Reply to Boundary review can’t come soon enough

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Boundary review can’t come soon enough"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous]

[quote]So now at least one Maury booster full of themselves enough to think they get rights over every other school?  So you think you're Brent community now  :roll:

SH is doing just fine without you.[/quote]

Yes. Plus, the Cluster, Ludlow-Taylor and JO Wilson (which feed currently) are closer than all of those listed above, to SH.[/quote]

I don't necessarily think Maury should feed to S-H, but this discussion of proximity is ridiculous.  Tyler, Payne and Miner are all farther away than Maury.  Maury is equidistant to S-H with Brent.  While Peabody is of course very close to S-H, Watkins is farther away than Maury and Brent.  It's silly not to acknowledge the gerrymandered cluster boundary in this discussion of boundary review.  Ideally there would be two Hill middle schools, with either a north south or an east west boundary, and the cluster should be broken up.  Having Hill elementaries feed to 3 middle schools with 2 underenrolled is a waste of resources.[/quote]

Watkins itself may be further away but kids live within the entire Cluster boundary, regardless of so-called gerrymandering. Plus, Maury boundary isn't any closer to SH than JOW or the Cluster boundaries (It's inside LT boundary). Or for than matter, Miner's western boundary.

https://dme.dc.gov/node/1348806.

Here is the prior year since Maury isn't shown above because of the swing space:

https://dme.dc.gov/node/1267916[/quote]

Again, I didn't say Maury should feed to SH just that I think the middle school feeder patterns and boundaries are problematic because they result in underutilized resources.   JOW should certainly feed to SH based on proximity. The clearly gerrymandered cluster boundary screws things up and I believe it should be redrawn in the next review. Maury should probably feed to E-H,[b] but so should half of the cluster boundary.[/b][/quote]

No, it shouldn't.  ECE in a separate location (including mandatory K) justifies a shuttle between Watkins and Peabody and proximity to Peabody that also allows SH families to manage siblings across the feed.  If Brent ever starts sending enough students to Jefferson they could make a strong case for a similar setup.  Maury is close enough to Eliot Hine that it wouldn't be necessary

Peabody K in a separate building is the reason for the Cluster feeder pattern, not some nefarious "gerrymandering"[/quote]

That's a circular argument. Peabody ECE could feed to a different, closer, school.  Brent, for example, is becoming increasingly overcrowded.  [/quote]

Sure - the world [i]could [/i]revolve around Brent  :roll: , or Brent can solve that problem by eliminating PK3.  Peabody serves 227 students - more than half of Brent's full enrollment.[/quote]

Peabody-Watkins is one of the largest DCPS elementary schools. Only Lafayette, Janney and Oyster-Adams are larger and those don't have PK3. That's a lot of children to shift around if the feed would change.[/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