Anonymous wrote:Exactly. Even if you are in boundary for quality IB Ward 3 schools DCPS is willing to rip kids from the closest schools from their homes for their social experiments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This proposal basically screws anyone not in Ward 3, Ross, Brent or Maury.

I would add a few more (Shepherd and maybe Powell) but yep.

How were these people already not screwed previously? The lottery this year really laid bare how few good schools (DCPS or Charters) have spots available for the high-demand grades.

Exactly. Someone should explain how the proposal makes it any worse for the "have-nots" whose IB school sucks already.

Does the proposal make things better for anyone?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This proposal basically screws anyone not in Ward 3, Ross, Brent or Maury.

I would add a few more (Shepherd and maybe Powell) but yep.

How were these people already not screwed previously? The lottery this year really laid bare how few good schools (DCPS or Charters) have spots available for the high-demand grades.

Exactly. Someone should explain how the proposal makes it any worse for the "have-nots" whose IB school sucks already.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that, if any preference is adopted, it should be as it was originally outlined--for people, regardless at income, who are in low-performing schools.

I prefer the focus to be keep on the child's SES not on the artificial construct (in my mind) of a "low performing" school.

I don't think there is anything artificial about a school where 70% of the kids are not at grade level. Why should working class families at these schools be forced to stay because they don't qualify as at risk and can't afford to move in boundary for a promising school? In fact, they are not going to compromise their kid's education; they will either go charter or move to the 'burbs, where they can afford to live IB for a good school. This will leave the struggling schools even worse off.

This. Why is the solution always to screw the middle class? We're the boots on the ground. We make the investments in our communities and schools. We work the hardest. To solution to make sure that our needs are ignored is going to have to stop if the city is going to continue to grow. The ultra-rich and the poorest of the poor are pretty stagnant numbers-wise. The middle guys are what's moving this city forward.

You're not forced to stay -- you can leave anytime --your choice, because as middle class, you have the $$ to move to the burbs (but maybe not to go private or move to ward 3, which you probably don't much like anyhow, because it's not "urban" enough). But if you want to live in DC with a burgeoning middle class, then you're in the middle of a big change-over -- and if DC wants to keep you here -- and I think they do -- then they HAVE to be accommodating.

This doesn't mean you all get feeder rights to Deal/Wilson. You're smart enough to figure out that in the long run, it's not feasible or even desirable for all good public education opportunities (and most private ones) to be in one part of town.

So, you get out soon, or you stick around, protect your housing investment and your urban way of life and work with DC and DCPS to develop viable options for your family -- the kind of family that DC needs more of.

Most of these families get into a charter, an acceptable DCPS usually OOBs or move. They already know DCPS hasn't been able to come up with a solution, ever, other than for some WoTP schools which has more to do with who lives there than DCPS, and aren't willing to risk their kids' education to "make it all better".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that, if any preference is adopted, it should be as it was originally outlined--for people, regardless at income, who are in low-performing schools.

I prefer the focus to be keep on the child's SES not on the artificial construct (in my mind) of a "low performing" school.

I don't think there is anything artificial about a school where 70% of the kids are not at grade level. Why should working class families at these schools be forced to stay because they don't qualify as at risk and can't afford to move in boundary for a promising school? In fact, they are not going to compromise their kid's education; they will either go charter or move to the 'burbs, where they can afford to live IB for a good school. This will leave the struggling schools even worse off.

This. Why is the solution always to screw the middle class? We're the boots on the ground. We make the investments in our communities and schools. We work the hardest. To solution to make sure that our needs are ignored is going to have to stop if the city is going to continue to grow. The ultra-rich and the poorest of the poor are pretty stagnant numbers-wise. The middle guys are what's moving this city forward.

You're not forced to stay -- you can leave anytime --your choice, because as middle class, you have the $$ to move to the burbs (but maybe not to go private or move to ward 3, which you probably don't much like anyhow, because it's not "urban" enough). But if you want to live in DC with a burgeoning middle class, then you're in the middle of a big change-over -- and if DC wants to keep you here -- and I think they do -- then they HAVE to be accommodating.

This doesn't mean you all get feeder rights to Deal/Wilson. You're smart enough to figure out that in the long run, it's not feasible or even desirable for all good public education opportunities (and most private ones) to be in one part of town.

So, you get out soon, or you stick around, protect your housing investment and your urban way of life and work with DC and DCPS to develop viable options for your family -- the kind of family that DC needs more of.

Most of these families get into a charter, an acceptable DCPS usually OOBs or move. They already know DCPS hasn't been able to come up with a solution, ever, other than for some WoTP schools which has more to do with who lives there than DCPS, and aren't willing to risk their kids' education to "make it all better".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that, if any preference is adopted, it should be as it was originally outlined--for people, regardless at income, who are in low-performing schools.

I prefer the focus to be keep on the child's SES not on the artificial construct (in my mind) of a "low performing" school.

I don't think there is anything artificial about a school where 70% of the kids are not at grade level. Why should working class families at these schools be forced to stay because they don't qualify as at risk and can't afford to move in boundary for a promising school? In fact, they are not going to compromise their kid's education; they will either go charter or move to the 'burbs, where they can afford to live IB for a good school. This will leave the struggling schools even worse off.

This. Why is the solution always to screw the middle class? We're the boots on the ground. We make the investments in our communities and schools. We work the hardest. To solution to make sure that our needs are ignored is going to have to stop if the city is going to continue to grow. The ultra-rich and the poorest of the poor are pretty stagnant numbers-wise. The middle guys are what's moving this city forward.

You're not forced to stay -- you can leave anytime --your choice, because as middle class, you have the $$ to move to the burbs (but maybe not to go private or move to ward 3, which you probably don't much like anyhow, because it's not "urban" enough). But if you want to live in DC with a burgeoning middle class, then you're in the middle of a big change-over -- and if DC wants to keep you here -- and I think they do -- then they HAVE to be accommodating.

This doesn't mean you all get feeder rights to Deal/Wilson. You're smart enough to figure out that in the long run, it's not feasible or even desirable for all good public education opportunities (and most private ones) to be in one part of town.

So, you get out soon, or you stick around, protect your housing investment and your urban way of life and work with DC and DCPS to develop viable options for your family -- the kind of family that DC needs more of.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that, if any preference is adopted, it should be as it was originally outlined--for people, regardless at income, who are in low-performing schools.

I prefer the focus to be keep on the child's SES not on the artificial construct (in my mind) of a "low performing" school.

I don't think there is anything artificial about a school where 70% of the kids are not at grade level. Why should working class families at these schools be forced to stay because they don't qualify as at risk and can't afford to move in boundary for a promising school? In fact, they are not going to compromise their kid's education; they will either go charter or move to the 'burbs, where they can afford to live IB for a good school. This will leave the struggling schools even worse off.

This. Why is the solution always to screw the middle class? We're the boots on the ground. We make the investments in our communities and schools. We work the hardest. To solution to make sure that our needs are ignored is going to have to stop if the city is going to continue to grow. The ultra-rich and the poorest of the poor are pretty stagnant numbers-wise. The middle guys are what's moving this city forward.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This proposal basically screws anyone not in Ward 3, Ross, Brent or Maury.

I would add a few more (Shepherd and maybe Powell) but yep.

How were these people already not screwed previously? The lottery this year really laid bare how few good schools (DCPS or Charters) have spots available for the high-demand grades.