Brainstorming refinements to Option 3 of Woodward Boundary Study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in looking again at Option 3 in terms of leveling out FARMS rates across at least high schools, is the juice worth the squeeze? The only really big difference in terms of just that one metric (%FARMS) across options looks like Whitman. It goes from 6% FARMS to 20%. It seems like you could just do something far less disruptive in terms of busing kids all over the county to increase the FARMS rate at Whitman.

Example is what has been proposed in this thread -- let FARMS kids lottery into Whitman, provide central bus locations.

That will be an awesome option for some families.

That just takes the most motivated kids with supportive parents out of the high farms schools which then become even worse with less opportuntities

but you want the more motivated kids to be able to take advantage of opportunities that less motivated kids won't. at the very least it will help some of them get out of schools with a higher likelihood of behavior issues.

We don’t need our kids out of these schools. We need the same offerings so our smart kids have the same opportunities. We don’t want our kids bussed and I know I don’t want mine at Whitman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in looking again at Option 3 in terms of leveling out FARMS rates across at least high schools, is the juice worth the squeeze? The only really big difference in terms of just that one metric (%FARMS) across options looks like Whitman. It goes from 6% FARMS to 20%. It seems like you could just do something far less disruptive in terms of busing kids all over the county to increase the FARMS rate at Whitman.

Example is what has been proposed in this thread -- let FARMS kids lottery into Whitman, provide central bus locations.

That will be an awesome option for some families.

That just takes the most motivated kids with supportive parents out of the high farms schools which then become even worse with less opportuntities

but you want the more motivated kids to be able to take advantage of opportunities that less motivated kids won't. at the very least it will help some of them get out of schools with a higher likelihood of behavior issues.

Basically you are creating a worse environment for the kids left behind. Either because they are not motivated or they can't make it work with work and/or sibling care commitments. It's really not a solution and one of the reasons why dcps is such a sh&t show

No, these kids aren’t getting the help and support they need in es to be successful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately choice programs are not effective for improving educational outcomes

the magnets don't improve educational outcomes? why have them, then? is that the reason they are reportedly getting phased out?

I'm mainly referring to non-application choice programs that allow families to enter a lottery for spots at schools from outside of their boundaries.

Well then resolve the DCC. I’m sure everyone will love that.

Like the DCPS choice program, the DCC choice program is popular but also exacerbates inequities. In both cases they are just carrots to entice people not to leave the area. However it does not help, and probably hurts the schools themselves.

It does help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in looking again at Option 3 in terms of leveling out FARMS rates across at least high schools, is the juice worth the squeeze? The only really big difference in terms of just that one metric (%FARMS) across options looks like Whitman. It goes from 6% FARMS to 20%. It seems like you could just do something far less disruptive in terms of busing kids all over the county to increase the FARMS rate at Whitman.

Example is what has been proposed in this thread -- let FARMS kids lottery into Whitman, provide central bus locations.

That will be an awesome option for some families.

That just takes the most motivated kids with supportive parents out of the high farms schools which then become even worse with less opportuntities

but you want the more motivated kids to be able to take advantage of opportunities that less motivated kids won't. at the very least it will help some of them get out of schools with a higher likelihood of behavior issues.

We don’t need our kids out of these schools. We need the same offerings so our smart kids have the same opportunities. We don’t want our kids bussed and I know I don’t want mine at Whitman.

Well that nice for you but if you are FARMS then the BOE is attempting to move your kids around and if you aren’t then the BOE doesn’t really care if your kids are bused around to help equalize FARMS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in looking again at Option 3 in terms of leveling out FARMS rates across at least high schools, is the juice worth the squeeze? The only really big difference in terms of just that one metric (%FARMS) across options looks like Whitman. It goes from 6% FARMS to 20%. It seems like you could just do something far less disruptive in terms of busing kids all over the county to increase the FARMS rate at Whitman.

Example is what has been proposed in this thread -- let FARMS kids lottery into Whitman, provide central bus locations.

That will be an awesome option for some families.

That just takes the most motivated kids with supportive parents out of the high farms schools which then become even worse with less opportuntities

but you want the more motivated kids to be able to take advantage of opportunities that less motivated kids won't. at the very least it will help some of them get out of schools with a higher likelihood of behavior issues.

We don’t need our kids out of these schools. We need the same offerings so our smart kids have the same opportunities. We don’t want our kids bussed and I know I don’t want mine at Whitman.

Are you FARMS? Who is “we”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in looking again at Option 3 in terms of leveling out FARMS rates across at least high schools, is the juice worth the squeeze? The only really big difference in terms of just that one metric (%FARMS) across options looks like Whitman. It goes from 6% FARMS to 20%. It seems like you could just do something far less disruptive in terms of busing kids all over the county to increase the FARMS rate at Whitman.

Example is what has been proposed in this thread -- let FARMS kids lottery into Whitman, provide central bus locations.

That will be an awesome option for some families.

That just takes the most motivated kids with supportive parents out of the high farms schools which then become even worse with less opportuntities

but you want the more motivated kids to be able to take advantage of opportunities that less motivated kids won't. at the very least it will help some of them get out of schools with a higher likelihood of behavior issues.

We don’t need our kids out of these schools. We need the same offerings so our smart kids have the same opportunities. We don’t want our kids bussed and I know I don’t want mine at Whitman.

Well that nice for you but if you are FARMS then the BOE is attempting to move your kids around and if you aren’t then the BOE doesn’t really care if your kids are bused around to help equalize FARMS.

They aren’t just moving farms, they are moving communities and some of us live in mixed communities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in looking again at Option 3 in terms of leveling out FARMS rates across at least high schools, is the juice worth the squeeze? The only really big difference in terms of just that one metric (%FARMS) across options looks like Whitman. It goes from 6% FARMS to 20%. It seems like you could just do something far less disruptive in terms of busing kids all over the county to increase the FARMS rate at Whitman.

Example is what has been proposed in this thread -- let FARMS kids lottery into Whitman, provide central bus locations.

That will be an awesome option for some families.

That just takes the most motivated kids with supportive parents out of the high farms schools which then become even worse with less opportuntities

Classic crabs in a bucket mentality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in looking again at Option 3 in terms of leveling out FARMS rates across at least high schools, is the juice worth the squeeze? The only really big difference in terms of just that one metric (%FARMS) across options looks like Whitman. It goes from 6% FARMS to 20%. It seems like you could just do something far less disruptive in terms of busing kids all over the county to increase the FARMS rate at Whitman.

Example is what has been proposed in this thread -- let FARMS kids lottery into Whitman, provide central bus locations.

That will be an awesome option for some families.

That just takes the most motivated kids with supportive parents out of the high farms schools which then become even worse with less opportuntities

but you want the more motivated kids to be able to take advantage of opportunities that less motivated kids won't. at the very least it will help some of them get out of schools with a higher likelihood of behavior issues.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in looking again at Option 3 in terms of leveling out FARMS rates across at least high schools, is the juice worth the squeeze? The only really big difference in terms of just that one metric (%FARMS) across options looks like Whitman. It goes from 6% FARMS to 20%. It seems like you could just do something far less disruptive in terms of busing kids all over the county to increase the FARMS rate at Whitman.

Example is what has been proposed in this thread -- let FARMS kids lottery into Whitman, provide central bus locations.

That will be an awesome option for some families.

That just takes the most motivated kids with supportive parents out of the high farms schools which then become even worse with less opportuntities

but you want the more motivated kids to be able to take advantage of opportunities that less motivated kids won't. at the very least it will help some of them get out of schools with a higher likelihood of behavior issues.

We don’t need our kids out of these schools. We need the same offerings so our smart kids have the same opportunities. We don’t want our kids bussed and I know I don’t want mine at Whitman.

Well that nice for you but if you are FARMS then the BOE is attempting to move your kids around and if you aren’t then the BOE doesn’t really care if your kids are bused around to help equalize FARMS.

They aren’t just moving farms, they are moving communities and some of us live in mixed communities.

Expand on “moving communities” please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in looking again at Option 3 in terms of leveling out FARMS rates across at least high schools, is the juice worth the squeeze? The only really big difference in terms of just that one metric (%FARMS) across options looks like Whitman. It goes from 6% FARMS to 20%. It seems like you could just do something far less disruptive in terms of busing kids all over the county to increase the FARMS rate at Whitman.

Example is what has been proposed in this thread -- let FARMS kids lottery into Whitman, provide central bus locations.

That will be an awesome option for some families.

That just takes the most motivated kids with supportive parents out of the high farms schools which then become even worse with less opportuntities

but you want the more motivated kids to be able to take advantage of opportunities that less motivated kids won't. at the very least it will help some of them get out of schools with a higher likelihood of behavior issues.

+100

You guys are like:
"Bus rides are terrible for kids, especially poor kids"
And
"Give the poor kids an opportunity by asking them to take a long bus ride to the whitest school, and who cares about the kids that can't/won't do that"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in looking again at Option 3 in terms of leveling out FARMS rates across at least high schools, is the juice worth the squeeze? The only really big difference in terms of just that one metric (%FARMS) across options looks like Whitman. It goes from 6% FARMS to 20%. It seems like you could just do something far less disruptive in terms of busing kids all over the county to increase the FARMS rate at Whitman.

Example is what has been proposed in this thread -- let FARMS kids lottery into Whitman, provide central bus locations.

That will be an awesome option for some families.

That just takes the most motivated kids with supportive parents out of the high farms schools which then become even worse with less opportuntities

Yeah, for this among other reasons, the lottery thing makes no sense.

Either they should amend option 3, or just lean in on having the most desirable magnets at the poorest schools.

This is what they need to do. Move the desirable magnets to Kennedy. Problem solved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in looking again at Option 3 in terms of leveling out FARMS rates across at least high schools, is the juice worth the squeeze? The only really big difference in terms of just that one metric (%FARMS) across options looks like Whitman. It goes from 6% FARMS to 20%. It seems like you could just do something far less disruptive in terms of busing kids all over the county to increase the FARMS rate at Whitman.

Example is what has been proposed in this thread -- let FARMS kids lottery into Whitman, provide central bus locations.

That will be an awesome option for some families.

That just takes the most motivated kids with supportive parents out of the high farms schools which then become even worse with less opportuntities

but you want the more motivated kids to be able to take advantage of opportunities that less motivated kids won't. at the very least it will help some of them get out of schools with a higher likelihood of behavior issues.

+100

You guys are like:
"Bus rides are terrible for kids, especially poor kids"
And
"Give the poor kids an opportunity by asking them to take a long bus ride to the whitest school, and who cares about the kids that can't/won't do that"

It’s almost like there are multiple people with different opinions!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in looking again at Option 3 in terms of leveling out FARMS rates across at least high schools, is the juice worth the squeeze? The only really big difference in terms of just that one metric (%FARMS) across options looks like Whitman. It goes from 6% FARMS to 20%. It seems like you could just do something far less disruptive in terms of busing kids all over the county to increase the FARMS rate at Whitman.

Example is what has been proposed in this thread -- let FARMS kids lottery into Whitman, provide central bus locations.

That will be an awesome option for some families.

That just takes the most motivated kids with supportive parents out of the high farms schools which then become even worse with less opportuntities

but you want the more motivated kids to be able to take advantage of opportunities that less motivated kids won't. at the very least it will help some of them get out of schools with a higher likelihood of behavior issues.

+100

You guys are like:
"Bus rides are terrible for kids, especially poor kids"
And
"Give the poor kids an opportunity by asking them to take a long bus ride to the whitest school, and who cares about the kids that can't/won't do that"

But busing kids long distances is option 3. Do you object to option 3?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in looking again at Option 3 in terms of leveling out FARMS rates across at least high schools, is the juice worth the squeeze? The only really big difference in terms of just that one metric (%FARMS) across options looks like Whitman. It goes from 6% FARMS to 20%. It seems like you could just do something far less disruptive in terms of busing kids all over the county to increase the FARMS rate at Whitman.

Example is what has been proposed in this thread -- let FARMS kids lottery into Whitman, provide central bus locations.

That will be an awesome option for some families.

That just takes the most motivated kids with supportive parents out of the high farms schools which then become even worse with less opportuntities

but you want the more motivated kids to be able to take advantage of opportunities that less motivated kids won't. at the very least it will help some of them get out of schools with a higher likelihood of behavior issues.

+100

You guys are like:
"Bus rides are terrible for kids, especially poor kids"
And
"Give the poor kids an opportunity by asking them to take a long bus ride to the whitest school, and who cares about the kids that can't/won't do that"

But busing kids long distances is option 3. Do you object to option 3?

I don't know how many times I have to say that I don't think the long bus rides in Option 3 are worth it?

But fwiw with this "Option 5" plan y'all are saying give any FARMS kids from anywhere the option to go to low poverty schools. Do you not realize their travel times will likely be much longer if they first have to get to centralized bus stops? If anything this plan highlights that Option 3 is actually not that bad because the kids get bus service from their neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in looking again at Option 3 in terms of leveling out FARMS rates across at least high schools, is the juice worth the squeeze? The only really big difference in terms of just that one metric (%FARMS) across options looks like Whitman. It goes from 6% FARMS to 20%. It seems like you could just do something far less disruptive in terms of busing kids all over the county to increase the FARMS rate at Whitman.

Example is what has been proposed in this thread -- let FARMS kids lottery into Whitman, provide central bus locations.

That will be an awesome option for some families.

That just takes the most motivated kids with supportive parents out of the high farms schools which then become even worse with less opportuntities

Yeah, for this among other reasons, the lottery thing makes no sense.

Either they should amend option 3, or just lean in on having the most desirable magnets at the poorest schools.

This is what they need to do. Move the desirable magnets to Kennedy. Problem solved.

This would make sense. Traditionally they put them at low preforming schools.