Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not handle this situation a little obliquely and have Maury drop PK classes and Miner add a bunch?

I was thinking something similar -- a cluster for PK only. That seems to meet space issues. Otherwise it seems like we're inevitably headed towards getting rid of PK at Maury.

I've asked about this very topic before (clustering ECE). The issue is how many classes could one school convert to ECE (rooms with bathrooms, on the first floor). I think that can be a sticking point for a lot of schools. I know several that might have 4 to 6 but I'm assuming you would need 8+ in this case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCPS included the Maury/Miner cluster as an option to deal with in-boundary demand, but it was originally proposed by Joe Weedon, the Ward 6 rep to the State Board of Education. Weedon wrote a letter to DCPS in Dec 2015 urging DCPS to explore either 1) a Maury/Miner cluster or 2) moving Maury's 3-5 grades to Eliot-Hine MS.

Weedon didn't do any meaningful outreach on these ideas to either the Maury or Miner communities, so I think there was some shock when DCPS floated this to Maury (and neglected to advise Miner that a cluster was being considered). Whether or not Weedon or DCPS should be blamed for bad process, both the Maury PTA survey and the DCPS survey show little support for a cluster now among Maury families. The well is poisoned, perhaps even more so by this thread.

I think Weedon is angry that people aren't lining up behind his ideas. His family has been at Maury since the early days of the PK program and he has a kid at Eliot-Hine now. I think he feels like he built Maury so he should be able to propose significant changes to the neighborhood school model. I think his belief is that these changes (along with the Eliot-Hine renovation) would convince more Maury families to continue to Eliot-Hine instead of bailing for Basis, Latin, etc. Maybe. But I can see how the risk-averse might need more convincing.

What has been ugly is Weedon telling people not to discuss the cluster idea on the Maury listserv, accusing anyone who doesn't line up behind him as a racist, and saying that people who support the cluster have been intimidated. He can get a bit heated when you don't yield to his ideas, but these are scorched earth tactics. At this point, I think the cluster idea is dead both for lack of support and Weedon's approach/attitude.

Weedon is now saying on Facebook that he can't support the additional funding for an addition that would accommodate Maury's projected in-boundary demand. I think this is about his hurt feelings, so I doubt he will come around to supporting what a majority of Maury families want.

I am kind of curious about the OP. I don't know why you would post that message to DCUM instead of the school listserv unless you were deliberately trying to make people with concerns about the cluster idea look like troglodytes.

Yikes, that sounds like a mess! I'm sympathetic to Weedon's ultimate position, but it sounds like he's going about it in absolutely the worst way. You have to build community for these kinds of big ideas and socialize them. Otherwise they break down into a predictably toxic mess.

Build community? If anything many of these comments demonstrate that some individuals only care about their slice of Ward 6.

Fenty thought he could win reelection by ignoring the interests of Miner parents and those of us with less means that can't afford to threaten to just move when things don't go their way.

We should support equal opportunity for all of our children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCPS included the Maury/Miner cluster as an option to deal with in-boundary demand, but it was originally proposed by Joe Weedon, the Ward 6 rep to the State Board of Education. Weedon wrote a letter to DCPS in Dec 2015 urging DCPS to explore either 1) a Maury/Miner cluster or 2) moving Maury's 3-5 grades to Eliot-Hine MS.

Weedon didn't do any meaningful outreach on these ideas to either the Maury or Miner communities, so I think there was some shock when DCPS floated this to Maury (and neglected to advise Miner that a cluster was being considered). Whether or not Weedon or DCPS should be blamed for bad process, both the Maury PTA survey and the DCPS survey show little support for a cluster now among Maury families. The well is poisoned, perhaps even more so by this thread.

I think Weedon is angry that people aren't lining up behind his ideas. His family has been at Maury since the early days of the PK program and he has a kid at Eliot-Hine now. I think he feels like he built Maury so he should be able to propose significant changes to the neighborhood school model. I think his belief is that these changes (along with the Eliot-Hine renovation) would convince more Maury families to continue to Eliot-Hine instead of bailing for Basis, Latin, etc. Maybe. But I can see how the risk-averse might need more convincing.

What has been ugly is Weedon telling people not to discuss the cluster idea on the Maury listserv, accusing anyone who doesn't line up behind him as a racist, and saying that people who support the cluster have been intimidated. He can get a bit heated when you don't yield to his ideas, but these are scorched earth tactics. At this point, I think the cluster idea is dead both for lack of support and Weedon's approach/attitude.

Weedon is now saying on Facebook that he can't support the additional funding for an addition that would accommodate Maury's projected in-boundary demand. I think this is about his hurt feelings, so I doubt he will come around to supporting what a majority of Maury families want.

I am kind of curious about the OP. I don't know why you would post that message to DCUM instead of the school listserv unless you were deliberately trying to make people with concerns about the cluster idea look like troglodytes.

Yikes, that sounds like a mess! I'm sympathetic to Weedon's ultimate position, but it sounds like he's going about it in absolutely the worst way. You have to build community for these kinds of big ideas and socialize them. Otherwise they break down into a predictably toxic mess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCPS included the Maury/Miner cluster as an option to deal with in-boundary demand, but it was originally proposed by Joe Weedon, the Ward 6 rep to the State Board of Education. Weedon wrote a letter to DCPS in Dec 2015 urging DCPS to explore either 1) a Maury/Miner cluster or 2) moving Maury's 3-5 grades to Eliot-Hine MS.

Weedon didn't do any meaningful outreach on these ideas to either the Maury or Miner communities, so I think there was some shock when DCPS floated this to Maury (and neglected to advise Miner that a cluster was being considered). Whether or not Weedon or DCPS should be blamed for bad process, both the Maury PTA survey and the DCPS survey show little support for a cluster now among Maury families. The well is poisoned, perhaps even more so by this thread.

I think Weedon is angry that people aren't lining up behind his ideas. His family has been at Maury since the early days of the PK program and he has a kid at Eliot-Hine now. I think he feels like he built Maury so he should be able to propose significant changes to the neighborhood school model. I think his belief is that these changes (along with the Eliot-Hine renovation) would convince more Maury families to continue to Eliot-Hine instead of bailing for Basis, Latin, etc. Maybe. But I can see how the risk-averse might need more convincing.

What has been ugly is Weedon telling people not to discuss the cluster idea on the Maury listserv, accusing anyone who doesn't line up behind him as a racist, and saying that people who support the cluster have been intimidated. He can get a bit heated when you don't yield to his ideas, but these are scorched earth tactics. At this point, I think the cluster idea is dead both for lack of support and Weedon's approach/attitude.

Weedon is now saying on Facebook that he can't support the additional funding for an addition that would accommodate Maury's projected in-boundary demand. I think this is about his hurt feelings, so I doubt he will come around to supporting what a majority of Maury families want.

I am kind of curious about the OP. I don't know why you would post that message to DCUM instead of the school listserv unless you were deliberately trying to make people with concerns about the cluster idea look like troglodytes.

Yikes, that sounds like a mess! I'm sympathetic to Weedon's ultimate position, but it sounds like he's going about it in absolutely the worst way. You have to build community for these kinds of big ideas and socialize them. Otherwise they break down into a predictably toxic mess.

Anonymous wrote:DCPS included the Maury/Miner cluster as an option to deal with in-boundary demand, but it was originally proposed by Joe Weedon, the Ward 6 rep to the State Board of Education. Weedon wrote a letter to DCPS in Dec 2015 urging DCPS to explore either 1) a Maury/Miner cluster or 2) moving Maury's 3-5 grades to Eliot-Hine MS.

Weedon didn't do any meaningful outreach on these ideas to either the Maury or Miner communities, so I think there was some shock when DCPS floated this to Maury (and neglected to advise Miner that a cluster was being considered). Whether or not Weedon or DCPS should be blamed for bad process, both the Maury PTA survey and the DCPS survey show little support for a cluster now among Maury families. The well is poisoned, perhaps even more so by this thread.

I think Weedon is angry that people aren't lining up behind his ideas. His family has been at Maury since the early days of the PK program and he has a kid at Eliot-Hine now. I think he feels like he built Maury so he should be able to propose significant changes to the neighborhood school model. I think his belief is that these changes (along with the Eliot-Hine renovation) would convince more Maury families to continue to Eliot-Hine instead of bailing for Basis, Latin, etc. Maybe. But I can see how the risk-averse might need more convincing.

What has been ugly is Weedon telling people not to discuss the cluster idea on the Maury listserv, accusing anyone who doesn't line up behind him as a racist, and saying that people who support the cluster have been intimidated. He can get a bit heated when you don't yield to his ideas, but these are scorched earth tactics. At this point, I think the cluster idea is dead both for lack of support and Weedon's approach/attitude.

Weedon is now saying on Facebook that he can't support the additional funding for an addition that would accommodate Maury's projected in-boundary demand. I think this is about his hurt feelings, so I doubt he will come around to supporting what a majority of Maury families want.

I am kind of curious about the OP. I don't know why you would post that message to DCUM instead of the school listserv unless you were deliberately trying to make people with concerns about the cluster idea look like troglodytes.

Anonymous wrote:What do you know about PPs mixing with neighbors? We've on the Hill since the 90s, so we've done a little of that along the way. We were also part of the group that lobbied to prevent Maury building from being shuttered and handed off to a developer over a decade ago. Please go jump in a lake with your holier than thou BS.

Anonymous wrote:If you can't stand us, you can always move to cheer up.

The cluster idea was obviously dead in the water from its inception, explaining why it never took off. OP was simply seeking drama. Not cool.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
OP, if you look at the slides that were linked to the survey, it shows that parents have already been surveyed and responses compiled. Plus this already went out to Maury families on Maury's list serv. What is the actual intent of your post? Seems like the school list serv would be a better way to reach more families.

I second this! The Maury community weighed in already with its own survey, and overwhelming disfavored the cluster option. In our meeting DCPS officials, they seemed to say the cluster wasn't a real option, at least in the near term. The DCPS survey is intended to get feedback on a newly proposed option 4 that would renovate and modernize the school, with the caveat that additional funds from the FY2018 budget will need to be secured to move forward. I wonder why the poster even started this thread. Seems like more trouble/drama rather than a productive way to really think through this issue.

Let's keep it positive on this thread -- or better yet, stop responding to it.