Anonymous wrote:
Everyone is assuming that "neighborhood preference" has to be the 1500 feet from the school rule. I don't see any reason why that has to be the case, especially with boundary changes coming. I think this is an opportunity for DCPS to rethink the boundaries entirely. In my opinion, this petition just asks them to have a preference for those who live in the neighborhood - however that might be defined.

Anonymous wrote:C'mon now how long can young gentrifiers stay young? This has been going on for atleast 10 years and not a single nary budge. Really, how hard is it to have Eliot-Hine retooled but what has DCPS done but ignore the gentrifiers outcry and kept it the same.

Sure you buy a house in Ward 6 but theres a family moving into the projects of Ward 6 everyday. The gentrifiers move in and have a baby and there is the project family moving with 3 to 4 school age children.

So who does DCPS turn to at the moment, it is not rocket science, people? A school system that has a majority of AA will be the primary focus for the future because the past has shown that our gentrifiers will never catch-up.

It is not that the city doesn't cares but they are not concern because gentrifiers are replacing gentrifiers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This school is not the "Hill" it is a northeast located school. Giving it to a neighborhood that doesn't give a fudge about school boundaries and their true demographics is such a Paula Deen hidded agenda.

This is so funny - the school fortunately is not in the historic Hill district, which might make renovations a nightmare, but it is basically across the street from it. It's new location is 9th and F NE. That's the Hill.

And although many families attending SWS were not technically in the boundary, the vast majority lived somewhere on the Hill. So moving it from a Hill school to a citywide school is frustrating to Hill families who want to see more high quality seats near their homes than less. This isn't something just tied to property values, many families value walking/biking/scooting to school, neighborhood playdates, etc. It's perfectly reasonable to be frustrated by this decision - including families that attend SWS currently, families that live within a block or two of the school's new location, and families that live on the Hill generally who don't like the fact that the only citywide elementary public schools (and there are only 2) are on the Hill.

It may not happen, but I think it is worthwhile to try. And it's my understanding that many in the Ludlow Taylor community are sending emails in opposition to neighborhood preference for fear that it will undermine LT. So hearing the other side of this debate seems important.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing I don't get is all the vitriol that is directed toward the Hill. A lot of people seem to have the attitude that the Hill doesn't "deserve" more good schools because we already have some. Guess what folks? It's not a zero-sum game. Bitching about the (relatively high) quality of schools on the Hill will not improve the (relatively low) quality of schools elsewhere. Ten years ago, there was one decent school option on the Hill (Cluster). Now there are 4-6, depending on who you ask and their standards. That is the result of a lot of sweat equity and money by parents on the Hill, and it is absolutely replicable elsewhere.

I guess that's DCUM for you though... Better to bitch anonymously on the internet than to get off your ass and fix the problem...

Is this mean to be ironic, or just unintentionally hilarious? The whole point of this conversation is that there is a small slice of Hill families who absolutely do not want to put their sweat equity and money into their in-bounds school and claim that the relative success enjoyed by other Hill schools is absolutely NOT replicable at Ludlow Taylor. So, yes, I agree with you that this talk of proximity preference is pure nonsense.

You are ignorant of the history of SWS. It WAS a neighborhood school and it was built by families on the Hill. Almost every kid who is there currently is an inbounds Hill kid. It hasn't even experienced one class of students from a citywide draw yet. It is an historically neighborhood school; the petition seeks to return it to a school that serves the neighborhood in which it is located, just like every other DCPS school (except the Montessori one).

None of us are ignorant of the history of SWS, except for you, it seems. SWS was a PRESCHOOL that did serve neighborhood families, but it did not ever serve YOUR house. It is no longer a preschool. For all of your citing of history, you are not asking to restore it to its historical neighborhood, you are asking for it to serve a new and different group of people, that happens to include you. I think there is some merit to the argument that schools should serve neighborhoods, but you are not even asking that SWS serve the entire Ludlow-Taylor catchment, only that it serve a handful of families, which again, happens to include you (assuming that you are the author of the petition, who does indeed fall within the proximity boundaries).

I do find your hubris to be amusing (the school was built by Hill families! Just not my family! But I deserve it anyway!), and will enjoy watching this play out.

Anonymous wrote:

And the VAST majority of Hill families prefer citywide to proximity since at least they have a chance with a citywide draw. Please don't think for one second that you are speaking for all Hill families. I think that has been made abundantly clear in this thread.

If you would like to be guaranteed to walk or scooter to school, I suggest that you buy a house with an in-bounds school that you like, or plan to move near the school that you lottery into. Really, it's not that complicated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This school is not the "Hill" it is a northeast located school. Giving it to a neighborhood that doesn't give a fudge about school boundaries and their true demographics is such a Paula Deen hidded agenda.

This is so funny - the school fortunately is not in the historic Hill district, which might make renovations a nightmare, but it is basically across the street from it. It's new location is 9th and F NE. That's the Hill.

And although many families attending SWS were not technically in the boundary, the vast majority lived somewhere on the Hill. So moving it from a Hill school to a citywide school is frustrating to Hill families who want to see more high quality seats near their homes than less. This isn't something just tied to property values, many families value walking/biking/scooting to school, neighborhood playdates, etc. It's perfectly reasonable to be frustrated by this decision - including families that attend SWS currently, families that live within a block or two of the school's new location, and families that live on the Hill generally who don't like the fact that the only citywide elementary public schools (and there are only 2) are on the Hill.

It may not happen, but I think it is worthwhile to try. And it's my understanding that many in the Ludlow Taylor community are sending emails in opposition to neighborhood preference for fear that it will undermine LT. So hearing the other side of this debate seems important.

Anonymous wrote:

Almost every kid who is there currently is an inbounds Hill kid. It hasn't even experienced one class of students from a citywide draw yet. It is an historically neighborhood school; the petition seeks to return it to a school that serves the neighborhood in which it is located, just like every other DCPS school (except the Montessori one).

Anonymous wrote:This school is not the "Hill" it is a northeast located school. Giving it to a neighborhood that doesn't give a fudge about school boundaries and their true demographics is such a Paula Deen hidded agenda.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing I don't get is all the vitriol that is directed toward the Hill. A lot of people seem to have the attitude that the Hill doesn't "deserve" more good schools because we already have some. Guess what folks? It's not a zero-sum game. Bitching about the (relatively high) quality of schools on the Hill will not improve the (relatively low) quality of schools elsewhere. Ten years ago, there was one decent school option on the Hill (Cluster). Now there are 4-6, depending on who you ask and their standards. That is the result of a lot of sweat equity and money by parents on the Hill, and it is absolutely replicable elsewhere.

I guess that's DCUM for you though... Better to bitch anonymously on the internet than to get off your ass and fix the problem...

Is this mean to be ironic, or just unintentionally hilarious? The whole point of this conversation is that there is a small slice of Hill families who absolutely do not want to put their sweat equity and money into their in-bounds school and claim that the relative success enjoyed by other Hill schools is absolutely NOT replicable at Ludlow Taylor. So, yes, I agree with you that this talk of proximity preference is pure nonsense.

You are ignorant of the history of SWS. It WAS a neighborhood school and it was built by families on the Hill. Almost every kid who is there currently is an inbounds Hill kid. It hasn't even experienced one class of students from a citywide draw yet. It is an historically neighborhood school; the petition seeks to return it to a school that serves the neighborhood in which it is located, just like every other DCPS school (except the Montessori one).