Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There must be some GDS-affiliated developers associated with this plan, but I still can't see how the trustees can approve it with so much expense for little/no extra space.
Every one I talk to is very excited about the new, state-of-the art combined campus. One person even described the deal as "brilliant." I trust the Trustees.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Maybe they will retain the lower school location for lower school and just move the middle school?
I hope so. That would make more sense.
Anonymous wrote:There must be some GDS-affiliated developers associated with this plan, but I still can't see how the trustees can approve it with so much expense for little/no extra space.
Anonymous wrote:Maybe they will retain the lower school location for lower school and just move the middle school?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Don’t underestimate how much the consolidated campus will be more efficient for GDS operations and enhance campus security in a way that never could be addressed today at the Palisades site or with a public supermarket across the driveway from the Upper School. Of course, a secure and private campus is important for all students and staff, but it is vital in Washington for any school that serves the children of top elected officials. For some parents, it still rankles that the Obamas were forced for security reasons to pass on GDS. GDS was probably the best fit – as the first integrated independent school in D.C. and with lots of ties to Obama insiders. (David Brooks wrote in 2008 in the NY Times that “So many of them send their kids to Georgetown Day School, the posh leftish private school in D.C., that they’ll be able to hold White House staff meetings in the carpool line.”). While families know the superior value of a GDS education, there’s a sense of frustration that the school hasn’t received the same recognition that has been accorded to St. Albans and Sidwell because those schools have educated prominent political offspring. By controlling access to basically an entire city block, GDS will be able to address past security concerns and ensure that when a future POTUS or VP wants to select GDS, there will be no veto by the Secret Service.
Wow. this is the stupidest post on so many levels. (Obama's - get over it, nothing to do with security). But previous posters citing GDS' open campus, now this poster is claiming security concerns as a reason people pass on the school. Maybe they passed on the school because of the crappy campus, lack of cafetaria, informal atmosphere and failure to get enough kids in to Harvard.
Anonymous wrote:Don’t underestimate how much the consolidated campus will be more efficient for GDS operations and enhance campus security in a way that never could be addressed today at the Palisades site or with a public supermarket across the driveway from the Upper School. Of course, a secure and private campus is important for all students and staff, but it is vital in Washington for any school that serves the children of top elected officials. For some parents, it still rankles that the Obamas were forced for security reasons to pass on GDS. GDS was probably the best fit – as the first integrated independent school in D.C. and with lots of ties to Obama insiders. (David Brooks wrote in 2008 in the NY Times that “So many of them send their kids to Georgetown Day School, the posh leftish private school in D.C., that they’ll be able to hold White House staff meetings in the carpool line.”). While families know the superior value of a GDS education, there’s a sense of frustration that the school hasn’t received the same recognition that has been accorded to St. Albans and Sidwell because those schools have educated prominent political offspring. By controlling access to basically an entire city block, GDS will be able to address past security concerns and ensure that when a future POTUS or VP wants to select GDS, there will be no veto by the Secret Service.