Initial boundary options for Woodward study area are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh Woodward pulling from the bad elementary/middle schools... AND it might be an arts magnet. Double whammy. Mix in a little MS13. Let's bring everyone down.

It will be an inferior to school to WJ. Who cares about a new building. Property values on the west side or the CSX will go down. On the east side they will go up.

If we are lucky they won't find the money to put in the auditorium to throw sand in the gears on an arts magnet. Arts don't create jobs. Waste.

Woodward will not get an arts magnet - that's talk from a few years back, when Woodward was under discussion to be rebuilt. Now that MCPS is in line to get regional programs, I think Woodward is more likely to get a STEM-based program like a Computer, Science, and Mathematics regional program.

I've never seen it discussed that Woodward be a STEM program. Only arts. They think it's equitable to have high school kids be equipped for the real world with coloring skills

[Anonymous]

This foolish person thinks the real world is fair. Lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just to bring in some history, years ago WJ families were asked by MCPS survey whether they would like to stay together and build huge addition on WJ or reopen Woodward to accommodate the growing number of students, while likely taking in some DCC schools.

Overwhelmingly, WJ parents voted to reopen Woodward. WJ parents and students went to County Council meetings all decked out in Green to show support for funding for Woodward. We’ve filled out I don’t know how many surveys about Woodward.

Now it looks like MCPS may renege on that and send WJ families from Farmland, Garrett Park and KP to other parts of the county. That’s half of WJ.

No good deed shall go unpunished. Bait and switch.

Wow, this is just...wow. The entitlement in this post is staggering. WJ families are not entitled to anything more than other MCPS families. Wow.

What you may view as "entitlement", others may view as "advocacy" for their children and community.

Kids don't deserve extra advantages based on how skilled their parents are at advocacy. (And honestly they generally already get advantages based on their parents' advocacy at an individual level... they definitely don't deserve the double benefit of getting better school assignments due to their parents' better advocacy. Triple benefit, honestly, because likely these families have a lot of other socioeconomic advantages over other kids to start with...)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One thing I do know is that if those who are opposed to option 3 do NOT speak up, MCPS will surely adopt it as we know that others are advocating in favor.

And you know what? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, to advocate for their kids and communities and so on.

That’s the beauty of the First Anendment.

On cost alone I doubt they would adopt option 3.

[Anonymous]

BOE and Superintendent won't listen to parents. All of these surveys and townhalls are a waste of time.

Look how they shoved the LGBTQ+ books in elementary years down our throats. Parent opinion? Doesn't matter. SCOTUS will smack them down pretty soon at least.

BOE will go with the most ridiculous option. Put your money on #3. Fools are in charge

[Anonymous]

What kinds of policies in Moco have to go through environmental review? And what rights do citizens have around those?

[Anonymous]

Genuinely asking. What’s the consequence of long bus rides? The kids will still get to school and they are out of your hair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Genuinely asking. What’s the consequence of long bus rides? The kids will still get to school and they are out of your hair.

Studies show it increases absenteeism and lateness. Long bus rides also mean being far away from your house, which complicates after school activities, being able to work full time (parents), etc. Also incidents of behavioral problems on buses.

Kids have less time to do homework, be with their families and friends….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Genuinely asking. What’s the consequence of long bus rides? The kids will still get to school and they are out of your hair.

Are you a parent?

[Anonymous]

For high school waking up at 5:30 am v 6:30 am…standing at the bus stop in the dark on busy roads too. Mcps would also have to pay the bus drivers more bc it would be an earlier day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:BOE and Superintendent won't listen to parents. All of these surveys and townhalls are a waste of time.

Look how they shoved the LGBTQ+ books in elementary years down our throats. Parent opinion? Doesn't matter. SCOTUS will smack them down pretty soon at least.

BOE will go with the most ridiculous option. Put your money on #3. Fools are in charge

But BOE and superintendent will probably listen to whatever budget they have. The options aren’t equal in the sense of budget.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing I do know is that if those who are opposed to option 3 do NOT speak up, MCPS will surely adopt it as we know that others are advocating in favor.

And you know what? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, to advocate for their kids and communities and so on.

That’s the beauty of the First Anendment.

On cost alone I doubt they would adopt option 3.

Option 3 at least don’t have a lot of split articulations

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Genuinely asking. What’s the consequence of long bus rides? The kids will still get to school and they are out of your hair.

There’s actually plenty of data on harm to teenagers from getting up early, as they would need to do to go cross county. Terrible (impossible) study environment. And don’t think for a minute that don’t get bullied on buses - they do. This would provide the perfect opportunity for that. Limited adult supervision, extended period of time.

And actually I don’t want my kids out of my hair. They are busy after school with volunteering, studying, sports, scouts, tutoring, music lessons, religious classes, swim team, orthodontist and other appointments, and just hanging out at the pool or elsewhere with friends. The list goes on and on. You know, normal kid stuff (when you don’t have to sit on a bus).

We live here so I don’t have a commute and they don’t have a commute. We maximize our time off.

Of course we would move to keep that, but would rather not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing I do know is that if those who are opposed to option 3 do NOT speak up, MCPS will surely adopt it as we know that others are advocating in favor.

And you know what? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, to advocate for their kids and communities and so on.

That’s the beauty of the First Anendment.

On cost alone I doubt they would adopt option 3.

Option 3 at least don’t have a lot of split articulations

It just wrecks community and bonds in other ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This foolish person thinks the real world is fair. Lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just to bring in some history, years ago WJ families were asked by MCPS survey whether they would like to stay together and build huge addition on WJ or reopen Woodward to accommodate the growing number of students, while likely taking in some DCC schools.

Overwhelmingly, WJ parents voted to reopen Woodward. WJ parents and students went to County Council meetings all decked out in Green to show support for funding for Woodward. We’ve filled out I don’t know how many surveys about Woodward.

Now it looks like MCPS may renege on that and send WJ families from Farmland, Garrett Park and KP to other parts of the county. That’s half of WJ.

No good deed shall go unpunished. Bait and switch.

Wow, this is just...wow. The entitlement in this post is staggering. WJ families are not entitled to anything more than other MCPS families. Wow.

What you may view as "entitlement", others may view as "advocacy" for their children and community.

Kids don't deserve extra advantages based on how skilled their parents are at advocacy. (And honestly they generally already get advantages based on their parents' advocacy at an individual level... they definitely don't deserve the double benefit of getting better school assignments due to their parents' better advocacy. Triple benefit, honestly, because likely these families have a lot of other socioeconomic advantages over other kids to start with...)

I think you are missing the point. When asked, WJ families overwhelmingly voted in surveys and advocated for reopening Woodward and expanding the boundary of Woodward to include DCC students versus just building WJ big enough to actually house the current WJ student body.

They advocated for Woodward as a solution to overcrowding in WJ and DCC, along with expansion of Northwood.

WJ PTAs testified for this at the BOE. Most other high school cluster PTAs also advocate for things that they want. It really is ok. And it is ok to have feelings when things don’t work out the way you want

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just to bring in some history, years ago WJ families were asked by MCPS survey whether they would like to stay together and build huge addition on WJ or reopen Woodward to accommodate the growing number of students, while likely taking in some DCC schools.

Overwhelmingly, WJ parents voted to reopen Woodward. WJ parents and students went to County Council meetings all decked out in Green to show support for funding for Woodward. We’ve filled out I don’t know how many surveys about Woodward.

Now it looks like MCPS may renege on that and send WJ families from Farmland, Garrett Park and KP to other parts of the county. That’s half of WJ.

No good deed shall go unpunished. Bait and switch.

Wow, this is just...wow. The entitlement in this post is staggering. WJ families are not entitled to anything more than other MCPS families. Wow.

You are just looking for our kids to be punished with long bus rides, for reasons I do not know. Not a good look for you PP.

Huh? I guess I was wrong, you aren't just an entitled rich person with a savior complex, you are also unhinged

It is reasonable, not unhinged, to have an opinion about commute times for kids and the impact distance between school and home will have on household logistics. Reasonable.