How much of a property value drop could a house expect if its school were reassigned out of Deal?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How much of a property value drop could a house expect if its school were reassigned out of Deal?
Depends on location. If you could walk to Deal but now had to drive across town to school, it would have a bigger negative impact than if you would now walk to a school that was now good because of all the former Deal kids who now go there, such that the latter scenario may actually have a positive property impact.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OOB feeders account for 1/3 of Deal's population. That would allow OOB kids from all over to have access and put the capacity well below limits.
Great solution if it's accurate. What's your source for 1/3 of Deal being OOB students?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I got interested in the diversity point - i.e., whether shifting Bancroft and/or Shepherd to the MacFarland cluster would effectively eliminate racial diversity at Deal - and did a little math.
Currently, Deal is 45% white, 31% black, 13% Latino, and a mixture of other races (total of 55% non-white). I looked at the race percentages of each of the feeder elementary schools, and calculated what Deal's race demographics might look like if Bancroft and Shepherd are rerouted to MacFarland. If that happens, Deal's student population would be about 1,080, with 65% white / 35% non-white. But because Deal's capacity is 1200, and DCPS is aiming for 10% at-risk population, those numbers conveniently allow for 120 at-risk students. I assume almost all of those at-risk students would be non-white. If that's a valid assumption, then the final balance at Deal without Bancroft/Shepherd would be 58% white / 42% non-white.
Everyone can make their own individual judgments about whether that shift in race diversity is an acceptable side-effect of rerouting Bancroft and Shepherd. Speaking only for myself, I don't think that shift is a problem. Several posters had claimed that Deal without Bancroft/Shepherd would be an essentially all-white middle school, and that potential result concerned me because I do think exposing children (and frankly everyone) to race diversity is important. But these numbers suggest that the fear of an all-white school is simply mistaken. It seems Deal would still have plenty of non-white diversity even after rerouting Bancroft and Shepherd to MacFarland.
To put things in context, Ward 3 where Deal is located, is about 78% white, 7% Latino, 6% black, 6% Asian, and a mixture of other races. So either way, Deal itself has far more race diversity than the surrounding area.
Fully agree.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How much of a property value drop could a house expect if its school were reassigned out of Deal?
Zero. The DC market is way too hot.
Anonymous wrote:How much of a property value drop could a house expect if its school were reassigned out of Deal?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I got interested in the diversity point - i.e., whether shifting Bancroft and/or Shepherd to the MacFarland cluster would effectively eliminate racial diversity at Deal - and did a little math.
Currently, Deal is 45% white, 31% black, 13% Latino, and a mixture of other races (total of 55% non-white). I looked at the race percentages of each of the feeder elementary schools, and calculated what Deal's race demographics might look like if Bancroft and Shepherd are rerouted to MacFarland. If that happens, Deal's student population would be about 1,080, with 65% white / 35% non-white. But because Deal's capacity is 1200, and DCPS is aiming for 10% at-risk population, those numbers conveniently allow for 120 at-risk students. I assume almost all of those at-risk students would be non-white. If that's a valid assumption, then the final balance at Deal without Bancroft/Shepherd would be 58% white / 42% non-white.
Everyone can make their own individual judgments about whether that shift in race diversity is an acceptable side-effect of rerouting Bancroft and Shepherd. Speaking only for myself, I don't think that shift is a problem. Several posters had claimed that Deal without Bancroft/Shepherd would be an essentially all-white middle school, and that potential result concerned me because I do think exposing children (and frankly everyone) to race diversity is important. But these numbers suggest that the fear of an all-white school is simply mistaken. It seems Deal would still have plenty of non-white diversity even after rerouting Bancroft and Shepherd to MacFarland.
To put things in context, Ward 3 where Deal is located, is about 78% white, 7% Latino, 6% black, 6% Asian, and a mixture of other races. So either way, Deal itself has far more race diversity than the surrounding area.
Except the 10% at-risk set aside hasn't been implemented yet and no one knows if it ever would be.
MacFarland is a wild card here -- because Bancroft students have a right to attend there, as well as Deal. Will families choose this new dual-language option or continue to go to Deal? Will Deal eventually be taken away a la Oyster after a few years once MacFarland is up and running.
Anonymous wrote:I got interested in the diversity point - i.e., whether shifting Bancroft and/or Shepherd to the MacFarland cluster would effectively eliminate racial diversity at Deal - and did a little math.
Currently, Deal is 45% white, 31% black, 13% Latino, and a mixture of other races (total of 55% non-white). I looked at the race percentages of each of the feeder elementary schools, and calculated what Deal's race demographics might look like if Bancroft and Shepherd are rerouted to MacFarland. If that happens, Deal's student population would be about 1,080, with 65% white / 35% non-white. But because Deal's capacity is 1200, and DCPS is aiming for 10% at-risk population, those numbers conveniently allow for 120 at-risk students. I assume almost all of those at-risk students would be non-white. If that's a valid assumption, then the final balance at Deal without Bancroft/Shepherd would be 58% white / 42% non-white.
Everyone can make their own individual judgments about whether that shift in race diversity is an acceptable side-effect of rerouting Bancroft and Shepherd. Speaking only for myself, I don't think that shift is a problem. Several posters had claimed that Deal without Bancroft/Shepherd would be an essentially all-white middle school, and that potential result concerned me because I do think exposing children (and frankly everyone) to race diversity is important. But these numbers suggest that the fear of an all-white school is simply mistaken. It seems Deal would still have plenty of non-white diversity even after rerouting Bancroft and Shepherd to MacFarland.
To put things in context, Ward 3 where Deal is located, is about 78% white, 7% Latino, 6% black, 6% Asian, and a mixture of other races. So either way, Deal itself has far more race diversity than the surrounding area.
Anonymous wrote:I got interested in the diversity point - i.e., whether shifting Bancroft and/or Shepherd to the MacFarland cluster would effectively eliminate racial diversity at Deal - and did a little math.
Currently, Deal is 45% white, 31% black, 13% Latino, and a mixture of other races (total of 55% non-white). I looked at the race percentages of each of the feeder elementary schools, and calculated what Deal's race demographics might look like if Bancroft and Shepherd are rerouted to MacFarland. If that happens, Deal's student population would be about 1,080, with 65% white / 35% non-white. But because Deal's capacity is 1200, and DCPS is aiming for 10% at-risk population, those numbers conveniently allow for 120 at-risk students. I assume almost all of those at-risk students would be non-white. If that's a valid assumption, then the final balance at Deal without Bancroft/Shepherd would be 58% white / 42% non-white.
Everyone can make their own individual judgments about whether that shift in race diversity is an acceptable side-effect of rerouting Bancroft and Shepherd. Speaking only for myself, I don't think that shift is a problem. Several posters had claimed that Deal without Bancroft/Shepherd would be an essentially all-white middle school, and that potential result concerned me because I do think exposing children (and frankly everyone) to race diversity is important. But these numbers suggest that the fear of an all-white school is simply mistaken. It seems Deal would still have plenty of non-white diversity even after rerouting Bancroft and Shepherd to MacFarland.
To put things in context, Ward 3 where Deal is located, is about 78% white, 7% Latino, 6% black, 6% Asian, and a mixture of other races. So either way, Deal itself has far more race diversity than the surrounding area.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Lordy. This thread comes up every quarter or so. Everyone spouts off. "The way to fix it is so." "It's obvious what need to be done." "Of course X school needs to be cut out." OOB kids (many of whom have attended their OOB school since PK) must be kicked for the feeder path." "Something must be done." "I envision the solution that doesn't impact my snowflake." Blah, blah, freaking blah. Everyone on here has repeated the same crap for 10+ years on here. If you want to impact change in some way (or defend the current system) get off here and make your arguments to decision makers.
I think it's a useful discussion because - for me at least - it lets me hear all sides of the issue, so I can make up my own mind about what makes sense and what doesn't. Seems to me that the people trying to squash discussion are often the ones who benefit from an unfair status quo, so they don't want any open discussion about possible changes.
It's May and this is already the third or fourth time this "discussion" has come up here, without any prospect of a single word typed here making any difference. Animosity is really the only product generated. Until there is new news, this topic is well past its shelf life.
Anonymous wrote:How much of a property value drop could a house expect if its school were reassigned out of Deal?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Lordy. This thread comes up every quarter or so. Everyone spouts off. "The way to fix it is so." "It's obvious what need to be done." "Of course X school needs to be cut out." OOB kids (many of whom have attended their OOB school since PK) must be kicked for the feeder path." "Something must be done." "I envision the solution that doesn't impact my snowflake." Blah, blah, freaking blah. Everyone on here has repeated the same crap for 10+ years on here. If you want to impact change in some way (or defend the current system) get off here and make your arguments to decision makers.
I think it's a useful discussion because - for me at least - it lets me hear all sides of the issue, so I can make up my own mind about what makes sense and what doesn't. Seems to me that the people trying to squash discussion are often the ones who benefit from an unfair status quo, so they don't want any open discussion about possible changes.