SWS parent, IB for LT. Absolutely support proximity preference. Hell, I'd rather have a real boundary and be done with it.

+1

Anonymous wrote:I am an SWS parent of two (PK4 and 1st) and I do not know a single parent here -- not a single one -- who is in favor of proximity preference. Maybe it's because we're already in and we no longer care, but I think for the most part we understand that it's not good for the community at large, and everyone thinks the one guy agitating for it is pretty annoying.

SWS parent here ( not the guy you are maligning ) and I am in favor of proximity preference purely because I believe it is what is best for the culture and the health of the school. It is good for the school to have immediate neighbors invested and good for the neighbors to feel welcomed by the nearest traditional public DCPS ( I don't feel the same way about charter schools. That's different ). I am in favor of giving immediate neighbors the choice to attend SWS on a proximity preference or, if they don't think the curriculum is a good fit, to attend their assigned DCPS elementary. I know there are other arguments for what happens to the demographics of the school, availability of slots and effect on Ludlow Taylor. But I keep returning to what is best for the long term health of SWS. Immediate community engagement is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another idea for the LT families (that is too bad that the time doesn't work) - ask incoming families to speak to the issue. They are unlikely to go to the performance but certainly have a stake.

I don't follow. incoming families are heavily skewed toward sibs. There are a lot of SWS families sympathetic to the neighbors' push for proximity but others ambivalent. Enough so that I've never gotten a read on whether the school community is for or against it.

In the school wide poll, 65% of us supported proximity preference. Which makes sense given that every other school has it and given that we're an overwhelmingly neighborhood school. Am I the only one who found it a little funny that we won an award for the highest level of bike to school day participation? Page through your school directory and you'll see that 90+% of us are from the neighborhood at large.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reasons that SWS does not have proximity are lame and anachronistic. There are enough Reggio inspired schools -LT- around that are neighborhood schools. What makes SWS so much different to keep that OOB status alive?

Clearly you've ever been through the school.

Well, why don't you tell us what you think makes SWS so special to "deserve" an OOB-only status.

Anonymous wrote:The reasons that SWS does not have proximity are lame and anachronistic. There are enough Reggio inspired schools -LT- around that are neighborhood schools. What makes SWS so much different to keep that OOB status alive?

Clearly you've ever been through the school.

Current parents couldn't care less about proximity because most of them are from the Hill but south of the present location. Giving proximity would exclude their friends kids. If they were all from the neighborhood, I'm sure they would think differently.

The reasons that SWS does not have proximity are lame and anachronistic. There are enough Reggio inspired schools -LT- around that are neighborhood schools. What makes SWS so much different to keep that OOB status alive?

It seems that proximity preference makes a great deal of sense at the elementary level. It seems that most parents would like to have a quality school that they can walk to in their neighborhood.

Anonymous wrote:I am an SWS parent of two (PK4 and 1st) and I do not know a single parent here -- not a single one -- who is in favor of proximity preference. Maybe it's because we're already in and we no longer care, but I think for the most part we understand that it's not good for the community at large, and everyone thinks the one guy agitating for it is pretty annoying.

Not a SWS (or LT) parent, but a neighbor, and I agree 100 percent.

Anonymous wrote:I am an SWS parent of two (PK4 and 1st) and I do not know a single parent here -- not a single one -- who is in favor of proximity preference. Maybe it's because we're already in and we no longer care, but I think for the most part we understand that it's not good for the community at large, and everyone thinks the one guy agitating for it is pretty annoying.

I'm an SWS parent and I am in favor of proximity preference. We are definitely out there. I''m not the guy your talking about -- I don't even know who that is.

I am an SWS parent of two (PK4 and 1st) and I do not know a single parent here -- not a single one -- who is in favor of proximity preference. Maybe it's because we're already in and we no longer care, but I think for the most part we understand that it's not good for the community at large, and everyone thinks the one guy agitating for it is pretty annoying.

PP here -Yes, I meant incoming LT families. I know a lot of neighbors who are into LT this year for the first time and are considering sending their kids. These are families likely to be shut out of preference for SWS. They may or may not have a view, but are unlikely to attend a concert at the school if their kids aren't yet there.

I think PP meant incoming for LT. They don't have kids performing, but would definitely have a stake in the SWS proximity question.

Anonymous wrote:Another idea for the LT families (that is too bad that the time doesn't work) - ask incoming families to speak to the issue. They are unlikely to go to the performance but certainly have a stake.

I don't follow. incoming families are heavily skewed toward sibs. There are a lot of SWS families sympathetic to the neighbors' push for proximity but others ambivalent. Enough so that I've never gotten a read on whether the school community is for or against it.