Unfortunately for LT families I can't see any improvement there until the principal is replaced. She has been there for 7 years and could not even answer parents questions about uniform colors or school day start time at the new student orientation this year.

School within a school. Needs to be changed, obviously.

SWS stands for??

Sws has become what is known as a magnet school ( no neighborhood boundary, drawing from district as a whole based on special interest/curriculum). Logan Montessori is also a magnet school. We also have high schools ( some with nominal applications ) that act as magnet schools. I.e. nobody has geographic right of entry. What I find baffling is that after multiple proposals and efforts, DCPS has refused to implement a magnet school at the middle school level. This is arguably when it could most impact and keep families invested in the system.

So DCPS embraces magnets for ages 3 to 10 and 14 to 18 but rejects them for ages 11-13. What could be the reasoning here?

Now tell me why the new SWS is any different than a charter? If there's NO proximity preference, it might as well be a charter, except it has the benefit of all the layers of nonsense/waste like union custodians. The current families really have a stranglehold on this situation.

Having SWS in the LT neighborhood if not their district (Prospect building is in the Maury District, isn't it?) will make it even less likely that LT will ever get its act together for neighborhood families after K. With yet another ES option, the middle-class cohort in the Stanton Park neighborhood will be even more spread out. Tommy Wells and the Chancellor will just tell you get involved at LT and improve the school -they don't take the big PG address county problem seriously. The Brent PTA president from 2004-2007 lived in the LT district - Brent drew from all over the Hill for years to improve dramatically. LT can't even draw from the LT district above K for more than around a dozen families. Lost cause even after its renovated...this summer or maybe next.

The word is citywide lottery for 13-14, with boundaries or proximity preference to be revisited in the spring. I like the idea of a citywide lottery because it may help to keep some families in DCPS who might otherwise leave for charters.

The LT parents are only LT parents because they have not gotten in to a better school, and we all know that is not easy or even likely. Its an amazing, involved group of families and SWS would benefit greatly to at a minimum giving walking distance preference. I have already sent my note to the chancellor and I urge others to do the same.

Since the school wil no longer be a school within a school, wil there be a new name?? Anybody know? Prospect School or something?

Anonymous wrote:Organize and lobby dcps! Did you see how many communiies thought their schools were going to close and then they presented well thought out plans and voila, school saved? Go for it.

No point in lobbying since its a majority of SWS PARENTS wanting a city-wide draw. If you attended last week's parents planning meeting, you're aware that this is the case.

The Stanton-North of Lincoln Park neighborhood has never been in-bounds for Peabody/Watkins, with its long oval-shaped district stretch far east on the Hill, so these parents are not inclined to make it a neighborhood school for the Prospect neighborhood. Everybody knows that the LT parents don't like their school above around K, but they're finding other options as it is, particularly language immersion schools in Brookland and Inspired Teaching. So just another option on the menu for the Stanton Park crowd. This change will help them, not as much as they'd surely like but it will.

There are too many neighborhood families investing in LT, both high-SES and low-SES, and too many others investing happily in charters, for the neighborhood parents to override the vision of most of the SWS parents.

Anonymous wrote:The current SWS profile on the DCPS website states that it has 52% in-boundary students. Does that mean that it was a boundary school and will be moving to a lottery only format?

Potentially, but SWS has never had a standard neighborhood boundary. It shared boundaries with the Cap Hill Cluster and rising students had right to attend to Watkins along with rising Peabody K. Peabody was the 'by right' option for K and being inbounds improved odds for space in SWS for K but did not guarantee space. It's not clear if there will be a proximity preference -- it may be lottery only.

That 2011-12 number is misleading because it does not include the expansion to 1st grade in 2012 which increased enrollment 50%. That number may be lower for 2012-1-2013, but only because SWS is operating under Cluster boundaries and the draw for SWS is largely the greater Hill and near-Hill neighborhoods. Lots of Hill families who are technically not inbounds but don't live too far away. Peabody/Cluster and SWS made a temporary allowance for students to move between programs for 2012-13 (and until permanent home found). Sibling priority was also granted for Cluster families, and Watkins is 75% OOB.

As a parent in posession of an SWS directory, I can honestly say SWS is about 75-80% Hill families (including H St and Hill East), whatever official number DCPS publishes.

This is exciting- SWS is such a great school, it deserved to expand. This option will mean more families stay on the Hill. Good work DCPS!

Anonymous wrote:Why the bad rap for Ludlow-Taylor? Sorry if that's off topic...

SWS has a fair share of Ludlow Taylor refuges who've never looked back fwiw

Its good for PS3/PK but after that quickly turns into a school for Pg county kids, due to a long history of this and due to available spaces b/c in bounds families leave. Among other things, the principal is not proactive or seemingly interested in making the school better, so most in bonds families leave as soon as they have another option. Its a shame as our community is a great one over here!

Why the bad rap for Ludlow-Taylor? Sorry if that's off topic...