Ok - not overly dramatic at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't seem to be aware that your school is part of a school system and that that school system is part of a political system. If the only issue was crowding at a small set of schools wotp you would be right, but it's not.

I am aware of that. Making our schools worse, isn't the answer. The problems in Ward 3 schools aren't the same as the problems at Ward 8 schools, so why try to fix both of them with the same solution? It's not going to work.

the fix requires some pain WOTP because the solutions for the WOTP schools (a mix of expansions, boundary reductions and reductions in OOB admissions) are not politically palitable outside Ward 3.

^^how can you say that about option B 15:41, what am I missing here?

If the concept of "neighborhood schools" were a person, it would have reported a case of "rape" to the police department by now. An investigation would be under way. Prosecutors will be making charges soon.

I don't get any of that - "violence of the recommendations"? Is that some kind of auto correct thing?

Anonymous wrote:I would say the violence of the recommendations with respect to "feeder patterns" is shocking to any observer who wasn't part of the conspiracy from the beginning.

What conspiracy? Genuinely asking. I don't know what that means.

Anonymous wrote:I would say the violence of the recommendations with respect to "feeder patterns" is shocking to any observer who wasn't part of the conspiracy from the beginning.

But what do you think of Option B?

I would say the violence of the recommendations with respect to "feeder patterns" is shocking to any observer who wasn't part of the conspiracy from the beginning.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OOB set aside is bullshit - how much do you want to bet that is Central Office folks setting aside seats for their kids, so they can be sent to good schools while keeping their low mortgages in other parts of the city. Great way to fund a Mercedes.

I would have laughed at this but at least one of the options gives preference to DCPS employees. I think they have to work at the school, though.

Unbelievable! Option B sucks. All the options do. I'm not supporting the least sucky option. I'd rather leave things as is and start over with more competent people at the helm.

What about option b isn't good? What exactly are you hoping for?

The poster said explicitly what s/he is hoping for. All of options infect the expectation of neighborhood schools; so the options, as presented so far, are unacceptable. Start over. Try again.

Basically, don't say you're going to work on boundaries and instead change the entire system for feeding the schools. That's real easy to understand as a criticism of what's going on.

This. The proposal was a waste of money.

1) I don't think the proposal is very good, but they were explicit from the get-go about reviewing feeder patterns and not just boundaries.

2) I happen to think option B is a balanced approach, though clearly in need of some revision for details like whether the set asides are additive. For those who want everyone to go back to the drawing board, what will that achieve? Spending millions more for Muriel Bowser's buds to re-do all this with the same outcome? I don't see the benefit of years and years of more hand-wringing with option B on the table.

Anonymous wrote:You don't seem to be aware that your school is part of a school system and that that school system is part of a political system. If the only issue was crowding at a small set of schools wotp you would be right, but it's not.

I am aware of that. Making our schools worse, isn't the answer. The problems in Ward 3 schools aren't the same as the problems at Ward 8 schools, so why try to fix both of them with the same solution? It's not going to work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OOB set aside is bullshit - how much do you want to bet that is Central Office folks setting aside seats for their kids, so they can be sent to good schools while keeping their low mortgages in other parts of the city. Great way to fund a Mercedes.

I would have laughed at this but at least one of the options gives preference to DCPS employees. I think they have to work at the school, though.

Unbelievable! Option B sucks. All the options do. I'm not supporting the least sucky option. I'd rather leave things as is and start over with more competent people at the helm.

What about option b isn't good? What exactly are you hoping for?

The poster said explicitly what s/he is hoping for. All of options infect the expectation of neighborhood schools; so the options, as presented so far, are unacceptable. Start over. Try again.

Basically, don't say you're going to work on boundaries and instead change the entire system for feeding the schools. That's real easy to understand as a criticism of what's going on.

This. The proposal was a waste of money.

You don't seem to be aware that your school is part of a school system and that that school system is part of a political system. If the only issue was crowding at a small set of schools wotp you would be right, but it's not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OOB set aside is bullshit - how much do you want to bet that is Central Office folks setting aside seats for their kids, so they can be sent to good schools while keeping their low mortgages in other parts of the city. Great way to fund a Mercedes.

I would have laughed at this but at least one of the options gives preference to DCPS employees. I think they have to work at the school, though.

Unbelievable! Option B sucks. All the options do. I'm not supporting the least sucky option. I'd rather leave things as is and start over with more competent people at the helm.

What about option b isn't good? What exactly are you hoping for?

The major problem seems to be overcrowding on all levels. Why can't that be addressed and leave everything else alone? End OOB feeder rights for Middle and High Schools. Make it a space available lottery. Expansion at Murch is supposed to happen. Do that at whatever other schools need renovating/expanding. The schools are fine and don't need anything else but space.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OOB set aside is bullshit - how much do you want to bet that is Central Office folks setting aside seats for their kids, so they can be sent to good schools while keeping their low mortgages in other parts of the city. Great way to fund a Mercedes.

I would have laughed at this but at least one of the options gives preference to DCPS employees. I think they have to work at the school, though.

Unbelievable! Option B sucks. All the options do. I'm not supporting the least sucky option. I'd rather leave things as is and start over with more competent people at the helm.

What about option b isn't good? What exactly are you hoping for?

The poster said explicitly what s/he is hoping for. All of options infect the expectation of neighborhood schools; so the options, as presented so far, are unacceptable. Start over. Try again.

Basically, don't say you're going to work on boundaries and instead change the entire system for feeding the schools. That's real easy to understand as a criticism of what's going on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OOB set aside is bullshit - how much do you want to bet that is Central Office folks setting aside seats for their kids, so they can be sent to good schools while keeping their low mortgages in other parts of the city. Great way to fund a Mercedes.

I would have laughed at this but at least one of the options gives preference to DCPS employees. I think they have to work at the school, though.

Unbelievable! Option B sucks. All the options do. I'm not supporting the least sucky option. I'd rather leave things as is and start over with more competent people at the helm.

What about option b isn't good? What exactly are you hoping for?