Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The current renovation for Ellington is $130m. Dunbary was $120m and built from scratch for a capacity of ~1200. Why would putting Ellington facility for ~600 at Shaw MS or Garnet-Patterson cost so much more?

Looking at the renovation already underway answers your question. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fcd4hTLEGQg

I don't go to the school or have any plans to do so. But even from the outside and having no dog in the fight, this tiresome refrain looks entitled, chauvinistic and an ugly reminder of uglier times. Please stop.

Where would you suggest as the site for the new Ward 2/Ward 3 high school then? Ellington makes the most sense, but given entrenched interests there may be unlikely. Unless you want Wilson to become a strictly west of the park high school, there will be a need for another HS in the area -- any sites that you would suggest instead?

Why don't you go after the old Hardy School on Foxhall instead? Lab School leases it and there may enough land there for your high school.

Maybe, but unforutately the site is less than half of Wilson's and that would be WITH taking all of the surrounding property which is owned by the Department of Parks & Rec. A bigger site could be had near Maclean Gardens by evicting the Second District police station and taking all of the surrounding land that is currently the McL Gardens playground, dog park and community gardens. Aside from predictable opposition to taking those uses, the real problem with that site is its relative proximity to Wilson itself.

It's ridicolos, your are talking about sites which are 1 mile or 3.5 miles from one another. No additional schools in Upper NW.

Yes, perhaps you are right. If you take additional schools off the table WOTP, the simplest solution to deal with Wilson and Deal overcrowding is to end OOB feeder rights from elementary schools and, if additional steps are necessary, shrink Wilson's far-flung boundary area a bit closer to the school. It would be a straightforward solution, although not necessarily a universally popular one politically.

"Far-flung" is exactly what you could call a new Western high school for the large population of students who need different options and won't be opting for private.

To alleviate overcrowding in Upper NW secondary schools, I vote for ending OOB feeder rights but would be ok with grandfathering students already in the system (but not for their siblings not yet of school age).

The tone-deafness here is a force of nature.

DCPS is not interested in any solution which involves you digging a moat around higher-performing DCPSs, and excluding the OOB students who use the schools in upper NW as an escape valve.

How much clearer does it need to be made to you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The question I keep asking myself is WHY people who live east of the park would rather attend a new school with no track record in upper northwest than an existing (and revitalized) school that is east of the park and closer to their homes. That just makes no sense to me. Why build a new building far away from where you live, when there's already a renovated building a few blocks from home? Are they so certain that any school in the neighborhood where they live is doomed to fail?

Commuting sucks. No one prefers that. But they would rather commute than send their kids to bad schools.

Give people a good option close to home and they'll take it.

But why would you assume a new school in NW will be a good school, and a revitalized school EotP will be a bad school? Whatever might make the new NW school good can surely be replicated at an EotP school, can't it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:



The tone-deafness here is a force of nature.

DCPS is not interested in any solution which involves you digging a moat around higher-performing DCPSs, and excluding the OOB students who use the schools in upper NW as an escape valve.

How much clearer does it need to be made to you?

So we've got one faction saying "no more schools in upper NW" and another faction saying "no digging moats." It's got to be one or the other folks.

Personally I think the "no more schools in upper NW" camp has it wrong. Clearly there are significant numbers of people who live outside of UNW who want to go to school there. Give the people what they want!

+1

The way I interpret these contradictory statements is let OOB kids keep going to work school (no moats) and if they are overcrowded make wotp kids attend currently empty schools (no more wotp schools).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The question I keep asking myself is WHY people who live east of the park would rather attend a new school with no track record in upper northwest than an existing (and revitalized) school that is east of the park and closer to their homes. That just makes no sense to me. Why build a new building far away from where you live, when there's already a renovated building a few blocks from home? Are they so certain that any school in the neighborhood where they live is doomed to fail?

Commuting sucks. No one prefers that. But they would rather commute than send their kids to bad schools.

Give people a good option close to home and they'll take it.

But why would you assume a new school in NW will be a good school, and a revitalized school EotP will be a bad school? Whatever might make the new NW school good can surely be replicated at an EotP school, can't it?

Anonymous wrote:Economics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The question I keep asking myself is WHY people who live east of the park would rather attend a new school with no track record in upper northwest than an existing (and revitalized) school that is east of the park and closer to their homes. That just makes no sense to me. Why build a new building far away from where you live, when there's already a renovated building a few blocks from home? Are they so certain that any school in the neighborhood where they live is doomed to fail?

Commuting sucks. No one prefers that. But they would rather commute than send their kids to bad schools.

Give people a good option close to home and they'll take it.

Anonymous wrote:The question I keep asking myself is WHY people who live east of the park would rather attend a new school with no track record in upper northwest than an existing (and revitalized) school that is east of the park and closer to their homes. That just makes no sense to me. Why build a new building far away from where you live, when there's already a renovated building a few blocks from home? Are they so certain that any school in the neighborhood where they live is doomed to fail?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:



The tone-deafness here is a force of nature.

DCPS is not interested in any solution which involves you digging a moat around higher-performing DCPSs, and excluding the OOB students who use the schools in upper NW as an escape valve.

How much clearer does it need to be made to you?

So we've got one faction saying "no more schools in upper NW" and another faction saying "no digging moats." It's got to be one or the other folks.

Personally I think the "no more schools in upper NW" camp has it wrong. Clearly there are significant numbers of people who live outside of UNW who want to go to school there. Give the people what they want!

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The question I keep asking myself is WHY people who live east of the park would rather attend a new school with no track record in upper northwest than an existing (and revitalized) school that is east of the park and closer to their homes. That just makes no sense to me. Why build a new building far away from where you live, when there's already a renovated building a few blocks from home? Are they so certain that any school in the neighborhood where they live is doomed to fail?

Where are you getting that people EotP want that?

Anonymous wrote:The question I keep asking myself is WHY people who live east of the park would rather attend a new school with no track record in upper northwest than an existing (and revitalized) school that is east of the park and closer to their homes. That just makes no sense to me. Why build a new building far away from where you live, when there's already a renovated building a few blocks from home? Are they so certain that any school in the neighborhood where they live is doomed to fail?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:



The tone-deafness here is a force of nature.

DCPS is not interested in any solution which involves you digging a moat around higher-performing DCPSs, and excluding the OOB students who use the schools in upper NW as an escape valve.

How much clearer does it need to be made to you?

So we've got one faction saying "no more schools in upper NW" and another faction saying "no digging moats." It's got to be one or the other folks.

Personally I think the "no more schools in upper NW" camp has it wrong. Clearly there are significant numbers of people who live outside of UNW who want to go to school there. Give the people what they want!

Anonymous wrote:



The tone-deafness here is a force of nature.

DCPS is not interested in any solution which involves you digging a moat around higher-performing DCPSs, and excluding the OOB students who use the schools in upper NW as an escape valve.

How much clearer does it need to be made to you?