Woodward HS boundary study - BCC, Blair, Einstein, WJ, Kennedy, Northwood, Wheaton, Whitman impacts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Diversity metrics aside, the bottom line for many parents in many of the highest performing MCPS schools is that if after redistricting, they believe:

- There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops

Then some proportion of parents will lose confidence in the school system and put their kids in private. This could potentially snowball as performance metrics continue to decline due to higher performers leaving the system.

It's a challenge for MCPS because there only needs to be a perception that this is true for things to get out of hand.

"There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops"

This is all true is it not? I mean, these are the reasons that pro-busers want busing, to spread some of the poverty around which (in their minds) will lessen these issues at the poorest schools. Except that's not going to happen. Schools start to go downhill at 20% farms. At 40% a school is doomed. So people at a 10% farms school don't want 20% added to their school and they definitely don't want their kid bused to a 40% school.

Last I knew the county's average farms rate was around 35%. You may want to move elsewhere.

Everfarms (which is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries) is 42% in MCPS. And I don't care what the county's average is. As long as my kids' schools are under 10% I'm happy.

Sounds like you'd be happier in private school.

My kids' schools are under 10% so I'm happy. I'd be happier if east county progressives weren't trying to ruin our schools.

So, it’s ok the nanny cares for your kids but her kids cannot go to school with yours as you are too cheap to pay her properly so she’s poor. She’s good enough to raise your kids and you still look down on her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Diversity metrics aside, the bottom line for many parents in many of the highest performing MCPS schools is that if after redistricting, they believe:

- There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops

Then some proportion of parents will lose confidence in the school system and put their kids in private. This could potentially snowball as performance metrics continue to decline due to higher performers leaving the system.

It's a challenge for MCPS because there only needs to be a perception that this is true for things to get out of hand.

"There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops"

This is all true is it not? I mean, these are the reasons that pro-busers want busing, to spread some of the poverty around which (in their minds) will lessen these issues at the poorest schools. Except that's not going to happen. Schools start to go downhill at 20% farms. At 40% a school is doomed. So people at a 10% farms school don't want 20% added to their school and they definitely don't want their kid bused to a 40% school.

Last I knew the county's average farms rate was around 35%. You may want to move elsewhere.

Everfarms (which is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries) is 42% in MCPS. And I don't care what the county's average is. As long as my kids' schools are under 10% I'm happy.

No, it doesn't.

Yes it does. This quote is from the boundary analysis.

Sure, but the boundary analysis was not a boundary study. Boundary studies are how new boundaries are determined. Here is the superintendent's recommendation for Clarksburg, Northwest, and Seneca Valley, in which you can see that FARMS rate, not EverFARMS, was used as one of the components of demographic information.

https://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/SVHS_SupplementA.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like a whole lot of people already have those perceptions now.

If you look at academic performance metrics that MCPS makes available, you can see top schools have still been going strong, even through COVID. These schools are still excellent. If MCPS makes deliberate changes which end up tanking these metrics, they might end up making a more drastic transformation of the educational landscape than they foresaw.

I wouldn't say they're excellent per se, but they have fewer low-income students dragging down their test averages because of the historically redlined boundaries. Even if they were magically more diverse tomorrow, the same kids who are already there would do exactly the same because that's more of a function of the HHI and parental education level.

&nless they bus in enough poor kids to make the school so disruptive that even the high performing kids can't learn anymore....which is why east county progressives want busing.

A select few want busing. We don’t want our kids at your schools which is why we choose to live in the dcc. Dcc has wealthy families with high hhi and educations.

Oh yes, that's exactly what the DCC is known for. Lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Diversity metrics aside, the bottom line for many parents in many of the highest performing MCPS schools is that if after redistricting, they believe:

- There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops

Then some proportion of parents will lose confidence in the school system and put their kids in private. This could potentially snowball as performance metrics continue to decline due to higher performers leaving the system.

It's a challenge for MCPS because there only needs to be a perception that this is true for things to get out of hand.

"There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops"

This is all true is it not? I mean, these are the reasons that pro-busers want busing, to spread some of the poverty around which (in their minds) will lessen these issues at the poorest schools. Except that's not going to happen. Schools start to go downhill at 20% farms. At 40% a school is doomed. So people at a 10% farms school don't want 20% added to their school and they definitely don't want their kid bused to a 40% school.

Last I knew the county's average farms rate was around 35%. You may want to move elsewhere.

Everfarms (which is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries) is 42% in MCPS. And I don't care what the county's average is. As long as my kids' schools are under 10% I'm happy.

Sounds like you'd be happier in private school.

My kids' schools are under 10% so I'm happy. I'd be happier if east county progressives weren't trying to ruin our schools.

So, it’s ok the nanny cares for your kids but her kids cannot go to school with yours as you are too cheap to pay her properly so she’s poor. She’s good enough to raise your kids and you still look down on her.

This is the fantasy that east county progressives are trying to sell. Most families in W schools are middle class (by MoCo standards) and don't have nannies. Actual rich people send their kids to private school. That aside, no one wants poor kids in their schools. That's why east county progressives want busing and no one else does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Diversity metrics aside, the bottom line for many parents in many of the highest performing MCPS schools is that if after redistricting, they believe:

- There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops

Then some proportion of parents will lose confidence in the school system and put their kids in private. This could potentially snowball as performance metrics continue to decline due to higher performers leaving the system.

It's a challenge for MCPS because there only needs to be a perception that this is true for things to get out of hand.

"There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops"

This is all true is it not? I mean, these are the reasons that pro-busers want busing, to spread some of the poverty around which (in their minds) will lessen these issues at the poorest schools. Except that's not going to happen. Schools start to go downhill at 20% farms. At 40% a school is doomed. So people at a 10% farms school don't want 20% added to their school and they definitely don't want their kid bused to a 40% school.

Last I knew the county's average farms rate was around 35%. You may want to move elsewhere.

Everfarms (which is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries) is 42% in MCPS. And I don't care what the county's average is. As long as my kids' schools are under 10% I'm happy.

No, it doesn't.

Yes it does. This quote is from the boundary analysis.

Sure, but the boundary analysis was not a boundary study. Boundary studies are how new boundaries are determined. Here is the superintendent's recommendation for Clarksburg, Northwest, and Seneca Valley, in which you can see that FARMS rate, not EverFARMS, was used as one of the components of demographic information.

https://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/SVHS_SupplementA.pdf

That's true. But but MCPS can use whatever metric it wants when it does a boundary study. The boundary policy doesn't prescribe one or the other. If the pro-busing element really wants to mess things up, we'll see the use of Everfarms in this and the Crown studies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Diversity metrics aside, the bottom line for many parents in many of the highest performing MCPS schools is that if after redistricting, they believe:

- There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops

Then some proportion of parents will lose confidence in the school system and put their kids in private. This could potentially snowball as performance metrics continue to decline due to higher performers leaving the system.

It's a challenge for MCPS because there only needs to be a perception that this is true for things to get out of hand.

"There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops"

This is all true is it not? I mean, these are the reasons that pro-busers want busing, to spread some of the poverty around which (in their minds) will lessen these issues at the poorest schools. Except that's not going to happen. Schools start to go downhill at 20% farms. At 40% a school is doomed. So people at a 10% farms school don't want 20% added to their school and they definitely don't want their kid bused to a 40% school.

Last I knew the county's average farms rate was around 35%. You may want to move elsewhere.

Everfarms (which is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries) is 42% in MCPS. And I don't care what the county's average is. As long as my kids' schools are under 10% I'm happy.

Sounds like you'd be happier in private school.

My kids' schools are under 10% so I'm happy. I'd be happier if east county progressives weren't trying to ruin our schools.

So, it’s ok the nanny cares for your kids but her kids cannot go to school with yours as you are too cheap to pay her properly so she’s poor. She’s good enough to raise your kids and you still look down on her.

This is the fantasy that east county progressives are trying to sell. Most families in W schools are middle class (by MoCo standards) and don't have nannies. Actual rich people send their kids to private school. That aside, no one wants poor kids in their schools. That's why east county progressives want busing and no one else does.

What a POS you are. Lots of us want a mix of kids in our schools, including "poor kids." It makes it more likely for them to grow up to be decent, caring human beings unlike yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Diversity metrics aside, the bottom line for many parents in many of the highest performing MCPS schools is that if after redistricting, they believe:

- There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops

Then some proportion of parents will lose confidence in the school system and put their kids in private. This could potentially snowball as performance metrics continue to decline due to higher performers leaving the system.

It's a challenge for MCPS because there only needs to be a perception that this is true for things to get out of hand.

"There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops"

This is all true is it not? I mean, these are the reasons that pro-busers want busing, to spread some of the poverty around which (in their minds) will lessen these issues at the poorest schools. Except that's not going to happen. Schools start to go downhill at 20% farms. At 40% a school is doomed. So people at a 10% farms school don't want 20% added to their school and they definitely don't want their kid bused to a 40% school.

Last I knew the county's average farms rate was around 35%. You may want to move elsewhere.

Everfarms (which is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries) is 42% in MCPS. And I don't care what the county's average is. As long as my kids' schools are under 10% I'm happy.

No, it doesn't.

Yes it does. This quote is from the boundary analysis.

Sure, but the boundary analysis was not a boundary study. Boundary studies are how new boundaries are determined. Here is the superintendent's recommendation for Clarksburg, Northwest, and Seneca Valley, in which you can see that FARMS rate, not EverFARMS, was used as one of the components of demographic information.

https://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/SVHS_SupplementA.pdf

That's true. But but MCPS can use whatever metric it wants when it does a boundary study. The boundary policy doesn't prescribe one or the other. If the pro-busing element really wants to mess things up, we'll see the use of Everfarms in this and the Crown studies.

Keep moving those goalposts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Diversity metrics aside, the bottom line for many parents in many of the highest performing MCPS schools is that if after redistricting, they believe:

- There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops

Then some proportion of parents will lose confidence in the school system and put their kids in private. This could potentially snowball as performance metrics continue to decline due to higher performers leaving the system.

It's a challenge for MCPS because there only needs to be a perception that this is true for things to get out of hand.

"There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops"

This is all true is it not? I mean, these are the reasons that pro-busers want busing, to spread some of the poverty around which (in their minds) will lessen these issues at the poorest schools. Except that's not going to happen. Schools start to go downhill at 20% farms. At 40% a school is doomed. So people at a 10% farms school don't want 20% added to their school and they definitely don't want their kid bused to a 40% school.

Last I knew the county's average farms rate was around 35%. You may want to move elsewhere.

Everfarms (which is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries) is 42% in MCPS. And I don't care what the county's average is. As long as my kids' schools are under 10% I'm happy.

No, it doesn't.

Yes it does. This quote is from the boundary analysis.

Sure, but the boundary analysis was not a boundary study. Boundary studies are how new boundaries are determined. Here is the superintendent's recommendation for Clarksburg, Northwest, and Seneca Valley, in which you can see that FARMS rate, not EverFARMS, was used as one of the components of demographic information.

https://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/SVHS_SupplementA.pdf

That's true. But but MCPS can use whatever metric it wants when it does a boundary study. The boundary policy doesn't prescribe one or the other. If the pro-busing element really wants to mess things up, we'll see the use of Everfarms in this and the Crown studies.

Keep moving those goalposts.

Did the boundary analysis use Farms or Everfarms? Does the boundary policy say Farms, Everfarms, or does it not say?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Diversity metrics aside, the bottom line for many parents in many of the highest performing MCPS schools is that if after redistricting, they believe:

- There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops

Then some proportion of parents will lose confidence in the school system and put their kids in private. This could potentially snowball as performance metrics continue to decline due to higher performers leaving the system.

It's a challenge for MCPS because there only needs to be a perception that this is true for things to get out of hand.

"There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops"

This is all true is it not? I mean, these are the reasons that pro-busers want busing, to spread some of the poverty around which (in their minds) will lessen these issues at the poorest schools. Except that's not going to happen. Schools start to go downhill at 20% farms. At 40% a school is doomed. So people at a 10% farms school don't want 20% added to their school and they definitely don't want their kid bused to a 40% school.

Last I knew the county's average farms rate was around 35%. You may want to move elsewhere.

Everfarms (which is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries) is 42% in MCPS. And I don't care what the county's average is. As long as my kids' schools are under 10% I'm happy.

No, it doesn't.

Yes it does. This quote is from the boundary analysis.

Sure, but the boundary analysis was not a boundary study. Boundary studies are how new boundaries are determined. Here is the superintendent's recommendation for Clarksburg, Northwest, and Seneca Valley, in which you can see that FARMS rate, not EverFARMS, was used as one of the components of demographic information.

https://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/SVHS_SupplementA.pdf

That's true. But but MCPS can use whatever metric it wants when it does a boundary study. The boundary policy doesn't prescribe one or the other. If the pro-busing element really wants to mess things up, we'll see the use of Everfarms in this and the Crown studies.

Keep moving those goalposts.

Did the boundary analysis use Farms or Everfarms? Does the boundary policy say Farms, Everfarms, or does it not say?

You: EverFARMS is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries.
Me: No, it uses FARMS, in addition to other measures [links to proof].
You: Well, it could use EverFARMS if it wanted to...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Diversity metrics aside, the bottom line for many parents in many of the highest performing MCPS schools is that if after redistricting, they believe:

- There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops

Then some proportion of parents will lose confidence in the school system and put their kids in private. This could potentially snowball as performance metrics continue to decline due to higher performers leaving the system.

It's a challenge for MCPS because there only needs to be a perception that this is true for things to get out of hand.

"There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops"

This is all true is it not? I mean, these are the reasons that pro-busers want busing, to spread some of the poverty around which (in their minds) will lessen these issues at the poorest schools. Except that's not going to happen. Schools start to go downhill at 20% farms. At 40% a school is doomed. So people at a 10% farms school don't want 20% added to their school and they definitely don't want their kid bused to a 40% school.

Last I knew the county's average farms rate was around 35%. You may want to move elsewhere.

Everfarms (which is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries) is 42% in MCPS. And I don't care what the county's average is. As long as my kids' schools are under 10% I'm happy.

Sounds like you'd be happier in private school.

My kids' schools are under 10% so I'm happy. I'd be happier if east county progressives weren't trying to ruin our schools.

So, it’s ok the nanny cares for your kids but her kids cannot go to school with yours as you are too cheap to pay her properly so she’s poor. She’s good enough to raise your kids and you still look down on her.

This is the fantasy that east county progressives are trying to sell. Most families in W schools are middle class (by MoCo standards) and don't have nannies. Actual rich people send their kids to private school. That aside, no one wants poor kids in their schools. That's why east county progressives want busing and no one else does.

Middle class families are not living in 800-1 million dollar plus homes. Middle class earn around $80-120-140k max, not 250-800k or more. Those are rich people and you can afford to send your kids to private on that salary. It’s all about lifestyle choices.

We live in a very mixed income community and schools and have no issue with it. We purposely avoided the w schools. We could afford more but don’t need to live in your bubble.

You don’t want your nanny or maids children with yours.

Kids are not poor. Most kids have no income. Parents may make far less than you but that is your fault as you are too stingy to pay them a good wage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Diversity metrics aside, the bottom line for many parents in many of the highest performing MCPS schools is that if after redistricting, they believe:

- There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops

Then some proportion of parents will lose confidence in the school system and put their kids in private. This could potentially snowball as performance metrics continue to decline due to higher performers leaving the system.

It's a challenge for MCPS because there only needs to be a perception that this is true for things to get out of hand.

"There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops"

This is all true is it not? I mean, these are the reasons that pro-busers want busing, to spread some of the poverty around which (in their minds) will lessen these issues at the poorest schools. Except that's not going to happen. Schools start to go downhill at 20% farms. At 40% a school is doomed. So people at a 10% farms school don't want 20% added to their school and they definitely don't want their kid bused to a 40% school.

Last I knew the county's average farms rate was around 35%. You may want to move elsewhere.

Everfarms (which is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries) is 42% in MCPS. And I don't care what the county's average is. As long as my kids' schools are under 10% I'm happy.

Sounds like you'd be happier in private school.

My kids' schools are under 10% so I'm happy. I'd be happier if east county progressives weren't trying to ruin our schools.

So, it’s ok the nanny cares for your kids but her kids cannot go to school with yours as you are too cheap to pay her properly so she’s poor. She’s good enough to raise your kids and you still look down on her.

This is the fantasy that east county progressives are trying to sell. Most families in W schools are middle class (by MoCo standards) and don't have nannies. Actual rich people send their kids to private school. That aside, no one wants poor kids in their schools. That's why east county progressives want busing and no one else does.

Middle class families are not living in 800-1 million dollar plus homes. Middle class earn around $80-120-140k max, not 250-800k or more. Those are rich people and you can afford to send your kids to private on that salary. It’s all about lifestyle choices.

We live in a very mixed income community and schools and have no issue with it. We purposely avoided the w schools. We could afford more but don’t need to live in your bubble.

You don’t want your nanny or maids children with yours.

Kids are not poor. Most kids have no income. Parents may make far less than you but that is your fault as you are too stingy to pay them a good wage.

Keep selling that fantasy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Diversity metrics aside, the bottom line for many parents in many of the highest performing MCPS schools is that if after redistricting, they believe:

- There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops

Then some proportion of parents will lose confidence in the school system and put their kids in private. This could potentially snowball as performance metrics continue to decline due to higher performers leaving the system.

It's a challenge for MCPS because there only needs to be a perception that this is true for things to get out of hand.

"There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops"

This is all true is it not? I mean, these are the reasons that pro-busers want busing, to spread some of the poverty around which (in their minds) will lessen these issues at the poorest schools. Except that's not going to happen. Schools start to go downhill at 20% farms. At 40% a school is doomed. So people at a 10% farms school don't want 20% added to their school and they definitely don't want their kid bused to a 40% school.

Last I knew the county's average farms rate was around 35%. You may want to move elsewhere.

Everfarms (which is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries) is 42% in MCPS. And I don't care what the county's average is. As long as my kids' schools are under 10% I'm happy.

Sounds like you'd be happier in private school.

My kids' schools are under 10% so I'm happy. I'd be happier if east county progressives weren't trying to ruin our schools.

So, it’s ok the nanny cares for your kids but her kids cannot go to school with yours as you are too cheap to pay her properly so she’s poor. She’s good enough to raise your kids and you still look down on her.

This is the fantasy that east county progressives are trying to sell. Most families in W schools are middle class (by MoCo standards) and don't have nannies. Actual rich people send their kids to private school. That aside, no one wants poor kids in their schools. That's why east county progressives want busing and no one else does.

Middle class families are not living in 800-1 million dollar plus homes. Middle class earn around $80-120-140k max, not 250-800k or more. Those are rich people and you can afford to send your kids to private on that salary. It’s all about lifestyle choices.

We live in a very mixed income community and schools and have no issue with it. We purposely avoided the w schools. We could afford more but don’t need to live in your bubble.

You don’t want your nanny or maids children with yours.

Kids are not poor. Most kids have no income. Parents may make far less than you but that is your fault as you are too stingy to pay them a good wage.

It's clear they think poverty is contagious. Yes, lower-income students would reduce their school's test average but it would have no impact on how their kids do. The pro-segregation posters are nuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Diversity metrics aside, the bottom line for many parents in many of the highest performing MCPS schools is that if after redistricting, they believe:

- There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops

Then some proportion of parents will lose confidence in the school system and put their kids in private. This could potentially snowball as performance metrics continue to decline due to higher performers leaving the system.

It's a challenge for MCPS because there only needs to be a perception that this is true for things to get out of hand.

"There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops"

This is all true is it not? I mean, these are the reasons that pro-busers want busing, to spread some of the poverty around which (in their minds) will lessen these issues at the poorest schools. Except that's not going to happen. Schools start to go downhill at 20% farms. At 40% a school is doomed. So people at a 10% farms school don't want 20% added to their school and they definitely don't want their kid bused to a 40% school.

Last I knew the county's average farms rate was around 35%. You may want to move elsewhere.

Everfarms (which is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries) is 42% in MCPS. And I don't care what the county's average is. As long as my kids' schools are under 10% I'm happy.

Sounds like you'd be happier in private school.

My kids' schools are under 10% so I'm happy. I'd be happier if east county progressives weren't trying to ruin our schools.

So, it’s ok the nanny cares for your kids but her kids cannot go to school with yours as you are too cheap to pay her properly so she’s poor. She’s good enough to raise your kids and you still look down on her.

This is the fantasy that east county progressives are trying to sell. Most families in W schools are middle class (by MoCo standards) and don't have nannies. Actual rich people send their kids to private school. That aside, no one wants poor kids in their schools. That's why east county progressives want busing and no one else does.

Middle class families are not living in 800-1 million dollar plus homes. Middle class earn around $80-120-140k max, not 250-800k or more. Those are rich people and you can afford to send your kids to private on that salary. It’s all about lifestyle choices.

We live in a very mixed income community and schools and have no issue with it. We purposely avoided the w schools. We could afford more but don’t need to live in your bubble.

You don’t want your nanny or maids children with yours.

Kids are not poor. Most kids have no income. Parents may make far less than you but that is your fault as you are too stingy to pay them a good wage.

It's clear they think poverty is contagious. Yes, lower-income students would reduce their school's test average but it would have no impact on how their kids do. The pro-segregation posters are nuts.

"pro-segregation"? The Troll is strong in this one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Diversity metrics aside, the bottom line for many parents in many of the highest performing MCPS schools is that if after redistricting, they believe:

- There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops

Then some proportion of parents will lose confidence in the school system and put their kids in private. This could potentially snowball as performance metrics continue to decline due to higher performers leaving the system.

It's a challenge for MCPS because there only needs to be a perception that this is true for things to get out of hand.

"There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops"

This is all true is it not? I mean, these are the reasons that pro-busers want busing, to spread some of the poverty around which (in their minds) will lessen these issues at the poorest schools. Except that's not going to happen. Schools start to go downhill at 20% farms. At 40% a school is doomed. So people at a 10% farms school don't want 20% added to their school and they definitely don't want their kid bused to a 40% school.

Last I knew the county's average farms rate was around 35%. You may want to move elsewhere.

Everfarms (which is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries) is 42% in MCPS. And I don't care what the county's average is. As long as my kids' schools are under 10% I'm happy.

Sounds like you'd be happier in private school.

My kids' schools are under 10% so I'm happy. I'd be happier if east county progressives weren't trying to ruin our schools.

So, it’s ok the nanny cares for your kids but her kids cannot go to school with yours as you are too cheap to pay her properly so she’s poor. She’s good enough to raise your kids and you still look down on her.

This is the fantasy that east county progressives are trying to sell. Most families in W schools are middle class (by MoCo standards) and don't have nannies. Actual rich people send their kids to private school. That aside, no one wants poor kids in their schools. That's why east county progressives want busing and no one else does.

Middle class families are not living in 800-1 million dollar plus homes. Middle class earn around $80-120-140k max, not 250-800k or more. Those are rich people and you can afford to send your kids to private on that salary. It’s all about lifestyle choices.

We live in a very mixed income community and schools and have no issue with it. We purposely avoided the w schools. We could afford more but don’t need to live in your bubble.

You don’t want your nanny or maids children with yours.

Kids are not poor. Most kids have no income. Parents may make far less than you but that is your fault as you are too stingy to pay them a good wage.

Keep selling that fantasy.

We've done it on far less than you think, sending our kid to private when they needed it. It's amazing how you can budget on a higher income and be just fine. The difference is our housing costs. If you choose an expensive house, you will not have the financial freedom for other choices/needs/wants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Diversity metrics aside, the bottom line for many parents in many of the highest performing MCPS schools is that if after redistricting, they believe:

- There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops

Then some proportion of parents will lose confidence in the school system and put their kids in private. This could potentially snowball as performance metrics continue to decline due to higher performers leaving the system.

It's a challenge for MCPS because there only needs to be a perception that this is true for things to get out of hand.

"There are significantly more classroom disruptions than there were pre-redistricting
- Students feel less safe than they did pre-redistricting
- Academic performance drops"

This is all true is it not? I mean, these are the reasons that pro-busers want busing, to spread some of the poverty around which (in their minds) will lessen these issues at the poorest schools. Except that's not going to happen. Schools start to go downhill at 20% farms. At 40% a school is doomed. So people at a 10% farms school don't want 20% added to their school and they definitely don't want their kid bused to a 40% school.

Last I knew the county's average farms rate was around 35%. You may want to move elsewhere.

Everfarms (which is what MCPS uses to determine boundaries) is 42% in MCPS. And I don't care what the county's average is. As long as my kids' schools are under 10% I'm happy.

Sounds like you'd be happier in private school.

My kids' schools are under 10% so I'm happy. I'd be happier if east county progressives weren't trying to ruin our schools.

So, it’s ok the nanny cares for your kids but her kids cannot go to school with yours as you are too cheap to pay her properly so she’s poor. She’s good enough to raise your kids and you still look down on her.

This is the fantasy that east county progressives are trying to sell. Most families in W schools are middle class (by MoCo standards) and don't have nannies. Actual rich people send their kids to private school. That aside, no one wants poor kids in their schools. That's why east county progressives want busing and no one else does.

Middle class families are not living in 800-1 million dollar plus homes. Middle class earn around $80-120-140k max, not 250-800k or more. Those are rich people and you can afford to send your kids to private on that salary. It’s all about lifestyle choices.

We live in a very mixed income community and schools and have no issue with it. We purposely avoided the w schools. We could afford more but don’t need to live in your bubble.

You don’t want your nanny or maids children with yours.

Kids are not poor. Most kids have no income. Parents may make far less than you but that is your fault as you are too stingy to pay them a good wage.

It's clear they think poverty is contagious. Yes, lower-income students would reduce their school's test average but it would have no impact on how their kids do. The pro-segregation posters are nuts.

Kids of lower income parents can also have high test scores. I'm fine with segregation. I don't want my kids at those schools nor do I want my kids bussed when we purposely avoided the W schools. Let them self-segregate. It's better anyway as their kids will not be kind to the lower income kids so it's best to keep the kids separate. Kids b