What would happen if families in dc all had their kids attend their In Boundary school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would work IF DC had a magnet option in every school or a cluster of schools....see MOCO...

Instead, DCPS does things like “honors for all” and now “ap for all” (see Wilson). If you can’t close the gap then dumb it down for the advanced kid and slap a name on it that makes everyone feel good.

THIS x 1 million. Newbie and young school age parents EOTP are so naive but find out fast by mid elementary.

There is one and only one agenda that DCPS has and it’s closing the achievement gap by not meeting the needs of the top and essentially bringing the top down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we stop pretending that all gentrification is done by white people and that it’s a black/ white issue? It’s far more a class issue than anyone gives voice to. Most folks with money also don’t send their kids to the low achieving schools in rural poor predominantly white areas. It’s not so much about race (though in we can acknowledge that institutional racism does impact class mobility), but to simply blame DCPS issues on “white parents” not wanting to send their kids to school with “Black kids”, is actually code for middle/ upper middle class college educated parents (of all races) don’t want to send their kids to school with children who come from and continue to live in generational poverty and deal with the issues that brings. And it seems like in this constant conversation on DCUM the presumption is that all brown kids are poor. Which is simply not true.

I hate to contradict this, but DC does not have the demographics of America or even the rest of the DMV. There are few middle class residents of any kind. Our upper income families include a black minority. Our lower income families include almost zero white people. So we can say it is "not true" that "all brown kids are poor" but the massive intersectionality of race and class in DC is totally skewed.

Yes, but I still agree with the bolded. It plays out racially a lot in DC but what rings true is the poverty aspect. I think it’s worth examining more deeply because perhaps there is soul searching that needs to happen and isn’t. If we focus exclusively on race, it might overlook the class issue which drives us. I for one don’t necessarily want to have no class diversity among my kids friends and schoolmates, but perhaps that’s happening anyway because our schools are too segregated by class.

[Anonymous]

I'm the dude who wrote the race/class intersectionality thing before, I'd say that my family back home in the rural west is part of that "intergenerational poverty" and it's definitely a mindset or culture or something that is hard to break through and I am not surprised that people want to stay away from it.

But I want to be sympathetic too; my dad was the guy who was not like the rest despite his community and turned out totally different. So I feel this affinity on a class basis, I guess, and want to support these kids. It feels a little lonely to think like this - feels rare around here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if this happened resources would be spread more evenly and result in real equity. More diversity would exist racially and economically. Families with greater political influence would advocate and all students would benefit. Children and families within walking distance would build relationships.
Think of the potential!!

Bless your heart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Without charter schools, one would be able to buy a rowhouse for $250K in Petworth, Brightwood Park, etc.

But nobody would.

Sure they would. People without kids.

Why do people without kids need a house? I would stay in an apartment.

To have space for stuff people like. Like hobbies, which are a thing that childless adults often use to fill their free time. I have heard tales of craft rooms, and libraries, and gyms, and guest bedrooms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm the dude who wrote the race/class intersectionality thing before, I'd say that my family back home in the rural west is part of that "intergenerational poverty" and it's definitely a mindset or culture or something that is hard to break through and I am not surprised that people want to stay away from it.

But I want to be sympathetic too; my dad was the guy who was not like the rest despite his community and turned out totally different. So I feel this affinity on a class basis, I guess, and want to support these kids. It feels a little lonely to think like this - feels rare around here.

Can you tell us a little more about that mindset?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Without charter schools, one would be able to buy a rowhouse for $250K in Petworth, Brightwood Park, etc.

But nobody would.

Sure they would. People without kids.

Why do people without kids need a house? I would stay in an apartment.

To have space for stuff people like. Like hobbies, which are a thing that childless adults often use to fill their free time. I have heard tales of craft rooms, and libraries, and gyms, and guest bedrooms.

So, is there some narrative here, or is this purely a tangent?

DC shouldn't have good schools so that the childless can have hobby rooms?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The only reason I am willing to live in NE DC at all is because I have school choice. If I didn't, I would never have moved here, and I would move away if I did live here. It's that simple.


The question is whether there are enough people like you in your area of NE DC that, if they all actually stayed in bounds, they could help turn schools around in a reasonable time period. I don't know the answer, but don't think the question is clear cut.



I live in NE, DC and it’s no way I would send my child to my neighborhood elementary, middle or high school. He has been in a ward 6 school since pk3 and now heading to Washington Latin after matching from the lottery. It’s just too much of work to risk my child in his In-boundary school and I’m not willing to chance that with him. That’s why I support school choice. If it was mandated to send your kids to their neighborhood school you better bet I would be using my aunt address to place my child in one of the top rated schools that’s talked about constantly on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
The only reason I am willing to live in NE DC at all is because I have school choice. If I didn't, I would never have moved here, and I would move away if I did live here. It's that simple.


The question is whether there are enough people like you in your area of NE DC that, if they all actually stayed in bounds, they could help turn schools around in a reasonable time period. I don't know the answer, but don't think the question is clear cut.



I live in NE, DC and it’s no way I would send my child to my neighborhood elementary, middle or high school. He has been in a ward 6 school since pk3 and now heading to Washington Latin after matching from the lottery. It’s just too much of work to risk my child in his In-boundary school and I’m not willing to chance that with him. That’s why I support school choice. If it was mandated to send your kids to their neighborhood school you better bet I would be using my aunt address to place my child in one of the top rated schools that’s talked about constantly on DCUM.

You’re child isn’t going to Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
The only reason I am willing to live in NE DC at all is because I have school choice. If I didn't, I would never have moved here, and I would move away if I did live here. It's that simple.


The question is whether there are enough people like you in your area of NE DC that, if they all actually stayed in bounds, they could help turn schools around in a reasonable time period. I don't know the answer, but don't think the question is clear cut.



I live in NE, DC and it’s no way I would send my child to my neighborhood elementary, middle or high school. He has been in a ward 6 school since pk3 and now heading to Washington Latin after matching from the lottery. It’s just too much of work to risk my child in his In-boundary school and I’m not willing to chance that with him. That’s why I support school choice. If it was mandated to send your kids to their neighborhood school you better bet I would be using my aunt address to place my child in one of the top rated schools that’s talked about constantly on DCUM.

You’re child isn’t going to Harvard.

Your

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
The only reason I am willing to live in NE DC at all is because I have school choice. If I didn't, I would never have moved here, and I would move away if I did live here. It's that simple.


The question is whether there are enough people like you in your area of NE DC that, if they all actually stayed in bounds, they could help turn schools around in a reasonable time period. I don't know the answer, but don't think the question is clear cut.



I live in NE, DC and it’s no way I would send my child to my neighborhood elementary, middle or high school. He has been in a ward 6 school since pk3 and now heading to Washington Latin after matching from the lottery. It’s just too much of work to risk my child in his In-boundary school and I’m not willing to chance that with him. That’s why I support school choice. If it was mandated to send your kids to their neighborhood school you better bet I would be using my aunt address to place my child in one of the top rated schools that’s talked about constantly on DCUM.

Children grow faster than schools. I did enroll my child in an EOTP IB-- a particularly low-scoring one. And I worked really hard, for years. But the change didn't happen fast enough for my kid. It's just not as simple or achievable as naive PPs seem to think. Even if people do what you think they should, children grow faster than schools. Now, other people replaced me and worked hard for the school in their turn, and others after them. In my kid's PK3 year a lot of people went back mid-year to private daycares, it was that bad, and now some people are staying at this school through K or even 1st. But to push the attrition timeline out by 2-3 years took about six years of hard work. And as anyone who has a clue knows, it's much much harder to retain people in the older grades when parents start thinking about middle school access. It's not a matter of having enough people. Even when you do have enough people, it's very slow going and the middle school issue is a brick wall

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
The only reason I am willing to live in NE DC at all is because I have school choice. If I didn't, I would never have moved here, and I would move away if I did live here. It's that simple.


The question is whether there are enough people like you in your area of NE DC that, if they all actually stayed in bounds, they could help turn schools around in a reasonable time period. I don't know the answer, but don't think the question is clear cut.



I live in NE, DC and it’s no way I would send my child to my neighborhood elementary, middle or high school. He has been in a ward 6 school since pk3 and now heading to Washington Latin after matching from the lottery. It’s just too much of work to risk my child in his In-boundary school and I’m not willing to chance that with him. That’s why I support school choice. If it was mandated to send your kids to their neighborhood school you better bet I would be using my aunt address to place my child in one of the top rated schools that’s talked about constantly on DCUM.

You’re child isn’t going to Harvard.

What a weird and unnecessarily nasty thing to say.

[Anonymous]

The core flaw in this whole way of thinking is that it's based on the assumption that DCPS will deliver an adequate school if enough high-income people demand it. That's just not how it works. DCPS doesn't really care what people want, and often isn't capable of delivering it even if it wanted to. It's not a vending machine where you put in 200 high income kids and a good principal and talented teachers and a superintendent who isn't a sadistic lunatic pops out the bottom. It takes years and years of effort and for many people, the payoff isn't going to happen in time for their kid or even younger siblings to benefit from it. And attending a badly functioning school for many many years is a high price to pay for principle or social altruism.

[Anonymous]

At our EOTP school, a small group of parents have joined with teachers to keep schools closed indefinitely. Anyone who advocates to reopen— just giving families the choice— is labelled racist. As a result, we will change schools via the lottery. Ending 7 years of our kids attending this school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Without charter schools, one would be able to buy a rowhouse for $250K in Petworth, Brightwood Park, etc.

But nobody would.

Sure they would. People without kids.

Why do people without kids need a house? I would stay in an apartment.

To have space for stuff people like. Like hobbies, which are a thing that childless adults often use to fill their free time. I have heard tales of craft rooms, and libraries, and gyms, and guest bedrooms.

So, is there some narrative here, or is this purely a tangent?

DC shouldn't have good schools so that the childless can have hobby rooms?

Primarily a tangent. I'm mostly confused by the person who is like "why would ppl want homes"