A good way to keep diversity at Hardy, deal, and JR while reducing overcrowding would be to end feeder rights. If you get in to hyde-addison for Pre-K, it shouldn't guarantee you a space through 12th grade. There are families that can't get a little kid across town but would enter the middle school or HS lottery.

I can tell a lot of you have no insight of historical events. SP was given access to an under enrolled Deal middle school 30+ years ago when Paul Jr High was closed as a DCPS and there was no other middle school option. Even then, SP kept high school rights to Coolidge. SP didn’t get IB rights to Wilson until the 2013 mix up to align all feeders based on high school pyramid. At that time, there was no Wells middle school. Also agree, the J&J set largely sends their kids to Sidwell, GDS, Maret, Stone Ridge, and St Johns.

Yes, Janney and all their 4% black kids should be the sole driver of bringing diversity to Deal 😂

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is why is Bancroft.

yes. Both Oyster and Bancroft should feed to MacFarland and Roosevelt.MacFarland would easily have PARCC scores on par with Stuart-Hobson: not amazing, but able to get more in-bounds buy-in, and the school would get big enough to offer more courses and extracurriculars. By having Oyster and Adams only serve PK3-5, there would be a lot more ECE slots.

If the existing residents won't send their kids there, why do you think that the re-zoned ones would? It's about a one in five in boundary participation rate for both MacFarland and Roosevelt. Under 5% at both schools testing proficient in math.

People move in groups. If a cohort of kids from Bancroft and Adams went to MacFarland, it wouldn't have such low math proficiency. It doesn't take many kids to move that needle. What would really help is if DCPS promised and provided honors classes at MacFarland based on PARCC scores. It could also help is if DCPS did everything possible to move all interested Adams staff over to MacFarland. Of course people would prefer to have feeder rights to higher-performing schools, but "Alice Deal for All" did not mean literally routing every school to Deal and JR.

Agree on the real differentiation. If they did, more parents would opt in. Without that, I don't see it. It might not take many kids, but that doesn't mean you'll get any. It's not that there aren't already tons of kids who are zoned for those schools who do well -- there are, and they send their kids to Wilson, DCI, Deal, Latin, Banneker, SWW, BASIS, etc. And so would the new ones. Rezoning in combination with differentiation and other changes - that would be interesting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is why is Bancroft.

yes. Both Oyster and Bancroft should feed to MacFarland and Roosevelt.MacFarland would easily have PARCC scores on par with Stuart-Hobson: not amazing, but able to get more in-bounds buy-in, and the school would get big enough to offer more courses and extracurriculars. By having Oyster and Adams only serve PK3-5, there would be a lot more ECE slots.

Yes, eliminate a very successful bilingual middle school for… more ECE slots. Great idea.

The demand is for ECE. The way to create more kids who are prepared for middle school and will lift middle school proficiency rates is to get them in at ECE. Having a tiny middle school does not allow for the courses and extracurriculars that provide a full middle school experience. It also makes no sense to dump a small group of Adams grads in at JR where they can't continue on their bilingual path. DCPS needs to plan centrally and not be beholden to a few hundred parents. If Oyster families want to have everything their way, they should create a bilingual PK-8 charter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is why is Bancroft.

yes. Both Oyster and Bancroft should feed to MacFarland and Roosevelt.MacFarland would easily have PARCC scores on par with Stuart-Hobson: not amazing, but able to get more in-bounds buy-in, and the school would get big enough to offer more courses and extracurriculars. By having Oyster and Adams only serve PK3-5, there would be a lot more ECE slots.

If the existing residents won't send their kids there, why do you think that the re-zoned ones would? It's about a one in five in boundary participation rate for both MacFarland and Roosevelt. Under 5% at both schools testing proficient in math.

People move in groups. If a cohort of kids from Bancroft and Adams went to MacFarland, it wouldn't have such low math proficiency. It doesn't take many kids to move that needle. What would really help is if DCPS promised and provided honors classes at MacFarland based on PARCC scores. It could also help is if DCPS did everything possible to move all interested Adams staff over to MacFarland. Of course people would prefer to have feeder rights to higher-performing schools, but "Alice Deal for All" did not mean literally routing every school to Deal and JR.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser lives in SP and isn’t about to let her UMC neighbors’ kids to get cut out of Deal/JR. So this is a moot discussion.

...until we stop voting for corruption and incompetence.

I mean... R White *also* has kids at Shepherd, so that wasn't going to help in this regard.

Bowser will be out of office and her daughter in private school before the boundary decision comes out, let alone goes into effect. There will be a long grandfathering period, a la Crestwood. The dynamics in other Ward 4 neighborhoods are changing enough that the Lafayette/Shepherd set-aside doesn't make much sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is why is Bancroft.

yes. Both Oyster and Bancroft should feed to MacFarland and Roosevelt.MacFarland would easily have PARCC scores on par with Stuart-Hobson: not amazing, but able to get more in-bounds buy-in, and the school would get big enough to offer more courses and extracurriculars. By having Oyster and Adams only serve PK3-5, there would be a lot more ECE slots.

If the existing residents won't send their kids there, why do you think that the re-zoned ones would? It's about a one in five in boundary participation rate for both MacFarland and Roosevelt. Under 5% at both schools testing proficient in math.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser lives in SP and isn’t about to let her UMC neighbors’ kids to get cut out of Deal/JR. So this is a moot discussion.

...until we stop voting for corruption and incompetence.

I mean... R White *also* has kids at Shepherd, so that wasn't going to help in this regard.

We had a chance with Catania and blew it.

Yes! The best schools should be reserved for the richest families!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser lives in SP and isn’t about to let her UMC neighbors’ kids to get cut out of Deal/JR. So this is a moot discussion.

...until we stop voting for corruption and incompetence.

I mean... R White *also* has kids at Shepherd, so that wasn't going to help in this regard.

Anonymous wrote:Bowser lives in SP and isn’t about to let her UMC neighbors’ kids to get cut out of Deal/JR. So this is a moot discussion.

...until we stop voting for corruption and incompetence.

Anonymous wrote:Politics most likely. Who has the loudest voice, makes the most noise, and gives the most money. It’s easier to continue feeding Bancroft to an overcrowded school on the other side of town than p-off influential people. See also: Shepherd.

+1

It's just the political elite helping itself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is why is Bancroft.

yes. Both Oyster and Bancroft should feed to MacFarland and Roosevelt.MacFarland would easily have PARCC scores on par with Stuart-Hobson: not amazing, but able to get more in-bounds buy-in, and the school would get big enough to offer more courses and extracurriculars. By having Oyster and Adams only serve PK3-5, there would be a lot more ECE slots.

Yes, eliminate a very successful bilingual middle school for… more ECE slots. Great idea.

Anonymous wrote:The real question is why is Bancroft.

yes. Both Oyster and Bancroft should feed to MacFarland and Roosevelt.MacFarland would easily have PARCC scores on par with Stuart-Hobson: not amazing, but able to get more in-bounds buy-in, and the school would get big enough to offer more courses and extracurriculars. By having Oyster and Adams only serve PK3-5, there would be a lot more ECE slots.

Bowser lives in SP and isn’t about to let her UMC neighbors’ kids to get cut out of Deal/JR. So this is a moot discussion.