B-CC MS number 2

[Anonymous]

I'm a CCES parent and went to the boundary meetings that our PTA put on at our school.

It was by an overwhelming margin that we voted not breakup our connection with our Rosemary Hills catchment. Overcrowding was also very important to us, as we have been in an overcrowded RHPS and CCES situation for years.

I don't think it is a healthy environment to have Westland be an all white school like Pyle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a CCES parent and went to the boundary meetings that our PTA put on at our school.

It was by an overwhelming margin that we voted not breakup our connection with our Rosemary Hills catchment. Overcrowding was also very important to us, as we have been in an overcrowded RHPS and CCES situation for years.

I don't think it is a healthy environment to have Westland be an all white school like Pyle.

Pyle is something like 72% white. Westland will be something like between 63% and 68% white under option 7 vs option 1. In theory we could have an intelligent discussion about what to do about the balancing the racist history of this country particularly in real estate against the general desire for neighborhood schools, but whatever your views on that, I think anyone screaming that the sky is falling on resegregation of the schools is at best just using that a cover for their own preferred outcome, and the more loudly they scream it the less sincere they sound.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a strange feeling that the CC families are ticked because they probably would have preferred to stay at Westland and would have been fine splitting off, but it wasn't PC to say that to the rest of the school. Now they are stuck with what they see as a "worse" school.

That's what happens when you operate in bad faith...

I am not sure I understand who is supposed to be operating in "bad faith" here. The CCES families?

I am not a CCES parent, but personally agree with the PP that it seems CCES would be better off splitting up. But not because diversity or FARMS or any of the rest. The primary issue would be the fact that my kid has to travel to a MS outside the beltway when most CC residents probably live closer to Deal.

My take is that unless MCPS is fully committed to desegregation through busing everyone, then it shouldn't bus anyone. There are areas of the county now that are more affluent and white than CC, so the original intent of this busing plan that began 40+ years ago is basically not relevant anymore.

The school boundary issue could be solved much, much more easily if they just applied much more simple criteria. Draw a circle around each school, that is your boundary. If it results in one school being more crowded and a neighboring school being less crowded, then adjust the edges as necessary. A contiguous "neighborhood" should not all go to one school just because. That's it, done.

Everyone stops whining and then we can move on.

[Anonymous]

Under that contiguous argument, it would be much easier, use Connecticut Ave and East West Hwy as boundary lines.

Problem then is half of Chevy Chase would go to Westland with Bethesda and Somerset, and there would be zero diversity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone at RCF supports Option 7, in fact many do not but some on the PTA have decided to say to the community and the board that "the school" supports Option 7. When they send emails out to the parents asking them to write to the board, they don't mention that Option 7 splits the school. I guess they are hoping that we don't notice. In fact some parents have been shocked to learn that RCF is supporting the option that splits the school. They have assumed the best of the PTA, and only realized after it was too late that this was the direction the PTA was going.

First of all, this is a lie. Not only have the emails and the survey made it very clear that Option 7 splits the two programs, there was a vigorous discussion on the parent listserv about what this means for all of the efforts that have been made in recent years to create a unified community at RCF. This was also debated at the school-wide meeting held right after the superintendent's recommendation came out. At the meeting, it was also discussed that the RCF boundary committee would advocate for transportation from RCF to Westland if the BOE does go with Option 7. So you're either lying about being an RCF parent or you're lying about what the emails said.

For those who are saying the RCF community doesn't understand that this will be a drain in PTA resources - with the immersion folks our school is at around 25% FARMS. The new MS would have a lower FARMS rate than RCF (or course, our neighborhood-only FARMS rate is way higher). So I'm pretty confident that just as our PTA currently finds enough volunteers and donations, the new MS PTA will be able to do the same with a lower FARMS rate than we currently have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Under that contiguous argument, it would be much easier, use Connecticut Ave and East West Hwy as boundary lines.

Problem then is half of Chevy Chase would go to Westland with Bethesda and Somerset, and there would be zero diversity.

And...? I don't see how this is a problem.

The issue is that we are debating diversity within a cluster. It all seems a bit silly to me when the biggest diversity issue is between clusters. Cluster boundaries themselves are now effective redlining. RM vs. Wooton for example is a disgrace. We should not be concerned about less diversity in ESs or MSs within a cluster because all the kids will end up in the same place at some point anyway. If MCPS were actually concerned about diversity, it would bus across clusters or gerrymander boundaries to even it out. But it doesn't. So i am not concerned about whether or not Westland is 68% white while MS#2 is 58%. This is completely irrelevant to me at least, if we are really concerned about diversity. But the truth is that we are not and the current cluster boundaries prove it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those who are saying the RCF community doesn't understand that this will be a drain in PTA resources - with the immersion folks our school is at around 25% FARMS. The new MS would have a lower FARMS rate than RCF (or course, our neighborhood-only FARMS rate is way higher). So I'm pretty confident that just as our PTA currently finds enough volunteers and donations, the new MS PTA will be able to do the same with a lower FARMS rate than we currently have.

Someone just dropped the mic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who are saying the RCF community doesn't understand that this will be a drain in PTA resources - with the immersion folks our school is at around 25% FARMS. The new MS would have a lower FARMS rate than RCF (or course, our neighborhood-only FARMS rate is way higher). So I'm pretty confident that just as our PTA currently finds enough volunteers and donations, the new MS PTA will be able to do the same with a lower FARMS rate than we currently have.

Someone just dropped the mic.

The unofficial FARMS rate at CCES has gone up significantly in the past two years (approx 3%). According to an insider, the current numbers are not correct and the school has has outpaced MCPS's projected growth by 3% in ONE YEAR ALONE. Add up that growth over 5-10 years. Neither the FARMS nor the increased projected enrollment at CCES alone shows no signs of slowing down. The FARMS rate at the new Middle will be much higher than what you state and MORE IMPORTANTLY the ENROLLMENT will be much much higher. Everyone knows the capacity numbers are bogus and under reported by MCPS and do not take into account the development happening in the next year or two. My main concern is capacity and overcrowding.

CCES houses a lot of diversity, just slightly less than RCF, even though everyone accuses the school of being rich because of it's name. It is a few affluent kids mixed in with a fair amount of disadvantaged kids. NCC actually has less diversity than CCES, very little in fact, it is more equivalent to Somerset or BE. I can attest that RHPS and CCES are bursting at the seams.

RFC, being a title one school has caps on classroom size, keeping them them small, sweet and condusive to learning. RCF has fortunately never had to deal with classrooms of 27 kids and multiple lunches for one grade because there are too many kids. Honestly, I think part of the problem is that from lack of experience, RCF has no idea how horrible being in an overcrowded school is. No. Idea. They have never had to deal with it. Meanwhile, CCES and RHPS familes have been crammed into classrooms like sardines for years and want some relief. They understand intimately exactly what overcrowded and overcapacity means because they live it and are tired of it. Hence the anger at the capacity numbers.

[Anonymous]

if the capacity numbers are bogus, then they are bogus for BE/westbard just as much as they are bogus for CCES/chevy chase lake. If you want to argue that you want to be in the less utilized school then that's fine-- make that argument but don't expect the world to stop spinning for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:if the capacity numbers are bogus, then they are bogus for BE/westbard just as much as they are bogus for CCES/chevy chase lake. If you want to argue that you want to be in the less utilized school then that's fine-- make that argument but don't expect the world to stop spinning for you.

That's exactly it. The reality is that everyone not in a Title I school up and down this county is suffering from overcrowding. The blame for that is not RCF though, it is with the council, MCPS and the BOE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if the capacity numbers are bogus, then they are bogus for BE/westbard just as much as they are bogus for CCES/chevy chase lake. If you want to argue that you want to be in the less utilized school then that's fine-- make that argument but don't expect the world to stop spinning for you.

That's exactly it. The reality is that everyone not in a Title I school up and down this county is suffering from overcrowding. The blame for that is not RCF though, it is with the council, MCPS and ]

Well consider yourself lucky RCF that you never had to deal with overcrowding through elemenatry! How do you jusitify making other disadvataged kids who have to had to deal with overcrowding for years to even more of it? We have a lot of disadvantaged kids, almost as many as you, who did not have the luxury of small classes. It's not our faults we are overcrowded either.

The schools should start off as true equals in every way but since that won' t or can't happen, let's start with making the starting capacities equal!!!!

[Anonymous]

I just had to respond to this:
'The new school will start off with an inexperienced staff".

I am an MCPS teacher who is interested in maybe teaching at B-CC MS #2 (Can't wait until it actually gets a name, btw) and have 11 years of teaching experience. I live in Chevy Chase DC and am intrigued by the idea of:
a) the excitement of helping to start a school from the beginning and
b) a shorter commute to work from my home

I actually think many experienced educators will apply to teach at the new middle school, especially if they choose a good principal!

I'm staying out of the boundary argument, but just wanted to chime in that I do not think the staff itself will be 'inexperienced' as compared to Westland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who are saying the RCF community doesn't understand that this will be a drain in PTA resources - with the immersion folks our school is at around 25% FARMS. The new MS would have a lower FARMS rate than RCF (or course, our neighborhood-only FARMS rate is way higher). So I'm pretty confident that just as our PTA currently finds enough volunteers and donations, the new MS PTA will be able to do the same with a lower FARMS rate than we currently have.

Someone just dropped the mic.

The unofficial FARMS rate at CCES has gone up significantly in the past two years (approx 3%). According to an insider, the current numbers are not correct and the school has has outpaced MCPS's projected growth by 3% in ONE YEAR ALONE. Add up that growth over 5-10 years. Neither the FARMS nor the increased projected enrollment at CCES alone shows no signs of slowing down. The FARMS rate at the new Middle will be much higher than what you state and MORE IMPORTANTLY the ENROLLMENT will be much much higher. Everyone knows the capacity numbers are bogus and under reported by MCPS and do not take into account the development happening in the next year or two. My main concern is capacity and overcrowding.

CCES houses a lot of diversity, just slightly less than RCF, even though everyone accuses the school of being rich because of it's name. It is a few affluent kids mixed in with a fair amount of disadvantaged kids. NCC actually has less diversity than CCES, very little in fact, it is more equivalent to Somerset or BE. I can attest that RHPS and CCES are bursting at the seams.

RFC, being a title one school has caps on classroom size, keeping them them small, sweet and condusive to learning. RCF has fortunately never had to deal with classrooms of 27 kids and multiple lunches for one grade because there are too many kids. Honestly, I think part of the problem is that from lack of experience, RCF has no idea how horrible being in an overcrowded school is. No. Idea. They have never had to deal with it. Meanwhile, CCES and RHPS familes have been crammed into classrooms like sardines for years and want some relief. They understand intimately exactly what overcrowded and overcapacity means because they live it and are tired of it. Hence the anger at the capacity numbers.

RCF is not a title 1 school. It has 26% FARMs, nowhere near the 40% minimum needed to qualify for title 1 funds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who are saying the RCF community doesn't understand that this will be a drain in PTA resources - with the immersion folks our school is at around 25% FARMS. The new MS would have a lower FARMS rate than RCF (or course, our neighborhood-only FARMS rate is way higher). So I'm pretty confident that just as our PTA currently finds enough volunteers and donations, the new MS PTA will be able to do the same with a lower FARMS rate than we currently have.

Someone just dropped the mic.

The unofficial FARMS rate at CCES has gone up significantly in the past two years (approx 3%). According to an insider, the current numbers are not correct and the school has has outpaced MCPS's projected growth by 3% in ONE YEAR ALONE. Add up that growth over 5-10 years. Neither the FARMS nor the increased projected enrollment at CCES alone shows no signs of slowing down. The FARMS rate at the new Middle will be much higher than what you state and MORE IMPORTANTLY the ENROLLMENT will be much much higher. Everyone knows the capacity numbers are bogus and under reported by MCPS and do not take into account the development happening in the next year or two. My main concern is capacity and overcrowding.

CCES houses a lot of diversity, just slightly less than RCF, even though everyone accuses the school of being rich because of it's name. It is a few affluent kids mixed in with a fair amount of disadvantaged kids. NCC actually has less diversity than CCES, very little in fact, it is more equivalent to Somerset or BE. I can attest that RHPS and CCES are bursting at the seams.

RFC, being a title one school has caps on classroom size, keeping them them small, sweet and condusive to learning. RCF has fortunately never had to deal with classrooms of 27 kids and multiple lunches for one grade because there are too many kids. Honestly, I think part of the problem is that from lack of experience, RCF has no idea how horrible being in an overcrowded school is. No. Idea. They have never had to deal with it. Meanwhile, CCES and RHPS familes have been crammed into classrooms like sardines for years and want some relief. They understand intimately exactly what overcrowded and overcapacity means because they live it and are tired of it. Hence the anger at the capacity numbers.

RCF is not a title 1 school. It has 26% FARMs, nowhere near the 40% minimum needed to qualify for title 1 funds.

The Triad sure is clueless...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well consider yourself lucky RCF that you never had to deal with overcrowding through elemenatry! How do you jusitify making other disadvataged kids who have to had to deal with overcrowding for years to even more of it? We have a lot of disadvantaged kids, almost as many as you, who did not have the luxury of small classes. It's not our faults we are overcrowded either.

The schools should start off as true equals in every way but since that won' t or can't happen, let's start with making the starting capacities equal!!!!

Your assumptions are wrong, and you’re spreading a lot of misinformation. Please read this and try to understand where your neighbors are coming from.

1) RCF is not a Title 1 school, and does not get Title 1 services or benefits.

2) MCPS reports RCF’s demographics in aggregate for the whole school, neighborhood plus spanish Immersion. This is very misleading because those children do not learn in the same academic classrooms and have very different experiences in the classroom. So our reported (aggregate) FARMS rate is 26%. However, RCF neighborhood school FARMS rate is actually 43%, which is by far the highest FARMS rate in the Cluster. This is 145% higher than CCES, and 246% higher than NCC. RCF neighborhood school ESOL rate is 420% higher than CCES and 247% higher than NCC. Our neighborhood school is made up of 70% kids who are non-white.

3) We are a Focus school, which means in grades K-2 our neighborhood classes are small, and that is a benefit we definitely enjoy. But at 3rd grade and up, our neighborhood class sizes are the same as yours, which means jam-packed. In my child’s 3rd grade classroom there are 30 kids and in my older child’s 5th grade class there are 32 kids.

4) We do have a great new school, which is in its 2nd year, and is now at capacity. Everyone in 2nd grade and up spent time in our old school building that crammed more than 600 kids into a building designed for 250, had rodents and roaches, and was last updated in 1970 prior to being torn down in 2013. RCF was passed up for modernization for a decade while our wealthier neighboring schools got additions and upgrades.

So, with all due respect, you don’t have “nearly as many disadvantaged children as RCF” (not even close), we do have plenty of experience with overcrowding (just like every school in the county), and we are not starting out on equal footing.