Feedback on 2023 Boundary and Student Assignment Process from Cathy Reilly
/Dear Deputy Mayor Kihn, Jenn Comey, and Michael Akin,
This is my feedback on the Student Assignment and Boundary Study Process. I appreciate the chance to weigh in and hope that it will inform future convenings. As I get more distance from the process, I have felt more distressed about some of what follows. We spent so much time with some communities and so little with others that will be affected in the future. I do have the experience of the two committees 10 years apart. I hope we can capture some of what the first offered that we did not have this time in the next iteration. If I can I will try and send on more thoughts that capture that.
The Advisory group was a strong and thoughtful group. The choice to have the number of members on the committee reflect the proportion of DCPS students from the different wards of the city worked. I felt the decision to have the government as voting members compared to the practice in 2013 to have them present and contributing but not voting, had mixed results. I can share more on this if it would be helpful.
One Geographic Feeder Pattern: One goal of both the 2013 and 2023 committees was to ensure that for consistency and equity that all students would have the geographic right to one feeder pattern. This would be clear and would not negate other programmatic rights. Everyone still has the ability to participate in the lottery.
Recommendation #8 accomplished this. It acknowledged that a 10-year ramp from the 2014 recommendation to implantation was more than sufficient for families to make plans. It reads: “DCPS shall effective SY2025-26 sunset the 2015 revisions that extended the phase in policy for families assigned to a new middle school until 2022. This sunsetting ensures that every middle school attendance zone boundary will consist of the select elementary attendance zones designated to it and no students will have multiple middle school geographic rights” [1]
The executive put forth this recommendation, the committee approved it and then the executive essentially rescinded it. The reasoning from the executive that there has been inadequate time for communication and notification could have been resolved with a one or two year further extension. The lack of clarity, given that there is a map, could have come with a list of the addresses affected confirmed.[2] Instead there is just a statement that: DCPS will specifically review the following phase-in policies from the 2014 study due to the lack of clarity and communication with families (particularly during and after the pandemic), which will remain in effect pending DCPS’s review.[3]
There is no end date or even commitment to honor these policy recommendations in the communication. This recommendation was advanced by two different advisory groups 10 years apart. The Mayor could have stated in March of 2023 that she is going to retain dual geographic rights for this select community and maintain the dual feeder pattern for Kelly Miller.[4] She could have acknowledged she was making an exception for only these 2 groups and provided her reasoning. We could have debated and engaged publicly then.
Pending further explanation, I am left to assume that a community can always make an end run around this process with little public justification. The statements I made to these communities (that this policy would be implemented) and the trust they placed in me and this process was betrayed. While the final say was always with the Executive, I assumed it would apply to new recommendations that came from the committee, not ones that originated with the executive.
This undermined the integrity of the process. In 2014 it made some sense because it was a new Mayor. That was not true this time.
Time: The meetings were kept to roughly two hours which was not enough time. I would recommend either more meetings or more time at the monthly meeting to allow for more closure.
Groupings: DCPS is an agency under the Mayor. There is no way that this does not affect the discussion even with some speaking more openly. The citywide group to wrestle with potential recommendations that would be citywide was almost completely government with charter, lottery, the DME. DCPS was not able to attend all of the meetings and representatives of the geographic groups were consulted at the end with the writing of the final recommendations. This group was more of a government group with input from the advisory committee members at the end of the time. I believe this should have had representation from the geographic groups or it could have been conducted with the whole group as it was at the end. I found the framing and the process here very difficult. I hope this whole piece can be rethought.
Time on Maury Minor versus time in wards 7 and 8 on reasons for staying and leaving DCPS
I felt the focus on Maury Minor and the enormous amount of time spent there to promote integration meant that time was not spent on understanding why families particularly in wards 5, 7 and 8 were travelling from their neighborhood school and why some were staying. Under enrollment is a huge issue and the travel time and inequity between these wards and ward 3 in particular was only addressed at the very end with recommendation #17 . We could have done far more with this and it would have informed socio economic and racial integration. We got a hint at the in- person meeting with Sousa that this would have been productive. This was really unfortunate and a missed opportunity. The one recommendation requiring DCPS to go further with program equity should have been more fleshed out during the process. We will see if it goes anywhere. I think this piece of the process should be re-examined.
Equitable Access: I realize the working theory is that equitable access is providing a preference for students to travel to schools outside of their neighborhood to schools that are perceived as higher quality using the limited measures that we have. I continue to disagree with this definition and would have wished for more of an effort to discover what families would like to see at their schools or in their neighborhoods so the longer travel would not be necessary. Could they have closer to home, the quality that they are travelling to?
Joint Planning: According to Recommendation 23, the DME work with PCSB and DCPS on an aligned and transparent planning process to be completed by December of this year. I look forward to the opportunity for public feedback on the plan and on the process. It is my hope that there be a clear acknowledgement and adjustment noting that DCPS is by far the largest LEA and it is the publicly managed infrastructure. It is not just one of 67.
Contractors: It was my experience that the WXY had a system and format that they wanted to follow. I did not feel it was a good match for the challenges that we are facing. There were adjustments but overall, we still jumped to the policy levers before enough exploration of why. Also, the scenarios were confusing. Perhaps I was spoiled by the experience with a local contractor last time and the knowledge and expertise that comes with that.
I do understand how difficult these issues are. We all made compromises. I appreciated being a part of both groups. I learned and continue to learn from these processes. I will not be on the next panel in 10 years. I do hope that the lessons learned will inform it however especially the area where the process was undermined.
Thank you,
Cathy Reilly
Member of the 2013-2014 DC Advisory Committee on Student Assignment and the 2023 Boundary and Student Assignment Study Advisory Committee.
[1] https://dcgov.app.box.com/v/2023dcboundaryreport
· [2] Dual Wells & Deal rights: homes in the 6300-6600 blocks of 16th St NW (west-side,
even #’s only) and 1600 blocks of Tuckerman, Underwood & Van Buren St’s NW. (In-bounds for Brightwood ES but west of 16th St NW)
Dual MacFarland & Deal rights: all of Crestwood: all who are west of 16th St NW in the 3900-5000 blocks between Shepherd St NW & Colorado Ave NW; most of 16th Street Heights: everyone north of Arkansas Ave NW from 16th St NW to Georgia Ave NW up to Longfellow St NW.
Dual MacFarland & CHEC rights: homes east of 16th St NW, south of Quincy St NW, west of Georgia Ave NW, and north of Park Rd NW.
[3] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1G4AgFlT8x7_JZhG_CzgOkB8T-Jaout2jOahoPVWSVFk/edit?usp=sharing
[4] Dual middle school rights
• For families residing in the MacFarland MS and Ida B. Wells MS boundaries who
had been previously zoned to other middle schools (see the attached map).
• For families whose children attend Kelly Miller MS and have a dual middle
school right to Eastern HS.
The right of siblings of a child attending their zoned school prior to the implementation
of the 2014 boundary changes to attend either their original or newly zoned school.
DCPS will prioritize this review after its implementation planning for the 2024 Boundary Study
recommendations.