Maury Elementary feedback?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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).

Typo - Meant to say 3 offers for inbounds *without* sibling preference. And yes, my understanding is that it is at the school's discretion when they can release the set-aside seats to fill with non-set-aside waitlist. So there is certainly a good chance the WL will move at least 1-2 more times by August.

[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.

Yeah, that was the main interaction that colored my views. There were a lot of parents (who, by the way, benefit from a silly looking boundary designed to increase equity) focusing not on perfectly understandable concerns about timelines, numbers, etc. but issues like pedagogical differences, Miner student performance, property values, and lots of othering.

Of course, that group could have been a vocal obnoxious minority, which exist everywhere in the world!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yeah, that was the main interaction that colored my views. There were a lot of parents (who, by the way, benefit from a silly looking boundary designed to increase equity) focusing not on perfectly understandable concerns about timelines, numbers, etc. but issues like pedagogical differences, Miner student performance, property values, and lots of othering.

Of course, that group could have been a vocal obnoxious minority, which exist everywhere in the world!

Maybe that was because the one side started the convo by calling everyone racist.

BTW: "othering" is not a word. Please use real words that normal people understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Maury parent here. Like most other elementary schools there are some overinvolved annoying parents at the ECE level but this starts to evaporate as the kids get older. By and large most people are on the Hill because we want to be in an urban setting that is less pretentious so it is very easy to find lots of parents who are chill. And also very smart! I am very happy we settled on the Hill to raise kids. I don’t think you can go wrong at any Hill elementary school (although I am jealous of the ones that have bigger playgrounds - but my son still insists the Maury playground is the best.)

As far as IEP support goes, we were very happy in ECE - 2nd then Covid messed everything up. But for the crucial activities of the early years (learning to read, write and do math) Maury was great. As an older kid my kid didn’t need the academic small group pullouts but they helped him make friends and with social skills. The school overall is really good at creating groups for kids with IEPs to socialize.

[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?

Where did you get that impression?

[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.

Exactly. anyone who found Maury parents distasteful and is in favor of more integration can easily find a more affordable place zones for Miner. Nobody is stopping you! You could probably also just live in the Maury zone and lottery for Miner.

[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).

My big objection to the plan was that it was totally contentless when it came to actually improving educational outcomes. Just a total fairy tale based on a belief that whiter schools are better for black kids. which … yeah.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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).

My big objection to the plan was that it was totally contentless when it came to actually improving educational outcomes. Just a total fairy tale based on a belief that whiter schools are better for black kids. which … yeah.

It has been obvious to anyone who has sat in a single DCPS meeting dating back to the Gray administration that the only plan to close the achievement gap is to drag the top down. The proposal was another pass at that effort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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).

My big objection to the plan was that it was totally contentless when it came to actually improving educational outcomes. Just a total fairy tale based on a belief that whiter schools are better for black kids. which … yeah.

It has been obvious to anyone who has sat in a single DCPS meeting dating back to the Gray administration that the only plan to close the achievement gap is to drag the top down. The proposal was another pass at that effort.

I don’t think their plan even was that coherent! I would have respected it more if they said “we’re going to put more resources into remediation and cut the specials teachers” or whatever. Not that I would have agreed with that but at least it would have been something other than “white kids are Magic.”

[Anonymous]

We lotteried into Maury for third grade (from a charter) and kid needed a 504 plan. Maury was awesome to work with to set it up and all staff were more than willing to work with us to ensure our kid was getting the support they needed. Could not be happier we ended up there.

[Anonymous]

The principal on Maury has been on maternity leave, which was a little rough at the end of last year when the AP was put on leave. Surprisingly (and sadly), he came back. The social worker and psychologist are both fantastic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The principal on Maury has been on maternity leave, which was a little rough at the end of last year when the AP was put on leave. Surprisingly (and sadly), he came back. The social worker and psychologist are both fantastic.

Doesn’t Maury have a new AP for next year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The principal on Maury has been on maternity leave, which was a little rough at the end of last year when the AP was put on leave. Surprisingly (and sadly), he came back. The social worker and psychologist are both fantastic.

The AP was not put on leave. He was also out on parental leave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The principal on Maury has been on maternity leave, which was a little rough at the end of last year when the AP was put on leave. Surprisingly (and sadly), he came back. The social worker and psychologist are both fantastic.

The AP was not put on leave. He was also out on parental leave.

Interesting. He was definitely being investigated while he was out however they want to spin the leave.

[Anonymous]

For what? This Maury parent has not heard one whisper about anything like this.