Maury Elementary feedback?

[Anonymous]

You won't get your younger child into PK3 at Maury with a post-lottery application this year, but you stand an above-average chance of getting in for PK4 next year if you are inbounds and your older child is enrolled. It varies year to year because you never know how many spots will open up or how many families applying will also be inbounds with sibling, but in the past 5 years, every PK4 applicant who was in boundary with sibling attending matched in the lottery. And this year, there weren't even any in boundary with sibling attending applicants, so the lottery spots (10) all went to in boundary applicants with no sibling.

So unless next year is weird, you'd really only be looking at one year with your kids at different schools, and if you got into Appletree or Miner, the commute would be no big deal.

[Anonymous]

Maury does seem like one of the better elementary schools on the Hill but I admittedly am turned off by what seems to be an obnoxious group of parents. Is that an unfair stereotype/hasty view from the outside?

[Anonymous]

yes thats unfair but i also think the surrounding schools are fine

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maury does seem like one of the better elementary schools on the Hill but I admittedly am turned off by what seems to be an obnoxious group of parents. Is that an unfair stereotype/hasty view from the outside?

Interesting -- I know some schools where the parents have bad reputations (Lafayette jumps to mind), but never heard that about Maury. Now dying for the tea.

[Anonymous]

My kids at are LT, but obviously we know tons of Maury families because the boundaries are tiny/it’s pretty much the same neighborhood. I have (anecdotally) found the parents I’ve met to be lovely and I am not aware of them having a bad rep. I know some people didn’t love how they handled the Maury/Miner proposal, but I don’t blame them given how it was handled by DCPS. (Also, remember that the Miner PTO was basically on their side too and the set aside seats didn’t actually fill during the lottery, suggesting that any Miner IB demand for Maury seats was largely driven by the UMC families in the Miner zone and not the families the proposal was allegedly on behalf of.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kids at are LT, but obviously we know tons of Maury families because the boundaries are tiny/it’s pretty much the same neighborhood. I have (anecdotally) found the parents I’ve met to be lovely and I am not aware of them having a bad rep. I know some people didn’t love how they handled the Maury/Miner proposal, but I don’t blame them given how it was handled by DCPS. (Also, remember that the Miner PTO was basically on their side too and the set aside seats didn’t actually fill during the lottery, suggesting that any Miner IB demand for Maury seats was largely driven by the UMC families in the Miner zone and not the families the proposal was allegedly on behalf of.)

That was obvious the entire time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kids at are LT, but obviously we know tons of Maury families because the boundaries are tiny/it’s pretty much the same neighborhood. I have (anecdotally) found the parents I’ve met to be lovely and I am not aware of them having a bad rep. I know some people didn’t love how they handled the Maury/Miner proposal, but I don’t blame them given how it was handled by DCPS. (Also, remember that the Miner PTO was basically on their side too and the set aside seats didn’t actually fill during the lottery, suggesting that any Miner IB demand for Maury seats was largely driven by the UMC families in the Miner zone and not the families the proposal was allegedly on behalf of.)

Is the complaint just that they opposed it? Not sure there was a “nicer” way to oppose it than how they did it. And I don’t think people having different views than me is some great crime.

[Anonymous]

Agree that I know many Maury families who I like, but I found the collective tantrum about the integration proposal to be distasteful, which made me think less of the Maury community in general.

[Anonymous]

i support integrated schools but the combined maury/miner elementary school would have been too large to be effective. think 140 kids and 6+ classrooms per grade. you also have a lot of younger families that very intentionally chose to buy homes in the maury zone. if you like the neighborhood but want to more fully avoid those types, id maybe look at payne.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:i support integrated schools but the combined maury/miner elementary school would have been too large to be effective. think 140 kids and 6+ classrooms per grade. you also have a lot of younger families that very intentionally chose to buy homes in the maury zone. if you like the neighborhood but want to more fully avoid those types, id maybe look at payne.

The proposal was stupid and poorly thought out. Everyone is fine with boundary adjustments, but the proposal here was a bizarre "paired school" nightmare that would have increased transitions (a bad thing) and increased logistical challenges especially for families with multiple children (a thing that would obviously disproportionately affect the chronically truant families they presumably were trying to help). DME could not point to one example of the proposed model working.

That said, I found the opposition to be very civil (and more civil, frankly, then the proponents who suggested that opposition itself made you a racist).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You won't get your younger child into PK3 at Maury with a post-lottery application this year, but you stand an above-average chance of getting in for PK4 next year if you are inbounds and your older child is enrolled. It varies year to year because you never know how many spots will open up or how many families applying will also be inbounds with sibling, but in the past 5 years, every PK4 applicant who was in boundary with sibling attending matched in the lottery. And this year, there weren't even any in boundary with sibling attending applicants, so the lottery spots (10) all went to in boundary applicants with no sibling.

So unless next year is weird, you'd really only be looking at one year with your kids at different schools, and if you got into Appletree or Miner, the commute would be no big deal.

That isn't necessarily true. Looking at the data, there were 3 offers for inbounds with sibling preference. If you submitted a post-lottery application and reach out to admin team you have a good shot at being #1 on the WL and likely getting an offer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i support integrated schools but the combined maury/miner elementary school would have been too large to be effective. think 140 kids and 6+ classrooms per grade. you also have a lot of younger families that very intentionally chose to buy homes in the maury zone. if you like the neighborhood but want to more fully avoid those types, id maybe look at payne.

The proposal was stupid and poorly thought out. Everyone is fine with boundary adjustments, but the proposal here was a bizarre "paired school" nightmare that would have increased transitions (a bad thing) and increased logistical challenges especially for families with multiple children (a thing that would obviously disproportionately affect the chronically truant families they presumably were trying to help). DME could not point to one example of the proposed model working.

That said, I found the opposition to be very civil (and more civil, frankly, then the proponents who suggested that opposition itself made you a racist).

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kids at are LT, but obviously we know tons of Maury families because the boundaries are tiny/it’s pretty much the same neighborhood. I have (anecdotally) found the parents I’ve met to be lovely and I am not aware of them having a bad rep. I know some people didn’t love how they handled the Maury/Miner proposal, but I don’t blame them given how it was handled by DCPS. (Also, remember that the Miner PTO was basically on their side too and the set aside seats didn’t actually fill during the lottery, suggesting that any Miner IB demand for Maury seats was largely driven by the UMC families in the Miner zone and not the families the proposal was allegedly on behalf of.)

I think the Maury set-aside was only for in-bounds pre-K families, so I don't think them filling or not necessarily says anything about Miner IB demand for Maury seats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You won't get your younger child into PK3 at Maury with a post-lottery application this year, but you stand an above-average chance of getting in for PK4 next year if you are inbounds and your older child is enrolled. It varies year to year because you never know how many spots will open up or how many families applying will also be inbounds with sibling, but in the past 5 years, every PK4 applicant who was in boundary with sibling attending matched in the lottery. And this year, there weren't even any in boundary with sibling attending applicants, so the lottery spots (10) all went to in boundary applicants with no sibling.

So unless next year is weird, you'd really only be looking at one year with your kids at different schools, and if you got into Appletree or Miner, the commute would be no big deal.

That isn't necessarily true. Looking at the data, there were 3 offers for inbounds with sibling preference. If you submitted a post-lottery application and reach out to admin team you have a good shot at being #1 on the WL and likely getting an offer.

Which data? Looking at MSDC Tableau data it looks even better for OP (unless I am reading it wrong) -- it says two IB students with no sibling pref were matched. I guess the result is the same -- should be #1 on the WL. There have been offers made for PK3 in August and October for the last several years, so OP stands a pretty good chance (of course, the total seats are a little lower this year because some have been reserved for the equitable access set-aside, so not sure how that may affect turnover -- maybe less turnover than usual, but at #1 I think OP still has a decent shot).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree that I know many Maury families who I like, but I found the collective tantrum about the integration proposal to be distasteful, which made me think less of the Maury community in general.

Tantrum over a horrible "social justice" plan that has been proven to be a failure? Yeah, a worthwhile tantrum.