Maury Capitol Hill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Brent discussion made zero sense. The reason for shrinking the boundary is to alleviate over-crowding, and yet there is no overcrowding currently, nor any projected overcrowding because of the renovation? What on earth???

They have not provided any good info on how an at-risk set aside would work when many schools with low at-risk populations are at capacity. Perhaps the additional capacity at Brent would be used to accommodate that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, this is a really hard and hurtful thread to read as a Watkins parent. My child is thriving at Watkins. I’m happy to talk to anyone about the many great things going on at Watkins. Karen Pence, [e-mail].

Do you live IB? Presumably your goal would be to persuade IB parents of Watkins quality so they would send their kids there. Watkins is at 33% IB and Maury is 84% (albeit upper grades lower, but still much higher than 1/3). Maury is demonstrably thriving as is, and Watkins is not getting the same buy-in. Maury parents reasonably do not want to change to a model that fewer people want.

+1. Why does Watkins have such little IB buy-in? Maybe Karen can explain?

Not Karen but I wonder if the cluster model actually is a big reason for the anomalously low and decreasing IB rate at Watkins. I know that for us at Maury, a lot of school community and culture was built up from PK3 on looking up to the older kids and all their traditions like PARCC popsicles and the 5th grade fundraisers. So even though school gets higher stakes and more complex as kids get older the transition is natural. But for a cluster you have no continuity and you have nothing to look forward to being one of the “big kids” at the school. So many more families just peel off after Peabody for other solutions.

No, there is continuity. When my PK3 was at Peabody, he looked up to the "big kids" who were the kindergartners. When he moved to Watkins, he looked up to the "big kids" who were the 5th graders. You are coming at this with the perspective of a parent rather than as an actual kid in the cluster.

[Anonymous]

I'm not a Miner parent but I was offended on their behalf reading this thread, so I'm not at all surprised that Miner parents following this process feel "rejected" by some in the Maury community. Just as an example, when discussing test scores, people in this thread have alleged that Miner kids "can't read" and complained that having Miner and Maury students in the same classes would be horribly unfair to the Maury kid. Of course that's offensive!

A lot of the conversation about the neighborhood issues is also pretty offensive. These schools are very near one another (a half mile along a major thoroughfare). But several posters have stated that the neighborhoods are "very different" and that they would not feel safe in the area around Miner. So you wouldn't feel safe walking four blocks from where you currently live and go to school? You never go to the Rosedale pool or library? You don't go to H Street? You don't take your kids to the playground and fields at RFK? Posters are talking about Miner like it's in a war zone or something, when it is simply in a less nice but extremely nearby part of the neighborhood they currently live in.

Of course Miner families are offended. People are really showing their a$$es here, and it's unsurprising to me that this thread is full of hand-wringing from Maury parents but I have seen few if any comments from Miner parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, this is a really hard and hurtful thread to read as a Watkins parent. My child is thriving at Watkins. I’m happy to talk to anyone about the many great things going on at Watkins. Karen Pence, [e-mail].

Do you live IB? Presumably your goal would be to persuade IB parents of Watkins quality so they would send their kids there. Watkins is at 33% IB and Maury is 84% (albeit upper grades lower, but still much higher than 1/3). Maury is demonstrably thriving as is, and Watkins is not getting the same buy-in. Maury parents reasonably do not want to change to a model that fewer people want.

+1. Why does Watkins have such little IB buy-in? Maybe Karen can explain?

Not Karen but I wonder if the cluster model actually is a big reason for the anomalously low and decreasing IB rate at Watkins. I know that for us at Maury, a lot of school community and culture was built up from PK3 on looking up to the older kids and all their traditions like PARCC popsicles and the 5th grade fundraisers. So even though school gets higher stakes and more complex as kids get older the transition is natural. But for a cluster you have no continuity and you have nothing to look forward to being one of the “big kids” at the school. So many more families just peel off after Peabody for other solutions.

No, there is continuity. When my PK3 was at Peabody, he looked up to the "big kids" who were the kindergartners. When he moved to Watkins, he looked up to the "big kids" who were the 5th graders. You are coming at this with the perspective of a parent rather than as an actual kid in the cluster.

+1 I remember my kindergartner taking care of his PK3 brother more at Peabody, because my K'er felt like the big man on campus. He also had a kind of maturity about him when he entered 1st grade at Watkins because of that experience. I thought it was a positive, rather than a negative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, this is a really hard and hurtful thread to read as a Watkins parent. My child is thriving at Watkins. I’m happy to talk to anyone about the many great things going on at Watkins. Karen Pence, [e-mail].

Do you live IB? Presumably your goal would be to persuade IB parents of Watkins quality so they would send their kids there. Watkins is at 33% IB and Maury is 84% (albeit upper grades lower, but still much higher than 1/3). Maury is demonstrably thriving as is, and Watkins is not getting the same buy-in. Maury parents reasonably do not want to change to a model that fewer people want.

+1. Why does Watkins have such little IB buy-in? Maybe Karen can explain?

Not Karen but I wonder if the cluster model actually is a big reason for the anomalously low and decreasing IB rate at Watkins. I know that for us at Maury, a lot of school community and culture was built up from PK3 on looking up to the older kids and all their traditions like PARCC popsicles and the 5th grade fundraisers. So even though school gets higher stakes and more complex as kids get older the transition is natural. But for a cluster you have no continuity and you have nothing to look forward to being one of the “big kids” at the school. So many more families just peel off after Peabody for other solutions.

No, there is continuity. When my PK3 was at Peabody, he looked up to the "big kids" who were the kindergartners. When he moved to Watkins, he looked up to the "big kids" who were the 5th graders. You are coming at this with the perspective of a parent rather than as an actual kid in the cluster.

Not a Peabody/Watkins parent but the bolded is an incredibly useful point that I think a lot more people in this thread could stand to think about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a Miner parent but I was offended on their behalf reading this thread, so I'm not at all surprised that Miner parents following this process feel "rejected" by some in the Maury community. Just as an example, when discussing test scores, people in this thread have alleged that Miner kids "can't read" and complained that having Miner and Maury students in the same classes would be horribly unfair to the Maury kid. Of course that's offensive!

A lot of the conversation about the neighborhood issues is also pretty offensive. These schools are very near one another (a half mile along a major thoroughfare). But several posters have stated that the neighborhoods are "very different" and that they would not feel safe in the area around Miner. So you wouldn't feel safe walking four blocks from where you currently live and go to school? You never go to the Rosedale pool or library? You don't go to H Street? You don't take your kids to the playground and fields at RFK? Posters are talking about Miner like it's in a war zone or something, when it is simply in a less nice but extremely nearby part of the neighborhood they currently live in.

Of course Miner families are offended. People are really showing their a$$es here, and it's unsurprising to me that this thread is full of hand-wringing from Maury parents but I have seen few if any comments from Miner parents.

Honestly, I'm guessing that's because Miner parents don't know what's going on because DME has yet to meet with them!

Just as an aside, I've lived on the Hill for 20 years and I've yet to go to the Rosedale pool and library. They are weirdly hard to get to unless you drive or bike.

[Anonymous]

Peabody/Watkins parents are feeling thankful seeing what others are going through.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, this is a really hard and hurtful thread to read as a Watkins parent. My child is thriving at Watkins. I’m happy to talk to anyone about the many great things going on at Watkins. Karen Pence, [e-mail].

Do you live IB? Presumably your goal would be to persuade IB parents of Watkins quality so they would send their kids there. Watkins is at 33% IB and Maury is 84% (albeit upper grades lower, but still much higher than 1/3). Maury is demonstrably thriving as is, and Watkins is not getting the same buy-in. Maury parents reasonably do not want to change to a model that fewer people want.

+1. Why does Watkins have such little IB buy-in? Maybe Karen can explain?

Not Karen but I wonder if the cluster model actually is a big reason for the anomalously low and decreasing IB rate at Watkins. I know that for us at Maury, a lot of school community and culture was built up from PK3 on looking up to the older kids and all their traditions like PARCC popsicles and the 5th grade fundraisers. So even though school gets higher stakes and more complex as kids get older the transition is natural. But for a cluster you have no continuity and you have nothing to look forward to being one of the “big kids” at the school. So many more families just peel off after Peabody for other solutions.

No, there is continuity. When my PK3 was at Peabody, he looked up to the "big kids" who were the kindergartners. When he moved to Watkins, he looked up to the "big kids" who were the 5th graders. You are coming at this with the perspective of a parent rather than as an actual kid in the cluster.

Not a Peabody/Watkins parent but the bolded is an incredibly useful point that I think a lot more people in this thread could stand to think about.

The Peabody-Watkins-Stuart Hobson Cluster model worked for many, many years. In 2015, Principal Bell arrived and in the years following, several issues have led to the situation that Peabody and Watkins is in today. The Cluster model can work but you need strong leadership, a community that is open to trusting process, and actual transparency from DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, this is a really hard and hurtful thread to read as a Watkins parent. My child is thriving at Watkins. I’m happy to talk to anyone about the many great things going on at Watkins. Karen Pence, [e-mail].

Do you live IB? Presumably your goal would be to persuade IB parents of Watkins quality so they would send their kids there. Watkins is at 33% IB and Maury is 84% (albeit upper grades lower, but still much higher than 1/3). Maury is demonstrably thriving as is, and Watkins is not getting the same buy-in. Maury parents reasonably do not want to change to a model that fewer people want.

+1. Why does Watkins have such little IB buy-in? Maybe Karen can explain?

Not Karen but I wonder if the cluster model actually is a big reason for the anomalously low and decreasing IB rate at Watkins. I know that for us at Maury, a lot of school community and culture was built up from PK3 on looking up to the older kids and all their traditions like PARCC popsicles and the 5th grade fundraisers. So even though school gets higher stakes and more complex as kids get older the transition is natural. But for a cluster you have no continuity and you have nothing to look forward to being one of the “big kids” at the school. So many more families just peel off after Peabody for other solutions.

No, there is continuity. When my PK3 was at Peabody, he looked up to the "big kids" who were the kindergartners. When he moved to Watkins, he looked up to the "big kids" who were the 5th graders. You are coming at this with the perspective of a parent rather than as an actual kid in the cluster.

The point is the transition year, which is much more disruptive than at Maury and where the IB families peel off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, this is a really hard and hurtful thread to read as a Watkins parent. My child is thriving at Watkins. I’m happy to talk to anyone about the many great things going on at Watkins. Karen Pence, [e-mail].

Do you live IB? Presumably your goal would be to persuade IB parents of Watkins quality so they would send their kids there. Watkins is at 33% IB and Maury is 84% (albeit upper grades lower, but still much higher than 1/3). Maury is demonstrably thriving as is, and Watkins is not getting the same buy-in. Maury parents reasonably do not want to change to a model that fewer people want.

+1. Why does Watkins have such little IB buy-in? Maybe Karen can explain?

Not Karen but I wonder if the cluster model actually is a big reason for the anomalously low and decreasing IB rate at Watkins. I know that for us at Maury, a lot of school community and culture was built up from PK3 on looking up to the older kids and all their traditions like PARCC popsicles and the 5th grade fundraisers. So even though school gets higher stakes and more complex as kids get older the transition is natural. But for a cluster you have no continuity and you have nothing to look forward to being one of the “big kids” at the school. So many more families just peel off after Peabody for other solutions.

No, there is continuity. When my PK3 was at Peabody, he looked up to the "big kids" who were the kindergartners. When he moved to Watkins, he looked up to the "big kids" who were the 5th graders. You are coming at this with the perspective of a parent rather than as an actual kid in the cluster.

Not a Peabody/Watkins parent but the bolded is an incredibly useful point that I think a lot more people in this thread could stand to think about.

The Peabody-Watkins-Stuart Hobson Cluster model worked for many, many years. In 2015, Principal Bell arrived and in the years following, several issues have led to the situation that Peabody and Watkins is in today. The Cluster model can work but you need strong leadership, a community that is open to trusting process, and actual transparency from DCPS.

My now-middle school kids went through the Cluster, and very few of the teachers they had are still there. Maybe this was the result of the pandemic? I don't know. But I was surprised to see the amount of turnover when i just looked at the staff lists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a Miner parent but I was offended on their behalf reading this thread, so I'm not at all surprised that Miner parents following this process feel "rejected" by some in the Maury community. Just as an example, when discussing test scores, people in this thread have alleged that Miner kids "can't read" and complained that having Miner and Maury students in the same classes would be horribly unfair to the Maury kid. Of course that's offensive!

A lot of the conversation about the neighborhood issues is also pretty offensive. These schools are very near one another (a half mile along a major thoroughfare). But several posters have stated that the neighborhoods are "very different" and that they would not feel safe in the area around Miner. So you wouldn't feel safe walking four blocks from where you currently live and go to school? You never go to the Rosedale pool or library? You don't go to H Street? You don't take your kids to the playground and fields at RFK? Posters are talking about Miner like it's in a war zone or something, when it is simply in a less nice but extremely nearby part of the neighborhood they currently live in.

Of course Miner families are offended. People are really showing their a$$es here, and it's unsurprising to me that this thread is full of hand-wringing from Maury parents but I have seen few if any comments from Miner parents.

Both things are unfair - that most Miner kids struggle with reading and that grade-level kids in a clustered school would not get grade-level instruction. That’s what some of us have been saying all along. This plan makes it worse for everyone without actually addressing the needs at Miner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a Miner parent but I was offended on their behalf reading this thread, so I'm not at all surprised that Miner parents following this process feel "rejected" by some in the Maury community. Just as an example, when discussing test scores, people in this thread have alleged that Miner kids "can't read" and complained that having Miner and Maury students in the same classes would be horribly unfair to the Maury kid. Of course that's offensive!

A lot of the conversation about the neighborhood issues is also pretty offensive. These schools are very near one another (a half mile along a major thoroughfare). But several posters have stated that the neighborhoods are "very different" and that they would not feel safe in the area around Miner. So you wouldn't feel safe walking four blocks from where you currently live and go to school? You never go to the Rosedale pool or library? You don't go to H Street? You don't take your kids to the playground and fields at RFK? Posters are talking about Miner like it's in a war zone or something, when it is simply in a less nice but extremely nearby part of the neighborhood they currently live in.

Of course Miner families are offended. People are really showing their a$$es here, and it's unsurprising to me that this thread is full of hand-wringing from Maury parents but I have seen few if any comments from Miner parents.

TBH the Starburst actually does have a war zone feeling, and I don’t love walking to the Rosedale pool. Once my kid picked up an empty shotgun shell on the way there. Being in denial doesn’t help - and again it does not help MINER kids either to deny how dangerous their neighborhood is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, this is a really hard and hurtful thread to read as a Watkins parent. My child is thriving at Watkins. I’m happy to talk to anyone about the many great things going on at Watkins. Karen Pence, [e-mail].

Do you live IB? Presumably your goal would be to persuade IB parents of Watkins quality so they would send their kids there. Watkins is at 33% IB and Maury is 84% (albeit upper grades lower, but still much higher than 1/3). Maury is demonstrably thriving as is, and Watkins is not getting the same buy-in. Maury parents reasonably do not want to change to a model that fewer people want.

+1. Why does Watkins have such little IB buy-in? Maybe Karen can explain?

Not Karen but I wonder if the cluster model actually is a big reason for the anomalously low and decreasing IB rate at Watkins. I know that for us at Maury, a lot of school community and culture was built up from PK3 on looking up to the older kids and all their traditions like PARCC popsicles and the 5th grade fundraisers. So even though school gets higher stakes and more complex as kids get older the transition is natural. But for a cluster you have no continuity and you have nothing to look forward to being one of the “big kids” at the school. So many more families just peel off after Peabody for other solutions.

No, there is continuity. When my PK3 was at Peabody, he looked up to the "big kids" who were the kindergartners. When he moved to Watkins, he looked up to the "big kids" who were the 5th graders. You are coming at this with the perspective of a parent rather than as an actual kid in the cluster.

Not a Peabody/Watkins parent but the bolded is an incredibly useful point that I think a lot more people in this thread could stand to think about.

I mean the parents are making the decisions, so it kind of does matter …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a Miner parent but I was offended on their behalf reading this thread, so I'm not at all surprised that Miner parents following this process feel "rejected" by some in the Maury community. Just as an example, when discussing test scores, people in this thread have alleged that Miner kids "can't read" and complained that having Miner and Maury students in the same classes would be horribly unfair to the Maury kid. Of course that's offensive!

A lot of the conversation about the neighborhood issues is also pretty offensive. These schools are very near one another (a half mile along a major thoroughfare). But several posters have stated that the neighborhoods are "very different" and that they would not feel safe in the area around Miner. So you wouldn't feel safe walking four blocks from where you currently live and go to school? You never go to the Rosedale pool or library? You don't go to H Street? You don't take your kids to the playground and fields at RFK? Posters are talking about Miner like it's in a war zone or something, when it is simply in a less nice but extremely nearby part of the neighborhood they currently live in.

Of course Miner families are offended. People are really showing their a$$es here, and it's unsurprising to me that this thread is full of hand-wringing from Maury parents but I have seen few if any comments from Miner parents.

TBH the Starburst actually does have a war zone feeling, and I don’t love walking to the Rosedale pool. Once my kid picked up an empty shotgun shell on the way there. Being in denial doesn’t help - and again it does not help MINER kids either to deny how dangerous their neighborhood is.

(Also Miner and the RFK fields are like a mile apart so sounds like you don’t even understand the neighborhood at all.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a Miner parent but I was offended on their behalf reading this thread, so I'm not at all surprised that Miner parents following this process feel "rejected" by some in the Maury community. Just as an example, when discussing test scores, people in this thread have alleged that Miner kids "can't read" and complained that having Miner and Maury students in the same classes would be horribly unfair to the Maury kid. Of course that's offensive!

A lot of the conversation about the neighborhood issues is also pretty offensive. These schools are very near one another (a half mile along a major thoroughfare). But several posters have stated that the neighborhoods are "very different" and that they would not feel safe in the area around Miner. So you wouldn't feel safe walking four blocks from where you currently live and go to school? You never go to the Rosedale pool or library? You don't go to H Street? You don't take your kids to the playground and fields at RFK? Posters are talking about Miner like it's in a war zone or something, when it is simply in a less nice but extremely nearby part of the neighborhood they currently live in.

Of course Miner families are offended. People are really showing their a$$es here, and it's unsurprising to me that this thread is full of hand-wringing from Maury parents but I have seen few if any comments from Miner parents.

Big surprise someone not at all connected to the situation can talk out their ass and be “offended” on behalf of someone else. Send your own kids to Miner and then I might give half a sht what you think.