Proposal is up!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Brookland kids will go to Dunbar? Seems odd.

What would be logical to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, I feel kinda screwed in SW. Losing Wilson, while expected, sucks. A guaranteed right to attend PK in-bounds doesn't make up for that. Actually can't tell if I'll be in Van Ness or Amidon, but I don't have a huge preference.

Also, it's at-risk KIDS, not kids in schools with lots of at-risk kids, who get preference at the wealthier schools. So if you are middle class but live in an area with crappy schools, you have less of a chance now to get into a better school OOB than you did before. Your only "benefit" is that some of the poorer kids will be able to go elsewhere--but it's the ones with the most motivated parents, so that's not actually good.

The Van Ness boundary runs down South Capitol. I have no idea how they will fill that school, but if done right, it should immediately be far superior to Amidon, so you probably should have a preference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like a huge expansion of SH boundary, but Brent still missed out. Of course, many of the kids with proposed new rights could have gotten there through Watkins.

It looks to me like the only addition to SH is JO Wilson, but I can't tell where JO Wilson feeds now, so it could already be SH. If this is a new feed, it makes a lot more sense than a Brent feed, since JO Wilson is very walkable to SH. I walk by both schools (from my home IB for LT) every weekend on my way to Union Market. They are very close together.

JO Wilson already feeds to SH. So no actual change. I think the subtext is that the Cluster is being broken up - Peabody/Watkins is listed as one school, SH another. No mention of the CH Cluster anymore.

A feed is different than a boundary. SH's boundary now stops at G to the north and ECap to the south. The change means that if you are now at Brent or Maury, for example, but your IB school is JO or Watkins, you can go straight to SH.

We live near Watkins on the south end of the new SH boundary and and our kids go to a charter. We are currently zoned for EH because we're not at Watkins. Under this proposal we can go to SH, right?

That's my take as well

[Anonymous]

Yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I feel kinda screwed in SW. Losing Wilson, while expected, sucks. A guaranteed right to attend PK in-bounds doesn't make up for that. Actually can't tell if I'll be in Van Ness or Amidon, but I don't have a huge preference.

Also, it's at-risk KIDS, not kids in schools with lots of at-risk kids, who get preference at the wealthier schools. So if you are middle class but live in an area with crappy schools, you have less of a chance now to get into a better school OOB than you did before. Your only "benefit" is that some of the poorer kids will be able to go elsewhere--but it's the ones with the most motivated parents, so that's not actually good.

The Van Ness boundary runs down South Capitol. I have no idea how they will fill that school, but if done right, it should immediately be far superior to Amidon, so you probably should have a preference.

My understanding is that kids at at-risk schools have the guaranteed right to PK, but only at risk kids, regardless of school, have admissions preference at other schools and the right to stay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:http://dme.dc.gov/page/advisory-committee-draft-proposal-and-boundaries-june-2014

Seriously? DCPS hopes Bloomingdale will cross N. Capitol for Langley? What do they smoke there? Not a chance!

Welcome Mundo Verde! And 2 Rivers, and LAMB, and Yu Ying, and Stokes. Or private school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why would CHEC, which is dual-language only for middle school with no English track, have as its only 2 feeder schools Tubman and Cooke, neither of which is a dual-language school? Especially when there are other dual language schools close by (Bancroft, Powell, Bruce Monroe@Park View).

Because they've looked at the demographics, and are counting on a majority of those students being ESL - Spanish - anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://dme.dc.gov/page/advisory-committee-draft-proposal-and-boundaries-june-2014

Seriously? DCPS hopes Bloomingdale will cross N. Capitol for Langley? What do they smoke there? Not a chance!

Welcome Mundo Verde! And 2 Rivers, and LAMB, and Yu Ying, and Stokes. Or private school.

Langley has long been considered the neighborhood school for Bloomingdale. What are you talking about?

[Anonymous]

For the dual language schools (except BM and Powell) do they have preference to enroll in MacFarland and Roosevelt if they want to continue the dual language path? It's not clear, although they have IB middle schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://dme.dc.gov/page/advisory-committee-draft-proposal-and-boundaries-june-2014

Seriously? DCPS hopes Bloomingdale will cross N. Capitol for Langley? What do they smoke there? Not a chance!

Welcome Mundo Verde! And 2 Rivers, and LAMB, and Yu Ying, and Stokes. Or private school.

All easy to get into! Good luck!

[Anonymous]

The sibling preference language sounds fuzzy to me. It says "Starting in 2015-16, students and their siblings who have been enrolled in their in-boundary
school, but have been re-zoned to another school, shall maintain in-boundary rights, at their
current in-boundary school until they complete that school"."

Does this mean the sibling needs to be enrolled in the in-boundary school, or only the older student and the sibling is grandfathered?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Page 7, big opportunity for savvy low-income families. Move IB and rent for 1 year for K or PK, move back to your old neighborhood but stay at the school until grade 5, and then presumably until grade 12 with feeder rights. One year of renting and you can do Janney/Deal/Wilson from anywhere in the city. Can't say I am totally critical - maybe low-income families deserve the break, but this did surprise me. Maybe the definition of at-risk is more narrow than I think:

"25.
A student whose place of residence within the District of Columbia changes from one attendance zone
to a different attendance zone shall be permitted to stay in his or her current school until the end of the
school year, and students who are defined as
at-risk under the UPSFF
shall be permitted to attend the
school until the final grade level"

That's not likely to be as easy to pull off for anyone who meets the definition of at risk as you think it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The sibling preference language sounds fuzzy to me. It says "Starting in 2015-16, students and their siblings who have been enrolled in their in-boundary
school, but have been re-zoned to another school, shall maintain in-boundary rights, at their
current in-boundary school until they complete that school"."

Does this mean the sibling needs to be enrolled in the in-boundary school, or only the older student and the sibling is grandfathered?

I think it means that the student needs to be enrolled at the school to pass down preference. You can't have a school-age kid at a charter or OOB elsewhere and pass down the right to a sibling at an IB school you could have attended but didn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://dme.dc.gov/page/advisory-committee-draft-proposal-and-boundaries-june-2014

Seriously? DCPS hopes Bloomingdale will cross N. Capitol for Langley? What do they smoke there? Not a chance!

Welcome Mundo Verde! And 2 Rivers, and LAMB, and Yu Ying, and Stokes. Or private school.

All easy to get into! Good luck!

Not to mention that you have to cross N Capitol to get to most of those.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bowser and Catania have publically stated they will support none of these proposals. Catania also stated in April that he would not support any plan that would reassign parents into lower performing schools. These proposals do not meet Catania's criteria.

Elementary school students should have guaranteed access to schools less than half a mile (0.5) from their homes. Item 12 of the proposal is exceptionally convoluted. You only have a right to your closest neighborhood school if your other option is over a mile away. Why not make it simple and have a right of access provision that states that children can go to the closest school to their homes?

The new mayor can undertake these matters in a serious way. Saying there is data underlying assumptions for demographic estimates and not providing it in the proposals is unacceptable.

The data that DCPS is not disclosing readily is that the system is rapidly losing students -- the only way to retain enrollment is by extending preK 3 to larger and larger sections of the city, including the most affluent Wards. It is unacceptable that Ward 3 gets more optional expanded preK3s while Ward 7 struggles to offer a minimum quality neighborhood school for elementary students.

Where is the evidence of the stated overcrowding in the listed schools. Haven't several of these schools been renovated? Aren't some of these schools slated for major renovations in the next year? The prinicipals don't think they are overcrowded because are offering optional programming such as expanded preK4. Why work on perks when you can't provide an acceptable level of education for the majority of DC children? DCPS please get your priorities straight.

Fine, but have you donated to his campaign or are you waiting on the Gates Foundation to lead the way.