Initial boundary options for Woodward study area are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone tell me why MoCo has split articulation? I can see a definition on MCPS but it seems like a practice that leads to a pretty awkward middle school experience. Kids do not bother making friends with other kids who they know are going off to a different high school. It was difficult recruiting parents to invest their time in PTA and volunteer efforts because no one was invested in the school. It cast a shadow over the whole experience for us.

It’s not ideal for sure but it’s not as bad as you might think. I went to Cabin John and then Churchill. At the time it was probably 65-70% went to Wootton and 30-35% to Churchill. I was definitely friends with a lot of people who went to Wootton and it was really sad to split up for high school but once a month or two of high school passed most people made friends with kids from the other middle school Hoover.

Where things would be really bad would be if say 20-30% or less of an ES went to a different MS. Or if a small percentage of an ES went to the same MS as the rest of their ES but then split up and went to a different HS and was maybe 10%-25% of a MS going to a HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone tell me why MoCo has split articulation? I can see a definition on MCPS but it seems like a practice that leads to a pretty awkward middle school experience. Kids do not bother making friends with other kids who they know are going off to a different high school. It was difficult recruiting parents to invest their time in PTA and volunteer efforts because no one was invested in the school. It cast a shadow over the whole experience for us.

It’s not ideal for sure but it’s not as bad as you might think. I went to Cabin John and then Churchill. At the time it was probably 65-70% went to Wootton and 30-35% to Churchill. I was definitely friends with a lot of people who went to Wootton and it was really sad to split up for high school but once a month or two of high school passed most people made friends with kids from the other middle school Hoover.

Where things would be really bad would be if say 20-30% or less of an ES went to a different MS. Or if a small percentage of an ES went to the same MS as the rest of their ES but then split up and went to a different HS and was maybe 10%-25% of a MS going to a HS.

That’s what will happen in option 2 for my kids. It really makes me sad, especially since one of my kids will be in 10th grade. After having to deal with Covid and those social impacts, this feels cruel. Plus, they’ll go through the big adjustment at high school in 9th grade, only to have to adjust again in 10th at a new school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS and Flo Analytics should be ashamed of themselves for releasing Option 3 if there is actually no intention of using that map.

I do not think there is any intention of using any of these maps

I think these initial options are kind of a waste of time, but I don't think there was malicious intent. Just plain old incompetence.

If that's the case then what is the point of all of releasing them? I truly don't get it. That's what makes me think they are on the table.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS and Flo Analytics should be ashamed of themselves for releasing Option 3 if there is actually no intention of using that map.

I do not think there is any intention of using any of these maps

I think these initial options are kind of a waste of time, but I don't think there was malicious intent. Just plain old incompetence.

The stated intention is to “refine” these options, so they very much are meant to represent possibilities.

MCPS and Flo Analytics should be ashamed of their incompetence, then. If it is just that.

Yup. I want someone to feed all this data into AI and see if it does any better. Probably won't but it would show that this was a waste of resources.

Well, it certainly can't do worse!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS and Flo Analytics should be ashamed of themselves for releasing Option 3 if there is actually no intention of using that map.

I do not think there is any intention of using any of these maps

I think these initial options are kind of a waste of time, but I don't think there was malicious intent. Just plain old incompetence.

The stated intention is to “refine” these options, so they very much are meant to represent possibilities.

MCPS and Flo Analytics should be ashamed of their incompetence, then. If it is just that.

Yup. I want someone to feed all this data into AI and see if it does any better. Probably won't but it would show that this was a waste of resources.

Well, it certainly can't do worse!

Agreed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Really curious if anyone thinks it is plausible that there will be an option keeping south kensington in play for BCC. Kids in this cluster already attend RH and then are split from their friends in 3rd to split btw NCC and CCES but come back together at SCMS and BCC-- it seems really unfair and silly to have kids together in elementary then not have them meet back up. MCPS should either redraw the lines for elementary or make this change. Also why are we not considering just taking kids from wheaton/ WJ etc and pushing those kids into the new school which makes more sense than bussing CCES kids to Blair, or removing South Kensington families from their assigned schools, friends, and schools in an easy distance.

100% agree. NCC and CCES kids should come back together after the bussing required for ES. I don't see why they are messing with the kids currently zoned to Silver Creek & B-CC. They are not the problem. Silver Creek is a very diverse school. About 1/3 Black, 1/3 Hispanic, and 1/3 white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Farmland Elementary is 1.7 miles to the new Woodward High and 1.1 miles to Tilden Middle (walking distances - which means limited bus cost required).

Option 3 has Farmland going to Parkland Middle (5+ miles driving) and Kennedy High (6+ miles driving). This will cause disruption for students, increased cost for the County to bus students, and is not proximate. Three of the four priorities of the Boundary Study are NOT supported.

It is important for students and parents to be located close to schools/work. Shorter commutes result in more happiness and life satisfaction (NIH).

And miles are misleading. During rush hour and school bus hours you could easily spend 5 mins to drive 1 mile.

You could spend 30 minutes going a mile.

[Anonymous]

There’s no perfect way to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS and Flo Analytics should be ashamed of themselves for releasing Option 3 if there is actually no intention of using that map.

I do not think there is any intention of using any of these maps

I think these initial options are kind of a waste of time, but I don't think there was malicious intent. Just plain old incompetence.

If that's the case then what is the point of all of releasing them? I truly don't get it. That's what makes me think they are on the table.

They're not going to be the final options, because once they release the regional programs plan in late June, all the numbers will have to be recalculated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Repeat after me:

These are not the actual options. These 4 options show how to emphasize each of the 4 equal parts of the FAA policy.

Real options will come in the Fall.

No need to go crazy at this time.

I disagree. People need to vociforously oppose option 3 across the county. If we don't, just watch what happens come fall. Something that is similar to option 3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So do they ever present the relative costs of each of the options? Or is cost weirdly not something considered? At a county level, I'd think you'd have the following costs to consider:

1. busing costs
2. changes in property values = changes in tax base = potential change in funding for schools
3. costs of building whatever extra things needed for buildings

Anything else?

Presumably there will need to be some redistribution of where teachers work, but shouldn't there also be consideration for changes in types of supports at various schools?

In past studies, they have definitely ruled options in or out based on potential costs for busing or buildings. But I don't recall them ever labeling options with projected cost amounts. Maybe that's something Taylor will more inclined to do.

I would think that in the current economic environment (job market tanking because of fed + contractor layoffs, for example) that costs would play a large role in decision-making. I also cannot imagine county execs not caring at all about the impact on property values of any changes. I mean, maybe the county just is stupid wrt finances? Possible.

Elrich and council members may be concerned about property values, but they don't have a direct role to play with respect to boundaries. They can of course attempt to pressure Taylor and the board to avoid options they don't like.

but the schools are directly funded by the county, correct? At least that article suggested that the county taxes are used to directly fund (or not) schools. I guess Taylor would have to consider which option would require the biggest budget ask. Could MCPS adopt a costly option that was unfunded?

Very clearly option 3 would be the most expensive because it would require by far the most bussing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious what the Wheaton community thinks the best solution is? Different matriculation pattern or sounds like adding on isn’t possible with the distance between buildings? FLO analytics kept mentioning the Edison building and sounds like that is not helpful? Seems like FLO has a disconnect on this point.

The Wheaton cluster coordinator's testimony in 2023 :

"there is a quick and practical solution to our overcrowding
problem that has yet to be utilized - an unfinished shell located within the
Thomas Edison building. Our Community strongly urges MCPS to build
out and finish that shell so that both Wheaton and Thomas Edison can
use that space to accommodate our growing population."

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/CXCN955EC89E/$file/Narissa%20Johnson%20-%202023%20CIP%20Testimony%20.pdf

It takes years to find something like that and it wouldn’t work as the distance is too far in less they arranged specific students and basically segregated them.

Huh? It's literally there in the Edison building.

I think PP meant fund, not find.

If it were so easy why not do it this summer? Oh, because it will be years before a project like this is approved, planned and designed, let alone built.

FLO Analytics mentioned this Edison shell space during the presentation last week, which means MCPS CO staff must have told them about it as an option under consideration. We can keep an eye out for this fall's CIP to see if it's included. If so, that could be a clue to how Taylor is leaning.

I couldn't follow that part of the presentation. Can you explain how the CIP budget for Edison would signal how Taylor is leaning?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve read all 43 pages of this thread and am pretty disheartened. I have not seen one comment in favor of the more disruptive (to the current status quo) options say a single thing about the prospective quality of education improvement that the potential new Whitman and BCC students would receive. Instead, it’s all about sending Whitman and BCC bus loads of poor kids to somehow stick it to them? If those poor kids have to spend 45 minutes on a bus to (somehow?) upset the rich kids, great!

The kids being bussed from poor communities? Those are kids, not props in your vendetta fantasies. The rich kids you’re sticking it to? Also, just kids. The “foolish” communities that want to stay together? Communities of people (that just want to stay together).

Let’s make every school better and every kid’s life better. Let’s not use them as props against each other.

As a poor family. I sorry you don’t want our kids. Actually some of us aren’t that poor, we make different life choices. The best solution would be to open up another hs lower dcc.

Want to give you a big hug. Your kids are wanted. All kids are wanted. To be fair, from what I have read, I think everyone here welcomes diversity of income, culture and race. The problem is that no one of any income level wants to be bused away from their neighborhoods and rightfully so. Every school needs to be stronger and some underperforming schools need more money, support and staff. Whatever it takes, they should get it.

We are wanted as long as we are not in your schools or competition for your kids. No one wants their kids bussed but maybe this will give those kids opportunities they don’t have to get ahead. Our kids don’t have the same opportunities.

Unfortunately it’s a zero sum game and we don’t get do overs with our kids’ education. I’d support funding more opportunities for your kids through modestly higher property taxes but not at the expense of my own kids’ opportunities or busing them across town. Everyone wants the best opportunities for their children (which is why most of us moved to the best place we could afford) and are looking to preserve that as much as possible in an increasingly uncertain world.

Wow we are all on the same team PP. it’s not a zero sum game.

Are we? There's only one (or few) valedictorians and there's an implicit quota in how many kids from each school matriculate to a particular university. We're not in this together and that's been apparent since I set foot in this county or on DCUM and seen others asking questions about the "preferred preschool to get into the Ivy League" or "my DD has the following stats but they don't have a hook and therefore, didn't get into [insert highly selective university]", especially as our kids get closer and closer to high school. We're more like participants running the gauntlet in The Hunger Games where "may the odds ever be in your favor". This is the meritocracy that we find ourselves in and the system that each of us has to face (or ignore). So forgive me if I don't want my kids being bussed across town to a different school and not the neighborhood school I've already paid a high cost entry fee to get into.

You did not pay a "fee" to "get into" your neighborhood. You purchased an asset, which you can sell or rent out if you want.

You’re delusional to think that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone tell me why MoCo has split articulation? I can see a definition on MCPS but it seems like a practice that leads to a pretty awkward middle school experience. Kids do not bother making friends with other kids who they know are going off to a different high school. It was difficult recruiting parents to invest their time in PTA and volunteer efforts because no one was invested in the school. It cast a shadow over the whole experience for us.

It’s not ideal for sure but it’s not as bad as you might think. I went to Cabin John and then Churchill. At the time it was probably 65-70% went to Wootton and 30-35% to Churchill. I was definitely friends with a lot of people who went to Wootton and it was really sad to split up for high school but once a month or two of high school passed most people made friends with kids from the other middle school Hoover.

Where things would be really bad would be if say 20-30% or less of an ES went to a different MS. Or if a small percentage of an ES went to the same MS as the rest of their ES but then split up and went to a different HS and was maybe 10%-25% of a MS going to a HS.

I really hope they minimize split articulation for the same ES for MS and HS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone tell me why MoCo has split articulation? I can see a definition on MCPS but it seems like a practice that leads to a pretty awkward middle school experience. Kids do not bother making friends with other kids who they know are going off to a different high school. It was difficult recruiting parents to invest their time in PTA and volunteer efforts because no one was invested in the school. It cast a shadow over the whole experience for us.

It’s not ideal for sure but it’s not as bad as you might think. I went to Cabin John and then Churchill. At the time it was probably 65-70% went to Wootton and 30-35% to Churchill. I was definitely friends with a lot of people who went to Wootton and it was really sad to split up for high school but once a month or two of high school passed most people made friends with kids from the other middle school Hoover.

Where things would be really bad would be if say 20-30% or less of an ES went to a different MS. Or if a small percentage of an ES went to the same MS as the rest of their ES but then split up and went to a different HS and was maybe 10%-25% of a MS going to a HS.

That’s what will happen in option 2 for my kids. It really makes me sad, especially since one of my kids will be in 10th grade. After having to deal with Covid and those social impacts, this feels cruel. Plus, they’ll go through the big adjustment at high school in 9th grade, only to have to adjust again in 10th at a new school?

Covid was years ago. If you or your kids are impacted get mental health treatment. It’s typical downcounty kids don’t stay together and it’s not a big deal.