Taylor's Feb. Rec for Woodward Boundary Study

[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:The issue is the demographics of the new WJ. Do the math.

It’s another Whitman (less diverse and richer than current WJ) while Woodward is just a mile away and will be a very different school.

What do you mean by different?

Wealth. A lot less of it.

Don’t turn on the new Woodward families when MCPS divided the schools and even the WJ cluster in an unexpected way. The way they split KP and GP puts all the single family homes in WJ rather than Woodward.

Is there a more close up map to show where gp and kp split?

GPES has many multi family houses still going to WJ. The Parkside condos, stoneybrook, apts near Grosvenor.

The islands from GPES that didn’t get WJ make complete sense. They should go to Woodward. One is directly next to Woodward.

Option B was the right call.

They will do elementary boundary soon to mitigate some of the split articulation issues. KPES is under capacity and Ashburton is over capacity. It will get resolved.

Looks like all the Option B signs on Strathmore worked.

They were desperate to avoid Woodward.

I won't celebrate yet. MCPS may not ceoncentrate poverty in Woodward and make both schools more similar in final approval. It will depend on how hard Old Farm/North FArm and Luxmanor area lobbies.

As they should have been desperate to avoid Woodward. Fashion design? It grabs from Wheaton Woods now too. No thank you

Attention will be on Wootton. This Woodward rec is done deal.

Note that Taylor only submitted this rec for Woodward. In the Crown study he submitted a recommendation plus an alternative.

The BOE members can if they want to not appear completely useless stand up bravely against racial segregation by moving Viers Mill ES to WJ.

You lost credibility there. VM “improved” from Wheaton to Woodward too. You don’t see VM clamoring for WJ. GPE and KPE keeps status quo for its core.

I am from VM and prefer WJ.

Should have made some road signs then. Too bad. Too late.

Recommnesdation is not decision. Board can pick anything including recommendation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issue is the demographics of the new WJ. Do the math.

It’s another Whitman (less diverse and richer than current WJ) while Woodward is just a mile away and will be a very different school.

What do you mean by different?

Wealth. A lot less of it.

Don’t turn on the new Woodward families when MCPS divided the schools and even the WJ cluster in an unexpected way. The way they split KP and GP puts all the single family homes in WJ rather than Woodward.

That is actually false.

Is it? We have a Whitman 2.0 supporter here.

No, I share concerns. I just think facts matter and there are multifamily homes from GP zoned to WJ in the proposal.

But all single family homes from KP and GP are zoned WJ.

Yeah, but those islands they rezoned are in the walk zone to Woodward, without walking on OGR and crossing the beltway to WJ, and a large proportion of those neighbors requested Woodward for that reason. WJ has a lot of multifamily dwellings from the Ashburton zone.

That's a good decision to get rid of those island. Bad decision is to add two DCC ES in Woodward instead of adding in WJ and Woodward each. It's very low hanging fruit for BOE members.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a class of 30 students, it is going from 25 non-FARM students to 20 non-FARM students. Not an earth shattering change. No need for hyperbole.

And remember most FARMS students just like the non FARMS students are good kids whose parents care about their education.

This arguments shouldn't be used to concentrate poverty in one school when alternative is available without extra travel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a class of 30 students, it is going from 25 non-FARM students to 20 non-FARM students. Not an earth shattering change. No need for hyperbole.

And remember most FARMS students just like the non FARMS students are good kids whose parents care about their education.

This arguments shouldn't be used to concentrate poverty in one school when alternative is available without extra travel.

Is still below avg poverty compared to county. And JFK and Wheaton in region. This won’t resonate. I’m a farmland family. It is what is is. Who cares

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issue is the demographics of the new WJ. Do the math.

It’s another Whitman (less diverse and richer than current WJ) while Woodward is just a mile away and will be a very different school.

What do you mean by different?

Wealth. A lot less of it.

Don’t turn on the new Woodward families when MCPS divided the schools and even the WJ cluster in an unexpected way. The way they split KP and GP puts all the single family homes in WJ rather than Woodward.

Is there a more close up map to show where gp and kp split?

GPES has many multi family houses still going to WJ. The Parkside condos, stoneybrook, apts near Grosvenor.

The islands from GPES that didn’t get WJ make complete sense. They should go to Woodward. One is directly next to Woodward.

Option B was the right call.

They will do elementary boundary soon to mitigate some of the split articulation issues. KPES is under capacity and Ashburton is over capacity. It will get resolved.

Looks like all the Option B signs on Strathmore worked.

They were desperate to avoid Woodward.

I won't celebrate yet. MCPS may not ceoncentrate poverty in Woodward and make both schools more similar in final approval. It will depend on how hard Old Farm/North FArm and Luxmanor area lobbies.

Farmland and luxmanor are supposed to argue that they “deserve” less poor kids in their school? Yea, that argument will go over really well. Not.

Farmland and luxmanor are supposed to argue that ceoncentrating poverty in one school when both are right next to each other is harlful for FARMS and NON-FARMS students.

Not harmful for my NON FARMS kid at new WJ! Woohoo!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a class of 30 students, it is going from 25 non-FARM students to 20 non-FARM students. Not an earth shattering change. No need for hyperbole.

And remember most FARMS students just like the non FARMS students are good kids whose parents care about their education.

This arguments shouldn't be used to concentrate poverty in one school when alternative is available without extra travel.

Is still below avg poverty compared to county. And JFK and Wheaton in region. This won’t resonate. I’m a farmland family. It is what is is. Who cares

County average is meanigless.

There are some areas where we can distribute and some areas where we can't distribute without creating hardship. If we can create many HS around 20% FARMS then we should do it rather than creating Whitman 2.0 and Woodward with 35% FARMS when they are next to each other.

Here, there is a perfect chance to add one high FARMS ES in Woodward and WJ each instead of adding both in Woodward. It will benefit all students. It's a brainded decision. I am not even from WJ/Woodward zoned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a class of 30 students, it is going from 25 non-FARM students to 20 non-FARM students. Not an earth shattering change. No need for hyperbole.

And remember most FARMS students just like the non FARMS students are good kids whose parents care about their education.

This arguments shouldn't be used to concentrate poverty in one school when alternative is available without extra travel.

Is still below avg poverty compared to county. And JFK and Wheaton in region. This won’t resonate. I’m a farmland family. It is what is is. Who cares

County average is meanigless.

There are some areas where we can distribute and some areas where we can't distribute without creating hardship. If we can create many HS around 20% FARMS then we should do it rather than creating Whitman 2.0 and Woodward with 35% FARMS when they are next to each other.

Here, there is a perfect chance to add one high FARMS ES in Woodward and WJ each instead of adding both in Woodward. It will benefit all students. It's a brainded decision. I am not even from WJ/Woodward zoned.

You’re not from WJ/Woodward? If true, you need to get a better hobby.

But my guess is you’re farmland and against Wheaton Woods coming to your precious new construction high school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issue is the demographics of the new WJ. Do the math.

It’s another Whitman (less diverse and richer than current WJ) while Woodward is just a mile away and will be a very different school.

What do you mean by different?

Wealth. A lot less of it.

Don’t turn on the new Woodward families when MCPS divided the schools and even the WJ cluster in an unexpected way. The way they split KP and GP puts all the single family homes in WJ rather than Woodward.

Is there a more close up map to show where gp and kp split?

GPES has many multi family houses still going to WJ. The Parkside condos, stoneybrook, apts near Grosvenor.

The islands from GPES that didn’t get WJ make complete sense. They should go to Woodward. One is directly next to Woodward.

Option B was the right call.

They will do elementary boundary soon to mitigate some of the split articulation issues. KPES is under capacity and Ashburton is over capacity. It will get resolved.

Looks like all the Option B signs on Strathmore worked.

They were desperate to avoid Woodward.

I won't celebrate yet. MCPS may not ceoncentrate poverty in Woodward and make both schools more similar in final approval. It will depend on how hard Old Farm/North FArm and Luxmanor area lobbies.

Farmland and luxmanor are supposed to argue that they “deserve” less poor kids in their school? Yea, that argument will go over really well. Not.

Farmland and luxmanor are supposed to argue that ceoncentrating poverty in one school when both are right next to each other is harlful for FARMS and NON-FARMS students.

Not harmful for my NON FARMS kid at new WJ! Woohoo!

troll

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a class of 30 students, it is going from 25 non-FARM students to 20 non-FARM students. Not an earth shattering change. No need for hyperbole.

And remember most FARMS students just like the non FARMS students are good kids whose parents care about their education.

This arguments shouldn't be used to concentrate poverty in one school when alternative is available without extra travel.

Is still below avg poverty compared to county. And JFK and Wheaton in region. This won’t resonate. I’m a farmland family. It is what is is. Who cares

County average is meanigless.

There are some areas where we can distribute and some areas where we can't distribute without creating hardship. If we can create many HS around 20% FARMS then we should do it rather than creating Whitman 2.0 and Woodward with 35% FARMS when they are next to each other.

Here, there is a perfect chance to add one high FARMS ES in Woodward and WJ each instead of adding both in Woodward. It will benefit all students. It's a brainded decision. I am not even from WJ/Woodward zoned.

You’re not from WJ/Woodward? If true, you need to get a better hobby.

But my guess is you’re farmland and against Wheaton Woods coming to your precious new construction high school

Do you realize that many pepple are commenting here

PP actually makes a lot of sense. One ES can be added to WJ and one in Woodward. There is no downside.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a class of 30 students, it is going from 25 non-FARM students to 20 non-FARM students. Not an earth shattering change. No need for hyperbole.

And remember most FARMS students just like the non FARMS students are good kids whose parents care about their education.

This arguments shouldn't be used to concentrate poverty in one school when alternative is available without extra travel.

Is still below avg poverty compared to county. And JFK and Wheaton in region. This won’t resonate. I’m a farmland family. It is what is is. Who cares

County average is meanigless.

There are some areas where we can distribute and some areas where we can't distribute without creating hardship. If we can create many HS around 20% FARMS then we should do it rather than creating Whitman 2.0 and Woodward with 35% FARMS when they are next to each other.

Here, there is a perfect chance to add one high FARMS ES in Woodward and WJ each instead of adding both in Woodward. It will benefit all students. It's a brainded decision. I am not even from WJ/Woodward zoned.

+1

Woodward families should write to BOE members and present the case. Smaller groups should meet BOE members one by one as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issue is the demographics of the new WJ. Do the math.

It’s another Whitman (less diverse and richer than current WJ) while Woodward is just a mile away and will be a very different school.

What do you mean by different?

Wealth. A lot less of it.

Don’t turn on the new Woodward families when MCPS divided the schools and even the WJ cluster in an unexpected way. The way they split KP and GP puts all the single family homes in WJ rather than Woodward.

That is actually false.

Is it? We have a Whitman 2.0 supporter here.

No, I share concerns. I just think facts matter and there are multifamily homes from GP zoned to WJ in the proposal.

But all single family homes from KP and GP are zoned WJ.

Yeah, but those islands they rezoned are in the walk zone to Woodward, without walking on OGR and crossing the beltway to WJ, and a large proportion of those neighbors requested Woodward for that reason. WJ has a lot of multifamily dwellings from the Ashburton zone.

That's a good decision to get rid of those island. Bad decision is to add two DCC ES in Woodward instead of adding in WJ and Woodward each. It's very low hanging fruit for BOE members.

I understand the arguments re poverty concentration. I wonder if there are credible reasons for this recomendation that make this less low hanging fruit.

Maybe it is better to combine 2 current WJ ES and 2 current DCC ES into a new high school rather than 3:1? Wouldn't that result in more cohesion in the new school? Less likely for anyone to be othered or ignored? Less likely for the former WJ ES communities to dominate?

I know I will be dismissed as wanting Whitman 2.0 or whatever but genuinely asking.

[Anonymous]

Am I reading the chart correctly that WJ’s capacity is dropping from its current 130% to a projected 77%? Do WJ families that feel happy with the downsizing in student body (and diversity) realize how this will drastically reduce WJ course offerings?

There is an elementary school boundary study in the works, right? I would not be surprised to see changes made to middle school assignments when that study happens. There are smaller boundary shifts that happen all the time. For better or worse, this here recommendation is not set in stone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Am I reading the chart correctly that WJ’s capacity is dropping from its current 130% to a projected 77%? Do WJ families that feel happy with the downsizing in student body (and diversity) realize how this will drastically reduce WJ course offerings?

There is an elementary school boundary study in the works, right? I would not be surprised to see changes made to middle school assignments when that study happens. There are smaller boundary shifts that happen all the time. For better or worse, this here recommendation is not set in stone.

This is why Viers Mill should be added to WJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issue is the demographics of the new WJ. Do the math.

It’s another Whitman (less diverse and richer than current WJ) while Woodward is just a mile away and will be a very different school.

What do you mean by different?

Wealth. A lot less of it.

Don’t turn on the new Woodward families when MCPS divided the schools and even the WJ cluster in an unexpected way. The way they split KP and GP puts all the single family homes in WJ rather than Woodward.

That is actually false.

Is it? We have a Whitman 2.0 supporter here.

No, I share concerns. I just think facts matter and there are multifamily homes from GP zoned to WJ in the proposal.

But all single family homes from KP and GP are zoned WJ.

Yeah, but those islands they rezoned are in the walk zone to Woodward, without walking on OGR and crossing the beltway to WJ, and a large proportion of those neighbors requested Woodward for that reason. WJ has a lot of multifamily dwellings from the Ashburton zone.

That's a good decision to get rid of those island. Bad decision is to add two DCC ES in Woodward instead of adding in WJ and Woodward each. It's very low hanging fruit for BOE members.

I understand the arguments re poverty concentration. I wonder if there are credible reasons for this recomendation that make this less low hanging fruit.

Maybe it is better to combine 2 current WJ ES and 2 current DCC ES into a new high school rather than 3:1? Wouldn't that result in more cohesion in the new school? Less likely for anyone to be othered or ignored? Less likely for the former WJ ES communities to dominate?

I know I will be dismissed as wanting Whitman 2.0 or whatever but genuinely asking.

DCC schools don't want to travel that far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Am I reading the chart correctly that WJ’s capacity is dropping from its current 130% to a projected 77%? Do WJ families that feel happy with the downsizing in student body (and diversity) realize how this will drastically reduce WJ course offerings?

There is an elementary school boundary study in the works, right? I would not be surprised to see changes made to middle school assignments when that study happens. There are smaller boundary shifts that happen all the time. For better or worse, this here recommendation is not set in stone.

Yes. I’m very pleased. And any high achieving kid can go to JFK or Wheaton program if they want.

Great recommendation from Taylor.