Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 15:00     Subject: Re:Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
jsteele wrote:Update concerning Crestwood:

I still haven't seen any documentation, but have been told that there are special provisions for cases in which the recommended schools are not yet open -- which appears to be the case for Crestwood which is losing access to Deal but being assigned a school that does not exist. Those special provisions will allow Crestwood to continue having rights to Deal. Presumably, access to Wilson will be available via feeder rights.


So it WILL be Deal for all! Bowser is so smart!
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 15:00     Subject: Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
Anonymous wrote:This is a cluster@&$€


No one here is surprised, though. DCPS is our Forrest Gump.
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 14:53     Subject: Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
This is a cluster@&$€
jsteele
Post 06/12/2014 14:52     Subject: Re:Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
Update concerning Crestwood:

I still haven't seen any documentation, but have been told that there are special provisions for cases in which the recommended schools are not yet open -- which appears to be the case for Crestwood which is losing access to Deal but being assigned a school that does not exist. Those special provisions will allow Crestwood to continue having rights to Deal. Presumably, access to Wilson will be available via feeder rights.
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 14:51     Subject: Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

SE/SW should have never been in Wilson's boundary in the first place.



Well, it made perfect sense when Jefferson fed Wilson.

If Deal and Hardy and the elementary schools that feed them end up with more in-bound kids, I think Wilson will become a lot less diverse over the next few years. Look at the racial makeup of the areas in Wilson's proposed zone vs. the parts that would be cut out of attending: http://greatergreaterwashington.org/image.cgi?src=201009/racemaplarge.jpg&ref=7220


I'm AA and live Eotp and wouldn't mind if Wilson was 80% white so long as every kid had a shot at good educational options/services/extras/etc.
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 14:50     Subject: Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
Anonymous wrote:Everyone should be emailing the DME now, demanding the release of the entire proposal...this drips and drabs stuff is just awful: dme.studentassignment@dc.gov


Calls to the DME's office go straight to VM.
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 14:45     Subject: Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

SE/SW should have never been in Wilson's boundary in the first place.



Well, it made perfect sense when Jefferson fed Wilson.

If Deal and Hardy and the elementary schools that feed them end up with more in-bound kids, I think Wilson will become a lot less diverse over the next few years. Look at the racial makeup of the areas in Wilson's proposed zone vs. the parts that would be cut out of attending: http://greatergreaterwashington.org/image.cgi?src=201009/racemaplarge.jpg&ref=7220


The census data used to create the map is now 14 years out of date.
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 14:37     Subject: Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

SE/SW should have never been in Wilson's boundary in the first place.



Well, it made perfect sense when Jefferson fed Wilson.

If Deal and Hardy and the elementary schools that feed them end up with more in-bound kids, I think Wilson will become a lot less diverse over the next few years. Look at the racial makeup of the areas in Wilson's proposed zone vs. the parts that would be cut out of attending: http://greatergreaterwashington.org/image.cgi?src=201009/racemaplarge.jpg&ref=7220


Diversity is far deeper than the skin-deep differences in black, white and brown.
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 14:35     Subject: Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Q: I haven't seen anything about OOB feeder rights.

The first page, before the map, talks about grandfathering, but I don't see anything on a right to continue in a feeder stream.

I'm guessing it's still a "right."


The paragraph addressing feeder rights is pretty straightforward. Children in Grades 6, 7 & 8 will have the option to feed to the current HS, as will their sibs.


No, this is different (I think). That sentence pertains to a child who was IB for, say, Wilson but is no longer IB for Wilson. I'm asking about the child who was never IB for Wilson but gained admittance to, say, Hardy, or Hearst. Could they continue on to Wilson?

Am I missing something?

And the sib preference extends only so long as a sib is in that school. (That's a sensible limitation.)


I'm the PP. Yeah, I think I'm missing something. I now think you're right: OOB feeder rights are discontinued. This is another positive achievement!


You're wrong. Excerpt from my elementary school's document: "Anyone living in the proposed new boundary for XXXXXXX ES is zoned for and has a right to attend Hardy MS and Wilson HS. Any student attending the school out-of-boundary has the right to continue in the feeder pattern to Hardy." Yay! Sorry to burst your bubble PP. I know you were anxious to get rid of us unsavory EotP types. Was never, ever going to happen.


Yes, you're right and the revised version of me is wrong.

You're still not getting me though. It's not you that I find unsavory, it's your continual insistence that the only reason I and other oppose OOB feeder rights is because we find you unsavory. Overcrowding is real, and removing the 5-year-old OOB feeder rights is the best way to address that. Your inability to understand this motive is unsavory, not you.
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 14:35     Subject: Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Lobbying and political games at the exponential level: Shepherd Park is in; Crestwood is out.

How will she have the face to present this?


Just looking the Wilson map is shocking. They'll reach all the way north and capture the top corner for Wilson but cut Crestwood loose? Just visually, it's ridiculous.


Shepherd Park has a LOT of political clout.
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 14:34     Subject: Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
I'm dying to see if education campuses are going to be phased out. and if not, are people being kicked out of Deal going to be told, "sorry, you get to go to an EC instead that has not even 10% of the extras that Deals has?"
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 14:33     Subject: Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
Anonymous wrote:

SE/SW should have never been in Wilson's boundary in the first place.



Well, it made perfect sense when Jefferson fed Wilson.

If Deal and Hardy and the elementary schools that feed them end up with more in-bound kids, I think Wilson will become a lot less diverse over the next few years. Look at the racial makeup of the areas in Wilson's proposed zone vs. the parts that would be cut out of attending: http://greatergreaterwashington.org/image.cgi?src=201009/racemaplarge.jpg&ref=7220
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 14:29     Subject: Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
Dme@dc.gov
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 14:28     Subject: Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
Abigail.smith@dc.gov
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 14:27     Subject: Revised Boundary Recommendations to be released on or about June 13
Everyone should be emailing the DME now, demanding the release of the entire proposal...this drips and drabs stuff is just awful: dme.studentassignment@dc.gov