Maury Capitol Hill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this is just demographics, why not start at the root and make the neighborhood more appealing to other demographics. Instead, H St is in decline and people are sick of getting carjacked and wanting to leave the Hill.

It’s not just that. They could make Miner more appealing and increase high SES enrollment steadily, just like Payne.

They have the IB demographics for it. They are just not pulling them in because the school has been such a shitshow for the past 10 years.

+1. This is the reason the cluster idea is so puzzling. How does clustering with the admin at Miner improve anything? How would the Maury admin work with these people? Why hasn't DME looked into why the admin at Miner is poor?

[Anonymous]

What is the cluster idea, exactly? Will Maury admin control both schools, and the Miner admin be dismissed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Miner meeting was a little interesting. Obviously Miner parents are more open to the idea, though I thought other than three or four very excited parents support seemed a little muted.

DME continues to say Peabody/Watkins is not a perfect comparison, so they’ve cobbled together from examples from other school districts. I take this as a pretty bad sign, that instead of realizing what a stupid plan this is, they are trying to backfill the huge holes in their plan.

The boundary tool shows average driving distance going up to .7 at both schools. Someone asked about how this was calculated—I think clearly trying to determine whether potentially having to commute to two schools was taken into account—but the DME lady declined to answer.

DME lady is all hot on choice sets now, so she brought those up and said she is taking the idea to the Advisory Committee tomorrow.

DME lady stated pretty clearly that this is solely about demographics, not educational outcomes—so presumably they weren’t able to cobble together any compelling evidence there.

A few comments about Maury parents’ reaction, including a Miner dad who invited Maury families to leave the school if they don’t like it. A Miner mom who was clearly sore to have failed to lottery into Maury (and is therefore against at-risk set asides). DME lady said she was sympathetic to the “heartache” Miner parents must have felt at some of the Maury comments. It is ungood to oppose the cluster and doubleplus ungood to say so.

So DME openly admitted that this has nothing to do with improving education, even though per their website:

"The DME is responsible for developing and implementing the Mayor's vision for academic excellence and creating a high-quality education continuum from birth to 24 (from early childhood to K-12 to post-secondary and the workforce)."

Shouldn't this be grounds for removal? DME is off on a frolic and detour, instead of focusing on what they should actually be focusing, which is developing a vision for academic excellence and a high-quality education continuum.

[Anonymous]

Of note, Maury gets "majority white" phrase thrown around like it's 98.7% white in a gated community in suburb of Birmingham, Alabama.

It's 59%-41%. Someone smarter than me could do the math but if X number of students were POC and it's not a majority white school.

DME knows some special diversity formula that makes everything better?

And none of this has anything to do with improving educational outcomes for anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this is just demographics, why not start at the root and make the neighborhood more appealing to other demographics. Instead, H St is in decline and people are sick of getting carjacked and wanting to leave the Hill.

It’s not just that. They could make Miner more appealing and increase high SES enrollment steadily, just like Payne.

They have the IB demographics for it. They are just not pulling them in because the school has been such a shitshow for the past 10 years.

yes. Ironically, the way to *actually* achieve the goals of equity is right in front of them, but it is ideologically impermissible because it means accepting that serving high SES, grade-level kids is a goal too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this is just demographics, why not start at the root and make the neighborhood more appealing to other demographics. Instead, H St is in decline and people are sick of getting carjacked and wanting to leave the Hill.

It’s not just that. They could make Miner more appealing and increase high SES enrollment steadily, just like Payne.

They have the IB demographics for it. They are just not pulling them in because the school has been such a shitshow for the past 10 years.

+1. This is the reason the cluster idea is so puzzling. How does clustering with the admin at Miner improve anything? How would the Maury admin work with these people? Why hasn't DME looked into why the admin at Miner is poor?

What they should actually do is have the EH admins come in and advise Miner. EH has it nailed down over there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is the cluster idea, exactly? Will Maury admin control both schools, and the Miner admin be dismissed?

Nobody knows. I think they are just two separate schools with two sets of admins. The “cluster” is the feeder pattern and boundary, not a different relationship between the schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of note, Maury gets "majority white" phrase thrown around like it's 98.7% white in a gated community in suburb of Birmingham, Alabama.

It's 59%-41%. Someone smarter than me could do the math but if X number of students were POC and it's not a majority white school.

DME knows some special diversity formula that makes everything better?

And none of this has anything to do with improving educational outcomes for anyone.

Maury is definitely not majority white in the upper grades. Maybe in PK.

[Anonymous]

The way people keep making the focus about race instead of improving educational outcomes for every child is the reason gets away with incompetent proposals time and time again. Wake up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The way people keep making the focus about race instead of improving educational outcomes for every child is the reason DME gets away with incompetent proposals time and time again. Wake up.

*DME* gets away with

[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:Of note, Maury gets "majority white" phrase thrown around like it's 98.7% white in a gated community in suburb of Birmingham, Alabama.

It's 59%-41%. Someone smarter than me could do the math but if X number of students were POC and it's not a majority white school.

DME knows some special diversity formula that makes everything better?

And none of this has anything to do with improving educational outcomes for anyone.

Maury is definitely not majority white in the upper grades. Maybe in PK.

I’m sorry but a school that is 60% white is majority white. The only reason you people are against the cluster idea is due to fear of more black children coming to the school. You people aren’t slick. I hope it happens just to show ya’ll that you don’t run anything.

That sounds like a great attitude to run a diverse school system!

Why is it that whenever someone tries to do something to improve the educational outcomes of black children, the affluent folks are always up in arms? Like I previously said, Maury was a predominately black school and it needs to go back to being a diverse school. Now, black families are shut out. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that.

You know what actually sounds racist? Believing that black kids can only do well in school if there are enough white kids.

I’m sorry but last time I checked, I didn’t say anything about black children needing to be around white children to do well. Stop twisting people’s words to fit your agenda.

Then we don't need the cluster, right? Because what other reason is there?

And you just exposed yourself as being racist. The majority of the people against the cluster idea need to stop hiding behind excuse and admit the real reason they don’t like the idea. The bottom line is that most people believe that black children will dilute the Maury population. Somebody on the town hall already said this so the attitude is prevalent.

lol no. Logic is hard for you.

Most? Try again.

Drop offs. Logistics. School consistency. Outcomes. We keep saying these things and you ignore them and choose to race-bait. Try harder.

Anytime black people call out apparent racism, it’s always called “race baiting” by obvious guilty parties who want to shut down the conversation. No ma’m, not today. That’s what we aren’t going to do. The only “outcome” you’re concerned about is your fear of black children corrupting white students.

How about you tell us how DME's proposal improves the education of black children, whether they are at Maury or Miner?

https://upward-mobility.urban.org/school-economic-diversity

“Attending economically diverse schools with low concentrations of students experiencing poverty affects children’s long-term mobility prospects. Low-income children and children of color achieve better academic outcomes when they attend more economically and racially diverse schools”

[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:Of note, Maury gets "majority white" phrase thrown around like it's 98.7% white in a gated community in suburb of Birmingham, Alabama.

It's 59%-41%. Someone smarter than me could do the math but if X number of students were POC and it's not a majority white school.

DME knows some special diversity formula that makes everything better?

And none of this has anything to do with improving educational outcomes for anyone.

Maury is definitely not majority white in the upper grades. Maybe in PK.

I’m sorry but a school that is 60% white is majority white. The only reason you people are against the cluster idea is due to fear of more black children coming to the school. You people aren’t slick. I hope it happens just to show ya’ll that you don’t run anything.

That sounds like a great attitude to run a diverse school system!

Why is it that whenever someone tries to do something to improve the educational outcomes of black children, the affluent folks are always up in arms? Like I previously said, Maury was a predominately black school and it needs to go back to being a diverse school. Now, black families are shut out. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that.

You know what actually sounds racist? Believing that black kids can only do well in school if there are enough white kids.

I’m sorry but last time I checked, I didn’t say anything about black children needing to be around white children to do well. Stop twisting people’s words to fit your agenda.

Then we don't need the cluster, right? Because what other reason is there?

And you just exposed yourself as being racist. The majority of the people against the cluster idea need to stop hiding behind excuse and admit the real reason they don’t like the idea. The bottom line is that most people believe that black children will dilute the Maury population. Somebody on the town hall already said this so the attitude is prevalent.

lol no. Logic is hard for you.

Most? Try again.

Drop offs. Logistics. School consistency. Outcomes. We keep saying these things and you ignore them and choose to race-bait. Try harder.

Anytime black people call out apparent racism, it’s always called “race baiting” by obvious guilty parties who want to shut down the conversation. No ma’m, not today. That’s what we aren’t going to do. The only “outcome” you’re concerned about is your fear of black children corrupting white students.

How about you tell us how DME's proposal improves the education of black children, whether they are at Maury or Miner?

https://upward-mobility.urban.org/school-economic-diversity

“Attending economically diverse schools with low concentrations of students experiencing poverty affects children’s long-term mobility prospects. Low-income children and children of color achieve better academic outcomes when they attend more economically and racially diverse schools”

This is a reason to increase IB buy-in at Miner, not to completely dismantle the two schools. Also that research is likely based on boundary changes which is not the proposal here.

[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:Of note, Maury gets "majority white" phrase thrown around like it's 98.7% white in a gated community in suburb of Birmingham, Alabama.

It's 59%-41%. Someone smarter than me could do the math but if X number of students were POC and it's not a majority white school.

DME knows some special diversity formula that makes everything better?

And none of this has anything to do with improving educational outcomes for anyone.

Maury is definitely not majority white in the upper grades. Maybe in PK.

I’m sorry but a school that is 60% white is majority white. The only reason you people are against the cluster idea is due to fear of more black children coming to the school. You people aren’t slick. I hope it happens just to show ya’ll that you don’t run anything.

That sounds like a great attitude to run a diverse school system!

Why is it that whenever someone tries to do something to improve the educational outcomes of black children, the affluent folks are always up in arms? Like I previously said, Maury was a predominately black school and it needs to go back to being a diverse school. Now, black families are shut out. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that.

You know what actually sounds racist? Believing that black kids can only do well in school if there are enough white kids.

I’m sorry but last time I checked, I didn’t say anything about black children needing to be around white children to do well. Stop twisting people’s words to fit your agenda.

Then we don't need the cluster, right? Because what other reason is there?

And you just exposed yourself as being racist. The majority of the people against the cluster idea need to stop hiding behind excuse and admit the real reason they don’t like the idea. The bottom line is that most people believe that black children will dilute the Maury population. Somebody on the town hall already said this so the attitude is prevalent.

lol no. Logic is hard for you.

Most? Try again.

Drop offs. Logistics. School consistency. Outcomes. We keep saying these things and you ignore them and choose to race-bait. Try harder.

Anytime black people call out apparent racism, it’s always called “race baiting” by obvious guilty parties who want to shut down the conversation. No ma’m, not today. That’s what we aren’t going to do. The only “outcome” you’re concerned about is your fear of black children corrupting white students.

How about you tell us how DME's proposal improves the education of black children, whether they are at Maury or Miner?

https://upward-mobility.urban.org/school-economic-diversity

“Attending economically diverse schools with low concentrations of students experiencing poverty affects children’s long-term mobility prospects. Low-income children and children of color achieve better academic outcomes when they attend more economically and racially diverse schools”

There's nothing stopping Miner families from doing the same thing Maury families did. At the end of the day parents need to be involved and this silly cluster idea won't solve that.

This plan will erode trust in the system and cause an exodus. The two schools will end up like Miner and the entire system will suffer. But hey, I guess that would be fair in your mind.

[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:Of note, Maury gets "majority white" phrase thrown around like it's 98.7% white in a gated community in suburb of Birmingham, Alabama.

It's 59%-41%. Someone smarter than me could do the math but if X number of students were POC and it's not a majority white school.

DME knows some special diversity formula that makes everything better?

And none of this has anything to do with improving educational outcomes for anyone.

Maury is definitely not majority white in the upper grades. Maybe in PK.

I’m sorry but a school that is 60% white is majority white. The only reason you people are against the cluster idea is due to fear of more black children coming to the school. You people aren’t slick. I hope it happens just to show ya’ll that you don’t run anything.

That sounds like a great attitude to run a diverse school system!

Why is it that whenever someone tries to do something to improve the educational outcomes of black children, the affluent folks are always up in arms? Like I previously said, Maury was a predominately black school and it needs to go back to being a diverse school. Now, black families are shut out. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that.

You know what actually sounds racist? Believing that black kids can only do well in school if there are enough white kids.

I’m sorry but last time I checked, I didn’t say anything about black children needing to be around white children to do well. Stop twisting people’s words to fit your agenda.

Then we don't need the cluster, right? Because what other reason is there?

And you just exposed yourself as being racist. The majority of the people against the cluster idea need to stop hiding behind excuse and admit the real reason they don’t like the idea. The bottom line is that most people believe that black children will dilute the Maury population. Somebody on the town hall already said this so the attitude is prevalent.

lol no. Logic is hard for you.

Most? Try again.

Drop offs. Logistics. School consistency. Outcomes. We keep saying these things and you ignore them and choose to race-bait. Try harder.

Anytime black people call out apparent racism, it’s always called “race baiting” by obvious guilty parties who want to shut down the conversation. No ma’m, not today. That’s what we aren’t going to do. The only “outcome” you’re concerned about is your fear of black children corrupting white students.

How about you tell us how DME's proposal improves the education of black children, whether they are at Maury or Miner?

https://upward-mobility.urban.org/school-economic-diversity

“Attending economically diverse schools with low concentrations of students experiencing poverty affects children’s long-term mobility prospects. Low-income children and children of color achieve better academic outcomes when they attend more economically and racially diverse schools”

If you do your research, you'll see that the studies on this have pretty mixed results.

[Anonymous]

I think the cluster idea is half-baked as best and will pose as many problems as it solves.

BUT I do think that just looking at the boundary lines and demographics for these two schools (my children attend neither), it's obvious to me that Miner is taking on all the more difficult educational duties of the neighborhood. Literally all the low income housing in Hill East is zoned to Miner, Payne, Tyler. None of it to Maury. Of course Maury has high test scores and strong IB buy in! They have a nice little island of UMC people to draw from.

I'd be curious to know what percentage of Maury's already low at-risk student body is OOB.

The problem here is the boundary lines. They should be redrawn so that every school in Hill East is taking on a reasonable share of low income and at risk IB kids. I know with the lottery not all of these families will choose to go IB, but the boundaries should accurately reflect the composition of the neighborhood. Right now, Maury's boundary doesn't. It honestly looks like redlining when you look at the demographics of the neighborhood.

Drop the cluster idea, address the fact that the boundary lines are drawn so that Maury has a significantly wealthier, whiter IB demographic than other Hill East Schools.

Let's have Maury educating an actually represented cross-section of the neighborhood, and then see if they still want to brag about their test scores. It's easy to achieve high test scores when you have a high percentage of UMC kids with highly involved parents.