Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a heck of a lot closer to LT or SWS than to Watkins.

That may be the case, but the way the proximity piece works, I doubt the preference would extend to you. So.... You should probably be arguing AGAINST it if you really want in. Right? You're the person to argue you deserves just as much of a shot as the guys that live across the street. Or, do you think they deserve it more than you?

I think the guy or gal across the street from SWS deserves a bigger shot, yes. I'd also like to have a proximity include me, if possible.

Yes, but it WON'T include you. So, given that knowledge are you willing to give up any chance you had so the guy across the street gets his preference?

Yes, this. There were a few confused people on MoTH who were all in favor of supporting "proximity for the Hill" until they figured out it would mean they had NO chance at all of getting into SWS. If proximity preference happens, this "citywide" program will become a program for siblings and a handful of proximity neighbors ONLY. Perhaps a few seats per year at higher grades.

Unless it's in a choice set, which would limit access for the rest of the city, but create a proximity preference for a broader swath of the Hill than a boundary would.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a heck of a lot closer to LT or SWS than to Watkins.

That may be the case, but the way the proximity piece works, I doubt the preference would extend to you. So.... You should probably be arguing AGAINST it if you really want in. Right? You're the person to argue you deserves just as much of a shot as the guys that live across the street. Or, do you think they deserve it more than you?

I think the guy or gal across the street from SWS deserves a bigger shot, yes. I'd also like to have a proximity include me, if possible.

Yes, but it WON'T include you. So, given that knowledge are you willing to give up any chance you had so the guy across the street gets his preference?

Yes, this. There were a few confused people on MoTH who were all in favor of supporting "proximity for the Hill" until they figured out it would mean they had NO chance at all of getting into SWS. If proximity preference happens, this "citywide" program will become a program for siblings and a handful of proximity neighbors ONLY. Perhaps a few seats per year at higher grades.

Unless it's in a choice set, which would limit access for the rest of the city, but create a proximity preference for a broader swath of the Hill than a boundary would.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a heck of a lot closer to LT or SWS than to Watkins.

That may be the case, but the way the proximity piece works, I doubt the preference would extend to you. So.... You should probably be arguing AGAINST it if you really want in. Right? You're the person to argue you deserves just as much of a shot as the guys that live across the street. Or, do you think they deserve it more than you?

I think the guy or gal across the street from SWS deserves a bigger shot, yes. I'd also like to have a proximity include me, if possible.

Yes, but it WON'T include you. So, given that knowledge are you willing to give up any chance you had so the guy across the street gets his preference?

Yes, this. There were a few confused people on MoTH who were all in favor of supporting "proximity for the Hill" until they figured out it would mean they had NO chance at all of getting into SWS. If proximity preference happens, this "citywide" program will become a program for siblings and a handful of proximity neighbors ONLY. Perhaps a few seats per year at higher grades.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that most in-boundary families haven't been thrilled with Ludlow-Taylor, but a big part of that is breathtaking arrogance and a culture of what can truly be described as well-poisoning on the part of some neighbors. Nowhere else in the city have I witnessed such an unbelievable attitude of entitlement as the in-bounds L-T gentrifiers. Hopefully the renovation and a new principal, coupled with a decision on the future of SWS, will help the neighborhood unite behind their school.

I don't hear entitlement, I hear frustration that L-T has lagged far behind Maury on various levels, and that in-boundary parents can't do much about it. Nothing unbelievable there. I don't expect the neighborhood to unite behind "their school," since few neighbors approach L-T with a sense of ownership, but do expect more in-boundary parents of little ones to try the early childhood program under new leadership. On our block, there are a dozen families with ES-age children and none has stayed at L-T past prek. Many hoped to, and worked to, but none did. If the new principal can convince most in-boundary parents that they can't do better than L-T, with or without lottery luck, perfect. Yea!!!!

As far as I can tell, the only area where LT has "lagged far behind" Maury is in the number of white/high-SES kids. There are more kids scoring advanced at LT than there are at Maury. I'd much rather my kid go to a school that challenges her academically, where she has the opportunity to become friends with kids from all walks of life who she might not otherwise get to know because they live in other parts of the city.

Scores as a flat indicator mean very little becasue the trend over time is a better indicator. Maury is trending up and it's gains are building from lower grades up. DC CAS only begins in 2nd grade and up For 2013 Maury made the single greatest gain in reading prociency and the 5th highest for math on the DC CAS. LT had suspiciously high scores in the Rhee cheating era and has leveled off since (LT also has a rep as a very IEP friendly school so many accomodations provided). LT could build from the ground up like Maury if the IB families would embrace the school and make it work. It has the foundations for being a great community school with more buy-in from the community. I understand the frustration of the LT parents who are invested in their school and struggling to get the same level of buy-in from some of their neighbors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that most in-boundary families haven't been thrilled with Ludlow-Taylor, but a big part of that is breathtaking arrogance and a culture of what can truly be described as well-poisoning on the part of some neighbors. Nowhere else in the city have I witnessed such an unbelievable attitude of entitlement as the in-bounds L-T gentrifiers. Hopefully the renovation and a new principal, coupled with a decision on the future of SWS, will help the neighborhood unite behind their school.

I don't hear entitlement, I hear frustration that L-T has lagged far behind Maury on various levels, and that in-boundary parents can't do much about it. Nothing unbelievable there. I don't expect the neighborhood to unite behind "their school," since few neighbors approach L-T with a sense of ownership, but do expect more in-boundary parents of little ones to try the early childhood program under new leadership. On our block, there are a dozen families with ES-age children and none has stayed at L-T past prek. Many hoped to, and worked to, but none did. If the new principal can convince most in-boundary parents that they can't do better than L-T, with or without lottery luck, perfect. Yea!!!!

As far as I can tell, the only area where LT has "lagged far behind" Maury is in the number of white/high-SES kids. There are more kids scoring advanced at LT than there are at Maury. I'd much rather my kid go to a school that challenges her academically, where she has the opportunity to become friends with kids from all walks of life who she might not otherwise get to know because they live in other parts of the city.