There is no integrity in the central planning of DCPS.

Anonymous wrote:And just how does adding more oob kids at an already overly full Murch help to solve overcrowding at Deal?
Sorry, my logical brain just does not get it.
Eaton parents, where are you?

I agree. So you're talking about potentially sending and additional 25 kids in 3 years to Deal (5 OOB 5th, 10 for 4th and 3rd). I don't even think Crestwood alone was sending that many in 3 years. I know they are grandfathered for now, but I would be livid.

And just how does adding more oob kids at an already overly full Murch help to solve overcrowding at Deal?
Sorry, my logical brain just does not get it.
Eaton parents, where are you?

Why does OOB = diverse? I know plenty of white, wealthy families who live east of the park who lotteried into a WOTP school. (Because they would never dream of staying at their IB school past PK.)

Anonymous wrote:my son is on the waitlist and his spot has not moved at all. do not think they are accepting lots of OOB students.

They seem to be accepting a lot only in comparison to Lafayette & Janney.

my son is on the waitlist and his spot has not moved at all. do not think they are accepting lots of OOB students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, so what was the point of the boundary review then? Seems to me, if Murch's boundaries were shrunk because they were too overcrowded, how can anyone turn around and say, shucks, we have plenty of room to add 60 kids. Seems to me, deft hand of the principal or not, that someone is totally gaming the system.

It's why no one downtown cares that they keep getting booted down the renovation list; everyone knows that they are gaming the system so the cries of "overcrowded!!" fall on deaf ears.

Actually Murch wasn't booted down again. Clearly you aren't following along.

I don't get the issue here. Either you accept OOB because kids need better schools or you are a bunch of racist for not accepting more OOB kids. Can't we just agree that Murch is not Janney and never will be Janney. For that we should all be proud and rejoice. It is an excellent school which happily welcomes all families from the ones who live in apartments to the ones coming in from foreign countries to the kids who travel across the city twice a day for Murch to the kids who are still bused to Murch to the kids who are in the citywide autistic program to the kids who live in $2Mil houses.

This is how Murch does it. Renovations are moving forward and those extra 60 kids are coming to a community which will embrace them while embracing crisply facilities.

Wow, impressed how quickly we transitioned from "the Principal is not getting his way because he's incompetent" to "the Principal is not getting his way because he is too clever."

Anonymous wrote:Ok, so what was the point of the boundary review then? Seems to me, if Murch's boundaries were shrunk because they were too overcrowded, how can anyone turn around and say, shucks, we have plenty of room to add 60 kids. Seems to me, deft hand of the principal or not, that someone is totally gaming the system.

It's why no one downtown cares that they keep getting booted down the renovation list; everyone knows that they are gaming the system so the cries of "overcrowded!!" fall on deaf ears.

It would be great if this helped Murch get additional funding so that they could re-institute SEM which had to be cut after one year because their budget decreased. It had such a promising start in my opinion.

Ok, so what was the point of the boundary review then? Seems to me, if Murch's boundaries were shrunk because they were too overcrowded, how can anyone turn around and say, shucks, we have plenty of room to add 60 kids. Seems to me, deft hand of the principal or not, that someone is totally gaming the system.

Anonymous wrote:How is it Janney gets a waiver for the set aside but Murch gets more overcrowded?

Janney has a much stronger political hand because it's parents are organized and vocal. They've had, what, 2 or 3 recent renovations, all the while the community at Murch trailer city has been begging. Let's see if Bowser finally comes through or pushes Murch down the renovation queue again to fund the next cost overrun at the Duke Ellington Taj Mahal School for Kids Who Don't Even Live in DC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCPS is forcing it.

A strong principal would push back.

A strong principal would recognize that accepting just enough OOB students gets him an extra teacher per grade, which decreases class size. Murch has better-than-average class size despite extreme overcrowding. So, I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt here and assume he is playing his hand correctly.

Yup. Murch parent here, and the principal is VERY canny about this stuff. I completely support his approach; it's the difference between classes of 20-22 and classes of 25+. They've already figured out how to handle the number of classes, so he doesn't need to find new space. Fewer kids gets us nothing but more kids per classroom/teacher--not sure why any Murch parent would want that.

(And to those asking about "where do they eat lunch"--in their classrooms. Murch doesn't have a cafeteria. So more kids in the school doesn't change anything about that sort of shared space.)

How is it Janney gets a waiver for the set aside but Murch gets more overcrowded?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OOB system seems broken.

Don't necessarily agree - but wonder how things may change once the at-risk set aside places are fully implemented.

How do you mean?