Overcrowding and lack of space in Ward 3 Schools

[Anonymous]

AP classes of 36-38 students at Wilson is not ok. At the latest open house one parent enquired, the two assistant principals confirmed that these are the numbers for some classes, but this is a "strategic decisions", because AP classes are attended by the "best" students who do not need much support, and the school "strategically" set smaller classes for troubled or remedial students.

I talked to students attending, they confirmed that 36 student classes are not ok: teachers are able to accept only 3-4 questions at the end ("I can only take 3 questions today"), students are discouraged to ask for clarifications during the lesson, zero individual feedback. So, they are ok, which is different from doing well or thriving, which is what they should instead deserve.

That's the strategic plan Wilson has in mind for my advanced/honor 8th grader who will join next year.

With two good incomes post-cancer uncertainty we decided we won't pay for private. SWW and Banneker are far away, like 45 minutes (1 and half hour commuting daily), while Wilson is 15min walking, 4 min biking.

We will be at the meeting with Mary Cheh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you get rid of PK in Ward 3 - and curtail OOB - then I think the rest of the city should reciprocate: No Ward 3 PK3-4 squatting in our schools.

If OOB spots are available (and they should only be made available where there is excess capacity), any child in DC is eligible to lottery for it. Just because a child lives in a ward with overcrowded schools with little to no OOB capacity doesn't mean they can't lottery for available OOB spots elsewhere. And your idea is even more delusional if you want to apply it to city-wide charters. Do you consider those "your" schools as well?

It is certainly true that most people in Ward 3 don't *need* free PK, but neither do the middle and upper middle class gentrifiers and long-term residents EOTP. So there is really no economic argument either to support your resentment-driven ideas, unless you want to introduce means-tested access to PK city-wide.

+1. If PP wants to go to 'their' schools IB, they can, with priority in PK3 and PK4 over OOBs from WOTP and anywhere else. So what's this "squatting" that PP feels harmed by? Bizarre.

(Oops, quoted wrong post. Meant to respond to this.)

There is one person on this board who is obsessed with this 'issue' and keeps calling children from WOTP who attend PK EOTP "squatters".

I've seen it destabilize early ES when the PKers return to their neighborhood school for K. The kids who take their places did not go through PK, are nowhere near as ready to learn as the kids who attended PK3 & 4.

And it's the fault of kids that went to PK that others didn't? Still not following the logic.

Agree. If the OOB kids got a spot to begin with, it is because no on IB wanted it. Would an empty seat (no $$) be more stable?

PP is hoping that an OOB student who does not have a better neighborhood option starting in K would get the spot instead, and wants Ward 3 kids to be banned from the lottery because they are certain to return to their neighborhood schools come K. Given the fact that the vast majority of higher SES EOTP families are also certain not to stay at an underperforming school beyond PK or maybe K, however, this is a very weak argument. They higher performing DCPS EOTP are as impossible to lottery into OOB as are Ward 3 schools, and city-wide charters are city-wide (plus they offer alternative pedagogical concepts), so there really is no legal or moral argument to be made for excluding kids from WOTP from the lottery. This whole discussion is a non starter, but there are a few people here who love to bring it up from time to time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is about Deal and Wilson, and maybe Janney.

Lafayette and Hearst are not crowded. Murch is no longer crowded. They just did a huge boundary adjustment on Murch (huge chunk shifted to Lafayette and moved the south boundary to only 3 blocks away from the school), and they are rebuilding for 100 spaces over current enrollment. Murch will be fine, even with boundary grandfathering. Besides, any adjustments to Murch will not change Deal or Wilson anyway.

If Eaton is crowded, that is their fault for accepting too many OOB students because the school has (or should have) complete control over that, unlike schools that are crowded due to IB enrollment as of right.

Janney's boundary abuts Lafayette, Murch, Hearst, and Mann. The only boundary change that fixes crowding at Janney and Deal in one move is to shift some of Janney to Mann, which is a small school on a a big lot of land. The ripple effect is that it increases the Hardy boundary, which ends up reducing the number of OOB spots available at Hardy, and so possibly the enrollment at Wilson.

Mann, Stoddert and Key are all over-crowded. Stodder turns away in-boundary kids with siblings for pre-K, I think they're the only school in DCPS that does that. Key has over 400 in a school built for 300. None of those schools have significant number of OOB. None have obvious boundary adjustments.

Key's two fifth grade classes are in trailers. Around 15% OOB. There as a proposal in the boundary discussions a couple/few years ago to move a portion of student living beyond Reservoir Rd to Hyde - and the who neighborhood/school freaked out at that. Either the boundary shift or cutting OOB would reduce the #s but neither likely to happen & DCPS celebrates the increased enrollment as a big victory.

Many on this thread are rehashing some issues from the last boundary kerfuffles without knowing them. Most of the involved schools pushed heavily back against proposed boundary changes (including some made no sense - like sending families who lived a block from Murch to Hearst etc). And there's a big commitment to 10-15% OOB for most WOTP schools as part of a larger equity battle, so good luck with that.

I'm not sure if this is true? I thought the OOB problem goes something like this example:

1) Number of IB students exceed the number of spots available, let's say for PK4.

2) There is a plan to open a new PK4 class. However, since the exact # of IB students that will enroll isn't known, there is some guesswork here.

3) During initial lottery, PK4 is 90% IB.

4) A few IB families change their minds and decide to keep their kids in daycare another year, or get off the waitlist at a more preferred school.

5) PK4 ends up being 75% IB, with several OOB spots open.

6) Additional IB families decide to join in Kindergarten, which leads to some overcrowding.

What am I missing?

You are missing the most obvious and important.

We have a neighborhood-based system.

With plenty of charters for people who don't like their neighborhood option.

No need to steal anyone else's seat.

Most of the WOTP schools are 100% IB for pre-k. The schools are highly pressured and expected to take 10-15% OOB starting in K still. The increasing IB enrollment overall is pushing the class sizes and overall #s higher.

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure if this is true? I thought the OOB problem goes something like this example:

1) Number of IB students exceed the number of spots available, let's say for PK4.

2) There is a plan to open a new PK4 class. However, since the exact # of IB students that will enroll isn't known, there is some guesswork here.

3) During initial lottery, PK4 is 90% IB.

4) A few IB families change their minds and decide to keep their kids in daycare another year, or get off the waitlist at a more preferred school.

5) PK4 ends up being 75% IB, with several OOB spots open.

6) Additional IB families decide to join in Kindergarten, which leads to some overcrowding.

What am I missing?

Well, how about when DCPS tells an elementary school to go over-capacity so they can accept 50-70 more OOBs? Then those dozens of extra students not only crowd the elementary, but also Wilson down the road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not sure if this is true? I thought the OOB problem goes something like this example:

1) Number of IB students exceed the number of spots available, let's say for PK4.

2) There is a plan to open a new PK4 class. However, since the exact # of IB students that will enroll isn't known, there is some guesswork here.

3) During initial lottery, PK4 is 90% IB.

4) A few IB families change their minds and decide to keep their kids in daycare another year, or get off the waitlist at a more preferred school.

5) PK4 ends up being 75% IB, with several OOB spots open.

6) Additional IB families decide to join in Kindergarten, which leads to some overcrowding.

What am I missing?

Well, how about when DCPS tells an elementary school to go over-capacity so they can accept 50-70 more OOBs? Then those dozens of extra students not only crowd the elementary, but also Wilson down the road.

When DCPS lets a kid into a Deal feeder OOB they're writing a check they can't cash. They're promising that in six years that kid can go to Deal and in nine years Wilson.

Under the current system OOB kids are the only ones who are guaranteed their spots. IB kids can lose them to redistricting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not sure if this is true? I thought the OOB problem goes something like this example:

1) Number of IB students exceed the number of spots available, let's say for PK4.

2) There is a plan to open a new PK4 class. However, since the exact # of IB students that will enroll isn't known, there is some guesswork here.

3) During initial lottery, PK4 is 90% IB.

4) A few IB families change their minds and decide to keep their kids in daycare another year, or get off the waitlist at a more preferred school.

5) PK4 ends up being 75% IB, with several OOB spots open.

6) Additional IB families decide to join in Kindergarten, which leads to some overcrowding.

What am I missing?

Well, how about when DCPS tells an elementary school to go over-capacity so they can accept 50-70 more OOBs? Then those dozens of extra students not only crowd the elementary, but also Wilson down the road.

DCPS doesn't care. They are out of answers. The charters skim off the cream of the crop EOTP. Their only solution is to try and pack as many kids into Deal and Wilson until the IB parents leave or revolt. To date they have not revolted. I sense that may change in a few years. It won't be pretty, but DCPS should have made the difficult decisions in 2014 instead of kicking the can down the road.

[Anonymous]

I appreciate that everyone is offering solutions here. A several thoughts:

1. Please do come out to our meeting on February 23rd at 6:45pm (note a little earlier than we usually meet) at the Tenley-Friendship Library. Please RSVP to [e-mail] if you are coming.

2. As noted, the focus of the meeting will be to talk about overcrowding in Wilson Feeder schools and possible solutions to help relieve this overcrowding. This is an initial conversation and will hopefully be followed up with a future meeting with DCPS Planning Office staff (at least we are working on that).

3. The Councilmember is not coming to offer us solutions. So please come to this meeting ready to offer your own constructive suggestions and feedback. As I said, I appreciate folks offering thoughts here, but getting in the same room and having a conversation with one another is an important step.

4. W3EdNet (for short) includes all of the schools in the Wilson feeder pattern. So Bancroft (Ward 1), Shepherd and Lafayette (Ward 4), and Hardy and Hyde (Ward 2) all participate in the group (to varying degrees -- we all don't show up for every meeting). We welcome families from all of these school regardless of where they live in the District. Staff and other interest community members are welcome as well.

5. These are not the only meetings coming up!

-- On January 31st at 7pm at the Georgetown library, we will be hearing from State Superintendent for Education Hanseul Kang. Please come ask her questions about such things as PARCC testing.
-- And on February 8 at 7pm at Wilson High School, we are sponsoring a joint meeting with OSSE and the SBOE about new school rating/accountability plan under the federal education law (ESSA). We discussed a preliminary version at a previous W3EdNet meeting with State School Board rep from Ward 3, Ruth Wattenberg. But this is another opportunity, with both organizations present, to provide feedback. The SBOE will have an up or down vote on the final proposal later in March.
-- AND we recently heard from Chancellor Wilson, and he has committed to attending a future meeting. That meeting has yet to be scheduled.

6. You can follow us at @W3EdNet on Twitter and https://www.facebook.com/W3EdNet on Facebook. If you email [e-mail], we can also make sure that you know about future meetings.

Thanks,

Brian Doyle
Co-Chair W3EdNet

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate that everyone is offering solutions here. A several thoughts:

1. Please do come out to our meeting on February 23rd at 6:45pm (note a little earlier than we usually meet) at the Tenley-Friendship Library. Please RSVP to [e-mail] if you are coming.

2. As noted, the focus of the meeting will be to talk about overcrowding in Wilson Feeder schools and possible solutions to help relieve this overcrowding. This is an initial conversation and will hopefully be followed up with a future meeting with DCPS Planning Office staff (at least we are working on that).

3. The Councilmember is not coming to offer us solutions. So please come to this meeting ready to offer your own constructive suggestions and feedback. As I said, I appreciate folks offering thoughts here, but getting in the same room and having a conversation with one another is an important step.

4. W3EdNet (for short) includes all of the schools in the Wilson feeder pattern. So Bancroft (Ward 1), Shepherd and Lafayette (Ward 4), and Hardy and Hyde (Ward 2) all participate in the group (to varying degrees -- we all don't show up for every meeting). We welcome families from all of these school regardless of where they live in the District. Staff and other interest community members are welcome as well.

5. These are not the only meetings coming up!

-- On January 31st at 7pm at the Georgetown library, we will be hearing from State Superintendent for Education Hanseul Kang. Please come ask her questions about such things as PARCC testing.
-- And on February 8 at 7pm at Wilson High School, we are sponsoring a joint meeting with OSSE and the SBOE about new school rating/accountability plan under the federal education law (ESSA). We discussed a preliminary version at a previous W3EdNet meeting with State School Board rep from Ward 3, Ruth Wattenberg. But this is another opportunity, with both organizations present, to provide feedback. The SBOE will have an up or down vote on the final proposal later in March.
-- AND we recently heard from Chancellor Wilson, and he has committed to attending a future meeting. That meeting has yet to be scheduled.

6. You can follow us at @W3EdNet on Twitter and https://www.facebook.com/W3EdNet on Facebook. If you email [e-mail], we can also make sure that you know about future meetings.

Thanks,

Brian Doyle
Co-Chair W3EdNet

Brian, is there any way that this group could be renamed to just Wilson Feeder School Education Network, w/o the Ward 3 part? That is, if all Wilson feeder schools are indeed weighted equally within this group. It would avoid a lot of confusion and perhaps be perceived as more welcoming to non-Ward 3 folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate that everyone is offering solutions here. A several thoughts:

1. Please do come out to our meeting on February 23rd at 6:45pm (note a little earlier than we usually meet) at the Tenley-Friendship Library. Please RSVP to [e-mail] if you are coming.

2. As noted, the focus of the meeting will be to talk about overcrowding in Wilson Feeder schools and possible solutions to help relieve this overcrowding. This is an initial conversation and will hopefully be followed up with a future meeting with DCPS Planning Office staff (at least we are working on that).

3. The Councilmember is not coming to offer us solutions. So please come to this meeting ready to offer your own constructive suggestions and feedback. As I said, I appreciate folks offering thoughts here, but getting in the same room and having a conversation with one another is an important step.

4. W3EdNet (for short) includes all of the schools in the Wilson feeder pattern. So Bancroft (Ward 1), Shepherd and Lafayette (Ward 4), and Hardy and Hyde (Ward 2) all participate in the group (to varying degrees -- we all don't show up for every meeting). We welcome families from all of these school regardless of where they live in the District. Staff and other interest community members are welcome as well.

5. These are not the only meetings coming up!

-- On January 31st at 7pm at the Georgetown library, we will be hearing from State Superintendent for Education Hanseul Kang. Please come ask her questions about such things as PARCC testing.
-- And on February 8 at 7pm at Wilson High School, we are sponsoring a joint meeting with OSSE and the SBOE about new school rating/accountability plan under the federal education law (ESSA). We discussed a preliminary version at a previous W3EdNet meeting with State School Board rep from Ward 3, Ruth Wattenberg. But this is another opportunity, with both organizations present, to provide feedback. The SBOE will have an up or down vote on the final proposal later in March.
-- AND we recently heard from Chancellor Wilson, and he has committed to attending a future meeting. That meeting has yet to be scheduled.

6. You can follow us at @W3EdNet on Twitter and https://www.facebook.com/W3EdNet on Facebook. If you email [e-mail], we can also make sure that you know about future meetings.

Thanks,

Brian Doylestown
Co-Chair W3EdNet

So those of us with grandfathered rights to Deal / Wilson are not welcome?

[Anonymous]

Oyster?

[Anonymous]

This is getting ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was a newsletter in my inbox this morning from Ruth Wattenberg. This was one of the items:

Ward3-Wilson Feeder School Education Network meetings

Wed, Feb 23,
6:45 PM
Tenley Library
with Ward 3 Councilwoman Mary Cheh.
The focus of the meeting will be to talk about the overcrowding and lack of space in the W3/Wilson Feeder schools and possible solutions.


What do you think? What are the solutions?

Were the ward 4 Wilson feeders invited?

Yes, the Ward 3 - Wilson Feeder Education Network includes all schools in the Wilson feeder pattern.

I didn't get an invite. I blame Todd.

Who are you? I don't know who OP is to get one in his/her "inbox," but it doesn't offend me that I didn't get a personal note on a silver tray. I heard about the meeting the way every does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oyster?

Sorry! Yes, sorry I forgot Oyster-Adams.

If anyone in the Wilson feeder pattern is welcome, I am confused why you think anyone in Deal or Wilson would not be welcome. Of course, they are. As are folks who live in the feeder pattern but attend schools (DCPS or charter) elsewhere in the city. Heck, anyone who wants to come to our meetings is welcome.

Our name is the Ward 3 - Wilson Feeder Education Network, and coming to that name took several long meetings. In the end, we chose the combined name (1) since each ward has an education group of some sort, so it was important to some to have Ward 3 in the name for clarity, and (2) it was important to acknowledge that Wilson draws from more than just Ward 3 (and indeed many of our feeder schools have both IB and OOB students and both are equally important). Many of our students will move across wards just because of how the feeder pattern is. We've been W3EdNet for a few years now, and it's not my top priority to revisit it (though I appreciate the feedback).

Thanks,

Brian Doyle
Co-chair, W3EdNet

[Anonymous]

You may think your name is clear but in this forum everyone is looking for a cohort to kick out bc 'crowding.' That's why the defensiveness on this from Bancroft, Shepherd, Lafayette and Ouster-Adams.

But you already knew that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hearst PK has barely any OOB as it is, things have changed quickly. I would guess next year is all IB. Just a guess.

This year's Hearst PreK is almost entirely IB with ~4 OOB with siblings. Also for last year's lottery, the principal did not open any OOB slots in K-5. This means that over the entire school, only 3-4 OOB students were added.