Reply to SWS - as an IB School? L-T prospects?

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "SWS - as an IB School? L-T prospects?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]No indeed. I am an SWS parent and am fully in favor of a city-wide draw that will open the school up to people from all over the city, but I also support proximity preference where immediate neighbors can opt in to the school if they so choose.  To me, this seems a reasonable middle way.

My only interest here is for a healthy, sustained and community supported SWS.  ( no property value boost or other benefits to accrue to me and I have no need to create the highest possible number of city-wide slots since I am already in  ).  That's why I can look at this with a modicum of reason instead of self interest with ridiculous "better for the city" arguments as cover.[/quote]

PP - But it it makes little difference for the city as the number of spaces is relatively small.  It's going to fill largely with sibs at the younger grades (like all the sought after charters).  I should clarify that I'm less against than neutral on it.  Not sure proximity will make it lean anymore towards the Hill than it will on its own, as it will continue to attract from the neighborhood.  Just don't see why it needs to be a significant chunk of the LT catchment above the rest of the Hill.[/quote]

I don't care if it leans to the Hill or not.  Wherever the school is located, it is a positive thing in my mind to give immediate neighbors the option to go to the school, especially with the history and culture of sws.  For me this holds true whoever lives nearby. [/quote]

how is the "history and culture" any different than any other neighborhood school?  It never functioned as a standard "neighborhood school" before since only 1/2 the students were below K and not guaranteed neighborhood seats.  Even SWS K didn't guarantee neighborhood seats -- only Peabody did.  there was never any kind of proximity preference for SWS in its old location. Its boundary included families as far east as Barney Circle and Stadium Armory area via the Cluster

[b]DCPS didnt' intend to create another neighborhood school to fight over boundary lines. [/b] SWS was intended as a specialized program to compete with charters and complement other DCPS offerings.[/quote]

This.  [url=http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/local/dc-public-schools-closure-list-january-2013/25/]Here's the list of schools being closed[/url].  Ward 6 is one of only two wards that is unaffected.  Ward 7 has four elementary schools closing.  Ward 8 has three.  Ward 5 has one.  How is Kaya realistically to take away all of those ES seats from other wards, and then turn around and create new ES seats, exclusively for Ward 6?  Because we all know that proximity preference will effectively turn SWS into an IB school.  Think about the optics of this here, folks:   Ward 6 getting new ES seats for IB (sorry, "proximity preference) families, while 5, 7, and 8 are losing a few hundred of them.

This is exactly the sort of result that keeps Barry, Orange, Bonds et al in office - it would be just too easy to exploit those results for political gain.

[/quote]

PP 13:54 here -- I highly doubt SWS is going to be a big magnet for all those displaced from the closing process.  It will more likely become another prospective option for families weighing EOTP charters[/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