Reply to DME Meeting at SWS June 5th

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "DME Meeting at SWS June 5th"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Yikes -- there are some BITTER Ludlow-Taylor folks! [/quote]

That was my feeling too. Seems like the sent the three wicked witches of the West. Too bad it was acoustically difficult to understand what they were rambling on about, but one even dropped the word "gerrymandering" somehow into her tirade. Maybe somebody else can elaborate how that fit into the discussion.
 
I understand their frustration somehow. They worked hard to make LT better and they are succeeding. But their success shouldn't be based on SWS not giving proximity preference to the neighbors. I think their success should come from parents wanting to have their kids go to LT for the long-haul because it is on par with some of the best schools in the city. Their goal should be to be the #1 choice for parents in the neighborhood and have a clear strategy/timeline how to get their. Getting rid of the competition has never really helped anyone to improve.[/quote]

In this case, a neighborhood preference for a city-wide school looks like the very definition of gerrymandering.  That's actually a generous way to define it.

You can't be a neighbor of SWS without being a neighbor to LT, so why do you need a preference to one but not the other? The reason all those school buildings exist right on top of each other in the Old City areas is because of pre-[i]Brown[/i] segregation.  Alright, you want special program that is going to serve the whole city? Fine. [b]But now you want to rig the game to basically reinstate that segregation?  [/b]Not likely.[/quote]

Yes, this. Re-segregation is not be the intent of proximity preference, but it will definitely be the result. I think the DME should be sensitive to that.[/quote]

I always thought that SWS was set up as a citywide school because it offers a "unique" RE program. What you are saying is that what is unique about it, is that it is to be diverse and fight [i]segregation. If that was its mission, it pretty much has failed since its inception. Since it is already a segregated school, i think the best thing would be to take away sibling preference. Without those 26+ seats taken by these segregationists, the school could become diverse in no time. 
[/quote]

You are being deliberately obtuse. You simply can't have proximity preference at a citywide school. It undermines the ENTIRE CONCEPT of citywide. [/quote]

Correct. And that's why this whole discussion about public schools being citywide is so wrong: Public schools are either neighborhood schools (or at least proximity) or test-in schools. The whole citywide concept is reserved for Charter schools. And it works find there.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics