new HS (whether new construction or not) in either Wards 2 or 3 (where ALL of the Hardy feeders are located) could be great. I would much prefer that over Wilson, especially if new construction.

Don't you recall the political firestorm last year when Evans suggested restoring a Western High School in the present Ellington building? Or when Cheh proposed building another middle school in upper northwest? It is folly to think that Hardy would feed to a shiny new nearby high school.

George H.W. Bush has been in the news of late. As he might say about a new high school west of Rock Creek Park.

Nah. Gonna. Happen.

No doubt, Ellington has a vocal constituency. But I think they can (and will) be bought off by a better building elsewhere. Especially if a few years goes by before any decisions have to be made.

That said, I think I still like Option C best.