Two concepts should be banned in discussing boundary studies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing is unfair about some schools having high farms rate and others having low farms rate. Everyone makes decisions based on their priorities.

The bigger issue is the disparities in offerings between the schools.

I think the biggest issue is the lack of resources to support students living in poverty. At the high school level there is no significant funding to address the learning challenges associated with poverty. Extra money does help. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/how-money-matters-factsheet

These high poverty high schools really are stretched thin for supporting low income kids. It would be easier if the high needs kids weren't so concentrated in certain schools. For example, we know experienced teachers are more effective and that wealthy schools attract more experienced teachers. It is better for low income kids to be in schools with more experienced teachers. The most cost effective way to do that is to reduce racial and economic segregation in schools.

Of course as a result of housing discrimination and exclusionary zoning in Montgomery County, it is hard not to concentrate poverty in certain schools, but it's crazy to me that the BOE isn't even considering some obvious ways to reduce segregation and is in fact only looking at boundary options that increase segregation.

Not necessarily. Parents at all schools are complaining about teachers. There are great teachers at all schools and some really bad ones.

The bigger issue is the curriculum and kids aren't getting tested and special services when they are behind or have learning or other disabilities. Richer parents can pay privately. Low income can get services, not tutoring through medicaid. Middle income either get it through insurance, private pay or go without. But, it takes a savy parent to be able to advocate, which often involves an attorney, which most families cannot do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't there places where the nearest high school is over four miles away?

That is an exception. I meant a general rule. I just do not like busing a long distance as a tool for balancing FARMS.

Np I disagree. I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% farms.

In my neighborhood there are two elementary schools 1 mile apart. One has only 1m+ sfhs and a few townhouses. The other has 1m homes and then a new apartment complex was built. It’s now 60% farms. I think there would be a massive benefit in balancing the schools. Only the sfhs are within walking distance to both schools. The apartments are already bused from a mile away.

You do know that Countywide, FARMS is about 50%. So how exactly would this work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What they should do at high farm schools is make the kids stay in school until the parents get off work and make them do homework.

absolutely they should use extra funding to pay a couple teacher chaperones and let the kids stay until 6ish. honestly it would probably be really positive. it would keep them from getting into trouble and help them get their work done.

That's what community centers and after schools programs are geared towards.

[Anonymous]

Because everyone, from the wealthy to the poor, want to attend their neighborhood school and not sit in traffic on an unnecessary bus when you can walk. You can't do that and equally distribute poverty throughout the schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because everyone, from the wealthy to the poor, want to attend their neighborhood school and not sit in traffic on an unnecessary bus when you can walk. You can't do that and equally distribute poverty throughout the schools.

I think people purposely bring up the idea of "distributing poverty equally" to distract from the fact that there are adjacent clusters with vastly different farms rates and that MCPS could reduce segregation if it tried. However, it is uninterested in doing so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because everyone, from the wealthy to the poor, want to attend their neighborhood school and not sit in traffic on an unnecessary bus when you can walk. You can't do that and equally distribute poverty throughout the schools.

No no don’t you understand, everyone wa nuts to sit on a bus for hours to equalize poverty levels in schools. The poor especially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Balancing the farms rate should have nothing to do with new boundaries. If you chose to buy in Einstein, you prioritized close in proximity over the school attendance zone.

If you cared about the school attendance zone, you could have bought a house in Poolesville for a similar price as Einstein. But instead you prioritized close in proximity to DC.

I - like many of my neighbors - chose to use my JD/PhD/MD for public service which means I have to go into work in person and don’t get paid the big bucks to do it. Yet my neighbors who chose to maximize $ think that somehow makes them and their kids more deserving than mine. This is the heart of my disgust with many of my fellow MoCo residents (fellow citizens too but that’s not the subject of this thread).

You prioritized commute time over the quality of your kids school. End of story. There are many phds that work in public service, commute to DC, and live in Howard County.

DP and yeah, we prioritized time with our kids over sending them to a school with fewer poor kids. We actually looked at a couple homes in Poolseville and liked the area but would have each had 1-1.5 hr commutes. Just wasn't going to work. I had a decent amount of telework for a couple years but that's all gone again and I'm so thankful we didn't move further out, it's stressful enough. Overall we have been happy with our schools in Silver Spring, the things we've been unhappy with have largely been more at the MCPS level and would have been an issue at a lower-FARMS school too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't there places where the nearest high school is over four miles away?

That is an exception. I meant a general rule. I just do not like busing a long distance as a tool for balancing FARMS.

Np I disagree. I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% farms.

In my neighborhood there are two elementary schools 1 mile apart. One has only 1m+ sfhs and a few townhouses. The other has 1m homes and then a new apartment complex was built. It’s now 60% farms. I think there would be a massive benefit in balancing the schools. Only the sfhs are within walking distance to both schools. The apartments are already bused from a mile away.

What a fantastic example of how out of touch some people on the wealthier side of the county are. “I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% FARMS.” And also, we should let them eat cake!

Here in reality, 44% of the students in the county are eligible for FARMS.

If the county is 44% FARMS, they should mandate that every school have 44% FARMs. Instead of having one school be 80% FARM and one be 10%.

I'd like to see some conceptual school boundaries based on this goal, because my guess is that they would be pretty ridiculous and require way longer bus rides than even its proponents realize. Because most of the schools with 10% FARMS are not adjacent to schools with 80% FARMS. There are other schools in the middle, many of which hover around the mean MCPS rates. There's a reason that no one is seriously proposing this outside of an anonymous message board.

the FARMS rates for Einstein and Wheaton are 2-3 times that of Walter Johnson which is adjacent to those clusters

Right but even within those clusters there is vaiability- there are nice SFH home neighbohoods and there are run down apartment blocks. You'd have to do more than nibble at the edges of the boundaries because it isn't going to get you what you want- you'd probably have go create "holes" within the Einstein and Wheaton clusters to get enough FARMS kids in a concentrated area and ship those kids to WJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't there places where the nearest high school is over four miles away?

That is an exception. I meant a general rule. I just do not like busing a long distance as a tool for balancing FARMS.

Np I disagree. I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% farms.

In my neighborhood there are two elementary schools 1 mile apart. One has only 1m+ sfhs and a few townhouses. The other has 1m homes and then a new apartment complex was built. It’s now 60% farms. I think there would be a massive benefit in balancing the schools. Only the sfhs are within walking distance to both schools. The apartments are already bused from a mile away.

What a fantastic example of how out of touch some people on the wealthier side of the county are. “I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% FARMS.” And also, we should let them eat cake!

Here in reality, 44% of the students in the county are eligible for FARMS.

If the county is 44% FARMS, they should mandate that every school have 44% FARMs. Instead of having one school be 80% FARM and one be 10%.

I'd like to see some conceptual school boundaries based on this goal, because my guess is that they would be pretty ridiculous and require way longer bus rides than even its proponents realize. Because most of the schools with 10% FARMS are not adjacent to schools with 80% FARMS. There are other schools in the middle, many of which hover around the mean MCPS rates. There's a reason that no one is seriously proposing this outside of an anonymous message board.

the FARMS rates for Einstein and Wheaton are 2-3 times that of Walter Johnson which is adjacent to those clusters

Right but even within those clusters there is vaiability- there are nice SFH home neighbohoods and there are run down apartment blocks. You'd have to do more than nibble at the edges of the boundaries because it isn't going to get you what you want- you'd probably have go create "holes" within the Einstein and Wheaton clusters to get enough FARMS kids in a concentrated area and ship those kids to WJ.

Not really. There is.an option that sends Veirs Mill ES and Wheaton woods ES to WJ and Woodward. What is missing is an option that sends Kensington Parkwood ES (excluding the island that is next to Woodward) to Einstein HS. Now that enrollment projections are down, they could easily make room at Einstein for KP. They are explicitly choosing to not even discuss this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't there places where the nearest high school is over four miles away?

That is an exception. I meant a general rule. I just do not like busing a long distance as a tool for balancing FARMS.

Np I disagree. I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% farms.

In my neighborhood there are two elementary schools 1 mile apart. One has only 1m+ sfhs and a few townhouses. The other has 1m homes and then a new apartment complex was built. It’s now 60% farms. I think there would be a massive benefit in balancing the schools. Only the sfhs are within walking distance to both schools. The apartments are already bused from a mile away.

What a fantastic example of how out of touch some people on the wealthier side of the county are. “I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% FARMS.” And also, we should let them eat cake!

Here in reality, 44% of the students in the county are eligible for FARMS.

If the county is 44% FARMS, they should mandate that every school have 44% FARMs. Instead of having one school be 80% FARM and one be 10%.

I'd like to see some conceptual school boundaries based on this goal, because my guess is that they would be pretty ridiculous and require way longer bus rides than even its proponents realize. Because most of the schools with 10% FARMS are not adjacent to schools with 80% FARMS. There are other schools in the middle, many of which hover around the mean MCPS rates. There's a reason that no one is seriously proposing this outside of an anonymous message board.

the FARMS rates for Einstein and Wheaton are 2-3 times that of Walter Johnson which is adjacent to those clusters

Right but even within those clusters there is vaiability- there are nice SFH home neighbohoods and there are run down apartment blocks. You'd have to do more than nibble at the edges of the boundaries because it isn't going to get you what you want- you'd probably have go create "holes" within the Einstein and Wheaton clusters to get enough FARMS kids in a concentrated area and ship those kids to WJ.

Not really. There is.an option that sends Veirs Mill ES and Wheaton woods ES to WJ and Woodward. What is missing is an option that sends Kensington Parkwood ES (excluding the island that is next to Woodward) to Einstein HS. Now that enrollment projections are down, they could easily make room at Einstein for KP. They are explicitly choosing to not even discuss this.

That was in one of the initial options, but then in round two they started including the regional lines which must not be crossed for some unknown reason. Since WJ and Einstein are in different regions, that option went away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't there places where the nearest high school is over four miles away?

That is an exception. I meant a general rule. I just do not like busing a long distance as a tool for balancing FARMS.

Np I disagree. I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% farms.

In my neighborhood there are two elementary schools 1 mile apart. One has only 1m+ sfhs and a few townhouses. The other has 1m homes and then a new apartment complex was built. It’s now 60% farms. I think there would be a massive benefit in balancing the schools. Only the sfhs are within walking distance to both schools. The apartments are already bused from a mile away.

What a fantastic example of how out of touch some people on the wealthier side of the county are. “I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% FARMS.” And also, we should let them eat cake!

Here in reality, 44% of the students in the county are eligible for FARMS.

If the county is 44% FARMS, they should mandate that every school have 44% FARMs. Instead of having one school be 80% FARM and one be 10%.

I'd like to see some conceptual school boundaries based on this goal, because my guess is that they would be pretty ridiculous and require way longer bus rides than even its proponents realize. Because most of the schools with 10% FARMS are not adjacent to schools with 80% FARMS. There are other schools in the middle, many of which hover around the mean MCPS rates. There's a reason that no one is seriously proposing this outside of an anonymous message board.

the FARMS rates for Einstein and Wheaton are 2-3 times that of Walter Johnson which is adjacent to those clusters

Right but even within those clusters there is vaiability- there are nice SFH home neighbohoods and there are run down apartment blocks. You'd have to do more than nibble at the edges of the boundaries because it isn't going to get you what you want- you'd probably have go create "holes" within the Einstein and Wheaton clusters to get enough FARMS kids in a concentrated area and ship those kids to WJ.

Not really. There is.an option that sends Veirs Mill ES and Wheaton woods ES to WJ and Woodward. What is missing is an option that sends Kensington Parkwood ES (excluding the island that is next to Woodward) to Einstein HS. Now that enrollment projections are down, they could easily make room at Einstein for KP. They are explicitly choosing to not even discuss this.

That was in one of the initial options, but then in round two they started including the regional lines which must not be crossed for some unknown reason. Since WJ and Einstein are in different regions, that option went away.

Yes
That option also included a lot of poison pills

[Anonymous]

Right, instead of trying to balance FARMS with geography, they’re continuing to bus kids from the wealthiest part of Kensington to a ha in Bethesda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't there places where the nearest high school is over four miles away?

That is an exception. I meant a general rule. I just do not like busing a long distance as a tool for balancing FARMS.

Np I disagree. I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% farms.

In my neighborhood there are two elementary schools 1 mile apart. One has only 1m+ sfhs and a few townhouses. The other has 1m homes and then a new apartment complex was built. It’s now 60% farms. I think there would be a massive benefit in balancing the schools. Only the sfhs are within walking distance to both schools. The apartments are already bused from a mile away.

What a fantastic example of how out of touch some people on the wealthier side of the county are. “I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% FARMS.” And also, we should let them eat cake!

Here in reality, 44% of the students in the county are eligible for FARMS.

If the county is 44% FARMS, they should mandate that every school have 44% FARMs. Instead of having one school be 80% FARM and one be 10%.

I'd like to see some conceptual school boundaries based on this goal, because my guess is that they would be pretty ridiculous and require way longer bus rides than even its proponents realize. Because most of the schools with 10% FARMS are not adjacent to schools with 80% FARMS. There are other schools in the middle, many of which hover around the mean MCPS rates. There's a reason that no one is seriously proposing this outside of an anonymous message board.

the FARMS rates for Einstein and Wheaton are 2-3 times that of Walter Johnson which is adjacent to those clusters

Right but even within those clusters there is vaiability- there are nice SFH home neighbohoods and there are run down apartment blocks. You'd have to do more than nibble at the edges of the boundaries because it isn't going to get you what you want- you'd probably have go create "holes" within the Einstein and Wheaton clusters to get enough FARMS kids in a concentrated area and ship those kids to WJ.

Not really. There is.an option that sends Veirs Mill ES and Wheaton woods ES to WJ and Woodward. What is missing is an option that sends Kensington Parkwood ES (excluding the island that is next to Woodward) to Einstein HS. Now that enrollment projections are down, they could easily make room at Einstein for KP. They are explicitly choosing to not even discuss this.

Oh ok, so you're only looking to balance HSs, not "every school." That's a bit more feasible. If KP were rezoned to Einstein does that get both high schools close to 44% each?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't there places where the nearest high school is over four miles away?

That is an exception. I meant a general rule. I just do not like busing a long distance as a tool for balancing FARMS.

Np I disagree. I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% farms.

In my neighborhood there are two elementary schools 1 mile apart. One has only 1m+ sfhs and a few townhouses. The other has 1m homes and then a new apartment complex was built. It’s now 60% farms. I think there would be a massive benefit in balancing the schools. Only the sfhs are within walking distance to both schools. The apartments are already bused from a mile away.

What a fantastic example of how out of touch some people on the wealthier side of the county are. “I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% FARMS.” And also, we should let them eat cake!

Here in reality, 44% of the students in the county are eligible for FARMS.

If the county is 44% FARMS, they should mandate that every school have 44% FARMs. Instead of having one school be 80% FARM and one be 10%.

I'd like to see some conceptual school boundaries based on this goal, because my guess is that they would be pretty ridiculous and require way longer bus rides than even its proponents realize. Because most of the schools with 10% FARMS are not adjacent to schools with 80% FARMS. There are other schools in the middle, many of which hover around the mean MCPS rates. There's a reason that no one is seriously proposing this outside of an anonymous message board.

the FARMS rates for Einstein and Wheaton are 2-3 times that of Walter Johnson which is adjacent to those clusters

Right but even within those clusters there is vaiability- there are nice SFH home neighbohoods and there are run down apartment blocks. You'd have to do more than nibble at the edges of the boundaries because it isn't going to get you what you want- you'd probably have go create "holes" within the Einstein and Wheaton clusters to get enough FARMS kids in a concentrated area and ship those kids to WJ.

Not really. There is.an option that sends Veirs Mill ES and Wheaton woods ES to WJ and Woodward. What is missing is an option that sends Kensington Parkwood ES (excluding the island that is next to Woodward) to Einstein HS. Now that enrollment projections are down, they could easily make room at Einstein for KP. They are explicitly choosing to not even discuss this.

Oh ok, so you're only looking to balance HSs, not "every school." That's a bit more feasible. If KP were rezoned to Einstein does that get both high schools close to 44% each?

Why did you put "every school" in quotes?

Also it is not my job to calculate new FARMS rates. Our tax dollars are paying for a consultant whose job it is to do just that, but they were instructed not to offer this particular change in their options even though it would satisfy three of the four factors, which is rare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't there places where the nearest high school is over four miles away?

That is an exception. I meant a general rule. I just do not like busing a long distance as a tool for balancing FARMS.

Np I disagree. I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% farms.

In my neighborhood there are two elementary schools 1 mile apart. One has only 1m+ sfhs and a few townhouses. The other has 1m homes and then a new apartment complex was built. It’s now 60% farms. I think there would be a massive benefit in balancing the schools. Only the sfhs are within walking distance to both schools. The apartments are already bused from a mile away.

What a fantastic example of how out of touch some people on the wealthier side of the county are. “I don’t think they should let any school get over 15-20% FARMS.” And also, we should let them eat cake!

Here in reality, 44% of the students in the county are eligible for FARMS.

If the county is 44% FARMS, they should mandate that every school have 44% FARMs. Instead of having one school be 80% FARM and one be 10%.

I'd like to see some conceptual school boundaries based on this goal, because my guess is that they would be pretty ridiculous and require way longer bus rides than even its proponents realize. Because most of the schools with 10% FARMS are not adjacent to schools with 80% FARMS. There are other schools in the middle, many of which hover around the mean MCPS rates. There's a reason that no one is seriously proposing this outside of an anonymous message board.

the FARMS rates for Einstein and Wheaton are 2-3 times that of Walter Johnson which is adjacent to those clusters

Right but even within those clusters there is vaiability- there are nice SFH home neighbohoods and there are run down apartment blocks. You'd have to do more than nibble at the edges of the boundaries because it isn't going to get you what you want- you'd probably have go create "holes" within the Einstein and Wheaton clusters to get enough FARMS kids in a concentrated area and ship those kids to WJ.

Not really. There is.an option that sends Veirs Mill ES and Wheaton woods ES to WJ and Woodward. What is missing is an option that sends Kensington Parkwood ES (excluding the island that is next to Woodward) to Einstein HS. Now that enrollment projections are down, they could easily make room at Einstein for KP. They are explicitly choosing to not even discuss this.

Oh ok, so you're only looking to balance HSs, not "every school." That's a bit more feasible. If KP were rezoned to Einstein does that get both high schools close to 44% each?

Why did you put "every school" in quotes?

Also it is not my job to calculate new FARMS rates. Our tax dollars are paying for a consultant whose job it is to do just that, but they were instructed not to offer this particular change in their options even though it would satisfy three of the four factors, which is rare.

Because of the previous post: "If the county is 44% FARMS, they should mandate that every school have 44% FARMs. Instead of having one school be 80% FARM and one be 10%." Does moving KP to Einstein achieve your goal?