Woodward boundary study public hearing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is painful to read the (pretend) outrage toward Woodward families because they are requesting for WJ and Woodward - and every high school ideally! - to have similar utilization rates.

There is something very, very wrong when utilization rates differ so widely among schools. This is the opportunity to even it out and this recommendation absolutely does not do that.

The truth is parents are mostly outraged at the numbers of FARMS kids now attending their kids school. I guarantee they would have said nothing about utilization rates if two wealthier elementary schools were zoned for Woodward. This sentiment about FARMS kids does not just apply to these Farmland and Luxmanor parents, it really applies to all these Bethesda and Potomac parents who would be protesting if this situation happened to them. These families don’t mind financially supporting these FARMS families and schools, but they definitely don’t want them coming to their kids school. Let’s not kid ourselves that it’s anything other than that….

+1

It's simple: Caucasian Farmland and Luxmanor home owners do not want poor, brown Wheaton kids affecting the value of their homes and the perceived quality of the school.

They repeatedly said they were OK with the options presented and pretended as if they thought those were the only menu of options that could be picked (so they are either liars or stupid if they really didn't know the Super couldn't propose something else). But in theory they were OK with up to 32% FARMS and 90% Utilizations. So they get 3% more FARMS kids with the superintendent's recommendation and they cry foul now. Why didn't they comment all year strongly opposed to say Option D and F?

Option A had 27% FARMS for Woodward and 80% Utilization
Option B had 28% FARMS and 73% Utilization
Option C had 27% FARMS and 81% Utilization
Option D had 32% FARMS and 86% Utilization
Option E had 27% FARMS and 80% Utilization
Option F had 30% FARMS and 90% Utilization
Option G had 27% FARMS and 81% Utilization

+1

No sympathy. I’m zoned for Woodward and like the recommendation fine. Sorry my kids rely on FARMS

The post you’re quoting is actually really helpful for showing that the consultants proposed a range of recommended options and where Taylor landed is not anywhere within the range shown. This decision impacts thousands of children. Taylor has not faced enough scrutiny for his changes.

It’s really helpful for Taylor to illustrate it was single digit changes from what he proposed in farms and utilization. Not catastrophic 11th hour changes like the orange shirts want everyone to think.

The GP split articulation between WJ and Woodward was an unwelcome surprise. Maybe they should split articulate VM instead, sending all of GP to Woodward. That probably would satisfy a lot of folks as long as it keeps the utilization down below 90% (ideally well below 90%). This doesn’t have to be so hard.

Why? Because you want the rich white kids in GP at Woodward instead?

Because years ago, MCPS asked WJ families to vote (survey) on whether to expand WJ or build Woodward. The vote was to build Woodward, so long as the Tilden MS feeders — all of them — went to Woodward TOGETHER. Garrett Park, Farmland, Luxmanor. WJ then helped advocate for funding for Woodward etc. FOR YEARS. That was the deal. Under modified B, yes the wealthier GP families (majority of the single family homes) are going to WJ, but that’s not why.

Sounds like you don't live there and those people are long gone. The Garrett Park guy at the 2/24 BOE meeting mentioned the support of the community for the Superintendent's proposal or original option B. Apparently he was the SMOB on the BOE back in the day so I bet he remembers the history too.

Interesting. There seems to be the misguided belief that they are going to use an option provided by the consultants. Looks like that ship has sailed. “Those people” (like me) are certainly not long gone. What we want is for Woodward to be a wonderful new school for all students. A performing arts magnet, that is top notch, would be a wonderful addition to our county. (Major gap today.)

Also let’s not forget that Viers Mills once WAS part of Woodward and got excluded when the other three schools went to WJ. (And no, I wasn’t here then but know plenty of people who were. It didn’t go terribly well.)

You really are in favor of a fashion design magnet? Dance? Backstage theater set up? They should mix it up. OK fine have some program for the drama nerds and kids who like to play music. But they should have some rigorous science, math or language arts program in there too. Middle college means shipping your kid up the road to be with community college people...ie, people not smart enough to get into a real college. Dilutes the high school experience.

Did you realize there are actually jobs in performing arts, it’s actually a major industry in LA but elsewhere? And some kids from our county will go on to work in this field? We can’t all be engineers PP.

An elective or 2? Sure. An entire school curriculum? No

Art will not support Montgomery county. And it is Montgomery county tax dollars funding that school. Census data indicates the vast majority of Americans end up living within 50 miles of where they grew up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

Are you saying she is a realtor?

A simple google search shows she's a mom of two, and works in data visualization. Not a realtor. The poster is a troll.

Sounds to me like the realtor here is the poster trying to discredit the person who publicly advocated for moving VMES to WJ

I think they mean that the Farmland people ONLY care about their real estate prices. Like that VM person who doesn’t represent their community with zero kids in the school (another post mentions that as well in a different thread)

Not sure why you are bringing Farmland into this discussion. As I understand from previous posts, the VMES person who testified resides in the VMES community and has kids that will attend VMES. The fact folks are trying to discredit her is a little ridiculous and says more about them than it does about her.

Fyi if you are
- someone living in a neighborhood that Taylor's recommendation places in WJ and
- gleefully calling Luxmanor and Farmland people racist and that they "only care about property values"

then we have a pot/kettle situation here because it is pretty clear what you care about. The only difference is you are feeling smug and the Farmland/Luxmanor people are feeling scared but for both it is because you want your property values to stay up.

Farmland and Luxmanor literally had realtors leading the charge and testifying.... what are you actually scared about? Our kids will be fine at Woodward. It saddens me as a Luxmanor family that everyone is so up in arms about this. It's a brand new school. Chill out everyone.

I'm not zoned for any of these schools. I just posted that a VMES community person testified at the hearing. I happen to agree with her just from a perspective of what is best for the kids. But it sounds like what people are saying is we can't do what is best for the kids because otherwise we can't stick it to the "realtors" which has nothing to do with what I posted.

Nobody articulated why it is better for the kids with any academic literature. It's as Rita said... you all dont want the FARMS kids in your school. Sad.

DH and I intentionally chose a cluster with higher FARMS rates than what Taylor has proposed for Woodward or WJ. It sounds like you are desperate to promote a certain narrative about who I am and who everyone is who disagrees with you.

As for the research, I have posted it before, and clearly it is a waste of time because most of you are determined to remain ignorant. If you really have questions AI can be a great tool especially for topics where a lot of research has been done, like this one.

You and DH are ignorant if you read (fake) research that said 35% FARMS rates are detrimental for kids and CHOSE to be at one of those schools when you had the means not to be one of those schools.

Nobody has ever posted research. You just claim facts that don't exist.

If you bother to look at the research you claim doesn't exist without even taking literally 6l5 seconds to post the question in ChatGPT, you would get all your questions answered (hint: kids from families with low income are the ones that most benefit from low FARMS rates and in the research for that purpose 35% is not that low. For a well resourced kid with educated parents, 35% or even more is completely fine)

Yawn. Next time say "just google it." You don't have any studies.

The unintelligent rely on the computer "intelligence."

Next time just say, "I don't care if there is any research so I am not even going to bother to use a simple tool to find it within seconds"

I don't need to prove anything to you. Anyone alcan Google or Chatgpt this if they care. But you've already shown us who you are.

go cook your DH some dinner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is painful to read the (pretend) outrage toward Woodward families because they are requesting for WJ and Woodward - and every high school ideally! - to have similar utilization rates.

There is something very, very wrong when utilization rates differ so widely among schools. This is the opportunity to even it out and this recommendation absolutely does not do that.

The truth is parents are mostly outraged at the numbers of FARMS kids now attending their kids school. I guarantee they would have said nothing about utilization rates if two wealthier elementary schools were zoned for Woodward. This sentiment about FARMS kids does not just apply to these Farmland and Luxmanor parents, it really applies to all these Bethesda and Potomac parents who would be protesting if this situation happened to them. These families don’t mind financially supporting these FARMS families and schools, but they definitely don’t want them coming to their kids school. Let’s not kid ourselves that it’s anything other than that….

+1

It's simple: Caucasian Farmland and Luxmanor home owners do not want poor, brown Wheaton kids affecting the value of their homes and the perceived quality of the school.

They repeatedly said they were OK with the options presented and pretended as if they thought those were the only menu of options that could be picked (so they are either liars or stupid if they really didn't know the Super couldn't propose something else). But in theory they were OK with up to 32% FARMS and 90% Utilizations. So they get 3% more FARMS kids with the superintendent's recommendation and they cry foul now. Why didn't they comment all year strongly opposed to say Option D and F?

Option A had 27% FARMS for Woodward and 80% Utilization
Option B had 28% FARMS and 73% Utilization
Option C had 27% FARMS and 81% Utilization
Option D had 32% FARMS and 86% Utilization
Option E had 27% FARMS and 80% Utilization
Option F had 30% FARMS and 90% Utilization
Option G had 27% FARMS and 81% Utilization

+1

No sympathy. I’m zoned for Woodward and like the recommendation fine. Sorry my kids rely on FARMS

The post you’re quoting is actually really helpful for showing that the consultants proposed a range of recommended options and where Taylor landed is not anywhere within the range shown. This decision impacts thousands of children. Taylor has not faced enough scrutiny for his changes.

It’s really helpful for Taylor to illustrate it was single digit changes from what he proposed in farms and utilization. Not catastrophic 11th hour changes like the orange shirts want everyone to think.

The GP split articulation between WJ and Woodward was an unwelcome surprise. Maybe they should split articulate VM instead, sending all of GP to Woodward. That probably would satisfy a lot of folks as long as it keeps the utilization down below 90% (ideally well below 90%). This doesn’t have to be so hard.

Why? Because you want the rich white kids in GP at Woodward instead?

Because years ago, MCPS asked WJ families to vote (survey) on whether to expand WJ or build Woodward. The vote was to build Woodward, so long as the Tilden MS feeders — all of them — went to Woodward TOGETHER. Garrett Park, Farmland, Luxmanor. WJ then helped advocate for funding for Woodward etc. FOR YEARS. That was the deal. Under modified B, yes the wealthier GP families (majority of the single family homes) are going to WJ, but that’s not why.

Sounds like you don't live there and those people are long gone. The Garrett Park guy at the 2/24 BOE meeting mentioned the support of the community for the Superintendent's proposal or original option B. Apparently he was the SMOB on the BOE back in the day so I bet he remembers the history too.

Interesting. There seems to be the misguided belief that they are going to use an option provided by the consultants. Looks like that ship has sailed. “Those people” (like me) are certainly not long gone. What we want is for Woodward to be a wonderful new school for all students. A performing arts magnet, that is top notch, would be a wonderful addition to our county. (Major gap today.)

Also let’s not forget that Viers Mills once WAS part of Woodward and got excluded when the other three schools went to WJ. (And no, I wasn’t here then but know plenty of people who were. It didn’t go terribly well.)

You really are in favor of a fashion design magnet? Dance? Backstage theater set up? They should mix it up. OK fine have some program for the drama nerds and kids who like to play music. But they should have some rigorous science, math or language arts program in there too. Middle college means shipping your kid up the road to be with community college people...ie, people not smart enough to get into a real college. Dilutes the high school experience.

Did you realize there are actually jobs in performing arts, it’s actually a major industry in LA but elsewhere? And some kids from our county will go on to work in this field? We can’t all be engineers PP.

An elective or 2? Sure. An entire school curriculum? No

Art will not support Montgomery county. And it is Montgomery county tax dollars funding that school. Census data indicates the vast majority of Americans end up living within 50 miles of where they grew up.

All for it. I love community theater!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is painful to read the (pretend) outrage toward Woodward families because they are requesting for WJ and Woodward - and every high school ideally! - to have similar utilization rates.

There is something very, very wrong when utilization rates differ so widely among schools. This is the opportunity to even it out and this recommendation absolutely does not do that.

The truth is parents are mostly outraged at the numbers of FARMS kids now attending their kids school. I guarantee they would have said nothing about utilization rates if two wealthier elementary schools were zoned for Woodward. This sentiment about FARMS kids does not just apply to these Farmland and Luxmanor parents, it really applies to all these Bethesda and Potomac parents who would be protesting if this situation happened to them. These families don’t mind financially supporting these FARMS families and schools, but they definitely don’t want them coming to their kids school. Let’s not kid ourselves that it’s anything other than that….

+1

It's simple: Caucasian Farmland and Luxmanor home owners do not want poor, brown Wheaton kids affecting the value of their homes and the perceived quality of the school.

They repeatedly said they were OK with the options presented and pretended as if they thought those were the only menu of options that could be picked (so they are either liars or stupid if they really didn't know the Super couldn't propose something else). But in theory they were OK with up to 32% FARMS and 90% Utilizations. So they get 3% more FARMS kids with the superintendent's recommendation and they cry foul now. Why didn't they comment all year strongly opposed to say Option D and F?

Option A had 27% FARMS for Woodward and 80% Utilization
Option B had 28% FARMS and 73% Utilization
Option C had 27% FARMS and 81% Utilization
Option D had 32% FARMS and 86% Utilization
Option E had 27% FARMS and 80% Utilization
Option F had 30% FARMS and 90% Utilization
Option G had 27% FARMS and 81% Utilization

+1

No sympathy. I’m zoned for Woodward and like the recommendation fine. Sorry my kids rely on FARMS

The post you’re quoting is actually really helpful for showing that the consultants proposed a range of recommended options and where Taylor landed is not anywhere within the range shown. This decision impacts thousands of children. Taylor has not faced enough scrutiny for his changes.

It’s really helpful for Taylor to illustrate it was single digit changes from what he proposed in farms and utilization. Not catastrophic 11th hour changes like the orange shirts want everyone to think.

The GP split articulation between WJ and Woodward was an unwelcome surprise. Maybe they should split articulate VM instead, sending all of GP to Woodward. That probably would satisfy a lot of folks as long as it keeps the utilization down below 90% (ideally well below 90%). This doesn’t have to be so hard.

Why? Because you want the rich white kids in GP at Woodward instead?

Because years ago, MCPS asked WJ families to vote (survey) on whether to expand WJ or build Woodward. The vote was to build Woodward, so long as the Tilden MS feeders — all of them — went to Woodward TOGETHER. Garrett Park, Farmland, Luxmanor. WJ then helped advocate for funding for Woodward etc. FOR YEARS. That was the deal. Under modified B, yes the wealthier GP families (majority of the single family homes) are going to WJ, but that’s not why.

Sounds like you don't live there and those people are long gone. The Garrett Park guy at the 2/24 BOE meeting mentioned the support of the community for the Superintendent's proposal or original option B. Apparently he was the SMOB on the BOE back in the day so I bet he remembers the history too.

Interesting. There seems to be the misguided belief that they are going to use an option provided by the consultants. Looks like that ship has sailed. “Those people” (like me) are certainly not long gone. What we want is for Woodward to be a wonderful new school for all students. A performing arts magnet, that is top notch, would be a wonderful addition to our county. (Major gap today.)

Also let’s not forget that Viers Mills once WAS part of Woodward and got excluded when the other three schools went to WJ. (And no, I wasn’t here then but know plenty of people who were. It didn’t go terribly well.)

You really are in favor of a fashion design magnet? Dance? Backstage theater set up? They should mix it up. OK fine have some program for the drama nerds and kids who like to play music. But they should have some rigorous science, math or language arts program in there too. Middle college means shipping your kid up the road to be with community college people...ie, people not smart enough to get into a real college. Dilutes the high school experience.

Did you realize there are actually jobs in performing arts, it’s actually a major industry in LA but elsewhere? And some kids from our county will go on to work in this field? We can’t all be engineers PP.

An elective or 2? Sure. An entire school curriculum? No

Art will not support Montgomery county. And it is Montgomery county tax dollars funding that school. Census data indicates the vast majority of Americans end up living within 50 miles of where they grew up.

Again, we can’t all be computer scientists, scientists and engineers. The world would be a pretty bleak place without the creatives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

Are you saying she is a realtor?

A simple google search shows she's a mom of two, and works in data visualization. Not a realtor. The poster is a troll.

Sounds to me like the realtor here is the poster trying to discredit the person who publicly advocated for moving VMES to WJ

I think they mean that the Farmland people ONLY care about their real estate prices. Like that VM person who doesn’t represent their community with zero kids in the school (another post mentions that as well in a different thread)

Not sure why you are bringing Farmland into this discussion. As I understand from previous posts, the VMES person who testified resides in the VMES community and has kids that will attend VMES. The fact folks are trying to discredit her is a little ridiculous and says more about them than it does about her.

Fyi if you are
- someone living in a neighborhood that Taylor's recommendation places in WJ and
- gleefully calling Luxmanor and Farmland people racist and that they "only care about property values"

then we have a pot/kettle situation here because it is pretty clear what you care about. The only difference is you are feeling smug and the Farmland/Luxmanor people are feeling scared but for both it is because you want your property values to stay up.

Farmland and Luxmanor literally had realtors leading the charge and testifying.... what are you actually scared about? Our kids will be fine at Woodward. It saddens me as a Luxmanor family that everyone is so up in arms about this. It's a brand new school. Chill out everyone.

I'm not zoned for any of these schools. I just posted that a VMES community person testified at the hearing. I happen to agree with her just from a perspective of what is best for the kids. But it sounds like what people are saying is we can't do what is best for the kids because otherwise we can't stick it to the "realtors" which has nothing to do with what I posted.

Nobody articulated why it is better for the kids with any academic literature. It's as Rita said... you all dont want the FARMS kids in your school. Sad.

DH and I intentionally chose a cluster with higher FARMS rates than what Taylor has proposed for Woodward or WJ. It sounds like you are desperate to promote a certain narrative about who I am and who everyone is who disagrees with you.

As for the research, I have posted it before, and clearly it is a waste of time because most of you are determined to remain ignorant. If you really have questions AI can be a great tool especially for topics where a lot of research has been done, like this one.

You and DH are ignorant if you read (fake) research that said 35% FARMS rates are detrimental for kids and CHOSE to be at one of those schools when you had the means not to be one of those schools.

Nobody has ever posted research. You just claim facts that don't exist.

If you bother to look at the research you claim doesn't exist without even taking literally 6l5 seconds to post the question in ChatGPT, you would get all your questions answered (hint: kids from families with low income are the ones that most benefit from low FARMS rates and in the research for that purpose 35% is not that low. For a well resourced kid with educated parents, 35% or even more is completely fine)

Yawn. Next time say "just google it." You don't have any studies.

The unintelligent rely on the computer "intelligence."

Next time just say, "I don't care if there is any research so I am not even going to bother to use a simple tool to find it within seconds"

I don't need to prove anything to you. Anyone alcan Google or Chatgpt this if they care. But you've already shown us who you are.

go cook your DH some dinner.

My DH already made our dinner. My guess is you project a lot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

Are you saying she is a realtor?

A simple google search shows she's a mom of two, and works in data visualization. Not a realtor. The poster is a troll.

Sounds to me like the realtor here is the poster trying to discredit the person who publicly advocated for moving VMES to WJ

I think they mean that the Farmland people ONLY care about their real estate prices. Like that VM person who doesn’t represent their community with zero kids in the school (another post mentions that as well in a different thread)

Not sure why you are bringing Farmland into this discussion. As I understand from previous posts, the VMES person who testified resides in the VMES community and has kids that will attend VMES. The fact folks are trying to discredit her is a little ridiculous and says more about them than it does about her.

Fyi if you are
- someone living in a neighborhood that Taylor's recommendation places in WJ and
- gleefully calling Luxmanor and Farmland people racist and that they "only care about property values"

then we have a pot/kettle situation here because it is pretty clear what you care about. The only difference is you are feeling smug and the Farmland/Luxmanor people are feeling scared but for both it is because you want your property values to stay up.

Farmland and Luxmanor literally had realtors leading the charge and testifying.... what are you actually scared about? Our kids will be fine at Woodward. It saddens me as a Luxmanor family that everyone is so up in arms about this. It's a brand new school. Chill out everyone.

I'm not zoned for any of these schools. I just posted that a VMES community person testified at the hearing. I happen to agree with her just from a perspective of what is best for the kids. But it sounds like what people are saying is we can't do what is best for the kids because otherwise we can't stick it to the "realtors" which has nothing to do with what I posted.

Nobody articulated why it is better for the kids with any academic literature. It's as Rita said... you all dont want the FARMS kids in your school. Sad.

DH and I intentionally chose a cluster with higher FARMS rates than what Taylor has proposed for Woodward or WJ. It sounds like you are desperate to promote a certain narrative about who I am and who everyone is who disagrees with you.

As for the research, I have posted it before, and clearly it is a waste of time because most of you are determined to remain ignorant. If you really have questions AI can be a great tool especially for topics where a lot of research has been done, like this one.

You and DH are ignorant if you read (fake) research that said 35% FARMS rates are detrimental for kids and CHOSE to be at one of those schools when you had the means not to be one of those schools.

Nobody has ever posted research. You just claim facts that don't exist.

If you bother to look at the research you claim doesn't exist without even taking literally 6l5 seconds to post the question in ChatGPT, you would get all your questions answered (hint: kids from families with low income are the ones that most benefit from low FARMS rates and in the research for that purpose 35% is not that low. For a well resourced kid with educated parents, 35% or even more is completely fine)

Yawn. Next time say "just google it." You don't have any studies.

The unintelligent rely on the computer "intelligence."

Next time just say, "I don't care if there is any research so I am not even going to bother to use a simple tool to find it within seconds"

I don't need to prove anything to you. Anyone alcan Google or Chatgpt this if they care. But you've already shown us who you are.

I just did exactly this. According to ChatGPT, the school will be worse off/have fewer resources but wealthy parents will spend extra on extracurriculars and enrichment to ensure same outcomes for their kids. Oh, great, that’s so reassuring. Thanks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

Are you saying she is a realtor?

A simple google search shows she's a mom of two, and works in data visualization. Not a realtor. The poster is a troll.

Sounds to me like the realtor here is the poster trying to discredit the person who publicly advocated for moving VMES to WJ

I think they mean that the Farmland people ONLY care about their real estate prices. Like that VM person who doesn’t represent their community with zero kids in the school (another post mentions that as well in a different thread)

Not sure why you are bringing Farmland into this discussion. As I understand from previous posts, the VMES person who testified resides in the VMES community and has kids that will attend VMES. The fact folks are trying to discredit her is a little ridiculous and says more about them than it does about her.

Fyi if you are
- someone living in a neighborhood that Taylor's recommendation places in WJ and
- gleefully calling Luxmanor and Farmland people racist and that they "only care about property values"

then we have a pot/kettle situation here because it is pretty clear what you care about. The only difference is you are feeling smug and the Farmland/Luxmanor people are feeling scared but for both it is because you want your property values to stay up.

Farmland and Luxmanor literally had realtors leading the charge and testifying.... what are you actually scared about? Our kids will be fine at Woodward. It saddens me as a Luxmanor family that everyone is so up in arms about this. It's a brand new school. Chill out everyone.

I'm not zoned for any of these schools. I just posted that a VMES community person testified at the hearing. I happen to agree with her just from a perspective of what is best for the kids. But it sounds like what people are saying is we can't do what is best for the kids because otherwise we can't stick it to the "realtors" which has nothing to do with what I posted.

Nobody articulated why it is better for the kids with any academic literature. It's as Rita said... you all dont want the FARMS kids in your school. Sad.

DH and I intentionally chose a cluster with higher FARMS rates than what Taylor has proposed for Woodward or WJ. It sounds like you are desperate to promote a certain narrative about who I am and who everyone is who disagrees with you.

As for the research, I have posted it before, and clearly it is a waste of time because most of you are determined to remain ignorant. If you really have questions AI can be a great tool especially for topics where a lot of research has been done, like this one.

You and DH are ignorant if you read (fake) research that said 35% FARMS rates are detrimental for kids and CHOSE to be at one of those schools when you had the means not to be one of those schools.

Nobody has ever posted research. You just claim facts that don't exist.

If you bother to look at the research you claim doesn't exist without even taking literally 6l5 seconds to post the question in ChatGPT, you would get all your questions answered (hint: kids from families with low income are the ones that most benefit from low FARMS rates and in the research for that purpose 35% is not that low. For a well resourced kid with educated parents, 35% or even more is completely fine)

Yawn. Next time say "just google it." You don't have any studies.

The unintelligent rely on the computer "intelligence."

Next time just say, "I don't care if there is any research so I am not even going to bother to use a simple tool to find it within seconds"

I don't need to prove anything to you. Anyone alcan Google or Chatgpt this if they care. But you've already shown us who you are.

I just did exactly this. According to ChatGPT, the school will be worse off/have fewer resources but wealthy parents will spend extra on extracurriculars and enrichment to ensure same outcomes for their kids. Oh, great, that’s so reassuring. Thanks?

I don't know what you asked but it wasn't "is a 20% farms rate in a schoo better for kids from low income families than a 35% farms rate"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

Are you saying she is a realtor?

A simple google search shows she's a mom of two, and works in data visualization. Not a realtor. The poster is a troll.

Sounds to me like the realtor here is the poster trying to discredit the person who publicly advocated for moving VMES to WJ

I think they mean that the Farmland people ONLY care about their real estate prices. Like that VM person who doesn’t represent their community with zero kids in the school (another post mentions that as well in a different thread)

Not sure why you are bringing Farmland into this discussion. As I understand from previous posts, the VMES person who testified resides in the VMES community and has kids that will attend VMES. The fact folks are trying to discredit her is a little ridiculous and says more about them than it does about her.

Fyi if you are
- someone living in a neighborhood that Taylor's recommendation places in WJ and
- gleefully calling Luxmanor and Farmland people racist and that they "only care about property values"

then we have a pot/kettle situation here because it is pretty clear what you care about. The only difference is you are feeling smug and the Farmland/Luxmanor people are feeling scared but for both it is because you want your property values to stay up.

Farmland and Luxmanor literally had realtors leading the charge and testifying.... what are you actually scared about? Our kids will be fine at Woodward. It saddens me as a Luxmanor family that everyone is so up in arms about this. It's a brand new school. Chill out everyone.

I'm not zoned for any of these schools. I just posted that a VMES community person testified at the hearing. I happen to agree with her just from a perspective of what is best for the kids. But it sounds like what people are saying is we can't do what is best for the kids because otherwise we can't stick it to the "realtors" which has nothing to do with what I posted.

Nobody articulated why it is better for the kids with any academic literature. It's as Rita said... you all dont want the FARMS kids in your school. Sad.

DH and I intentionally chose a cluster with higher FARMS rates than what Taylor has proposed for Woodward or WJ. It sounds like you are desperate to promote a certain narrative about who I am and who everyone is who disagrees with you.

As for the research, I have posted it before, and clearly it is a waste of time because most of you are determined to remain ignorant. If you really have questions AI can be a great tool especially for topics where a lot of research has been done, like this one.

You and DH are ignorant if you read (fake) research that said 35% FARMS rates are detrimental for kids and CHOSE to be at one of those schools when you had the means not to be one of those schools.

Nobody has ever posted research. You just claim facts that don't exist.

If you bother to look at the research you claim doesn't exist without even taking literally 6l5 seconds to post the question in ChatGPT, you would get all your questions answered (hint: kids from families with low income are the ones that most benefit from low FARMS rates and in the research for that purpose 35% is not that low. For a well resourced kid with educated parents, 35% or even more is completely fine)

Yawn. Next time say "just google it." You don't have any studies.

The unintelligent rely on the computer "intelligence."

Next time just say, "I don't care if there is any research so I am not even going to bother to use a simple tool to find it within seconds"

I don't need to prove anything to you. Anyone alcan Google or Chatgpt this if they care. But you've already shown us who you are.

I just did exactly this. According to ChatGPT, the school will be worse off/have fewer resources but wealthy parents will spend extra on extracurriculars and enrichment to ensure same outcomes for their kids. Oh, great, that’s so reassuring. Thanks?

I don't know what you asked but it wasn't "is a 20% farms rate in a schoo better for kids from low income families than a 35% farms rate"

+1

She’s doing the dishes for DH

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

Are you saying she is a realtor?

A simple google search shows she's a mom of two, and works in data visualization. Not a realtor. The poster is a troll.

Sounds to me like the realtor here is the poster trying to discredit the person who publicly advocated for moving VMES to WJ

I think they mean that the Farmland people ONLY care about their real estate prices. Like that VM person who doesn’t represent their community with zero kids in the school (another post mentions that as well in a different thread)

Not sure why you are bringing Farmland into this discussion. As I understand from previous posts, the VMES person who testified resides in the VMES community and has kids that will attend VMES. The fact folks are trying to discredit her is a little ridiculous and says more about them than it does about her.

Fyi if you are
- someone living in a neighborhood that Taylor's recommendation places in WJ and
- gleefully calling Luxmanor and Farmland people racist and that they "only care about property values"

then we have a pot/kettle situation here because it is pretty clear what you care about. The only difference is you are feeling smug and the Farmland/Luxmanor people are feeling scared but for both it is because you want your property values to stay up.

Farmland and Luxmanor literally had realtors leading the charge and testifying.... what are you actually scared about? Our kids will be fine at Woodward. It saddens me as a Luxmanor family that everyone is so up in arms about this. It's a brand new school. Chill out everyone.

I'm not zoned for any of these schools. I just posted that a VMES community person testified at the hearing. I happen to agree with her just from a perspective of what is best for the kids. But it sounds like what people are saying is we can't do what is best for the kids because otherwise we can't stick it to the "realtors" which has nothing to do with what I posted.

Nobody articulated why it is better for the kids with any academic literature. It's as Rita said... you all dont want the FARMS kids in your school. Sad.

DH and I intentionally chose a cluster with higher FARMS rates than what Taylor has proposed for Woodward or WJ. It sounds like you are desperate to promote a certain narrative about who I am and who everyone is who disagrees with you.

As for the research, I have posted it before, and clearly it is a waste of time because most of you are determined to remain ignorant. If you really have questions AI can be a great tool especially for topics where a lot of research has been done, like this one.

You and DH are ignorant if you read (fake) research that said 35% FARMS rates are detrimental for kids and CHOSE to be at one of those schools when you had the means not to be one of those schools.

Nobody has ever posted research. You just claim facts that don't exist.

If you bother to look at the research you claim doesn't exist without even taking literally 6l5 seconds to post the question in ChatGPT, you would get all your questions answered (hint: kids from families with low income are the ones that most benefit from low FARMS rates and in the research for that purpose 35% is not that low. For a well resourced kid with educated parents, 35% or even more is completely fine)

Yawn. Next time say "just google it." You don't have any studies.

The unintelligent rely on the computer "intelligence."

Next time just say, "I don't care if there is any research so I am not even going to bother to use a simple tool to find it within seconds"

I don't need to prove anything to you. Anyone alcan Google or Chatgpt this if they care. But you've already shown us who you are.

I just did exactly this. According to ChatGPT, the school will be worse off/have fewer resources but wealthy parents will spend extra on extracurriculars and enrichment to ensure same outcomes for their kids. Oh, great, that’s so reassuring. Thanks?

I don't know what you asked but it wasn't "is a 20% farms rate in a schoo better for kids from low income families than a 35% farms rate"

+1

She’s doing the dishes for DH

I am a different poster but not particularly insulted by the concept of doing dishes. Nor am I surprised that the “ask AI” stunt did not work and it fact produced the opposite result.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

Are you saying she is a realtor?

A simple google search shows she's a mom of two, and works in data visualization. Not a realtor. The poster is a troll.

Sounds to me like the realtor here is the poster trying to discredit the person who publicly advocated for moving VMES to WJ

I think they mean that the Farmland people ONLY care about their real estate prices. Like that VM person who doesn’t represent their community with zero kids in the school (another post mentions that as well in a different thread)

Not sure why you are bringing Farmland into this discussion. As I understand from previous posts, the VMES person who testified resides in the VMES community and has kids that will attend VMES. The fact folks are trying to discredit her is a little ridiculous and says more about them than it does about her.

Fyi if you are
- someone living in a neighborhood that Taylor's recommendation places in WJ and
- gleefully calling Luxmanor and Farmland people racist and that they "only care about property values"

then we have a pot/kettle situation here because it is pretty clear what you care about. The only difference is you are feeling smug and the Farmland/Luxmanor people are feeling scared but for both it is because you want your property values to stay up.

Farmland and Luxmanor literally had realtors leading the charge and testifying.... what are you actually scared about? Our kids will be fine at Woodward. It saddens me as a Luxmanor family that everyone is so up in arms about this. It's a brand new school. Chill out everyone.

I'm not zoned for any of these schools. I just posted that a VMES community person testified at the hearing. I happen to agree with her just from a perspective of what is best for the kids. But it sounds like what people are saying is we can't do what is best for the kids because otherwise we can't stick it to the "realtors" which has nothing to do with what I posted.

Nobody articulated why it is better for the kids with any academic literature. It's as Rita said... you all dont want the FARMS kids in your school. Sad.

DH and I intentionally chose a cluster with higher FARMS rates than what Taylor has proposed for Woodward or WJ. It sounds like you are desperate to promote a certain narrative about who I am and who everyone is who disagrees with you.

As for the research, I have posted it before, and clearly it is a waste of time because most of you are determined to remain ignorant. If you really have questions AI can be a great tool especially for topics where a lot of research has been done, like this one.

You and DH are ignorant if you read (fake) research that said 35% FARMS rates are detrimental for kids and CHOSE to be at one of those schools when you had the means not to be one of those schools.

Nobody has ever posted research. You just claim facts that don't exist.

If you bother to look at the research you claim doesn't exist without even taking literally 6l5 seconds to post the question in ChatGPT, you would get all your questions answered (hint: kids from families with low income are the ones that most benefit from low FARMS rates and in the research for that purpose 35% is not that low. For a well resourced kid with educated parents, 35% or even more is completely fine)

Yawn. Next time say "just google it." You don't have any studies.

The unintelligent rely on the computer "intelligence."

Next time just say, "I don't care if there is any research so I am not even going to bother to use a simple tool to find it within seconds"

I don't need to prove anything to you. Anyone alcan Google or Chatgpt this if they care. But you've already shown us who you are.

I just did exactly this. According to ChatGPT, the school will be worse off/have fewer resources but wealthy parents will spend extra on extracurriculars and enrichment to ensure same outcomes for their kids. Oh, great, that’s so reassuring. Thanks?

I don't know what you asked but it wasn't "is a 20% farms rate in a schoo better for kids from low income families than a 35% farms rate"

+1

She’s doing the dishes for DH

I am a different poster but not particularly insulted by the concept of doing dishes. Nor am I surprised that the “ask AI” stunt did not work and it fact produced the opposite result.

It wasn't the "opposite result" it was a non sequitur

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

Are you saying she is a realtor?

A simple google search shows she's a mom of two, and works in data visualization. Not a realtor. The poster is a troll.

Sounds to me like the realtor here is the poster trying to discredit the person who publicly advocated for moving VMES to WJ

I think they mean that the Farmland people ONLY care about their real estate prices. Like that VM person who doesn’t represent their community with zero kids in the school (another post mentions that as well in a different thread)

Not sure why you are bringing Farmland into this discussion. As I understand from previous posts, the VMES person who testified resides in the VMES community and has kids that will attend VMES. The fact folks are trying to discredit her is a little ridiculous and says more about them than it does about her.

Fyi if you are
- someone living in a neighborhood that Taylor's recommendation places in WJ and
- gleefully calling Luxmanor and Farmland people racist and that they "only care about property values"

then we have a pot/kettle situation here because it is pretty clear what you care about. The only difference is you are feeling smug and the Farmland/Luxmanor people are feeling scared but for both it is because you want your property values to stay up.

Farmland and Luxmanor literally had realtors leading the charge and testifying.... what are you actually scared about? Our kids will be fine at Woodward. It saddens me as a Luxmanor family that everyone is so up in arms about this. It's a brand new school. Chill out everyone.

I'm not zoned for any of these schools. I just posted that a VMES community person testified at the hearing. I happen to agree with her just from a perspective of what is best for the kids. But it sounds like what people are saying is we can't do what is best for the kids because otherwise we can't stick it to the "realtors" which has nothing to do with what I posted.

Nobody articulated why it is better for the kids with any academic literature. It's as Rita said... you all dont want the FARMS kids in your school. Sad.

DH and I intentionally chose a cluster with higher FARMS rates than what Taylor has proposed for Woodward or WJ. It sounds like you are desperate to promote a certain narrative about who I am and who everyone is who disagrees with you.

As for the research, I have posted it before, and clearly it is a waste of time because most of you are determined to remain ignorant. If you really have questions AI can be a great tool especially for topics where a lot of research has been done, like this one.

You and DH are ignorant if you read (fake) research that said 35% FARMS rates are detrimental for kids and CHOSE to be at one of those schools when you had the means not to be one of those schools.

Nobody has ever posted research. You just claim facts that don't exist.

If you bother to look at the research you claim doesn't exist without even taking literally 6l5 seconds to post the question in ChatGPT, you would get all your questions answered (hint: kids from families with low income are the ones that most benefit from low FARMS rates and in the research for that purpose 35% is not that low. For a well resourced kid with educated parents, 35% or even more is completely fine)

Yawn. Next time say "just google it." You don't have any studies.

The unintelligent rely on the computer "intelligence."

Next time just say, "I don't care if there is any research so I am not even going to bother to use a simple tool to find it within seconds"

I don't need to prove anything to you. Anyone alcan Google or Chatgpt this if they care. But you've already shown us who you are.

I just did exactly this. According to ChatGPT, the school will be worse off/have fewer resources but wealthy parents will spend extra on extracurriculars and enrichment to ensure same outcomes for their kids. Oh, great, that’s so reassuring. Thanks?

I don't know what you asked but it wasn't "is a 20% farms rate in a schoo better for kids from low income families than a 35% farms rate"

+1

She’s doing the dishes for DH

I am a different poster but not particularly insulted by the concept of doing dishes. Nor am I surprised that the “ask AI” stunt did not work and it fact produced the opposite result.

We found another poster that will spend hours arguing on DCUM about something they won't bother to so much as Google

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

Are you saying she is a realtor?

A simple google search shows she's a mom of two, and works in data visualization. Not a realtor. The poster is a troll.

Sounds to me like the realtor here is the poster trying to discredit the person who publicly advocated for moving VMES to WJ

I think they mean that the Farmland people ONLY care about their real estate prices. Like that VM person who doesn’t represent their community with zero kids in the school (another post mentions that as well in a different thread)

Not sure why you are bringing Farmland into this discussion. As I understand from previous posts, the VMES person who testified resides in the VMES community and has kids that will attend VMES. The fact folks are trying to discredit her is a little ridiculous and says more about them than it does about her.

Fyi if you are
- someone living in a neighborhood that Taylor's recommendation places in WJ and
- gleefully calling Luxmanor and Farmland people racist and that they "only care about property values"

then we have a pot/kettle situation here because it is pretty clear what you care about. The only difference is you are feeling smug and the Farmland/Luxmanor people are feeling scared but for both it is because you want your property values to stay up.

Farmland and Luxmanor literally had realtors leading the charge and testifying.... what are you actually scared about? Our kids will be fine at Woodward. It saddens me as a Luxmanor family that everyone is so up in arms about this. It's a brand new school. Chill out everyone.

I'm not zoned for any of these schools. I just posted that a VMES community person testified at the hearing. I happen to agree with her just from a perspective of what is best for the kids. But it sounds like what people are saying is we can't do what is best for the kids because otherwise we can't stick it to the "realtors" which has nothing to do with what I posted.

Nobody articulated why it is better for the kids with any academic literature. It's as Rita said... you all dont want the FARMS kids in your school. Sad.

DH and I intentionally chose a cluster with higher FARMS rates than what Taylor has proposed for Woodward or WJ. It sounds like you are desperate to promote a certain narrative about who I am and who everyone is who disagrees with you.

As for the research, I have posted it before, and clearly it is a waste of time because most of you are determined to remain ignorant. If you really have questions AI can be a great tool especially for topics where a lot of research has been done, like this one.

You and DH are ignorant if you read (fake) research that said 35% FARMS rates are detrimental for kids and CHOSE to be at one of those schools when you had the means not to be one of those schools.

Nobody has ever posted research. You just claim facts that don't exist.

If you bother to look at the research you claim doesn't exist without even taking literally 6l5 seconds to post the question in ChatGPT, you would get all your questions answered (hint: kids from families with low income are the ones that most benefit from low FARMS rates and in the research for that purpose 35% is not that low. For a well resourced kid with educated parents, 35% or even more is completely fine)

Yawn. Next time say "just google it." You don't have any studies.

The unintelligent rely on the computer "intelligence."

Next time just say, "I don't care if there is any research so I am not even going to bother to use a simple tool to find it within seconds"

I don't need to prove anything to you. Anyone alcan Google or Chatgpt this if they care. But you've already shown us who you are.

I just did exactly this. According to ChatGPT, the school will be worse off/have fewer resources but wealthy parents will spend extra on extracurriculars and enrichment to ensure same outcomes for their kids. Oh, great, that’s so reassuring. Thanks?

I don't know what you asked but it wasn't "is a 20% farms rate in a schoo better for kids from low income families than a 35% farms rate"

+1

She’s doing the dishes for DH

I am a different poster but not particularly insulted by the concept of doing dishes. Nor am I surprised that the “ask AI” stunt did not work and it fact produced the opposite result.

It wasn't the "opposite result" it was a non sequitur

No, that would be your sexist comments in a discussion about school boundaries. Well, I guess the nice thing about putting your foot in your mouth is there are no dishes to wash! Peace

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

Are you saying she is a realtor?

A simple google search shows she's a mom of two, and works in data visualization. Not a realtor. The poster is a troll.

Sounds to me like the realtor here is the poster trying to discredit the person who publicly advocated for moving VMES to WJ

I think they mean that the Farmland people ONLY care about their real estate prices. Like that VM person who doesn’t represent their community with zero kids in the school (another post mentions that as well in a different thread)

Not sure why you are bringing Farmland into this discussion. As I understand from previous posts, the VMES person who testified resides in the VMES community and has kids that will attend VMES. The fact folks are trying to discredit her is a little ridiculous and says more about them than it does about her.

Fyi if you are
- someone living in a neighborhood that Taylor's recommendation places in WJ and
- gleefully calling Luxmanor and Farmland people racist and that they "only care about property values"

then we have a pot/kettle situation here because it is pretty clear what you care about. The only difference is you are feeling smug and the Farmland/Luxmanor people are feeling scared but for both it is because you want your property values to stay up.

Farmland and Luxmanor literally had realtors leading the charge and testifying.... what are you actually scared about? Our kids will be fine at Woodward. It saddens me as a Luxmanor family that everyone is so up in arms about this. It's a brand new school. Chill out everyone.

I'm not zoned for any of these schools. I just posted that a VMES community person testified at the hearing. I happen to agree with her just from a perspective of what is best for the kids. But it sounds like what people are saying is we can't do what is best for the kids because otherwise we can't stick it to the "realtors" which has nothing to do with what I posted.

Nobody articulated why it is better for the kids with any academic literature. It's as Rita said... you all dont want the FARMS kids in your school. Sad.

DH and I intentionally chose a cluster with higher FARMS rates than what Taylor has proposed for Woodward or WJ. It sounds like you are desperate to promote a certain narrative about who I am and who everyone is who disagrees with you.

As for the research, I have posted it before, and clearly it is a waste of time because most of you are determined to remain ignorant. If you really have questions AI can be a great tool especially for topics where a lot of research has been done, like this one.

You and DH are ignorant if you read (fake) research that said 35% FARMS rates are detrimental for kids and CHOSE to be at one of those schools when you had the means not to be one of those schools.

Nobody has ever posted research. You just claim facts that don't exist.

If you bother to look at the research you claim doesn't exist without even taking literally 6l5 seconds to post the question in ChatGPT, you would get all your questions answered (hint: kids from families with low income are the ones that most benefit from low FARMS rates and in the research for that purpose 35% is not that low. For a well resourced kid with educated parents, 35% or even more is completely fine)

Yawn. Next time say "just google it." You don't have any studies.

The unintelligent rely on the computer "intelligence."

Next time just say, "I don't care if there is any research so I am not even going to bother to use a simple tool to find it within seconds"

I don't need to prove anything to you. Anyone alcan Google or Chatgpt this if they care. But you've already shown us who you are.

I just did exactly this. According to ChatGPT, the school will be worse off/have fewer resources but wealthy parents will spend extra on extracurriculars and enrichment to ensure same outcomes for their kids. Oh, great, that’s so reassuring. Thanks?

I don't know what you asked but it wasn't "is a 20% farms rate in a schoo better for kids from low income families than a 35% farms rate"

+1

She’s doing the dishes for DH

I am a different poster but not particularly insulted by the concept of doing dishes. Nor am I surprised that the “ask AI” stunt did not work and it fact produced the opposite result.

It wasn't the "opposite result" it was a non sequitur

No, that would be your sexist comments in a discussion about school boundaries. Well, I guess the nice thing about putting your foot in your mouth is there are no dishes to wash! Peace

She had to go iron DHs shirts for work tomorrow

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

Are you saying she is a realtor?

A simple google search shows she's a mom of two, and works in data visualization. Not a realtor. The poster is a troll.

Sounds to me like the realtor here is the poster trying to discredit the person who publicly advocated for moving VMES to WJ

I think they mean that the Farmland people ONLY care about their real estate prices. Like that VM person who doesn’t represent their community with zero kids in the school (another post mentions that as well in a different thread)

Not sure why you are bringing Farmland into this discussion. As I understand from previous posts, the VMES person who testified resides in the VMES community and has kids that will attend VMES. The fact folks are trying to discredit her is a little ridiculous and says more about them than it does about her.

Fyi if you are
- someone living in a neighborhood that Taylor's recommendation places in WJ and
- gleefully calling Luxmanor and Farmland people racist and that they "only care about property values"

then we have a pot/kettle situation here because it is pretty clear what you care about. The only difference is you are feeling smug and the Farmland/Luxmanor people are feeling scared but for both it is because you want your property values to stay up.

Farmland and Luxmanor literally had realtors leading the charge and testifying.... what are you actually scared about? Our kids will be fine at Woodward. It saddens me as a Luxmanor family that everyone is so up in arms about this. It's a brand new school. Chill out everyone.

I'm not zoned for any of these schools. I just posted that a VMES community person testified at the hearing. I happen to agree with her just from a perspective of what is best for the kids. But it sounds like what people are saying is we can't do what is best for the kids because otherwise we can't stick it to the "realtors" which has nothing to do with what I posted.

Nobody articulated why it is better for the kids with any academic literature. It's as Rita said... you all dont want the FARMS kids in your school. Sad.

DH and I intentionally chose a cluster with higher FARMS rates than what Taylor has proposed for Woodward or WJ. It sounds like you are desperate to promote a certain narrative about who I am and who everyone is who disagrees with you.

As for the research, I have posted it before, and clearly it is a waste of time because most of you are determined to remain ignorant. If you really have questions AI can be a great tool especially for topics where a lot of research has been done, like this one.

You and DH are ignorant if you read (fake) research that said 35% FARMS rates are detrimental for kids and CHOSE to be at one of those schools when you had the means not to be one of those schools.

Nobody has ever posted research. You just claim facts that don't exist.

If you bother to look at the research you claim doesn't exist without even taking literally 6l5 seconds to post the question in ChatGPT, you would get all your questions answered (hint: kids from families with low income are the ones that most benefit from low FARMS rates and in the research for that purpose 35% is not that low. For a well resourced kid with educated parents, 35% or even more is completely fine)

Yawn. Next time say "just google it." You don't have any studies.

The unintelligent rely on the computer "intelligence."

Next time just say, "I don't care if there is any research so I am not even going to bother to use a simple tool to find it within seconds"

I don't need to prove anything to you. Anyone alcan Google or Chatgpt this if they care. But you've already shown us who you are.

I just did exactly this. According to ChatGPT, the school will be worse off/have fewer resources but wealthy parents will spend extra on extracurriculars and enrichment to ensure same outcomes for their kids. Oh, great, that’s so reassuring. Thanks?

I don't know what you asked but it wasn't "is a 20% farms rate in a schoo better for kids from low income families than a 35% farms rate"

+1

She’s doing the dishes for DH

I am a different poster but not particularly insulted by the concept of doing dishes. Nor am I surprised that the “ask AI” stunt did not work and it fact produced the opposite result.

It wasn't the "opposite result" it was a non sequitur

No, that would be your sexist comments in a discussion about school boundaries. Well, I guess the nice thing about putting your foot in your mouth is there are no dishes to wash! Peace

I actually wasn't the person that mentioned the PP doing dishes for her DH, and this is getting quite convoluted (my guess is that is intentional to distract from the fact so many of you literally could not care less about whether going to a school with lower FARMS rates could help kids from families with lower incomes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just skimmed the testimony and it looks like several folks brought up the proposed low SSIMS utilization. How did Taylor/Board members respond?

Maybe a couple. No response, but there has only been 1 QA session thus far. Not the focus thus far. It's just farmland realtors complaining.

Stop trolling. I am not in that part of the country, but I watched the hearing and there were lots of farmland parents there, several testifying. This is not just realtors.