New boundary study for Churchill, Clarksburg, Damascus, Gaithersburg, RM, Northwest, Poolesville, QO, SV, WM, Wootton

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Way back when Chicago schools were extremely segregated there was a big lawsuit. The Winston Churchill or TJ school with “best teachers” and “”best facilities” was forced to take all the students from the inner city run down school with “bad teachers”

Literally all the students switched schools. Guess what happened. The bad school grades and scores shot up and those bad teachers became good teachers almost overnight.

The good school became a bad school. So much is the teachers and parents.

*shrug*

Here are the facts:

1. There will be a boundary study
2. The boundary study will have a public input process
3. Boundaries will change
4. Some people will complain
5. The sky will not fall

In previous boundary changes, has the public input process ever amounted to significant change from the presented options? Or is it just a venting process meant to make people feel like they are heard?

Yes, it often leads to additional options.

HoCo's 2019 redistricting was widely criticized, and it did not lead to additional options that addressed criticisms to be presented.

Instead, the media covered the plans and shut down criticism by labeling it as right-wing.

In hindsight, much of the criticism turned out to be correct. The longer bus rides have contributed to the district's bus issues. Neighborhoods were split, so that young children make friends who then separate where they didn't before. You can find both of these complaints mentioned in media coverage from the time. And we can now see from the data that these efforts failed to make meaningful changes in the demographic makeup of these schools, but the district is now stuck with the longer bus rides and split communities.

So as far as seeing additional options - I'll believe it when I see it.

Whatever, PP. If you want to carry on about how horrible the MCPS boundary studies will be, based on your interpretation of something that happened in a different school district, go right ahead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Way back when Chicago schools were extremely segregated there was a big lawsuit. The Winston Churchill or TJ school with “best teachers” and “”best facilities” was forced to take all the students from the inner city run down school with “bad teachers”

Literally all the students switched schools. Guess what happened. The bad school grades and scores shot up and those bad teachers became good teachers almost overnight.

The good school became a bad school. So much is the teachers and parents.

*shrug*

Here are the facts:

1. There will be a boundary study
2. The boundary study will have a public input process
3. Boundaries will change
4. Some people will complain
5. The sky will not fall

In previous boundary changes, has the public input process ever amounted to significant change from the presented options? Or is it just a venting process meant to make people feel like they are heard?

Yes, it often leads to additional options.

HoCo's 2019 redistricting was widely criticized, and it did not lead to additional options that addressed criticisms to be presented.

Instead, the media covered the plans and shut down criticism by labeling it as right-wing.

In hindsight, much of the criticism turned out to be correct. The longer bus rides have contributed to the district's bus issues. Neighborhoods were split, so that young children make friends who then separate where they didn't before. You can find both of these complaints mentioned in media coverage from the time. And we can now see from the data that these efforts failed to make meaningful changes in the demographic makeup of these schools, but the district is now stuck with the longer bus rides and split communities.

So as far as seeing additional options - I'll believe it when I see it.

In the last HS boundary study for Clarksburg, Northwest, and Seneca Valley, there were initially 8 options presented. Then after some community input, a second round of options was added, including 6 more for a total of 14 to be considered. And that was with just three clusters in scope. With the Crown/Damascus study covering 11 clusters, there are likely to be many more options presented.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Way back when Chicago schools were extremely segregated there was a big lawsuit. The Winston Churchill or TJ school with “best teachers” and “”best facilities” was forced to take all the students from the inner city run down school with “bad teachers”

Literally all the students switched schools. Guess what happened. The bad school grades and scores shot up and those bad teachers became good teachers almost overnight.

The good school became a bad school. So much is the teachers and parents.

*shrug*

Here are the facts:

1. There will be a boundary study
2. The boundary study will have a public input process
3. Boundaries will change
4. Some people will complain
5. The sky will not fall

In previous boundary changes, has the public input process ever amounted to significant change from the presented options? Or is it just a venting process meant to make people feel like they are heard?

Yes, it often leads to additional options.

Initially, BCC was supposed to be part of the DCC being downcounty and all, but the parents successfully lobbied to keep it separate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Way back when Chicago schools were extremely segregated there was a big lawsuit. The Winston Churchill or TJ school with “best teachers” and “”best facilities” was forced to take all the students from the inner city run down school with “bad teachers”

Literally all the students switched schools. Guess what happened. The bad school grades and scores shot up and those bad teachers became good teachers almost overnight.

The good school became a bad school. So much is the teachers and parents.

*shrug*

Here are the facts:

1. There will be a boundary study
2. The boundary study will have a public input process
3. Boundaries will change
4. Some people will complain
5. The sky will not fall

In previous boundary changes, has the public input process ever amounted to significant change from the presented options? Or is it just a venting process meant to make people feel like they are heard?

Yes, it often leads to additional options.

Initially, BCC was supposed to be part of the DCC being downcounty and all, but the parents successfully lobbied to keep it separate.

That has nothing to do with boundary studies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Way back when Chicago schools were extremely segregated there was a big lawsuit. The Winston Churchill or TJ school with “best teachers” and “”best facilities” was forced to take all the students from the inner city run down school with “bad teachers”

Literally all the students switched schools. Guess what happened. The bad school grades and scores shot up and those bad teachers became good teachers almost overnight.

The good school became a bad school. So much is the teachers and parents.

*shrug*

Here are the facts:

1. There will be a boundary study
2. The boundary study will have a public input process
3. Boundaries will change
4. Some people will complain
5. The sky will not fall

In previous boundary changes, has the public input process ever amounted to significant change from the presented options? Or is it just a venting process meant to make people feel like they are heard?

Yes, it often leads to additional options.

HoCo's 2019 redistricting was widely criticized, and it did not lead to additional options that addressed criticisms to be presented.

Instead, the media covered the plans and shut down criticism by labeling it as right-wing.

In hindsight, much of the criticism turned out to be correct. The longer bus rides have contributed to the district's bus issues. Neighborhoods were split, so that young children make friends who then separate where they didn't before. You can find both of these complaints mentioned in media coverage from the time. And we can now see from the data that these efforts failed to make meaningful changes in the demographic makeup of these schools, but the district is now stuck with the longer bus rides and split communities.

So as far as seeing additional options - I'll believe it when I see it.

What does HoCo have to do with MoCo boundary studies??? You need only look at the recent MoCo boundary studies to know that producing more options is a valid statement.

[Anonymous]

No one is talking about the Facilities and Boundary hearing that happened last Thursday?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one is talking about the Facilities and Boundary hearing that happened last Thursday?

What would you like to talk about? The hearing was mostly Wootton students and parents asking that their major capital project which had already been delayed to 2029 not be delayed even further.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one is talking about the Facilities and Boundary hearing that happened last Thursday?

In this meeting, many parents and students described the unsafe conditions at Wootton, including students who suffered autoimmune flair ups from exposure to mold. After 15 years of delaying renovations, and recent announcements that further delays are likely, it is clear that repeating the same pleas for renovation are not going to fix the situation. MCPS has already shown that they don't believe the health hazards that these kids are currently being exposed to every day are compelling enough to warrant action.

At this point, I wonder if a class action lawsuit on behalf of children who are affected would be a better approach. Legal consequences, further budget constraints, and other means of directly affecting board members are likely to prove more effective at preventing further damage to the health and safety of these students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one is talking about the Facilities and Boundary hearing that happened last Thursday?

In this meeting, many parents and students described the unsafe conditions at Wootton, including students who suffered autoimmune flair ups from exposure to mold. After 15 years of delaying renovations, and recent announcements that further delays are likely, it is clear that repeating the same pleas for renovation are not going to fix the situation. MCPS has already shown that they don't believe the health hazards that these kids are currently being exposed to every day are compelling enough to warrant action.

At this point, I wonder if a class action lawsuit on behalf of children who are affected would be a better approach. Legal consequences, further budget constraints, and other means of directly affecting board members are likely to prove more effective at preventing further damage to the health and safety of these students.

How would further budget constraints be helpful?? What’s the criteria everyone would liked used when the CE and Council ask for Non-Recommended changes and cuts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one is talking about the Facilities and Boundary hearing that happened last Thursday?

In this meeting, many parents and students described the unsafe conditions at Wootton, including students who suffered autoimmune flair ups from exposure to mold. After 15 years of delaying renovations, and recent announcements that further delays are likely, it is clear that repeating the same pleas for renovation are not going to fix the situation. MCPS has already shown that they don't believe the health hazards that these kids are currently being exposed to every day are compelling enough to warrant action.

At this point, I wonder if a class action lawsuit on behalf of children who are affected would be a better approach. Legal consequences, further budget constraints, and other means of directly affecting board members are likely to prove more effective at preventing further damage to the health and safety of these students.

How would further budget constraints be helpful?? What’s the criteria everyone would liked used when the CE and Council ask for Non-Recommended changes and cuts?

What I meant is that if the human cost of mold flourishing throughout the building is not a good enough reason to address the issue, then avoiding the costs associated with fighting a class action lawsuit might be enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If MCPS has good schools with top-notch education programs, FARMS won't matter one way or the other. Parents that care about education will relocate to the county for their children's educational opportunities.

It seems MCPS has given up trying to provide top-notch programs. Now their only strategy is to shift around poor people in the hopes of watering down issues at their home schools.

However, the assumption that poor=problem is one MCPS CO is making up themselves. Instead the CO should step up and go sit daily at the schools with problems and instead of at Hungerford. And they should sit there, at that school, until it's problems have been fixed.

This is nonsense. Even in MCPS, there's a direct correlation between test scores and poverty. Schools with the least poverty have the highest averages. Even schools where many kids do as well as anywhere have a lower average because they shoulder more poverty. You can try to pretend it doesn't matter but it really does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one is talking about the Facilities and Boundary hearing that happened last Thursday?

In this meeting, many parents and students described the unsafe conditions at Wootton, including students who suffered autoimmune flair ups from exposure to mold. After 15 years of delaying renovations, and recent announcements that further delays are likely, it is clear that repeating the same pleas for renovation are not going to fix the situation. MCPS has already shown that they don't believe the health hazards that these kids are currently being exposed to every day are compelling enough to warrant action.

At this point, I wonder if a class action lawsuit on behalf of children who are affected would be a better approach. Legal consequences, further budget constraints, and other means of directly affecting board members are likely to prove more effective at preventing further damage to the health and safety of these students.

How would further budget constraints be helpful?? What’s the criteria everyone would liked used when the CE and Council ask for Non-Recommended changes and cuts?

What I meant is that if the human cost of mold flourishing throughout the building is not a good enough reason to address the issue, then avoiding the costs associated with fighting a class action lawsuit might be enough.

What are you such a moldist!?! The mold is integral part of the school culture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If MCPS has good schools with top-notch education programs, FARMS won't matter one way or the other. Parents that care about education will relocate to the county for their children's educational opportunities.

It seems MCPS has given up trying to provide top-notch programs. Now their only strategy is to shift around poor people in the hopes of watering down issues at their home schools.

However, the assumption that poor=problem is one MCPS CO is making up themselves. Instead the CO should step up and go sit daily at the schools with problems and instead of at Hungerford. And they should sit there, at that school, until it's problems have been fixed.

This is nonsense. Even in MCPS, there's a direct correlation between test scores and poverty. Schools with the least poverty have the highest averages. Even schools where many kids do as well as anywhere have a lower average because they shoulder more poverty. You can try to pretend it doesn't matter but it really does.

You are confusing correlation with causation. The kids have high test scores because of their affluent and highly educated parents. Parental background is by far the largest predictor of student performance. This is something that the schools has no control over. Shuffling around students will make the metrics look better, but it will have minimal impact on individual student outcomes. Equal outcomes is impossible unless we put everyone in government run childcare institutions and the kids have no contact with their family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If MCPS has good schools with top-notch education programs, FARMS won't matter one way or the other. Parents that care about education will relocate to the county for their children's educational opportunities.

It seems MCPS has given up trying to provide top-notch programs. Now their only strategy is to shift around poor people in the hopes of watering down issues at their home schools.

However, the assumption that poor=problem is one MCPS CO is making up themselves. Instead the CO should step up and go sit daily at the schools with problems and instead of at Hungerford. And they should sit there, at that school, until it's problems have been fixed.

This is nonsense. Even in MCPS, there's a direct correlation between test scores and poverty. Schools with the least poverty have the highest averages. Even schools where many kids do as well as anywhere have a lower average because they shoulder more poverty. You can try to pretend it doesn't matter but it really does.

You are confusing correlation with causation. The kids have high test scores because of their affluent and highly educated parents. Parental background is by far the largest predictor of student performance. This is something that the schools has no control over. Shuffling around students will make the metrics look better, but it will have minimal impact on individual student outcomes. Equal outcomes is impossible unless we put everyone in government run childcare institutions and the kids have no contact with their family.

"Shuffling around students" actually does have a measurable impact on individual student outcomes for students from low-income families. That has been well-established.

Plus, if it has minimal impact on individual student outcomes, why worry about your kids (assuming they have an affluent, highly-educated family) having to go to school with poor kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If MCPS has good schools with top-notch education programs, FARMS won't matter one way or the other. Parents that care about education will relocate to the county for their children's educational opportunities.

It seems MCPS has given up trying to provide top-notch programs. Now their only strategy is to shift around poor people in the hopes of watering down issues at their home schools.

However, the assumption that poor=problem is one MCPS CO is making up themselves. Instead the CO should step up and go sit daily at the schools with problems and instead of at Hungerford. And they should sit there, at that school, until it's problems have been fixed.

This is nonsense. Even in MCPS, there's a direct correlation between test scores and poverty. Schools with the least poverty have the highest averages. Even schools where many kids do as well as anywhere have a lower average because they shoulder more poverty. You can try to pretend it doesn't matter but it really does.

You are confusing correlation with causation. The kids have high test scores because of their affluent and highly educated parents. Parental background is by far the largest predictor of student performance. This is something that the schools has no control over. Shuffling around students will make the metrics look better, but it will have minimal impact on individual student outcomes. Equal outcomes is impossible unless we put everyone in government run childcare institutions and the kids have no contact with their family.

"Shuffling around students" actually does have a measurable impact on individual student outcomes for students from low-income families. That has been well-established.

Plus, if it has minimal impact on individual student outcomes, why worry about your kids (assuming they have an affluent, highly-educated family) having to go to school with poor kids?

Unfortunately, many of these parents find this undesirable and they will pull their kids out of public school or relocate school attendance zones to avoid schools with high numbers of low-income kids. In cities like NYC (many high poverty public schools), Kids in wealthy census tracts have private school enrollment rates above 50%.