Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It is so charming how Janney can annex Hearst - is Mann off the table b/c there s more wealth there?
Nah, it's because Mann's Achilles Heel is that it's stuck with Hardy for middle school.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It is so charming how Janney can annex Hearst - is Mann off the table b/c there s more wealth there?
Nah, it's because Mann's Achilles Heel is that it's stuck with Hardy for middle school.
Anonymous wrote:It is so charming how Janney can annex Hearst - is Mann off the table b/c there s more wealth there?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's ultimately a boundary issue. Don't forget about the proposal to award 10 percent of lottery seats to at risk kids.
That's what the "Janney annex" (a lease at St Ann's) will be for.
Perhaps Hearst should become the "Janney annex." They could split Janney's boundaries and direct more kids to Hearst, or pair with Hearst and move whole grades over there. Either way, if Janney and Hearst had a common program and perhaps some administrative coordination, more Janney parents would be happy sending their kids over to Hearst.
This is actually not a terrible idea. Make Hearst PK4-2 and Janney 3-5.
Not this debate again....in fact until about 7 years ago Hearst only went to 3rd grade and DCPS made the decision to have it go to 5th.
And really, Hearst is just fine and many in the Hearst community would not want it to become the "Janney annex." If families from anywhere in the city want to join the community, great, but please don't imply that it needs to become a "Janney annex" for it to be desirable. Come check it out now and see what a great school it is.
maybe the principals should talk about this?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's ultimately a boundary issue. Don't forget about the proposal to award 10 percent of lottery seats to at risk kids.
That's what the "Janney annex" (a lease at St Ann's) will be for.
Perhaps Hearst should become the "Janney annex." They could split Janney's boundaries and direct more kids to Hearst, or pair with Hearst and move whole grades over there. Either way, if Janney and Hearst had a common program and perhaps some administrative coordination, more Janney parents would be happy sending their kids over to Hearst.
This is actually not a terrible idea. Make Hearst PK4-2 and Janney 3-5.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's ultimately a boundary issue. Don't forget about the proposal to award 10 percent of lottery seats to at risk kids.
That's what the "Janney annex" (a lease at St Ann's) will be for.
Perhaps Hearst should become the "Janney annex." They could split Janney's boundaries and direct more kids to Hearst, or pair with Hearst and move whole grades over there. Either way, if Janney and Hearst had a common program and perhaps some administrative coordination, more Janney parents would be happy sending their kids over to Hearst.
This is actually not a terrible idea. Make Hearst PK4-2 and Janney 3-5.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's ultimately a boundary issue. Don't forget about the proposal to award 10 percent of lottery seats to at risk kids.
That's what the "Janney annex" (a lease at St Ann's) will be for.
Perhaps Hearst should become the "Janney annex." They could split Janney's boundaries and direct more kids to Hearst, or pair with Hearst and move whole grades over there. Either way, if Janney and Hearst had a common program and perhaps some administrative coordination, more Janney parents would be happy sending their kids over to Hearst.
Anonymous wrote:I paid nearly $1.0 million for 2,000 100 year old Sq. Ft. when I could live in a better house for less money.
I don't want to totally derail this thread by asking, but I can't resist: where would you say the truly, objectively better homes are in the District? Not "more vibrant" blocks (Logan?) but the actual homes themselves -- the physical structure -- that look better on the inside and the outside, plus the piece of property where they sit?
I can think of 2, up to 4 neighborhoods that fit that bill -- but the homes cost more, not less.
Here are neighborhoods that come up a lot on DCUM that do not pass this ^ test (i.e. the inside of the homes won't be any better): Brookland, Mt. Pleasant, Petworth, 16th ST heights, most of Crestwood, all of not-historic "capitol hill" (i.e., Hill East, Navy Yard), woodridge, trinidad, burleith, almost all of Woodley park, a lot (not all) of shaw, shepherd park, brightwood, eckington.
the neighborhoods where the homes will have reliably more spectacular interiors in a SFH -- true Logan, tiny historic capitol hill, Georgetown, Dupont, historic Shaw, Kalorama - all cost more for a SFH.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's ultimately a boundary issue. Don't forget about the proposal to award 10 percent of lottery seats to at risk kids.
That's what the "Janney annex" (a lease at St Ann's) will be for.
I paid nearly $1.0 million for 2,000 100 year old Sq. Ft. when I could live in a better house for less money.
Anonymous wrote:There should be an entire thread devoted to "Janney Boundary Cheaters" and how to catch them. The school's so big, and class sizes so large, they can thrive in the anonymity like mice in a blanket.