Option H is permanent and the old Wootton HS campus will be closed for good?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many students from Fields Road are walkable to Crown. They should be sent to Crown. The City of Gaithersburg Mayor even came out to support modifying H to include Fields Road. Moving Fields Road would also help alleviate overcrowding from QO (which currently has 18 portables) while moving parts of Rosemont ES would help alleviate overcrowding at GHS.

The problem is if you put Fields Road and parts of Rosemont into Crown, all of the Wootton cluster cannot also fit in Crown.

Remember, the Superintendent can take pieces of every option in making his proposal. There’s nothing to stop him from cutting up Wootton cluster (say removing Cold Spring and Fallsmead), moving the rest of Wootton to Crown, and add in Rosemont and Fields Road.

Most Wootton families have no problems with adding students to their cluster. What they have a problem with is their cluster being broken apart. And the reason why Wootton’s current location is beloved isn’t because the building itself is somehow magically responsible for academic achievement, but because it really is a community hub. There are so many connections between Frost MS and Wootton HS. They are currently on a shared campus!

Not to mention what are the practical implications of turning Wootton into a holding school? If Wootton is a run-down unsafe building that the Board is refusing to renovate, how does turning it into a holding school make it magically safe for Damascus and Magruder students? What are the practical safety implications of bussing kids all the way from Damascus and Magruder into Wootton Parkway—which is a single-lane road—while also bussing all of the previously walkable Wootton kids out of Wootton parkway to Crown? The morning congestion is already terrible on both Wootton Parkway and around Sam Eig/270. This isn’t going to help.

The research on road safety is clear. The farther kids travel, the more bussing involved, the more there will be accidents and deaths. For example, can you begin to imagine a bunch of inexperienced teenage drivers driving quite literally across the county going from Damascus to Wootton?

Actually many of the fatilities with children/students have been walking, not on actual busses.

So the data on this is actually available publically.

In a 1/2 mile radius of Wootton High School, there were 84 instances, and 7 of them involved pedestrians/cyclists. In a 1/2 mile radius of the Crown High School site, there were 936 incidents, and 32 involved pedestrians/cyclists.

You can’t seriously be disputing the idea that the further kids have to travel, the more likely there will be incidents…

Can you cite your source for this?

I have serious concerns of the walkability of the Crown High School site. Everything within the Rio, Crown and Decloverly area would probably be okay.

But I question everything outside of the Sam Eig Highway, Shady Grove Road, 28/West Montgomery Ave and Great Seneca Highway perimeter.

Yes. Source: County provided crash incident
https://data.montgomerycountymd.gov/Public-Safety/Crash-Reporting-Incidents-Data/bhju-22kf/about_data

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many students from Fields Road are walkable to Crown. They should be sent to Crown. The City of Gaithersburg Mayor even came out to support modifying H to include Fields Road. Moving Fields Road would also help alleviate overcrowding from QO (which currently has 18 portables) while moving parts of Rosemont ES would help alleviate overcrowding at GHS.

The problem is if you put Fields Road and parts of Rosemont into Crown, all of the Wootton cluster cannot also fit in Crown.

Remember, the Superintendent can take pieces of every option in making his proposal. There’s nothing to stop him from cutting up Wootton cluster (say removing Cold Spring and Fallsmead), moving the rest of Wootton to Crown, and add in Rosemont and Fields Road.

Most Wootton families have no problems with adding students to their cluster. What they have a problem with is their cluster being broken apart. And the reason why Wootton’s current location is beloved isn’t because the building itself is somehow magically responsible for academic achievement, but because it really is a community hub. There are so many connections between Frost MS and Wootton HS. They are currently on a shared campus!

Not to mention what are the practical implications of turning Wootton into a holding school? If Wootton is a run-down unsafe building that the Board is refusing to renovate, how does turning it into a holding school make it magically safe for Damascus and Magruder students? What are the practical safety implications of bussing kids all the way from Damascus and Magruder into Wootton Parkway—which is a single-lane road—while also bussing all of the previously walkable Wootton kids out of Wootton parkway to Crown? The morning congestion is already terrible on both Wootton Parkway and around Sam Eig/270. This isn’t going to help.

The research on road safety is clear. The farther kids travel, the more bussing involved, the more there will be accidents and deaths. For example, can you begin to imagine a bunch of inexperienced teenage drivers driving quite literally across the county going from Damascus to Wootton?

Actually many of the fatilities with children/students have been walking, not on actual busses.

So the data on this is actually available publically.

In a 1/2 mile radius of Wootton High School, there were 84 instances, and 7 of them involved pedestrians/cyclists. In a 1/2 mile radius of the Crown High School site, there were 936 incidents, and 32 involved pedestrians/cyclists.

You can’t seriously be disputing the idea that the further kids have to travel, the more likely there will be incidents…

Can you cite your source for this?

I have serious concerns of the walkability of the Crown High School site. Everything within the Rio, Crown and Decloverly area would probably be okay.

But I question everything outside of the Sam Eig Highway, Shady Grove Road, 28/West Montgomery Ave and Great Seneca Highway perimeter.

Yes. Source: County provided crash incident
https://data.montgomerycountymd.gov/Public-Safety/Crash-Reporting-Incidents-Data/bhju-22kf/about_data

Thanks!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we are making much progress in this discussion. We have established that if H passes, the Wootton name will disappear, the new replacement school will be mediocre, that many people who bought into the Wootton district will be seeking to move or to send their kids to private schools, and that we will continue to elect people who think all of this is good for the county.

I don't think you know what that phrase means.

You saying something does not "establish" it.

Pedantic much?

Try a substantive response next time. You will be taken more seriously.

P.S. Mandy Patinkin did it better than you.

OK, let's try this:
1. What are your facts to support the conclusion that the Wootton name will disappear?
2. What are your facts to support the conclusion that the school will be mediocre?

I'm looking for facts here, which are needed to "establish" something. Conjecture doesn't count.

DP. Just so we’re on the same page here. Please define what you will accept as “facts” to support. Do you mean direct evidence, or will you accept circumstantial evidence? Will you accept past behaviors and statistics as “facts” to support these will likely happen?

Happy to spend the time to provide a substantive response, but I won’t waste my time if you’re going to act like a child and claim “that doesn’t count because <fill in the blank>”. That kind of response will only demonstrate you never wanted answers and are only virtue signaling to your supporters on this thread.

PP thanks for asking. Certainly, circumstantial evidence counts. For example, if you can find anybody involved in the decision at any point making a statement saying that Wootton's name is problematic or should be changed, that would be relevant. Or if you can point to any research that the geographic location of a school impacts the quality of education, or that the school at Wootton would provide less advanced programs, or that when a physical location changes the quality of teachers declines... Anything like that.

And then we can value the weight of those facts to see if they establish anything.

DP but one fact you can add is that the school(s) they are adding as feeders have lower test scores (fact) and very inactive/nonexistent PTAs( I know this is true for Rosemont-not 100% for the other schools but will guarantee they are not as active as the current Wootton feeders PTA).

There is no magic that is going to make low performing kids suddenly be high performing when put in a new school. So, in turn the overall performance of the school will decline. Therefore-mediocre.

Actually there is quite a bit of research that indicates that peer group positively impacts academic performance. So...no not medicore.

https://ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRT2211091.pdf
https://www.education-progress.org/en/focus/31-peereffects

Remember that any studies or research are probably based on the assumptions that school systems have the goal of raising the bottom, not lowering the bar.

But from what we've seen MCPS is intent on lowering the bar.

Our child's math class in MCPS literally stopped instruction about two or three weeks at the end of each marking period because the teacher said that they were ahead of the rest of the county and finished everything and didn't have to do anything until the next marking period. So they spent those next two or three weeks on their Chromebooks playing games.

The other example is eliminating the countywide regional magnets. People on DCUM acknowledged, they are perfectly fine with removing the very high level countywide programs to something that is more widely available but may be pretty much the equivalent of honors classes at some other schools.

If it really was just an issue of not being fair due to the limited amount of seats, they could have explored expanding the program by maybe another 30 or 60 seats and/or make sure there are a set number of seats for students from the underrepresented schools (and maybe demographics/income based on FARMS eligibility). Or if it is an issue of access, maybe opening an additional program. So three magnets, instead of two, and/or two county wide IB programs instead of just RMIB. Not water it down to six and limit the geographic areas that feed into each one.

PP here and I agree with most of what you write. But, respectfully, is it relevant to the issue of whether adding a small percentage of low performing (on average in the aggregate) students to a large amount of high performing students will make a school mediocre?

It’s not a small number. It’s up to 1/3 addition from Gaithersburg catchment area. If you have followed this thread or community chat channel closely, you’ll see sup and some ESs under GHS are actively advocating a modified option H to add 1-2 more ESs belonging to GHS currently.

Exactly-in the end it will be about 1/3 the school. That’s not small. MCPS wants it at capacity. The scores will plummet.

Wootton cluster has six ES, and you're complaining about adding one maybe two ES to Crown because .... omg.. the scores will plumment.

In as much as your striver kid's academics won't rub off on a poor brown kid, the poor brown kid's poor performance won't rub off on your kid.

There will be enough striver kids at Crown from Wootton to still have lots of AP classes, and probably the STEM magnet.

You Wootton parents are racist and ridiculous.

They have 6 ES right now-yes. But after the move 1-2 Wootton feeders will likely be pushed out. The only people that keep mentioning color are posters against Wootton parents-not a single Wootton parent has made a comment saying they don’t want kids of a certain race. Not wanting the scores at your child’s score to seriously decrease is not racist.

Your child's score won't decrease. Poor academic performance isn't contagious. Moving one ES to Crown won't push anyone out.

You're ridiculous.

Contagious-no? Having to slow down the curriculum for other students? That’s a problem that has an effect on everybody in the class. Behavior issues that cause disruption to the class? That’s another problem. So yes these things affect the school and instruction as a whole.

And you have no idea how they will redistrict if H goes through and it’s very possible they will move some Wootton feeders out-because at this point it’s clear that they have no oversight whatsoever and basically do whatever they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we are making much progress in this discussion. We have established that if H passes, the Wootton name will disappear, the new replacement school will be mediocre, that many people who bought into the Wootton district will be seeking to move or to send their kids to private schools, and that we will continue to elect people who think all of this is good for the county.

I don't think you know what that phrase means.

You saying something does not "establish" it.

Pedantic much?

Try a substantive response next time. You will be taken more seriously.

P.S. Mandy Patinkin did it better than you.

OK, let's try this:
1. What are your facts to support the conclusion that the Wootton name will disappear?
2. What are your facts to support the conclusion that the school will be mediocre?

I'm looking for facts here, which are needed to "establish" something. Conjecture doesn't count.

DP. Just so we’re on the same page here. Please define what you will accept as “facts” to support. Do you mean direct evidence, or will you accept circumstantial evidence? Will you accept past behaviors and statistics as “facts” to support these will likely happen?

Happy to spend the time to provide a substantive response, but I won’t waste my time if you’re going to act like a child and claim “that doesn’t count because <fill in the blank>”. That kind of response will only demonstrate you never wanted answers and are only virtue signaling to your supporters on this thread.

PP thanks for asking. Certainly, circumstantial evidence counts. For example, if you can find anybody involved in the decision at any point making a statement saying that Wootton's name is problematic or should be changed, that would be relevant. Or if you can point to any research that the geographic location of a school impacts the quality of education, or that the school at Wootton would provide less advanced programs, or that when a physical location changes the quality of teachers declines... Anything like that.

And then we can value the weight of those facts to see if they establish anything.

DP but one fact you can add is that the school(s) they are adding as feeders have lower test scores (fact) and very inactive/nonexistent PTAs( I know this is true for Rosemont-not 100% for the other schools but will guarantee they are not as active as the current Wootton feeders PTA).

There is no magic that is going to make low performing kids suddenly be high performing when put in a new school. So, in turn the overall performance of the school will decline. Therefore-mediocre.

Actually there is quite a bit of research that indicates that peer group positively impacts academic performance. So...no not medicore.

https://ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRT2211091.pdf
https://www.education-progress.org/en/focus/31-peereffects

Remember that any studies or research are probably based on the assumptions that school systems have the goal of raising the bottom, not lowering the bar.

But from what we've seen MCPS is intent on lowering the bar.

Our child's math class in MCPS literally stopped instruction about two or three weeks at the end of each marking period because the teacher said that they were ahead of the rest of the county and finished everything and didn't have to do anything until the next marking period. So they spent those next two or three weeks on their Chromebooks playing games.

The other example is eliminating the countywide regional magnets. People on DCUM acknowledged, they are perfectly fine with removing the very high level countywide programs to something that is more widely available but may be pretty much the equivalent of honors classes at some other schools.

If it really was just an issue of not being fair due to the limited amount of seats, they could have explored expanding the program by maybe another 30 or 60 seats and/or make sure there are a set number of seats for students from the underrepresented schools (and maybe demographics/income based on FARMS eligibility). Or if it is an issue of access, maybe opening an additional program. So three magnets, instead of two, and/or two county wide IB programs instead of just RMIB. Not water it down to six and limit the geographic areas that feed into each one.

PP here and I agree with most of what you write. But, respectfully, is it relevant to the issue of whether adding a small percentage of low performing (on average in the aggregate) students to a large amount of high performing students will make a school mediocre?

It’s not a small number. It’s up to 1/3 addition from Gaithersburg catchment area. If you have followed this thread or community chat channel closely, you’ll see sup and some ESs under GHS are actively advocating a modified option H to add 1-2 more ESs belonging to GHS currently.

Exactly-in the end it will be about 1/3 the school. That’s not small. MCPS wants it at capacity. The scores will plummet.

Wootton cluster has six ES, and you're complaining about adding one maybe two ES to Crown because .... omg.. the scores will plumment.

In as much as your striver kid's academics won't rub off on a poor brown kid, the poor brown kid's poor performance won't rub off on your kid.

There will be enough striver kids at Crown from Wootton to still have lots of AP classes, and probably the STEM magnet.

You Wootton parents are racist and ridiculous.

They have 6 ES right now-yes. But after the move 1-2 Wootton feeders will likely be pushed out. The only people that keep mentioning color are posters against Wootton parents-not a single Wootton parent has made a comment saying they don’t want kids of a certain race. Not wanting the scores at your child’s score to seriously decrease is not racist.

Your child's score won't decrease. Poor academic performance isn't contagious. Moving one ES to Crown won't push anyone out.

You're ridiculous.

Did you not read any of the other posts or read the news? Moving Fields Road to Crown + portions of Rosemont while moving Cold Spring and Fallsmead out is most definitely pushing out Wootton families who have historically been a part of the Wootton cluster. Just read the open letter from the Gaithersburg mayor.

Tell me you aren’t following this without telling me you aren’t.

I love trolls who are all why are Wootton parents so pissed when these trolls have no idea what is happening. Stop telling us that outrage on option H is unwarranted when you don’t even know the implications of option H.

You sound like the Board President who came to the Wootton town hall literally not knowing option H moves Wootton to Crown 🤣. The utter incompetence.

[Anonymous]

I drove by Fields Road yesterday - nice quiet street and the school cordoned off area seems huge. Rio may never be the same again after that school opens - I hope the high school kids don't trash the movie theater nearby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we are making much progress in this discussion. We have established that if H passes, the Wootton name will disappear, the new replacement school will be mediocre, that many people who bought into the Wootton district will be seeking to move or to send their kids to private schools, and that we will continue to elect people who think all of this is good for the county.

I don't think you know what that phrase means.

You saying something does not "establish" it.

Pedantic much?

Try a substantive response next time. You will be taken more seriously.

P.S. Mandy Patinkin did it better than you.

OK, let's try this:
1. What are your facts to support the conclusion that the Wootton name will disappear?
2. What are your facts to support the conclusion that the school will be mediocre?

I'm looking for facts here, which are needed to "establish" something. Conjecture doesn't count.

DP. Just so we’re on the same page here. Please define what you will accept as “facts” to support. Do you mean direct evidence, or will you accept circumstantial evidence? Will you accept past behaviors and statistics as “facts” to support these will likely happen?

Happy to spend the time to provide a substantive response, but I won’t waste my time if you’re going to act like a child and claim “that doesn’t count because <fill in the blank>”. That kind of response will only demonstrate you never wanted answers and are only virtue signaling to your supporters on this thread.

PP thanks for asking. Certainly, circumstantial evidence counts. For example, if you can find anybody involved in the decision at any point making a statement saying that Wootton's name is problematic or should be changed, that would be relevant. Or if you can point to any research that the geographic location of a school impacts the quality of education, or that the school at Wootton would provide less advanced programs, or that when a physical location changes the quality of teachers declines... Anything like that.

And then we can value the weight of those facts to see if they establish anything.

DP but one fact you can add is that the school(s) they are adding as feeders have lower test scores (fact) and very inactive/nonexistent PTAs( I know this is true for Rosemont-not 100% for the other schools but will guarantee they are not as active as the current Wootton feeders PTA).

There is no magic that is going to make low performing kids suddenly be high performing when put in a new school. So, in turn the overall performance of the school will decline. Therefore-mediocre.

Actually there is quite a bit of research that indicates that peer group positively impacts academic performance. So...no not medicore.

https://ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRT2211091.pdf
https://www.education-progress.org/en/focus/31-peereffects

Remember that any studies or research are probably based on the assumptions that school systems have the goal of raising the bottom, not lowering the bar.

But from what we've seen MCPS is intent on lowering the bar.

Our child's math class in MCPS literally stopped instruction about two or three weeks at the end of each marking period because the teacher said that they were ahead of the rest of the county and finished everything and didn't have to do anything until the next marking period. So they spent those next two or three weeks on their Chromebooks playing games.

The other example is eliminating the countywide regional magnets. People on DCUM acknowledged, they are perfectly fine with removing the very high level countywide programs to something that is more widely available but may be pretty much the equivalent of honors classes at some other schools.

If it really was just an issue of not being fair due to the limited amount of seats, they could have explored expanding the program by maybe another 30 or 60 seats and/or make sure there are a set number of seats for students from the underrepresented schools (and maybe demographics/income based on FARMS eligibility). Or if it is an issue of access, maybe opening an additional program. So three magnets, instead of two, and/or two county wide IB programs instead of just RMIB. Not water it down to six and limit the geographic areas that feed into each one.

PP here and I agree with most of what you write. But, respectfully, is it relevant to the issue of whether adding a small percentage of low performing (on average in the aggregate) students to a large amount of high performing students will make a school mediocre?

It’s not a small number. It’s up to 1/3 addition from Gaithersburg catchment area. If you have followed this thread or community chat channel closely, you’ll see sup and some ESs under GHS are actively advocating a modified option H to add 1-2 more ESs belonging to GHS currently.

Exactly-in the end it will be about 1/3 the school. That’s not small. MCPS wants it at capacity. The scores will plummet.

Wootton cluster has six ES, and you're complaining about adding one maybe two ES to Crown because .... omg.. the scores will plumment.

In as much as your striver kid's academics won't rub off on a poor brown kid, the poor brown kid's poor performance won't rub off on your kid.

There will be enough striver kids at Crown from Wootton to still have lots of AP classes, and probably the STEM magnet.

You Wootton parents are racist and ridiculous.

They have 6 ES right now-yes. But after the move 1-2 Wootton feeders will likely be pushed out. The only people that keep mentioning color are posters against Wootton parents-not a single Wootton parent has made a comment saying they don’t want kids of a certain race. Not wanting the scores at your child’s score to seriously decrease is not racist.

Your child's score won't decrease. Poor academic performance isn't contagious. Moving one ES to Crown won't push anyone out.

You're ridiculous.

Contagious-no? Having to slow down the curriculum for other students? That’s a problem that has an effect on everybody in the class. Behavior issues that cause disruption to the class? That’s another problem. So yes these things affect the school and instruction as a whole.

And you have no idea how they will redistrict if H goes through and it’s very possible they will move some Wootton feeders out-because at this point it’s clear that they have no oversight whatsoever and basically do whatever they want.

NP. While I agree with this, it should not really affect the AP classes or Honors classes since the poor performing students would struggle and quit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we are making much progress in this discussion. We have established that if H passes, the Wootton name will disappear, the new replacement school will be mediocre, that many people who bought into the Wootton district will be seeking to move or to send their kids to private schools, and that we will continue to elect people who think all of this is good for the county.

I don't think you know what that phrase means.

You saying something does not "establish" it.

Pedantic much?

Try a substantive response next time. You will be taken more seriously.

P.S. Mandy Patinkin did it better than you.

OK, let's try this:
1. What are your facts to support the conclusion that the Wootton name will disappear?
2. What are your facts to support the conclusion that the school will be mediocre?

I'm looking for facts here, which are needed to "establish" something. Conjecture doesn't count.

DP. Just so we’re on the same page here. Please define what you will accept as “facts” to support. Do you mean direct evidence, or will you accept circumstantial evidence? Will you accept past behaviors and statistics as “facts” to support these will likely happen?

Happy to spend the time to provide a substantive response, but I won’t waste my time if you’re going to act like a child and claim “that doesn’t count because <fill in the blank>”. That kind of response will only demonstrate you never wanted answers and are only virtue signaling to your supporters on this thread.

PP thanks for asking. Certainly, circumstantial evidence counts. For example, if you can find anybody involved in the decision at any point making a statement saying that Wootton's name is problematic or should be changed, that would be relevant. Or if you can point to any research that the geographic location of a school impacts the quality of education, or that the school at Wootton would provide less advanced programs, or that when a physical location changes the quality of teachers declines... Anything like that.

And then we can value the weight of those facts to see if they establish anything.

DP but one fact you can add is that the school(s) they are adding as feeders have lower test scores (fact) and very inactive/nonexistent PTAs( I know this is true for Rosemont-not 100% for the other schools but will guarantee they are not as active as the current Wootton feeders PTA).

There is no magic that is going to make low performing kids suddenly be high performing when put in a new school. So, in turn the overall performance of the school will decline. Therefore-mediocre.

Actually there is quite a bit of research that indicates that peer group positively impacts academic performance. So...no not medicore.

https://ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRT2211091.pdf
https://www.education-progress.org/en/focus/31-peereffects

Remember that any studies or research are probably based on the assumptions that school systems have the goal of raising the bottom, not lowering the bar.

But from what we've seen MCPS is intent on lowering the bar.

Our child's math class in MCPS literally stopped instruction about two or three weeks at the end of each marking period because the teacher said that they were ahead of the rest of the county and finished everything and didn't have to do anything until the next marking period. So they spent those next two or three weeks on their Chromebooks playing games.

The other example is eliminating the countywide regional magnets. People on DCUM acknowledged, they are perfectly fine with removing the very high level countywide programs to something that is more widely available but may be pretty much the equivalent of honors classes at some other schools.

If it really was just an issue of not being fair due to the limited amount of seats, they could have explored expanding the program by maybe another 30 or 60 seats and/or make sure there are a set number of seats for students from the underrepresented schools (and maybe demographics/income based on FARMS eligibility). Or if it is an issue of access, maybe opening an additional program. So three magnets, instead of two, and/or two county wide IB programs instead of just RMIB. Not water it down to six and limit the geographic areas that feed into each one.

PP here and I agree with most of what you write. But, respectfully, is it relevant to the issue of whether adding a small percentage of low performing (on average in the aggregate) students to a large amount of high performing students will make a school mediocre?

It’s not a small number. It’s up to 1/3 addition from Gaithersburg catchment area. If you have followed this thread or community chat channel closely, you’ll see sup and some ESs under GHS are actively advocating a modified option H to add 1-2 more ESs belonging to GHS currently.

Exactly-in the end it will be about 1/3 the school. That’s not small. MCPS wants it at capacity. The scores will plummet.

Wootton cluster has six ES, and you're complaining about adding one maybe two ES to Crown because .... omg.. the scores will plumment.

In as much as your striver kid's academics won't rub off on a poor brown kid, the poor brown kid's poor performance won't rub off on your kid.

There will be enough striver kids at Crown from Wootton to still have lots of AP classes, and probably the STEM magnet.

You Wootton parents are racist and ridiculous.

They have 6 ES right now-yes. But after the move 1-2 Wootton feeders will likely be pushed out. The only people that keep mentioning color are posters against Wootton parents-not a single Wootton parent has made a comment saying they don’t want kids of a certain race. Not wanting the scores at your child’s score to seriously decrease is not racist.

Your child's score won't decrease. Poor academic performance isn't contagious. Moving one ES to Crown won't push anyone out.

You're ridiculous.

Contagious-no? Having to slow down the curriculum for other students? That’s a problem that has an effect on everybody in the class. Behavior issues that cause disruption to the class? That’s another problem. So yes these things affect the school and instruction as a whole.

And you have no idea how they will redistrict if H goes through and it’s very possible they will move some Wootton feeders out-because at this point it’s clear that they have no oversight whatsoever and basically do whatever they want.

NP. While I agree with this, it should not really affect the AP classes or Honors classes since the poor performing students would struggle and quit

It will because

1) See previous post. There’s a reason why AP classes at some schools are in name only.
2) The reason why the attitude of the majority of the student body matters is because it’s the majority that sets school culture—how much most kids care about academics within a school matters and will influence what type of classes are even being offered. Why do you think Wootton currently has so many APs? It’s because there’s interest in the student body. If not enough kids want or are capable of taking an AP class, that class simply won’t be offered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I drove by Fields Road yesterday - nice quiet street and the school cordoned off area seems huge. Rio may never be the same again after that school opens - I hope the high school kids don't trash the movie theater nearby.

Having a high school so close to that much retail is always a huge risk. You would think businesses would be happy but that’s not the case. Any high school that close causes havoc. You are looking at a huge amount of kids walking over at the end of every school day causing issues. That area is already crazy on Friday nights-I can’t imagine how crazy it will be with the high school there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many students from Fields Road are walkable to Crown. They should be sent to Crown. The City of Gaithersburg Mayor even came out to support modifying H to include Fields Road. Moving Fields Road would also help alleviate overcrowding from QO (which currently has 18 portables) while moving parts of Rosemont ES would help alleviate overcrowding at GHS.

The problem is if you put Fields Road and parts of Rosemont into Crown, all of the Wootton cluster cannot also fit in Crown.

Remember, the Superintendent can take pieces of every option in making his proposal. There’s nothing to stop him from cutting up Wootton cluster (say removing Cold Spring and Fallsmead), moving the rest of Wootton to Crown, and add in Rosemont and Fields Road.

Most Wootton families have no problems with adding students to their cluster. What they have a problem with is their cluster being broken apart. And the reason why Wootton’s current location is beloved isn’t because the building itself is somehow magically responsible for academic achievement, but because it really is a community hub. There are so many connections between Frost MS and Wootton HS. They are currently on a shared campus!

Not to mention what are the practical implications of turning Wootton into a holding school? If Wootton is a run-down unsafe building that the Board is refusing to renovate, how does turning it into a holding school make it magically safe for Damascus and Magruder students? What are the practical safety implications of bussing kids all the way from Damascus and Magruder into Wootton Parkway—which is a single-lane road—while also bussing all of the previously walkable Wootton kids out of Wootton parkway to Crown? The morning congestion is already terrible on both Wootton Parkway and around Sam Eig/270. This isn’t going to help.

The research on road safety is clear. The farther kids travel, the more bussing involved, the more there will be accidents and deaths. For example, can you begin to imagine a bunch of inexperienced teenage drivers driving quite literally across the county going from Damascus to Wootton?

Someone tell me why turning dilapidated Wootton into a holding school makes sense? Damascus parents hate it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many students from Fields Road are walkable to Crown. They should be sent to Crown. The City of Gaithersburg Mayor even came out to support modifying H to include Fields Road. Moving Fields Road would also help alleviate overcrowding from QO (which currently has 18 portables) while moving parts of Rosemont ES would help alleviate overcrowding at GHS.

The problem is if you put Fields Road and parts of Rosemont into Crown, all of the Wootton cluster cannot also fit in Crown.

Remember, the Superintendent can take pieces of every option in making his proposal. There’s nothing to stop him from cutting up Wootton cluster (say removing Cold Spring and Fallsmead), moving the rest of Wootton to Crown, and add in Rosemont and Fields Road.

Most Wootton families have no problems with adding students to their cluster. What they have a problem with is their cluster being broken apart. And the reason why Wootton’s current location is beloved isn’t because the building itself is somehow magically responsible for academic achievement, but because it really is a community hub. There are so many connections between Frost MS and Wootton HS. They are currently on a shared campus!

Not to mention what are the practical implications of turning Wootton into a holding school? If Wootton is a run-down unsafe building that the Board is refusing to renovate, how does turning it into a holding school make it magically safe for Damascus and Magruder students? What are the practical safety implications of bussing kids all the way from Damascus and Magruder into Wootton Parkway—which is a single-lane road—while also bussing all of the previously walkable Wootton kids out of Wootton parkway to Crown? The morning congestion is already terrible on both Wootton Parkway and around Sam Eig/270. This isn’t going to help.

The research on road safety is clear. The farther kids travel, the more bussing involved, the more there will be accidents and deaths. For example, can you begin to imagine a bunch of inexperienced teenage drivers driving quite literally across the county going from Damascus to Wootton?

Removing an ES which was never presented in all previous options last minute is a problem. It’s not enough community engagement. Closing Wootton and relocating to crown is also introduced late and doesn’t have enough public engagement and not legal in the boundary study process.

Exactly! Why is no one talking about this? Option H will close Wootton—that is inappropriate for a boundary study. Also everyone should be alarmed. If MCPS can just close a school rather than renovate it, maybe Damascus and Magruder are next.

This thread is full of crown trolls dreaming that the Wootton asset will be transferred to their neighborhood and skyrocket their property values. Any legal or reasonable argument is conveniently ignored. Reality check is coming in about a month.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many students from Fields Road are walkable to Crown. They should be sent to Crown. The City of Gaithersburg Mayor even came out to support modifying H to include Fields Road. Moving Fields Road would also help alleviate overcrowding from QO (which currently has 18 portables) while moving parts of Rosemont ES would help alleviate overcrowding at GHS.

The problem is if you put Fields Road and parts of Rosemont into Crown, all of the Wootton cluster cannot also fit in Crown.

Remember, the Superintendent can take pieces of every option in making his proposal. There’s nothing to stop him from cutting up Wootton cluster (say removing Cold Spring and Fallsmead), moving the rest of Wootton to Crown, and add in Rosemont and Fields Road.

Most Wootton families have no problems with adding students to their cluster. What they have a problem with is their cluster being broken apart. And the reason why Wootton’s current location is beloved isn’t because the building itself is somehow magically responsible for academic achievement, but because it really is a community hub. There are so many connections between Frost MS and Wootton HS. They are currently on a shared campus!

Not to mention what are the practical implications of turning Wootton into a holding school? If Wootton is a run-down unsafe building that the Board is refusing to renovate, how does turning it into a holding school make it magically safe for Damascus and Magruder students? What are the practical safety implications of bussing kids all the way from Damascus and Magruder into Wootton Parkway—which is a single-lane road—while also bussing all of the previously walkable Wootton kids out of Wootton parkway to Crown? The morning congestion is already terrible on both Wootton Parkway and around Sam Eig/270. This isn’t going to help.

The research on road safety is clear. The farther kids travel, the more bussing involved, the more there will be accidents and deaths. For example, can you begin to imagine a bunch of inexperienced teenage drivers driving quite literally across the county going from Damascus to Wootton?

Removing an ES which was never presented in all previous options last minute is a problem. It’s not enough community engagement. Closing Wootton and relocating to crown is also introduced late and doesn’t have enough public engagement and not legal in the boundary study process.

Exactly! Why is no one talking about this? Option H will close Wootton—that is inappropriate for a boundary study. Also everyone should be alarmed. If MCPS can just close a school rather than renovate it, maybe Damascus and Magruder are next.

This thread is full of crown trolls dreaming that the Wootton asset will be transferred to their neighborhood and skyrocket their property values. Any legal or reasonable argument is conveniently ignored. Reality check is coming in about a month.

Say it louder for the people in the back.
MCPS sure does have money for litigation but not for renovation schools!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we are making much progress in this discussion. We have established that if H passes, the Wootton name will disappear, the new replacement school will be mediocre, that many people who bought into the Wootton district will be seeking to move or to send their kids to private schools, and that we will continue to elect people who think all of this is good for the county.

I don't think you know what that phrase means.

You saying something does not "establish" it.

Pedantic much?

Try a substantive response next time. You will be taken more seriously.

P.S. Mandy Patinkin did it better than you.

OK, let's try this:
1. What are your facts to support the conclusion that the Wootton name will disappear?
2. What are your facts to support the conclusion that the school will be mediocre?

I'm looking for facts here, which are needed to "establish" something. Conjecture doesn't count.

DP. Just so we’re on the same page here. Please define what you will accept as “facts” to support. Do you mean direct evidence, or will you accept circumstantial evidence? Will you accept past behaviors and statistics as “facts” to support these will likely happen?

Happy to spend the time to provide a substantive response, but I won’t waste my time if you’re going to act like a child and claim “that doesn’t count because <fill in the blank>”. That kind of response will only demonstrate you never wanted answers and are only virtue signaling to your supporters on this thread.

PP thanks for asking. Certainly, circumstantial evidence counts. For example, if you can find anybody involved in the decision at any point making a statement saying that Wootton's name is problematic or should be changed, that would be relevant. Or if you can point to any research that the geographic location of a school impacts the quality of education, or that the school at Wootton would provide less advanced programs, or that when a physical location changes the quality of teachers declines... Anything like that.

And then we can value the weight of those facts to see if they establish anything.

DP but one fact you can add is that the school(s) they are adding as feeders have lower test scores (fact) and very inactive/nonexistent PTAs( I know this is true for Rosemont-not 100% for the other schools but will guarantee they are not as active as the current Wootton feeders PTA).

There is no magic that is going to make low performing kids suddenly be high performing when put in a new school. So, in turn the overall performance of the school will decline. Therefore-mediocre.

Actually there is quite a bit of research that indicates that peer group positively impacts academic performance. So...no not medicore.

https://ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRT2211091.pdf
https://www.education-progress.org/en/focus/31-peereffects

Remember that any studies or research are probably based on the assumptions that school systems have the goal of raising the bottom, not lowering the bar.

But from what we've seen MCPS is intent on lowering the bar.

Our child's math class in MCPS literally stopped instruction about two or three weeks at the end of each marking period because the teacher said that they were ahead of the rest of the county and finished everything and didn't have to do anything until the next marking period. So they spent those next two or three weeks on their Chromebooks playing games.

The other example is eliminating the countywide regional magnets. People on DCUM acknowledged, they are perfectly fine with removing the very high level countywide programs to something that is more widely available but may be pretty much the equivalent of honors classes at some other schools.

If it really was just an issue of not being fair due to the limited amount of seats, they could have explored expanding the program by maybe another 30 or 60 seats and/or make sure there are a set number of seats for students from the underrepresented schools (and maybe demographics/income based on FARMS eligibility). Or if it is an issue of access, maybe opening an additional program. So three magnets, instead of two, and/or two county wide IB programs instead of just RMIB. Not water it down to six and limit the geographic areas that feed into each one.

PP here and I agree with most of what you write. But, respectfully, is it relevant to the issue of whether adding a small percentage of low performing (on average in the aggregate) students to a large amount of high performing students will make a school mediocre?

It’s not a small number. It’s up to 1/3 addition from Gaithersburg catchment area. If you have followed this thread or community chat channel closely, you’ll see sup and some ESs under GHS are actively advocating a modified option H to add 1-2 more ESs belonging to GHS currently.

Exactly-in the end it will be about 1/3 the school. That’s not small. MCPS wants it at capacity. The scores will plummet.

Wootton cluster has six ES, and you're complaining about adding one maybe two ES to Crown because .... omg.. the scores will plumment.

In as much as your striver kid's academics won't rub off on a poor brown kid, the poor brown kid's poor performance won't rub off on your kid.

There will be enough striver kids at Crown from Wootton to still have lots of AP classes, and probably the STEM magnet.

You Wootton parents are racist and ridiculous.

They have 6 ES right now-yes. But after the move 1-2 Wootton feeders will likely be pushed out. The only people that keep mentioning color are posters against Wootton parents-not a single Wootton parent has made a comment saying they don’t want kids of a certain race. Not wanting the scores at your child’s score to seriously decrease is not racist.

Regardless of race, you are clear you only want high preforming kids from the right famlies at your school.

This is the right take. It’s not about race. It is about high performing kids from parents who are involved. God forbid parents want their kids to go to school with the right kind of other kids—the right kind of kids being kids who care about school and will push themselves to do well. Yes—that is quite literally why Wootton parents will pay extra money for smaller, older houses.

Yeah i’m not really sure why this was presented as an insult. Yes-I want my kids going to school with kids who work hard and have parents invested in their education. You want to shame parents for that? Go right ahead.

And, your kids would be. There is always a strong group of smart kids who work hard and have parents invested in their education. I cannot imagine that Wootton doesn't have lower-income families or students with disabilities who struggle. So, basically you are saying you don't want them at your school which speaks volumes.

GHS has a graduation rate that fluctuates between 75%-82%. Wootton has been at 98% graduation rate consistently. What does that tell you?

[Anonymous]

I feel badly for those impacted but the Wootton community could have also done better. First, while not everyone did, I believe that a significant portion of the Wootton community actually voted for this BOE. There was a concerted effort by a couple groups to get this group elected and I believe many in the community voted for that financially backed sample ballot. We now have what was voted in. Secondly, as has been pointed out by the busy trolls, most of the major stories to come out of Wootton recently have been negative. We all know what they are. Some of these stories were emphasized in the media due to Wootton community outrage. There was little concerted effort to get positive information out to counter those stories. Third this is not the first time that Wootton has been threatened with redistricting/closure.. It has survived the first 2-3 but perhaps not this one. Problem was the survival the first couple of times just postponed the issue. The people involved at the time were ok, because their kids graduated . however, they passed the issue down to the next generation. The issues were never resolved. What should they have done? See issue #1, pay attention to BOE and related elections. Lastly, outside of community control is the name thing. Forgetting whether or not any BOE advocated for the name change or not, there will not be any new building built with the Wootton named etched into it. The best that could be hoped for is small renovations in the existing building. A new building means the Wootton name will be retired. The same is true for all schools on the naughty name list. They will only keep their names if their building remains. Any tear down will also result in a name change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many students from Fields Road are walkable to Crown. They should be sent to Crown. The City of Gaithersburg Mayor even came out to support modifying H to include Fields Road. Moving Fields Road would also help alleviate overcrowding from QO (which currently has 18 portables) while moving parts of Rosemont ES would help alleviate overcrowding at GHS.

The problem is if you put Fields Road and parts of Rosemont into Crown, all of the Wootton cluster cannot also fit in Crown.

Remember, the Superintendent can take pieces of every option in making his proposal. There’s nothing to stop him from cutting up Wootton cluster (say removing Cold Spring and Fallsmead), moving the rest of Wootton to Crown, and add in Rosemont and Fields Road.

Most Wootton families have no problems with adding students to their cluster. What they have a problem with is their cluster being broken apart. And the reason why Wootton’s current location is beloved isn’t because the building itself is somehow magically responsible for academic achievement, but because it really is a community hub. There are so many connections between Frost MS and Wootton HS. They are currently on a shared campus!

Not to mention what are the practical implications of turning Wootton into a holding school? If Wootton is a run-down unsafe building that the Board is refusing to renovate, how does turning it into a holding school make it magically safe for Damascus and Magruder students? What are the practical safety implications of bussing kids all the way from Damascus and Magruder into Wootton Parkway—which is a single-lane road—while also bussing all of the previously walkable Wootton kids out of Wootton parkway to Crown? The morning congestion is already terrible on both Wootton Parkway and around Sam Eig/270. This isn’t going to help.

The research on road safety is clear. The farther kids travel, the more bussing involved, the more there will be accidents and deaths. For example, can you begin to imagine a bunch of inexperienced teenage drivers driving quite literally across the county going from Damascus to Wootton?

Removing an ES which was never presented in all previous options last minute is a problem. It’s not enough community engagement. Closing Wootton and relocating to crown is also introduced late and doesn’t have enough public engagement and not legal in the boundary study process.

Exactly! Why is no one talking about this? Option H will close Wootton—that is inappropriate for a boundary study. Also everyone should be alarmed. If MCPS can just close a school rather than renovate it, maybe Damascus and Magruder are next.

This thread is full of crown trolls dreaming that the Wootton asset will be transferred to their neighborhood and skyrocket their property values. Any legal or reasonable argument is conveniently ignored. Reality check is coming in about a month.

Say it louder for the people in the back.
MCPS sure does have money for litigation but not for renovation schools!

MCPS better have a lot of it. Wootton families are going to file one or more lawsuits over this. Apparently the BOE/MCPS members blanched when they heard this during the hearing. A friendly judge could slap an injunction on the entire decision process, leading to discovery and depositions. Who knows, maybe some of the developers around Crown will get pulled into it. Rest assured, MCPS does not want any part of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many students from Fields Road are walkable to Crown. They should be sent to Crown. The City of Gaithersburg Mayor even came out to support modifying H to include Fields Road. Moving Fields Road would also help alleviate overcrowding from QO (which currently has 18 portables) while moving parts of Rosemont ES would help alleviate overcrowding at GHS.

The problem is if you put Fields Road and parts of Rosemont into Crown, all of the Wootton cluster cannot also fit in Crown.

Remember, the Superintendent can take pieces of every option in making his proposal. There’s nothing to stop him from cutting up Wootton cluster (say removing Cold Spring and Fallsmead), moving the rest of Wootton to Crown, and add in Rosemont and Fields Road.

Most Wootton families have no problems with adding students to their cluster. What they have a problem with is their cluster being broken apart. And the reason why Wootton’s current location is beloved isn’t because the building itself is somehow magically responsible for academic achievement, but because it really is a community hub. There are so many connections between Frost MS and Wootton HS. They are currently on a shared campus!

Not to mention what are the practical implications of turning Wootton into a holding school? If Wootton is a run-down unsafe building that the Board is refusing to renovate, how does turning it into a holding school make it magically safe for Damascus and Magruder students? What are the practical safety implications of bussing kids all the way from Damascus and Magruder into Wootton Parkway—which is a single-lane road—while also bussing all of the previously walkable Wootton kids out of Wootton parkway to Crown? The morning congestion is already terrible on both Wootton Parkway and around Sam Eig/270. This isn’t going to help.

The research on road safety is clear. The farther kids travel, the more bussing involved, the more there will be accidents and deaths. For example, can you begin to imagine a bunch of inexperienced teenage drivers driving quite literally across the county going from Damascus to Wootton?

Removing an ES which was never presented in all previous options last minute is a problem. It’s not enough community engagement. Closing Wootton and relocating to crown is also introduced late and doesn’t have enough public engagement and not legal in the boundary study process.

Exactly! Why is no one talking about this? Option H will close Wootton—that is inappropriate for a boundary study. Also everyone should be alarmed. If MCPS can just close a school rather than renovate it, maybe Damascus and Magruder are next.

This thread is full of crown trolls dreaming that the Wootton asset will be transferred to their neighborhood and skyrocket their property values. Any legal or reasonable argument is conveniently ignored. Reality check is coming in about a month.

Say it louder for the people in the back.
MCPS sure does have money for litigation but not for renovation schools!

MCPS better have a lot of it. Wootton families are going to file one or more lawsuits over this. Apparently the BOE/MCPS members blanched when they heard this during the hearing. A friendly judge could slap an injunction on the entire decision process, leading to discovery and depositions. Who knows, maybe some of the developers around Crown will get pulled into it. Rest assured, MCPS does not want any part of that.

A formal legal notice was already sent to the Board. Suffice it to say, it’s getting very interesting… MCPS Office of General Counsel is now involved.