Garrison vs Langley?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regardless of who the principal is, I see positive things happening for Garrison now that the building renovation is finally underway. I think the building itself was the biggest turnoff to many people.

+1 If DCPS is smart, it'll see Garrision's potential to be a domino school. Having a renovation and a new principal are a way to kickstart the process. It could also take pressure off charters if parents IB are happy with their school (at least through 4th).

The school will always have a large FARMs population due to its boundaries, but you could in a few years have majority high SES enrollment (few houses or condos are under $800k these days around 14th)... and that would raise all boats. (Not in an elitist way, but simply because of the benefit of having more children of college-educated as students - see the research about the 30/40% farms threshold)

The thing is, there are a lot of schools in that category. An extra $200,000 a year could hire an extra teacher to run a special program (like great music or STEM), and two more aides for academics and behavior. A few years of that could tip the school into the gentrified, self-fundraising category. But politically, you would have to do that to Seaton, Cleveland, Langley, Langdon, Noyes, Bunker Hill, Burroughs, Bruce Monroe, Tubman, Miner, Payne, Tyler, etc. So that's like $2.5 million a year. And it would be hard to phase it out. And that would mean less money available for the truly needy. So it's just really hard to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's true that it was too quick. Neighborhoods like Brookland are gentrifying, but they're gentrifying with families into houses and neighborhoods. The same can be said of parts of the Hill moving north and east. The part of Shaw/Bloomingdale/LeDroit that has gentrified has done so in way that's very urban - there are no schools and parks, but lots of restaurants and bars and access to metro. It's not a part of the city that lends itself to families settling in and building schools.

Huh? There are lots of houses that suit families' needs in these neighborhoods, lots of parks, and plenty of schools. I have no idea what you're talking about.

I live in Bloomingdale/Shaw and we don't have anything in the way of parks other than the Florida Ave. triangle. Plenty of restaurants and bars though, but it really doesn't compete with neighborhoods that have access to lots of green space.

You need to get out more then. How about park at ledroit or our neighborhood park, Harry Thomas. Shaw has others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's true that it was too quick. Neighborhoods like Brookland are gentrifying, but they're gentrifying with families into houses and neighborhoods. The same can be said of parts of the Hill moving north and east. The part of Shaw/Bloomingdale/LeDroit that has gentrified has done so in way that's very urban - there are no schools and parks, but lots of restaurants and bars and access to metro. It's not a part of the city that lends itself to families settling in and building schools.

Huh? There are lots of houses that suit families' needs in these neighborhoods, lots of parks, and plenty of schools. I have no idea what you're talking about.

I live in Bloomingdale/Shaw and we don't have anything in the way of parks other than the Florida Ave. triangle. Plenty of restaurants and bars though, but it really doesn't compete with neighborhoods that have access to lots of green space.

You need to get out more then. How about park at ledroit or our neighborhood park, Harry Thomas. Shaw has others.

Seriously, you have no clue. What about the Elm Street Park, it's huge and has a dog run and a farm. What about Harry Thomas, the rec center and track and two play sets and the pool and kiddie pool? And people go to Westminster, and Turkey Thicket is not that far away, that has an awesome playground and really nice pool.

[Anonymous]

And crispus attucks? That is really Bloomingdales gem of a park.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, we live in Bloomingdale and toured both schools. We know people in each PK3 classroom at Langley who endorsed their teacher, and do not know people at Garrison, so that was one reason. Ultimately we decided that while Garrison may be slighly different in various ways, it was not significantly better in any way that justified the commute. It would have been great to be at Langley with several friends and share pickup and half day duties. Also it's much easier to be an involved parent if the school is close by. Ultimately we matched elsewhere, so my research was for naught. Hope it helps you.

Thank you - very helpful. May I ask if you matched at another DCPS or HRC? If DCPS is there a specific reason you chose it over your neighborhood school?

Thank you.

We matched at Mundo, so... Really, other than Seaton, no neighborhood school that we could get into OOB, was worth the logistical problems it would have created.

I would have happily enrolled in Langley or Seaton (Seaton being so close to the G8 and Shaw metro), and I am 100% certain that Langley, Seaton, Garrison, and Cleveland have the potential to be much better than they are today, and to be true neighborhood schools that most people are happy to attend. It is an uphill battle and DCPS itself is both friend and foe, but it is obvious to me after living here for a while that progress is happening. If Bloomingdale/Eckington came together and demanded better for its school like other neighborhoods do every year, it would work.

Bloomingdale gentrified so quickly, there's no neighborhood force for the schools (No, the Bloomingdale Kids listserv doesn't count. Just ask the Moms on the Hill). It's the new Dupont Circle: singles, couples (gay or straight, but without children), and legacy families without children competing for schools. Who buys a 1500 sq. ft. newly renovated condo in Bloomingdale for $700K expecting to raise a family in that space and invest in the schools? Pre-school? Okay, but long-term? Not a chance.

Is 20 plus years "so quick"?

It's true that it was too quick. Neighborhoods like Brookland are gentrifying, but they're gentrifying with families into houses and neighborhoods. The same can be said of parts of the Hill moving north and east. The part of Shaw/Bloomingdale/LeDroit that has gentrified has done so in way that's very urban - there are no schools and parks, but lots of restaurants and bars and access to metro. It's not a part of the city that lends itself to families settling in and building schools.

Right. You know just what you are talking about obviously, and my nearly 20 years in Bloomingdale means nothing. Bloomingdale has been "gentrifying" since the 1990s.

Bullsh*t. This was written in 2001 and describes Shaw and Bloomingdale and LeDroit Park and every other decayed neighborhood on Florida Ave. So yes, your nearly 20 years mean nothing.

Those neighborhoods were a cesspit. Don't lie and say they've been gentrifying for 20 years. They've been gentrifying since when the Big Bear Market became the Big Bear Coffeehouse and the Farmer's Market opened on that corner. That happened in the late 'aughts. It hasn't even been 10 years.

Big bear opened in 2007. That's ten years ago. I moved to bloomingdale in 2002. People who were priced out of Adams Morgan, Logan Circle and DuPont were buying houses and doing them up. 15 years ago. Bloomingdale was a "gentrifying" neighborhood back then. Talk to any of your longer term neighbors. It's pure ignorance to ignore this.

Or read this article from 2001 about a Bloomingdale resident's experience buying a home a year earlier. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2001/06/17/i-wont-let-dc-lose-its-flavor/40ba5b8f-469c-498d-9eb6-208cca2d2222/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And crispus attucks? That is really Bloomingdales gem of a park.

Yes, seriously. And yet, with all of these amenities, my kids' favorite is the mini slide on the sidewalk outside of Bacio.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In light of Garrison's principal leaving and Langley having a good principal, and the convenience factor, I would say choose Langley. They are really not very different, OP.

Actually, Garrison's principal leaving can only be a good thing. He was terrible. I only see positive things for Garrison now that he's out.

Except that you could end up with someone just as bad. See Miner.

+1. It is alarming how bad some principals are. Or someone who is good but makes different policy choices than you would prefer.

Langley's principal is good. She is new to Langley this year but has plenty of experience as an AP in DCPS. So far I think she has done well with it and implemented some great ideas, as well as brought some outside partnerships that she has experience with at Watkins.

Can you share some of things the Langley Principal has done or partnerships you mention? DS going to Langley next year and interested to learn more.

Thanks!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In light of Garrison's principal leaving and Langley having a good principal, and the convenience factor, I would say choose Langley. They are really not very different, OP.

Actually, Garrison's principal leaving can only be a good thing. He was terrible. I only see positive things for Garrison now that he's out.

Except that you could end up with someone just as bad. See Miner.

+1. It is alarming how bad some principals are. Or someone who is good but makes different policy choices than you would prefer.

Langley's principal is good. She is new to Langley this year but has plenty of experience as an AP in DCPS. So far I think she has done well with it and implemented some great ideas, as well as brought some outside partnerships that she has experience with at Watkins.

Can you share some of things the Langley Principal has done or partnerships you mention? DS going to Langley next year and interested to learn more.

Thanks!

Programs called Playworks and Foodprints. Playworks involves a recess coach for physical activity and character development, leadership, social skill type stuff. Food prints is a garden thing. They also have Little Friends for Peace, which is a socioemotional development nonprofit. And maybe Flex for aftercare classes, but only if enough parents show an interest in paying for it.

Welcome to the team!!

[Anonymous]

Now that the new principal has been announced, what are the thoughts on Garrison? From what I hear about Mr. Kiplinger, it sounds like a good placement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In light of Garrison's principal leaving and Langley having a good principal, and the convenience factor, I would say choose Langley. They are really not very different, OP.

Actually, Garrison's principal leaving can only be a good thing. He was terrible. I only see positive things for Garrison now that he's out.

Except that you could end up with someone just as bad. See Miner.

+1. It is alarming how bad some principals are. Or someone who is good but makes different policy choices than you would prefer.

Langley's principal is good. She is new to Langley this year but has plenty of experience as an AP in DCPS. So far I think she has done well with it and implemented some great ideas, as well as brought some outside partnerships that she has experience with at Watkins.

It's interesting how Prek parents seem to have a different perspective than the rest of the school. I've been a long time resident of the neighborhood. My family has been attending Langley for years and this by far has been our worst year. We are leaving. Half the staff has also left, including over 2 teachers who quit during the school year. The upstairs is very chaotic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In light of Garrison's principal leaving and Langley having a good principal, and the convenience factor, I would say choose Langley. They are really not very different, OP.

Actually, Garrison's principal leaving can only be a good thing. He was terrible. I only see positive things for Garrison now that he's out.

Except that you could end up with someone just as bad. See Miner.

+1. It is alarming how bad some principals are. Or someone who is good but makes different policy choices than you would prefer.

Langley's principal is good. She is new to Langley this year but has plenty of experience as an AP in DCPS. So far I think she has done well with it and implemented some great ideas, as well as brought some outside partnerships that she has experience with at Watkins.

It's interesting how Prek parents seem to have a different perspective than the rest of the school. I've been a long time resident of the neighborhood. My family has been attending Langley for years and this by far has been our worst year. We are leaving. Half the staff has also left, including over 2 teachers who quit during the school year. The upstairs is very chaotic.

Were you at Langley's predecessor too? I understood that the current Langley hadn't been there long. Honest question, trying to understand the history. I'm sorry to hear it's not going well for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, we live in Bloomingdale and toured both schools. We know people in each PK3 classroom at Langley who endorsed their teacher, and do not know people at Garrison, so that was one reason. Ultimately we decided that while Garrison may be slighly different in various ways, it was not significantly better in any way that justified the commute. It would have been great to be at Langley with several friends and share pickup and half day duties. Also it's much easier to be an involved parent if the school is close by. Ultimately we matched elsewhere, so my research was for naught. Hope it helps you.

Thank you - very helpful. May I ask if you matched at another DCPS or HRC? If DCPS is there a specific reason you chose it over your neighborhood school?

Thank you.

We matched at Mundo, so... Really, other than Seaton, no neighborhood school that we could get into OOB, was worth the logistical problems it would have created.

I would have happily enrolled in Langley or Seaton (Seaton being so close to the G8 and Shaw metro), and I am 100% certain that Langley, Seaton, Garrison, and Cleveland have the potential to be much better than they are today, and to be true neighborhood schools that most people are happy to attend. It is an uphill battle and DCPS itself is both friend and foe, but it is obvious to me after living here for a while that progress is happening. If Bloomingdale/Eckington came together and demanded better for its school like other neighborhoods do every year, it would work.

Bloomingdale gentrified so quickly, there's no neighborhood force for the schools (No, the Bloomingdale Kids listserv doesn't count. Just ask the Moms on the Hill). It's the new Dupont Circle: singles, couples (gay or straight, but without children), and legacy families without children competing for schools. Who buys a 1500 sq. ft. newly renovated condo in Bloomingdale for $700K expecting to raise a family in that space and invest in the schools? Pre-school? Okay, but long-term? Not a chance.

This is just a crazy comment. Clearly you don't live there. Yes, new real estate is nuts, but TONS of rising PK3 families who are vying for spots nearby. And who plan to stay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now that the new principal has been announced, what are the thoughts on Garrison? From what I hear about Mr. Kiplinger, it sounds like a good placement.

I am going to get flamed for this, but I think the issues at Garrison go beyond whatever a principal is able to do. Certainly, a principal can do a lot to improve a school (and conversely, to hurt a school), but the things I dislike about Garrison as a long term option for my children are not so easily addressed. There are a lot of things I really liked about the PK program, but the things I dislike about the school as a whole are not going away anytime soon. With no viable feeder option, it makes no sense to keep my children in the school to see if things get better, knowing we'll need to explore our options in a few years anyway. I know every school has issues but Garrison's seem systemic. Maybe I'm wrong and Garrison will become a fabulous neighborhood school - I certainly hope that will be the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that the new principal has been announced, what are the thoughts on Garrison? From what I hear about Mr. Kiplinger, it sounds like a good placement.

I am going to get flamed for this, but I think the issues at Garrison go beyond whatever a principal is able to do. Certainly, a principal can do a lot to improve a school (and conversely, to hurt a school), but the things I dislike about Garrison as a long term option for my children are not so easily addressed. There are a lot of things I really liked about the PK program, but the things I dislike about the school as a whole are not going away anytime soon. With no viable feeder option, it makes no sense to keep my children in the school to see if things get better, knowing we'll need to explore our options in a few years anyway. I know every school has issues but Garrison's seem systemic. Maybe I'm wrong and Garrison will become a fabulous neighborhood school - I certainly hope that will be the case.

So how are the issues at Garrison any different than Seaton or Langley for that matter? Seaton is feeding into the same exact school, Cardozo, but everyone seems to swoon with its mention. I'm genuinely interested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that the new principal has been announced, what are the thoughts on Garrison? From what I hear about Mr. Kiplinger, it sounds like a good placement.

I am going to get flamed for this, but I think the issues at Garrison go beyond whatever a principal is able to do. Certainly, a principal can do a lot to improve a school (and conversely, to hurt a school), but the things I dislike about Garrison as a long term option for my children are not so easily addressed. There are a lot of things I really liked about the PK program, but the things I dislike about the school as a whole are not going away anytime soon. With no viable feeder option, it makes no sense to keep my children in the school to see if things get better, knowing we'll need to explore our options in a few years anyway. I know every school has issues but Garrison's seem systemic. Maybe I'm wrong and Garrison will become a fabulous neighborhood school - I certainly hope that will be the case.

So how are the issues at Garrison any different than Seaton or Langley for that matter? Seaton is feeding into the same exact school, Cardozo, but everyone seems to swoon with its mention. I'm genuinely interested.

The issues are all typical of title I schools as far as I know. Gentrification awkwardness, low test scores, not enough affluent parents to fund the extras, behavior issues in the upper grades, and people leave even if their experience has been fine because of lack of acceptable feeders. Garrison had a renovation and that was putting people off. Seaton has had an excellent principal for some years and that is probably why its star has been rising. Langley has a big special needs program and that is an added challenge administratively and affects the test scores somewhat. Langley has a modest STEM program for upper grades, and a very big and nice building. People don't stay because of the middle school issue, so they tend to choose the most convenient or where they have friends.

Langley is a few years behind in gentrification, not surprising as it is further east. Now that it is harder to get into nearby charters and even Seaton and Cleveland and Garrison, Langley is getting more traction. The Langley building is historic, but it was reopened as an elementary school about 6 or 7 years ago and Emery and Shaed schools were combined into it.