Mayor Bowser to Make Education Policy and Personnel Announcement - Boundary Decision?

[Anonymous]

True.

Do you live west of the park? Then the mayor couldn't care less about you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/bowser-announces-tweaks-to-dc-school-boundary-plan/2015/02/27/b5f33f34-be2f-11e4-bdfa-b8e8f594e6ee_story.html

Wow, congrats to Crestwood!

Do you mean 16th St Heights rather than Crestwood? They're talking about West now feeding to Deals, right? So, are they going to start busing the lucky ducks who are now an hour walk away from school instead of 20mn?

No, they are not talking about changing feeders. They are talking about extending a grandfathering. West will not feed to Deal.

Am I the only one actually watching/listening to this?

(FYI I'm responsible for half the posts in this thread - your own faithful DCUM live blogger)

some of us with West as our IB school have also had feeder rights to Deal all along. What happens to us? that would seem to be considered grandfathering to me.

I am PP (the live blogger). Sorry to get technical with you, but you are confusing geographical attendance with feeders. If you are IB for West then you have never had a feeder right to Deal. You have had a geographical attendance right, which the Gray plan removed. Your geographical right is now grandfathered until 2022. Regardless of where your kids attend elementary school (private, charter, DCPS), if you were IB for Deal in the year 2013, then you continue to be IB for Deal until 2022. This means that people can continue to buy/rent in Crestwood or 16 st H until 2022 and send their kids to Deal. After that, no.

This much is clear. What remains unclear to me is, as I wrote above, Eaton and other reassigned neighborhoods/schools.

Thanks, I am the PP and this is a very helpful clarification about the difference between geographic rights and feeder schools.

No problem, this stuff is confusing!!

And I agree with PP above that Rudd and municipal services and many other issues are important, but it would be nice for reporters to take the time to first ensure that the issue of the day is clarified, in this case the school boundary tweaks, before moving on to other issues. But that's just me. This press conference was like most of the DC press conferences I have heard... not very detail oriented, let's put it that way.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It does not impact Eaton as Hardy is already an opened middle school. It only impacts kids that were IB for Deal and were going to be grandfathered for a few years after Macfarland opened. Now they stay until 2022 regardless of when Macfarland opens.

Not to nitpick, okay, to nitpick, the previous plan didn't contain any grandfathering once MacFarland opened. That was part of our complaints because we didn't know when MacFarland would open and it would become our assigned school on day 1. It made planning impossible.

My bad, you're right. I just had it in my head that would be a tweak that was going to happen. Only seems like the fair thing to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So eaton is still shut out from Deal. Oyster too.

This has been gone over so many times on DCUM this past year: Oyster has its own MS. Yes, some of (not all of) the Oyster-Adams boundary has also been IB for Deal, and this is changing. But Oyster keeps its own MS, and then feeds to Wilson. Oyster parents were at least successful in lobbying to maintain the Wilson feed, which was removed in the first version of the plan. I would say that Oyster families are in a pretty good situation overall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It does not impact Eaton as Hardy is already an opened middle school. It only impacts kids that were IB for Deal and were going to be grandfathered for a few years after Macfarland opened. Now they stay until 2022 regardless of when Macfarland opens.

Not to nitpick, okay, to nitpick, the previous plan didn't contain any grandfathering once MacFarland opened. That was part of our complaints because we didn't know when MacFarland would open and it would become our assigned school on day 1. It made planning impossible.

My bad, you're right. I just had it in my head that would be a tweak that was going to happen. Only seems like the fair thing to do.

No, the fair thing was to tell them that unless and until McFarland opens, they can continue to attend Deal. Assure them that there will be at least one full school year's warning before the opening of McFarland.

That's fair. This is just the first step towards granting the neighborhood rights to Deal and Wilson in perpetuity. The rest of the city EOTP should be pissed off right now.

[Anonymous]

I hope this at least means the naysayers that hate that Shepherd still feeds to Deal will at least be quiet until 2022. Every. Single. Post. about Shepherd is interrupted with a (likely) Janney parent saying "Shepherd" has an uncertain future.

[Anonymous]

Shepherd has a fine future. It's the present that's the problem...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It does not impact Eaton as Hardy is already an opened middle school. It only impacts kids that were IB for Deal and were going to be grandfathered for a few years after Macfarland opened. Now they stay until 2022 regardless of when Macfarland opens.

Not to nitpick, okay, to nitpick, the previous plan didn't contain any grandfathering once MacFarland opened. That was part of our complaints because we didn't know when MacFarland would open and it would become our assigned school on day 1. It made planning impossible.

My bad, you're right. I just had it in my head that would be a tweak that was going to happen. Only seems like the fair thing to do.

No, the fair thing was to tell them that unless and until McFarland opens, they can continue to attend Deal. Assure them that there will be at least one full school year's warning before the opening of McFarland.

That's fair. This is just the first step towards granting the neighborhood rights to Deal and Wilson in perpetuity. The rest of the city EOTP should be pissed off right now.

Why is this true, in bold? Crestwood and 16th Street Heights were the only EOTP areas of the city that were cut from Deal under the Gray plan. They have now been restored until 2022. There is no change for the rest of the EOTP neighborhoods, all of which continue the status quo they had for decades, either with rights to Deal or no rights to Deal.

There is a larger section of the city that was cut from Wilson; maybe that is what you are thinking of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So eaton is still shut out from Deal. Oyster too.

This has been gone over so many times on DCUM this past year: Oyster has its own MS. Yes, some of (not all of) the Oyster-Adams boundary has also been IB for Deal, and this is changing. But Oyster keeps its own MS, and then feeds to Wilson. Oyster parents were at least successful in lobbying to maintain the Wilson feed, which was removed in the first version of the plan. I would say that Oyster families are in a pretty good situation overall.

I agree! I'm an Oyster parent, and I'm really happy that we no longer feed to Deal. I really wish that SOME (by no means the majority) Oyster parents would stop whining. We already have a great middle school--stop being so greedy! If you want Deal, then PLEASE move IB for Deal. Personally, I want my child to be bilingual and biliterate, so I'm riding the Oyster train until graduation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, there is no hope to relieve overcrowding at Deal and Wilson before 2022? Great plan!

Well, if you were to fully get behind the new MacFarland middle school to help make it awesome then you would likely decrease the pressure on Deal.

This is an important point. It would be great to hear a rush of genuine support for the new EOTP MS from WOTP parents zoned for Deal.

[Anonymous]

It is hard to build successful new schools without critical mass of sufficiently prepared students. This "tweak" reduces the pool of students used to form critical mass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Shepherd has a fine future. It's the present that's the problem...

how so?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Shepherd has a fine future. It's the present that's the problem...

Oh that really hurts. What power do you get from putting down a solid school? What is your issue with Shepherd? Too many AAs for your blood?

[Anonymous]

I need clarification on the newly assigned middle schools portion. It will change my rankings as I will be more than delighted to attend our IB, Eaton, if this change means the feeder to Deal stands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It does not impact Eaton as Hardy is already an opened middle school. It only impacts kids that were IB for Deal and were going to be grandfathered for a few years after Macfarland opened. Now they stay until 2022 regardless of when Macfarland opens.

Not to nitpick, okay, to nitpick, the previous plan didn't contain any grandfathering once MacFarland opened. That was part of our complaints because we didn't know when MacFarland would open and it would become our assigned school on day 1. It made planning impossible.

My bad, you're right. I just had it in my head that would be a tweak that was going to happen. Only seems like the fair thing to do.

No, the fair thing was to tell them that unless and until McFarland opens, they can continue to attend Deal. Assure them that there will be at least one full school year's warning before the opening of McFarland.

That's fair. This is just the first step towards granting the neighborhood rights to Deal and Wilson in perpetuity. The rest of the city EOTP should be pissed off right now.

Yes absolutely. When she will seek re-election she will buy votes by promising further extensions to granfathering. Forget about rewamping MacFarland and about Deal overcrowding. Deal feeder map is just ridicolous.