Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
The answer is no. The political will is not there and won't happen. I attended every meeting of the boundary discussion process a couple years back and the advocates for the OOB system are vocal and persistent.
That is my experience as well. But here's what I think is interesting: I've been posting on DCUM for about five years, this topic comes up pretty regularly. In the past the OOB advocates would have been all over this thread, and as you said, vocal and persistent. Where have they gone?
Anonymous wrote:
The answer is no. The political will is not there and won't happen. I attended every meeting of the boundary discussion process a couple years back and the advocates for the OOB system are vocal and persistent.
Anonymous wrote:
It's also important to acknowledge that a big part of the overcrowding problem in upper NW schools is that families bail on their inboundary schools and usually do it without reasonable notice. So upper middle class families will leave after 2nd, 3rd or 4th grade in order to claim a private school spot. That's fine. Do what's best for your child, right? But it leaves the DCPS holding the bag and a target enrollment number that the principal is obliged to try and reach. So he/she goes to the waitlist to fill up those classrooms that are now unexpectedly small in order to meet enrollment targets and justify the teacher salary. Making some sort of blanket statement that OOB practices should be halted is naive and doesn't take reality in to account. Rather than trying to eliminate OOB or middle and high school feeder rights (which I genuinely think are nonstarters), I think a better step would be to implement a "no new OOB students" policy for grades 3rd through 5th at upper NW "desirable" schools and have downtown give those schools a little break in not forcing them to fill those grades to capacity (because doing so grows the Deal and Wilson overcrowding problems as they inherit those kids). You can't blame OOB families for wanting to get their children into a feeder pattern that is attractive.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If Deal and Wilson are 40% and 50% OOB why is anyone even talking about removing any feeders? Sounds like the schooks would be under capacity if they're were no OOB kids. If they removed Eaton from Deal before removing OOB, you know DCPS does not have the will to remove OOB though.
You are saying more clearly and directly the thing I was trying to say a couple pages ago. We all know how to reduce overcrowding (remove OOB first, and then feeder schools if necessary). The real question is whether anyone in DCPS, or more likely DC government, has the willpower and courage to do it.
The answer is no. The political will is not there and won't happen. I attended every meeting of the boundary discussion process a couple years back and the advocates for the OOB system are vocal and persistent.
It's also important to acknowledge that a big part of the overcrowding problem in upper NW schools is that families bail on their inboundary schools and usually do it without reasonable notice. So upper middle class families will leave after 2nd, 3rd or 4th grade in order to claim a private school spot. That's fine. Do what's best for your child, right? But it leaves the DCPS holding the bag and a target enrollment number that the principal is obliged to try and reach. So he/she goes to the waitlist to fill up those classrooms that are now unexpectedly small in order to meet enrollment targets and justify the teacher salary. Making some sort of blanket statement that OOB practices should be halted is naive and doesn't take reality in to account. Rather than trying to eliminate OOB or middle and high school feeder rights (which I genuinely think are nonstarters), I think a better step would be to implement a "no new OOB students" policy for grades 3rd through 5th at upper NW "desirable" schools and have downtown give those schools a little break in not forcing them to fill those grades to capacity (because doing so grows the Deal and Wilson overcrowding problems as they inherit those kids). You can't blame OOB families for wanting to get their children into a feeder pattern that is attractive.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If Deal and Wilson are 40% and 50% OOB why is anyone even talking about removing any feeders? Sounds like the schooks would be under capacity if they're were no OOB kids. If they removed Eaton from Deal before removing OOB, you know DCPS does not have the will to remove OOB though.
You are saying more clearly and directly the thing I was trying to say a couple pages ago. We all know how to reduce overcrowding (remove OOB first, and then feeder schools if necessary). The real question is whether anyone in DCPS, or more likely DC government, has the willpower and courage to do it.
Anonymous wrote:If Deal and Wilson are 40% and 50% OOB why is anyone even talking about removing any feeders? Sounds like the schooks would be under capacity if they're were no OOB kids. If they removed Eaton from Deal before removing OOB, you know DCPS does not have the will to remove OOB though.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Bancroft and shepherd send about 50 total kids to Deal each year, are you sure that will solve the problem?
Deal capacity = 1200 students
Deal enrollment in 20115-16 = 1341 students (probably higher now)
If (as you claim) Bancroft & Shepherd are sending 50 students per year to Deal, that's 150 students total in grades 6-8.
1341 - 150 = 1191 students
Removing Bancroft & Shepherd would put Deal almost exactly at capacity.
Personally, I think restricting OOB feeder rights is a better first step than removing schools from the feeder pattern. But if restricting OOB feeder rights doesn't solve the problem, then changing the feeder pattern will absolutely solve the problem.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Bancroft and shepherd send about 50 total kids to Deal each year, are you sure that will solve the problem?
Deal capacity = 1200 students
Deal enrollment in 20115-16 = 1341 students (probably higher now)
If (as you claim) Bancroft & Shepherd are sending 50 students per year to Deal, that's 150 students total in grades 6-8.
1341 - 150 = 1191 students
Removing Bancroft & Shepherd would put Deal almost exactly at capacity.
Personally, I think restricting OOB feeder rights is a better first step than removing schools from the feeder pattern. But if restricting OOB feeder rights doesn't solve the problem, then changing the feeder pattern will absolutely solve the problem.
Anonymous wrote:Bancroft and shepherd send about 50 total kids to Deal each year, are you sure that will solve the problem?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Re-route Shepherd, Bancroft, and Oyster. Problem solved.
Solved for Deal and maybe Wilson. Does nothing for overcrowded elementary schools.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Shrinking boundaries (i.e., cutting out the 50 kids a year at bancroft and shepherd that attend Deal) is not enough. It will not address over crowding at Eaton, Janney, Mann, Lafayette, and now Hearst. It will barely throw a stitch at Deal and Wilson. There obviously needs to be a new elementary, new middle and new high school WOTP at the very least. New elementary should primarily pull from Janney and Lafayette.
This. At the rate things are going, Janney will have 1500 kids and Deal will have Janney as its sole feeder schoolClearly the city needs to respond and build schools where the school-aged population is growing. This is assuming that the growth is projected to continue. If this is a temporary demographic bulge (there is evidence of this for Lafeyette), then the best solutiom is probably to ride it out and shrink OOB by attrition which is already happening. We will also see the impacts of the 2014 boundary shrinking that occurred for both Deal and Wilson. Don't forget both Cleveland Park and Woodley Park were removed from Deal and numerous neighborhoods were removed from Wilson. It was a big reduction for both, Wilson especially, and it takes a few years for the students from those neighborhoods to graduate. They will not be replaced, now that the boundaries have shrunk.
Agree with all of this. Seems that kicking out EOTP feeders would at best be kicking the can down the road for a few more years, and at worse may have a negligible effect on reducing overcrowding. Parents in overcrowded, majority IB schools like Janney may need to get their heads around revisiting current boundaries. Similarly, OOB rights to Deal/Wilson may need to be reconsidered.
Um, no. Moving the EOTP feeders and ending OOB feeders would literally solve Deal and Wilson overcrowding overnight.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Thanks Brian
I will come to the meeting, but will not offer or propose solutions. I am not an educator or school system expert and I do not plan to be. ...
It's not my job to find a solution, rather the job of those who are paid to do that and supposedly have the skills to do that.
This. A thousand times this. What is it about DCPS that they expect parents to come up with the answers? It drives me crazy when I go to a meeting and they say things like, "We're here to listen to your ideas." OK, listening is better than not listening, but who's supposed to be the expert here? When you go to the dentist, does he ask you your opinion of the best way to crown a broken tooth? Does the airline pilot ask the passengers to vote on a cruising altitude? Does the quarterback take suggestions from the fans on what play to run?
Brian Doyle wrote, "The Councilmember is not coming to offer us solutions. So please come to this meeting ready to offer your own constructive suggestions and feedback." I can kind of get behind the councilmember not offering solutions, her job is to be a generalist not a specialist, she should be pushing the specialists for answers -- not the parents.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
1. Reduce OOB access for overcrowded schools. This includes not only new OOB students, but also the feeder rights of enrolled OOB students.
2. Shrink boundaries around overcrowded schools.
Neither step alone will completely solve the overcrowding problem, but I am quite confident that if used in combination, these two steps will solve the overcrowding problem at any school.
The problem with Janney, Key, Stoddert and Mann is:
* They're all overcrowded
* None have a significant number of OOB
* They border each other.
So the formula of adjusting boundaries and limiting OOB isn't going to fix it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Shrinking boundaries (i.e., cutting out the 50 kids a year at bancroft and shepherd that attend Deal) is not enough. It will not address over crowding at Eaton, Janney, Mann, Lafayette, and now Hearst. It will barely throw a stitch at Deal and Wilson. There obviously needs to be a new elementary, new middle and new high school WOTP at the very least. New elementary should primarily pull from Janney and Lafayette.
This. At the rate things are going, Janney will have 1500 kids and Deal will have Janney as its sole feeder schoolClearly the city needs to respond and build schools where the school-aged population is growing. This is assuming that the growth is projected to continue. If this is a temporary demographic bulge (there is evidence of this for Lafeyette), then the best solutiom is probably to ride it out and shrink OOB by attrition which is already happening. We will also see the impacts of the 2014 boundary shrinking that occurred for both Deal and Wilson. Don't forget both Cleveland Park and Woodley Park were removed from Deal and numerous neighborhoods were removed from Wilson. It was a big reduction for both, Wilson especially, and it takes a few years for the students from those neighborhoods to graduate. They will not be replaced, now that the boundaries have shrunk.
Agree with all of this. Seems that kicking out EOTP feeders would at best be kicking the can down the road for a few more years, and at worse may have a negligible effect on reducing overcrowding. Parents in overcrowded, majority IB schools like Janney may need to get their heads around revisiting current boundaries. Similarly, OOB rights to Deal/Wilson may need to be reconsidered.
Um, no. Moving the EOTP feeders and ending OOB feeders would literally solve Deal and Wilson overcrowding overnight.
But it's still kicking the problem down the road until the 35,000 new kids that are coming in the next five years arrive.