Reply to Question for Supporters of New WotP High School

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Question for Supporters of New WotP High School"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=jsteele][quote=Anonymous]
Mt P parent again - thanks for your reply. Probably there are many on DCUM who know where you live, because of previous posts that you have made, but I do not know where you live, so I can't reply to what you write with regard to your own neighborhood.

Regarding your first statement in bold: I'm going to ignore the real estate appraisal comment, but otherwise, yes, my logic is that there is no need to redraw boundaries so long as there are OOB students at a school, whether by feeder rights or other paths. In most school districts across the country OOB is only offered when a school is not full with IB students. It is a basic principle of fairness that you solve an over-crowding problem first by reducing or eliminating OOB and only then, if overcrowding remains, by reducing the geographical IB area. For example at the ES level, Janney is now full of IB students and thus it no longer accepts OOB. That's how it is supposed to operate. I don't see any proposals to shrink the Janney IB area in order to accept more OOB. Yet there are some, like the other poster on this thread who is posting proposed boundary maps, who would propose to carve Mt P out of Wilson and, presumably, allow OOB students from feeders to continue attending Wilson. This is unfair - shrinking boundaries should be a last resort. First, you reduce OOB.

Re: your second statement - again, I don't know where you live so I don't understand your comment - are you within the Roosevelt boundary proposed in the maps on this thread?

Re: your third statement in bold above, this doesn't make sense in the context of the proposals in this thread. The boundary maps in this thread show Mt P assigned to Roosevelt, so it would appear that if I help create Roosevelt, as proposed here, I likely will lose the Wilson access, right?

In general you seem overly optimistic about the prospects of this new school, but that's another discussion. 
[/quote]

Attempting to resolve Wilson and Deal overcrowding simply by eliminating OOB feeder rights is just a version of the "fighting for a piece of the pie" scenario. You've got your piece of the pie, so let the OOB students eat cake. Don't be surprised when they start rolling out a metaphorical guillotine, a citywide high school lottery.

The boundary maps in this thread are the creation of one poster who is simply trying to advance the discussion and give us a framework for discussion. If you have a better idea for a map, please contribute it. I live in Crestwood which, like Mt. Pleasant, has long been zoned for Deal and Wilson. Crestwood has been included in the Roosevelt boundaries in the maps posted here. But, as I've said repeatedly, I would not send my children to a school that was not of equal or better quality than Wilson.

Incidentally, the DME's Proposal Example B shrinks Janney's boundaries and reserves 10% of the seats for OOB students. So, if you haven't seen such a proposal, please read Example B.

We don't know what, if anything, will happen to Roosevelt's boundaries. We are just brainstorming to see what possibilities exist to make Roosevelt an attractive alternative to an overcrowded Wilson. Two out of three of the DME's proposals call for citywide lotteries for high schools. So, maybe there won't be boundaries at all.

Of course optimism is required for this exercise. I know that you feel it is important to look out for your own interests. It is equally important to me to look out for my interests, just as it is for every other poster in this forum to look out for theirs. However, it is self-defeating if your fixation on protecting your piece of the Wilson pie results in something even worse. Do you want a citywide high school lottery? If so, then stand strong in your position that only a select few should be able to have access to Wilson while everyone else is left with unacceptable alternatives. I'd rather see additional high quality alternatives and this thread is aimed at exploring one possibility. There has been a lot of great input for which I am thankful. But, the few posters whose only interest is ensuring that they don't have to sacrifice in the slightest way are very short-sighted.
[/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