Maury Capitol Hill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just got back from reading to my kindergartener's class and doubling up by assisting in my older child's classroom. Total commute and volunteering time today: 40 minutes. In the proposed cluster, commute and same school volunteer work would have taken a total of 2 hours today.

I get that some people don't think the logistical/commute problems are real, and certainly they aren't the most important ones, but a change like this could materially change parental engagement for the worse. I can usually get away with 40 minutes away from work, but I can almost never get away with 2 hours.

Are you volunteering in the 5th grade classrooms? Because that grade is a mess and could use the help. Actually, 4th grade could use it too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ludlow is 17% at risk and JOW is 59% at risk. Both feed to SH. They are 3 blocks away from each other. If clustering schools is the solution why aren't those also under consideration?

One thing they factored in was whether there was a major thoroughfare dividing the boundaries. I *think* H street qualifies.

It's just sort of silly -- plenty of DC school boundaries cross major thoroughfares.

Hence the conspiracy theories that this is a Joe Weedon vanity project …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ludlow is 17% at risk and JOW is 59% at risk. Both feed to SH. They are 3 blocks away from each other. If clustering schools is the solution why aren't those also under consideration?

This has been addressed several times on this thread. The Advisory committee only looked at school pairs where the difference in at-risk students was 50% or more -- LT/JOW didn't meet this threshold.

None of the other pairs that were considered were as close as Maury/Miner, and the others had major traffic arteries separating the schools, making the commuting issues people are raising for Maury/Miner significantly worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on the other thread about Miner it really seems like DCPS should get them some solid leadership support and see how that helps before dismantling and rearranging both schools like duplos.

And wait another 10 years?

who said DCPS has to wait to start figuring out how to improve academics in high-needs schools? they can start doing it now by mandating phonics and going back to teaching math facts. nobody is stopping DCPS.

The whole reason this conversation is taking place because of the 10 year boundary study…

Sure, so the boundary question maybe has to wait (though I don't know if there is anything that actually prevents DC from considering boundary issues between these big studies). But that's the point -- we are saying this kind of hugely dramatic change *should* wait while DC actually tries administrative, academic, and programmatic improvements (which I think they can do pretty much at will).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ludlow is 17% at risk and JOW is 59% at risk. Both feed to SH. They are 3 blocks away from each other. If clustering schools is the solution why aren't those also under consideration?

One thing they factored in was whether there was a major thoroughfare dividing the boundaries. I *think* H street qualifies.

It's just sort of silly -- plenty of DC school boundaries cross major thoroughfares.

Exactly the point—the Miner/Maury one does not so that’s why they focused on it. I’m not saying that’s logical but that is their reasoning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on the other thread about Miner it really seems like DCPS should get them some solid leadership support and see how that helps before dismantling and rearranging both schools like duplos.

And wait another 10 years?

who said DCPS has to wait to start figuring out how to improve academics in high-needs schools? they can start doing it now by mandating phonics and going back to teaching math facts. nobody is stopping DCPS.

I do not know what you are talking about. I have a kindergartener in a Title 1 school (not Miner) and they use a mandated and very good phonics program (Heggarty). DCPS does new math like every other school in the country -- memorizing math facts is no longer considered the best approach pedagogically. I was not initially sold but the more I see how they approach it, the more sense it makes to me. Instead of relying on memorized times tables or similar, kids learn strategies for decoding any math problem using logic and fundamental knowledge. It's a good system.

None of this has anything to do with Miner -- their problem is not curriculum-based. But oh by the way, LOTS of the cities high-SES fell prey to the Lucy Caulkins reading trap, including the vaunted SWS, to disastrous effect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on the other thread about Miner it really seems like DCPS should get them some solid leadership support and see how that helps before dismantling and rearranging both schools like duplos.

And wait another 10 years?

who said DCPS has to wait to start figuring out how to improve academics in high-needs schools? they can start doing it now by mandating phonics and going back to teaching math facts. nobody is stopping DCPS.

I do not know what you are talking about. I have a kindergartener in a Title 1 school (not Miner) and they use a mandated and very good phonics program (Heggarty). DCPS does new math like every other school in the country -- memorizing math facts is no longer considered the best approach pedagogically. I was not initially sold but the more I see how they approach it, the more sense it makes to me. Instead of relying on memorized times tables or similar, kids learn strategies for decoding any math problem using logic and fundamental knowledge. It's a good system.

None of this has anything to do with Miner -- their problem is not curriculum-based. But oh by the way, LOTS of the cities high-SES fell prey to the Lucy Caulkins reading trap, including the vaunted SWS, to disastrous effect.

Yep, in fact Miner uses Heggerty too

[Anonymous]

Maybe DC should consider year-round schooling, which from what I have read can help high-risk students and families a great deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on the other thread about Miner it really seems like DCPS should get them some solid leadership support and see how that helps before dismantling and rearranging both schools like duplos.

And wait another 10 years?

who said DCPS has to wait to start figuring out how to improve academics in high-needs schools? they can start doing it now by mandating phonics and going back to teaching math facts. nobody is stopping DCPS.

I do not know what you are talking about. I have a kindergartener in a Title 1 school (not Miner) and they use a mandated and very good phonics program (Heggarty). DCPS does new math like every other school in the country -- memorizing math facts is no longer considered the best approach pedagogically. I was not initially sold but the more I see how they approach it, the more sense it makes to me. Instead of relying on memorized times tables or similar, kids learn strategies for decoding any math problem using logic and fundamental knowledge. It's a good system.

None of this has anything to do with Miner -- their problem is not curriculum-based. But oh by the way, LOTS of the cities high-SES fell prey to the Lucy Caulkins reading trap, including the vaunted SWS, to disastrous effect.

Yep, in fact Miner uses Heggerty too

Of course they do, it's required by DCPS. Maury and Miner both use the same curriculum.

I love that there are people who think Miner's test scores are low because they aren't teaching phonics, and not because 65% of their school population experiences things like poverty, housing insecurity, parents in jail, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on the other thread about Miner it really seems like DCPS should get them some solid leadership support and see how that helps before dismantling and rearranging both schools like duplos.

And wait another 10 years?

who said DCPS has to wait to start figuring out how to improve academics in high-needs schools? they can start doing it now by mandating phonics and going back to teaching math facts. nobody is stopping DCPS.

I do not know what you are talking about. I have a kindergartener in a Title 1 school (not Miner) and they use a mandated and very good phonics program (Heggarty). DCPS does new math like every other school in the country -- memorizing math facts is no longer considered the best approach pedagogically. I was not initially sold but the more I see how they approach it, the more sense it makes to me. Instead of relying on memorized times tables or similar, kids learn strategies for decoding any math problem using logic and fundamental knowledge. It's a good system.

None of this has anything to do with Miner -- their problem is not curriculum-based. But oh by the way, LOTS of the cities high-SES fell prey to the Lucy Caulkins reading trap, including the vaunted SWS, to disastrous effect.

Yep, in fact Miner uses Heggerty too

Of course they do, it's required by DCPS. Maury and Miner both use the same curriculum.

I love that there are people who think Miner's test scores are low because they aren't teaching phonics, and not because 65% of their school population experiences things like poverty, housing insecurity, parents in jail, etc.

Bingo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe DC should consider year-round schooling, which from what I have read can help high-risk students and families a great deal.

I would support this. It can be really hard to get buy-in though. High-income families dislike it because they want their summer vacations, or the chance to do summer enrichment, and they can easily afford summer childcare so that's not an issue. But teachers are often the most vocal opposition. My SIL is a school principal in another district and was part of a group trying to push for a year round schedule specifically to address learning loss and other issue with lower income students, but the teachers' union squashed it. Many people go into teaching specifically for the schedule.

Sometimes even low income families oppose it, though. Change is really hard for people, as this thread is demonstrating very well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on the other thread about Miner it really seems like DCPS should get them some solid leadership support and see how that helps before dismantling and rearranging both schools like duplos.

And wait another 10 years?

who said DCPS has to wait to start figuring out how to improve academics in high-needs schools? they can start doing it now by mandating phonics and going back to teaching math facts. nobody is stopping DCPS.

I do not know what you are talking about. I have a kindergartener in a Title 1 school (not Miner) and they use a mandated and very good phonics program (Heggarty). DCPS does new math like every other school in the country -- memorizing math facts is no longer considered the best approach pedagogically. I was not initially sold but the more I see how they approach it, the more sense it makes to me. Instead of relying on memorized times tables or similar, kids learn strategies for decoding any math problem using logic and fundamental knowledge. It's a good system.

None of this has anything to do with Miner -- their problem is not curriculum-based. But oh by the way, LOTS of the cities high-SES fell prey to the Lucy Caulkins reading trap, including the vaunted SWS, to disastrous effect.

I agree that DCPS has a longer tradition of phonics but unless I’m wrong, I don’t think it is required to be used in every school. 50% of students scoring 1 on PARCC suggest DCPS needs to be targeting Miner kids with heavy duty intervention, not engaging in magical thinking about how all they need is to be in a classroom with kids who read on a higher level … As for math, no you cannot learn math without memorizing math facts. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At the end of the day some of us are trying to engage with human behavior as it actually is and make our predictions data-based and realistic. Are you?

Absolutely and data shows that kids who go to a more diverse school (whether racially, socioeconomically, or academically) can benefit ALL the students.

No it does not. Busing (which is basically what this is) is pretty much universally accepted to be a failure by all sides. In contrast, creating diversity through actual community participation - ie creating schools where IB families chose to go - can result in positive impacts. But at the end of the day there are not enough rich white kids to be the medicine to fix DCPS - and that it what fundamentally makes this a PR exercise and not a legitimate attempt for DCPS to solve its problems.

This is not "basically" busing. If they cluster the schools, no one will be bussed. They will go to their IB, neighborhood school unless they choose to lottery out or go private.

Bussing is when you take kids in one neighborhood and put them on an actual bus to send them to a school in another neighborhood. It has nothing to do with this situation at all.

It’s busing without the buses. Sending kids from one school to another for the sole purpose of demographics.

Oh it's not busing, just a far walk! Totally different!

3-4 blocks is “far”? Really?

It's far for a 3 year old. And the total commute of home-Maury-Miner-work adds up to a lot.

Is there any talk of a shuttle like Watkins used to have?

I would assume that would have to be parent (PTA) funded. I don’t disagree that it’s a bit of a walk for a 3 year old but I do think that when some Miner IB families are actually closer to Maury and some Maury IB are closer to Miner, it makes the distance argument one of the weaker ones.

It's not just the distance, it's having to go to two schools each day instead of one.

Also, this hasn't really come up, but transitioning an IEP from one school to another. Getting used to new related service providers, and getting a kid who struggles with transitions to settle in to a new school. Most kids will take this in stride as the transition is expected and they're moving with peers. But for some kids it'll be a big deal.

All of which would still be issues if they redraw boundaries, which is the alternative solution. These are not arguments against the cluster, they are things that would need to be addressed by families and DCPS no matter how this problem is solved.

What? How would those be issues if they redraw boundaries? Kids that currently attend would be permitted to stay, if you're thinking they would be kicked out.

In order to redraw the boundaries such that it addresses the massive imbalance in at risk populations at two closely located schools, a signifiant portion of Maury's existing boundary would be re-assigned to Miner or another school. Thus a large number of families who currently commute to Maury would be commuting to Miner or another school (or commuting to a charter or private school located even further away).

Once you understand this, you get why the "but my commute!" objections don't hold water. Maury families think the options are continue to go to Maury or combine with Miner and send their kids to Miner for early grades. Nope. The options are combine with Miner or undergo a potentially *even more painful* redistricting process that could have significantly worse outcomes for them personally.

Wait, why is some people being re-zoned to Ludlow-Taylor or Peabody more painful than everyone being partially re-zoned to Miner?

The degree to which this comment fully centers the entire conversation around the experience of Maury families to the exclusion of anything else is so frustrating. Solving this problem by redrawing the boundary wouldn't just result in some Maury families being rezoned to LT or Payne (though FYI, if they did, some of them would wind up with less convenient commutes but for some reason walking 4 blocks out of your way to Miner is unacceptable, but walking 6 blocks out of your way to LT or Payne is fine, it's almost like the commute is not the problem). It would result in Maury families being rezoned to Miner. So some of these families are going to Miner either way.

But in any case, "pain to Maury families" should not be the sole metric by which any plan is evaluated. It's relevant, of course. But any plan should be evaluated by the possible benefits and harms to the entire population, not just Maury families.

You are missing the point. Personally I would much prefer walking 6 blocks to LT and having ALL my kids at LT, rather than walking however many blocks Maury and then to Miner. That would be way better for me. The benefits of having all my kids in one place FAR exceed the drawback of a few extra blocks.

People have said this so often that I think PP is not really willing to engage in good faith.

LT also has the SH feeder, which most would see as an extra benefit.

No, you guys don't get it. You are looking at this from the perspective of what you personally want. You aren't ordering off a menu here.

Of course we'd all prefer a great IB school where all our kids can attend with a desirable MS feed. Duh. Everyone wants that.

The point is that some Maury families having to do a less desirable commute is an acceptable outcome if the plan overall solves the bigger issues. Yes commutes are a factor in boundary drawing and school assignment, but they obviously are not the determinative factor in a city that has a lottery system where something like 70% of students go to school out of bounds.

Nobody's saying it's a determinative factor. It seems inevitable that some Maury families will have a less desirable commute in service of the DME's goals. But if you think My House-->LT-->Work is worse than My House-->Maury-->Miner-->Work, I don't know what to tell you. Especially with all the disadvantages that come with splitting your kids across two different locations.

What about the experience of Miner families? Does that matter to anyone?

Obviously not to DME or the Miner admin? DME claims to have tried to set up a meeting with Miner families, but no one responded? Either they are lying, or Miner admin doesn't care about the experience of its families at all.

DME reached out to former principal who has since left and never checked his email. Admin team didn’t even know about it until friend of mine with kids at Miner told them. Yes you read that right, the admin team learned about the proposal from a parent who heard about it from Maury parents. DME has since been in contact with their interim principal and I think they have now scheduled a meeting. While no one lied, it’s pretty awful that the DME didn’t make more of an effort to reach out. They shouldn’t have leaned about it from us.

So please tell us why we should trust anything DME is doing when it has this level of incompetence??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on the other thread about Miner it really seems like DCPS should get them some solid leadership support and see how that helps before dismantling and rearranging both schools like duplos.

And wait another 10 years?

who said DCPS has to wait to start figuring out how to improve academics in high-needs schools? they can start doing it now by mandating phonics and going back to teaching math facts. nobody is stopping DCPS.

I do not know what you are talking about. I have a kindergartener in a Title 1 school (not Miner) and they use a mandated and very good phonics program (Heggarty). DCPS does new math like every other school in the country -- memorizing math facts is no longer considered the best approach pedagogically. I was not initially sold but the more I see how they approach it, the more sense it makes to me. Instead of relying on memorized times tables or similar, kids learn strategies for decoding any math problem using logic and fundamental knowledge. It's a good system.

None of this has anything to do with Miner -- their problem is not curriculum-based. But oh by the way, LOTS of the cities high-SES fell prey to the Lucy Caulkins reading trap, including the vaunted SWS, to disastrous effect.

Yep, in fact Miner uses Heggerty too

Of course they do, it's required by DCPS. Maury and Miner both use the same curriculum.

I love that there are people who think Miner's test scores are low because they aren't teaching phonics, and not because 65% of their school population experiences things like poverty, housing insecurity, parents in jail, etc.

So you think that there’s nothing to be done to actually teach them directly to read & write better and the only possible thing is being in physical proximity to kids who read better? This almost supernatural belief is an interesting take on curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on the other thread about Miner it really seems like DCPS should get them some solid leadership support and see how that helps before dismantling and rearranging both schools like duplos.

And wait another 10 years?

who said DCPS has to wait to start figuring out how to improve academics in high-needs schools? they can start doing it now by mandating phonics and going back to teaching math facts. nobody is stopping DCPS.

I do not know what you are talking about. I have a kindergartener in a Title 1 school (not Miner) and they use a mandated and very good phonics program (Heggarty). DCPS does new math like every other school in the country -- memorizing math facts is no longer considered the best approach pedagogically. I was not initially sold but the more I see how they approach it, the more sense it makes to me. Instead of relying on memorized times tables or similar, kids learn strategies for decoding any math problem using logic and fundamental knowledge. It's a good system.

None of this has anything to do with Miner -- their problem is not curriculum-based. But oh by the way, LOTS of the cities high-SES fell prey to the Lucy Caulkins reading trap, including the vaunted SWS, to disastrous effect.

Actually, memorizing basic math facts is something every student should be doing in addition to learning math strategies. Ask any math teacher and they'll tell you this.