Anonymous wrote:13:23 posting - you can call me "J". Is there something I can call you?

I worry we're misunderstanding each other, so let me spell out my views and my understanding of what you're saying.

1. I'm definitely not angry at Brian or the W3 gang. I think they're doing good work. I am impressed at their stamina in the face of headwinds.

2. I think this overcrowding situation is incredibly complex and difficult to solve in a way that will be productive for DCPS and will make even a plurality of people happy. It's complex because it dredges up issues of school-quality, educational equity, race, funding, and political power.

3. I'm pretty confident there's no one solution that will satisfy everyone. I suspect the best path forward will need to be a mixture of several different initiatives that combine to solve the problem while keeping peace among the various interests.

4. I'm frustrated that DCPS has unilaterally decided to take some approached "off the table" - specifically (a) the possibility of adjustments to OOB feeder rights, (b) the possibility of adjustments to feeder patterns, and (c) the possibility of adjustments to school boundaries. It's especially frustrating because DCPS has given no explanation for why those approaches - which a very sizable portion of the community seems to favor - cannot even be considered. If DCPS/DME has legitimate reasons not to pursue those approaches, then DCPS/DME should be willing to spell those reasons out and discuss them openly. If there are other limitations that DCPS/DME is putting on the available approaches, then those should be explained as well. Otherwise, community involvement is ineffective and frustrating.

5. I suspect DCPS/DME really wants to delay this issue entirely until after the next election, or perhaps indefinitely. I think people need to be active and pushy if they want DCPS to actually address this issue.

Please call me Z. I appreciate your cordial tone-- I should not be so cranky!

Here's the thing. I agree that taking schools out of the feeder pattern is politically unrealistic. I do. And I understand that they don't want to make any changes that would make Wilson serve fewer students of color. They did the reboundary process and now it's done, no more changes for a while. I don't live in Ward 3 and have no plans to send a kid to Wilson ever. My kid goes to a Title I that many of the people all worked up about Wilson would never, ever consider. So I really don't have anything at stake with the feeder patterns thing.

What really frustrates me, though, is this. It seems like the only solution in the long term is to develop a second large comprehensive high school that upper-income families are willing to attend. But the things that would have to be done to make that happen are not politically feasible either. I think to make, say, Eastern or Coolidge into a desirable school, would cost millions of dollars. It is fantastically expensive to serve the needs of low-income and academically challenging students while also providing the kinds of things that attract upper-income and high-achieving students. And to do it for just one school is politically very challenging, for one school to get a ton of money and others not. Test-in programs are politically difficult too because they wouldn't necessarily be as racially diverse as downtown would like, and would require extra money too. So it's just very, very difficult to do. And it frustrates me that downtown is up-front about changing feeder patterns being off the table because it's too hard, yet they will not acknowledge that creating a second comprehensive high school is also politically unrealistic. Why is one unrealistic proposal being moved off the table, but we are expected to maintain the charade for other unrealistic proposals?

Brian, I would love to hear your thoughts on this.

I think everyone appreciates Brian's efforts. But when the most cost effective and quickest solution is not on the table for at least a public discussion of the merits. And, that solution happens to also be the option in the best interest of Ward 3. Then, it makes you wonder who's agenda is being served here. W3Ed net should be looking at all the options here, not just the politically viable ones. And let's not forget that the majority of D.C taxpayers do not have school aged kids and I'm sure they would appreciate even a passing conversation of cost effective solutions that also cut down on already oppressive D.C. traffic.

Anonymous wrote:13:23 posting - you can call me "J". Is there something I can call you?

I worry we're misunderstanding each other, so let me spell out my views and my understanding of what you're saying.

1. I'm definitely not angry at Brian or the W3 gang. I think they're doing good work. I am impressed at their stamina in the face of headwinds.

2. I think this overcrowding situation is incredibly complex and difficult to solve in a way that will be productive for DCPS and will make even a plurality of people happy. It's complex because it dredges up issues of school-quality, educational equity, race, funding, and political power.

3. I'm pretty confident there's no one solution that will satisfy everyone. I suspect the best path forward will need to be a mixture of several different initiatives that combine to solve the problem while keeping peace among the various interests.

4. I'm frustrated that DCPS has unilaterally decided to take some approached "off the table" - specifically (a) the possibility of adjustments to OOB feeder rights, (b) the possibility of adjustments to feeder patterns, and (c) the possibility of adjustments to school boundaries. It's especially frustrating because DCPS has given no explanation for why those approaches - which a very sizable portion of the community seems to favor - cannot even be considered. If DCPS/DME has legitimate reasons not to pursue those approaches, then DCPS/DME should be willing to spell those reasons out and discuss them openly. If there are other limitations that DCPS/DME is putting on the available approaches, then those should be explained as well. Otherwise, community involvement is ineffective and frustrating.

5. I suspect DCPS/DME really wants to delay this issue entirely until after the next election, or perhaps indefinitely. I think people need to be active and pushy if they want DCPS to actually address this issue.

The DCPS staff do openly say they are off the table because of equity. (They acknowledge that it's drop in the bucket and avoids systematic change and harms the best performing schools and over crowds them...). But that's the answer and doesn't budge.

(It can also be code for wanting ward 4 and 5 votes)

J again. I agree no approach should we written off as "unrealistic." Undoubtedly every possible approach will have a mix of pros and cons. Even an approach with a major con can be modified or scaled down to reduce the con, but that's only possible if people specifically identify the con. All should be "on the table."

13:23 posting - you can call me "J". Is there something I can call you?

I worry we're misunderstanding each other, so let me spell out my views and my understanding of what you're saying.

1. I'm definitely not angry at Brian or the W3 gang. I think they're doing good work. I am impressed at their stamina in the face of headwinds.

2. I think this overcrowding situation is incredibly complex and difficult to solve in a way that will be productive for DCPS and will make even a plurality of people happy. It's complex because it dredges up issues of school-quality, educational equity, race, funding, and political power.

3. I'm pretty confident there's no one solution that will satisfy everyone. I suspect the best path forward will need to be a mixture of several different initiatives that combine to solve the problem while keeping peace among the various interests.

4. I'm frustrated that DCPS has unilaterally decided to take some approached "off the table" - specifically (a) the possibility of adjustments to OOB feeder rights, (b) the possibility of adjustments to feeder patterns, and (c) the possibility of adjustments to school boundaries. It's especially frustrating because DCPS has given no explanation for why those approaches - which a very sizable portion of the community seems to favor - cannot even be considered. If DCPS/DME has legitimate reasons not to pursue those approaches, then DCPS/DME should be willing to spell those reasons out and discuss them openly. If there are other limitations that DCPS/DME is putting on the available approaches, then those should be explained as well. Otherwise, community involvement is ineffective and frustrating.

5. I suspect DCPS/DME really wants to delay this issue entirely until after the next election, or perhaps indefinitely. I think people need to be active and pushy if they want DCPS to actually address this issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, Brian, I get that ending feeder rights seems unrealistic. But your other ideas are equally unrealistic. Until you get serious about spending enough to meet the actual need and fire all the underperformers in every part of the system (Family Engagement and ECE Outreach, this means you!), nothing will change.

Different poster. I see Brian as someone who's doing the hard and usually thankless task of pushing for progress, so I hope you're not bashing him. I agree with you that many of the proposed solutions seem unrealistic, and that DCPS and DC politics will resist the logical solutions. But I think we ought to be doing all we can to support people like Brian, because they're willing to be out front as the "tip of the spear" that's prodding DCPS to improve.

Brian is lovely (and handsome too), but the fact remains, all their ideas are unrealistic, won't work, or both.

You're saying that ending feeder rights is unrealistic, and also that all the other ideas Brian and his W3EdNet gang are suggesting are also unrealistic or unworkable. So are you essentially saying there is no solution and we might as well give up and accept whatever idiocy DCPS offers (i.e., either continued overcrowding, or building a flotilla of new schools in NWDC to allow all the OOB students to commute to W3 for school)? Or do you have some unmentioned third way approach for solving this problem?

I'm genuinely not trying to argue with you. I just don't understand what you're suggesting if you think no approaches will work. If your approach is "firing all the underperformers in every part of the system," then I have to say that doesn't seem terribly realistic either.

Please help me understand you.

Why is ending feeder rights unrealistic? It's not an entitlement, folks.

Here's a new idea: put up a few test-in magnet programs east, and also more east, of Connecticut Avenue. Problem solved to a lot degree then.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, Brian, I get that ending feeder rights seems unrealistic. But your other ideas are equally unrealistic. Until you get serious about spending enough to meet the actual need and fire all the underperformers in every part of the system (Family Engagement and ECE Outreach, this means you!), nothing will change.

Different poster. I see Brian as someone who's doing the hard and usually thankless task of pushing for progress, so I hope you're not bashing him. I agree with you that many of the proposed solutions seem unrealistic, and that DCPS and DC politics will resist the logical solutions. But I think we ought to be doing all we can to support people like Brian, because they're willing to be out front as the "tip of the spear" that's prodding DCPS to improve.

Brian is lovely (and handsome too), but the fact remains, all their ideas are unrealistic, won't work, or both.

You're saying that ending feeder rights is unrealistic, and also that all the other ideas Brian and his W3EdNet gang are suggesting are also unrealistic or unworkable. So are you essentially saying there is no solution and we might as well give up and accept whatever idiocy DCPS offers (i.e., either continued overcrowding, or building a flotilla of new schools in NWDC to allow all the OOB students to commute to W3 for school)? Or do you have some unmentioned third way approach for solving this problem?

I'm genuinely not trying to argue with you. I just don't understand what you're suggesting if you think no approaches will work. If your approach is "firing all the underperformers in every part of the system," then I have to say that doesn't seem terribly realistic either.

Please help me understand you.

I am saying that they should offer a slate of realistic proposals, even if they are more modest in scale. And that ruling out changes to the feeder pattern as unrealistic is not persuasive because that criticism can be made of all the proposals. If they are unwilling to propose changes to the feeder pattern they should state the real reason. It makes no sense to throw one unrealistic proposal out and keep other unrealistic proposals in.

I would add that your anger at the W3-feeder gang is misplaced. DCPS has said in no uncertain terms over and over and over that the OOB/feeder patterns is OFF THE TABLE ... (and basically will not be heard) so, they are focusing on other ideas.
If you don't believe that - try going to endless meetings including facing the political realities of how unpopular it would be for the Mayor and Council outside of Ward 3... keep fighting away at the feeder rights if you want... but will also be constructive to engage in efforts to at least try to think of anything else that might be possible.

I actually agree that it can't happen politically and should not be pursued. I would just like them to get real about their other proposals being equally unrealistic. Once we stop BSing ourselves we might make some progress.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, Brian, I get that ending feeder rights seems unrealistic. But your other ideas are equally unrealistic. Until you get serious about spending enough to meet the actual need and fire all the underperformers in every part of the system (Family Engagement and ECE Outreach, this means you!), nothing will change.

Different poster. I see Brian as someone who's doing the hard and usually thankless task of pushing for progress, so I hope you're not bashing him. I agree with you that many of the proposed solutions seem unrealistic, and that DCPS and DC politics will resist the logical solutions. But I think we ought to be doing all we can to support people like Brian, because they're willing to be out front as the "tip of the spear" that's prodding DCPS to improve.

Brian is lovely (and handsome too), but the fact remains, all their ideas are unrealistic, won't work, or both.

You're saying that ending feeder rights is unrealistic, and also that all the other ideas Brian and his W3EdNet gang are suggesting are also unrealistic or unworkable. So are you essentially saying there is no solution and we might as well give up and accept whatever idiocy DCPS offers (i.e., either continued overcrowding, or building a flotilla of new schools in NWDC to allow all the OOB students to commute to W3 for school)? Or do you have some unmentioned third way approach for solving this problem?

I'm genuinely not trying to argue with you. I just don't understand what you're suggesting if you think no approaches will work. If your approach is "firing all the underperformers in every part of the system," then I have to say that doesn't seem terribly realistic either.

Please help me understand you.

I am saying that they should offer a slate of realistic proposals, even if they are more modest in scale. And that ruling out changes to the feeder pattern as unrealistic is not persuasive because that criticism can be made of all the proposals. If they are unwilling to propose changes to the feeder pattern they should state the real reason. It makes no sense to throw one unrealistic proposal out and keep other unrealistic proposals in.

I would add that your anger at the W3-feeder gang is misplaced. DCPS has said in no uncertain terms over and over and over that the OOB/feeder patterns is OFF THE TABLE ... (and basically will not be heard) so, they are focusing on other ideas.
If you don't believe that - try going to endless meetings including facing the political realities of how unpopular it would be for the Mayor and Council outside of Ward 3... keep fighting away at the feeder rights if you want... but will also be constructive to engage in efforts to at least try to think of anything else that might be possible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, Brian, I get that ending feeder rights seems unrealistic. But your other ideas are equally unrealistic. Until you get serious about spending enough to meet the actual need and fire all the underperformers in every part of the system (Family Engagement and ECE Outreach, this means you!), nothing will change.

Different poster. I see Brian as someone who's doing the hard and usually thankless task of pushing for progress, so I hope you're not bashing him. I agree with you that many of the proposed solutions seem unrealistic, and that DCPS and DC politics will resist the logical solutions. But I think we ought to be doing all we can to support people like Brian, because they're willing to be out front as the "tip of the spear" that's prodding DCPS to improve.

Brian is lovely (and handsome too), but the fact remains, all their ideas are unrealistic, won't work, or both.

You're saying that ending feeder rights is unrealistic, and also that all the other ideas Brian and his W3EdNet gang are suggesting are also unrealistic or unworkable. So are you essentially saying there is no solution and we might as well give up and accept whatever idiocy DCPS offers (i.e., either continued overcrowding, or building a flotilla of new schools in NWDC to allow all the OOB students to commute to W3 for school)? Or do you have some unmentioned third way approach for solving this problem?

I'm genuinely not trying to argue with you. I just don't understand what you're suggesting if you think no approaches will work. If your approach is "firing all the underperformers in every part of the system," then I have to say that doesn't seem terribly realistic either.

Please help me understand you.

I am saying that they should offer a slate of realistic proposals, even if they are more modest in scale. And that ruling out changes to the feeder pattern as unrealistic is not persuasive because that criticism can be made of all the proposals. If they are unwilling to propose changes to the feeder pattern they should state the real reason. It makes no sense to throw one unrealistic proposal out and keep other unrealistic proposals in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, Brian, I get that ending feeder rights seems unrealistic. But your other ideas are equally unrealistic. Until you get serious about spending enough to meet the actual need and fire all the underperformers in every part of the system (Family Engagement and ECE Outreach, this means you!), nothing will change.

Different poster. I see Brian as someone who's doing the hard and usually thankless task of pushing for progress, so I hope you're not bashing him. I agree with you that many of the proposed solutions seem unrealistic, and that DCPS and DC politics will resist the logical solutions. But I think we ought to be doing all we can to support people like Brian, because they're willing to be out front as the "tip of the spear" that's prodding DCPS to improve.

Brian is lovely (and handsome too), but the fact remains, all their ideas are unrealistic, won't work, or both.

You're saying that ending feeder rights is unrealistic, and also that all the other ideas Brian and his W3EdNet gang are suggesting are also unrealistic or unworkable. So are you essentially saying there is no solution and we might as well give up and accept whatever idiocy DCPS offers (i.e., either continued overcrowding, or building a flotilla of new schools in NWDC to allow all the OOB students to commute to W3 for school)? Or do you have some unmentioned third way approach for solving this problem?

I'm genuinely not trying to argue with you. I just don't understand what you're suggesting if you think no approaches will work. If your approach is "firing all the underperformers in every part of the system," then I have to say that doesn't seem terribly realistic either.

Please help me understand you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, Brian, I get that ending feeder rights seems unrealistic. But your other ideas are equally unrealistic. Until you get serious about spending enough to meet the actual need and fire all the underperformers in every part of the system (Family Engagement and ECE Outreach, this means you!), nothing will change.

Different poster. I see Brian as someone who's doing the hard and usually thankless task of pushing for progress, so I hope you're not bashing him. I agree with you that many of the proposed solutions seem unrealistic, and that DCPS and DC politics will resist the logical solutions. But I think we ought to be doing all we can to support people like Brian, because they're willing to be out front as the "tip of the spear" that's prodding DCPS to improve.

Brian is lovely (and handsome too), but the fact remains, all their ideas are unrealistic, won't work, or both.

Anonymous wrote:Look, Brian, I get that ending feeder rights seems unrealistic. But your other ideas are equally unrealistic. Until you get serious about spending enough to meet the actual need and fire all the underperformers in every part of the system (Family Engagement and ECE Outreach, this means you!), nothing will change.

Different poster. I see Brian as someone who's doing the hard and usually thankless task of pushing for progress, so I hope you're not bashing him. I agree with you that many of the proposed solutions seem unrealistic, and that DCPS and DC politics will resist the logical solutions. But I think we ought to be doing all we can to support people like Brian, because they're willing to be out front as the "tip of the spear" that's prodding DCPS to improve.

Look, Brian, I get that ending feeder rights seems unrealistic. But your other ideas are equally unrealistic. Until you get serious about spending enough to meet the actual need and fire all the underperformers in every part of the system (Family Engagement and ECE Outreach, this means you!), nothing will change.

Anonymous wrote:The survey is pointless without the most obvious and effective solution -- ending OOB feeder rights -- not included.

I just wrote that solution into the comments section, and emphasized why it's important and logical. I encourage others to do the same. If lots of people make that point, it gives advocates a better chance to push for that result. If you let DCPS skew the results by agreeing to one of the other suggestions - or by skipping the survey altogether - then you're letting DCPS manipulate the data to support some other illogical plan of their choice. Make your voice heard.