Anonymous
04/22/2019 07:56
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
It’s the benefit of living where I live in Ward 4. You treat your nice schools in Ward 3 like property and never expect that to change. Nice when the asymmetry always changes to better favor the privileged. Now I see why some on the Council are proposing language immersion schools for each Ward. Because it’s more equitable than citywide schools that become a power grab for people who want access who already have, not a way for have nots to get better access.
Anonymous
04/21/2019 16:40
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
Anonymous wrote:If a specialty program near my house is open to anyone by lottery without boundaries will the JKLMs too? Ward 1 and 4 have them due to their Hispanic ELL populations they are serving.
Why would they? DCPS could rezone neighborhood schools and take the immersion schools out of it. Those are lottery only. This is how it works in other places.
Anonymous
04/21/2019 16:11
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Good post. I think #1 is the most feasible option. I too see the appeal of #4 but don’t think it’s politically viable. San Francisco has a system similar to #4 but it’s pretty unpopular even if well-intentioned and pretty effective at integrating schools. And that’s with SF having many more good schools than DC.
Boston also tried a similar syatem, but had to walk it back, so that some preference is given to residents.
San Francisco has a much smaller percentage of residents with children, partially because of expense, and partially due to the lottery. I don't think SF has more good schools than DC. California per pupil expenditure is very low compared to most DMV school districts. The kinds of specials we take for granted would be unheard of in a lot of CA schools.
I agree with a lot of your post, including regarding per-pupil expenditure and specials. But SF schools are better-scoring than DC schools. As an example, look at US News's "College Readiness Index," which compares AP/IB performance. SFUSD's score is 42.1 and DCPS is 28.9. Also compare the scatter plots for district high schools (DC has so many in the lower left corner): https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/district-of-columbia/districts/district-of-columbia-public-schools/wilson-high-school-4649 https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/california/districts/san-francisco-unified-school-district/abraham-lincoln-high-school-3254 Neither district scores too well, but SF has a lot more schools that are mediocre but not terrible. My only point is that moving away from IB schools will be even harder in DC than it was in SF where's it's very unpopular.
didn't SF go back to neigborhood schools?
The change from the all-lottery system is going to take several years to implement and the new system will not be an only-neighborhood school approach.
The new SF system is supposed to include automatic assignment to a neighborhood school, with additional lottery-based choice for citywide or specialized options like language immersion programs; a choice system based primarily on home address and a zone-based assignment with a guaranteed assignment to one in a set of schools.
I personally think they are on the right track with specialized programs such as immersion being offered to all via a lottery, e.g. not at a neighborhood school.
The difference is that the decision to flee SF because of schools is a difficult one because the commute is hellacious if you work in the city. So more middle class parents are willing to try and make it work. But in DC the difference between commuting downtown from Jamey/Murch/Hearst/LaFayette vs. Wood acres/Summerset is only about 5 minutes. So DCPS has far less leverage with Ward 3 families.
Anonymous
04/21/2019 16:06
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
Anonymous wrote:Just because $250K annual income doesn’t get you champagne and helicopters doesn’t mean it’s not the top quintile of US incomes.
According to the Census Bureau $227 HHI is 95th percentile.
Anonymous
04/21/2019 16:05
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
Anonymous wrote:I actually think an ELL trump card lottery preference for access to the dual language schools is probably a good idea to maintain their tie to programmatic need.
No reason why all dual language programs could not operate the way DCPS does now, with 1/2 seats for native Spanish speakers and 1/2 seats for non-native speakers.
Anonymous
04/21/2019 15:55
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
I actually think an ELL trump card lottery preference for access to the dual language schools is probably a good idea to maintain their tie to programmatic need.
Anonymous
04/21/2019 15:54
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
If a specialty program near my house is open to anyone by lottery without boundaries will the JKLMs too? Ward 1 and 4 have them due to their Hispanic ELL populations they are serving.
Anonymous
04/21/2019 15:16
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think all special programs should be lottery based.
And I think if there is a specialized program in an elementary school (Montessori, language immersion etc), there should be one offered in each ward. It doesn’t seem fair that kids in ward 8 automatically have less of a chance at both of those program because of where they live.
I agree. However, as DCPS immersion programs are currently all neighborhood based, you can live 3 blocks from a DCPS immersion school in Ward 1 and if you aren’t IB you have no shot at attending. These programs need to be open to all.
I absolutely agree and think that proximity lottery preference should be taken away for specialized programs.
Anonymous
04/21/2019 15:01
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think all special programs should be lottery based.
And I think if there is a specialized program in an elementary school (Montessori, language immersion etc), there should be one offered in each ward. It doesn’t seem fair that kids in ward 8 automatically have less of a chance at both of those program because of where they live.
I agree. However, as DCPS immersion programs are currently all neighborhood based, you can live 3 blocks from a DCPS immersion school in Ward 1 and if you aren’t IB you have no shot at attending. These programs need to be open to all.
Anonymous
04/21/2019 13:25
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
Anonymous wrote:I think all special programs should be lottery based.
And I think if there is a specialized program in an elementary school (Montessori, language immersion etc), there should be one offered in each ward. It doesn’t seem fair that kids in ward 8 automatically have less of a chance at both of those program because of where they live.
Anonymous
04/21/2019 12:02
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
Anonymous wrote:I think all special programs should be lottery based.
+1. And I realize it will require opening or redrawing boundaries to create IB schools for those areas. I also think that all special programs expect perhaps for Montessori, should feed to a MS AND HS to continue that program. If you want to opt out at some point, you go to the neighborhood school and its feeder program.
There is no reason that this is how it works for CHML and SWS, and not for the DCPS immersion schools.
Anonymous
04/21/2019 11:35
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
I think all special programs should be lottery based.
Anonymous
04/21/2019 11:06
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
Anonymous
04/21/2019 11:05
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Good post. I think #1 is the most feasible option. I too see the appeal of #4 but don’t think it’s politically viable. San Francisco has a system similar to #4 but it’s pretty unpopular even if well-intentioned and pretty effective at integrating schools. And that’s with SF having many more good schools than DC.
Boston also tried a similar syatem, but had to walk it back, so that some preference is given to residents.
San Francisco has a much smaller percentage of residents with children, partially because of expense, and partially due to the lottery. I don't think SF has more good schools than DC. California per pupil expenditure is very low compared to most DMV school districts. The kinds of specials we take for granted would be unheard of in a lot of CA schools.
I agree with a lot of your post, including regarding per-pupil expenditure and specials. But SF schools are better-scoring than DC schools. As an example, look at US News's "College Readiness Index," which compares AP/IB performance. SFUSD's score is 42.1 and DCPS is 28.9. Also compare the scatter plots for district high schools (DC has so many in the lower left corner): https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/district-of-columbia/districts/district-of-columbia-public-schools/wilson-high-school-4649 https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/california/districts/san-francisco-unified-school-district/abraham-lincoln-high-school-3254 Neither district scores too well, but SF has a lot more schools that are mediocre but not terrible. My only point is that moving away from IB schools will be even harder in DC than it was in SF where's it's very unpopular.
didn't SF go back to neigborhood schools?
The change from the all-lottery system is going to take several years to implement and the new system will not be an only-neighborhood school approach.
The new SF system is supposed to include automatic assignment to a neighborhood school, with additional lottery-based choice for citywide or specialized options like language immersion programs; a choice system based primarily on home address and a zone-based assignment with a guaranteed assignment to one in a set of schools.
I personally think they are on the right track with specialized programs such as immersion being offered to all via a lottery, e.g. not at a neighborhood school.
Anonymous
04/21/2019 10:45
Subject: Boundary review can’t come soon enough
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Good post. I think #1 is the most feasible option. I too see the appeal of #4 but don’t think it’s politically viable. San Francisco has a system similar to #4 but it’s pretty unpopular even if well-intentioned and pretty effective at integrating schools. And that’s with SF having many more good schools than DC.
Boston also tried a similar syatem, but had to walk it back, so that some preference is given to residents.
San Francisco has a much smaller percentage of residents with children, partially because of expense, and partially due to the lottery. I don't think SF has more good schools than DC. California per pupil expenditure is very low compared to most DMV school districts. The kinds of specials we take for granted would be unheard of in a lot of CA schools.
I agree with a lot of your post, including regarding per-pupil expenditure and specials. But SF schools are better-scoring than DC schools. As an example, look at US News's "College Readiness Index," which compares AP/IB performance. SFUSD's score is 42.1 and DCPS is 28.9. Also compare the scatter plots for district high schools (DC has so many in the lower left corner): https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/district-of-columbia/districts/district-of-columbia-public-schools/wilson-high-school-4649 https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/california/districts/san-francisco-unified-school-district/abraham-lincoln-high-school-3254 Neither district scores too well, but SF has a lot more schools that are mediocre but not terrible. My only point is that moving away from IB schools will be even harder in DC than it was in SF where's it's very unpopular.
didn't SF go back to neigborhood schools?