Has Bancroft's rapid gentrification ruined its chances to have its current feeder rights preserved?

[Anonymous]

I'm pretty sure we're all opposed to gun violence and none of us is perpetrating it. The only thing to argue about is whether our elected officials have any ability to stop it. And that's a conversation for a different forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a ceiling, though, to how upper-middle class Bancroft will become, and it may have hit it. There are FAR more subsidized apartments and affordable apartments in the Bancroft geography than there are million-dollar plus row houses. The Woodner alone has more families than the rowhouses do.

This.

If Bancroft is fed to MacFarland, MacFarland will be awesome.

you are assuming that upper middle class parents from bancroft will send their kids to MacFarland and I know that MacFarland needs at least 10 years to have a really strong cohort. We are at a MacFarland feeder and so far, only about 5 UMC families have said they are going to MacFarland. Currently the test scores are abysmal and a lot of distractions at MacFarland

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm pretty sure we're all opposed to gun violence and none of us is perpetrating it. The only thing to argue about is whether our elected officials have any ability to stop it. And that's a conversation for a different forum.

So it’s normal for JR shooting thread to have multiple pages in a few hours but not Roosevelt student killed gets 2 pages on DCUM? What changed regarding hopelessness from November JR thread to now?

[Anonymous]

Does anyone know when we should expect any additional information re new boundaries?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, Bancroft was 24% White in 2021-2022. 64% Latino. (Last year DCPS shows the demographics.)

This is why it's at risk of getting moved out of JR. If it were 64% Black, there's no way we would be having this conversation.

[Anonymous]

I'm curious why any school would be moved out of the Jackson-Reed feeder. Deal and Jackson-Reed would be below capacity if they were only in-boundary students. They would even be below capacity if they had a sizeable amount of out of boundary students - say, 15% - but not the enormous number they have now (22% at Deal and 36% at Jackson-Reed).

Why would out of boundary students be prioritized over students in the current feeder?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm curious why any school would be moved out of the Jackson-Reed feeder. Deal and Jackson-Reed would be below capacity if they were only in-boundary students. They would even be below capacity if they had a sizeable amount of out of boundary students - say, 15% - but not the enormous number they have now (22% at Deal and 36% at Jackson-Reed).

Why would out of boundary students be prioritized over students in the current feeder?

EQUITY

[Anonymous]

No way will JR be under capacity any time soon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like Bancroft parents are thinking it's a foregone conclusion that they will lose feeder rights. Is there a basis for this, other than simply looking at a map and seeing that geographically it's an outlier in feeding to Deal when Marfarland and CHEC are closer? Has anyone in charge suggested this will happen?

...hence OP's question. Bancroft is and has always been a geographical outlier. The previous argument of Bancroft adding Latino students to Deal/J-R is diminished now due to Bancroft becoming a richer, "whiter" school than it was 10 years ago.

Macfarland is the middle school for other DCPS dual language schools so it only makes sense to send Bancroft students there as well. Powell and Bruce Monroe feed there already.

[Anonymous]

It's really clear when you saw the last version of the boundaries discussion that it wasn't Black, Latino, lower-income Bancroft families demanding remaining in the Wilson-now-JR feeder pattern, it was clearly the pearl-clutching white folks who didn't buy inbounds for Stoddert or Janney who NEEDED to be in the JR boundary. And of course these parents were hyping the "diversity" that Bancroft was providing to JR though of course they were um "not that."

To me, that's the thing to end. If Bancroft feeds west, make it only at-risk families feed west. Everybody else, welcome to your neighborhood schools pattern and the lottery from out-of-bounds.

[Anonymous]

Are you really saying that your idea is to divide up graduating Bancroft 5th graders by race and income, and have different feeder patterns based on your skin color?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's really clear when you saw the last version of the boundaries discussion that it wasn't Black, Latino, lower-income Bancroft families demanding remaining in the Wilson-now-JR feeder pattern, it was clearly the pearl-clutching white folks who didn't buy inbounds for Stoddert or Janney who NEEDED to be in the JR boundary. And of course these parents were hyping the "diversity" that Bancroft was providing to JR though of course they were um "not that."

To me, that's the thing to end. If Bancroft feeds west, make it only at-risk families feed west. Everybody else, welcome to your neighborhood schools pattern and the lottery from out-of-bounds.

Sorry, did you just actually give voice to the thought that black and brown folks weren't looking to remain feeders to the best school in DC? That it's only a concern of white folks???!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's really clear when you saw the last version of the boundaries discussion that it wasn't Black, Latino, lower-income Bancroft families demanding remaining in the Wilson-now-JR feeder pattern, it was clearly the pearl-clutching white folks who didn't buy inbounds for Stoddert or Janney who NEEDED to be in the JR boundary. And of course these parents were hyping the "diversity" that Bancroft was providing to JR though of course they were um "not that."

To me, that's the thing to end. If Bancroft feeds west, make it only at-risk families feed west. Everybody else, welcome to your neighborhood schools pattern and the lottery from out-of-bounds.

Congrats. You managed to both insult black and brown families and propose something illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's really clear when you saw the last version of the boundaries discussion that it wasn't Black, Latino, lower-income Bancroft families demanding remaining in the Wilson-now-JR feeder pattern, it was clearly the pearl-clutching white folks who didn't buy inbounds for Stoddert or Janney who NEEDED to be in the JR boundary. And of course these parents were hyping the "diversity" that Bancroft was providing to JR though of course they were um "not that."

To me, that's the thing to end. If Bancroft feeds west, make it only at-risk families feed west. Everybody else, welcome to your neighborhood schools pattern and the lottery from out-of-bounds.

Um, no. I’m a URM Latino brown person and want my kid to feed to Deal/JR.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are you really saying that your idea is to divide up graduating Bancroft 5th graders by race and income, and have different feeder patterns based on your skin color?

is this your interpretation of the at-risk preference?