Maury Capitol Hill

Anonymous
fyi all the DCPS school boundaries are under review, not just Maury.
Anonymous
Last time in the boundary review, nobody was forced to leave a school they were already attending, I believe.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:I really really hope they don’t move it. We’re one of those that could be affected. We’re inbounds and have a pre-K3 kid but with the long waitlist we had/have no chance of getting in this year. My understanding is that if we don’t get in next year for pre-K 4 (more possible but still likely not going to happen), and we are zoned out of Maury, we’re out of luck for kindergarten. All because, despite trying, we couldn’t get into our highly popular IB school before 2025-2026. It sucks.


Yes, it's so terrible that you live IB for a school you actually want to attend. Think of how many people don't, or can't afford to.

You are more than welcome to a seat at any number of other schools in the area.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I really really hope they don’t move it. We’re one of those that could be affected. We’re inbounds and have a pre-K3 kid but with the long waitlist we had/have no chance of getting in this year. My understanding is that if we don’t get in next year for pre-K 4 (more possible but still likely not going to happen), and we are zoned out of Maury, we’re out of luck for kindergarten. All because, despite trying, we couldn’t get into our highly popular IB school before 2025-2026. It sucks.


Yes, it's so terrible that you live IB for a school you actually want to attend. Think of how many people don't, or can't afford to.

You are more than welcome to a seat at any number of other schools in the area.


No, the poster above won't be zoned out of Maury. That's just not how it works, boundary changes are normally phased in over 4-6 years. I learned this during the 2013-2014 boundary review on the Hill. Don't panic, mate, learn.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the Maury boundary would move further East if TPTB thinks the present boundary is over-gentrified. Maybe the people who need to worry are those on the western side of the Maury boundary.


There is nowhere for Maury's eastern boundary to go -- it runs to RFK. More likely they'd look at shifting the northern and southern boundaries. Though I think if there are shifts, you would see the western border move. It would be contentious though because Maury already sits towards the western end -- if you eliminate some of this blocks to the west of Lincoln Park from it's boundary, you will be shifting people who paid a major premium to be not only near Maury but near the park and Eastern Market. And they would likely be shifted to a school significantly further away, since Ludlow-Taylor already has a very large boundary and is pretty full. Unless you moved part of the L-T boundary up to JOW.

It gets very, very messy very quickly. Which is why if there's a redraw, it is likely to be quite minor. But you still might wind up with some unhappy folks.


The most natural change to the Maury boundary would be to flatten the top of the boundary and steal Miner's "tail." Pushing up the northern boundary of Maury a block or two at the Western end would have very little effect on demographics (unless you also bumped up the tail), since you'd carveout some of the gentrified L-T zone and a sliver of the most gentrified part of the Miner zone. You could shift the bottom part of the Maury boundary north in compensation & send those kids to Payne, but I'm not sure that has a huge effect on anything except moving a few very wealthy families to a school they may or may not use.

One thing to keep in mind is that both of the L-T & Maury districts are pretty narrow North-to-South. Look at the map and where Maury and L-T are stacked on top of each other is just East Capitol to H St... all of which is heavily gentrified central Hill. There's nowhere to go for non-gentrified real estate in that swath.

You can't give much of the L-T boundary to JOW by the way, because L-T is only a block from the Northern edge of the boundary... and the whole boundary is only from north of D to H; it's actually really narrow already. (Also, it goes unsaid that affected families would freak out entirely. There are many, many heavily involved L-T families on those blocks.) Unlike what the PP said, L-T is actually a small boundary... among the smallest in the area. But the school is full, so making it bigger would just mean weeding out OOB kids and with an IB rate approaching 2/3rds, I can't see why DCPS would back that either.

What you could do is move the Western edge of the Maury boundary to Watkins. Parents would freak out. As with the shift to Payne, it's taking the wealthiest families out of the zone and zoning them to somewhere they won't like as much. I think parents might balk even more, because there's a sense Payne is on the upswing with solid leadership and Watkins is very much the reverse.


The L-T boundary could move down and take Peabody. Then it could have both buildings. Watkins could be resized and made into a smaller K-5 school.
Anonymous
Someone asked about the boundary review at the Maury PTA meeting (in the sense of, is this something we need to pay attention to/may be affected by), but I heard the answer was that they don't anticipate Maury being affected (think they said potential changes are more in NW).
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the Maury boundary would move further East if TPTB thinks the present boundary is over-gentrified. Maybe the people who need to worry are those on the western side of the Maury boundary.


there are barely any kids on the western side - it’s only a few blocks. Maury admits a significant number of OOB students so would make more sense to rebalance the eastern boundaries to spread out between Maury, Payne and Miner.
Anonymous
any change is always grandfathered in. current students can always stay put. people impacted by change have rights to both the old or new option for a year (or two).
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the Maury boundary would move further East if TPTB thinks the present boundary is over-gentrified. Maybe the people who need to worry are those on the western side of the Maury boundary.


There is nowhere for Maury's eastern boundary to go -- it runs to RFK. More likely they'd look at shifting the northern and southern boundaries. Though I think if there are shifts, you would see the western border move. It would be contentious though because Maury already sits towards the western end -- if you eliminate some of this blocks to the west of Lincoln Park from it's boundary, you will be shifting people who paid a major premium to be not only near Maury but near the park and Eastern Market. And they would likely be shifted to a school significantly further away, since Ludlow-Taylor already has a very large boundary and is pretty full. Unless you moved part of the L-T boundary up to JOW.

It gets very, very messy very quickly. Which is why if there's a redraw, it is likely to be quite minor. But you still might wind up with some unhappy folks.


The most natural change to the Maury boundary would be to flatten the top of the boundary and steal Miner's "tail." Pushing up the northern boundary of Maury a block or two at the Western end would have very little effect on demographics (unless you also bumped up the tail), since you'd carveout some of the gentrified L-T zone and a sliver of the most gentrified part of the Miner zone. You could shift the bottom part of the Maury boundary north in compensation & send those kids to Payne, but I'm not sure that has a huge effect on anything except moving a few very wealthy families to a school they may or may not use.

One thing to keep in mind is that both of the L-T & Maury districts are pretty narrow North-to-South. Look at the map and where Maury and L-T are stacked on top of each other is just East Capitol to H St... all of which is heavily gentrified central Hill. There's nowhere to go for non-gentrified real estate in that swath.

You can't give much of the L-T boundary to JOW by the way, because L-T is only a block from the Northern edge of the boundary... and the whole boundary is only from north of D to H; it's actually really narrow already. (Also, it goes unsaid that affected families would freak out entirely. There are many, many heavily involved L-T families on those blocks.) Unlike what the PP said, L-T is actually a small boundary... among the smallest in the area. But the school is full, so making it bigger would just mean weeding out OOB kids and with an IB rate approaching 2/3rds, I can't see why DCPS would back that either.

What you could do is move the Western edge of the Maury boundary to Watkins. Parents would freak out. As with the shift to Payne, it's taking the wealthiest families out of the zone and zoning them to somewhere they won't like as much. I think parents might balk even more, because there's a sense Payne is on the upswing with solid leadership and Watkins is very much the reverse.


Some might freak out. Others would be glad for the opportunity to attend Stuart-Hobson instead of Eliot-Hine.


Doesn’t SH clear thief waitlist?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the Maury boundary would move further East if TPTB thinks the present boundary is over-gentrified. Maybe the people who need to worry are those on the western side of the Maury boundary.


There is nowhere for Maury's eastern boundary to go -- it runs to RFK. More likely they'd look at shifting the northern and southern boundaries. Though I think if there are shifts, you would see the western border move. It would be contentious though because Maury already sits towards the western end -- if you eliminate some of this blocks to the west of Lincoln Park from it's boundary, you will be shifting people who paid a major premium to be not only near Maury but near the park and Eastern Market. And they would likely be shifted to a school significantly further away, since Ludlow-Taylor already has a very large boundary and is pretty full. Unless you moved part of the L-T boundary up to JOW.

It gets very, very messy very quickly. Which is why if there's a redraw, it is likely to be quite minor. But you still might wind up with some unhappy folks.


The most natural change to the Maury boundary would be to flatten the top of the boundary and steal Miner's "tail." Pushing up the northern boundary of Maury a block or two at the Western end would have very little effect on demographics (unless you also bumped up the tail), since you'd carveout some of the gentrified L-T zone and a sliver of the most gentrified part of the Miner zone. You could shift the bottom part of the Maury boundary north in compensation & send those kids to Payne, but I'm not sure that has a huge effect on anything except moving a few very wealthy families to a school they may or may not use.

One thing to keep in mind is that both of the L-T & Maury districts are pretty narrow North-to-South. Look at the map and where Maury and L-T are stacked on top of each other is just East Capitol to H St... all of which is heavily gentrified central Hill. There's nowhere to go for non-gentrified real estate in that swath.

You can't give much of the L-T boundary to JOW by the way, because L-T is only a block from the Northern edge of the boundary... and the whole boundary is only from north of D to H; it's actually really narrow already. (Also, it goes unsaid that affected families would freak out entirely. There are many, many heavily involved L-T families on those blocks.) Unlike what the PP said, L-T is actually a small boundary... among the smallest in the area. But the school is full, so making it bigger would just mean weeding out OOB kids and with an IB rate approaching 2/3rds, I can't see why DCPS would back that either.

What you could do is move the Western edge of the Maury boundary to Watkins. Parents would freak out. As with the shift to Payne, it's taking the wealthiest families out of the zone and zoning them to somewhere they won't like as much. I think parents might balk even more, because there's a sense Payne is on the upswing with solid leadership and Watkins is very much the reverse.


Some might freak out. Others would be glad for the opportunity to attend Stuart-Hobson instead of Eliot-Hine.


Doesn’t SH clear thief waitlist?


It has in the past but I'm not sure about this year. Too soon to tell.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the Maury boundary would move further East if TPTB thinks the present boundary is over-gentrified. Maybe the people who need to worry are those on the western side of the Maury boundary.


There is nowhere for Maury's eastern boundary to go -- it runs to RFK. More likely they'd look at shifting the northern and southern boundaries. Though I think if there are shifts, you would see the western border move. It would be contentious though because Maury already sits towards the western end -- if you eliminate some of this blocks to the west of Lincoln Park from it's boundary, you will be shifting people who paid a major premium to be not only near Maury but near the park and Eastern Market. And they would likely be shifted to a school significantly further away, since Ludlow-Taylor already has a very large boundary and is pretty full. Unless you moved part of the L-T boundary up to JOW.

It gets very, very messy very quickly. Which is why if there's a redraw, it is likely to be quite minor. But you still might wind up with some unhappy folks.


The most natural change to the Maury boundary would be to flatten the top of the boundary and steal Miner's "tail." Pushing up the northern boundary of Maury a block or two at the Western end would have very little effect on demographics (unless you also bumped up the tail), since you'd carveout some of the gentrified L-T zone and a sliver of the most gentrified part of the Miner zone. You could shift the bottom part of the Maury boundary north in compensation & send those kids to Payne, but I'm not sure that has a huge effect on anything except moving a few very wealthy families to a school they may or may not use.

One thing to keep in mind is that both of the L-T & Maury districts are pretty narrow North-to-South. Look at the map and where Maury and L-T are stacked on top of each other is just East Capitol to H St... all of which is heavily gentrified central Hill. There's nowhere to go for non-gentrified real estate in that swath.

You can't give much of the L-T boundary to JOW by the way, because L-T is only a block from the Northern edge of the boundary... and the whole boundary is only from north of D to H; it's actually really narrow already. (Also, it goes unsaid that affected families would freak out entirely. There are many, many heavily involved L-T families on those blocks.) Unlike what the PP said, L-T is actually a small boundary... among the smallest in the area. But the school is full, so making it bigger would just mean weeding out OOB kids and with an IB rate approaching 2/3rds, I can't see why DCPS would back that either.

What you could do is move the Western edge of the Maury boundary to Watkins. Parents would freak out. As with the shift to Payne, it's taking the wealthiest families out of the zone and zoning them to somewhere they won't like as much. I think parents might balk even more, because there's a sense Payne is on the upswing with solid leadership and Watkins is very much the reverse.


Some might freak out. Others would be glad for the opportunity to attend Stuart-Hobson instead of Eliot-Hine.


Doesn’t SH clear thief waitlist?


It has in the past but I'm not sure about this year. Too soon to tell.


It never did pre-COVID. The last couple of years have been anomalous everywhere. It's not going to clear it WL this year.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the Maury boundary would move further East if TPTB thinks the present boundary is over-gentrified. Maybe the people who need to worry are those on the western side of the Maury boundary.


there are barely any kids on the western side - it’s only a few blocks. Maury admits a significant number of OOB students so would make more sense to rebalance the eastern boundaries to spread out between Maury, Payne and Miner.


What? Maury admits by far the smallest percentage of OOB kids anywhere on the Hill.
Anonymous
During the last boundary review, there was some discussion about combining Maury and Miner, like the Cluster schools.
Anonymous
Former Maury parent. Maury hasn’t been title I for a very long time. I can imagine a scenario to shift Maury’s boundary to 17th street to correspond to new ward boundaries and bolster Miner, which is underenrolled. But that’s just speculation. Maury is pretty much at capacity now, just three years after a major reno. There is nowhere else to go on that postage stamp of land, so they would be wise to draw back the boundary somewhat to prevent overcrowding, or Maury will have to lose its PK classes, which are not mandatory offerings like K-5 are. But DCPS/DME has never been forward thinking, so who knows.

Maury has admitted OOB students in the upper grades in particular for many years to fill out classes and add teachers where possible. But with the possible exception of Grade 5, I imagine they are well and truly at capacity with 3-4 classes per grade.

It would be interesting to see how we could look at equity across the Hill but that would require thoughtful planning and community involvement over years and I just don’t see that happening for many reasons.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the Maury boundary would move further East if TPTB thinks the present boundary is over-gentrified. Maybe the people who need to worry are those on the western side of the Maury boundary.


There is nowhere for Maury's eastern boundary to go -- it runs to RFK. More likely they'd look at shifting the northern and southern boundaries. Though I think if there are shifts, you would see the western border move. It would be contentious though because Maury already sits towards the western end -- if you eliminate some of this blocks to the west of Lincoln Park from it's boundary, you will be shifting people who paid a major premium to be not only near Maury but near the park and Eastern Market. And they would likely be shifted to a school significantly further away, since Ludlow-Taylor already has a very large boundary and is pretty full. Unless you moved part of the L-T boundary up to JOW.

It gets very, very messy very quickly. Which is why if there's a redraw, it is likely to be quite minor. But you still might wind up with some unhappy folks.


The most natural change to the Maury boundary would be to flatten the top of the boundary and steal Miner's "tail." Pushing up the northern boundary of Maury a block or two at the Western end would have very little effect on demographics (unless you also bumped up the tail), since you'd carveout some of the gentrified L-T zone and a sliver of the most gentrified part of the Miner zone. You could shift the bottom part of the Maury boundary north in compensation & send those kids to Payne, but I'm not sure that has a huge effect on anything except moving a few very wealthy families to a school they may or may not use.

One thing to keep in mind is that both of the L-T & Maury districts are pretty narrow North-to-South. Look at the map and where Maury and L-T are stacked on top of each other is just East Capitol to H St... all of which is heavily gentrified central Hill. There's nowhere to go for non-gentrified real estate in that swath.

You can't give much of the L-T boundary to JOW by the way, because L-T is only a block from the Northern edge of the boundary... and the whole boundary is only from north of D to H; it's actually really narrow already. (Also, it goes unsaid that affected families would freak out entirely. There are many, many heavily involved L-T families on those blocks.) Unlike what the PP said, L-T is actually a small boundary... among the smallest in the area. But the school is full, so making it bigger would just mean weeding out OOB kids and with an IB rate approaching 2/3rds, I can't see why DCPS would back that either.

What you could do is move the Western edge of the Maury boundary to Watkins. Parents would freak out. As with the shift to Payne, it's taking the wealthiest families out of the zone and zoning them to somewhere they won't like as much. I think parents might balk even more, because there's a sense Payne is on the upswing with solid leadership and Watkins is very much the reverse.


The L-T boundary could move down and take Peabody. Then it could have both buildings. Watkins could be resized and made into a smaller K-5 school.


L-T has an ECE wing, including 7 purpose-built ECE classrooms. It’s also getting an extension. Zero chance it wants the hassle of an extra building that is only good for the very lowest grades without a major reno. No reason DCPS would think that was a good idea either. If they rethink the Cluster, Peabody will become a standalone ECE like Stevens… which would be fine. Between Brent, Maury, LT & smaller Watkins, there’s plenty of ECE IB overflow needed on the Hill… plus people looking at privates, etc who would love to nab an only ECE spot for their kid for 2 years.
Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools
Go to: