Payne elementary

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Because there are low income apartments, and public housing with many units within the Payne catchment

Which buildings are you referring to? I just pulled up the Payne boundary map next to google maps and didn't recognize any big public housing projects. ( http://dme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dme/publication/attachments/Payne.pdf ). Looks like there are a few apartment buildings near Kennedy Row, some near the old Boys and Girls club, and some four-unit buildings by the south entrance to the metro station, but much of the rest looks like row houses from the satellite imagery.

They're thinking of the projects that are actually zoned to Tyler, I assume. Still, unsurprisingly, the housing stock near DC Armory isn't very nice/the residents aren't well off; that should change gradually once DC Armory closes. Although Miner is actually a marginally better school now in my opinion (mostly leadership, I think), Miner got pretty screwed with the rezoning (the new catchment area is WAY less gentrified than most of the existing area) while Payne didn't, so I'd probably bet on Payne long term. Tyler is still the most screwed long-term, because the Potomac Gardens seem to be, if anything, getting worse. But remember that schools with housing projects can do fine, is clearly the #3 elementary school in the Hill now and it has a not-very-nice housing project in its zone plus some other sketchy apartment complexes.

a lot of the PG and Hopkins kids go to Friendship Chamberlain for PK-8. It's like 700+ students and entirely FARM. Payne, Miner, and Tyler range from 1/4-1/3 IB which suggests that they're not simply places of last resort for the nearest public housing. They're likely magnets for public housing outside of Ward 6, as the IB numbers are inflated by IB ECE who may ride out a year or 2 of PK.

PK3 is almost entirely IB at Miner this year and, I believe, entirely IB (as of now, could clearly change) for next year. At any of these schools, the PK3/4 program is totally useable (though I'd still lottery for better local options), the upper grades are an entirely different conversation.

right, and the question becomes -- who's enrolled for K-5 at Miner, Payne and Tyler if the low IB numbers are even lower if you exclude ECE? Tyler OOB numbers are probably boosted by SI, but what's the OOB attraction to Miner and Payne for K-5 if it's not IB? Payne has some DC General kids but not enough to account for those numbers.

yes. I think that's the crux. Where do the K-5 students currently attending these schools live and how does that change as the current ECE population ages (assuming that large numbers of the current ECE population can't peel off to another hill ES because they are full) and the school continues to fill ECE with in-bounds?

Or more generally, what's your list of conditions to flip schools at this level and where do these schools stand on meeting the list?
- enough IB demand (proxy for high SES?)
- principal who can lead and effectively serve both populations as school transitions
- teachers who can serve both groups
- facilities
- usable aftercare
- active/determined pta or other parent group

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
PK3 is almost entirely IB at Miner this year and, I believe, entirely IB (as of now, could clearly change) for next year. At any of these schools, the PK3/4 program is totally useable (though I'd still lottery for better local options), the upper grades are an entirely different conversation.

Good luck playing the lottery for "better" local options given that all of the nearby PK3s seem to be full, with waitlists, or nearly full, of IB this year.... Does anyone know if any OOB kids got in to any of the PK3s on the Hill? Maybe a few at Van Ness?

Seems like Van Ness would be a possibility because they have to take all the IB and that might leave them with half a class they need to top up.

Better local options include SWS, TR, Appletree LP (most likely by far, obviously).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Should say "LT is clearly the #3..."

I would argue that the Cluster "clearly" is....

It's a toss up.

-IB for the Cluster

I know a few kids IB for LT enrolled in the Cluster (at both Watkins and Peabody); no idea whether the reverse is true.

Regardless, I'm rooting for both schools! And optimistic.

LT parent here and yes, we have several Watkins-zoned families enrolled at LT.

I'm curious if the Cluster-zoned kids at LT are mostly in the lower grades, i.e., PK3/4? The largest cohort of IB LT kids in the Cluster is now in 2nd -4th grade, I believe.

Yes, this. L-T flipped recently enough that it doesn't surprise me at all that some IB families originally started their kids in the Cluster and were happy enough so kept them there. I can't imagine families doing that now really, except maybe to keep siblings together. (Not that the Cluster is worse in my mind, just that they're comparable, so I don't know why you'd trek to Watkins from the vast majority of the L-T IB area.) In any case, even if the PP should have said "clearly #3 or #4," their point remains that L-T actually has some of the worst IB housing stock (after only Payne), but the rest of the catchment area offsets...

Not sure if you're the same PP who used the word catchment talking about public housing in Payne's boundary above, but I'd think Tyler draws a short straw with Potomac Gardens and Hopkins Apts. Others chimes in that there aren't large public housing buildings in Payne's Boundary

No, I'm the PP who said that I assumed he was talking about the housing projects actually zoned for Tyler. But you're right that I totally meant "(after only Tyler)" above!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Because there are low income apartments, and public housing with many units within the Payne catchment

Which buildings are you referring to? I just pulled up the Payne boundary map next to google maps and didn't recognize any big public housing projects. ( http://dme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dme/publication/attachments/Payne.pdf ). Looks like there are a few apartment buildings near Kennedy Row, some near the old Boys and Girls club, and some four-unit buildings by the south entrance to the metro station, but much of the rest looks like row houses from the satellite imagery.

They're thinking of the projects that are actually zoned to Tyler, I assume. Still, unsurprisingly, the housing stock near DC Armory isn't very nice/the residents aren't well off; that should change gradually once DC Armory closes. Although Miner is actually a marginally better school now in my opinion (mostly leadership, I think), Miner got pretty screwed with the rezoning (the new catchment area is WAY less gentrified than most of the existing area) while Payne didn't, so I'd probably bet on Payne long term. Tyler is still the most screwed long-term, because the Potomac Gardens seem to be, if anything, getting worse. But remember that schools with housing projects can do fine, is clearly the #3 elementary school in the Hill now and it has a not-very-nice housing project in its zone plus some other sketchy apartment complexes.

a lot of the PG and Hopkins kids go to Friendship Chamberlain for PK-8. It's like 700+ students and entirely FARM. Payne, Miner, and Tyler range from 1/4-1/3 IB which suggests that they're not simply places of last resort for the nearest public housing. They're likely magnets for public housing outside of Ward 6, as the IB numbers are inflated by IB ECE who may ride out a year or 2 of PK.

PK3 is almost entirely IB at Miner this year and, I believe, entirely IB (as of now, could clearly change) for next year. At any of these schools, the PK3/4 program is totally useable (though I'd still lottery for better local options), the upper grades are an entirely different conversation.

right, and the question becomes -- who's enrolled for K-5 at Miner, Payne and Tyler if the low IB numbers are even lower if you exclude ECE? Tyler OOB numbers are probably boosted by SI, but what's the OOB attraction to Miner and Payne for K-5 if it's not IB? Payne has some DC General kids but not enough to account for those numbers.

So, if the many reports generated during the boundary process were correct (which I would 100% not assume), then Miner's IB rate should actually shoot up this year, because the new IB area had a high proportion of kids enrolled at Miner (not surprising as because of Miner's location w/in its zone, lots of the new area is physically much closer to the school)... At least, that was one of the arguments made to justify the rezoning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Payne and Garrison are in special circumstances. I really do think that change is easier to make now that the desirable charters are so tough to get into. look at Seaton, for example, and Bruce Monroe.

What do you mean look at Seaton and Bruce Monroe? All of them are pretty much the same. There are no more "white" kids at Seaton and Bruce Monroe than there are at Garrison or Payne. In fact, Garrison is 10% white, Payne is 5% white, BM is 2% white, and Seaton is 5% white. Pretty comparable. They all have crappy feeders. None of them have great test scores, albeit some slightly better than others, but nothing to write home about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
PK3 is almost entirely IB at Miner this year and, I believe, entirely IB (as of now, could clearly change) for next year. At any of these schools, the PK3/4 program is totally useable (though I'd still lottery for better local options), the upper grades are an entirely different conversation.

Good luck playing the lottery for "better" local options given that all of the nearby PK3s seem to be full, with waitlists, or nearly full, of IB this year.... Does anyone know if any OOB kids got in to any of the PK3s on the Hill? Maybe a few at Van Ness?

Seems like Van Ness would be a possibility because they have to take all the IB and that might leave them with half a class they need to top up.

Better local options include SWS, TR, Appletree LP (most likely by far, obviously).

Right.... all of which have ridiculously long waitlists for PK3. There are not enough PK3 spots on the Hill for the population, by a long shot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Payne and Garrison are in special circumstances. I really do think that change is easier to make now that the desirable charters are so tough to get into. look at Seaton, for example, and Bruce Monroe.

What do you mean look at Seaton and Bruce Monroe? All of them are pretty much the same. There are no more "white" kids at Seaton and Bruce Monroe than there are at Garrison or Payne. In fact, Garrison is 10% white, Payne is 5% white, BM is 2% white, and Seaton is 5% white. Pretty comparable. They all have crappy feeders. None of them have great test scores, albeit some slightly better than others, but nothing to write home about.

Do Garrison/BM/Seaton have PKs though (serious question)? Because 5% white at Payne pretty much means that there are between 0 and 3 white kids not in PK3/4.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
PK3 is almost entirely IB at Miner this year and, I believe, entirely IB (as of now, could clearly change) for next year. At any of these schools, the PK3/4 program is totally useable (though I'd still lottery for better local options), the upper grades are an entirely different conversation.

Good luck playing the lottery for "better" local options given that all of the nearby PK3s seem to be full, with waitlists, or nearly full, of IB this year.... Does anyone know if any OOB kids got in to any of the PK3s on the Hill? Maybe a few at Van Ness?

Seems like Van Ness would be a possibility because they have to take all the IB and that might leave them with half a class they need to top up.

That is also true at Miner (just FWI for those IB at one of the other Hill schools).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
PK3 is almost entirely IB at Miner this year and, I believe, entirely IB (as of now, could clearly change) for next year. At any of these schools, the PK3/4 program is totally useable (though I'd still lottery for better local options), the upper grades are an entirely different conversation.

Good luck playing the lottery for "better" local options given that all of the nearby PK3s seem to be full, with waitlists, or nearly full, of IB this year.... Does anyone know if any OOB kids got in to any of the PK3s on the Hill? Maybe a few at Van Ness?

Seems like Van Ness would be a possibility because they have to take all the IB and that might leave them with half a class they need to top up.

Better local options include SWS, TR, Appletree LP (most likely by far, obviously).

Right.... all of which have ridiculously long waitlists for PK3. There are not enough PK3 spots on the Hill for the population, by a long shot.

Sure, but I think PP just meant that they don't have IBs, so they're worth applying to regardless of whether neighborhood fed DCPSes are getting filled. Also Appletree LP is still not a terrible bet, since they went past the 60s on the WL last year.

[Anonymous]

I thought the point is that you can go there for the free daycare/PS/PK, but after that you're on your own.

Also, Basis, Latin and DCI are the public middle schools of choice for families on the Hill who care about academics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought the point is that you can go there for the free daycare/PS/PK, but after that you're on your own.

Also, Basis, Latin and DCI are the public middle schools of choice for families on the Hill who care about academics.

Really? I'll be sure to pass that on to all the Hill families at SH--who knew they didn't care about academics! Their poor kids--must have gotten into Walls by mistake...

[Anonymous]

Has anyone met Payne's new principal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the point is that you can go there for the free daycare/PS/PK, but after that you're on your own.

Also, Basis, Latin and DCI are the public middle schools of choice for families on the Hill who care about academics.

Really? I'll be sure to pass that on to all the Hill families at SH--who knew they didn't care about academics! Their poor kids--must have gotten into Walls by mistake...

It's not all that hard to get into Walls from SH. DC is not NYC, where 8th graders rise fall on the strength of SSAT admissions test scores in applying to magnet high schools like Stuyvesant and Bronx Science. Neither is it Boston, where 6th graders compete to land spots at Boston Latin without admissions officers knowing anything about them (race, current school, socioeconomic status). The admissions process at Walls is highly subjective. SH isn't a bad middle school for DCPS, but comparing first year PARCC scores to those coming out of Deal, Washington Latin and BASIS gave me pause. Look at scores broken down by race and/or class and you'll see what I mean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone met Payne's new principal?

Someone on MOTH had nice things to say about her.

[Anonymous]

Can we please stop using the terms "flip" and "turn"? "Improve" is so much more genteel and conceals the racial animus a little better.