Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess I just don't get this thought process. If you live in the suburbs and live in bounds for school A and move to an area zoned for school B- you go to school B. If you still want school A then you buy a house in that area. There are boundaries for a reason. I do understand if you lottery as OOB and get in then absolutely you have the right to stay no matter what. Makes sense.

By the same token, if you have a seat at a school because you live in its boundaries, you should have the right to stay no matter what. What's the difference? Both students got a seat, but one is allowed to move wherever they want and still keep it? Why?

Because they only offer OOB in the first place if there is insufficient IB demand.

The schools where people game the system don't offer OOb anyway (or in oyster's case, not for english).

And, frankly, a bunch of Indiana transplants who came in and bought in Petworth and now think that families who have lived there for generations have less to do with the community than they do, are exactly the kind of people who shouldn't be in charge of a community.

It's not even like Petworth is that nice. I remain confused it is as expensive as it is, when there are neighborhoods with better school options that are cheaper and nicer.

Ha, so spreading their families across the city is the best way to support neighborhood schools? You can't claim to have the school's best interest at heart when you a) don't care enough to live nearby and b) don't care if class sizes become unsustainable because people game the system by renting IB for a year or faking the address.

If someone rents for a year, joins the PTA, volunteers at the school and works for it, I don't care. Families are already spread across the city, because DC has 40% of its students going to charters. Policies like this will only erode the cohesiveness of improving neighborhood schools, which will encourage more people to flee to charters or Deal for middle school. If you want to make your IB school a community, you have to accept everyone IN THAT COMMUNITY. Not just the moms who take yoga with you, and don't like juice boxes. Who work at whatever misbegotten policy institute overpays you. Or its ilk. DC is like the city of liberals who aren't actually liberal. It is so strange.

Ha, so spreading their families across the city is the best way to support neighborhood schools? You can't claim to have the school's best interest at heart when you a) don't care enough to live nearby and b) don't care if class sizes become unsustainable because people game the system by renting IB for a year or faking the address.

If you can't get back into the school OOB, it's because there are plenty of IB families moving in. And guess what? Middle class families are the ones buying up all those houses. Yes, you and your child have probably been an asset to the school. But don't pretend that they're not going to be fine without you.

I get that you think your circumstances (shopping close but not quite IB) warrant an exception. But the fact is that principal discretion has been applied very haphazardly and there ARE people who want to game the system.

Not our circumstances. I know you want to think I'm all about the sour grapes, but hardly. YOUR circumstances, perhaps. We're great.

But I have to wonder about the kind of mindset of a woman who thumbs their nose at a child who's happy at their elementary school, with their friends, and has decided, based on income, that they are no longer welcome at the public school that has been educating them. I really do wonder. Seriously, New York is a cut throat kind of place? But we're not assholes.

Not the poster you're responding to, but I have to wonder if this owner vs. renter thing is at the crux of the issue. More than half of people rent in DC but they don't and shouldn't really be considered part of the "small, cohesive" neighborhoods where they live until they own there.

Is this sarcasm?

I have to think it is, even if it's the exact attitude that kills me here. I am the OP. Again, I am IB for Deal. I could be like the rest of you, laugh, and say, "well, you get the school you afford, y'all! Don't come to mines!"

But I'm not an asshole. As I said, I'm not even sure Deal's the right fit for our kids. I would be more impressed with it if its parent body didn't seem to have so many death-match insane bitches in it.

DC has huge apartment buildings, and people who've lived there for a long time. I don't know the details of your version of rent control, but I know it exists. And, frankly, a bunch of Indiana transplants who came in and bought in Petworth and now think that families who have lived there for generations have less to do with the community than they do, are exactly the kind of people who shouldn't be in charge of a community. Or a school. These are the same people who whine about how "entitled" poor people are, while having conniption fits that someone might have moved to NE or SW and might still want to keep their kids and their community in the area where their parents grew up. Like that is a bad thing? Seriously?

They should really just end perpetual feeder rights.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The thing is DC used to have what you described in NY - it was called principal discretion and most principals let children stay. And the result was the imbalance and overcrowding at a few schools we have today.

If a school is overcrowded, you can expand it. I realize that costs money, but I know of one school that's pile driving steel supports into its second-floor expansion only to support the weight of a kiln. Murch is expanding as it is. And your EOTP schools are never going to improve if you keep fragmenting their communities. That's quite simple. If a school is overcrowded, there are a host of options that don't involve disrupting a child's education because their parents have to move.

Yes, Deal for all! Let's just have one middle school for all children in DC!

I think people don't realize that under the old policy, several schools more than doubled in size in 5 years, and they feed the same middle school and high school. It simply is not sustainable. You can't just keep expanding. The schools are too big already. It's really gotten crazy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Not NYC people. There is not way you can compare. In every other part of the country, you move, you go to new school. Period!

But this is not every other part of the country. This is a small city with HUGE income disparity - tiny pockets of concentrated wealth where people don't use the public schools and exponentially more pockets of concentrated poverty where the public schools couldn't possibly close the achievement gap without a middle class pulling them up.

A middle class is what's creating rising EOTP schools. That's a need that's particular to DC, and we're right on the edge of it changing it for the better. Churn doesn't help that.

Ha, so spreading their families across the city is the best way to support neighborhood schools? You can't claim to have the school's best interest at heart when you a) don't care enough to live nearby and b) don't care if class sizes become unsustainable because people game the system by renting IB for a year or faking the address.

If you can't get back into the school OOB, it's because there are plenty of IB families moving in. And guess what? Middle class families are the ones buying up all those houses. Yes, you and your child have probably been an asset to the school. But don't pretend that they're not going to be fine without you.

I get that you think your circumstances (shopping close but not quite IB) warrant an exception. But the fact is that principal discretion has been applied very haphazardly and there ARE people who want to game the system.

Spreading families across the city supports a SYSTEM of neighborhood schools. Concentrating families WOTP is asking for imbalance.

Personally, we attend an EOTP school OOB because we didn't lottery into our EOTP IB school last year. When it came time to reenroll this year, I did so without a second thought because DD loves her school. It's still walking distance from our house and we are still generally in the neighborhood as the school we attend. I love our neighborhood and have no immediate plans to move, but it is nice to know that if we do move, DD can still go to the school that she loves because we were already OOB.

Not sure if you are agreeing with the OP or not, but if you are, I would suggest that allowing IB people to move OOB and keep their spot doesn't support neighborhood schools, but rather supports some some schools at the expense of other neighborhoods and their schools.

Or maybe that's the point you were trying to make.

Yes, that's the point I was trying to make. Thank you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Not NYC people. There is not way you can compare. In every other part of the country, you move, you go to new school. Period!

But this is not every other part of the country. This is a small city with HUGE income disparity - tiny pockets of concentrated wealth where people don't use the public schools and exponentially more pockets of concentrated poverty where the public schools couldn't possibly close the achievement gap without a middle class pulling them up.

A middle class is what's creating rising EOTP schools. That's a need that's particular to DC, and we're right on the edge of it changing it for the better. Churn doesn't help that.

Ha, so spreading their families across the city is the best way to support neighborhood schools? You can't claim to have the school's best interest at heart when you a) don't care enough to live nearby and b) don't care if class sizes become unsustainable because people game the system by renting IB for a year or faking the address.

If you can't get back into the school OOB, it's because there are plenty of IB families moving in. And guess what? Middle class families are the ones buying up all those houses. Yes, you and your child have probably been an asset to the school. But don't pretend that they're not going to be fine without you.

I get that you think your circumstances (shopping close but not quite IB) warrant an exception. But the fact is that principal discretion has been applied very haphazardly and there ARE people who want to game the system.

Spreading families across the city supports a SYSTEM of neighborhood schools. Concentrating families WOTP is asking for imbalance.

Personally, we attend an EOTP school OOB because we didn't lottery into our EOTP IB school last year. When it came time to reenroll this year, I did so without a second thought because DD loves her school. It's still walking distance from our house and we are still generally in the neighborhood as the school we attend. I love our neighborhood and have no immediate plans to move, but it is nice to know that if we do move, DD can still go to the school that she loves because we were already OOB.

Not sure if you are agreeing with the OP or not, but if you are, I would suggest that allowing IB people to move OOB and keep their spot doesn't support neighborhood schools, but rather supports some some schools at the expense of other neighborhoods and their schools.

Or maybe that's the point you were trying to make.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Not NYC people. There is not way you can compare. In every other part of the country, you move, you go to new school. Period!

But this is not every other part of the country. This is a small city with HUGE income disparity - tiny pockets of concentrated wealth where people don't use the public schools and exponentially more pockets of concentrated poverty where the public schools couldn't possibly close the achievement gap without a middle class pulling them up.

A middle class is what's creating rising EOTP schools. That's a need that's particular to DC, and we're right on the edge of it changing it for the better. Churn doesn't help that.

Actually they DO use the public schools! The reason we have overcrowding issues at all is because rich parents are indeed using the public system, both filling it up with their kids and creating a stronger cohort and thus more desirable schools.

+1. Also lets not pretend that allowing the system to stay status quo where a formerly IB, now OOB student can continue to go to that school and feeders is creating a system of cheaters and futher amplifies the inequities. If you let this system remain, more and more folks will rent for a month IB at Oyster, WOTP or other Deal feeders, move back to Petworth and continue to overcrowd the sought after schools. Further, with almost half of the students going charter, that adds another wrench in the equation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Not NYC people. There is not way you can compare. In every other part of the country, you move, you go to new school. Period!

But this is not every other part of the country. This is a small city with HUGE income disparity - tiny pockets of concentrated wealth where people don't use the public schools and exponentially more pockets of concentrated poverty where the public schools couldn't possibly close the achievement gap without a middle class pulling them up.

A middle class is what's creating rising EOTP schools. That's a need that's particular to DC, and we're right on the edge of it changing it for the better. Churn doesn't help that.

Ha, so spreading their families across the city is the best way to support neighborhood schools? You can't claim to have the school's best interest at heart when you a) don't care enough to live nearby and b) don't care if class sizes become unsustainable because people game the system by renting IB for a year or faking the address.

If you can't get back into the school OOB, it's because there are plenty of IB families moving in. And guess what? Middle class families are the ones buying up all those houses. Yes, you and your child have probably been an asset to the school. But don't pretend that they're not going to be fine without you.

I get that you think your circumstances (shopping close but not quite IB) warrant an exception. But the fact is that principal discretion has been applied very haphazardly and there ARE people who want to game the system.

Spreading families across the city supports a SYSTEM of neighborhood schools. Concentrating families WOTP is asking for imbalance.

Personally, we attend an EOTP school OOB because we didn't lottery into our EOTP IB school last year. When it came time to reenroll this year, I did so without a second thought because DD loves her school. It's still walking distance from our house and we are still generally in the neighborhood as the school we attend. I love our neighborhood and have no immediate plans to move, but it is nice to know that if we do move, DD can still go to the school that she loves because we were already OOB.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Not NYC people. There is not way you can compare. In every other part of the country, you move, you go to new school. Period!

But this is not every other part of the country. This is a small city with HUGE income disparity - tiny pockets of concentrated wealth where people don't use the public schools and exponentially more pockets of concentrated poverty where the public schools couldn't possibly close the achievement gap without a middle class pulling them up.

A middle class is what's creating rising EOTP schools. That's a need that's particular to DC, and we're right on the edge of it changing it for the better. Churn doesn't help that.

Actually they DO use the public schools! The reason we have overcrowding issues at all is because rich parents are indeed using the public system, both filling it up with their kids and creating a stronger cohort and thus more desirable schools.

I actually think that the reason we have overcrowding issues in Ward 3 (and Brent) is the prevailing logic that says that when your kids are school age, you buy in Ward 3, or IB for Brent, or you move to the suburbs. To the extent that the attitude of "Ward 3, Brent or nothing" can be changed and people will stop frantically trying to move to AU Park when they have a child, the overcrowding issue will lessen. I don't think that realistically it will ever lessen to the point that there will be ample spaces available for OOB students in Ward 3 (and Brent), but I do think that if families stay where they are, the schools EOTP will improve dramatically and the overcrowded schools will right-size.

Just my $0.03.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Not NYC people. There is not way you can compare. In every other part of the country, you move, you go to new school. Period!

But this is not every other part of the country. This is a small city with HUGE income disparity - tiny pockets of concentrated wealth where people don't use the public schools and exponentially more pockets of concentrated poverty where the public schools couldn't possibly close the achievement gap without a middle class pulling them up.

A middle class is what's creating rising EOTP schools. That's a need that's particular to DC, and we're right on the edge of it changing it for the better. Churn doesn't help that.

Ha, so spreading their families across the city is the best way to support neighborhood schools? You can't claim to have the school's best interest at heart when you a) don't care enough to live nearby and b) don't care if class sizes become unsustainable because people game the system by renting IB for a year or faking the address.

If you can't get back into the school OOB, it's because there are plenty of IB families moving in. And guess what? Middle class families are the ones buying up all those houses. Yes, you and your child have probably been an asset to the school. But don't pretend that they're not going to be fine without you.

I get that you think your circumstances (shopping close but not quite IB) warrant an exception. But the fact is that principal discretion has been applied very haphazardly and there ARE people who want to game the system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Not NYC people. There is not way you can compare. In every other part of the country, you move, you go to new school. Period!

But this is not every other part of the country. This is a small city with HUGE income disparity - tiny pockets of concentrated wealth where people don't use the public schools and exponentially more pockets of concentrated poverty where the public schools couldn't possibly close the achievement gap without a middle class pulling them up.

A middle class is what's creating rising EOTP schools. That's a need that's particular to DC, and we're right on the edge of it changing it for the better. Churn doesn't help that.

I think schools have been rising since before a middle class following took hold. Take Truesdell for example, do you really think there's a strong middle class in the testing grades (third grade and above)? I'm sure that having some makes it easier, but the schools seem to be doing something right with or without.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Not NYC people. There is not way you can compare. In every other part of the country, you move, you go to new school. Period!

But this is not every other part of the country. This is a small city with HUGE income disparity - tiny pockets of concentrated wealth where people don't use the public schools and exponentially more pockets of concentrated poverty where the public schools couldn't possibly close the achievement gap without a middle class pulling them up.

A middle class is what's creating rising EOTP schools. That's a need that's particular to DC, and we're right on the edge of it changing it for the better. Churn doesn't help that.

Actually they DO use the public schools! The reason we have overcrowding issues at all is because rich parents are indeed using the public system, both filling it up with their kids and creating a stronger cohort and thus more desirable schools.