Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But they problem with #4 making them desirable... they are so far from that for parents with high performing kids, and parents with high performing kids who are mobile will just move when high school comes around, or go private. But high performing kids are needed to make the school desirable!

Ah, I think we've finally come to what you're really looking for. You want to either remove low-performing kids from Wilson or create a new high school for high-performing kids.

First off, that wasn't me you're quoting. ("Me" here refers to the pest asking the questions about choosing 1, 2, or 3.)

Second, don't presume you can divine someone's motives.

Ditto. And if I were divining motives, I'd say the diviner was ready to jump on someone for being elitist.

Anonymous wrote:

But they problem with #4 making them desirable... they are so far from that for parents with high performing kids, and parents with high performing kids who are mobile will just move when high school comes around, or go private. But high performing kids are needed to make the school desirable!

Ah, I think we've finally come to what you're really looking for. You want to either remove low-performing kids from Wilson or create a new high school for high-performing kids.

I don't really mind about Wilson - I am about to be drawn out of that boundary I think which makes sense as I live almost down town in Dupont Circle, but yes to a new high school that suits high performing kids, and I don't mean another select application only school. But I definitely mean a school where no fewer than 40% of kids are not reading at grade level for example (although maybe that is a bit to high, no fewer than 30%?). Not that I can just order up such a thing, but for parents with high performing kids to try out a new high school it needs to look like it will have these kind of outcomes from the outset.

I really think that DCPS has an obligation to provide children a decent education which means providing them with school environments that match and extend their academic output. Having all these kids graduating from elementary school who perform at advanced levels and not providing them middle or high schools to foster and build upon that is letting them down personally and it is a failure to design and lead a modern public school system.

Anonymous wrote:

But they problem with #4 making them desirable... they are so far from that for parents with high performing kids, and parents with high performing kids who are mobile will just move when high school comes around, or go private. But high performing kids are needed to make the school desirable!

Ah, I think we've finally come to what you're really looking for. You want to either remove low-performing kids from Wilson or create a new high school for high-performing kids.

First off, that wasn't me you're quoting. ("Me" here refers to the pest asking the questions about choosing 1, 2, or 3.)

Second, don't presume you can divine someone's motives.

But they problem with #4 making them desirable... they are so far from that for parents with high performing kids, and parents with high performing kids who are mobile will just move when high school comes around, or go private. But high performing kids are needed to make the school desirable!

Ah, I think we've finally come to what you're really looking for. You want to either remove low-performing kids from Wilson or create a new high school for high-performing kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're an idiot. Nobody wants a high school bottleneck in the western part of the city.

It's simple, really: many people can clearly foresee a looming overcrowding issue at Wilson. You have several choices:
1. Remove some feeder schools
2. Build greater capacity at Wilson
3. Create a new school.

If choosing 1., which feeder schools? Proponents of 3. realize that it may not be reasonable to remove east of the park feeder schools.

So, tell me again why I want?!? a bottleneck in my neighborhood. Or, stop denying the reality of the situation and tell me what you'd do.

NP -- I'd do #3 -- a new school, but outside of ward 3, e.g. the revitalized Roosevelt idea.

Thank you. Who would go to the new school? That is, how would this solution ease overcrowding at Wilson? Which feeders are you removing. (That's the hard question, so don't hide from it.)

Not PP, but I think the answer is easy: Powell, Oyster, Bancroft, maybe Shepherd. I'm sure I'm missing a few. This would be predicated on have quality MS and HS destinations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're an idiot. Nobody wants a high school bottleneck in the western part of the city.

It's simple, really: many people can clearly foresee a looming overcrowding issue at Wilson. You have several choices:
1. Remove some feeder schools
2. Build greater capacity at Wilson
3. Create a new school.

If choosing 1., which feeder schools? Proponents of 3. realize that it may not be reasonable to remove east of the park feeder schools.

So, tell me again why I want?!? a bottleneck in my neighborhood. Or, stop denying the reality of the situation and tell me what you'd do.

Are you the same person who said I was hiding hidden vitriol???

Here's a fourth choice, and the one I would choose:

4. Make one or more of the under-utilized high schools that currently exist EOTP into desirable schools. Each of Cardozo, Dunbar and Roosevelt has or is undergoing a renovation. Each of them is in a much better position to ease overcrowding at Wilson.

PP here, again. By the way, you do realize that your "Option 4" is the first option I listed. It requires answering which feeders are removed.

My option 4 doesn't require removing feeder schools. It requires parents choosing other feeders. Some think that requires force. I think it requires enticement, with the advantage that many already want alternatives to Deal and Hardy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're an idiot. Nobody wants a high school bottleneck in the western part of the city.

It's simple, really: many people can clearly foresee a looming overcrowding issue at Wilson. You have several choices:
1. Remove some feeder schools
2. Build greater capacity at Wilson
3. Create a new school.

If choosing 1., which feeder schools? Proponents of 3. realize that it may not be reasonable to remove east of the park feeder schools.

So, tell me again why I want?!? a bottleneck in my neighborhood. Or, stop denying the reality of the situation and tell me what you'd do.

Are you the same person who said I was hiding hidden vitriol???

Here's a fourth choice, and the one I would choose:

4. Make one or more of the under-utilized high schools that currently exist EOTP into desirable schools. Each of Cardozo, Dunbar and Roosevelt has or is undergoing a renovation. Each of them is in a much better position to ease overcrowding at Wilson.

But they problem with #4 making them desirable... they are so far from that for parents with high performing kids, and parents with high performing kids who are mobile will just move when high school comes around, or go private. But high performing kids are needed to make the school desirable!

So #3 of starting a new school seems to reduce the concern, at least for the first few years that there are poor student outcome, and may attract parents with high performing kids to try it out.

#5 The Francis Stephens campus is the size of a high school. I say turn it into a medium size high school, the select magnet high school and the principle can go anywhere, and the middle and elementary schools can go somewhere else in the boundary, emm not sure where exactly, which is the main problem with #5 but I am sure someone can think of something. And Duke Ellington gets left alone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're an idiot. Nobody wants a high school bottleneck in the western part of the city.

It's simple, really: many people can clearly foresee a looming overcrowding issue at Wilson. You have several choices:
1. Remove some feeder schools
2. Build greater capacity at Wilson
3. Create a new school.

If choosing 1., which feeder schools? Proponents of 3. realize that it may not be reasonable to remove east of the park feeder schools.

So, tell me again why I want?!? a bottleneck in my neighborhood. Or, stop denying the reality of the situation and tell me what you'd do.

NP -- I'd do #3 -- a new school, but outside of ward 3, e.g. the revitalized Roosevelt idea.

Thank you. Who would go to the new school? That is, how would this solution ease overcrowding at Wilson? Which feeders are you removing. (That's the hard question, so don't hide from it.)

Not the PP (but the one you called an idiot).

If you're talking about removing feeders from Wilson, those would stay as is. Deal and Hardy feed to Wilson. The hard part is changing the feeders to Deal.

In the case of Roosevelt high school, DCPS would need to do away with the PS-8 education campuses, currently the only middle school option for Ward 4 families. The alternative would be a re-opened MacFarland Middle School, which was closed last year for under-utilization. If more families stay at nearby elementary schools and those feed into a new MacFarland Middle School, then the new (already being renovated) Roosevelt would fill up and take pressure off of Wilson.

Repeat for Cardozo and Dunbar.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're an idiot. Nobody wants a high school bottleneck in the western part of the city.

It's simple, really: many people can clearly foresee a looming overcrowding issue at Wilson. You have several choices:
1. Remove some feeder schools
2. Build greater capacity at Wilson
3. Create a new school.

If choosing 1., which feeder schools? Proponents of 3. realize that it may not be reasonable to remove east of the park feeder schools.

So, tell me again why I want?!? a bottleneck in my neighborhood. Or, stop denying the reality of the situation and tell me what you'd do.

Are you the same person who said I was hiding hidden vitriol???

Here's a fourth choice, and the one I would choose:

4. Make one or more of the under-utilized high schools that currently exist EOTP into desirable schools. Each of Cardozo, Dunbar and Roosevelt has or is undergoing a renovation. Each of them is in a much better position to ease overcrowding at Wilson.

PP here, again. By the way, you do realize that your "Option 4" is the first option I listed. It requires answering which feeders are removed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're an idiot. Nobody wants a high school bottleneck in the western part of the city.

It's simple, really: many people can clearly foresee a looming overcrowding issue at Wilson. You have several choices:
1. Remove some feeder schools
2. Build greater capacity at Wilson
3. Create a new school.

If choosing 1., which feeder schools? Proponents of 3. realize that it may not be reasonable to remove east of the park feeder schools.

So, tell me again why I want?!? a bottleneck in my neighborhood. Or, stop denying the reality of the situation and tell me what you'd do.

Are you the same person who said I was hiding hidden vitriol???

Here's a fourth choice, and the one I would choose:

4. Make one or more of the under-utilized high schools that currently exist EOTP into desirable schools. Each of Cardozo, Dunbar and Roosevelt has or is undergoing a renovation. Each of them is in a much better position to ease overcrowding at Wilson.

No, I'm not. I'm the person who mentioned the $10m in renovation planning at Ellington and the other options for a HS in the "area."

Again, please tell me who you would (presumably force to) go to the HS. That's the million dollar question, not the facility.

In what time-period do you envision being able to lure said children to this newly revamped school? What are your plans if you fail to meet that deadline, the school remains relatively barren, and overcrowding persists? *Forcing students to attend would eliminate this concern, but it would force you to answer who you would remove from the Wilson boundary.

I'm not trying to be confrontational; please answer how you'd alleviate overcrowding at Wilson and through which means.

Anonymous wrote:You're an idiot. Nobody wants a high school bottleneck in the western part of the city.

It's simple, really: many people can clearly foresee a looming overcrowding issue at Wilson. You have several choices:
1. Remove some feeder schools
2. Build greater capacity at Wilson
3. Create a new school.

If choosing 1., which feeder schools? Proponents of 3. realize that it may not be reasonable to remove east of the park feeder schools.

So, tell me again why I want?!? a bottleneck in my neighborhood. Or, stop denying the reality of the situation and tell me what you'd do.

Are you the same person who said I was hiding hidden vitriol???

Here's a fourth choice, and the one I would choose:

4. Make one or more of the under-utilized high schools that currently exist EOTP into desirable schools. Each of Cardozo, Dunbar and Roosevelt has or is undergoing a renovation. Each of them is in a much better position to ease overcrowding at Wilson.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're an idiot. Nobody wants a high school bottleneck in the western part of the city.

It's simple, really: many people can clearly foresee a looming overcrowding issue at Wilson. You have several choices:
1. Remove some feeder schools
2. Build greater capacity at Wilson
3. Create a new school.

If choosing 1., which feeder schools? Proponents of 3. realize that it may not be reasonable to remove east of the park feeder schools.

So, tell me again why I want?!? a bottleneck in my neighborhood. Or, stop denying the reality of the situation and tell me what you'd do.

NP -- I'd do #3 -- a new school, but outside of ward 3, e.g. the revitalized Roosevelt idea.

Thank you. Who would go to the new school? That is, how would this solution ease overcrowding at Wilson? Which feeders are you removing. (That's the hard question, so don't hide from it.)

Here's the task, again. Don't deny the antecedent and say overcrowding is not an issue (if for no other reason than for the sake of genuine debate).

Anonymous wrote:Many people can clearly foresee a looming overcrowding issue at Wilson. You have several choices:
1. Remove some feeder schools
2. Build greater capacity at Wilson
3. Create a new school.

If choosing 1., which feeder schools?

Anonymous wrote:You're an idiot. Nobody wants a high school bottleneck in the western part of the city.

It's simple, really: many people can clearly foresee a looming overcrowding issue at Wilson. You have several choices:
1. Remove some feeder schools
2. Build greater capacity at Wilson
3. Create a new school.

If choosing 1., which feeder schools? Proponents of 3. realize that it may not be reasonable to remove east of the park feeder schools.

So, tell me again why I want?!? a bottleneck in my neighborhood. Or, stop denying the reality of the situation and tell me what you'd do.

NP -- I'd do #3 -- a new school, but outside of ward 3, e.g. the revitalized Roosevelt idea.

I mean that request seriously: tell me what you'd do.

And, for at least the sake of argument, don't deny that overcrowding is coming. Let's take it as given.

Feel free to marshall evidence of the optimal high school size when justifying your answer.