Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At risk set-asides are going to make a minimal difference.

Define "minimal difference." If Maury gets to the 25% it drops the disparity between the schools to below 40%, which is a big improvement by the DME's metric. If the set asides don't do that for whatever reason, then we'll know that and can explore other options.

Maury is 84% IB now. It can’t get to 25% and even if it did, those would not all be at-risk.

It is DME's own projection that with at-risk set-asides Maury's at-risk percentage is estimated to reach 25%, and they acknowledge that all of that growth will come from the upper grades.

Isn't 84% the percent of currently enrolled students, not 84% of capacity.

Maury is 100% at capacity and 16% IB. So even if 100% of OOB were at-risk, the percentage is not going over 16%. As for the upper grades my guess is that most of the new OOB students entering after 2nd grade are at risk now. So there just are not that many seats unless DCPS is going to insist that the school become over-enrolled.

Are you just making things up? Maury is not 100% capacity, as every presentation has shown. DME's own modeling suggests that they will get to 25% through the lottery. These slides are all on the boundary study website.

Maury is at 86% utilization. (https://dme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dme/publication/attachments/Boundary%20Study%20School%20Meetings%20Miner%2012.19.2023.pdf)

And many of the OOB students at Maury receive proximity preference and are not at-risk. If proximity preference is bumped for at-risk preference that could definitely have an impact, assuming there are interested at-risk students.

Does anyone know what the order of preferences will be. Normally schools decide. But are they going to make the schools put an at-risk preference first (even before siblings and proximity)? Seems pretty nuts. And going to be hard on some Peabody families that have proximity preference to Maury and aren't willing/able to go to Watkins (such a successful cluster).

At some point—I think fairly recently—the capacity for Maury was revised upward. I remember it being in the 580s or 590s post-renovation, and now they are saying 613 or something. I'd like to learn a lot more about that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At risk set-asides are going to make a minimal difference.

Define "minimal difference." If Maury gets to the 25% it drops the disparity between the schools to below 40%, which is a big improvement by the DME's metric. If the set asides don't do that for whatever reason, then we'll know that and can explore other options.

Maury is 84% IB now. It can’t get to 25% and even if it did, those would not all be at-risk.

It is DME's own projection that with at-risk set-asides Maury's at-risk percentage is estimated to reach 25%, and they acknowledge that all of that growth will come from the upper grades.

Isn't 84% the percent of currently enrolled students, not 84% of capacity.

Maury is 100% at capacity and 16% IB. So even if 100% of OOB were at-risk, the percentage is not going over 16%. As for the upper grades my guess is that most of the new OOB students entering after 2nd grade are at risk now. So there just are not that many seats unless DCPS is going to insist that the school become over-enrolled.

Are you just making things up? Maury is not 100% capacity, as every presentation has shown. DME's own modeling suggests that they will get to 25% through the lottery. These slides are all on the boundary study website.

Maury is at 86% utilization. (https://dme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dme/publication/attachments/Boundary%20Study%20School%20Meetings%20Miner%2012.19.2023.pdf)

And many of the OOB students at Maury receive proximity preference and are not at-risk. If proximity preference is bumped for at-risk preference that could definitely have an impact, assuming there are interested at-risk students.

Have to wonder too how well DCPS gets through to low SES families/parents of at risk kids as to the fact that this exists, as well as how to navigate the lottery to take advantage of it. This is only a beneficial program of parents know to use it and how. These aren't parents with a few hundred to spend on a DC lottery consultant to maximize their odds, or parents who can spend the time and effort to research different schools. Then, yes, the transportation is another barrier when we're talking about preschool and elementary school aged kids who can't independently take public transportation and the parents themselves may not own a car.

I think the biggest barrier is the cost of aftercare. Polite Piggies at Maury was over $400 a month for K-8 the last time I checked. There is a sliding scale, but it tops out at a family income of $65,000. Below that, families pay less, but still pay something. A family with income between about $20,000-$25,000 pays just under $100 a month, for example. How many families in that income range are going to enroll their kids in a "better" school if it's going to cost them an extra thousand dollars a year?

Because Miner is Title 1, aftercare is free. It is at nearly all--if not all--Title 1 schools. Kids in 4th or 5th grade are allowed to leave by themselves at the end of the school day. Below that, many, if not most, DCPS schools don't allow it. So most working poor families have to use aftercare.

I think even the savviest of low income families will hesitate to enroll their kids in a school where they have to pay for aftercare. Yes, SOME non-Title 1 schools have programs to assist at risk families with paying the bill.

Bottom line: I don't think it's lack of knowledge about at risk preferences that keeps poor families from enrolling their kids. I think it's the cost of aftercare. And I doubt very much that many of the at risk families are savvy about how much they would have to pay for aftercare at the schools w/ at risk preference.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At risk set-asides are going to make a minimal difference.

Define "minimal difference." If Maury gets to the 25% it drops the disparity between the schools to below 40%, which is a big improvement by the DME's metric. If the set asides don't do that for whatever reason, then we'll know that and can explore other options.

Maury is 84% IB now. It can’t get to 25% and even if it did, those would not all be at-risk.

It is DME's own projection that with at-risk set-asides Maury's at-risk percentage is estimated to reach 25%, and they acknowledge that all of that growth will come from the upper grades.

Isn't 84% the percent of currently enrolled students, not 84% of capacity.

Maury is 100% at capacity and 16% IB. So even if 100% of OOB were at-risk, the percentage is not going over 16%. As for the upper grades my guess is that most of the new OOB students entering after 2nd grade are at risk now. So there just are not that many seats unless DCPS is going to insist that the school become over-enrolled.

Are you just making things up? Maury is not 100% capacity, as every presentation has shown. DME's own modeling suggests that they will get to 25% through the lottery. These slides are all on the boundary study website.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At risk set-asides are going to make a minimal difference.

Define "minimal difference." If Maury gets to the 25% it drops the disparity between the schools to below 40%, which is a big improvement by the DME's metric. If the set asides don't do that for whatever reason, then we'll know that and can explore other options.

Maury is 84% IB now. It can’t get to 25% and even if it did, those would not all be at-risk.

It is DME's own projection that with at-risk set-asides Maury's at-risk percentage is estimated to reach 25%, and they acknowledge that all of that growth will come from the upper grades.

Isn't 84% the percent of currently enrolled students, not 84% of capacity.

Maury is 100% at capacity and 16% IB. So even if 100% of OOB were at-risk, the percentage is not going over 16%. As for the upper grades my guess is that most of the new OOB students entering after 2nd grade are at risk now. So there just are not that many seats unless DCPS is going to insist that the school become over-enrolled.

Anonymous wrote:REMINDER:

Anyone in favor of the Cluster from any Hill schools or otherwise can lottery into Miner next year. No need to wait for 2027 DME study. From the petition signatures, surely 150-200 UMC kids can apply and walla! DME cluster result achieved.

"Voila".

REMINDER:

Anyone in favor of the Cluster from any Hill schools or otherwise can lottery into Miner next year. No need to wait for 2027 DME study. From the petition signatures, surely 150-200 UMC kids can apply and walla! DME cluster result achieved.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At risk set-asides are going to make a minimal difference.

Define "minimal difference." If Maury gets to the 25% it drops the disparity between the schools to below 40%, which is a big improvement by the DME's metric. If the set asides don't do that for whatever reason, then we'll know that and can explore other options.

Maury is 84% IB now. It can’t get to 25% and even if it did, those would not all be at-risk.

It is DME's own projection that with at-risk set-asides Maury's at-risk percentage is estimated to reach 25%, and they acknowledge that all of that growth will come from the upper grades.

Isn't 84% the percent of currently enrolled students, not 84% of capacity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At risk set-asides are going to make a minimal difference.

Define "minimal difference." If Maury gets to the 25% it drops the disparity between the schools to below 40%, which is a big improvement by the DME's metric. If the set asides don't do that for whatever reason, then we'll know that and can explore other options.

Maury is 84% IB now. It can’t get to 25% and even if it did, those would not all be at-risk.

It is DME's own projection that with at-risk set-asides Maury's at-risk percentage is estimated to reach 25%, and they acknowledge that all of that growth will come from the upper grades.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At risk set-asides are going to make a minimal difference.

Define "minimal difference." If Maury gets to the 25% it drops the disparity between the schools to below 40%, which is a big improvement by the DME's metric. If the set asides don't do that for whatever reason, then we'll know that and can explore other options.

Maury is 84% IB now. It can’t get to 25% and even if it did, those would not all be at-risk.

Anonymous wrote:At risk set-asides are going to make a minimal difference.

Define "minimal difference." If Maury gets to the 25% it drops the disparity between the schools to below 40%, which is a big improvement by the DME's metric. If the set asides don't do that for whatever reason, then we'll know that and can explore other options.