Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:In the school's defense, they completely revamped their recruitment this year to try and increase their underserved populations. It was a big focus on their recruitment for this year's lottery.
Are they still eliminating free/low cost aftercare?
Anonymous wrote:In the school's defense, they completely revamped their recruitment this year to try and increase their underserved populations. It was a big focus on their recruitment for this year's lottery.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm very shocked that this Montessori School that claims that it wants to serve underserved children is still locating in gentrification central.
Very shocked.
(not shocked at all)
Shut up.
Does it hurt when someone points out your hypocrisy?
Not the PP, but it's incredibly irritating when people chime in with sarcasm on a known issue for DC schools. It's hard to find spaces that are affordable and already configured for a school. This is hardly the first school to be located in this location. Hell, it's not even the first Montessori school to be interested in being located in that area. There are plenty of under-served children in and near Ward 4. A large number of charters end up in Wards 4 and 5 specifically because spaces exist in those areas that can accommodate them. I was not terribly surprised when I learned that that's where they were locating initially. I am even less surprised that they're staying put for another year while they try to find another location.
In any case, your snark isn't funny or helpful.
Anonymous wrote:Who are the he charters that inevitably landed in Broomland. Is that a bad location/neighborhood? Or am I missing something. New to DC
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I haven't read the original charter , but if they were approved based on serving a economically disadvantaged population -- why aren't they relocating to Wards 7 or 8. High SES parents have the resources to commute. Nothing wrong with them being the public Montessori for the wealthy. There's always Lee and Shining Stars. Maybe one or both will expand and have locations in 7 or 8.
That's the $5M question. Other schools have opened facilities in Wards 7 and 8 in last 2 years (Rocketship comes to mind).
You people are so infuriating. You assume that just because a charter ends up in a certain location, that's the ONLY location they looked at. Seriously? In any case, I happen to know for a fact that they DID try to go to Ward 7 and were actively looking at a site there. For whatever reason it fell through. It's hard in the city to find space for a school. Then you do and the landlord wants too much money, or the building needs too much work. It happens. Ask any of the other charters that have looked for years for a good space and inevitably ended up in Brookland.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I haven't read the original charter , but if they were approved based on serving a economically disadvantaged population -- why aren't they relocating to Wards 7 or 8. High SES parents have the resources to commute. Nothing wrong with them being the public Montessori for the wealthy. There's always Lee and Shining Stars. Maybe one or both will expand and have locations in 7 or 8.
Their original charter stated Ward 1, not 7/8.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I haven't read the original charter , but if they were approved based on serving a economically disadvantaged population -- why aren't they relocating to Wards 7 or 8. High SES parents have the resources to commute. Nothing wrong with them being the public Montessori for the wealthy. There's always Lee and Shining Stars. Maybe one or both will expand and have locations in 7 or 8.
That's the $5M question. Other schools have opened facilities in Wards 7 and 8 in last 2 years (Rocketship comes to mind).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I haven't read the original charter , but if they were approved based on serving a economically disadvantaged population -- why aren't they relocating to Wards 7 or 8. High SES parents have the resources to commute. Nothing wrong with them being the public Montessori for the wealthy. There's always Lee and Shining Stars. Maybe one or both will expand and have locations in 7 or 8.
Their original charter stated Ward 1, not 7/8.
Anonymous wrote:I haven't read the original charter , but if they were approved based on serving a economically disadvantaged population -- why aren't they relocating to Wards 7 or 8. High SES parents have the resources to commute. Nothing wrong with them being the public Montessori for the wealthy. There's always Lee and Shining Stars. Maybe one or both will expand and have locations in 7 or 8.
Anonymous wrote:I haven't read the original charter , but if they were approved based on serving a economically disadvantaged population -- why aren't they relocating to Wards 7 or 8. High SES parents have the resources to commute. Nothing wrong with them being the public Montessori for the wealthy. There's always Lee and Shining Stars. Maybe one or both will expand and have locations in 7 or 8.