Pros/cons of Brent vs Maury?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Maury neighborhood is way more suburban feeling than the Brent one. It's just not near stuff, except for the southwest corner of the district. The L-T and Brent zones (& Watkins, but I wouldn't go there) are the ones that have the commercial stretches/interesting stuff by and large.

I would not head to Brent to possibly get stuck in swing space for 1/3 of your time. That would be crazy.

I'd seriously check out L-T if I were in your shoes. The best aftercare of the lot and comparable test scores.

LT housing stock is poor though. And i know many people who aren’t keen on the school upper grades, but worth investigating. I personally would not want to be near H St, and you can buy a 5 minute to 10 minute block away from H in the Maury district.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Maury neighborhood is way more suburban feeling than the Brent one. It's just not near stuff, except for the southwest corner of the district. The L-T and Brent zones (& Watkins, but I wouldn't go there) are the ones that have the commercial stretches/interesting stuff by and large.

I would not head to Brent to possibly get stuck in swing space for 1/3 of your time. That would be crazy.

I'd seriously check out L-T if I were in your shoes. The best aftercare of the lot and comparable test scores.

LT housing stock is poor though. And i know many people who aren’t keen on the school upper grades, but worth investigating. I personally would not want to be near H St, and you can buy a 5 minute to 10 minute block away from H in the Maury district.

Say more! Tell us about how dangerous it is north of H Street and how people are better off living 12th-5th nowhere near a metro than living close to a metro and near way more amenities. 1998 called, it wants its real estate logic back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A challenge at Brent is so many families start peeling off that the kid your child becomes friends with may not be there for 4th (and repeat for 5th).

It happens at Maury as well - but not to the same extent.

Data does not support this claim. Both had 11 move to BASIS.

Can you share the data source that supports this? Mostly curious to see the trends in 5th and 6th grader movements from Maury. As a mom to an ECE kid I am trying to wrap my mind around what ppl do beyond elementary.

https://dme.dc.gov/page/download-data

It requires some logic and noodling to put it together. For instance, there are 24 kids at Tyler who are IB for Brent. One assumes those kids are in PS3 and PK4 and didn't start at Brent and leave in upper ES. There are 11 kids at SWS who are IB for Maury. One assumes those kids didn't depart Maury for SWS in upper grades. BASIS is easier since the only overlapping year is 5th so we know with certainty that the kids moved there in 5th.

Interesting info, thanks for sharing. So does this mean in 2021 no one from Maury nor Brent went to Latin in 5th??

No. The reporting threshold is 10. There were 27 kids at Latin IB for Jefferson MS, 29 IB for EH MS and 42 from SH. No way of knowing what ES catchments those numbers came from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Maury neighborhood is way more suburban feeling than the Brent one. It's just not near stuff, except for the southwest corner of the district. The L-T and Brent zones (& Watkins, but I wouldn't go there) are the ones that have the commercial stretches/interesting stuff by and large.

I would not head to Brent to possibly get stuck in swing space for 1/3 of your time. That would be crazy.

I'd seriously check out L-T if I were in your shoes. The best aftercare of the lot and comparable test scores.

LT housing stock is poor though. And i know many people who aren’t keen on the school upper grades, but worth investigating. I personally would not want to be near H St, and you can buy a 5 minute to 10 minute block away from H in the Maury district.

Say more! Tell us about how dangerous it is north of H Street and how people are better off living 12th-5th nowhere near a metro than living close to a metro and near way more amenities. 1998 called, it wants its real estate logic back.

LT housing stock is poor? In what sense? It has more expensive housing on average than the Maury zone, FYI, per Redfin. The cheap part of the Maury zone (e.g., the open air drug market at 15 & C NE) is both way more dangerous and near less stuff than anything in the L-T zone... If you don't want to be near stuff, then yes L-T is not a good IB. But why are you focused on Capitol Hill if you don't want to live near stuff? Then you might as well go to quasi-suburban NW and get a good middle school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Maury neighborhood is way more suburban feeling than the Brent one. It's just not near stuff, except for the southwest corner of the district. The L-T and Brent zones (& Watkins, but I wouldn't go there) are the ones that have the commercial stretches/interesting stuff by and large.

I would not head to Brent to possibly get stuck in swing space for 1/3 of your time. That would be crazy.

I'd seriously check out L-T if I were in your shoes. The best aftercare of the lot and comparable test scores.

The way more suburban part is just one of a few reasons I'd go with Maury over Brent. The area right around Maury hits a sweet spot between all the retail, shops and activities at Eastern Market and H St without some of the less desirable crime and rat aspects that come with them. You can easily walk, bike, scooter to anything but have a very residential, neighborhood feeling. We've been very happy with Maury teachers, admin and our kids' experiences there. We don't know what we'll do when middle school comes around. We like to think we'll send them to Eliot Hine, but we will make decisions when the time comes.

[Anonymous]

I would just go with whichever school has the house you want to rent. Unless the Brent swing space thing is real. Swing space sucks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would just go with whichever school has the house you want to rent. Unless the Brent swing space thing is real. Swing space sucks.

Yes, this is the correct answer. Fact is, DC affords with a lot of choices beyond your boundary schools, so there really isn't a good reason to obsess over and pay for school boundaries. Beyond that, let me just say about what really matters: We - with now almost grown kids - always opted for what's near and it all worked out fine.That included mostly Title I schools and some options DCUM regularly trashes. Kids are thriving and on track to doing well in college. There are so many other things that determine your children's happiness and academic achievement. You most of all.

[Anonymous]

Not OP but I am bumping this up for additional LT and Brent comparisons. In at one and just got an offer for the other for K. Housing and transit are not an issue as commute would be about the same for us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not OP but I am bumping this up for additional LT and Brent comparisons. In at one and just got an offer for the other for K. Housing and transit are not an issue as commute would be about the same for us.

I think the schools are more similar than different at this point... But when we had to make this choice last year, we stuck with LT. I talked to a lot of families we knew at both schools and the overall sense I got was that Brent was richer, whiter and a bit more insular. Although the schools have similar IB rates now (63 v 68), LT has a recent history of an OOB majority whereas Brent has actually seen its IB decrease recently, so LT seemed a bit more welcoming/we're lucky to have you towards OOB families vs a little resentful, if that makes sense. (LT classes also max out at 22 kids and there are only 2 classes over 20, so there is also not a sense that OOB families are making classes too full, which may help too. I'm not sure.) Also because our kids are also young, the facilities situatio weighed for me as well. Brent's building is in really bad shape (terrible air quality numbers during COVID, overcrowded) and then they will be in swing space in 2 years and it could take 2 years until they get what should then be a really beautiful building back, and by that time my kids will be pratically out the door. Also, the differences between the two schools' outdoor facilities are pretty noticeable, but Brent has Garfield park right there, so maybe it doesn't matter.

Because we stayed at LT, I have way more familiarity with it. But we've had a really great experience. My kids' teachers are very good and truly amazing. The specials teachers are great. The after school clubs and aftercare are particularly incredible -- really unmatched anywhere on the Hill. The community events are really well done. Of course, we know families that are incredibly happy at Brent, so I don't think you can go wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not OP but I am bumping this up for additional LT and Brent comparisons. In at one and just got an offer for the other for K. Housing and transit are not an issue as commute would be about the same for us.

I think the schools are more similar than different at this point... But when we had to make this choice last year, we stuck with LT. I talked to a lot of families we knew at both schools and the overall sense I got was that Brent was richer, whiter and a bit more insular. Although the schools have similar IB rates now (63 v 68), LT has a recent history of an OOB majority whereas Brent has actually seen its IB decrease recently, so LT seemed a bit more welcoming/we're lucky to have you towards OOB families vs a little resentful, if that makes sense. (LT classes also max out at 22 kids and there are only 2 classes over 20, so there is also not a sense that OOB families are making classes too full, which may help too. I'm not sure.) Also because our kids are also young, the facilities situatio weighed for me as well. Brent's building is in really bad shape (terrible air quality numbers during COVID, overcrowded) and then they will be in swing space in 2 years and it could take 2 years until they get what should then be a really beautiful building back, and by that time my kids will be pratically out the door. Also, the differences between the two schools' outdoor facilities are pretty noticeable, but Brent has Garfield park right there, so maybe it doesn't matter.

Because we stayed at LT, I have way more familiarity with it. But we've had a really great experience. My kids' teachers are very good and truly amazing. The specials teachers are great. The after school clubs and aftercare are particularly incredible -- really unmatched anywhere on the Hill. The community events are really well done. Of course, we know families that are incredibly happy at Brent, so I don't think you can go wrong.

No hate toward LT. I am sure it is fine. Just noting for context that, if you read the threads on this board, there is obviously a post (or group of posters?) who spend their time talking up LT. I am not sure if it is PTA moms trying to build up their school or people who invested in housing in that zone hoping to get more appreciation. Still, it's notable, and you should view their comments in that light. For most people on the Hill, Brent and Maury are generally regarded as the top performers, which is why the LT posters also try to force themselves into discussions about those two schools or to favorably compare LT to those two schools. I have only limited experience with LT, so don't mean to bash it. However, I will say that the LT posting pops out as quite coordinated or purposerful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not OP but I am bumping this up for additional LT and Brent comparisons. In at one and just got an offer for the other for K. Housing and transit are not an issue as commute would be about the same for us.

I think the schools are more similar than different at this point... But when we had to make this choice last year, we stuck with LT. I talked to a lot of families we knew at both schools and the overall sense I got was that Brent was richer, whiter and a bit more insular. Although the schools have similar IB rates now (63 v 68), LT has a recent history of an OOB majority whereas Brent has actually seen its IB decrease recently, so LT seemed a bit more welcoming/we're lucky to have you towards OOB families vs a little resentful, if that makes sense. (LT classes also max out at 22 kids and there are only 2 classes over 20, so there is also not a sense that OOB families are making classes too full, which may help too. I'm not sure.) Also because our kids are also young, the facilities situatio weighed for me as well. Brent's building is in really bad shape (terrible air quality numbers during COVID, overcrowded) and then they will be in swing space in 2 years and it could take 2 years until they get what should then be a really beautiful building back, and by that time my kids will be pratically out the door. Also, the differences between the two schools' outdoor facilities are pretty noticeable, but Brent has Garfield park right there, so maybe it doesn't matter.

Because we stayed at LT, I have way more familiarity with it. But we've had a really great experience. My kids' teachers are very good and truly amazing. The specials teachers are great. The after school clubs and aftercare are particularly incredible -- really unmatched anywhere on the Hill. The community events are really well done. Of course, we know families that are incredibly happy at Brent, so I don't think you can go wrong.

No hate toward LT. I am sure it is fine. Just noting for context that, if you read the threads on this board, there is obviously a post (or group of posters?) who spend their time talking up LT. I am not sure if it is PTA moms trying to build up their school or people who invested in housing in that zone hoping to get more appreciation. Still, it's notable, and you should view their comments in that light. For most people on the Hill, Brent and Maury are generally regarded as the top performers, which is why the LT posters also try to force themselves into discussions about those two schools or to favorably compare LT to those two schools. I have only limited experience with LT, so don't mean to bash it. However, I will say that the LT posting pops out as quite coordinated or purposerful.

Wow, and this really reads like a Bitter Betty that your school’s club has gotten less exclusive. You don’t think it could be a group of families that are happy at LT? That’s less likely than real estate speculators? Really?

I think the PP was pretty open that Brent was more gentrified/richer than LT. Is that what you mean by a top performer? Last year’s PARCC scores split between the two schools and lean to LT if you account for demographics. What performance are you talking about, specifically?

My personal take is that Brent posters are bitter that Maury has clearly eclipsed them as the best regarded school on the Hill. Or perhaps it’s an orchestrated effort by real estate investors!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not OP but I am bumping this up for additional LT and Brent comparisons. In at one and just got an offer for the other for K. Housing and transit are not an issue as commute would be about the same for us.

I think the schools are more similar than different at this point... But when we had to make this choice last year, we stuck with LT. I talked to a lot of families we knew at both schools and the overall sense I got was that Brent was richer, whiter and a bit more insular. Although the schools have similar IB rates now (63 v 68), LT has a recent history of an OOB majority whereas Brent has actually seen its IB decrease recently, so LT seemed a bit more welcoming/we're lucky to have you towards OOB families vs a little resentful, if that makes sense. (LT classes also max out at 22 kids and there are only 2 classes over 20, so there is also not a sense that OOB families are making classes too full, which may help too. I'm not sure.) Also because our kids are also young, the facilities situatio weighed for me as well. Brent's building is in really bad shape (terrible air quality numbers during COVID, overcrowded) and then they will be in swing space in 2 years and it could take 2 years until they get what should then be a really beautiful building back, and by that time my kids will be pratically out the door. Also, the differences between the two schools' outdoor facilities are pretty noticeable, but Brent has Garfield park right there, so maybe it doesn't matter.

Because we stayed at LT, I have way more familiarity with it. But we've had a really great experience. My kids' teachers are very good and truly amazing. The specials teachers are great. The after school clubs and aftercare are particularly incredible -- really unmatched anywhere on the Hill. The community events are really well done. Of course, we know families that are incredibly happy at Brent, so I don't think you can go wrong.

No hate toward LT. I am sure it is fine. Just noting for context that, if you read the threads on this board, there is obviously a post (or group of posters?) who spend their time talking up LT. I am not sure if it is PTA moms trying to build up their school or people who invested in housing in that zone hoping to get more appreciation. Still, it's notable, and you should view their comments in that light. For most people on the Hill, Brent and Maury are generally regarded as the top performers, which is why the LT posters also try to force themselves into discussions about those two schools or to favorably compare LT to those two schools. I have only limited experience with LT, so don't mean to bash it. However, I will say that the LT posting pops out as quite coordinated or purposerful.

I mean the PP literally asked for a comparison of Brent and Ludlow, so I'm curious how your take is that Ludlow was forcing itself into that discussion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not OP but I am bumping this up for additional LT and Brent comparisons. In at one and just got an offer for the other for K. Housing and transit are not an issue as commute would be about the same for us.

I think the schools are more similar than different at this point... But when we had to make this choice last year, we stuck with LT. I talked to a lot of families we knew at both schools and the overall sense I got was that Brent was richer, whiter and a bit more insular. Although the schools have similar IB rates now (63 v 68), LT has a recent history of an OOB majority whereas Brent has actually seen its IB decrease recently, so LT seemed a bit more welcoming/we're lucky to have you towards OOB families vs a little resentful, if that makes sense. (LT classes also max out at 22 kids and there are only 2 classes over 20, so there is also not a sense that OOB families are making classes too full, which may help too. I'm not sure.) Also because our kids are also young, the facilities situatio weighed for me as well. Brent's building is in really bad shape (terrible air quality numbers during COVID, overcrowded) and then they will be in swing space in 2 years and it could take 2 years until they get what should then be a really beautiful building back, and by that time my kids will be pratically out the door. Also, the differences between the two schools' outdoor facilities are pretty noticeable, but Brent has Garfield park right there, so maybe it doesn't matter.

Because we stayed at LT, I have way more familiarity with it. But we've had a really great experience. My kids' teachers are very good and truly amazing. The specials teachers are great. The after school clubs and aftercare are particularly incredible -- really unmatched anywhere on the Hill. The community events are really well done. Of course, we know families that are incredibly happy at Brent, so I don't think you can go wrong.

I think the title of the thread is "Pros/cons of Brent vs Maury?" and it only turned to LT because the LT brigade showed up.

No hate toward LT. I am sure it is fine. Just noting for context that, if you read the threads on this board, there is obviously a post (or group of posters?) who spend their time talking up LT. I am not sure if it is PTA moms trying to build up their school or people who invested in housing in that zone hoping to get more appreciation. Still, it's notable, and you should view their comments in that light. For most people on the Hill, Brent and Maury are generally regarded as the top performers, which is why the LT posters also try to force themselves into discussions about those two schools or to favorably compare LT to those two schools. I have only limited experience with LT, so don't mean to bash it. However, I will say that the LT posting pops out as quite coordinated or purposerful.

I mean the PP literally asked for a comparison of Brent and Ludlow, so I'm curious how your take is that Ludlow was forcing itself into that discussion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not OP but I am bumping this up for additional LT and Brent comparisons. In at one and just got an offer for the other for K. Housing and transit are not an issue as commute would be about the same for us.

I think the schools are more similar than different at this point... But when we had to make this choice last year, we stuck with LT. I talked to a lot of families we knew at both schools and the overall sense I got was that Brent was richer, whiter and a bit more insular. Although the schools have similar IB rates now (63 v 68), LT has a recent history of an OOB majority whereas Brent has actually seen its IB decrease recently, so LT seemed a bit more welcoming/we're lucky to have you towards OOB families vs a little resentful, if that makes sense. (LT classes also max out at 22 kids and there are only 2 classes over 20, so there is also not a sense that OOB families are making classes too full, which may help too. I'm not sure.) Also because our kids are also young, the facilities situatio weighed for me as well. Brent's building is in really bad shape (terrible air quality numbers during COVID, overcrowded) and then they will be in swing space in 2 years and it could take 2 years until they get what should then be a really beautiful building back, and by that time my kids will be pratically out the door. Also, the differences between the two schools' outdoor facilities are pretty noticeable, but Brent has Garfield park right there, so maybe it doesn't matter.

Because we stayed at LT, I have way more familiarity with it. But we've had a really great experience. My kids' teachers are very good and truly amazing. The specials teachers are great. The after school clubs and aftercare are particularly incredible -- really unmatched anywhere on the Hill. The community events are really well done. Of course, we know families that are incredibly happy at Brent, so I don't think you can go wrong.

No hate toward LT. I am sure it is fine. Just noting for context that, if you read the threads on this board, there is obviously a post (or group of posters?) who spend their time talking up LT. I am not sure if it is PTA moms trying to build up their school or people who invested in housing in that zone hoping to get more appreciation. Still, it's notable, and you should view their comments in that light. For most people on the Hill, Brent and Maury are generally regarded as the top performers, which is why the LT posters also try to force themselves into discussions about those two schools or to favorably compare LT to those two schools. I have only limited experience with LT, so don't mean to bash it. However, I will say that the LT posting pops out as quite coordinated or purposerful.

I mean the PP literally asked for a comparison of Brent and Ludlow, so I'm curious how your take is that Ludlow was forcing itself into that discussion?

The title of the thread is "Pros/cons of Brent vs Maury" and it only turned to LT because the LT brigade showed up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not OP but I am bumping this up for additional LT and Brent comparisons. In at one and just got an offer for the other for K. Housing and transit are not an issue as commute would be about the same for us.

I think the schools are more similar than different at this point... But when we had to make this choice last year, we stuck with LT. I talked to a lot of families we knew at both schools and the overall sense I got was that Brent was richer, whiter and a bit more insular. Although the schools have similar IB rates now (63 v 68), LT has a recent history of an OOB majority whereas Brent has actually seen its IB decrease recently, so LT seemed a bit more welcoming/we're lucky to have you towards OOB families vs a little resentful, if that makes sense. (LT classes also max out at 22 kids and there are only 2 classes over 20, so there is also not a sense that OOB families are making classes too full, which may help too. I'm not sure.) Also because our kids are also young, the facilities situatio weighed for me as well. Brent's building is in really bad shape (terrible air quality numbers during COVID, overcrowded) and then they will be in swing space in 2 years and it could take 2 years until they get what should then be a really beautiful building back, and by that time my kids will be pratically out the door. Also, the differences between the two schools' outdoor facilities are pretty noticeable, but Brent has Garfield park right there, so maybe it doesn't matter.

Because we stayed at LT, I have way more familiarity with it. But we've had a really great experience. My kids' teachers are very good and truly amazing. The specials teachers are great. The after school clubs and aftercare are particularly incredible -- really unmatched anywhere on the Hill. The community events are really well done. Of course, we know families that are incredibly happy at Brent, so I don't think you can go wrong.

No hate toward LT. I am sure it is fine. Just noting for context that, if you read the threads on this board, there is obviously a post (or group of posters?) who spend their time talking up LT. I am not sure if it is PTA moms trying to build up their school or people who invested in housing in that zone hoping to get more appreciation. Still, it's notable, and you should view their comments in that light. For most people on the Hill, Brent and Maury are generally regarded as the top performers, which is why the LT posters also try to force themselves into discussions about those two schools or to favorably compare LT to those two schools. I have only limited experience with LT, so don't mean to bash it. However, I will say that the LT posting pops out as quite coordinated or purposerful.

Wow, and this really reads like a Bitter Betty that your school’s club has gotten less exclusive. You don’t think it could be a group of families that are happy at LT? That’s less likely than real estate speculators? Really?

I think the PP was pretty open that Brent was more gentrified/richer than LT. Is that what you mean by a top performer? Last year’s PARCC scores split between the two schools and lean to LT if you account for demographics. What performance are you talking about, specifically?

My personal take is that Brent posters are bitter that Maury has clearly eclipsed them as the best regarded school on the Hill. Or perhaps it’s an orchestrated effort by real estate investors!

Ok, but when was the last time you saw Brent or Maury parents inserting themselves into threads about LT? I actually don't have kids at Brent or Maury either. I am just an observer from the neighborhood who finds boosterism tiresome. Now, I will grant you that LT seems like a fine place. I would not have a problem sending my kids there, but we are elsewhere. I responded only to provide some additional color and context to the person asking.