Anonymous wrote:Janney teachers are not prepared to take at-risk kids. The only reason Janney is high performing is the students come from families that are highly educated. The teachers are average at best and many have serious classroom management issues in the case when there is a child who is disruptive. Yes - the environment is better than most schools across DCPS - but it is not the end all be all.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:when rezoning takes place and OSSE creates space overage for at-risk set-aside for which schools do not meet a minimum threshold for % at risk based on IB enrollment. Politically volatile but practical and systematic. No individual school will do this independently and every "successful" school is already at or above capacity.
should add that DCPS needs to provide incentives for the schools to take on at-risk students and penalties for falling short.
In other words, you want at risk kids to be forced into crowded classrooms when every study in the world says smaller class size is better for at risk kids? Because these schools aren't going to get physically bigger.
Schools don't need to get physically bigger -- the zones just needs to get smaller. As PP mentioned there are federal subsidies for transportation.
As long at the schools can provide the space they obviously can't make anyone enroll in a system where choice is a premium. At risk families have choices too but more hurdles and the system needs to help with those obstacles. Schools would need to offer enough supports to draw and retain at risk students. These are public schools that should offer a level playing field anyway.
Ok, then that would necessitate more schools. How are ya gonna do that?
Not really. You can shift Janney kids to Murch or Mann or Hearst or all three.
No way. All of these schools are bursting at the seams or will be in the next 5 years. Have you seen the projected birth rates and predicted school attendance rates for Ward 3 over the next 5-10 years? Under the current system, OOB will be completely shut out of WoTP schools by 2025: https://ggwash.org/view/71802/can-dcps-survive-the-coming-enrollment-surge
The child growth is not evenly spread out - it's concentrated in Wards 3, west side of Ward 2, and EoTP north of Columbia Heights.
How will shrinking the catchment areas for JKLMM help create more room for OOB? The kids outside the newly shrunken catchment areas will need to go somewhere else. Where do they go that's decently close to their neighborhood? You shrink boundaries but the kids who are now outside the boundary will need to be placed in a school. Your proposal makes no sense.
That's why I think Bowser will dismantle the boundary system when she leaves office in 2022. It will be the lasting piece of her legacy and then she can go peddle herself as an "education reformer" and make money. Meanwhile, the rest of us will be left to navigate the mess she leaves behind.
That will never happen. And, please stop trying to use my kids for your SJW experimentation.
Sadly, it can and probably will happen. That tiny AU Park colonial you paid $1M will be worth about $800k overnight. What are you going to do about it?
Isn't San Francisco a non-boundary, lottery school system? Also, isn't San Francisco one of the most expensive housing markets in the country? Despite the horror of your dc potentially attending school on the other side of the city and stepping over human feces on your daily commute to drop them off at said school and being accosted by beggars, real estate values don't seem to have taken a hit.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:when rezoning takes place and OSSE creates space overage for at-risk set-aside for which schools do not meet a minimum threshold for % at risk based on IB enrollment. Politically volatile but practical and systematic. No individual school will do this independently and every "successful" school is already at or above capacity.
should add that DCPS needs to provide incentives for the schools to take on at-risk students and penalties for falling short.
In other words, you want at risk kids to be forced into crowded classrooms when every study in the world says smaller class size is better for at risk kids? Because these schools aren't going to get physically bigger.
Schools don't need to get physically bigger -- the zones just needs to get smaller. As PP mentioned there are federal subsidies for transportation.
As long at the schools can provide the space they obviously can't make anyone enroll in a system where choice is a premium. At risk families have choices too but more hurdles and the system needs to help with those obstacles. Schools would need to offer enough supports to draw and retain at risk students. These are public schools that should offer a level playing field anyway.
Ok, then that would necessitate more schools. How are ya gonna do that?
Not really. You can shift Janney kids to Murch or Mann or Hearst or all three.
No way. All of these schools are bursting at the seams or will be in the next 5 years. Have you seen the projected birth rates and predicted school attendance rates for Ward 3 over the next 5-10 years? Under the current system, OOB will be completely shut out of WoTP schools by 2025: https://ggwash.org/view/71802/can-dcps-survive-the-coming-enrollment-surge
The child growth is not evenly spread out - it's concentrated in Wards 3, west side of Ward 2, and EoTP north of Columbia Heights.
How will shrinking the catchment areas for JKLMM help create more room for OOB? The kids outside the newly shrunken catchment areas will need to go somewhere else. Where do they go that's decently close to their neighborhood? You shrink boundaries but the kids who are now outside the boundary will need to be placed in a school. Your proposal makes no sense.
That's why I think Bowser will dismantle the boundary system when she leaves office in 2022. It will be the lasting piece of her legacy and then she can go peddle herself as an "education reformer" and make money. Meanwhile, the rest of us will be left to navigate the mess she leaves behind.
That will never happen. And, please stop trying to use my kids for your SJW experimentation.
Sadly, it can and probably will happen. That tiny AU Park colonial you paid $1M will be worth about $800k overnight. What are you going to do about it?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:when rezoning takes place and OSSE creates space overage for at-risk set-aside for which schools do not meet a minimum threshold for % at risk based on IB enrollment. Politically volatile but practical and systematic. No individual school will do this independently and every "successful" school is already at or above capacity.
should add that DCPS needs to provide incentives for the schools to take on at-risk students and penalties for falling short.
In other words, you want at risk kids to be forced into crowded classrooms when every study in the world says smaller class size is better for at risk kids? Because these schools aren't going to get physically bigger.
Schools don't need to get physically bigger -- the zones just needs to get smaller. As PP mentioned there are federal subsidies for transportation.
As long at the schools can provide the space they obviously can't make anyone enroll in a system where choice is a premium. At risk families have choices too but more hurdles and the system needs to help with those obstacles. Schools would need to offer enough supports to draw and retain at risk students. These are public schools that should offer a level playing field anyway.
Ok, then that would necessitate more schools. How are ya gonna do that?
Not really. You can shift Janney kids to Murch or Mann or Hearst or all three.
No way. All of these schools are bursting at the seams or will be in the next 5 years. Have you seen the projected birth rates and predicted school attendance rates for Ward 3 over the next 5-10 years? Under the current system, OOB will be completely shut out of WoTP schools by 2025: https://ggwash.org/view/71802/can-dcps-survive-the-coming-enrollment-surge
The child growth is not evenly spread out - it's concentrated in Wards 3, west side of Ward 2, and EoTP north of Columbia Heights.
How will shrinking the catchment areas for JKLMM help create more room for OOB? The kids outside the newly shrunken catchment areas will need to go somewhere else. Where do they go that's decently close to their neighborhood? You shrink boundaries but the kids who are now outside the boundary will need to be placed in a school. Your proposal makes no sense.
That's why I think Bowser will dismantle the boundary system when she leaves office in 2022. It will be the lasting piece of her legacy and then she can go peddle herself as an "education reformer" and make money. Meanwhile, the rest of us will be left to navigate the mess she leaves behind.
That will never happen. And, please stop trying to use my kids for your SJW experimentation.
Sadly, it can and probably will happen. That tiny AU Park colonial you paid $1M will be worth about $800k overnight. What are you going to do about it?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:when rezoning takes place and OSSE creates space overage for at-risk set-aside for which schools do not meet a minimum threshold for % at risk based on IB enrollment. Politically volatile but practical and systematic. No individual school will do this independently and every "successful" school is already at or above capacity.
should add that DCPS needs to provide incentives for the schools to take on at-risk students and penalties for falling short.
In other words, you want at risk kids to be forced into crowded classrooms when every study in the world says smaller class size is better for at risk kids? Because these schools aren't going to get physically bigger.
Schools don't need to get physically bigger -- the zones just needs to get smaller. As PP mentioned there are federal subsidies for transportation.
As long at the schools can provide the space they obviously can't make anyone enroll in a system where choice is a premium. At risk families have choices too but more hurdles and the system needs to help with those obstacles. Schools would need to offer enough supports to draw and retain at risk students. These are public schools that should offer a level playing field anyway.
Ok, then that would necessitate more schools. How are ya gonna do that?
Anonymous wrote:It's inevitable that DC scraps the system of neighborhood schools and moves to an all-lottery system with sibling and at-risk preferences. It's the only manageable way to drive toward more equity and inclusion, so that everyone has an equal chance at the better schools. A number of the key decision-makers in the Chancelor's office and OSSE want to do this. It's just a question of when the mayor feels that the political moment is ripe.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's inevitable that DC scraps the system of neighborhood schools and moves to an all-lottery system with sibling and at-risk preferences. It's the only manageable way to drive toward more equity and inclusion, so that everyone has an equal chance at the better schools. A number of the key decision-makers in the Chancelor's office and OSSE want to do this. It's just a question of when the mayor feels that the political moment is ripe.
What makes the "better schools" better? Most of these "better schools" are serving high populations of advantaged kids who are performing at or above grade level. An all-lottery system would fundamentally change this and will also alter the pride and investment that families have in the "better" neighborhood schools. An all lottery system isn't the way for everyone to have an equal chance at the better schools.
Anonymous wrote:It's inevitable that DC scraps the system of neighborhood schools and moves to an all-lottery system with sibling and at-risk preferences. It's the only manageable way to drive toward more equity and inclusion, so that everyone has an equal chance at the better schools. A number of the key decision-makers in the Chancelor's office and OSSE want to do this. It's just a question of when the mayor feels that the political moment is ripe.
Anonymous wrote:It's inevitable that DC scraps the system of neighborhood schools and moves to an all-lottery system with sibling and at-risk preferences. It's the only manageable way to drive toward more equity and inclusion, so that everyone has an equal chance at the better schools. A number of the key decision-makers in the Chancelor's office and OSSE want to do this. It's just a question of when the mayor feels that the political moment is ripe.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's inevitable that DC scraps the system of neighborhood schools and moves to an all-lottery system with sibling and at-risk preferences. It's the only manageable way to drive toward more equity and inclusion, so that everyone has an equal chance at the better schools. A number of the key decision-makers in the Chancelor's office and OSSE want to do this. It's just a question of when the mayor feels that the political moment is ripe.
So never, then? Got it. Doing this would cripple DCPS for good and decimate DC's tax base, and the mayor knows it.
Anonymous wrote:It's inevitable that DC scraps the system of neighborhood schools and moves to an all-lottery system with sibling and at-risk preferences. It's the only manageable way to drive toward more equity and inclusion, so that everyone has an equal chance at the better schools. A number of the key decision-makers in the Chancelor's office and OSSE want to do this. It's just a question of when the mayor feels that the political moment is ripe.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When they start forcing in bounds Janney kids to go to other schools. That'll be the day in DC.
What other schools, pray tell? Are there any schools even remotely close to that neighborhood that have room to spare?
I know kids who got into Key OOB recently.
Key taking more OOB kids is absurd. They already have TWO HOLE GRADES in trailers!
I thought that one reason for the John Eaton renovation and expansion is that DCPS wants to guarantee a minimum percentage of OOB students there, like at least 30 %. As the OOB percentage continues to fall in Ward 3 schools, at least one school needs to be designated and designed to help Ward 3 do its part for equity and inclusion. This would appear to be Eaton's role.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:when rezoning takes place and OSSE creates space overage for at-risk set-aside for which schools do not meet a minimum threshold for % at risk based on IB enrollment. Politically volatile but practical and systematic. No individual school will do this independently and every "successful" school is already at or above capacity.
should add that DCPS needs to provide incentives for the schools to take on at-risk students and penalties for falling short.
In other words, you want at risk kids to be forced into crowded classrooms when every study in the world says smaller class size is better for at risk kids? Because these schools aren't going to get physically bigger.
Schools don't need to get physically bigger -- the zones just needs to get smaller. As PP mentioned there are federal subsidies for transportation.
As long at the schools can provide the space they obviously can't make anyone enroll in a system where choice is a premium. At risk families have choices too but more hurdles and the system needs to help with those obstacles. Schools would need to offer enough supports to draw and retain at risk students. These are public schools that should offer a level playing field anyway.
Ok, then that would necessitate more schools. How are ya gonna do that?
Not really. You can shift Janney kids to Murch or Mann or Hearst or all three.
No way. All of these schools are bursting at the seams or will be in the next 5 years. Have you seen the projected birth rates and predicted school attendance rates for Ward 3 over the next 5-10 years? Under the current system, OOB will be completely shut out of WoTP schools by 2025: https://ggwash.org/view/71802/can-dcps-survive-the-coming-enrollment-surge
The child growth is not evenly spread out - it's concentrated in Wards 3, west side of Ward 2, and EoTP north of Columbia Heights.
How will shrinking the catchment areas for JKLMM help create more room for OOB? The kids outside the newly shrunken catchment areas will need to go somewhere else. Where do they go that's decently close to their neighborhood? You shrink boundaries but the kids who are now outside the boundary will need to be placed in a school. Your proposal makes no sense.
That's why I think Bowser will dismantle the boundary system when she leaves office in 2022. It will be the lasting piece of her legacy and then she can go peddle herself as an "education reformer" and make money. Meanwhile, the rest of us will be left to navigate the mess she leaves behind.
That will never happen. And, please stop trying to use my kids for your SJW experimentation.