Initial boundary options for Woodward study area are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there discussion to end the consortiums? Seems like such a waste of busses.

Sort of, but they may end up creating six regions across the county instead, so still a lot of bussing.

The wealthier schools have everything the kids need. The reason for the DCC was that these schools don't have nearly the same things and it gives kids opportunities to go to a school where they might have it.

This is categorically false. Look at the per pupil funding downcounty. It is MUCH higher than anywhere else.

Do your schools have multiple bands, marching band, gymnastics and crew, stem clubs, ap classes? Then you have a lot more.

I want to echo the PP. The schools receiving the most per pupil funding at not the W schools. I am curious why you think any programs or activities are provided by MCPS. If someone "has more" its because the kids advocated for it do the work run a club, or sport, activity or advocacy group. It's great leadership and something any student can take on. I heard the recent SMOB candidates talking about the school booster clubs in some schools have like they are part of the problem (???). My school's booster club spends an inordinate amount of time trying to raise funds for basic school property maintenance. Things I would think MCPS would cover. It's rather sad.

Having more per pupil funding does not equal having higher (or even similar) levels of educational services. The funding would have to change to be dramatically more than it currently is in the less well-off areas to effect that. And that dissimilarity in service levels is that which needs to be addressed, whether it be utilization rates or classes available.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there discussion to end the consortiums? Seems like such a waste of busses.

Sort of, but they may end up creating six regions across the county instead, so still a lot of bussing.

The wealthier schools have everything the kids need. The reason for the DCC was that these schools don't have nearly the same things and it gives kids opportunities to go to a school where they might have it.

This is categorically false. Look at the per pupil funding downcounty. It is MUCH higher than anywhere else.

Do your schools have multiple bands, marching band, gymnastics and crew, stem clubs, ap classes? Then you have a lot more.

I want to echo the PP. The schools receiving the most per pupil funding at not the W schools. I am curious why you think any programs or activities are provided by MCPS. If someone "has more" its because the kids advocated for it do the work run a club, or sport, activity or advocacy group. It's great leadership and something any student can take on. I heard the recent SMOB candidates talking about the school booster clubs in some schools have like they are part of the problem (???). My school's booster club spends an inordinate amount of time trying to raise funds for basic school property maintenance. Things I would think MCPS would cover. It's rather sad.

Having more per pupil funding does not equal having higher (or even similar) levels of educational services. The funding would have to change to be dramatically more than it currently is in the less well-off areas to effect that. And that dissimilarity in service levels is that which needs to be addressed, whether it be utilization rates or classes available.

What in the what?
This statements makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frankly, time to walk between building can conceivably be helped at the school level rather than shipping everyone around the county.

What are you suggesting? Hoverboards in the hallways?

Make the time between bells longer? Have leeway for students with long walks? Easier than hoverboards.

Then they lose out on academic time. Are you paying for the hoverboards?

PP doesn't care. They know know the new capital project will never be approved, but that's fine because it's not their kid in an overcrowded school while classrooms at other schools sit empty. Gotta love MoCo community spirit.

The only real solution is to build another school, down county under Blair as that's where it is needed. But, really, MCPS has a spending problem and their priorities are wacked so it will never happen. Many don't realize how much is lacking in the DCC schools outside Blair and Wheaton which make them popular. They should not allow any students outside the DCC into Blair or Wheaton. That would be a good start.

Decade-long proposition, there, to build another school. And one that was given cursory/unimaginative review close to a decade back so that they could say they considered it before discarding it in favor of building Woodward.

Too late, now, to be a solution for this boundary study, but probably not a bad idea for the future, what with the County Council and Montgomery Planning pushing for more and more density. There's some magical thinking going on there that because there currently is extra capacity in MCPS overall, relief of DCC overcrowding is a trivial matter.

Woodward is desperately needed for mid county but downcounty needs another school too.

Woodward reopening and the concurrent boundary shifts incorporating DCC populations being contemplated will have to do until, if ever, that other downcounty school is built.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many wealthy school PTSA’s have foundations as well, funded by family contributions. Schools with less wealth certainly don’t have those and barely have PTSA’s. Some high schools have long-standing booster clubs with a lot of support. Others do not.

Yes the PTA variability is wild to me and I'm sure I don't even know the half of it. We were at a Title I elementary school and the PTA was very small, very low budget. We moved and are at a nearby ES (still downcounty) and the PTA is huge with a lot of participation and great fundraising. Relatedly, I'm still sorry this boundary study did not include elementary schools.

Most PTAs in West County do not raise that much money. Yes, volunteerism is high. It’s easy to walk down the street to school and meet your neighbors. Is that what you want to take away? That is evil.

My kid attended the magnet program at Blair. I did not volunteer as it was too far away. At my childrens’ elementary school I was on the board of the PTA for 10 years. It was convenient to go to school events.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there discussion to end the consortiums? Seems like such a waste of busses.

Sort of, but they may end up creating six regions across the county instead, so still a lot of bussing.

The wealthier schools have everything the kids need. The reason for the DCC was that these schools don't have nearly the same things and it gives kids opportunities to go to a school where they might have it.

This is categorically false. Look at the per pupil funding downcounty. It is MUCH higher than anywhere else.

Do your schools have multiple bands, marching band, gymnastics and crew, stem clubs, ap classes? Then you have a lot more.

I want to echo the PP. The schools receiving the most per pupil funding at not the W schools. I am curious why you think any programs or activities are provided by MCPS. If someone "has more" its because the kids advocated for it do the work run a club, or sport, activity or advocacy group. It's great leadership and something any student can take on. I heard the recent SMOB candidates talking about the school booster clubs in some schools have like they are part of the problem (???). My school's booster club spends an inordinate amount of time trying to raise funds for basic school property maintenance. Things I would think MCPS would cover. It's rather sad.

Having more per pupil funding does not equal having higher (or even similar) levels of educational services. The funding would have to change to be dramatically more than it currently is in the less well-off areas to effect that. And that dissimilarity in service levels is that which needs to be addressed, whether it be utilization rates or classes available.

What in the what?
This statements makes no sense.

I think it makes sense. This PP is just realizing that more money doesnt fix the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there discussion to end the consortiums? Seems like such a waste of busses.

Sort of, but they may end up creating six regions across the county instead, so still a lot of bussing.

The wealthier schools have everything the kids need. The reason for the DCC was that these schools don't have nearly the same things and it gives kids opportunities to go to a school where they might have it.

This is categorically false. Look at the per pupil funding downcounty. It is MUCH higher than anywhere else.

Do your schools have multiple bands, marching band, gymnastics and crew, stem clubs, ap classes? Then you have a lot more.

I want to echo the PP. The schools receiving the most per pupil funding at not the W schools. I am curious why you think any programs or activities are provided by MCPS. If someone "has more" its because the kids advocated for it do the work run a club, or sport, activity or advocacy group. It's great leadership and something any student can take on. I heard the recent SMOB candidates talking about the school booster clubs in some schools have like they are part of the problem (???). My school's booster club spends an inordinate amount of time trying to raise funds for basic school property maintenance. Things I would think MCPS would cover. It's rather sad.

Having more per pupil funding does not equal having higher (or even similar) levels of educational services. The funding would have to change to be dramatically more than it currently is in the less well-off areas to effect that. And that dissimilarity in service levels is that which needs to be addressed, whether it be utilization rates or classes available.

It goes to the remedial classes to catch kids up as their elementary schools failed them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there discussion to end the consortiums? Seems like such a waste of busses.

Sort of, but they may end up creating six regions across the county instead, so still a lot of bussing.

The wealthier schools have everything the kids need. The reason for the DCC was that these schools don't have nearly the same things and it gives kids opportunities to go to a school where they might have it.

This is categorically false. Look at the per pupil funding downcounty. It is MUCH higher than anywhere else.

Do your schools have multiple bands, marching band, gymnastics and crew, stem clubs, ap classes? Then you have a lot more.

I want to echo the PP. The schools receiving the most per pupil funding at not the W schools. I am curious why you think any programs or activities are provided by MCPS. If someone "has more" its because the kids advocated for it do the work run a club, or sport, activity or advocacy group. It's great leadership and something any student can take on. I heard the recent SMOB candidates talking about the school booster clubs in some schools have like they are part of the problem (???). My school's booster club spends an inordinate amount of time trying to raise funds for basic school property maintenance. Things I would think MCPS would cover. It's rather sad.

Having more per pupil funding does not equal having higher (or even similar) levels of educational services. The funding would have to change to be dramatically more than it currently is in the less well-off areas to effect that. And that dissimilarity in service levels is that which needs to be addressed, whether it be utilization rates or classes available.

What in the what?
This statements makes no sense.

I think it makes sense. This PP is just realizing that more money doesnt fix the problem.

More money can help if the allocations go toward the needs and not just to some populations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This foolish person thinks the real world is fair. Lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just to bring in some history, years ago WJ families were asked by MCPS survey whether they would like to stay together and build huge addition on WJ or reopen Woodward to accommodate the growing number of students, while likely taking in some DCC schools.

Overwhelmingly, WJ parents voted to reopen Woodward. WJ parents and students went to County Council meetings all decked out in Green to show support for funding for Woodward. We’ve filled out I don’t know how many surveys about Woodward.

Now it looks like MCPS may renege on that and send WJ families from Farmland, Garrett Park and KP to other parts of the county. That’s half of WJ.

No good deed shall go unpunished. Bait and switch.

Wow, this is just...wow. The entitlement in this post is staggering. WJ families are not entitled to anything more than other MCPS families. Wow.

What you may view as "entitlement", others may view as "advocacy" for their children and community.

Kids don't deserve extra advantages based on how skilled their parents are at advocacy. (And honestly they generally already get advantages based on their parents' advocacy at an individual level... they definitely don't deserve the double benefit of getting better school assignments due to their parents' better advocacy. Triple benefit, honestly, because likely these families have a lot of other socioeconomic advantages over other kids to start with...)

I think you are missing the point. When asked, WJ families overwhelmingly voted in surveys and advocated for reopening Woodward and expanding the boundary of Woodward to include DCC students versus just building WJ big enough to actually house the current WJ student body.

They advocated for Woodward as a solution to overcrowding in WJ and DCC, along with expansion of Northwood.

WJ PTAs testified for this at the BOE. Most other high school cluster PTAs also advocate for things that they want. It really is ok. And it is ok to have feelings when things don’t work out the way you want

But the idea they liked was to relieve DCC overcrowding indirectly through a criteria-/application-based magnet program, only having to deal with a few select kids from the hoi polloi motivated enough to get into the magnet. Relocating Blair SMCS was the dream.

Can I be on Team Hoi Polloi? Why'd MCPS move Blair from Takoma if a school is needed in Takoma now? Probably because MCPS sucks at projecting population growth. Whatever you hear, I expect we will be moving to costly boundary studies every few years.

MCPS also seems to like asking for feedback, but then ignoring that feedback (the 2019 boundary effort, covid lockdowns, LGBT books, renaming schools like Macgruder). When it doesnt like the feedback, it does whatever it wants.

Covid was not a lockdown. You could leave your house. That was the only thing they did right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there discussion to end the consortiums? Seems like such a waste of busses.

Sort of, but they may end up creating six regions across the county instead, so still a lot of bussing.

The wealthier schools have everything the kids need. The reason for the DCC was that these schools don't have nearly the same things and it gives kids opportunities to go to a school where they might have it.

This is categorically false. Look at the per pupil funding downcounty. It is MUCH higher than anywhere else.

Do your schools have multiple bands, marching band, gymnastics and crew, stem clubs, ap classes? Then you have a lot more.

I want to echo the PP. The schools receiving the most per pupil funding at not the W schools. I am curious why you think any programs or activities are provided by MCPS. If someone "has more" its because the kids advocated for it do the work run a club, or sport, activity or advocacy group. It's great leadership and something any student can take on. I heard the recent SMOB candidates talking about the school booster clubs in some schools have like they are part of the problem (???). My school's booster club spends an inordinate amount of time trying to raise funds for basic school property maintenance. Things I would think MCPS would cover. It's rather sad.

Having more per pupil funding does not equal having higher (or even similar) levels of educational services. The funding would have to change to be dramatically more than it currently is in the less well-off areas to effect that. And that dissimilarity in service levels is that which needs to be addressed, whether it be utilization rates or classes available.

It goes to the remedial classes to catch kids up as their elementary schools failed them.

Their overall educational circumstance, not the ES, at least by itself. Lots of FARMS/EML new to the county/country? More that need supports that might be seen as remedial to a proper ES education by those on the outside, but have more to do with that circumstance.

That current differential funding goes to try to address that need, but does so only in part. In not completely covering it, those classmates not demonstrating that need suffer disservice, as teacher attention and other resources at the school are disproportionately focused on the more needy population

Funding differentials would have to be increased such that a student without such needs would expect to have roughly similar educational experiences for themselves whether at a school with large numbers of students in need or at one with few to none. This would not be expected to result in equal average educational outcomes from school to school, due to the differences in conditions of the overall populations. It would, however, be expected to result, on average, to similar educational outcomes across schools for the populations of similar condition at each.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there discussion to end the consortiums? Seems like such a waste of busses.

Sort of, but they may end up creating six regions across the county instead, so still a lot of bussing.

The wealthier schools have everything the kids need. The reason for the DCC was that these schools don't have nearly the same things and it gives kids opportunities to go to a school where they might have it.

This is categorically false. Look at the per pupil funding downcounty. It is MUCH higher than anywhere else.

Do your schools have multiple bands, marching band, gymnastics and crew, stem clubs, ap classes? Then you have a lot more.

I want to echo the PP. The schools receiving the most per pupil funding at not the W schools. I am curious why you think any programs or activities are provided by MCPS. If someone "has more" its because the kids advocated for it do the work run a club, or sport, activity or advocacy group. It's great leadership and something any student can take on. I heard the recent SMOB candidates talking about the school booster clubs in some schools have like they are part of the problem (???). My school's booster club spends an inordinate amount of time trying to raise funds for basic school property maintenance. Things I would think MCPS would cover. It's rather sad.

Having more per pupil funding does not equal having higher (or even similar) levels of educational services. The funding would have to change to be dramatically more than it currently is in the less well-off areas to effect that. And that dissimilarity in service levels is that which needs to be addressed, whether it be utilization rates or classes available.

It goes to the remedial classes to catch kids up as their elementary schools failed them.

Their overall educational circumstance, not the ES, at least by itself. Lots of FARMS/EML new to the county/country? More that need supports that might be seen as remedial to a proper ES education by those on the outside, but have more to do with that circumstance.

That current differential funding goes to try to address that need, but does so only in part. In not completely covering it, those classmates not demonstrating that need suffer disservice, as teacher attention and other resources at the school are disproportionately focused on the more needy population

Funding differentials would have to be increased such that a student without such needs would expect to have roughly similar educational experiences for themselves whether at a school with large numbers of students in need or at one with few to none. This would not be expected to result in equal average educational outcomes from school to school, due to the differences in conditions of the overall populations. It would, however, be expected to result, on average, to similar educational outcomes across schools for the populations of similar condition at each.

New immigrants not included but many of these kids have been in mcps and they failed them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This foolish person thinks the real world is fair. Lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just to bring in some history, years ago WJ families were asked by MCPS survey whether they would like to stay together and build huge addition on WJ or reopen Woodward to accommodate the growing number of students, while likely taking in some DCC schools.

Overwhelmingly, WJ parents voted to reopen Woodward. WJ parents and students went to County Council meetings all decked out in Green to show support for funding for Woodward. We’ve filled out I don’t know how many surveys about Woodward.

Now it looks like MCPS may renege on that and send WJ families from Farmland, Garrett Park and KP to other parts of the county. That’s half of WJ.

No good deed shall go unpunished. Bait and switch.

Wow, this is just...wow. The entitlement in this post is staggering. WJ families are not entitled to anything more than other MCPS families. Wow.

What you may view as "entitlement", others may view as "advocacy" for their children and community.

Kids don't deserve extra advantages based on how skilled their parents are at advocacy. (And honestly they generally already get advantages based on their parents' advocacy at an individual level... they definitely don't deserve the double benefit of getting better school assignments due to their parents' better advocacy. Triple benefit, honestly, because likely these families have a lot of other socioeconomic advantages over other kids to start with...)

I think you are missing the point. When asked, WJ families overwhelmingly voted in surveys and advocated for reopening Woodward and expanding the boundary of Woodward to include DCC students versus just building WJ big enough to actually house the current WJ student body.

They advocated for Woodward as a solution to overcrowding in WJ and DCC, along with expansion of Northwood.

WJ PTAs testified for this at the BOE. Most other high school cluster PTAs also advocate for things that they want. It really is ok. And it is ok to have feelings when things don’t work out the way you want

But the idea they liked was to relieve DCC overcrowding indirectly through a criteria-/application-based magnet program, only having to deal with a few select kids from the hoi polloi motivated enough to get into the magnet. Relocating Blair SMCS was the dream.

Can I be on Team Hoi Polloi? Why'd MCPS move Blair from Takoma if a school is needed in Takoma now? Probably because MCPS sucks at projecting population growth. Whatever you hear, I expect we will be moving to costly boundary studies every few years.

MCPS also seems to like asking for feedback, but then ignoring that feedback (the 2019 boundary effort, covid lockdowns, LGBT books, renaming schools like Macgruder). When it doesnt like the feedback, it does whatever it wants.

That happened in 1935!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frankly, time to walk between building can conceivably be helped at the school level rather than shipping everyone around the county.

What are you suggesting? Hoverboards in the hallways?

Make the time between bells longer? Have leeway for students with long walks? Easier than hoverboards.

Then they lose out on academic time. Are you paying for the hoverboards?

PP doesn't care. They know know the new capital project will never be approved, but that's fine because it's not their kid in an overcrowded school while classrooms at other schools sit empty. Gotta love MoCo community spirit.

The only real solution is to build another school, down county under Blair as that's where it is needed. But, really, MCPS has a spending problem and their priorities are wacked so it will never happen. Many don't realize how much is lacking in the DCC schools outside Blair and Wheaton which make them popular. They should not allow any students outside the DCC into Blair or Wheaton. That would be a good start.

Decade-long proposition, there, to build another school. And one that was given cursory/unimaginative review close to a decade back so that they could say they considered it before discarding it in favor of building Woodward.

Too late, now, to be a solution for this boundary study, but probably not a bad idea for the future, what with the County Council and Montgomery Planning pushing for more and more density. There's some magical thinking going on there that because there currently is extra capacity in MCPS overall, relief of DCC overcrowding is a trivial matter.

Woodward is desperately needed for mid county but downcounty needs another school too.

Woodward reopening and the concurrent boundary shifts incorporating DCC populations being contemplated will have to do until, if ever, that other downcounty school is built.

This is the problem though- the country govt wants denser and denser housing, but WTH are these extra kids supposed to go to school? The council and MCPS need to be working together to identify both a location and funding for a new MS and HS downcounty. It's irresponsible to keep pushing for more housing without the infrastucture to support it.

[Anonymous]

Woodward is/was ideally suited to take new density in North Bethesda. There’s a lot of new building going on, even if White Flint is sitting vacant. And when they do start building there … lots of kids. Who under option 3 will be bused across county to the East. Y’all are about to get more overcrowding over there. Welcome to our world.

Why plan all the density to bus all the kids some place else? That is nonsensical thinking and terrible urban planning.

And the idea originally was that Woodward would take half of WJ plus 1-2 DCC elementary schools. And have a performing arts magnet. Audition only.

You are wildly incorrect if you think there are not jobs in the performing arts and that it does not help kids get into colleges, open doors they would not otherwise have. Entertainment is actually a huge industry here in America - we export it around the world. Plus keeps the kids engaged in school.

People are apparently lying and cheating their way into Duke Ellington, why not have something similar here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This foolish person thinks the real world is fair. Lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just to bring in some history, years ago WJ families were asked by MCPS survey whether they would like to stay together and build huge addition on WJ or reopen Woodward to accommodate the growing number of students, while likely taking in some DCC schools.

Overwhelmingly, WJ parents voted to reopen Woodward. WJ parents and students went to County Council meetings all decked out in Green to show support for funding for Woodward. We’ve filled out I don’t know how many surveys about Woodward.

Now it looks like MCPS may renege on that and send WJ families from Farmland, Garrett Park and KP to other parts of the county. That’s half of WJ.

No good deed shall go unpunished. Bait and switch.

Wow, this is just...wow. The entitlement in this post is staggering. WJ families are not entitled to anything more than other MCPS families. Wow.

What you may view as "entitlement", others may view as "advocacy" for their children and community.

Kids don't deserve extra advantages based on how skilled their parents are at advocacy. (And honestly they generally already get advantages based on their parents' advocacy at an individual level... they definitely don't deserve the double benefit of getting better school assignments due to their parents' better advocacy. Triple benefit, honestly, because likely these families have a lot of other socioeconomic advantages over other kids to start with...)

I think you are missing the point. When asked, WJ families overwhelmingly voted in surveys and advocated for reopening Woodward and expanding the boundary of Woodward to include DCC students versus just building WJ big enough to actually house the current WJ student body.

They advocated for Woodward as a solution to overcrowding in WJ and DCC, along with expansion of Northwood.

WJ PTAs testified for this at the BOE. Most other high school cluster PTAs also advocate for things that they want. It really is ok. And it is ok to have feelings when things don’t work out the way you want

But the idea they liked was to relieve DCC overcrowding indirectly through a criteria-/application-based magnet program, only having to deal with a few select kids from the hoi polloi motivated enough to get into the magnet. Relocating Blair SMCS was the dream.

Can I be on Team Hoi Polloi? Why'd MCPS move Blair from Takoma if a school is needed in Takoma now? Probably because MCPS sucks at projecting population growth. Whatever you hear, I expect we will be moving to costly boundary studies every few years.

MCPS also seems to like asking for feedback, but then ignoring that feedback (the 2019 boundary effort, covid lockdowns, LGBT books, renaming schools like Macgruder). When it doesnt like the feedback, it does whatever it wants.

That happened in 1935!

That was only what about 90 years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Woodward is/was ideally suited to take new density in North Bethesda. There’s a lot of new building going on, even if White Flint is sitting vacant. And when they do start building there … lots of kids. Who under option 3 will be bused across county to the East. Y’all are about to get more overcrowding over there. Welcome to our world.

Why plan all the density to bus all the kids some place else? That is nonsensical thinking and terrible urban planning.

And the idea originally was that Woodward would take half of WJ plus 1-2 DCC elementary schools. And have a performing arts magnet. Audition only.

You are wildly incorrect if you think there are not jobs in the performing arts and that it does not help kids get into colleges, open doors they would not otherwise have. Entertainment is actually a huge industry here in America - we export it around the world. Plus keeps the kids engaged in school.

People are apparently lying and cheating their way into Duke Ellington, why not have something similar here?

*not the lying and the cheating, just the gem that is Duke Ellington.