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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Woodside has been looking opportunistically and coming up with convoluted arguments to go to BCC for a generation or two. It burns their craw that the nicest neighborhood goes to the worst HS. While nearby Rosemary Hills goes to school with kids from Bethesda & Chevy Chase. It would literally at a third to their already high (for silver spring) home values.

This is a weird thing to say. People love Einstein. It is smaller than other MCPS high schools, has a very strong administration, and the visual and performing arts focus brings in some nice kids from the entire DCC. It's absolutely not "the worst HS" and in fact is the first choice for many families in the area.

To anyone who has lived here for awhile... Einstein, along with Kennedy, Wheaton and more recently Watkins Mill were the worst schools. Real estate prices changed those neighborhoods near Einstein a lot, as did the DCC.

Okay? I am not sending my kid to Einstein in 1980. I am sending him there now. And it’s great.

Duh - explaining why someone would call it "the worst school."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Einstein is a great school. If you didn't send your kids there, how would you know?

In 2021 - 2022, 31.2% of Einstein students scored proficient in Math, and 64.3% scored proficient in Language Arts.

Everyone knows that state test was never a good measure of much of anything. I think 0% of the state is proficient at these things based on those metrics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Einstein is a great school. If you didn't send your kids there, how would you know?

In 2021 - 2022, 31.2% of Einstein students scored proficient in Math, and 64.3% scored proficient in Language Arts.

Everyone knows that state test was never a good measure of much of anything. I think 0% of the state is proficient at these things based on those metrics.

MCPS is a joke

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Einstein is a great school. If you didn't send your kids there, how would you know?

In 2021 - 2022, 31.2% of Einstein students scored proficient in Math, and 64.3% scored proficient in Language Arts.

Everyone knows that state test was never a good measure of much of anything. I think 0% of the state is proficient at these things based on those metrics.

Yet other school do much much better. It’s either the kids or the school that are below avg, you tell us.

[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:I feel like there is three morons posting on this thread for the past 30 pages, sometimes responding to them selves based on writing styles.

East county parents = we love poor kids but would love them more if sent to other peoples schools.

West county parents = no take backs

Ideal progressive = poor black kids simply need to see rich kids in their natural habitat to overcome all of society’s other systemic handicaps and generations of stunted momentum.

Ideal conservative = they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps even if only a few percentage make it out of the cycle. It’s worth abandoning the 90%+ because their exploitation is what props up the middle class and better them than me right?

Fabulous summary! (Grammar mistake aside, of course.)

Lol nope, these are just PP's hot takes on using boundary changes to promote diversity. Many of us who support including diversity as one of four priorities have said multiple times on this thread that we know it will be on the margins and that it won't fix anything.

Segregation as it exists now wasn't created in a day. It won't be reversed in one either. It will take a long series of small, seemingly inconsequential decisions to be anti-racist in drawing boundaries. The alternative is to continue entrenching segregation.

Anti-racism. Just say you want discrimination against whites and Asians.

How specifically do you think I would want discrimination against whites and Asians?

Because you are championing anti-racism and anti-racism discriminates against races who do well which, in the US, is whites and Asians.

Translation: I am totally fine with discrimination against Black and Latino (and Asian people but that's a story for another thread) people but won't admit it's happening despite mountains of evidence, and pretend that any efforts to combat that discrimination are "anti-White racism."

Can we get back to discussing boundary studies please?

False. As a good liberal, I oppose all forms of discrimination, even against whites and Asians. As a progressive, you want discrimination as long as it's the correct kind of discrimination which is of course, illiberal. Progressivism has become more like a fundamentalist religion.

This thread is about boundary studies. If you want to make an argument that it is discriminatory to consider demographics as part of them, go right ahead. Once again, I'm sure you'll be pretending that the alternative is boundaries based purely on proximity rather than what we actually have now which are boundaries designed specifically to segregate White and other wealthy kids from low-income and BIPOC children.

Come on man. No one believes that, not even east county progressives. You just say that to justify busing. Are there a couple areas where this was done? Sure. Could those have been fixed by prioritizing proximity? Absolutely. Instead, unscrupulous BOE members altered the boundary policy without public notice to prioritize diversity. This could fix a few bad boundaries but it will create many more bad ones which is exactly what eadt county progressives want.

People (just you?) have spent years on DCUM claiming that the "especially diversity" language will mean that kids are being bussed from Kennedy to Whitman any day now, but we've been through several boundary studies since that time and every single time there have been options that prioritized diversity, and the Board has never even once chosen the option that maximized diversity. They've always balanced other factors.

When will you stop lying?

Typical progressive strawman. No on ever say Kennedy to Whitman would happen. But what WILL happen is a lot more kids from WJ bused to Einstein and vic versa. Now should SOME of those kid be moved for proximity reasons? Sure. Could that have been done if they prioritized proximity? Absolutely. But they didn't. They prioritized diversity so they could start busing.

WTF are they supposed to fit more kids at Einstein? You clearly aren't familiar with the school, it's already overcrowded. Maybe one ES feeder will get sent toWoodward. I think what's equally likely to happen is that DCC boundaries will shift slightly and some parts currently in the Einstein boundary (and maybe Blair) will shift to Northwood.

Imagine that there is a boundary study about to be conducted where they will move a lot of kids out of Einstein to schools like WJ, BCC, and Woodward and fills some of those seats with kids from WJ and BCC. This satisfies the diversity mandate and the capacity factor. It makes proximity worse but that's not as high a factor as diversity.

That makes no sense since the DCC schools are so overcrowded. If they are brave, they will move Woodlin ES, which is far from Einstein, to BCC,.and KPES, which is close.to Einstein,.to Einstein. Then they will move one, maybe two Einstein feeders, such as Flora Singer or Highland, to Northwood or Wheaton, and move one, maybe two Wheaton feeders, such as Viers Mill and Wheaton Woods,.to Woodward and/or WJ. Maybe they will.make BCC, WJ and Woodward part of the DCC, so anyone who doesn't want to travel there will can choose another school, but anyone zoned for those.schools.is still.guaranteed a spot there.

Was the Beach Drive closure part of the rationale here? We used to live right across the street from KP and driving out Beach Drive to Grosvenor made WJ a lot faster than Einstein would be.

Beach Drive is open during the week. I hope they don't move KP to Einstein but they might. I mostly hope they don't because my kid will start at WJ and then have to move and that sucks.

The diversity bus is definitely coming for you. Sorry. But east county progressives painted a target over Kensington years ago and constantly point to it as the reason they want busing.

In the case of Kensington it’s not the diversity bus so much as it would be re-zoning kids to the school closest to where they live.

[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:I feel like there is three morons posting on this thread for the past 30 pages, sometimes responding to them selves based on writing styles.

East county parents = we love poor kids but would love them more if sent to other peoples schools.

West county parents = no take backs

Ideal progressive = poor black kids simply need to see rich kids in their natural habitat to overcome all of society’s other systemic handicaps and generations of stunted momentum.

Ideal conservative = they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps even if only a few percentage make it out of the cycle. It’s worth abandoning the 90%+ because their exploitation is what props up the middle class and better them than me right?

Fabulous summary! (Grammar mistake aside, of course.)

Lol nope, these are just PP's hot takes on using boundary changes to promote diversity. Many of us who support including diversity as one of four priorities have said multiple times on this thread that we know it will be on the margins and that it won't fix anything.

Segregation as it exists now wasn't created in a day. It won't be reversed in one either. It will take a long series of small, seemingly inconsequential decisions to be anti-racist in drawing boundaries. The alternative is to continue entrenching segregation.

Anti-racism. Just say you want discrimination against whites and Asians.

How specifically do you think I would want discrimination against whites and Asians?

Because you are championing anti-racism and anti-racism discriminates against races who do well which, in the US, is whites and Asians.

Translation: I am totally fine with discrimination against Black and Latino (and Asian people but that's a story for another thread) people but won't admit it's happening despite mountains of evidence, and pretend that any efforts to combat that discrimination are "anti-White racism."

Can we get back to discussing boundary studies please?

False. As a good liberal, I oppose all forms of discrimination, even against whites and Asians. As a progressive, you want discrimination as long as it's the correct kind of discrimination which is of course, illiberal. Progressivism has become more like a fundamentalist religion.

This thread is about boundary studies. If you want to make an argument that it is discriminatory to consider demographics as part of them, go right ahead. Once again, I'm sure you'll be pretending that the alternative is boundaries based purely on proximity rather than what we actually have now which are boundaries designed specifically to segregate White and other wealthy kids from low-income and BIPOC children.

Come on man. No one believes that, not even east county progressives. You just say that to justify busing. Are there a couple areas where this was done? Sure. Could those have been fixed by prioritizing proximity? Absolutely. Instead, unscrupulous BOE members altered the boundary policy without public notice to prioritize diversity. This could fix a few bad boundaries but it will create many more bad ones which is exactly what eadt county progressives want.

People (just you?) have spent years on DCUM claiming that the "especially diversity" language will mean that kids are being bussed from Kennedy to Whitman any day now, but we've been through several boundary studies since that time and every single time there have been options that prioritized diversity, and the Board has never even once chosen the option that maximized diversity. They've always balanced other factors.

When will you stop lying?

Typical progressive strawman. No on ever say Kennedy to Whitman would happen. But what WILL happen is a lot more kids from WJ bused to Einstein and vic versa. Now should SOME of those kid be moved for proximity reasons? Sure. Could that have been done if they prioritized proximity? Absolutely. But they didn't. They prioritized diversity so they could start busing.

WTF are they supposed to fit more kids at Einstein? You clearly aren't familiar with the school, it's already overcrowded. Maybe one ES feeder will get sent toWoodward. I think what's equally likely to happen is that DCC boundaries will shift slightly and some parts currently in the Einstein boundary (and maybe Blair) will shift to Northwood.

Imagine that there is a boundary study about to be conducted where they will move a lot of kids out of Einstein to schools like WJ, BCC, and Woodward and fills some of those seats with kids from WJ and BCC. This satisfies the diversity mandate and the capacity factor. It makes proximity worse but that's not as high a factor as diversity.

That makes no sense since the DCC schools are so overcrowded. If they are brave, they will move Woodlin ES, which is far from Einstein, to BCC,.and KPES, which is close.to Einstein,.to Einstein. Then they will move one, maybe two Einstein feeders, such as Flora Singer or Highland, to Northwood or Wheaton, and move one, maybe two Wheaton feeders, such as Viers Mill and Wheaton Woods,.to Woodward and/or WJ. Maybe they will.make BCC, WJ and Woodward part of the DCC, so anyone who doesn't want to travel there will can choose another school, but anyone zoned for those.schools.is still.guaranteed a spot there.

Was the Beach Drive closure part of the rationale here? We used to live right across the street from KP and driving out Beach Drive to Grosvenor made WJ a lot faster than Einstein would be.

Beach Drive is open during the week. I hope they don't move KP to Einstein but they might. I mostly hope they don't because my kid will start at WJ and then have to move and that sucks.

The diversity bus is definitely coming for you. Sorry. But east county progressives painted a target over Kensington years ago and constantly point to it as the reason they want busing.

In the case of Kensington it’s not the diversity bus so much as it would be re-zoning kids to the school closest to where they live.

Most of the other side of the tracks are closer to Einstein. It really depends on what part of Kensington for WJ. Einstein has no room to take on more Kensington kids.

[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:I feel like there is three morons posting on this thread for the past 30 pages, sometimes responding to them selves based on writing styles.

East county parents = we love poor kids but would love them more if sent to other peoples schools.

West county parents = no take backs

Ideal progressive = poor black kids simply need to see rich kids in their natural habitat to overcome all of society’s other systemic handicaps and generations of stunted momentum.

Ideal conservative = they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps even if only a few percentage make it out of the cycle. It’s worth abandoning the 90%+ because their exploitation is what props up the middle class and better them than me right?

Fabulous summary! (Grammar mistake aside, of course.)

Lol nope, these are just PP's hot takes on using boundary changes to promote diversity. Many of us who support including diversity as one of four priorities have said multiple times on this thread that we know it will be on the margins and that it won't fix anything.

Segregation as it exists now wasn't created in a day. It won't be reversed in one either. It will take a long series of small, seemingly inconsequential decisions to be anti-racist in drawing boundaries. The alternative is to continue entrenching segregation.

Anti-racism. Just say you want discrimination against whites and Asians.

How specifically do you think I would want discrimination against whites and Asians?

Because you are championing anti-racism and anti-racism discriminates against races who do well which, in the US, is whites and Asians.

Translation: I am totally fine with discrimination against Black and Latino (and Asian people but that's a story for another thread) people but won't admit it's happening despite mountains of evidence, and pretend that any efforts to combat that discrimination are "anti-White racism."

Can we get back to discussing boundary studies please?

False. As a good liberal, I oppose all forms of discrimination, even against whites and Asians. As a progressive, you want discrimination as long as it's the correct kind of discrimination which is of course, illiberal. Progressivism has become more like a fundamentalist religion.

This thread is about boundary studies. If you want to make an argument that it is discriminatory to consider demographics as part of them, go right ahead. Once again, I'm sure you'll be pretending that the alternative is boundaries based purely on proximity rather than what we actually have now which are boundaries designed specifically to segregate White and other wealthy kids from low-income and BIPOC children.

Come on man. No one believes that, not even east county progressives. You just say that to justify busing. Are there a couple areas where this was done? Sure. Could those have been fixed by prioritizing proximity? Absolutely. Instead, unscrupulous BOE members altered the boundary policy without public notice to prioritize diversity. This could fix a few bad boundaries but it will create many more bad ones which is exactly what eadt county progressives want.

People (just you?) have spent years on DCUM claiming that the "especially diversity" language will mean that kids are being bussed from Kennedy to Whitman any day now, but we've been through several boundary studies since that time and every single time there have been options that prioritized diversity, and the Board has never even once chosen the option that maximized diversity. They've always balanced other factors.

When will you stop lying?

Typical progressive strawman. No on ever say Kennedy to Whitman would happen. But what WILL happen is a lot more kids from WJ bused to Einstein and vic versa. Now should SOME of those kid be moved for proximity reasons? Sure. Could that have been done if they prioritized proximity? Absolutely. But they didn't. They prioritized diversity so they could start busing.

WTF are they supposed to fit more kids at Einstein? You clearly aren't familiar with the school, it's already overcrowded. Maybe one ES feeder will get sent toWoodward. I think what's equally likely to happen is that DCC boundaries will shift slightly and some parts currently in the Einstein boundary (and maybe Blair) will shift to Northwood.

Imagine that there is a boundary study about to be conducted where they will move a lot of kids out of Einstein to schools like WJ, BCC, and Woodward and fills some of those seats with kids from WJ and BCC. This satisfies the diversity mandate and the capacity factor. It makes proximity worse but that's not as high a factor as diversity.

That makes no sense since the DCC schools are so overcrowded. If they are brave, they will move Woodlin ES, which is far from Einstein, to BCC,.and KPES, which is close.to Einstein,.to Einstein. Then they will move one, maybe two Einstein feeders, such as Flora Singer or Highland, to Northwood or Wheaton, and move one, maybe two Wheaton feeders, such as Viers Mill and Wheaton Woods,.to Woodward and/or WJ. Maybe they will.make BCC, WJ and Woodward part of the DCC, so anyone who doesn't want to travel there will can choose another school, but anyone zoned for those.schools.is still.guaranteed a spot there.

Was the Beach Drive closure part of the rationale here? We used to live right across the street from KP and driving out Beach Drive to Grosvenor made WJ a lot faster than Einstein would be.

Beach Drive is open during the week. I hope they don't move KP to Einstein but they might. I mostly hope they don't because my kid will start at WJ and then have to move and that sucks.

The diversity bus is definitely coming for you. Sorry. But east county progressives painted a target over Kensington years ago and constantly point to it as the reason they want busing.

Source? or just more drunken ramblings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Einstein is a great school. If you didn't send your kids there, how would you know?

In 2021 - 2022, 31.2% of Einstein students scored proficient in Math, and 64.3% scored proficient in Language Arts.

Everyone knows that state test was never a good measure of much of anything. I think 0% of the state is proficient at these things based on those metrics.

MCPS is a joke

Helpful.

[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:I feel like there is three morons posting on this thread for the past 30 pages, sometimes responding to them selves based on writing styles.

East county parents = we love poor kids but would love them more if sent to other peoples schools.

West county parents = no take backs

Ideal progressive = poor black kids simply need to see rich kids in their natural habitat to overcome all of society’s other systemic handicaps and generations of stunted momentum.

Ideal conservative = they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps even if only a few percentage make it out of the cycle. It’s worth abandoning the 90%+ because their exploitation is what props up the middle class and better them than me right?

Fabulous summary! (Grammar mistake aside, of course.)

Lol nope, these are just PP's hot takes on using boundary changes to promote diversity. Many of us who support including diversity as one of four priorities have said multiple times on this thread that we know it will be on the margins and that it won't fix anything.

Segregation as it exists now wasn't created in a day. It won't be reversed in one either. It will take a long series of small, seemingly inconsequential decisions to be anti-racist in drawing boundaries. The alternative is to continue entrenching segregation.

Anti-racism. Just say you want discrimination against whites and Asians.

How specifically do you think I would want discrimination against whites and Asians?

Because you are championing anti-racism and anti-racism discriminates against races who do well which, in the US, is whites and Asians.

Translation: I am totally fine with discrimination against Black and Latino (and Asian people but that's a story for another thread) people but won't admit it's happening despite mountains of evidence, and pretend that any efforts to combat that discrimination are "anti-White racism."

Can we get back to discussing boundary studies please?

False. As a good liberal, I oppose all forms of discrimination, even against whites and Asians. As a progressive, you want discrimination as long as it's the correct kind of discrimination which is of course, illiberal. Progressivism has become more like a fundamentalist religion.

This thread is about boundary studies. If you want to make an argument that it is discriminatory to consider demographics as part of them, go right ahead. Once again, I'm sure you'll be pretending that the alternative is boundaries based purely on proximity rather than what we actually have now which are boundaries designed specifically to segregate White and other wealthy kids from low-income and BIPOC children.

Come on man. No one believes that, not even east county progressives. You just say that to justify busing. Are there a couple areas where this was done? Sure. Could those have been fixed by prioritizing proximity? Absolutely. Instead, unscrupulous BOE members altered the boundary policy without public notice to prioritize diversity. This could fix a few bad boundaries but it will create many more bad ones which is exactly what eadt county progressives want.

People (just you?) have spent years on DCUM claiming that the "especially diversity" language will mean that kids are being bussed from Kennedy to Whitman any day now, but we've been through several boundary studies since that time and every single time there have been options that prioritized diversity, and the Board has never even once chosen the option that maximized diversity. They've always balanced other factors.

When will you stop lying?

Typical progressive strawman. No on ever say Kennedy to Whitman would happen. But what WILL happen is a lot more kids from WJ bused to Einstein and vic versa. Now should SOME of those kid be moved for proximity reasons? Sure. Could that have been done if they prioritized proximity? Absolutely. But they didn't. They prioritized diversity so they could start busing.

WTF are they supposed to fit more kids at Einstein? You clearly aren't familiar with the school, it's already overcrowded. Maybe one ES feeder will get sent toWoodward. I think what's equally likely to happen is that DCC boundaries will shift slightly and some parts currently in the Einstein boundary (and maybe Blair) will shift to Northwood.

Imagine that there is a boundary study about to be conducted where they will move a lot of kids out of Einstein to schools like WJ, BCC, and Woodward and fills some of those seats with kids from WJ and BCC. This satisfies the diversity mandate and the capacity factor. It makes proximity worse but that's not as high a factor as diversity.

That makes no sense since the DCC schools are so overcrowded. If they are brave, they will move Woodlin ES, which is far from Einstein, to BCC,.and KPES, which is close.to Einstein,.to Einstein. Then they will move one, maybe two Einstein feeders, such as Flora Singer or Highland, to Northwood or Wheaton, and move one, maybe two Wheaton feeders, such as Viers Mill and Wheaton Woods,.to Woodward and/or WJ. Maybe they will.make BCC, WJ and Woodward part of the DCC, so anyone who doesn't want to travel there will can choose another school, but anyone zoned for those.schools.is still.guaranteed a spot there.

Was the Beach Drive closure part of the rationale here? We used to live right across the street from KP and driving out Beach Drive to Grosvenor made WJ a lot faster than Einstein would be.

Beach Drive is open during the week. I hope they don't move KP to Einstein but they might. I mostly hope they don't because my kid will start at WJ and then have to move and that sucks.

The diversity bus is definitely coming for you. Sorry. But east county progressives painted a target over Kensington years ago and constantly point to it as the reason they want busing.

In the case of Kensington it’s not the diversity bus so much as it would be re-zoning kids to the school closest to where they live.

KP is a toss-up between WJ and Einstein but now that the BOE must especially strive to create more diversity schools, KP will get rezoned like many other unsuspecting neighborhoods.

[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:I feel like there is three morons posting on this thread for the past 30 pages, sometimes responding to them selves based on writing styles.

East county parents = we love poor kids but would love them more if sent to other peoples schools.

West county parents = no take backs

Ideal progressive = poor black kids simply need to see rich kids in their natural habitat to overcome all of society’s other systemic handicaps and generations of stunted momentum.

Ideal conservative = they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps even if only a few percentage make it out of the cycle. It’s worth abandoning the 90%+ because their exploitation is what props up the middle class and better them than me right?

Fabulous summary! (Grammar mistake aside, of course.)

Lol nope, these are just PP's hot takes on using boundary changes to promote diversity. Many of us who support including diversity as one of four priorities have said multiple times on this thread that we know it will be on the margins and that it won't fix anything.

Segregation as it exists now wasn't created in a day. It won't be reversed in one either. It will take a long series of small, seemingly inconsequential decisions to be anti-racist in drawing boundaries. The alternative is to continue entrenching segregation.

Anti-racism. Just say you want discrimination against whites and Asians.

How specifically do you think I would want discrimination against whites and Asians?

Because you are championing anti-racism and anti-racism discriminates against races who do well which, in the US, is whites and Asians.

Translation: I am totally fine with discrimination against Black and Latino (and Asian people but that's a story for another thread) people but won't admit it's happening despite mountains of evidence, and pretend that any efforts to combat that discrimination are "anti-White racism."

Can we get back to discussing boundary studies please?

False. As a good liberal, I oppose all forms of discrimination, even against whites and Asians. As a progressive, you want discrimination as long as it's the correct kind of discrimination which is of course, illiberal. Progressivism has become more like a fundamentalist religion.

This thread is about boundary studies. If you want to make an argument that it is discriminatory to consider demographics as part of them, go right ahead. Once again, I'm sure you'll be pretending that the alternative is boundaries based purely on proximity rather than what we actually have now which are boundaries designed specifically to segregate White and other wealthy kids from low-income and BIPOC children.

Come on man. No one believes that, not even east county progressives. You just say that to justify busing. Are there a couple areas where this was done? Sure. Could those have been fixed by prioritizing proximity? Absolutely. Instead, unscrupulous BOE members altered the boundary policy without public notice to prioritize diversity. This could fix a few bad boundaries but it will create many more bad ones which is exactly what eadt county progressives want.

People (just you?) have spent years on DCUM claiming that the "especially diversity" language will mean that kids are being bussed from Kennedy to Whitman any day now, but we've been through several boundary studies since that time and every single time there have been options that prioritized diversity, and the Board has never even once chosen the option that maximized diversity. They've always balanced other factors.

When will you stop lying?

Typical progressive strawman. No on ever say Kennedy to Whitman would happen. But what WILL happen is a lot more kids from WJ bused to Einstein and vic versa. Now should SOME of those kid be moved for proximity reasons? Sure. Could that have been done if they prioritized proximity? Absolutely. But they didn't. They prioritized diversity so they could start busing.

WTF are they supposed to fit more kids at Einstein? You clearly aren't familiar with the school, it's already overcrowded. Maybe one ES feeder will get sent toWoodward. I think what's equally likely to happen is that DCC boundaries will shift slightly and some parts currently in the Einstein boundary (and maybe Blair) will shift to Northwood.

Imagine that there is a boundary study about to be conducted where they will move a lot of kids out of Einstein to schools like WJ, BCC, and Woodward and fills some of those seats with kids from WJ and BCC. This satisfies the diversity mandate and the capacity factor. It makes proximity worse but that's not as high a factor as diversity.

That makes no sense since the DCC schools are so overcrowded. If they are brave, they will move Woodlin ES, which is far from Einstein, to BCC,.and KPES, which is close.to Einstein,.to Einstein. Then they will move one, maybe two Einstein feeders, such as Flora Singer or Highland, to Northwood or Wheaton, and move one, maybe two Wheaton feeders, such as Viers Mill and Wheaton Woods,.to Woodward and/or WJ. Maybe they will.make BCC, WJ and Woodward part of the DCC, so anyone who doesn't want to travel there will can choose another school, but anyone zoned for those.schools.is still.guaranteed a spot there.

Was the Beach Drive closure part of the rationale here? We used to live right across the street from KP and driving out Beach Drive to Grosvenor made WJ a lot faster than Einstein would be.

Beach Drive is open during the week. I hope they don't move KP to Einstein but they might. I mostly hope they don't because my kid will start at WJ and then have to move and that sucks.

The diversity bus is definitely coming for you. Sorry. But east county progressives painted a target over Kensington years ago and constantly point to it as the reason they want busing.

In the case of Kensington it’s not the diversity bus so much as it would be re-zoning kids to the school closest to where they live.

Most of the other side of the tracks are closer to Einstein. It really depends on what part of Kensington for WJ. Einstein has no room to take on more Kensington kids.

They'll make room by busing poor kids OUT of Einstein.

[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:I feel like there is three morons posting on this thread for the past 30 pages, sometimes responding to them selves based on writing styles.

East county parents = we love poor kids but would love them more if sent to other peoples schools.

West county parents = no take backs

Ideal progressive = poor black kids simply need to see rich kids in their natural habitat to overcome all of society’s other systemic handicaps and generations of stunted momentum.

Ideal conservative = they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps even if only a few percentage make it out of the cycle. It’s worth abandoning the 90%+ because their exploitation is what props up the middle class and better them than me right?

Fabulous summary! (Grammar mistake aside, of course.)

Lol nope, these are just PP's hot takes on using boundary changes to promote diversity. Many of us who support including diversity as one of four priorities have said multiple times on this thread that we know it will be on the margins and that it won't fix anything.

Segregation as it exists now wasn't created in a day. It won't be reversed in one either. It will take a long series of small, seemingly inconsequential decisions to be anti-racist in drawing boundaries. The alternative is to continue entrenching segregation.

Anti-racism. Just say you want discrimination against whites and Asians.

How specifically do you think I would want discrimination against whites and Asians?

Because you are championing anti-racism and anti-racism discriminates against races who do well which, in the US, is whites and Asians.

Translation: I am totally fine with discrimination against Black and Latino (and Asian people but that's a story for another thread) people but won't admit it's happening despite mountains of evidence, and pretend that any efforts to combat that discrimination are "anti-White racism."

Can we get back to discussing boundary studies please?

False. As a good liberal, I oppose all forms of discrimination, even against whites and Asians. As a progressive, you want discrimination as long as it's the correct kind of discrimination which is of course, illiberal. Progressivism has become more like a fundamentalist religion.

This thread is about boundary studies. If you want to make an argument that it is discriminatory to consider demographics as part of them, go right ahead. Once again, I'm sure you'll be pretending that the alternative is boundaries based purely on proximity rather than what we actually have now which are boundaries designed specifically to segregate White and other wealthy kids from low-income and BIPOC children.

Come on man. No one believes that, not even east county progressives. You just say that to justify busing. Are there a couple areas where this was done? Sure. Could those have been fixed by prioritizing proximity? Absolutely. Instead, unscrupulous BOE members altered the boundary policy without public notice to prioritize diversity. This could fix a few bad boundaries but it will create many more bad ones which is exactly what eadt county progressives want.

People (just you?) have spent years on DCUM claiming that the "especially diversity" language will mean that kids are being bussed from Kennedy to Whitman any day now, but we've been through several boundary studies since that time and every single time there have been options that prioritized diversity, and the Board has never even once chosen the option that maximized diversity. They've always balanced other factors.

When will you stop lying?

Typical progressive strawman. No on ever say Kennedy to Whitman would happen. But what WILL happen is a lot more kids from WJ bused to Einstein and vic versa. Now should SOME of those kid be moved for proximity reasons? Sure. Could that have been done if they prioritized proximity? Absolutely. But they didn't. They prioritized diversity so they could start busing.

WTF are they supposed to fit more kids at Einstein? You clearly aren't familiar with the school, it's already overcrowded. Maybe one ES feeder will get sent toWoodward. I think what's equally likely to happen is that DCC boundaries will shift slightly and some parts currently in the Einstein boundary (and maybe Blair) will shift to Northwood.

Imagine that there is a boundary study about to be conducted where they will move a lot of kids out of Einstein to schools like WJ, BCC, and Woodward and fills some of those seats with kids from WJ and BCC. This satisfies the diversity mandate and the capacity factor. It makes proximity worse but that's not as high a factor as diversity.

That makes no sense since the DCC schools are so overcrowded. If they are brave, they will move Woodlin ES, which is far from Einstein, to BCC,.and KPES, which is close.to Einstein,.to Einstein. Then they will move one, maybe two Einstein feeders, such as Flora Singer or Highland, to Northwood or Wheaton, and move one, maybe two Wheaton feeders, such as Viers Mill and Wheaton Woods,.to Woodward and/or WJ. Maybe they will.make BCC, WJ and Woodward part of the DCC, so anyone who doesn't want to travel there will can choose another school, but anyone zoned for those.schools.is still.guaranteed a spot there.

Was the Beach Drive closure part of the rationale here? We used to live right across the street from KP and driving out Beach Drive to Grosvenor made WJ a lot faster than Einstein would be.

Beach Drive is open during the week. I hope they don't move KP to Einstein but they might. I mostly hope they don't because my kid will start at WJ and then have to move and that sucks.

The diversity bus is definitely coming for you. Sorry. But east county progressives painted a target over Kensington years ago and constantly point to it as the reason they want busing.

Source? or just more drunken ramblings?

The source is the diversity-first boundary policy and the screeches of east county progressives on this very board (and others) about how Kensington needs to go to Einstein.

[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:I feel like there is three morons posting on this thread for the past 30 pages, sometimes responding to them selves based on writing styles.

East county parents = we love poor kids but would love them more if sent to other peoples schools.

West county parents = no take backs

Ideal progressive = poor black kids simply need to see rich kids in their natural habitat to overcome all of society’s other systemic handicaps and generations of stunted momentum.

Ideal conservative = they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps even if only a few percentage make it out of the cycle. It’s worth abandoning the 90%+ because their exploitation is what props up the middle class and better them than me right?

Fabulous summary! (Grammar mistake aside, of course.)

Lol nope, these are just PP's hot takes on using boundary changes to promote diversity. Many of us who support including diversity as one of four priorities have said multiple times on this thread that we know it will be on the margins and that it won't fix anything.

Segregation as it exists now wasn't created in a day. It won't be reversed in one either. It will take a long series of small, seemingly inconsequential decisions to be anti-racist in drawing boundaries. The alternative is to continue entrenching segregation.

Anti-racism. Just say you want discrimination against whites and Asians.

How specifically do you think I would want discrimination against whites and Asians?

Because you are championing anti-racism and anti-racism discriminates against races who do well which, in the US, is whites and Asians.

Translation: I am totally fine with discrimination against Black and Latino (and Asian people but that's a story for another thread) people but won't admit it's happening despite mountains of evidence, and pretend that any efforts to combat that discrimination are "anti-White racism."

Can we get back to discussing boundary studies please?

False. As a good liberal, I oppose all forms of discrimination, even against whites and Asians. As a progressive, you want discrimination as long as it's the correct kind of discrimination which is of course, illiberal. Progressivism has become more like a fundamentalist religion.

This thread is about boundary studies. If you want to make an argument that it is discriminatory to consider demographics as part of them, go right ahead. Once again, I'm sure you'll be pretending that the alternative is boundaries based purely on proximity rather than what we actually have now which are boundaries designed specifically to segregate White and other wealthy kids from low-income and BIPOC children.

Come on man. No one believes that, not even east county progressives. You just say that to justify busing. Are there a couple areas where this was done? Sure. Could those have been fixed by prioritizing proximity? Absolutely. Instead, unscrupulous BOE members altered the boundary policy without public notice to prioritize diversity. This could fix a few bad boundaries but it will create many more bad ones which is exactly what eadt county progressives want.

People (just you?) have spent years on DCUM claiming that the "especially diversity" language will mean that kids are being bussed from Kennedy to Whitman any day now, but we've been through several boundary studies since that time and every single time there have been options that prioritized diversity, and the Board has never even once chosen the option that maximized diversity. They've always balanced other factors.

When will you stop lying?

Typical progressive strawman. No on ever say Kennedy to Whitman would happen. But what WILL happen is a lot more kids from WJ bused to Einstein and vic versa. Now should SOME of those kid be moved for proximity reasons? Sure. Could that have been done if they prioritized proximity? Absolutely. But they didn't. They prioritized diversity so they could start busing.

WTF are they supposed to fit more kids at Einstein? You clearly aren't familiar with the school, it's already overcrowded. Maybe one ES feeder will get sent toWoodward. I think what's equally likely to happen is that DCC boundaries will shift slightly and some parts currently in the Einstein boundary (and maybe Blair) will shift to Northwood.

Imagine that there is a boundary study about to be conducted where they will move a lot of kids out of Einstein to schools like WJ, BCC, and Woodward and fills some of those seats with kids from WJ and BCC. This satisfies the diversity mandate and the capacity factor. It makes proximity worse but that's not as high a factor as diversity.

That makes no sense since the DCC schools are so overcrowded. If they are brave, they will move Woodlin ES, which is far from Einstein, to BCC,.and KPES, which is close.to Einstein,.to Einstein. Then they will move one, maybe two Einstein feeders, such as Flora Singer or Highland, to Northwood or Wheaton, and move one, maybe two Wheaton feeders, such as Viers Mill and Wheaton Woods,.to Woodward and/or WJ. Maybe they will.make BCC, WJ and Woodward part of the DCC, so anyone who doesn't want to travel there will can choose another school, but anyone zoned for those.schools.is still.guaranteed a spot there.

Was the Beach Drive closure part of the rationale here? We used to live right across the street from KP and driving out Beach Drive to Grosvenor made WJ a lot faster than Einstein would be.

Beach Drive is open during the week. I hope they don't move KP to Einstein but they might. I mostly hope they don't because my kid will start at WJ and then have to move and that sucks.

The diversity bus is definitely coming for you. Sorry. But east county progressives painted a target over Kensington years ago and constantly point to it as the reason they want busing.

Source? or just more drunken ramblings?

The source is the diversity-first boundary policy and the screeches of east county progressives on this very board (and others) about how Kensington needs to go to Einstein.

So basically imaginary drivel. Got it!

[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:I feel like there is three morons posting on this thread for the past 30 pages, sometimes responding to them selves based on writing styles.

East county parents = we love poor kids but would love them more if sent to other peoples schools.

West county parents = no take backs

Ideal progressive = poor black kids simply need to see rich kids in their natural habitat to overcome all of society’s other systemic handicaps and generations of stunted momentum.

Ideal conservative = they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps even if only a few percentage make it out of the cycle. It’s worth abandoning the 90%+ because their exploitation is what props up the middle class and better them than me right?

Fabulous summary! (Grammar mistake aside, of course.)

Lol nope, these are just PP's hot takes on using boundary changes to promote diversity. Many of us who support including diversity as one of four priorities have said multiple times on this thread that we know it will be on the margins and that it won't fix anything.

Segregation as it exists now wasn't created in a day. It won't be reversed in one either. It will take a long series of small, seemingly inconsequential decisions to be anti-racist in drawing boundaries. The alternative is to continue entrenching segregation.

Anti-racism. Just say you want discrimination against whites and Asians.

How specifically do you think I would want discrimination against whites and Asians?

Because you are championing anti-racism and anti-racism discriminates against races who do well which, in the US, is whites and Asians.

Translation: I am totally fine with discrimination against Black and Latino (and Asian people but that's a story for another thread) people but won't admit it's happening despite mountains of evidence, and pretend that any efforts to combat that discrimination are "anti-White racism."

Can we get back to discussing boundary studies please?

False. As a good liberal, I oppose all forms of discrimination, even against whites and Asians. As a progressive, you want discrimination as long as it's the correct kind of discrimination which is of course, illiberal. Progressivism has become more like a fundamentalist religion.

This thread is about boundary studies. If you want to make an argument that it is discriminatory to consider demographics as part of them, go right ahead. Once again, I'm sure you'll be pretending that the alternative is boundaries based purely on proximity rather than what we actually have now which are boundaries designed specifically to segregate White and other wealthy kids from low-income and BIPOC children.

Come on man. No one believes that, not even east county progressives. You just say that to justify busing. Are there a couple areas where this was done? Sure. Could those have been fixed by prioritizing proximity? Absolutely. Instead, unscrupulous BOE members altered the boundary policy without public notice to prioritize diversity. This could fix a few bad boundaries but it will create many more bad ones which is exactly what eadt county progressives want.

People (just you?) have spent years on DCUM claiming that the "especially diversity" language will mean that kids are being bussed from Kennedy to Whitman any day now, but we've been through several boundary studies since that time and every single time there have been options that prioritized diversity, and the Board has never even once chosen the option that maximized diversity. They've always balanced other factors.

When will you stop lying?

Typical progressive strawman. No on ever say Kennedy to Whitman would happen. But what WILL happen is a lot more kids from WJ bused to Einstein and vic versa. Now should SOME of those kid be moved for proximity reasons? Sure. Could that have been done if they prioritized proximity? Absolutely. But they didn't. They prioritized diversity so they could start busing.

WTF are they supposed to fit more kids at Einstein? You clearly aren't familiar with the school, it's already overcrowded. Maybe one ES feeder will get sent toWoodward. I think what's equally likely to happen is that DCC boundaries will shift slightly and some parts currently in the Einstein boundary (and maybe Blair) will shift to Northwood.

Imagine that there is a boundary study about to be conducted where they will move a lot of kids out of Einstein to schools like WJ, BCC, and Woodward and fills some of those seats with kids from WJ and BCC. This satisfies the diversity mandate and the capacity factor. It makes proximity worse but that's not as high a factor as diversity.

That makes no sense since the DCC schools are so overcrowded. If they are brave, they will move Woodlin ES, which is far from Einstein, to BCC,.and KPES, which is close.to Einstein,.to Einstein. Then they will move one, maybe two Einstein feeders, such as Flora Singer or Highland, to Northwood or Wheaton, and move one, maybe two Wheaton feeders, such as Viers Mill and Wheaton Woods,.to Woodward and/or WJ. Maybe they will.make BCC, WJ and Woodward part of the DCC, so anyone who doesn't want to travel there will can choose another school, but anyone zoned for those.schools.is still.guaranteed a spot there.

Was the Beach Drive closure part of the rationale here? We used to live right across the street from KP and driving out Beach Drive to Grosvenor made WJ a lot faster than Einstein would be.

Beach Drive is open during the week. I hope they don't move KP to Einstein but they might. I mostly hope they don't because my kid will start at WJ and then have to move and that sucks.

The diversity bus is definitely coming for you. Sorry. But east county progressives painted a target over Kensington years ago and constantly point to it as the reason they want busing.

Source? or just more drunken ramblings?

The source is the diversity-first boundary policy and the screeches of east county progressives on this very board (and others) about how Kensington needs to go to Einstein.

Drunken ramblings. 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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like there is three morons posting on this thread for the past 30 pages, sometimes responding to them selves based on writing styles.

East county parents = we love poor kids but would love them more if sent to other peoples schools.

West county parents = no take backs

Ideal progressive = poor black kids simply need to see rich kids in their natural habitat to overcome all of society’s other systemic handicaps and generations of stunted momentum.

Ideal conservative = they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps even if only a few percentage make it out of the cycle. It’s worth abandoning the 90%+ because their exploitation is what props up the middle class and better them than me right?

Fabulous summary! (Grammar mistake aside, of course.)

Lol nope, these are just PP's hot takes on using boundary changes to promote diversity. Many of us who support including diversity as one of four priorities have said multiple times on this thread that we know it will be on the margins and that it won't fix anything.

Segregation as it exists now wasn't created in a day. It won't be reversed in one either. It will take a long series of small, seemingly inconsequential decisions to be anti-racist in drawing boundaries. The alternative is to continue entrenching segregation.

Anti-racism. Just say you want discrimination against whites and Asians.

How specifically do you think I would want discrimination against whites and Asians?

Because you are championing anti-racism and anti-racism discriminates against races who do well which, in the US, is whites and Asians.

Translation: I am totally fine with discrimination against Black and Latino (and Asian people but that's a story for another thread) people but won't admit it's happening despite mountains of evidence, and pretend that any efforts to combat that discrimination are "anti-White racism."

Can we get back to discussing boundary studies please?

False. As a good liberal, I oppose all forms of discrimination, even against whites and Asians. As a progressive, you want discrimination as long as it's the correct kind of discrimination which is of course, illiberal. Progressivism has become more like a fundamentalist religion.

This thread is about boundary studies. If you want to make an argument that it is discriminatory to consider demographics as part of them, go right ahead. Once again, I'm sure you'll be pretending that the alternative is boundaries based purely on proximity rather than what we actually have now which are boundaries designed specifically to segregate White and other wealthy kids from low-income and BIPOC children.

Come on man. No one believes that, not even east county progressives. You just say that to justify busing. Are there a couple areas where this was done? Sure. Could those have been fixed by prioritizing proximity? Absolutely. Instead, unscrupulous BOE members altered the boundary policy without public notice to prioritize diversity. This could fix a few bad boundaries but it will create many more bad ones which is exactly what eadt county progressives want.

People (just you?) have spent years on DCUM claiming that the "especially diversity" language will mean that kids are being bussed from Kennedy to Whitman any day now, but we've been through several boundary studies since that time and every single time there have been options that prioritized diversity, and the Board has never even once chosen the option that maximized diversity. They've always balanced other factors.

When will you stop lying?

Typical progressive strawman. No on ever say Kennedy to Whitman would happen. But what WILL happen is a lot more kids from WJ bused to Einstein and vic versa. Now should SOME of those kid be moved for proximity reasons? Sure. Could that have been done if they prioritized proximity? Absolutely. But they didn't. They prioritized diversity so they could start busing.

WTF are they supposed to fit more kids at Einstein? You clearly aren't familiar with the school, it's already overcrowded. Maybe one ES feeder will get sent toWoodward. I think what's equally likely to happen is that DCC boundaries will shift slightly and some parts currently in the Einstein boundary (and maybe Blair) will shift to Northwood.

Imagine that there is a boundary study about to be conducted where they will move a lot of kids out of Einstein to schools like WJ, BCC, and Woodward and fills some of those seats with kids from WJ and BCC. This satisfies the diversity mandate and the capacity factor. It makes proximity worse but that's not as high a factor as diversity.

That makes no sense since the DCC schools are so overcrowded. If they are brave, they will move Woodlin ES, which is far from Einstein, to BCC,.and KPES, which is close.to Einstein,.to Einstein. Then they will move one, maybe two Einstein feeders, such as Flora Singer or Highland, to Northwood or Wheaton, and move one, maybe two Wheaton feeders, such as Viers Mill and Wheaton Woods,.to Woodward and/or WJ. Maybe they will.make BCC, WJ and Woodward part of the DCC, so anyone who doesn't want to travel there will can choose another school, but anyone zoned for those.schools.is still.guaranteed a spot there.

Was the Beach Drive closure part of the rationale here? We used to live right across the street from KP and driving out Beach Drive to Grosvenor made WJ a lot faster than Einstein would be.

Beach Drive is open during the week. I hope they don't move KP to Einstein but they might. I mostly hope they don't because my kid will start at WJ and then have to move and that sucks.

The diversity bus is definitely coming for you. Sorry. But east county progressives painted a target over Kensington years ago and constantly point to it as the reason they want busing.

Source? or just more drunken ramblings?

The source is the diversity-first boundary policy and the screeches of east county progressives on this very board (and others) about how Kensington needs to go to Einstein.

So basically imaginary drivel. Got it!

DCUM has a handy search feature. You should try it sometime. You'll find all sorts of progressive screeching about this issue.

[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:I feel like there is three morons posting on this thread for the past 30 pages, sometimes responding to them selves based on writing styles.

East county parents = we love poor kids but would love them more if sent to other peoples schools.

West county parents = no take backs

Ideal progressive = poor black kids simply need to see rich kids in their natural habitat to overcome all of society’s other systemic handicaps and generations of stunted momentum.

Ideal conservative = they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps even if only a few percentage make it out of the cycle. It’s worth abandoning the 90%+ because their exploitation is what props up the middle class and better them than me right?

Fabulous summary! (Grammar mistake aside, of course.)

Lol nope, these are just PP's hot takes on using boundary changes to promote diversity. Many of us who support including diversity as one of four priorities have said multiple times on this thread that we know it will be on the margins and that it won't fix anything.

Segregation as it exists now wasn't created in a day. It won't be reversed in one either. It will take a long series of small, seemingly inconsequential decisions to be anti-racist in drawing boundaries. The alternative is to continue entrenching segregation.

Anti-racism. Just say you want discrimination against whites and Asians.

How specifically do you think I would want discrimination against whites and Asians?

Because you are championing anti-racism and anti-racism discriminates against races who do well which, in the US, is whites and Asians.

Translation: I am totally fine with discrimination against Black and Latino (and Asian people but that's a story for another thread) people but won't admit it's happening despite mountains of evidence, and pretend that any efforts to combat that discrimination are "anti-White racism."

Can we get back to discussing boundary studies please?

False. As a good liberal, I oppose all forms of discrimination, even against whites and Asians. As a progressive, you want discrimination as long as it's the correct kind of discrimination which is of course, illiberal. Progressivism has become more like a fundamentalist religion.

This thread is about boundary studies. If you want to make an argument that it is discriminatory to consider demographics as part of them, go right ahead. Once again, I'm sure you'll be pretending that the alternative is boundaries based purely on proximity rather than what we actually have now which are boundaries designed specifically to segregate White and other wealthy kids from low-income and BIPOC children.

Come on man. No one believes that, not even east county progressives. You just say that to justify busing. Are there a couple areas where this was done? Sure. Could those have been fixed by prioritizing proximity? Absolutely. Instead, unscrupulous BOE members altered the boundary policy without public notice to prioritize diversity. This could fix a few bad boundaries but it will create many more bad ones which is exactly what eadt county progressives want.

People (just you?) have spent years on DCUM claiming that the "especially diversity" language will mean that kids are being bussed from Kennedy to Whitman any day now, but we've been through several boundary studies since that time and every single time there have been options that prioritized diversity, and the Board has never even once chosen the option that maximized diversity. They've always balanced other factors.

When will you stop lying?

Typical progressive strawman. No on ever say Kennedy to Whitman would happen. But what WILL happen is a lot more kids from WJ bused to Einstein and vic versa. Now should SOME of those kid be moved for proximity reasons? Sure. Could that have been done if they prioritized proximity? Absolutely. But they didn't. They prioritized diversity so they could start busing.

WTF are they supposed to fit more kids at Einstein? You clearly aren't familiar with the school, it's already overcrowded. Maybe one ES feeder will get sent toWoodward. I think what's equally likely to happen is that DCC boundaries will shift slightly and some parts currently in the Einstein boundary (and maybe Blair) will shift to Northwood.

Imagine that there is a boundary study about to be conducted where they will move a lot of kids out of Einstein to schools like WJ, BCC, and Woodward and fills some of those seats with kids from WJ and BCC. This satisfies the diversity mandate and the capacity factor. It makes proximity worse but that's not as high a factor as diversity.

That makes no sense since the DCC schools are so overcrowded. If they are brave, they will move Woodlin ES, which is far from Einstein, to BCC,.and KPES, which is close.to Einstein,.to Einstein. Then they will move one, maybe two Einstein feeders, such as Flora Singer or Highland, to Northwood or Wheaton, and move one, maybe two Wheaton feeders, such as Viers Mill and Wheaton Woods,.to Woodward and/or WJ. Maybe they will.make BCC, WJ and Woodward part of the DCC, so anyone who doesn't want to travel there will can choose another school, but anyone zoned for those.schools.is still.guaranteed a spot there.

Was the Beach Drive closure part of the rationale here? We used to live right across the street from KP and driving out Beach Drive to Grosvenor made WJ a lot faster than Einstein would be.

Beach Drive is open during the week. I hope they don't move KP to Einstein but they might. I mostly hope they don't because my kid will start at WJ and then have to move and that sucks.

The diversity bus is definitely coming for you. Sorry. But east county progressives painted a target over Kensington years ago and constantly point to it as the reason they want busing.

In the case of Kensington it’s not the diversity bus so much as it would be re-zoning kids to the school closest to where they live.

Most of the other side of the tracks are closer to Einstein. It really depends on what part of Kensington for WJ. Einstein has no room to take on more Kensington kids.

They'll make room by busing poor kids OUT of Einstein.

How about we keep our great kids from lower income parents as most kids so they are all "poor" and you continue to self segregate.