Maury Capitol Hill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At the end of the day some of us are trying to engage with human behavior as it actually is and make our predictions data-based and realistic. Are you?

Absolutely and data shows that kids who go to a more diverse school (whether racially, socioeconomically, or academically) can benefit ALL the students.

No it does not. Busing (which is basically what this is) is pretty much universally accepted to be a failure by all sides. In contrast, creating diversity through actual community participation - ie creating schools where IB families chose to go - can result in positive impacts. But at the end of the day there are not enough rich white kids to be the medicine to fix DCPS - and that it what fundamentally makes this a PR exercise and not a legitimate attempt for DCPS to solve its problems.

This is not "basically" busing. If they cluster the schools, no one will be bussed. They will go to their IB, neighborhood school unless they choose to lottery out or go private.

Bussing is when you take kids in one neighborhood and put them on an actual bus to send them to a school in another neighborhood. It has nothing to do with this situation at all.

Combining schools like this to redistribute demographics is just busing on a small scale. Obviously.

Busing as a concept requires that the district physically transport kids to another school. If you can walk to the school in question, it's not busing.

When opponents to the cluster plan say stuff like "this is basically busing" in outrage, it becomes harder to argue that there is not a racial component to their objections. Read a freaking book about desegregation.

I mean, this is a plan intended to move kids around to change the racial demographics of the school. It’s the same thing. There’s absolutely NOTHING racist in questioning whether this helps black kids. What does seem oddly racist is the DME’s belief that a majority black school cannot be a good school, and that the only way for it to be “improved” is to add white kids. PS Maury is desegregated.

Well, that was literally the theory in Brown v. Board—not because a majority black school can’t be great, but because those schools are chronically under-resourced, and whites kids and their parents bring resources (and demands for resources that get responses) with them. So take it up with Thurgood Marshall, I guess. And that’s what is happening at Miner, by the way. There are tons of wonderful, dedicated parents there, but the segregation also means it is a higher proportion of parents who don’t have things like regular work hours or any extra help, or paid leave, so it’s just harder to keep tabs on the school and even do things like volunteer and lobby for changes. It’s not just about the money the PTA can bring, it’s a critical mass of watchful and involved parents who—busy as they may be—have the privilege and flexibility to participate in the school.

Why doesn't DCPS respond to calls for better resources from majority black schools? Why has DME not even bothered to meet with Miner parents? Why are DME and DCPS shifting their responsibilities to make Miner a better resourced school to the parents of another school?

[Anonymous]

If you are at a high performing Hill elementary and you are arguiing for the Maury/Miner Cluster, then your kid should have already done the lottery for any of the DCPS schools that have a very high percentage of at-risk kids. If you're only willing to do it IF you can force some of your cohorts at your high performing Hill elementary to come with you, then you are a hypocrite. We better see you there NEXT year. Lottery opens in a few days -- lots of schools to pick from (sadly).

And you better not make an argument about how the commute is too tough....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey all. Billy Lynch here, your local fair housing attorney who specializes in housing and school integration. Thought I’d drop some evidenced-based research into this riveting anonymous discussion. TLDR- integrated schools help all students and do not affect white student performance.

http://school-diversity.org/pdf/DiversityResearchBriefNo10.pdf

Integrationists in this thread: I see you and applaud you.

Bless you, but these people do not care about that. They don't want the yucky poor people diluting their pure, good, rich person school.

We are reading different threads somehow. By far the nastiest comments have been about (presumed) Maury parents.

That’s hilarious (and I’m not the PP).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey all. Billy Lynch here, your local fair housing attorney who specializes in housing and school integration. Thought I’d drop some evidenced-based research into this riveting anonymous discussion. TLDR- integrated schools help all students and do not affect white student performance.

http://school-diversity.org/pdf/DiversityResearchBriefNo10.pdf

Integrationists in this thread: I see you and applaud you.

Bless you, but these people do not care about that. They don't want the yucky poor people diluting their pure, good, rich person school.

We are reading different threads somehow. By far the nastiest comments have been about (presumed) Maury parents.

Saying "wow some of these comments and reactions are very nasty and hurtful to Miner families" is not, in itself, nasty.

I mean, in the last few pages, we had people pointing out that the comment from a Maury parent that combining with Miner would "dilute" Maury's population was a seriously offensive statement, and it's apparent from some of the responses that people aren't even sure why. Like some of the Maury parents on here actually DEFENDED language that sounds like a quote from a white person in Alabama in 1956. And now I'm sure you'll tell me that saying that is nasty. But it's not! Talking about how how all the poor black kids from Miner will "dilute" your school if they merge is nasty. I cannot believe people don't see this.

Thank you. Not only has the language been defended, but repeated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you are at a high performing Hill elementary and you are arguiing for the Maury/Miner Cluster, then your kid should have already done the lottery for any of the DCPS schools that have a very high percentage of at-risk kids. If you're only willing to do it IF you can force some of your cohorts at your high performing Hill elementary to come with you, then you are a hypocrite. We better see you there NEXT year. Lottery opens in a few days -- lots of schools to pick from (sadly).

And you better not make an argument about how the commute is too tough....

Lol, I'm zoned for a school like Miner and we attended for 4 years until we could lottery into one of those "high performing Hill elementaries" you are talking about. My commute is a lot longer than 4 blocks and I have zero complaints about it. And all of that is why I think the temper tantrum Maury parents are throwing on this thread is HILARIOUS. Sorry, I know that's petty of me but we're anonymous here and it's the truth.

I remember having a conversation on here in the last year or so where a Maury parent was claiming superiority over all of us struggling to get our kids into better schools, lecturing us about how we just hadn't had the foresight to move IB for Maury back before all the prices went up and before Maury lost it's Title 1 status, and bragging about how she and her husband had attended PTA meetings at schools around the Hill before purchasing and had known Maury was the right horse to bet on and anyone who didn't do that was too stupid to deserve a quality school.

So yes, I do find these temper tantrums being had on this thread funny. I'll bet you anything the lady from that other thread is among them. And girl, I don't feel sorry for you AT ALL. Good luck with the cluster or the lottery or whatever.

[Anonymous]

We’ll check back in 5 years and we’ll have two terrible school. Mark it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey all. Billy Lynch here, your local fair housing attorney who specializes in housing and school integration. Thought I’d drop some evidenced-based research into this riveting anonymous discussion. TLDR- integrated schools help all students and do not affect white student performance.

http://school-diversity.org/pdf/DiversityResearchBriefNo10.pdf

Integrationists in this thread: I see you and applaud you.

Bless you, but these people do not care about that. They don't want the yucky poor people diluting their pure, good, rich person school.

We are reading different threads somehow. By far the nastiest comments have been about (presumed) Maury parents.

Saying "wow some of these comments and reactions are very nasty and hurtful to Miner families" is not, in itself, nasty.

I mean, in the last few pages, we had people pointing out that the comment from a Maury parent that combining with Miner would "dilute" Maury's population was a seriously offensive statement, and it's apparent from some of the responses that people aren't even sure why. Like some of the Maury parents on here actually DEFENDED language that sounds like a quote from a white person in Alabama in 1956. And now I'm sure you'll tell me that saying that is nasty. But it's not! Talking about how how all the poor black kids from Miner will "dilute" your school if they merge is nasty. I cannot believe people don't see this.

Thank you. Not only has the language been defended, but repeated.

The "diluted" language was inserted from someone saying Maury parents said it and there was a transcript. It has not been verified. It might be true, it might not. But the person who provided the "diluted" quote said it was on a meeting transcript. That was not used by a poster on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey all. Billy Lynch here, your local fair housing attorney who specializes in housing and school integration. Thought I’d drop some evidenced-based research into this riveting anonymous discussion. TLDR- integrated schools help all students and do not affect white student performance.

http://school-diversity.org/pdf/DiversityResearchBriefNo10.pdf

Integrationists in this thread: I see you and applaud you.

Bless you, but these people do not care about that. They don't want the yucky poor people diluting their pure, good, rich person school.

We are reading different threads somehow. By far the nastiest comments have been about (presumed) Maury parents.

Saying "wow some of these comments and reactions are very nasty and hurtful to Miner families" is not, in itself, nasty.

I mean, in the last few pages, we had people pointing out that the comment from a Maury parent that combining with Miner would "dilute" Maury's population was a seriously offensive statement, and it's apparent from some of the responses that people aren't even sure why. Like some of the Maury parents on here actually DEFENDED language that sounds like a quote from a white person in Alabama in 1956. And now I'm sure you'll tell me that saying that is nasty. But it's not! Talking about how how all the poor black kids from Miner will "dilute" your school if they merge is nasty. I cannot believe people don't see this.

I'm PP, and for the record I don't think this comment is nasty. I appreciate you engaging on this. I did think some of the comments that Maury parents (or their comments) were "disgusting" or "repulsive," as well as some of the charges of racism and other forms of discrimination have been -- I guess I'll say intemperate. But I do appreciate that this is an inherently personal and emotional topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s have a meet up tomorrow morning at Lincoln Park and everyone can guess who wrote what a*$hole comments!

I've got some theories, but joke's on all of us when it turns out to have been just one person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People choose Miner for a lot of reasons. They don't want language instruction or they don't want Montessori for whatever reason. Or because they think Two Rivers stinks. Same for SSMA. Or because they want Eliot-Hine rights. Or because they need a self-contained classrooms and Miner's what they're offered.

"I'm choosing Miner because it gives me a path to EH." Said no one, ever, on Earth.

More myopia.

If you lived East of the river, you absolutely would seek out an EH feed. Where do you think all the OOB kids at EH and Eastern come from, friend?

By the way, if you are a Maury parent and this is your attitude about its MS feed, go ahead and leave because of the cluster. You were always going to leave anyway, and you aren't really the asset to the community you think you are.

That's a silly response. The people whom you dismiss are invested in trying to keep their ES on a positive track, and by association, EH on a positive trajectory. If those people pull out you'll have an EH with 60% at risk and 20% special ed. Sure, your kid and every other one in that school will be in a failing environment, but at least you'll feel morally superior. After all that's what counts, right?

Like it or not, UMC families who attend DCPS schools are an asset. Don't take my word for it, ask DME and DCPS. They're about to upend two schools to spread around the very people you dismiss. You don't have to like us, but you darn well sure need us to have a functioning public school system. If that hurts to hear, TFB.

The problem isn’t that you are seen as unneeded. The problem (and I’m not speaking about you personally) is that some of the UMC people look down on the at risk students. One person on that townhall even used the words “dilute our population.” And those comments stand out, even if they aren’t representative of a community as a whole.

+1. Are UMC people really an asset? This thread makes me think otherwise.

This comment and those that ask similar questions are empirically dumb. Schools with all or virtually all low SES do not do well. Look at Miner! If you'd rather feel superior and convince yourself you don't need UMC families (and their tax base!) then you deserve to have terrible schools and bad educational outcomes that perpetuate generational failure and economic segregation.

But the problem is many of the UMC families think they matter more, their kids matter more, and their needs are more important because they pay more. That’s not how this works.

I think what you are seeing is a societal shift. The pendulum is swinging back from the last few years where UMC white folks were told they needed to apologize for existing. Where people screamed "equity" and white UMC folks hid. What I see is families done apologizing for existing. Families who have seen educational outcomes dramatically improve BECAUSE of their investment and engagement. Maury's metrics tell us it is a good school. That isn't in spite of the UMC folks who are sending their kids there, it is because of it. I think (and hope) the day has passed when UMC families had to apologize for existing, where high test scores were associated with racism.

I demand a seat at the table. I matter. The needs of my kids are important and need to be reflected. Why can't UMC folks say those things just as at risk folks can?

You act like UMC families aren’t saying that. Until last week the Miner families didn’t even know the table existed (and honestly the only ones who currently know now are the UMC families at Miner because people at Maury who they’re friends with told them about it). So don’t act like you don’t control the table and own the chairs. Nice try.

Actually, DME owns the table and chairs. Why are you blaming Maury parents for DME's failure to invite Miner parents to the table?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At the end of the day some of us are trying to engage with human behavior as it actually is and make our predictions data-based and realistic. Are you?

Absolutely and data shows that kids who go to a more diverse school (whether racially, socioeconomically, or academically) can benefit ALL the students.

No it does not. Busing (which is basically what this is) is pretty much universally accepted to be a failure by all sides. In contrast, creating diversity through actual community participation - ie creating schools where IB families chose to go - can result in positive impacts. But at the end of the day there are not enough rich white kids to be the medicine to fix DCPS - and that it what fundamentally makes this a PR exercise and not a legitimate attempt for DCPS to solve its problems.

This is not "basically" busing. If they cluster the schools, no one will be bussed. They will go to their IB, neighborhood school unless they choose to lottery out or go private.

Bussing is when you take kids in one neighborhood and put them on an actual bus to send them to a school in another neighborhood. It has nothing to do with this situation at all.

Combining schools like this to redistribute demographics is just busing on a small scale. Obviously.

Busing as a concept requires that the district physically transport kids to another school. If you can walk to the school in question, it's not busing.

When opponents to the cluster plan say stuff like "this is basically busing" in outrage, it becomes harder to argue that there is not a racial component to their objections. Read a freaking book about desegregation.

I mean, this is a plan intended to move kids around to change the racial demographics of the school. It’s the same thing. There’s absolutely NOTHING racist in questioning whether this helps black kids. What does seem oddly racist is the DME’s belief that a majority black school cannot be a good school, and that the only way for it to be “improved” is to add white kids. PS Maury is desegregated.

Well, that was literally the theory in Brown v. Board—not because a majority black school can’t be great, but because those schools are chronically under-resourced, and whites kids and their parents bring resources (and demands for resources that get responses) with them. So take it up with Thurgood Marshall, I guess. And that’s what is happening at Miner, by the way. There are tons of wonderful, dedicated parents there, but the segregation also means it is a higher proportion of parents who don’t have things like regular work hours or any extra help, or paid leave, so it’s just harder to keep tabs on the school and even do things like volunteer and lobby for changes. It’s not just about the money the PTA can bring, it’s a critical mass of watchful and involved parents who—busy as they may be—have the privilege and flexibility to participate in the school.

I understand that challenge. I just also think it's not realistic to expect that Maury parents have the capacity to double their efforts, so I question how much a clustered school would benefit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey all. Billy Lynch here, your local fair housing attorney who specializes in housing and school integration. Thought I’d drop some evidenced-based research into this riveting anonymous discussion. TLDR- integrated schools help all students and do not affect white student performance.

http://school-diversity.org/pdf/DiversityResearchBriefNo10.pdf

Integrationists in this thread: I see you and applaud you.

Bless you, but these people do not care about that. They don't want the yucky poor people diluting their pure, good, rich person school.

We are reading different threads somehow. By far the nastiest comments have been about (presumed) Maury parents.

Saying "wow some of these comments and reactions are very nasty and hurtful to Miner families" is not, in itself, nasty.

I mean, in the last few pages, we had people pointing out that the comment from a Maury parent that combining with Miner would "dilute" Maury's population was a seriously offensive statement, and it's apparent from some of the responses that people aren't even sure why. Like some of the Maury parents on here actually DEFENDED language that sounds like a quote from a white person in Alabama in 1956. And now I'm sure you'll tell me that saying that is nasty. But it's not! Talking about how how all the poor black kids from Miner will "dilute" your school if they merge is nasty. I cannot believe people don't see this.

Thank you. Not only has the language been defended, but repeated.

The "diluted" language was inserted from someone saying Maury parents said it and there was a transcript. It has not been verified. It might be true, it might not. But the person who provided the "diluted" quote said it was on a meeting transcript. That was not used by a poster on DCUM.

Miner parent here who was on the townhall. A person who claimed to be a Maury parent said it. I don’t know if there’s a transcript of the townhall, but it was recorded so go ahead and listen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At the end of the day some of us are trying to engage with human behavior as it actually is and make our predictions data-based and realistic. Are you?

Absolutely and data shows that kids who go to a more diverse school (whether racially, socioeconomically, or academically) can benefit ALL the students.

No it does not. Busing (which is basically what this is) is pretty much universally accepted to be a failure by all sides. In contrast, creating diversity through actual community participation - ie creating schools where IB families chose to go - can result in positive impacts. But at the end of the day there are not enough rich white kids to be the medicine to fix DCPS - and that it what fundamentally makes this a PR exercise and not a legitimate attempt for DCPS to solve its problems.

This is not "basically" busing. If they cluster the schools, no one will be bussed. They will go to their IB, neighborhood school unless they choose to lottery out or go private.

Bussing is when you take kids in one neighborhood and put them on an actual bus to send them to a school in another neighborhood. It has nothing to do with this situation at all.

Combining schools like this to redistribute demographics is just busing on a small scale. Obviously.

Busing as a concept requires that the district physically transport kids to another school. If you can walk to the school in question, it's not busing.

When opponents to the cluster plan say stuff like "this is basically busing" in outrage, it becomes harder to argue that there is not a racial component to their objections. Read a freaking book about desegregation.

I mean, this is a plan intended to move kids around to change the racial demographics of the school. It’s the same thing. There’s absolutely NOTHING racist in questioning whether this helps black kids. What does seem oddly racist is the DME’s belief that a majority black school cannot be a good school, and that the only way for it to be “improved” is to add white kids. PS Maury is desegregated.

Well, that was literally the theory in Brown v. Board—not because a majority black school can’t be great, but because those schools are chronically under-resourced, and whites kids and their parents bring resources (and demands for resources that get responses) with them. So take it up with Thurgood Marshall, I guess. And that’s what is happening at Miner, by the way. There are tons of wonderful, dedicated parents there, but the segregation also means it is a higher proportion of parents who don’t have things like regular work hours or any extra help, or paid leave, so it’s just harder to keep tabs on the school and even do things like volunteer and lobby for changes. It’s not just about the money the PTA can bring, it’s a critical mass of watchful and involved parents who—busy as they may be—have the privilege and flexibility to participate in the school.

I understand that challenge. I just also think it's not realistic to expect that Maury parents have the capacity to double their efforts, so I question how much a clustered school would benefit.

There are already parents at Miner doing this work. And there are IB families who would be willing to give money and time if a cluster emerged. So it would not be all on Maury families to do it at all.

But right now Maury families have a community that is 88% non-at-risk families to pull from, and that's spread across PK3-4th (with 5th grade having a higher percentage of at risk kids). Miner has 35% of families who are not at-risk, and that includes some MC families who are commuting from across the river -- OOB families often have a harder time contributing due to distance.

But a combined school that could capitalize on the efforts at both campuses could do well, without Maury families needing to "redouble" their efforts.

I also just wish some of these people who are so convinced that Miner is a horrible place could just spend time there. There is so much good about Miner. They just have an uphill battle. The fears that many Maury families have expressed do not reflect the reality what is happening at Miner. To you it's just numbers -- you see test scores and demographic numbers and think you know what it's like. You don't. And whether you realize this or not, some of your fears are based in class and racial prejudice. I wish you could see how unnecessary most of those fears are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At the end of the day some of us are trying to engage with human behavior as it actually is and make our predictions data-based and realistic. Are you?

Absolutely and data shows that kids who go to a more diverse school (whether racially, socioeconomically, or academically) can benefit ALL the students.

No it does not. Busing (which is basically what this is) is pretty much universally accepted to be a failure by all sides. In contrast, creating diversity through actual community participation - ie creating schools where IB families chose to go - can result in positive impacts. But at the end of the day there are not enough rich white kids to be the medicine to fix DCPS - and that it what fundamentally makes this a PR exercise and not a legitimate attempt for DCPS to solve its problems.

This is not "basically" busing. If they cluster the schools, no one will be bussed. They will go to their IB, neighborhood school unless they choose to lottery out or go private.

Bussing is when you take kids in one neighborhood and put them on an actual bus to send them to a school in another neighborhood. It has nothing to do with this situation at all.

Combining schools like this to redistribute demographics is just busing on a small scale. Obviously.

Busing as a concept requires that the district physically transport kids to another school. If you can walk to the school in question, it's not busing.

When opponents to the cluster plan say stuff like "this is basically busing" in outrage, it becomes harder to argue that there is not a racial component to their objections. Read a freaking book about desegregation.

I mean, this is a plan intended to move kids around to change the racial demographics of the school. It’s the same thing. There’s absolutely NOTHING racist in questioning whether this helps black kids. What does seem oddly racist is the DME’s belief that a majority black school cannot be a good school, and that the only way for it to be “improved” is to add white kids. PS Maury is desegregated.

Well, that was literally the theory in Brown v. Board—not because a majority black school can’t be great, but because those schools are chronically under-resourced, and whites kids and their parents bring resources (and demands for resources that get responses) with them. So take it up with Thurgood Marshall, I guess. And that’s what is happening at Miner, by the way. There are tons of wonderful, dedicated parents there, but the segregation also means it is a higher proportion of parents who don’t have things like regular work hours or any extra help, or paid leave, so it’s just harder to keep tabs on the school and even do things like volunteer and lobby for changes. It’s not just about the money the PTA can bring, it’s a critical mass of watchful and involved parents who—busy as they may be—have the privilege and flexibility to participate in the school.

I understand that challenge. I just also think it's not realistic to expect that Maury parents have the capacity to double their efforts, so I question how much a clustered school would benefit.

There are already parents at Miner doing this work. And there are IB families who would be willing to give money and time if a cluster emerged. So it would not be all on Maury families to do it at all.

But right now Maury families have a community that is 88% non-at-risk families to pull from, and that's spread across PK3-4th (with 5th grade having a higher percentage of at risk kids). Miner has 35% of families who are not at-risk, and that includes some MC families who are commuting from across the river -- OOB families often have a harder time contributing due to distance.

But a combined school that could capitalize on the efforts at both campuses could do well, without Maury families needing to "redouble" their efforts.

I also just wish some of these people who are so convinced that Miner is a horrible place could just spend time there. There is so much good about Miner. They just have an uphill battle. The fears that many Maury families have expressed do not reflect the reality what is happening at Miner. To you it's just numbers -- you see test scores and demographic numbers and think you know what it's like. You don't. And whether you realize this or not, some of your fears are based in class and racial prejudice. I wish you could see how unnecessary most of those fears are.

I don’t know who you are but I love you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At the end of the day some of us are trying to engage with human behavior as it actually is and make our predictions data-based and realistic. Are you?

Absolutely and data shows that kids who go to a more diverse school (whether racially, socioeconomically, or academically) can benefit ALL the students.

No it does not. Busing (which is basically what this is) is pretty much universally accepted to be a failure by all sides. In contrast, creating diversity through actual community participation - ie creating schools where IB families chose to go - can result in positive impacts. But at the end of the day there are not enough rich white kids to be the medicine to fix DCPS - and that it what fundamentally makes this a PR exercise and not a legitimate attempt for DCPS to solve its problems.

This is not "basically" busing. If they cluster the schools, no one will be bussed. They will go to their IB, neighborhood school unless they choose to lottery out or go private.

Bussing is when you take kids in one neighborhood and put them on an actual bus to send them to a school in another neighborhood. It has nothing to do with this situation at all.

You clearly don’t understand the analogy, and therefore, also must not understand the history.

Busing was used to integrate schools that were experiencing de facto segregation. Literally NOTHING was done to address racially segregated neighborhoods. Bad leaders simply said, hey, if we swap these kids over here for some over there, then the schools no longer *seem* segregated! Except that ended up ruining the communities of both schools, and many families, including a high percentage of MC black families, ended up choosing parochial schools in their own neighborhoods over their public schools. Busing was most certainly a failed experiment, and led to a steady decline in public education as MC and UMC families exited the public schools. A better, long-term strategy would have been to work on policies to improve racial integration in housing.

Here, you have the same lazy approach, minus physical buses. Hey, there is a low number of at-risk kids over here, with high IB attendance, and a large number over there with low IB attendance. Let’s just mix them together so that the average *seems* better.

Get it? This is not a proposal based on equitable principles and goals. It is lazy governance at its finest.

(By the way, there should be a drinking game for every person who mentions equity and has no actual understanding of it or intention of actually solving problems. The race baiters are so manipulative and evil.)