Maury Capitol Hill

[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:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

This. EH is filled with families who struck out in the lottery and are trying to get a few more years in the city / hoping to lottery into Walls. IB families are not “choosing” EH.

There are absolutely EH families that choose EH over one of those charters … I’m under no illusions about having to find a different solution for HS but so far so good.

So you "chose" EH over a spot at Latin? Even though you won't use your IB HS? You are an example of what I described my friend. You feel you have options for HS; private $, move within DC, move out of DC, etc.

This. People will talk about going to EH or SH (or Jefferson) but their plan for HS is Walls, Banneker, private, or move. The plan is never Eastern. So it's tiresome when people talk about increased buy in for SH and EH (and let's get real about how much increased buy-in these schools are getting) without acknowledging that this is just people postponing their Plan Bs a few more years, not actually buying into the Ward 6 high school.

Both of these conversations can be true. The prior poster had the uninformed and inaccurate picture that all families at EH had already tried and struck out lottery. My family and many others never did the lottery and intended ongoing to EH from the get go.
As for high school, we are not ruling out Eastern but plan to learn about other public school options as well. Participating in the city's school choice system, especially for high school when there are very different programs does not mean you cannot be interested in and choose to go to your neighborhood middle school.

Not even entering the lottery is the picture of entitlement. In order to have acted in that manner you must have access to resources that informed that decision. There's nothing wrong with that, by the way. I would love to have mommy/daddy money to pay for private school. I would love to have a job that allows me to cash flow Sidwell in 9th. I would love to be able to move houses at the drop of a hat without regard to financial impact. Good for you.

But here's the thing. People like you ought not lecture people without those options or advantages about what they could or should do. It's the equivalent of having a parachute on under your jacket and encouraging others to get on a plane that is likely to crash, because "what if it doesn't and we reach our destination?"

I stand by my position that no one without HS options chose E-H without at least considering alternatives that solved for HS.

Ok. What’s your point again? The actual EH families’ point is that EH is going fine and we are reasonably happy. Not that we love the HS options or might have taken a spot at Latin. There’s always something potentially better so I struggle to understand why “striking out in the lottery” means EH is bad.

DP, but the point is that when you say lots of Maury families are "choosing EH" without acknowledging that these families often have resources that make them less stressed about HS.

People will lament the families who leave Hill elementaries in 5th for Latin or BASIS and try to argue "what's wrong with EH, SH, and Jefferson?" But the MSs are not the point. The high schools are. The people who lottery for characters in 5th and take those spots are not thrilled about giving up neighborhood schools and taking on long commutes for the next 8 years. They do it because they cannot afford to risk their kid not getting into Walls or Banneker, because they have no other good options. If you absolutely, 100% cannot afford private, and if moving would be a major financial stress (keep in mind that if you don't have a ton of money for private, you will also be limited as to where you can move and will likely not have access to the best suburban high schools either), then EH could be a freaking palace and a lot of parents would still choose a charter with an okay HS feed.

I often hear from Hill families that you have to be "willing to play the game." What this ignores is that some people are playing that game with extra cards. It is much easier to "roll the dice" on EH and the hope of Walls admissions if your back up is, to give a very common example, Gonzaga with with help from grandparents to cover costs. It's also easier to do if you have an HHI of 500k and you bought your Hill row house for 400k 15 years ago, so if you want to bail and move to Bethesda or Northern Virginia at any point, there are few barriers to you doing so.

Some of us cannot afford to do that. I do not ever want to put my kid in the position of having to get a spot in an application high school in DC or attend Eastern. Especially when grabbing spots at those applications schools becomes more and more of a crap shoot every year.

OK well that’s an argument not to move here in the first place, which is totally reasonable. From time immemorial, people have chosen homes based on schools. I myself will probably move us for HS. But none of that detracts from the fact that a) plenty of satisfaction w EH among current families and b) some people really do have lower stress levels and are fine with “seeing how it plays out.”

You’re proving PP’s point.

What point???? That most Hill kids don’t go IB for HS? Everyone knows that.

No. That the only people at Maury who "choose" EH do it because they have resources to avoid Eastern and don't have to rely on lotterying into a charter with a HS feed.

If you do not have resources for private or the ability to easily move IB for a good high school if your kid gets locked out of Walls/Banneker, then you do not have the luxury of "choosing" EH. It is irrelevant to people in this category withe EH is good or bad. EH feeds to Eastern, Eastern is not an acceptable HS choice, thus EH is not actually a viable MS choice unless you have special resources that will enable you to avoid Eastern no matter what.

I mean everyone who goes to EH from Maury has already chosen to be IB for Eastern, so your argument seems to apply to Maury as well? Seems like you are trying to prove EH is “bad” because people who have no choice have to go there? You’re not making any sense. Meanwhile we’re happy there so 🤷‍♀️

[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:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

This. EH is filled with families who struck out in the lottery and are trying to get a few more years in the city / hoping to lottery into Walls. IB families are not “choosing” EH.

There are absolutely EH families that choose EH over one of those charters … I’m under no illusions about having to find a different solution for HS but so far so good.

So you "chose" EH over a spot at Latin? Even though you won't use your IB HS? You are an example of what I described my friend. You feel you have options for HS; private $, move within DC, move out of DC, etc.

This. People will talk about going to EH or SH (or Jefferson) but their plan for HS is Walls, Banneker, private, or move. The plan is never Eastern. So it's tiresome when people talk about increased buy in for SH and EH (and let's get real about how much increased buy-in these schools are getting) without acknowledging that this is just people postponing their Plan Bs a few more years, not actually buying into the Ward 6 high school.

Both of these conversations can be true. The prior poster had the uninformed and inaccurate picture that all families at EH had already tried and struck out lottery. My family and many others never did the lottery and intended ongoing to EH from the get go.
As for high school, we are not ruling out Eastern but plan to learn about other public school options as well. Participating in the city's school choice system, especially for high school when there are very different programs does not mean you cannot be interested in and choose to go to your neighborhood middle school.

Not even entering the lottery is the picture of entitlement. In order to have acted in that manner you must have access to resources that informed that decision. There's nothing wrong with that, by the way. I would love to have mommy/daddy money to pay for private school. I would love to have a job that allows me to cash flow Sidwell in 9th. I would love to be able to move houses at the drop of a hat without regard to financial impact. Good for you.

But here's the thing. People like you ought not lecture people without those options or advantages about what they could or should do. It's the equivalent of having a parachute on under your jacket and encouraging others to get on a plane that is likely to crash, because "what if it doesn't and we reach our destination?"

I stand by my position that no one without HS options chose E-H without at least considering alternatives that solved for HS.

Ok. What’s your point again? The actual EH families’ point is that EH is going fine and we are reasonably happy. Not that we love the HS options or might have taken a spot at Latin. There’s always something potentially better so I struggle to understand why “striking out in the lottery” means EH is bad.

EH is objectively a bad school. You may be telling yourself that middle school academics don’t matter so it’s “going fine” but that doesn’t make it a good school. The academics are abysmal.

Do you have a kid there?

Seriously. The comments on this thread are exhausting. Some people choose one school, some people choose another. Great, that is why we have a lottery/school choice system. The vitriol and assumptions about people who choose to attend a DCPS middle school and think their kids are getting a good education is uncalled for. The merits of judging a school solely on test scores is a conversation for another day, as is the fact that kids can and do learn while in classrooms with kids of varying academic levels.

The vitriol stems from limited choice, because even with the lottery, parents in DC actually have very few good or reliable school choices past elementary school.

And the judgment flows both ways, all the time. Parents who go to charters are judged for "abandoning" DCPS. Parents who lottery into OOB DCPS are viewed as carpet baggers. Parents who send kids to schools with lower test scores (schools like Miner, which has been repeatedly trashed on this thread) are viewed as inadequate. Parents who move out of the city are views as weak-willed. And so on.

Basically the only parents who don't get judged in DC are the ones who send their kids to high quality IB DCPS schools. Like Maury. But then parents in that situation tend to judge everyone else for not being in that situation.

If this situation bothers you, you actually have to fix education in DC so that that people aren't constantly fighting over the very limited resource of good schools in this city.

I think there are small sub-segments of each population that come on here to judge. But outside of this forum, the vast majority of parents at schools are not wasting their energy on this. There are lots of good options in this city, many families are happy at a lot of different schools, not just the few that constantly get praised here . Mainly I am just suggesting people try to have a productive dialogue - when things devolve into uninformed insults from either side, it is unproductive. Even if both sides do it, doesn't mean it is right - isn't that we teach our kids?

The entire premise of this thread is for Maury parents to get mad about the prospect of merging with Miner. If this were a city with "lots of good options" for schools where families were "happy at lots of different schools" I do not think you would see the level of horror and anger in response to this proposal that you see.

Parents know Maury is one of a small handful of decent schools in Ward 6, and Miner is very much not, and this conversation revolves around parents at Maury trying to protect their access to what they are fully aware is a very precious resource.

I might be more inclined to agree with you if this thread were full of praise for Miner but let's get real 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:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

This. EH is filled with families who struck out in the lottery and are trying to get a few more years in the city / hoping to lottery into Walls. IB families are not “choosing” EH.

There are absolutely EH families that choose EH over one of those charters … I’m under no illusions about having to find a different solution for HS but so far so good.

So you "chose" EH over a spot at Latin? Even though you won't use your IB HS? You are an example of what I described my friend. You feel you have options for HS; private $, move within DC, move out of DC, etc.

This. People will talk about going to EH or SH (or Jefferson) but their plan for HS is Walls, Banneker, private, or move. The plan is never Eastern. So it's tiresome when people talk about increased buy in for SH and EH (and let's get real about how much increased buy-in these schools are getting) without acknowledging that this is just people postponing their Plan Bs a few more years, not actually buying into the Ward 6 high school.

Both of these conversations can be true. The prior poster had the uninformed and inaccurate picture that all families at EH had already tried and struck out lottery. My family and many others never did the lottery and intended ongoing to EH from the get go.
As for high school, we are not ruling out Eastern but plan to learn about other public school options as well. Participating in the city's school choice system, especially for high school when there are very different programs does not mean you cannot be interested in and choose to go to your neighborhood middle school.

Not even entering the lottery is the picture of entitlement. In order to have acted in that manner you must have access to resources that informed that decision. There's nothing wrong with that, by the way. I would love to have mommy/daddy money to pay for private school. I would love to have a job that allows me to cash flow Sidwell in 9th. I would love to be able to move houses at the drop of a hat without regard to financial impact. Good for you.

But here's the thing. People like you ought not lecture people without those options or advantages about what they could or should do. It's the equivalent of having a parachute on under your jacket and encouraging others to get on a plane that is likely to crash, because "what if it doesn't and we reach our destination?"

I stand by my position that no one without HS options chose E-H without at least considering alternatives that solved for HS.

Ok. What’s your point again? The actual EH families’ point is that EH is going fine and we are reasonably happy. Not that we love the HS options or might have taken a spot at Latin. There’s always something potentially better so I struggle to understand why “striking out in the lottery” means EH is bad.

DP, but the point is that when you say lots of Maury families are "choosing EH" without acknowledging that these families often have resources that make them less stressed about HS.

People will lament the families who leave Hill elementaries in 5th for Latin or BASIS and try to argue "what's wrong with EH, SH, and Jefferson?" But the MSs are not the point. The high schools are. The people who lottery for characters in 5th and take those spots are not thrilled about giving up neighborhood schools and taking on long commutes for the next 8 years. They do it because they cannot afford to risk their kid not getting into Walls or Banneker, because they have no other good options. If you absolutely, 100% cannot afford private, and if moving would be a major financial stress (keep in mind that if you don't have a ton of money for private, you will also be limited as to where you can move and will likely not have access to the best suburban high schools either), then EH could be a freaking palace and a lot of parents would still choose a charter with an okay HS feed.

I often hear from Hill families that you have to be "willing to play the game." What this ignores is that some people are playing that game with extra cards. It is much easier to "roll the dice" on EH and the hope of Walls admissions if your back up is, to give a very common example, Gonzaga with with help from grandparents to cover costs. It's also easier to do if you have an HHI of 500k and you bought your Hill row house for 400k 15 years ago, so if you want to bail and move to Bethesda or Northern Virginia at any point, there are few barriers to you doing so.

Some of us cannot afford to do that. I do not ever want to put my kid in the position of having to get a spot in an application high school in DC or attend Eastern. Especially when grabbing spots at those applications schools becomes more and more of a crap shoot every year.

OK well that’s an argument not to move here in the first place, which is totally reasonable. From time immemorial, people have chosen homes based on schools. I myself will probably move us for HS. But none of that detracts from the fact that a) plenty of satisfaction w EH among current families and b) some people really do have lower stress levels and are fine with “seeing how it plays out.”

You’re proving PP’s point.

What point???? That most Hill kids don’t go IB for HS? Everyone knows that.

No. That the only people at Maury who "choose" EH do it because they have resources to avoid Eastern and don't have to rely on lotterying into a charter with a HS feed.

If you do not have resources for private or the ability to easily move IB for a good high school if your kid gets locked out of Walls/Banneker, then you do not have the luxury of "choosing" EH. It is irrelevant to people in this category withe EH is good or bad. EH feeds to Eastern, Eastern is not an acceptable HS choice, thus EH is not actually a viable MS choice unless you have special resources that will enable you to avoid Eastern no matter what.

I mean everyone who goes to EH from Maury has already chosen to be IB for Eastern, so your argument seems to apply to Maury as well? Seems like you are trying to prove EH is “bad” because people who have no choice have to go there? You’re not making any sense. Meanwhile we’re happy there so 🤷‍♀️

The person you're replying to was referring to choosing EH over a charter MS that comes with a high school option. The conversation was about how families aren't peeling off for BASIS and Latin because of the middle school but rather because they don't want to have to roll the dice on high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

This. EH is filled with families who struck out in the lottery and are trying to get a few more years in the city / hoping to lottery into Walls. IB families are not “choosing” EH.

There are absolutely EH families that choose EH over one of those charters … I’m under no illusions about having to find a different solution for HS but so far so good.

So you "chose" EH over a spot at Latin? Even though you won't use your IB HS? You are an example of what I described my friend. You feel you have options for HS; private $, move within DC, move out of DC, etc.

This. People will talk about going to EH or SH (or Jefferson) but their plan for HS is Walls, Banneker, private, or move. The plan is never Eastern. So it's tiresome when people talk about increased buy in for SH and EH (and let's get real about how much increased buy-in these schools are getting) without acknowledging that this is just people postponing their Plan Bs a few more years, not actually buying into the Ward 6 high school.

Screaming at families like this is just blaming the victim. Fact is that DCPS has never missed a chance to mess up Eastern, EH or SH for that matter. Eastern long ago could have been a great school for W6, but DCPS will do whatever it can to prevent that. And useless Charles Allen is happy so long as he can do his little self-flagellation dance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

This. EH is filled with families who struck out in the lottery and are trying to get a few more years in the city / hoping to lottery into Walls. IB families are not “choosing” EH.

There are absolutely EH families that choose EH over one of those charters … I’m under no illusions about having to find a different solution for HS but so far so good.

So you "chose" EH over a spot at Latin? Even though you won't use your IB HS? You are an example of what I described my friend. You feel you have options for HS; private $, move within DC, move out of DC, etc.

This. People will talk about going to EH or SH (or Jefferson) but their plan for HS is Walls, Banneker, private, or move. The plan is never Eastern. So it's tiresome when people talk about increased buy in for SH and EH (and let's get real about how much increased buy-in these schools are getting) without acknowledging that this is just people postponing their Plan Bs a few more years, not actually buying into the Ward 6 high school.

Both of these conversations can be true. The prior poster had the uninformed and inaccurate picture that all families at EH had already tried and struck out lottery. My family and many others never did the lottery and intended ongoing to EH from the get go.
As for high school, we are not ruling out Eastern but plan to learn about other public school options as well. Participating in the city's school choice system, especially for high school when there are very different programs does not mean you cannot be interested in and choose to go to your neighborhood middle school.

Not even entering the lottery is the picture of entitlement. In order to have acted in that manner you must have access to resources that informed that decision. There's nothing wrong with that, by the way. I would love to have mommy/daddy money to pay for private school. I would love to have a job that allows me to cash flow Sidwell in 9th. I would love to be able to move houses at the drop of a hat without regard to financial impact. Good for you.

But here's the thing. People like you ought not lecture people without those options or advantages about what they could or should do. It's the equivalent of having a parachute on under your jacket and encouraging others to get on a plane that is likely to crash, because "what if it doesn't and we reach our destination?"

I stand by my position that no one without HS options chose E-H without at least considering alternatives that solved for HS.

Ok. What’s your point again? The actual EH families’ point is that EH is going fine and we are reasonably happy. Not that we love the HS options or might have taken a spot at Latin. There’s always something potentially better so I struggle to understand why “striking out in the lottery” means EH is bad.

EH is objectively a bad school. You may be telling yourself that middle school academics don’t matter so it’s “going fine” but that doesn’t make it a good school. The academics are abysmal.

Do you have a kid there?

Absolutely not.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

This. EH is filled with families who struck out in the lottery and are trying to get a few more years in the city / hoping to lottery into Walls. IB families are not “choosing” EH.

There are absolutely EH families that choose EH over one of those charters … I’m under no illusions about having to find a different solution for HS but so far so good.

So you "chose" EH over a spot at Latin? Even though you won't use your IB HS? You are an example of what I described my friend. You feel you have options for HS; private $, move within DC, move out of DC, etc.

This. People will talk about going to EH or SH (or Jefferson) but their plan for HS is Walls, Banneker, private, or move. The plan is never Eastern. So it's tiresome when people talk about increased buy in for SH and EH (and let's get real about how much increased buy-in these schools are getting) without acknowledging that this is just people postponing their Plan Bs a few more years, not actually buying into the Ward 6 high school.

Both of these conversations can be true. The prior poster had the uninformed and inaccurate picture that all families at EH had already tried and struck out lottery. My family and many others never did the lottery and intended ongoing to EH from the get go.
As for high school, we are not ruling out Eastern but plan to learn about other public school options as well. Participating in the city's school choice system, especially for high school when there are very different programs does not mean you cannot be interested in and choose to go to your neighborhood middle school.

Not even entering the lottery is the picture of entitlement. In order to have acted in that manner you must have access to resources that informed that decision. There's nothing wrong with that, by the way. I would love to have mommy/daddy money to pay for private school. I would love to have a job that allows me to cash flow Sidwell in 9th. I would love to be able to move houses at the drop of a hat without regard to financial impact. Good for you.

But here's the thing. People like you ought not lecture people without those options or advantages about what they could or should do. It's the equivalent of having a parachute on under your jacket and encouraging others to get on a plane that is likely to crash, because "what if it doesn't and we reach our destination?"

I stand by my position that no one without HS options chose E-H without at least considering alternatives that solved for HS.

Ok. What’s your point again? The actual EH families’ point is that EH is going fine and we are reasonably happy. Not that we love the HS options or might have taken a spot at Latin. There’s always something potentially better so I struggle to understand why “striking out in the lottery” means EH is bad.

DP, but the point is that when you say lots of Maury families are "choosing EH" without acknowledging that these families often have resources that make them less stressed about HS.

People will lament the families who leave Hill elementaries in 5th for Latin or BASIS and try to argue "what's wrong with EH, SH, and Jefferson?" But the MSs are not the point. The high schools are. The people who lottery for characters in 5th and take those spots are not thrilled about giving up neighborhood schools and taking on long commutes for the next 8 years. They do it because they cannot afford to risk their kid not getting into Walls or Banneker, because they have no other good options. If you absolutely, 100% cannot afford private, and if moving would be a major financial stress (keep in mind that if you don't have a ton of money for private, you will also be limited as to where you can move and will likely not have access to the best suburban high schools either), then EH could be a freaking palace and a lot of parents would still choose a charter with an okay HS feed.

I often hear from Hill families that you have to be "willing to play the game." What this ignores is that some people are playing that game with extra cards. It is much easier to "roll the dice" on EH and the hope of Walls admissions if your back up is, to give a very common example, Gonzaga with with help from grandparents to cover costs. It's also easier to do if you have an HHI of 500k and you bought your Hill row house for 400k 15 years ago, so if you want to bail and move to Bethesda or Northern Virginia at any point, there are few barriers to you doing so.

Some of us cannot afford to do that. I do not ever want to put my kid in the position of having to get a spot in an application high school in DC or attend Eastern. Especially when grabbing spots at those applications schools becomes more and more of a crap shoot every year.

OK well that’s an argument not to move here in the first place, which is totally reasonable. From time immemorial, people have chosen homes based on schools. I myself will probably move us for HS. But none of that detracts from the fact that a) plenty of satisfaction w EH among current families and b) some people really do have lower stress levels and are fine with “seeing how it plays out.”

You’re proving PP’s point.

What point???? That most Hill kids don’t go IB for HS? Everyone knows that.

No. That the only people at Maury who "choose" EH do it because they have resources to avoid Eastern and don't have to rely on lotterying into a charter with a HS feed.

If you do not have resources for private or the ability to easily move IB for a good high school if your kid gets locked out of Walls/Banneker, then you do not have the luxury of "choosing" EH. It is irrelevant to people in this category withe EH is good or bad. EH feeds to Eastern, Eastern is not an acceptable HS choice, thus EH is not actually a viable MS choice unless you have special resources that will enable you to avoid Eastern no matter what.

I mean everyone who goes to EH from Maury has already chosen to be IB for Eastern, so your argument seems to apply to Maury as well? Seems like you are trying to prove EH is “bad” because people who have no choice have to go there? You’re not making any sense. Meanwhile we’re happy there so 🤷‍♀️

The person you're replying to was referring to choosing EH over a charter MS that comes with a high school option. The conversation was about how families aren't peeling off for BASIS and Latin because of the middle school but rather because they don't want to have to roll the dice on high school.

well that’s obvious and I don’t see anyone disputing that it is common to pick a charter to have a HS path.

nevertheless there ARE families that didn’t lottery, or turned down Latin and Basis, or “lost” the lottery and see plenty of silver lining in EH (raises hand). that PP seems to think that the fact that many people choose charters somehow negates this.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

This. EH is filled with families who struck out in the lottery and are trying to get a few more years in the city / hoping to lottery into Walls. IB families are not “choosing” EH.

There are absolutely EH families that choose EH over one of those charters … I’m under no illusions about having to find a different solution for HS but so far so good.

So you "chose" EH over a spot at Latin? Even though you won't use your IB HS? You are an example of what I described my friend. You feel you have options for HS; private $, move within DC, move out of DC, etc.

This. People will talk about going to EH or SH (or Jefferson) but their plan for HS is Walls, Banneker, private, or move. The plan is never Eastern. So it's tiresome when people talk about increased buy in for SH and EH (and let's get real about how much increased buy-in these schools are getting) without acknowledging that this is just people postponing their Plan Bs a few more years, not actually buying into the Ward 6 high school.

Both of these conversations can be true. The prior poster had the uninformed and inaccurate picture that all families at EH had already tried and struck out lottery. My family and many others never did the lottery and intended ongoing to EH from the get go.
As for high school, we are not ruling out Eastern but plan to learn about other public school options as well. Participating in the city's school choice system, especially for high school when there are very different programs does not mean you cannot be interested in and choose to go to your neighborhood middle school.

Not even entering the lottery is the picture of entitlement. In order to have acted in that manner you must have access to resources that informed that decision. There's nothing wrong with that, by the way. I would love to have mommy/daddy money to pay for private school. I would love to have a job that allows me to cash flow Sidwell in 9th. I would love to be able to move houses at the drop of a hat without regard to financial impact. Good for you.

But here's the thing. People like you ought not lecture people without those options or advantages about what they could or should do. It's the equivalent of having a parachute on under your jacket and encouraging others to get on a plane that is likely to crash, because "what if it doesn't and we reach our destination?"

I stand by my position that no one without HS options chose E-H without at least considering alternatives that solved for HS.

Ok. What’s your point again? The actual EH families’ point is that EH is going fine and we are reasonably happy. Not that we love the HS options or might have taken a spot at Latin. There’s always something potentially better so I struggle to understand why “striking out in the lottery” means EH is bad.

DP, but the point is that when you say lots of Maury families are "choosing EH" without acknowledging that these families often have resources that make them less stressed about HS.

People will lament the families who leave Hill elementaries in 5th for Latin or BASIS and try to argue "what's wrong with EH, SH, and Jefferson?" But the MSs are not the point. The high schools are. The people who lottery for characters in 5th and take those spots are not thrilled about giving up neighborhood schools and taking on long commutes for the next 8 years. They do it because they cannot afford to risk their kid not getting into Walls or Banneker, because they have no other good options. If you absolutely, 100% cannot afford private, and if moving would be a major financial stress (keep in mind that if you don't have a ton of money for private, you will also be limited as to where you can move and will likely not have access to the best suburban high schools either), then EH could be a freaking palace and a lot of parents would still choose a charter with an okay HS feed.

I often hear from Hill families that you have to be "willing to play the game." What this ignores is that some people are playing that game with extra cards. It is much easier to "roll the dice" on EH and the hope of Walls admissions if your back up is, to give a very common example, Gonzaga with with help from grandparents to cover costs. It's also easier to do if you have an HHI of 500k and you bought your Hill row house for 400k 15 years ago, so if you want to bail and move to Bethesda or Northern Virginia at any point, there are few barriers to you doing so.

Some of us cannot afford to do that. I do not ever want to put my kid in the position of having to get a spot in an application high school in DC or attend Eastern. Especially when grabbing spots at those applications schools becomes more and more of a crap shoot every year.

OK well that’s an argument not to move here in the first place, which is totally reasonable. From time immemorial, people have chosen homes based on schools. I myself will probably move us for HS. But none of that detracts from the fact that a) plenty of satisfaction w EH among current families and b) some people really do have lower stress levels and are fine with “seeing how it plays out.”

You’re proving PP’s point.

What point???? That most Hill kids don’t go IB for HS? Everyone knows that.

No. That the only people at Maury who "choose" EH do it because they have resources to avoid Eastern and don't have to rely on lotterying into a charter with a HS feed.

If you do not have resources for private or the ability to easily move IB for a good high school if your kid gets locked out of Walls/Banneker, then you do not have the luxury of "choosing" EH. It is irrelevant to people in this category withe EH is good or bad. EH feeds to Eastern, Eastern is not an acceptable HS choice, thus EH is not actually a viable MS choice unless you have special resources that will enable you to avoid Eastern no matter what.

I mean everyone who goes to EH from Maury has already chosen to be IB for Eastern, so your argument seems to apply to Maury as well? Seems like you are trying to prove EH is “bad” because people who have no choice have to go there? You’re not making any sense. Meanwhile we’re happy there so 🤷‍♀️

The person you're replying to was referring to choosing EH over a charter MS that comes with a high school option. The conversation was about how families aren't peeling off for BASIS and Latin because of the middle school but rather because they don't want to have to roll the dice on high school.

well that’s obvious and I don’t see anyone disputing that it is common to pick a charter to have a HS path.

nevertheless there ARE families that didn’t lottery, or turned down Latin and Basis, or “lost” the lottery and see plenty of silver lining in EH (raises hand). that PP seems to think that the fact that many people choose charters somehow negates this.

I think they're right that people who are turning down the charter options are doing so because they have an out for high school. If you didn't have that as an option, that's not about you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My takeaway from the meeting materials is that combining Maury and Miner will move the needle on the city wide goal to reduce segregation across our schools. The DME team created a table of all the ES that border each other and picked the pair that would move the metric the most without a river or large road in between. Boundary adjustments “would not work” so the strategy is to replicate the Peabody Watkins cluster model.

The impact to the city wide metric under this plan is totally clear to me; segregation will go down, this is good. Less clear and unanswered is: how will the cluster model perform for our kids attending the new cluster school.

Peabody Watkins is a nearby cluster, and I’ve seen a lot of anecdotal comments online about how the school is doing; but frankly it’s really hard to know how to interpret them. Could be grumpy parents with an axe to grind, folks trolling and pretending to be impacted, parents rightfully being proud and invested in a school their children attend, etc. etc.

I took a look at enrollment and test scores for the Peabody Watkins cluster, and five other area ES to see how they’ve fared from 2014 to 2022. I chose those years because it’s when PARCC scores started. I’m sure there are flaws in this methodology; so by all means folks are welcome to jump in with thoughts/critiques and give recommendations on other data to consider.

Short summary 2014-2022 (PARCC era):
- The cluster is last in enrollment growth
- 5th in ELA, 4th in Math
- 5th in improvement of Math&ELA

This is all numbers with very little context, and I'm sure doesn't capture the entirety of the quality of education at all these schools; but at first glance it does not give me faith in the cluster plan. Why would Miner+Maury fair differently that Peabody+Watkins?

Enrollment:
+55% Maury
+45% Ludlow Taylor
+23% Payne
+17% Brent
-8% Peabody
-14% Miner
-31% Watkins

ELA (2022)
67% Ludlow Taylor
66% Brent
66% Maury
46% Payne
37% Watkins
10% Miner

MATH (2022)
67% Brent
59% Maury
45% Ludlow Taylor
39% Watkins
28% Payne
6% Miner

Improvement in ELA + Improvement in Math, From 2014 to 2022
+53% Payne
+44% Ludlow Taylor
+37% Maury
+8% Brent
+7% Watkins
-13% Mined

You should submit this to the DME. And you should loop in Charles Allen.

You realize the DME thinks it is BAD that Maury and LT grew and improved test scores to that extent, right? They want to stop that. That’s the whole goal.

Looking at this & the slide DME presented at the Maury meeting showing how they chose their potential cluster pairs (50%+ differential), I’d say Ludlow is very lucky they didn’t choose 40%+ as their arbitrary “too far apart” metric. If they had, Ludlow and JO would be having this same discussion and the geography there makes way more sense. And I can tell you as a JO IB family that IB families would love to cluster with Ludlow (though 2R would likely collapse overnight as a result).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Enrollment:
+55% Maury
+45% Ludlow Taylor
+23% Payne
+17% Brent
-8% Peabody
-14% Miner
-31% Watkins

The Principal said at the last LSAT meeting that Ludlow grew another 40-45 kids this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My takeaway from the meeting materials is that combining Maury and Miner will move the needle on the city wide goal to reduce segregation across our schools. The DME team created a table of all the ES that border each other and picked the pair that would move the metric the most without a river or large road in between. Boundary adjustments “would not work” so the strategy is to replicate the Peabody Watkins cluster model.

The impact to the city wide metric under this plan is totally clear to me; segregation will go down, this is good. Less clear and unanswered is: how will the cluster model perform for our kids attending the new cluster school.

Peabody Watkins is a nearby cluster, and I’ve seen a lot of anecdotal comments online about how the school is doing; but frankly it’s really hard to know how to interpret them. Could be grumpy parents with an axe to grind, folks trolling and pretending to be impacted, parents rightfully being proud and invested in a school their children attend, etc. etc.

I took a look at enrollment and test scores for the Peabody Watkins cluster, and five other area ES to see how they’ve fared from 2014 to 2022. I chose those years because it’s when PARCC scores started. I’m sure there are flaws in this methodology; so by all means folks are welcome to jump in with thoughts/critiques and give recommendations on other data to consider.

Short summary 2014-2022 (PARCC era):
- The cluster is last in enrollment growth
- 5th in ELA, 4th in Math
- 5th in improvement of Math&ELA

This is all numbers with very little context, and I'm sure doesn't capture the entirety of the quality of education at all these schools; but at first glance it does not give me faith in the cluster plan. Why would Miner+Maury fair differently that Peabody+Watkins?

Enrollment:
+55% Maury
+45% Ludlow Taylor
+23% Payne
+17% Brent
-8% Peabody
-14% Miner
-31% Watkins

ELA (2022)
67% Ludlow Taylor
66% Brent
66% Maury
46% Payne
37% Watkins
10% Miner

MATH (2022)
67% Brent
59% Maury
45% Ludlow Taylor
39% Watkins
28% Payne
6% Miner

Improvement in ELA + Improvement in Math, From 2014 to 2022
+53% Payne
+44% Ludlow Taylor
+37% Maury
+8% Brent
+7% Watkins
-13% Mined

You should submit this to the DME. And you should loop in Charles Allen.

You realize the DME thinks it is BAD that Maury and LT grew and improved test scores to that extent, right? They want to stop that. That’s the whole goal.

Looking at this & the slide DME presented at the Maury meeting showing how they chose their potential cluster pairs (50%+ differential), I’d say Ludlow is very lucky they didn’t choose 40%+ as their arbitrary “too far apart” metric. If they had, Ludlow and JO would be having this same discussion and the geography there makes way more sense. And I can tell you as a JO IB family that IB families would love to cluster with Ludlow (though 2R would likely collapse overnight as a result).

JO's on a better trajectory than Miner though. About to get a big renovation (really a brand new building which I'm guessing will be as nice as Maury's or SWS), 2R's star has really fallen in recent years, and with the development around Union Market, it is in an area that is demographically very similar to LT in terms of housing costs.

Most (but not all) of JO's FARMS students are coming to the school from across the river -- like Miner, it has a large OOB contingent. But JO has a better shot at increasing IB participation with the new school. So they could organically achieve the kind of "rising tide lifting all boats" effect that the DME is looking for from a Miner-Maury cluster. Miner doesn't have those timing or location advantages.

I'm sure there are JO families today who would love an LT cluster if it were to happen next year. I don't think that will be true in about three years when JO's new facility is done. Whereas I just don't see many signs of improvement at Miner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s almost like DCPS does not want to have highly functional schools exist within the system. They want to destroy what is currently working rather than learn from and emulate the functional school. The whole situation is ridiculous.

What’s happening is that someone who is not very bright either (1) thinks if the smoosh two schools together as an experiment, Miner will be no worse off so they might as well try it (and they DNGAF about Maury) or (2) they want to stick it to gentrifiers.

Maury should engage Charles Allen. See if that good for nothing waste of space can advocate for a preserving a successful school or if he will sell out the Hill once again.

hahahahahahahahahaha

I don't think that performative clown will save Maury

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My takeaway from the meeting materials is that combining Maury and Miner will move the needle on the city wide goal to reduce segregation across our schools. The DME team created a table of all the ES that border each other and picked the pair that would move the metric the most without a river or large road in between. Boundary adjustments “would not work” so the strategy is to replicate the Peabody Watkins cluster model.

The impact to the city wide metric under this plan is totally clear to me; segregation will go down, this is good. Less clear and unanswered is: how will the cluster model perform for our kids attending the new cluster school.

Peabody Watkins is a nearby cluster, and I’ve seen a lot of anecdotal comments online about how the school is doing; but frankly it’s really hard to know how to interpret them. Could be grumpy parents with an axe to grind, folks trolling and pretending to be impacted, parents rightfully being proud and invested in a school their children attend, etc. etc.

I took a look at enrollment and test scores for the Peabody Watkins cluster, and five other area ES to see how they’ve fared from 2014 to 2022. I chose those years because it’s when PARCC scores started. I’m sure there are flaws in this methodology; so by all means folks are welcome to jump in with thoughts/critiques and give recommendations on other data to consider.

Short summary 2014-2022 (PARCC era):
- The cluster is last in enrollment growth
- 5th in ELA, 4th in Math
- 5th in improvement of Math&ELA

This is all numbers with very little context, and I'm sure doesn't capture the entirety of the quality of education at all these schools; but at first glance it does not give me faith in the cluster plan. Why would Miner+Maury fair differently that Peabody+Watkins?

Enrollment:
+55% Maury
+45% Ludlow Taylor
+23% Payne
+17% Brent
-8% Peabody
-14% Miner
-31% Watkins

ELA (2022)
67% Ludlow Taylor
66% Brent
66% Maury
46% Payne
37% Watkins
10% Miner

MATH (2022)
67% Brent
59% Maury
45% Ludlow Taylor
39% Watkins
28% Payne
6% Miner

Improvement in ELA + Improvement in Math, From 2014 to 2022
+53% Payne
+44% Ludlow Taylor
+37% Maury
+8% Brent
+7% Watkins
-13% Mined

You should submit this to the DME. And you should loop in Charles Allen.

You realize the DME thinks it is BAD that Maury and LT grew and improved test scores to that extent, right? They want to stop that. That’s the whole goal.

Looking at this & the slide DME presented at the Maury meeting showing how they chose their potential cluster pairs (50%+ differential), I’d say Ludlow is very lucky they didn’t choose 40%+ as their arbitrary “too far apart” metric. If they had, Ludlow and JO would be having this same discussion and the geography there makes way more sense. And I can tell you as a JO IB family that IB families would love to cluster with Ludlow (though 2R would likely collapse overnight as a result).

JO's on a better trajectory than Miner though. About to get a big renovation (really a brand new building which I'm guessing will be as nice as Maury's or SWS), 2R's star has really fallen in recent years, and with the development around Union Market, it is in an area that is demographically very similar to LT in terms of housing costs.

Most (but not all) of JO's FARMS students are coming to the school from across the river -- like Miner, it has a large OOB contingent. But JO has a better shot at increasing IB participation with the new school. So they could organically achieve the kind of "rising tide lifting all boats" effect that the DME is looking for from a Miner-Maury cluster. Miner doesn't have those timing or location advantages.

I'm sure there are JO families today who would love an LT cluster if it were to happen next year. I don't think that will be true in about three years when JO's new facility is done. Whereas I just don't see many signs of improvement at Miner.

Co-sign. Miner does not have demographic advantages of JOW. I believe TR will shutter their 4th Street campus by 2030.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My takeaway from the meeting materials is that combining Maury and Miner will move the needle on the city wide goal to reduce segregation across our schools. The DME team created a table of all the ES that border each other and picked the pair that would move the metric the most without a river or large road in between. Boundary adjustments “would not work” so the strategy is to replicate the Peabody Watkins cluster model.

The impact to the city wide metric under this plan is totally clear to me; segregation will go down, this is good. Less clear and unanswered is: how will the cluster model perform for our kids attending the new cluster school.

Peabody Watkins is a nearby cluster, and I’ve seen a lot of anecdotal comments online about how the school is doing; but frankly it’s really hard to know how to interpret them. Could be grumpy parents with an axe to grind, folks trolling and pretending to be impacted, parents rightfully being proud and invested in a school their children attend, etc. etc.

I took a look at enrollment and test scores for the Peabody Watkins cluster, and five other area ES to see how they’ve fared from 2014 to 2022. I chose those years because it’s when PARCC scores started. I’m sure there are flaws in this methodology; so by all means folks are welcome to jump in with thoughts/critiques and give recommendations on other data to consider.

Short summary 2014-2022 (PARCC era):
- The cluster is last in enrollment growth
- 5th in ELA, 4th in Math
- 5th in improvement of Math&ELA

This is all numbers with very little context, and I'm sure doesn't capture the entirety of the quality of education at all these schools; but at first glance it does not give me faith in the cluster plan. Why would Miner+Maury fair differently that Peabody+Watkins?

Enrollment:
+55% Maury
+45% Ludlow Taylor
+23% Payne
+17% Brent
-8% Peabody
-14% Miner
-31% Watkins

ELA (2022)
67% Ludlow Taylor
66% Brent
66% Maury
46% Payne
37% Watkins
10% Miner

MATH (2022)
67% Brent
59% Maury
45% Ludlow Taylor
39% Watkins
28% Payne
6% Miner

Improvement in ELA + Improvement in Math, From 2014 to 2022
+53% Payne
+44% Ludlow Taylor
+37% Maury
+8% Brent
+7% Watkins
-13% Miner

Im fascinated why Tyler is always completely ignored as if it didn't even exist.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

This. EH is filled with families who struck out in the lottery and are trying to get a few more years in the city / hoping to lottery into Walls. IB families are not “choosing” EH.

There are absolutely EH families that choose EH over one of those charters … I’m under no illusions about having to find a different solution for HS but so far so good.

So you "chose" EH over a spot at Latin? Even though you won't use your IB HS? You are an example of what I described my friend. You feel you have options for HS; private $, move within DC, move out of DC, etc.

This. People will talk about going to EH or SH (or Jefferson) but their plan for HS is Walls, Banneker, private, or move. The plan is never Eastern. So it's tiresome when people talk about increased buy in for SH and EH (and let's get real about how much increased buy-in these schools are getting) without acknowledging that this is just people postponing their Plan Bs a few more years, not actually buying into the Ward 6 high school.

Both of these conversations can be true. The prior poster had the uninformed and inaccurate picture that all families at EH had already tried and struck out lottery. My family and many others never did the lottery and intended ongoing to EH from the get go.
As for high school, we are not ruling out Eastern but plan to learn about other public school options as well. Participating in the city's school choice system, especially for high school when there are very different programs does not mean you cannot be interested in and choose to go to your neighborhood middle school.

Not even entering the lottery is the picture of entitlement. In order to have acted in that manner you must have access to resources that informed that decision. There's nothing wrong with that, by the way. I would love to have mommy/daddy money to pay for private school. I would love to have a job that allows me to cash flow Sidwell in 9th. I would love to be able to move houses at the drop of a hat without regard to financial impact. Good for you.

But here's the thing. People like you ought not lecture people without those options or advantages about what they could or should do. It's the equivalent of having a parachute on under your jacket and encouraging others to get on a plane that is likely to crash, because "what if it doesn't and we reach our destination?"

I stand by my position that no one without HS options chose E-H without at least considering alternatives that solved for HS.

Ok. What’s your point again? The actual EH families’ point is that EH is going fine and we are reasonably happy. Not that we love the HS options or might have taken a spot at Latin. There’s always something potentially better so I struggle to understand why “striking out in the lottery” means EH is bad.

DP, but the point is that when you say lots of Maury families are "choosing EH" without acknowledging that these families often have resources that make them less stressed about HS.

People will lament the families who leave Hill elementaries in 5th for Latin or BASIS and try to argue "what's wrong with EH, SH, and Jefferson?" But the MSs are not the point. The high schools are. The people who lottery for characters in 5th and take those spots are not thrilled about giving up neighborhood schools and taking on long commutes for the next 8 years. They do it because they cannot afford to risk their kid not getting into Walls or Banneker, because they have no other good options. If you absolutely, 100% cannot afford private, and if moving would be a major financial stress (keep in mind that if you don't have a ton of money for private, you will also be limited as to where you can move and will likely not have access to the best suburban high schools either), then EH could be a freaking palace and a lot of parents would still choose a charter with an okay HS feed.

I often hear from Hill families that you have to be "willing to play the game." What this ignores is that some people are playing that game with extra cards. It is much easier to "roll the dice" on EH and the hope of Walls admissions if your back up is, to give a very common example, Gonzaga with with help from grandparents to cover costs. It's also easier to do if you have an HHI of 500k and you bought your Hill row house for 400k 15 years ago, so if you want to bail and move to Bethesda or Northern Virginia at any point, there are few barriers to you doing so.

Some of us cannot afford to do that. I do not ever want to put my kid in the position of having to get a spot in an application high school in DC or attend Eastern. Especially when grabbing spots at those applications schools becomes more and more of a crap shoot every year.

OK well that’s an argument not to move here in the first place, which is totally reasonable. From time immemorial, people have chosen homes based on schools. I myself will probably move us for HS. But none of that detracts from the fact that a) plenty of satisfaction w EH among current families and b) some people really do have lower stress levels and are fine with “seeing how it plays out.”

You’re proving PP’s point.

What point???? That most Hill kids don’t go IB for HS? Everyone knows that.

No. That the only people at Maury who "choose" EH do it because they have resources to avoid Eastern and don't have to rely on lotterying into a charter with a HS feed.

If you do not have resources for private or the ability to easily move IB for a good high school if your kid gets locked out of Walls/Banneker, then you do not have the luxury of "choosing" EH. It is irrelevant to people in this category withe EH is good or bad. EH feeds to Eastern, Eastern is not an acceptable HS choice, thus EH is not actually a viable MS choice unless you have special resources that will enable you to avoid Eastern no matter what.

I mean everyone who goes to EH from Maury has already chosen to be IB for Eastern, so your argument seems to apply to Maury as well? Seems like you are trying to prove EH is “bad” because people who have no choice have to go there? You’re not making any sense. Meanwhile we’re happy there so 🤷‍♀️

The person you're replying to was referring to choosing EH over a charter MS that comes with a high school option. The conversation was about how families aren't peeling off for BASIS and Latin because of the middle school but rather because they don't want to have to roll the dice on high school.

well that’s obvious and I don’t see anyone disputing that it is common to pick a charter to have a HS path.

nevertheless there ARE families that didn’t lottery, or turned down Latin and Basis, or “lost” the lottery and see plenty of silver lining in EH (raises hand). that PP seems to think that the fact that many people choose charters somehow negates this.

I think they're right that people who are turning down the charter options are doing so because they have an out for high school. If you didn't have that as an option, that's not about you.

Well, all UMC families have an “out” more or less. But still, that doesn’t change the actual experience at EH, which is what the PP seems to be arguing. I have absolutely no issues with people who decide NOT to move to the Hill because they want a more stable path through HS. But we are here and it’s ok so far!

[Anonymous]

One of the early DME decks actually had a Brent/Tyler slide. But then they probably realized Tyler is Spanish immersion.