Why Does Van Ness Elementary School Not Have a Boundary

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:also, the 400 units of public housing and any population growth from the market-rate units at CQ are still a little ways off. DCPS should draw the boundaries in a way that fills Van Ness now, starting the school with younger grades only and adding a grade a year until it's PK-5th. That probably means a boundary that extends into SW, with older kids still going to Amidon and some allowances for little kids to attend Amidon if they want to and they have a sibling there. If the population in Capitol Riverfront gets big enough that Van Ness is overfull with in-boundary kids, they can do what DCPS has recently done at other schools (put up portables and/or expand the school) or redraw the boundary at that point.

But the idea that CQ is going to get to gerrymander a school that cuts out poor kids (even for a few years until more public housing is built in the area and the main VN proponents' kids just happen to be in middle school or in charters that start in 5th grade) is just unrealistic.

I don't think having a boundary of South Capitol Street to the West, The SE/SW Freeway to the North, and the Anacostia River to the South and East is gerrymandering the Van Ness Elementary School Boundary. It makes a lot of sense to make that the boundary (take a look at the map). Also, take a look at the current boundary for Amidon-Bowen. Its huge!

All the more reason to shift some into Van Ness, don't you think?

But isn't Amidon way underenrolled? So no real need to shrink its boundary.

By this logic, there is no real need to open Van Ness.

Except, if you don't open a school that is acceptable to CQ families, you won't have any CQ families DC in DCPS elementary schools. Which will change the nature of the city. The residents of the new condos and apartments will be defined by what schooling is available to them. And the people paying big bucks for housing aren't going to send their children to A-B. Just ain't gonna happen. Creating a 35% FARM school for these families is a net positive for DC's finances. The extra real-estate taxes accruing on the extra priciness of these condos and the extra income taxes more than pays for the cost of a not yet full elementary school.

You can look at this as 'entitled' (yep, it is!) or as a trade-off (pay taxes, get services you value). It is still a better deal for the city than not providing a school that high-SES city residents will use.

What planet are you from? No one gives a shit about what a few UMC families living south of the Freeway think or do in terms of educational choices. It's not like families are going to flock to "extra pricey" high-rise condos based on the FARMS rate at Van Ness. The idea that families living IB for Van Ness will somehow change the nature of the city is bizarre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Except, if you don't open a school that is acceptable to CQ families, you won't have any CQ families DC in DCPS elementary schools. Which will change the nature of the city. The residents of the new condos and apartments will be defined by what schooling is available to them. And the people paying big bucks for housing aren't going to send their children to A-B. Just ain't gonna happen. Creating a 35% FARM school for these families is a net positive for DC's finances. The extra real-estate taxes accruing on the extra priciness of these condos and the extra income taxes more than pays for the cost of a not yet full elementary school.

You can look at this as 'entitled' (yep, it is!) or as a trade-off (pay taxes, get services you value). It is still a better deal for the city than not providing a school that high-SES city residents will use.

This is exactly right. There will be a lot more housing in the Capitol Riverfront than just Capitol Quarter. "The Lofts at Capitol Quarter" apartments (195 units), Park Chelsea (432 units), River Parc (287 Units), "Gallery At Capitol Riverfront" (324 units), "Ballpark Square" (326), Riverfront on Anacostia (305), Twelve12 (218 units), Yards Parcel N (327 Units), Foundry Lofts (200 units), Velocity Condos (200 Units), Capitol Hill Tower (300 Units). Not to mention that EYA is planning a condo in the area with about (150 units).

This is a LOT of housing in the Capitol Riverfront that's outside of Capitol Quarter, and this housing becomes a lot more attractive to middle-upper income families if they know they are zoned for a successful elementary school like Van Ness Elementary will be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven't spent any time at A-B but I have spent time at Brent. I have tremendous respect for the principal, staff and teachers who work tirelessly to provide the best education they can for all students in the building. Not many years ago, Brent had a higher number of low income kids, and I thought it was a good school then too. A measure of a good school is much greater than just the test scores.

I have no idea how Brent kids would do at A-B, as I've never been there, but I do think that A-B kids would get a good education at Brent were they there.

I disagree. In my opinion, if Amidon-Bowen and Brent Elementary would swap students, Amidon-Bowen would be considered a "good" school, and Brent Elementary would be considered a "bad" school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except, if you don't open a school that is acceptable to CQ families, you won't have any CQ families DC in DCPS elementary schools. Which will change the nature of the city. The residents of the new condos and apartments will be defined by what schooling is available to them. And the people paying big bucks for housing aren't going to send their children to A-B. Just ain't gonna happen. Creating a 35% FARM school for these families is a net positive for DC's finances. The extra real-estate taxes accruing on the extra priciness of these condos and the extra income taxes more than pays for the cost of a not yet full elementary school.

You can look at this as 'entitled' (yep, it is!) or as a trade-off (pay taxes, get services you value). It is still a better deal for the city than not providing a school that high-SES city residents will use.

This is exactly right. There will be a lot more housing in the Capitol Riverfront than just Capitol Quarter. "The Lofts at Capitol Quarter" apartments (195 units), Park Chelsea (432 units), River Parc (287 Units), "Gallery At Capitol Riverfront" (324 units), "Ballpark Square" (326), Riverfront on Anacostia (305), Twelve12 (218 units), Yards Parcel N (327 Units), Foundry Lofts (200 units), Velocity Condos (200 Units), Capitol Hill Tower (300 Units). Not to mention that EYA is planning a condo in the area with about (150 units).

This is a LOT of housing in the Capitol Riverfront that's outside of Capitol Quarter, and this housing becomes a lot more attractive to middle-upper income families if they know they are zoned for a successful elementary school like Van Ness Elementary will be.

How many of those units are 2 bedrooms or greater? Isn't Capitol Riverfront, outside of Capitol Quarter, currently dominated by twentysomethings and childless couples? No doubt there are some families in condos and apartments, but they seem to be more the exception than the rule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't spent any time at A-B but I have spent time at Brent. I have tremendous respect for the principal, staff and teachers who work tirelessly to provide the best education they can for all students in the building. Not many years ago, Brent had a higher number of low income kids, and I thought it was a good school then too. A measure of a good school is much greater than just the test scores.

I have no idea how Brent kids would do at A-B, as I've never been there, but I do think that A-B kids would get a good education at Brent were they there.

I disagree. In my opinion, if Amidon-Bowen and Brent Elementary would swap students, Amidon-Bowen would be considered a "good" school, and Brent Elementary would be considered a "bad" school

Absolutely, if all you judge a school by is the number of FARMS students, and maybe glance at test scores.

[Anonymous]

Nice try. Except no one judges the quality of a school primarily by the number of FARMS students. Even if they did, some charters serving low-SES families do quite well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

By this logic, there is no real need to open Van Ness.

I disagree with this statement. The three closest schools to housing in the Capitol Riverfront is (in this order) Brent Elementary School, Tyler Elementary School, Amidon-Bowen Elementary School.

Brent Elementary School
----------------------------
2013-2014 Enrollment - 359
Capacity 325


Tyler Elementary School
----------------------------
2013-2014 Enrollment - 507
Capacity - 500


Amidon-Bowen Elementary School
---------------------------------------
2013-2014 Enrollment - 342
Capacity - 400


I definitely believe that there is a need to reopen Van Ness Elementary School
Capacity - 400

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

By this logic, there is no real need to open Van Ness.

I disagree with this statement. The three closest schools to housing in the Capitol Riverfront is (in this order) Brent Elementary School, Tyler Elementary School, Amidon-Bowen Elementary School.

Brent Elementary School
----------------------------
2013-2014 Enrollment - 359
Capacity 325


Tyler Elementary School
----------------------------
2013-2014 Enrollment - 507
Capacity - 500


Amidon-Bowen Elementary School
---------------------------------------
2013-2014 Enrollment - 342
Capacity - 400


I definitely believe that there is a need to reopen Van Ness Elementary School

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The goal isn't to reduce the number of OOB students at A-B, but rather to get as many students as possible into a school where they can learn. A-B doesn't seem to be working well for many of its students. Maybe Van Ness would be an improvement for some of them.

Exactly. So the Capitol Quarter crew who would like to exclude them needs to understand exactly what they would be doing. It's unbecoming, not to mention fruitless.

You seem like a mean person. Where do your kids go to school and how committed are you to surrounding your kids with econ disadvantaged kids are you? Please provide details.

It's real easy to take cheap shots at parents who want a school that is predominantly middle class.

There are plenty of places you can live where schools are predominantly middle class. You might be surprised to know that there are plenty of middle class families living in SW who would consider sending their children to VN. The neighborhood is actually pretty diverse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except, if you don't open a school that is acceptable to CQ families, you won't have any CQ families DC in DCPS elementary schools. Which will change the nature of the city. The residents of the new condos and apartments will be defined by what schooling is available to them. And the people paying big bucks for housing aren't going to send their children to A-B. Just ain't gonna happen. Creating a 35% FARM school for these families is a net positive for DC's finances. The extra real-estate taxes accruing on the extra priciness of these condos and the extra income taxes more than pays for the cost of a not yet full elementary school.

You can look at this as 'entitled' (yep, it is!) or as a trade-off (pay taxes, get services you value). It is still a better deal for the city than not providing a school that high-SES city residents will use.

This is exactly right. There will be a lot more housing in the Capitol Riverfront than just Capitol Quarter. "The Lofts at Capitol Quarter" apartments (195 units), Park Chelsea (432 units), River Parc (287 Units), "Gallery At Capitol Riverfront" (324 units), "Ballpark Square" (326), Riverfront on Anacostia (305), Twelve12 (218 units), Yards Parcel N (327 Units), Foundry Lofts (200 units), Velocity Condos (200 Units), Capitol Hill Tower (300 Units). Not to mention that EYA is planning a condo in the area with about (150 units).

This is a LOT of housing in the Capitol Riverfront that's outside of Capitol Quarter, and this housing becomes a lot more attractive to middle-upper income families if they know they are zoned for a successful elementary school like Van Ness Elementary will be.

Many of these are studios -2br apts and condos filled with singles and dinks who will move once they start having kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The goal isn't to reduce the number of OOB students at A-B, but rather to get as many students as possible into a school where they can learn. A-B doesn't seem to be working well for many of its students. Maybe Van Ness would be an improvement for some of them.

Exactly. So the Capitol Quarter crew who would like to exclude them needs to understand exactly what they would be doing. It's unbecoming, not to mention fruitless.

You seem like a mean person. Where do your kids go to school and how committed are you to surrounding your kids with econ disadvantaged kids are you? Please provide details.

It's real easy to take cheap shots at parents who want a school that is predominantly middle class.

No, my dear. I'm an adult; one with children who has lived in DC longer than you have, and definitely sees the landscape clearer than you do. I've watched friends navigate the DCPS/charter/private options. My family has navigated the DCPS/charter/private options. We will all continue to do so.

Believe it or not, I'm trying to help you manage your expectations, because you clearly have no clue. I am your friend, you know. I can understand how you think that buying your expensive condo entitles you to a school full of children such as the ones you have yet to enroll. Were I so new to DC, or to homeownership, or to parenting, or to DCPS, I might think the same. But I am old, wizened, and familiar with the angst-ridden nature of DC politics which underlie everything in DC (potholes, trashbins, ANC spending, dogparks, bikelanes, condo conversions, double-parking on Sundays, corruption vs. pork, the change from taxi zones to meters... I could go on, but that would be overkill).

You are getting a newly renovated school. It is attractive inside and out. It is convenient to where you live. It is convenient to metro. It will become very popular, very fast. DCPS has every reason to entice you into this school, since it expects a cohort of higher SES students. This will start the school out on the "right foot." In a way, it will open like one of the hot charter schools - with lots of enthusiasm and participation from families who will set a certain tone and level of expectations. This is a good thing. We have learned that it's easier to open a new school and attract higher SES families, than to try to convince them to attend an old one.

What you need to understand, and the sooner the better, is that you will not be allowed a little high-SES citadel. If the families don't bring their students in themselves, then DCPS is intent on re-directing them towards you. You don't have to believe me, just read some threads about Murch, Janney, Oyster Adams, Hardy, Eaton... basically schools that have a long history of being almost exclusively higher SES. These are schools in neighborhoods with considerable political clout (yours doesn't) and they are being force-fed changes to the demographics of their neighborhood schools which don't reflect the neighborhood. Why? Because the city is determined to get more lower SES students into high performing schools. We can save the debate over whether or not this a social good or bad for another time, but like it or not it is a fact. There is absolutely no chance that a brand new high SES school will open on the Hill and keep out its idea of "the untouchables."

You're getting your new school. You'll also be getting friends from other neighborhoods. I'm not mean my dear, I'm a realist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except, if you don't open a school that is acceptable to CQ families, you won't have any CQ families DC in DCPS elementary schools. Which will change the nature of the city. The residents of the new condos and apartments will be defined by what schooling is available to them. And the people paying big bucks for housing aren't going to send their children to A-B. Just ain't gonna happen. Creating a 35% FARM school for these families is a net positive for DC's finances. The extra real-estate taxes accruing on the extra priciness of these condos and the extra income taxes more than pays for the cost of a not yet full elementary school.

You can look at this as 'entitled' (yep, it is!) or as a trade-off (pay taxes, get services you value). It is still a better deal for the city than not providing a school that high-SES city residents will use.

This is exactly right. There will be a lot more housing in the Capitol Riverfront than just Capitol Quarter. "The Lofts at Capitol Quarter" apartments (195 units), Park Chelsea (432 units), River Parc (287 Units), "Gallery At Capitol Riverfront" (324 units), "Ballpark Square" (326), Riverfront on Anacostia (305), Twelve12 (218 units), Yards Parcel N (327 Units), Foundry Lofts (200 units), Velocity Condos (200 Units), Capitol Hill Tower (300 Units). Not to mention that EYA is planning a condo in the area with about (150 units).

This is a LOT of housing in the Capitol Riverfront that's outside of Capitol Quarter, and this housing becomes a lot more attractive to middle-upper income families if they know they are zoned for a successful elementary school like Van Ness Elementary will be.

Middle-upper class families (however you define the term) will not be climbing over one another for the chance to buy a luxury condo in Near Southeast just to send their child to Van Ness. Even with a shiny new Vida Fitness and Whole Foods, your aren't living in the Upper West Side for chrissakes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except, if you don't open a school that is acceptable to CQ families, you won't have any CQ families DC in DCPS elementary schools. Which will change the nature of the city. The residents of the new condos and apartments will be defined by what schooling is available to them. And the people paying big bucks for housing aren't going to send their children to A-B. Just ain't gonna happen. Creating a 35% FARM school for these families is a net positive for DC's finances. The extra real-estate taxes accruing on the extra priciness of these condos and the extra income taxes more than pays for the cost of a not yet full elementary school.

You can look at this as 'entitled' (yep, it is!) or as a trade-off (pay taxes, get services you value). It is still a better deal for the city than not providing a school that high-SES city residents will use.

This is exactly right. There will be a lot more housing in the Capitol Riverfront than just Capitol Quarter. "The Lofts at Capitol Quarter" apartments (195 units), Park Chelsea (432 units), River Parc (287 Units), "Gallery At Capitol Riverfront" (324 units), "Ballpark Square" (326), Riverfront on Anacostia (305), Twelve12 (218 units), Yards Parcel N (327 Units), Foundry Lofts (200 units), Velocity Condos (200 Units), Capitol Hill Tower (300 Units). Not to mention that EYA is planning a condo in the area with about (150 units).

This is a LOT of housing in the Capitol Riverfront that's outside of Capitol Quarter, and this housing becomes a lot more attractive to middle-upper income families if they know they are zoned for a successful elementary school like Van Ness Elementary will be.

Middle-upper class families (however you define the term) will not be climbing over one another for the chance to buy a luxury condo in Near Southeast just to send their child to Van Ness. Even with a shiny new Vida Fitness and Whole Foods, your aren't living in the Upper West Side for chrissakes.

True. Anyone looking for the Upper West Side experience would rent on upper Connecticut Ave., and be inbounds for Murch (although the Murch v. Lafayette v. Hearst topic is very hot among that set, it is for another thread).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

From your own link:

with more than half of the students at the elementary school from out-of-bounds

The article is from September 2012, so was using data from the 2011-12 school year. The DCPS profile says it's 82% IB now. I'm guessing it's some combination of more kids living in the boundary and more families giving Amidon a try.

I think there is a lot more work to do before Amidon is a high-performing school (or even as good as other Title 1 schools in the area!). But one thing that will help is more neighborhood buy-in, and it seems like that's already begun. I know the principal has met with many families of young children to encourage them to rank Amidon high in the lottery. Of the 27 PK3 spots available for next year, IB families filled 25 of them in the first round (the other 2 went to OOB with siblings in the school). All 5 of the PK4 kids accepted were from IB, too.

It will be interesting to see what happens when Van Ness opens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The goal isn't to reduce the number of OOB students at A-B, but rather to get as many students as possible into a school where they can learn. A-B doesn't seem to be working well for many of its students. Maybe Van Ness would be an improvement for some of them.

Exactly. So the Capitol Quarter crew who would like to exclude them needs to understand exactly what they would be doing. It's unbecoming, not to mention fruitless.

You seem like a mean person. Where do your kids go to school and how committed are you to surrounding your kids with econ disadvantaged kids are you? Please provide details.

It's real easy to take cheap shots at parents who want a school that is predominantly middle class.

No, my dear. I'm an adult; one with children who has lived in DC longer than you have, and definitely sees the landscape clearer than you do. I've watched friends navigate the DCPS/charter/private options. My family has navigated the DCPS/charter/private options. We will all continue to do so.

Believe it or not, I'm trying to help you manage your expectations, because you clearly have no clue. I am your friend, you know. I can understand how you think that buying your expensive condo entitles you to a school full of children such as the ones you have yet to enroll. Were I so new to DC, or to homeownership, or to parenting, or to DCPS, I might think the same. But I am old, wizened, and familiar with the angst-ridden nature of DC politics which underlie everything in DC (potholes, trashbins, ANC spending, dogparks, bikelanes, condo conversions, double-parking on Sundays, corruption vs. pork, the change from taxi zones to meters... I could go on, but that would be overkill).

You are getting a newly renovated school. It is attractive inside and out. It is convenient to where you live. It is convenient to metro. It will become very popular, very fast. DCPS has every reason to entice you into this school, since it expects a cohort of higher SES students. This will start the school out on the "right foot." In a way, it will open like one of the hot charter schools - with lots of enthusiasm and participation from families who will set a certain tone and level of expectations. This is a good thing. We have learned that it's easier to open a new school and attract higher SES families, than to try to convince them to attend an old one.

What you need to understand, and the sooner the better, is that you will not be allowed a little high-SES citadel. If the families don't bring their students in themselves, then DCPS is intent on re-directing them towards you. You don't have to believe me, just read some threads about Murch, Janney, Oyster Adams, Hardy, Eaton... basically schools that have a long history of being almost exclusively higher SES. These are schools in neighborhoods with considerable political clout (yours doesn't) and they are being force-fed changes to the demographics of their neighborhood schools which don't reflect the neighborhood. Why? Because the city is determined to get more lower SES students into high performing schools. We can save the debate over whether or not this a social good or bad for another time, but like it or not it is a fact. There is absolutely no chance that a brand new high SES school will open on the Hill and keep out its idea of "the untouchables."

You're getting your new school. You'll also be getting friends from other neighborhoods. I'm not mean my dear, I'm a realist.

NP here. I totally agree with you except that Van Ness and the neighborhood around is NOT Capitol Hill. That's part of the entitlement problem, I think -- some families in Capitol Quarter are bent out of shape that they are rich and live nearby, yet they can't go to Brent.