Second round options for Woodward boundary study

[Anonymous]

Assuming no further modifications are made to the 4 options (A, B, C, and D), for families that will be zoned to WJ regardless of the option selected by MCPS, which option do you prefer and why?

I prefer Option B because it provides the most cohesiveness from the current WJ zone...continuity of community.

Also, for families zoned to Woodward regardless of the options selected by MCPS, which option do you prefer and why?

Is it the same as me? B?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Assuming no further modifications are made to the 4 options (A, B, C, and D), for families that will be zoned to WJ regardless of the option selected by MCPS, which option do you prefer and why?

I prefer Option B because it provides the most cohesiveness from the current WJ zone...continuity of community.

Also, for families zoned to Woodward regardless of the options selected by MCPS, which option do you prefer and why?

Is it the same as me? B?

I'm woodward regardless. I prefer Option B too. Think it balances the 4 criteria nicely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rough crowd. None of what you have to say matters anyway, the BOE and Co. Council will just do what they want to do that is in the name of equity, but really is just to cut costs, cost of buses, experienced teacher salaries, some curricular costs, as well as badly aging infrastructure costs, as best they can. They do not give one shit what any taxpayer and/or parent thinks and as long as the W schools, Wheaton not included, remain as they are and/or are no longer over capacity, the poor kids will take the brunt, and that's fine by the BOE.

Wheaton is lacking in the arts and in other areas.

Arts? Seriously? Who cares about that.

Many of us do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm curious which option current WJ Cluster families prefer: A, B, C or D.

To me, B appears the best outcome.

WJ cluster is going to see some serious staffing cuts when a good portion of their school moves to Woodward.

Well yeah, that's the main reason they opened Woodward.

Yes, but when that happens, staffing will be cut which means classes will be cut.

Because they don't need as many staff members if there are fewer students!

For schools like WJ with relatively low FARMS rates this will be fine. It's the high FARMS schools that have trouble offering certain courses as it is that will struggle with lower enrollment, especially when half the high achieving cohort signs up for programs in low FARMS schools.

Will it be fine? There will be some serious cuts.

The good teachers will stay at WJ. Why gamble on a new student population and a new boss if you are happy at your current job with current boss. It's not like you'll get a massive raise to move to Woodward.

It will depend on if they like the principal. Many teachers will be forced to other schools when the population of students is reduced.

[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:I'm curious which option current WJ Cluster families prefer: A, B, C or D.

To me, B appears the best outcome.

WJ cluster is going to see some serious staffing cuts when a good portion of their school moves to Woodward.

Well yeah, that's the main reason they opened Woodward.

Yes, but when that happens, staffing will be cut which means classes will be cut.

Because they don't need as many staff members if there are fewer students!

For schools like WJ with relatively low FARMS rates this will be fine. It's the high FARMS schools that have trouble offering certain courses as it is that will struggle with lower enrollment, especially when half the high achieving cohort signs up for programs in low FARMS schools.

Will it be fine? There will be some serious cuts.

I mean they might lose a few of their least popular elective, but generally, yes, they will be fine. A lot of the cuts just amount to there being half as many staff left to teach all the basic core courses, but there will also be half as many students taking them so it works out fine.

The real classes at risk there or anywhere, are classes where there aren't that many kids taking them to start with. At schools like Einstein this may include some higher level academic classes, but I doubt that's the case at WJ. Both they and poorer schools facing cuts will instead be more likely to lose electives (and possibly certain foreign language classes, if there were ones with lower numbers of kids to start with.). If they previously barely filled a class for an elective, it's probably gone with the cuts.

WJ is the "less common languages" designated school in Region 3, so I would think its unlikely that they will lose languages. More likely in the other schools in the region. If language is important those kids will move to WJ (in theory, anyway). I wonder about the visual arts classes - a general high school may not be able to offer Ceramics, and Photography and Drawng/Painting at the same time. If that level of art engagement is a student's interest, they may need to move to the school that has those programs. If that is the case, I hope they have transfers/onramps after 8th grade. Because kids interests change

Good luck with that. It’s not just about interests. It’s about staffing. Lose 1/4 of the students lose 1/4 of the staff.

Staffing is always proportional to student enrollment. It wouldn't make any sense otherwise.

Correct but what is each school going to lose in terms of classes with the staffing losses.

That's really up to the principal.

If the principal makes serious cuts how long till families get upset and act like they did not know?

Familes will complain and not do anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rough crowd. None of what you have to say matters anyway, the BOE and Co. Council will just do what they want to do that is in the name of equity, but really is just to cut costs, cost of buses, experienced teacher salaries, some curricular costs, as well as badly aging infrastructure costs, as best they can. They do not give one shit what any taxpayer and/or parent thinks and as long as the W schools, Wheaton not included, remain as they are and/or are no longer over capacity, the poor kids will take the brunt, and that's fine by the BOE.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rough crowd. None of what you have to say matters anyway, the BOE and Co. Council will just do what they want to do that is in the name of equity, but really is just to cut costs, cost of buses, experienced teacher salaries, some curricular costs, as well as badly aging infrastructure costs, as best they can. They do not give one shit what any taxpayer and/or parent thinks and as long as the W schools, Wheaton not included, remain as they are and/or are no longer over capacity, the poor kids will take the brunt, and that's fine by the BOE.

+1

All the schools will be hit if they reduce capacity and lose teachers. The w schools will have to make cuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rough crowd. None of what you have to say matters anyway, the BOE and Co. Council will just do what they want to do that is in the name of equity, but really is just to cut costs, cost of buses, experienced teacher salaries, some curricular costs, as well as badly aging infrastructure costs, as best they can. They do not give one shit what any taxpayer and/or parent thinks and as long as the W schools, Wheaton not included, remain as they are and/or are no longer over capacity, the poor kids will take the brunt, and that's fine by the BOE.

+1

All the schools will be hit if they reduce capacity and lose teachers. The w schools will have to make cuts.

The main point of this whole endeavor is to reduce overcrowding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rough crowd. None of what you have to say matters anyway, the BOE and Co. Council will just do what they want to do that is in the name of equity, but really is just to cut costs, cost of buses, experienced teacher salaries, some curricular costs, as well as badly aging infrastructure costs, as best they can. They do not give one shit what any taxpayer and/or parent thinks and as long as the W schools, Wheaton not included, remain as they are and/or are no longer over capacity, the poor kids will take the brunt, and that's fine by the BOE.

+1

All the schools will be hit if they reduce capacity and lose teachers. The w schools will have to make cuts.

But they will still have a healthy high achieving cohort to offer classes like AP physics, AP chem, AP bio, and MVC which low income schools do not offer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rough crowd. None of what you have to say matters anyway, the BOE and Co. Council will just do what they want to do that is in the name of equity, but really is just to cut costs, cost of buses, experienced teacher salaries, some curricular costs, as well as badly aging infrastructure costs, as best they can. They do not give one shit what any taxpayer and/or parent thinks and as long as the W schools, Wheaton not included, remain as they are and/or are no longer over capacity, the poor kids will take the brunt, and that's fine by the BOE.

Wheaton is lacking in the arts and in other areas.

Arts? Seriously? Who cares about that.

Many of us do.

Do you live in your parents basement? Or just want your kids to be baseball dwellers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rough crowd. None of what you have to say matters anyway, the BOE and Co. Council will just do what they want to do that is in the name of equity, but really is just to cut costs, cost of buses, experienced teacher salaries, some curricular costs, as well as badly aging infrastructure costs, as best they can. They do not give one shit what any taxpayer and/or parent thinks and as long as the W schools, Wheaton not included, remain as they are and/or are no longer over capacity, the poor kids will take the brunt, and that's fine by the BOE.

+1

All the schools will be hit if they reduce capacity and lose teachers. The w schools will have to make cuts.

But they will still have a healthy high achieving cohort to offer classes like AP physics, AP chem, AP bio, and MVC which low income schools do not offer

WJ will be higher achieving than Woodward. Lower FARMS means better academics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rough crowd. None of what you have to say matters anyway, the BOE and Co. Council will just do what they want to do that is in the name of equity, but really is just to cut costs, cost of buses, experienced teacher salaries, some curricular costs, as well as badly aging infrastructure costs, as best they can. They do not give one shit what any taxpayer and/or parent thinks and as long as the W schools, Wheaton not included, remain as they are and/or are no longer over capacity, the poor kids will take the brunt, and that's fine by the BOE.

+1

All the schools will be hit if they reduce capacity and lose teachers. The w schools will have to make cuts.

But they will still have a healthy high achieving cohort to offer classes like AP physics, AP chem, AP bio, and MVC which low income schools do not offer

WJ will be higher achieving than Woodward. Lower FARMS means better academics.

Lower farmers does not mean better academics. It depends on the principal and teachers your child has. They may have more course offerings but more with bad teachers isn’t better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rough crowd. None of what you have to say matters anyway, the BOE and Co. Council will just do what they want to do that is in the name of equity, but really is just to cut costs, cost of buses, experienced teacher salaries, some curricular costs, as well as badly aging infrastructure costs, as best they can. They do not give one shit what any taxpayer and/or parent thinks and as long as the W schools, Wheaton not included, remain as they are and/or are no longer over capacity, the poor kids will take the brunt, and that's fine by the BOE.

Wheaton is lacking in the arts and in other areas.

Arts? Seriously? Who cares about that.

Many of us do.

Do you live in your parents basement? Or just want your kids to be baseball dwellers?

You realize arts kids can be smart and into the arts. Clearly your kids are not at the high level in arts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rough crowd. None of what you have to say matters anyway, the BOE and Co. Council will just do what they want to do that is in the name of equity, but really is just to cut costs, cost of buses, experienced teacher salaries, some curricular costs, as well as badly aging infrastructure costs, as best they can. They do not give one shit what any taxpayer and/or parent thinks and as long as the W schools, Wheaton not included, remain as they are and/or are no longer over capacity, the poor kids will take the brunt, and that's fine by the BOE.

+1

All the schools will be hit if they reduce capacity and lose teachers. The w schools will have to make cuts.

But they will still have a healthy high achieving cohort to offer classes like AP physics, AP chem, AP bio, and MVC which low income schools do not offer

WJ will be higher achieving than Woodward. Lower FARMS means better academics.

WJ will be losing a lot of teachers so they will be reducing course offerings. Higher achieving has nothing to do with it. They cannot offer what they do now with less teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rough crowd. None of what you have to say matters anyway, the BOE and Co. Council will just do what they want to do that is in the name of equity, but really is just to cut costs, cost of buses, experienced teacher salaries, some curricular costs, as well as badly aging infrastructure costs, as best they can. They do not give one shit what any taxpayer and/or parent thinks and as long as the W schools, Wheaton not included, remain as they are and/or are no longer over capacity, the poor kids will take the brunt, and that's fine by the BOE.

+1

All the schools will be hit if they reduce capacity and lose teachers. The w schools will have to make cuts.

But they will still have a healthy high achieving cohort to offer classes like AP physics, AP chem, AP bio, and MVC which low income schools do not offer

WJ will be higher achieving than Woodward. Lower FARMS means better academics.

WJ will be losing a lot of teachers so they will be reducing course offerings. Higher achieving has nothing to do with it. They cannot offer what they do now with less teachers.

You'd rather remain overcrowded?