tired of "diversity for Deal and Wilson" as an argument

[Anonymous]

To 16:49. I do not dispute that they were neighborhood schools. I believe I stated that they were neighborhood schools that were essentially abandoned by the people who lived in the neighborhoods. To elaborate, the people in those neighborhoods preferred to send their children to private school rather than the neighborhood school. My point in mentioning the OOB process was to point out that rather than work to fully integrate the city so that AAs/Blacks were reintroduced to areas of the city that they had previously been shut out of, thereby creating a situation where there would be diversity in every neighborhood, the city ignored the issue. This brings us full circle to today where we are wringing our hands over the boundary issue.

As for what I meant by economic segregation, I was trying to explain the continued push of the upper middle class citizens to neighborhoods that have been historically populated by middle class AAs/Blacks, which thereby raising the costs to move into the neighborhoods to such a level that AAs/Blacks can no longer afford these neighborhoods and have to move neighborhoods that generally have a poorer population. For example I grew up in Petworth, and at this point, I could not afford to buy in Petworth and if I wanted to continue to live in DC, I would most likely move to Wards 7 and 8. More than likely, I would probably move out of the city. So the landscape becomes the uber wealthy concentrate in Spring Valley, Gtown, Cleveland Park, Chevy Chase (Ward 3), the upper middle class are in Wards 4, 5,6, and the poor are concentrated to Wards 7 and 8 because the cost to move back across the River or across the Park is too high.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I am a native Washingtonian who in the early 80's traveled from Columbia Heights across Rock Creek Park to attend a quality elementary school and then Deal Jr high school. Back then there were plenty of spaces since these schools were not in vogue with those who lived in the neighborhood. It was easier to manage this OOB process than try to deal with the fact that DC in the 1980s remained as segregated (in terms of housing and education) in the 80s as it had been in the 60s. Fast forward to today, I think DC still does not want to (or does not know how to deal) with fact that DC was never truly integrated and the discriminatory practices employed in the 50s, including redlining and covenants prohibiting sales of Ward 3 homes to African-Americans/Black, were never ameliorated. Now as a result of this inaction, DC is still de facto segregated and now thanks to gentrification, economically segregated.

If the Ward 3 schools become neighborhood schools, essentially a "separate and unequal" school system has been created - with the best public schools being in Ward 3 with great facilities, test scores, innovative classes/course work, teaching staff etc and the other schools across the park with low test scores, inferior facilities and classes, teachers etc . DC has begun to improve on the physical plants of its East of the Park schools but test scores are still dismal compared to Ward 3 schools. This is why I think that a legal challenge to any boundary revisions that cuts out diversity in Ward 3 has a chance of success. The history of racial discrimination in DC is distinguishable from the facts of the PICS and might lead to a different outcome. I agree with jsteele in that the threat of being branded as the govt that brought back a separate system for elite Whites in Ward 3 vs AA/Blacks in the Wards across the park means that diversity at Deal and Wilson will be somehow be retained.

Probably the best remark I've read on DCUB in a LONG time. +1000

They have always been neighborhood schools that made open spots available to OOB children. The facility improvements have been happening all over the city and there a a number of ward 3 schools that have not yet had facility upgrades. Their facilities are only not grim because of family involvement in beautification, not special treatment by DCPS plant. Excellent principals and teachers have been deployed to low performing schools. What is the difference, the cohort of children that attend. There are many other children around the city that are being raised in families that care about education and send their children to school ready to learn, many overcoming challenges to do so. DCPS has not been able to figure out a way to or is not willing to take the political hit to put those kids together in school, because that is seen as discriminatory against the children that do not have the benefit of such families. Thus, families that care a lot about education seek out the schools where that is the dominant neighborhood family type. It is not about race, it is about SES and culture. It is not racist to do what you can to place your child in a high performing school. My children go to a JKLM. It is not a lily white school, there are many cultures and languages represented. It does not have a large AA population but it does have a good number of AA students and they are from the neighborhood and OOB. I dont't care about the racial make up of my school, I do care about the preparedness of the students and the values of the families.

I dont think DCPS should cut out its eotp feeder schools, I do think they should reconsider the automatic right to progress to the MS or HS the feeder feeds when a student is OOB. Perhaps replace it with a priority in the lottery. I also think they should do more to create schools eotp families want to send their children to, I would certainly consider it if it were actually a good option and I am a ward 3 parent.

[Anonymous]

17:10 here, I meant to say create a school WOTP families want their kids to attend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I dont't care about the racial make up of my school, I do care about the preparedness of the students and the values of the families.

I dont think DCPS should cut out its eotp feeder schools, I do think they should reconsider the automatic right to progress to the MS or HS the feeder feeds when a student is OOB. Perhaps replace it with a priority in the lottery. I also think they should do more to create schools eotp families want to send their children to, I would certainly consider it if it were actually a good option and I am a ward 3 parent.

I don't agree with all you're saying, but I think the point to create a truly attractive option east of Rock Creek Park for all of the students you find there who are prepared at middle school for achievement is a great idea. And maybe even different flavors of that idea depending on what people really are interested in seeing.

[Anonymous]

So who is going to force all the middle class AAs that moved to MoCo and PG back into Ward 3?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To 16:49. I do not dispute that they were neighborhood schools. I believe I stated that they were neighborhood schools that were essentially abandoned by the people who lived in the neighborhoods. To elaborate, the people in those neighborhoods preferred to send their children to private school rather than the neighborhood school. My point in mentioning the OOB process was to point out that rather than work to fully integrate the city so that AAs/Blacks were reintroduced to areas of the city that they had previously been shut out of, thereby creating a situation where there would be diversity in every neighborhood, the city ignored the issue. This brings us full circle to today where we are wringing our hands over the boundary issue.

As for what I meant by economic segregation, I was trying to explain the continued push of the upper middle class citizens to neighborhoods that have been historically populated by middle class AAs/Blacks, which thereby raising the costs to move into the neighborhoods to such a level that AAs/Blacks can no longer afford these neighborhoods and have to move neighborhoods that generally have a poorer population. For example I grew up in Petworth, and at this point, I could not afford to buy in Petworth and if I wanted to continue to live in DC, I would most likely move to Wards 7 and 8. More than likely, I would probably move out of the city. So the landscape becomes the uber wealthy concentrate in Spring Valley, Gtown, Cleveland Park, Chevy Chase (Ward 3), the upper middle class are in Wards 4, 5,6, and the poor are concentrated to Wards 7 and 8 because the cost to move back across the River or across the Park is too high.

Isn't that your fault for not finding a career that would pay you well enough to afford those neighborhoods? I know plenty of AA lawyers and lobbyists that can afford to live in those neighborhoods. Do you want DC to subsidize your income?

[Anonymous]

The screwy thing here is, the assignment/boundaries/feeders panels has decisionmaking power only over the sticks in the process, not the carrots.

They can't create a gifted and talented middle school at Shaw, can they?

They can't create a "6th grade academy only for those who tested advanced on DC CAS," can they?

It means we get a half-process, all the pain, none of the promise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't that your fault for not finding a career that would pay you well enough to afford those neighborhoods? I know plenty of AA lawyers and lobbyists that can afford to live in those neighborhoods. Do you want DC to subsidize your income?

Is it your fault no one taught you that not everyone has equal opportunity, or that opportunity should not track geography?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:17:10 here, I meant to say create a school WOTP families want their kids to attend.

There is Hardy. An option many EOTP famiiles would love to have.

[Anonymous]

I am the pp you are calling names. I actually have no personal stake in the boundary changes, but am a close observer of the zeitgeist here. Tell me exactly why your certainty that a no-boundary system is not happening is more valid than my suspicion that the number one priority of this committee is to economically integrate the DC public schools and if it takes incrementally doing away with boundaries, they will try it.

It may get blocked and the mayors race may derail it, but my sense is that it is definitely on the table. Give me proof it isn't

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't think you corrected me so much as you offered your own interpretation. I'm still pretty comfortable with my interpretation. I have no idea what changes the Committee is likely to recommend. I would suggest that anyone who claims to know is not being honest.

OK. Just to be clear, your interpretation is that a finding of a compelling state interest in promoting diversity in schools schools means that defending a solution that does not preserve diversity would be difficult, correct?

Yep. That's my interpretation. The reason have this view was very well explained by the poster at 11/08/2013 16:44 (the post directly after yours).

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:I am the pp you are calling names. I actually have no personal stake in the boundary changes, but am a close observer of the zeitgeist here. Tell me exactly why your certainty that a no-boundary system is not happening is more valid than my suspicion that the number one priority of this committee is to economically integrate the DC public schools and if it takes incrementally doing away with boundaries, they will try it.

It may get blocked and the mayors race may derail it, but my sense is that it is definitely on the table. Give me proof it isn't

Nobody can give you proof of what is or is not on the table. And, a lot of things could be on the table just for the sake of argument. But, it is very unlikely that a no-boundary system for elementary schools is being considered. If nothing else, that would be a transportation nightmare.

[Anonymous]

Fair enough. But it could definitely be on the table for middle/high school in the near term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Money, in a word. I guess we can get into a debate about whether upper and upper-middle class students tend to be better prepared for school, but for the sake of argument let's just assume that that point is settled. So the question is how do we, as a city, use these upper and upper-middle class students to our advantage in improving educational opportunities for everyone. I think the answer is innovating schools that will entice these students to spread out (and maybe even entice some of the families using private schools to come back to public schools). The answer is NOT carving out space for 10 or 20 or even 100 OOB students to attend the one coveted middle school. Where does that leave the rest of the OOB population?

I understand what you are saying, and agree with it, for the most part. But the bolded sentence makes me cringe (even though I generally agree with it). My kid is not a tool to be used for social change. She's a 7 yo who deserves the best public education possible (as do all 7 yos, and all kids). And I'm fortunate to be able to provide her (within reason) with those opportunities. I wish all kids had the same opportunities, but I'm not willing to sacrifice her on the alter of social engineering so DCPS can "improve." Call me selfish, but that's how I view my responsibility as a parent. I'm not talking about being in a lily-white, rich school - she goes to a charter now, and the diversity there, both racial and SES, whould make many JKLMM parents run for the hills. But the minute I feel like she's being disadvantaged to further some political agenda is the minute I start screaming bloody murder, and either move to the 'burbs <shudder> or start applying to privates.

+1000,000 Totally agree. It is not my kid's job to fix other kids. That would be the schools' and parents' jobs!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Money, in a word. I guess we can get into a debate about whether upper and upper-middle class students tend to be better prepared for school, but for the sake of argument let's just assume that that point is settled. So the question is how do we, as a city, use these upper and upper-middle class students to our advantage in improving educational opportunities for everyone. I think the answer is innovating schools that will entice these students to spread out (and maybe even entice some of the families using private schools to come back to public schools). The answer is NOT carving out space for 10 or 20 or even 100 OOB students to attend the one coveted middle school. Where does that leave the rest of the OOB population?

I understand what you are saying, and agree with it, for the most part. But the bolded sentence makes me cringe (even though I generally agree with it). My kid is not a tool to be used for social change. She's a 7 yo who deserves the best public education possible (as do all 7 yos, and all kids). And I'm fortunate to be able to provide her (within reason) with those opportunities. I wish all kids had the same opportunities, but I'm not willing to sacrifice her on the alter of social engineering so DCPS can "improve." Call me selfish, but that's how I view my responsibility as a parent. I'm not talking about being in a lily-white, rich school - she goes to a charter now, and the diversity there, both racial and SES, whould make many JKLMM parents run for the hills. But the minute I feel like she's being disadvantaged to further some political agenda is the minute I start screaming bloody murder, and either move to the 'burbs <shudder> or start applying to privates.

+1000,000 Totally agree. It is not my kid's job to fix other kids. That would be the schools' and parents' jobs!

Yeah but if we don't fix other kids, we pay for it dearly later on when they are adults.