Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know the plan around the expected impact of switching Eaton to Hardy (from Deal) next year... that would theoretically be a shift of 70ish students out of Deal per class & more IB into Hardy quickly.

The numbers will not change much at all, maybe 30-40 kids. While Janney, Murch, Hearst are allowed to continually increase enrollment.
What the DME and the geniuses on the feeder pattern committees never considered was that many Eaton kids are OOB for Eaton but still IB for Deal (Shepard and Bancroft IB).
Mary Cheh and Matt Frumin really stuck it to the Cleveland Park families but to them our kids were just "collateral damage".

LSAT mtgs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know the plan around the expected impact of switching Eaton to Hardy (from Deal) next year... that would theoretically be a shift of 70ish students out of Deal per class & more IB into Hardy quickly.

Unfortunately, even with the Eaton switch to Deal, there is still a lot of leakage in the pipeline. For example, the Hearst principal seems incapable of understanding that the lower grades will fill with 100% IB students and continues to let in 5-6 OOB students each year over the summer leading to overcrowding at the ES level. First year, maybe honest mistake. Second year, not so much. Makes you wonder if central office is applying pressure. Similar is happening elsewhere.

You don't need to wonder. Yes, the central office and many of the 'higher performing' schools have a 10% set aside and different enrollment objectives (and look to fill cohort size by classroom capacity and not overall school size capacity etc). It's not up to the principal on their own. They speak about it openly about this at public meetings.

Who is "they"? And, which meetings are you talking about?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know the plan around the expected impact of switching Eaton to Hardy (from Deal) next year... that would theoretically be a shift of 70ish students out of Deal per class & more IB into Hardy quickly.

Unfortunately, even with the Eaton switch to Deal, there is still a lot of leakage in the pipeline. For example, the Hearst principal seems incapable of understanding that the lower grades will fill with 100% IB students and continues to let in 5-6 OOB students each year over the summer leading to overcrowding at the ES level. First year, maybe honest mistake. Second year, not so much. Makes you wonder if central office is applying pressure. Similar is happening elsewhere.

You don't need to wonder. Yes, the central office and many of the 'higher performing' schools have a 10% set aside and different enrollment objectives (and look to fill cohort size by classroom capacity and not overall school size capacity etc). It's not up to the principal on their own. They speak about it openly about this at public meetings.

What 10% set aside are you referring to? If it's the at-risk set-aside, those should be allocated at the lottery, not the summer.

The at risk set asides have never been formally implemented.

But they are still 'informally' done at a number of WOTP schools - even some that are overcrowded.

The central office may encourage schools to fill out classes and accept out of bound, but the seats go to whoever's name comes up on the WL through the lottery. No way for DCPS to control if they are at-risk or not.

OK, I stand corrected on having names read at graduation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know the plan around the expected impact of switching Eaton to Hardy (from Deal) next year... that would theoretically be a shift of 70ish students out of Deal per class & more IB into Hardy quickly.

Unfortunately, even with the Eaton switch to Deal, there is still a lot of leakage in the pipeline. For example, the Hearst principal seems incapable of understanding that the lower grades will fill with 100% IB students and continues to let in 5-6 OOB students each year over the summer leading to overcrowding at the ES level. First year, maybe honest mistake. Second year, not so much. Makes you wonder if central office is applying pressure. Similar is happening elsewhere.

You don't need to wonder. Yes, the central office and many of the 'higher performing' schools have a 10% set aside and different enrollment objectives (and look to fill cohort size by classroom capacity and not overall school size capacity etc). It's not up to the principal on their own. They speak about it openly about this at public meetings.

What 10% set aside are you referring to? If it's the at-risk set-aside, those should be allocated at the lottery, not the summer.

The at risk set asides have never been formally implemented.

But they are still 'informally' done at a number of WOTP schools - even some that are overcrowded.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These numbers are nauseating. DCPS has to find a way to correct this. Sure, some kids are peeling off Deal, but still not enough to make a difference.

Was bummed that the Deal didn't even call out the graduates names today, let alone let them walk across the stage. Presumably because there are too many of them.

Is there any information on how many teachers Wilson is hiring for 2017-18?

First, Deal doesn't call out names and have kids walk across the stage for promotion. Even 7 years ago they didn't do that.

This is a promotion after all -- from 8th grade. Not that big of a life event.

See the discussions on the MD & VA forums -- they don't do the 'graduation' ceremonies for 8th grade either. It's not really a thing (nor should it be)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know the plan around the expected impact of switching Eaton to Hardy (from Deal) next year... that would theoretically be a shift of 70ish students out of Deal per class & more IB into Hardy quickly.

Unfortunately, even with the Eaton switch to Deal, there is still a lot of leakage in the pipeline. For example, the Hearst principal seems incapable of understanding that the lower grades will fill with 100% IB students and continues to let in 5-6 OOB students each year over the summer leading to overcrowding at the ES level. First year, maybe honest mistake. Second year, not so much. Makes you wonder if central office is applying pressure. Similar is happening elsewhere.

You don't need to wonder. Yes, the central office and many of the 'higher performing' schools have a 10% set aside and different enrollment objectives (and look to fill cohort size by classroom capacity and not overall school size capacity etc). It's not up to the principal on their own. They speak about it openly about this at public meetings.

What 10% set aside are you referring to? If it's the at-risk set-aside, those should be allocated at the lottery, not the summer.

The at risk set asides have never been formally implemented.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know the plan around the expected impact of switching Eaton to Hardy (from Deal) next year... that would theoretically be a shift of 70ish students out of Deal per class & more IB into Hardy quickly.

Unfortunately, even with the Eaton switch to Deal, there is still a lot of leakage in the pipeline. For example, the Hearst principal seems incapable of understanding that the lower grades will fill with 100% IB students and continues to let in 5-6 OOB students each year over the summer leading to overcrowding at the ES level. First year, maybe honest mistake. Second year, not so much. Makes you wonder if central office is applying pressure. Similar is happening elsewhere.

You don't need to wonder. Yes, the central office and many of the 'higher performing' schools have a 10% set aside and different enrollment objectives (and look to fill cohort size by classroom capacity and not overall school size capacity etc). It's not up to the principal on their own. They speak about it openly about this at public meetings.

What 10% set aside are you referring to? If it's the at-risk set-aside, those should be allocated at the lottery, not the summer.

Anonymous wrote:These numbers are nauseating. DCPS has to find a way to correct this. Sure, some kids are peeling off Deal, but still not enough to make a difference.

Was bummed that the Deal didn't even call out the graduates names today, let alone let them walk across the stage. Presumably because there are too many of them.

Is there any information on how many teachers Wilson is hiring for 2017-18?

Wilson actually had about 50 fewer students this year than last. It's not at all clear that they need to hire more than the usual number of teachers for next year.

Anonymous wrote:These numbers are nauseating. DCPS has to find a way to correct this. Sure, some kids are peeling off Deal, but still not enough to make a difference.

Was bummed that the Deal didn't even call out the graduates names today, let alone let them walk across the stage. Presumably because there are too many of them.

Is there any information on how many teachers Wilson is hiring for 2017-18?

First, Deal doesn't call out names and have kids walk across the stage for promotion. Even 7 years ago they didn't do that.

This is a promotion after all -- from 8th grade. Not that big of a life event.

These numbers are nauseating. DCPS has to find a way to correct this. Sure, some kids are peeling off Deal, but still not enough to make a difference.

Was bummed that the Deal didn't even call out the graduates names today, let alone let them walk across the stage. Presumably because there are too many of them.

Is there any information on how many teachers Wilson is hiring for 2017-18?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know the plan around the expected impact of switching Eaton to Hardy (from Deal) next year... that would theoretically be a shift of 70ish students out of Deal per class & more IB into Hardy quickly.

With this year's Deal audited enrollment is 1476 - (538 for 6th, 466 for 7th, and 472 for 8th) - if the numbers are similar this year... taking out the Eaton population would take the per class #s back to around 460ish, and keep the school at 1400 total. Hopefully they don't then refill the 'slots' created with additional students from elsewhere?

You're making an assumption here that I have not found to be accurate in our time at Eaton. Many of the OOB students at Eaton have independent rights to Deal. So you are cutting, at most, given the current make up of 5th grade (and its previous make up) 21-28 IB students plus the handful of students who are OOB and don't have independent rights to Deal. The most recent data I could find shows that in school year 2013/2014 34 students from Eaton went to Deal. https://mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dme/publication/attachments/Feeder%20Pattern%20Analysis%20of%20DCPS%20Middle%20or%20MS&HS%20Education%20Campuses_4.2.14.pdf While the lower grades have a higher percentage of IB students, the current 5th grade and obviously, previous 5th grades, did not.

You aren't going to get a net 70 student decrease from moving Eaton out of the feeder pattern. It was merely the sacrificial lamb on the PR altar of redistricting.