Attn Maury parents

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not true. There were concerns about how a cluster would work wrt respect to administration, teachers, greater need among combined pop, possible loss of Title I resources, etc. Weedon has been fanning those flames.

You only lose Title I funds if you lose your lower socioeconomic students. Title I is for poor students, not the rich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not true. There were concerns about how a cluster would work wrt respect to administration, teachers, greater need among combined pop, possible loss of Title I resources, etc. Weedon has been fanning those flames.

You only lose Title I funds if you lose your lower socioeconomic students. Title I is for poor students, not the rich.

Presumably it would be Miner losing Title I.

[Anonymous]

NP. Maury parent. I agree that the comments on the listserv were not racist—not to me, anyway. Many were anti-cluster—and one interpretation of that is ok, those people are racist—but I don't think that reflects the Maury community that I know. There was discussion about the achievement gap—Maury is struggling with that, as are most schools—and confusion as to how a cluster might affect Miner's Title I status, which could take resources away from kids who need it most. It's hard to have a complex discussion—especially about things where race, class, culture, and education intersect—anywhere, let alone on a school listserv.

My view (shared by many of the other parents I talked to) felt that the cluster was so out of left field with no detail or communication with either Maury or Miner, that it was solely designed for cost savings. It was so bungled—no thought to what that might mean more broadly, for class sizes, for drop-offs, principals, teacher retention, curriculum, whatever. And there was a quickly looming deadline—we were told that DCPS would make a decision by the end of the year without meeting with the community or anything. We forced them to hold off and hold a meeting, but the damage was done.

What's sad is that I think if handled another way, it could have had a very different result. I think there is a lot of blame to go around: Grosso, Weedon, and certainly DCPS—all of whom should know better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. Maury parent. I agree that the comments on the listserv were not racist—not to me, anyway. Many were anti-cluster—and one interpretation of that is ok, those people are racist—but I don't think that reflects the Maury community that I know. There was discussion about the achievement gap—Maury is struggling with that, as are most schools—and confusion as to how a cluster might affect Miner's Title I status, which could take resources away from kids who need it most. It's hard to have a complex discussion—especially about things where race, class, culture, and education intersect—anywhere, let alone on a school listserv.

My view (shared by many of the other parents I talked to) felt that the cluster was so out of left field with no detail or communication with either Maury or Miner, that it was solely designed for cost savings. It was so bungled—no thought to what that might mean more broadly, for class sizes, for drop-offs, principals, teacher retention, curriculum, whatever. And there was a quickly looming deadline—we were told that DCPS would make a decision by the end of the year without meeting with the community or anything. We forced them to hold off and hold a meeting, but the damage was done.

What's sad is that I think if handled another way, it could have had a very different result. I think there is a lot of blame to go around: Grosso, Weedon, and certainly DCPS—all of whom should know better.

Yeah, Grosso has really disappointed me. I supported him when he first ran. He told me how much he'd support our schools, provide meanfuk oversight of our schools, and make sure neighborhood views were included in any decisions. I guess he's now a typical political.

[Anonymous]

Any updates on where this stands?

[Anonymous]

Dead in the water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any updates on where this stands?

Here is the latest from the Maury PTA site:

Push for a Win-Win Solution—Join the Advocacy Group!
Ideas are already forming for ways to lobby the Mayor, Council, and DCPS to move quickly to help us achieve a win-win solution—but we need your help! Small efforts make a big impact—writing letters, making phone calls, working with others in our community to leverage resources—and the more folks we have, the greater the impact. Sign up here.

We already have some new information. Here’s what LSAT and SIT members have learned since the DCPS Meeting on January 12:

DCPS has already budgeted for the full-size, new school for this coming budget cycle. Back in December 2016 when it was due to be submitted, DCPS put in the budget request for $15M more (needed for the full renovation) and $6M (needed to build the Trailer City at Eliot-Hine).

DCPS last fall asked the Mayor to get underway for the full-size, new school, but the Mayor said no. DCPS could start the design and study for the full-size, new school right now if the Mayor agreed to “reprogram” the $15M for this fiscal year. Because the Mayor reportedly declined this request, DCPS won’t start doing the design/build work until the extra $15M is procured in October 2017.

DCPS already had the initial feasibility study for the full-size, new school back a year ago. Although only unveiled on January 12th, DCPS had the study done back in spring 2016.

There are lots of better, win-win options that lessen the impact on students and actually saves D.C. money (move Maury’s students just one time, not twice; away for 3 school semesters, not 4), but it requires the Mayor/DCPS to act now. Please see the attached table.

Among the better options, there is a true win-win solution: have the Mayor/DCPS start the design process right now, instead of waiting for the 2017-18 budget cycle to complete. A top Maury parent/faculty concern is moving twice (once to Eliot-Hine in 2017, then to the Trailer City in 2018). If the design process starts now, Maury could move move just once to Eliot-Hine in Summer 2017, finishing Maury’s construction before Eliot-Hine starts its renovation in January 2019. This saves D.C. money and meets top parent/faculty concerns without disrupting Eliot-Hine’s renovation.

This requires the Mayor/DCPS to be proactive, not settling for status quo, starting NOW.

Maury Advocacy Group

First meeting: Thursday, February 23 (time TBD).

Questions? E-mail Kenyon Weaver ([e-mail]) or LSAT Chair Amber Gove ([e-mail])

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually think the combined ECE grades would work fine and would have the added benefit of all/most Maury families getting access to PK, which only siblings get right now. Also, Maury families: keep in mind that the alternative will likely involve scrapping your PK all together eventually...

Obviously the question is whether the Cluster would destroy the upper grades at Maury, since those grades don't work at Miner at all at the moment.

It's obvious it will destroy maury. Do you think upper elementary Maury teachers with effective ratings are going to waste their time trying to teach miner kids? No. The good teachers will leave and have their choice of other schools that aren't being actively undermined by DCPS

Wow! So I guess you think there aren't highly effective teachers at Miner? Well there are, and they earned their rating teaching "Miner kids". If your Maury teachers are so great, they should be able to receive the same rating regardless of who they are teaching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any updates on where this stands?

Here is the latest from the Maury PTA site:

Push for a Win-Win Solution—Join the Advocacy Group!
Ideas are already forming for ways to lobby the Mayor, Council, and DCPS to move quickly to help us achieve a win-win solution—but we need your help! Small efforts make a big impact—writing letters, making phone calls, working with others in our community to leverage resources—and the more folks we have, the greater the impact. Sign up here.

We already have some new information. Here’s what LSAT and SIT members have learned since the DCPS Meeting on January 12:

DCPS has already budgeted for the full-size, new school for this coming budget cycle. Back in December 2016 when it was due to be submitted, DCPS put in the budget request for $15M more (needed for the full renovation) and $6M (needed to build the Trailer City at Eliot-Hine).

DCPS last fall asked the Mayor to get underway for the full-size, new school, but the Mayor said no. DCPS could start the design and study for the full-size, new school right now if the Mayor agreed to “reprogram” the $15M for this fiscal year. Because the Mayor reportedly declined this request, DCPS won’t start doing the design/build work until the extra $15M is procured in October 2017.

DCPS already had the initial feasibility study for the full-size, new school back a year ago. Although only unveiled on January 12th, DCPS had the study done back in spring 2016.

There are lots of better, win-win options that lessen the impact on students and actually saves D.C. money (move Maury’s students just one time, not twice; away for 3 school semesters, not 4), but it requires the Mayor/DCPS to act now. Please see the attached table.

Among the better options, there is a true win-win solution: have the Mayor/DCPS start the design process right now, instead of waiting for the 2017-18 budget cycle to complete. A top Maury parent/faculty concern is moving twice (once to Eliot-Hine in 2017, then to the Trailer City in 2018). If the design process starts now, Maury could move move just once to Eliot-Hine in Summer 2017, finishing Maury’s construction before Eliot-Hine starts its renovation in January 2019. This saves D.C. money and meets top parent/faculty concerns without disrupting Eliot-Hine’s renovation.

This requires the Mayor/DCPS to be proactive, not settling for status quo, starting NOW.

Maury Advocacy Group

First meeting: Thursday, February 23 (time TBD).

Questions? E-mail Kenyon Weaver ([e-mail]) or LSAT Chair Amber Gove ([e-mail])

Can anyone tell me what happened at this meeting?