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.
Let’s call a spade a spade, if Highland is moved out of Einstein it drastically changes the school’s demographics. An Einstein composed of OTES, Rock View, Flora Singer and Parkwood is a completely different school.
If they are bold they will send OTES to Wheaton.
A good bit of it is walkable to Einstein.
Yes, you've posted this obvious point many times before. They will need to rezone a lot of "walkers" as part of this boundary study.
Why would they "need to"?
Because there are a lot of walkers in the DCC and a lot of overcrowding and it's not practical to only rezone the non-walkers. Woodlin should obviously be rezoned to BCC, but if you do that by itself you're increasing segregation, so you have to swap KPES in and take another school out. You can't send Flora Singer to Woodward, for example, that's ridiculous. You can maybe send it to Northwood? But then how do you alleviate the overcrowding at Blair?
To make your point about there being a lot of walkers in the DCC you actually just named 2 DCC schools that have no walkers. From MCPSs perspective Woodlin and Singer are more easily re-zoned because all of those kids are on buses anyway.
Where do you think they will send Flora Singer?
Flora Singer is further than many other of the ES, so I could not imagine they'd send them to Woodward.
All schools have walkers. Lots of busses too.
And I could not imagine a BOE prioritizing diversity above proximity, but here we are. So is that move makes Woodward more diverse, that's what's going to happen.
You mean there you are. The rest of us are here in the real world, where they consider all four factors, look at the tradeoffs, and more often than not, do not go with options which would have prioritized diversity.
No we ALL are. The diversity-first boundary policy affects everyone. And this study includes Kensington, the area progressives have been screeching about for years. The Crown study will include a few Wootton neighborhoods that progressives have also been screeching about. The diversity bus is coming for these areas and more. The severity of busing will depend on how much the BOE wants to virtue signal their progressive values when the decision is made.
Yes, I think the IMAGINARY diversity first boundary might do that. The other poster is talking about real policy.
Perhaps you'd like to post the verbiage of the boundary policy so everyone can see what it says. We just need the 4 factors section.
It's been done many times already and clearly states all 4 factors carry equal weight.
It actually doesn't state that. It says that the BOE must especially strive to create more diverse schools.
No, it doesn't state anyone "must" do anything. You have been trying to read this document for five years and still haven't understood it. And you conveniently disregard this sentence:
"While each of the factors will be considered, it may not be feasible to reconcile each and every recommendation with each and every factor."
There is also the accompanying regulation FAA-RA, which provides this helpful clarification, italics mine:
"This means that a key consideration is significant disparity in the demographic characteristics between schools in the affected geographic areas that cannot be justified by any other factor.
Therefore, any of the other three factors can justify disparities in demographic characteristics. In other words, the demographics factor is not the top priority.
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.
Let’s call a spade a spade, if Highland is moved out of Einstein it drastically changes the school’s demographics. An Einstein composed of OTES, Rock View, Flora Singer and Parkwood is a completely different school.
If they are bold they will send OTES to Wheaton.
A good bit of it is walkable to Einstein.
Yes, you've posted this obvious point many times before. They will need to rezone a lot of "walkers" as part of this boundary study.
Why would they "need to"?
Because there are a lot of walkers in the DCC and a lot of overcrowding and it's not practical to only rezone the non-walkers. Woodlin should obviously be rezoned to BCC, but if you do that by itself you're increasing segregation, so you have to swap KPES in and take another school out. You can't send Flora Singer to Woodward, for example, that's ridiculous. You can maybe send it to Northwood? But then how do you alleviate the overcrowding at Blair?
To make your point about there being a lot of walkers in the DCC you actually just named 2 DCC schools that have no walkers. From MCPSs perspective Woodlin and Singer are more easily re-zoned because all of those kids are on buses anyway.
Where do you think they will send Flora Singer?
Flora Singer is further than many other of the ES, so I could not imagine they'd send them to Woodward.
All schools have walkers. Lots of busses too.
And I could not imagine a BOE prioritizing diversity above proximity, but here we are. So is that move makes Woodward more diverse, that's what's going to happen.
You mean there you are. The rest of us are here in the real world, where they consider all four factors, look at the tradeoffs, and more often than not, do not go with options which would have prioritized diversity.
No we ALL are. The diversity-first boundary policy affects everyone. And this study includes Kensington, the area progressives have been screeching about for years. The Crown study will include a few Wootton neighborhoods that progressives have also been screeching about. The diversity bus is coming for these areas and more. The severity of busing will depend on how much the BOE wants to virtue signal their progressive values when the decision is made.
Yes, I think the IMAGINARY diversity first boundary might do that. The other poster is talking about real policy.
Perhaps you'd like to post the verbiage of the boundary policy so everyone can see what it says. We just need the 4 factors section.
It's been done many times already and clearly states all 4 factors carry equal weight.
It actually doesn't state that. It says that the BOE must especially strive to create more diverse schools.
No, it doesn't state anyone "must" do anything. You have been trying to read this document for five years and still haven't understood it. And you conveniently disregard this sentence:
"While each of the factors will be considered, it may not be feasible to reconcile each and every recommendation with each and every factor."
https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/faa.pdf[/quote"]Options should especially strive to
create a diverse student body in each of the affected schools." So I guess you're right that it doesn't say they must do busing. It says they SHOULD do busing.
Anonymous wrote:There is also the accompanying regulation FAA-RA, which provides this helpful clarification, italics mine:
"This means that a key consideration is significant disparity in the demographic characteristics between schools in the affected geographic areas that cannot be justified by any other factor.
Therefore, any of the other three factors can justify disparities in demographic characteristics. In other words, the demographics factor is not the top priority.
Ah yes, justified. With equity, almost anything an be justified. So it will depend how progressive the BOE is when they make the decision. For instance one BOE member said "once kids are on a bus, it doesn't matter how far that bus going."
Anonymous wrote:There is also the accompanying regulation FAA-RA, which provides this helpful clarification, italics mine:
"This means that a key consideration is significant disparity in the demographic characteristics between schools in the affected geographic areas that cannot be justified by any other factor.
Therefore, any of the other three factors can justify disparities in demographic characteristics. In other words, the demographics factor is not the top priority.
Ah yes, justified. With equity, almost anything an be justified. So it will depend how progressive the BOE is when they make the decision. For instance one BOE member said "once kids are on a bus, it doesn't matter how far that bus going."
And yet the proximity factor seems to be the one the BoE uses most.
Anonymous wrote:There is also the accompanying regulation FAA-RA, which provides this helpful clarification, italics mine:
"This means that a key consideration is significant disparity in the demographic characteristics between schools in the affected geographic areas that cannot be justified by any other factor.
Therefore, any of the other three factors can justify disparities in demographic characteristics. In other words, the demographics factor is not the top priority.
Ah yes, justified. With equity, almost anything an be justified. So it will depend how progressive the BOE is when they make the decision. For instance one BOE member said "once kids are on a bus, it doesn't matter how far that bus going."
And yet the proximity factor seems to be the one the BoE uses most.
That's because most of the studies were small in scale and didn't provide the kind of opportunity to do busing that this study and the Crown study will. At the end of the day, all I want is for people to know the history of the boundary policy and what was said when they changed it. That 8ncludes the underhanded way it was changed (without alerting the public). You seem to want people to think that there's no way anyone will be bused so they stop paying attention. Progressives have shown that you only care about democracy when it benefits you.
Anonymous wrote:I think both sides a represented by only trolls at this point, at least for the last 40 or so pages
You say trolls. I say opposing interests. There are those who want busing and those who don't. The pro busing side is trying to convince everyone that busing won't happen so they should just go about their lives and not worry about it. The anti-busing side knows what the intent of the boundary policy changes and boundary analysis were because we watched the BOE meetings and heard the words of the BOE members themselves and we want the public to keep a close eye on this process. Which side sounds more democratic?
Anonymous wrote:There is also the accompanying regulation FAA-RA, which provides this helpful clarification, italics mine:
"This means that a key consideration is significant disparity in the demographic characteristics between schools in the affected geographic areas that cannot be justified by any other factor.
Therefore, any of the other three factors can justify disparities in demographic characteristics. In other words, the demographics factor is not the top priority.
Ah yes, justified. With equity, almost anything an be justified. So it will depend how progressive the BOE is when they make the decision. For instance one BOE member said "once kids are on a bus, it doesn't matter how far that bus going."
And yet the proximity factor seems to be the one the BoE uses most.
That's because most of the studies were small in scale and didn't provide the kind of opportunity to do busing that this study and the Crown study will. At the end of the day, all I want is for people to know the history of the boundary policy and what was said when they changed it. That 8ncludes the underhanded way it was changed (without alerting the public). You seem to want people to think that there's no way anyone will be bused so they stop paying attention. Progressives have shown that you only care about democracy when it benefits you.
LOL that's completely false. It's because they prioritize proximity. You need to read the policy more carefully.
Anonymous wrote:I think both sides a represented by only trolls at this point, at least for the last 40 or so pages
You say trolls. I say opposing interests. There are those who want busing and those who don't. The pro busing side is trying to convince everyone that busing won't happen so they should just go about their lives and not worry about it. The anti-busing side knows what the intent of the boundary policy changes and boundary analysis were because we watched the BOE meetings and heard the words of the BOE members themselves and we want the public to keep a close eye on this process. Which side sounds more democratic?
Anonymous wrote:I think both sides a represented by only trolls at this point, at least for the last 40 or so pages
You say trolls. I say opposing interests. There are those who want busing and those who don't. The pro busing side is trying to convince everyone that busing won't happen so they should just go about their lives and not worry about it. The anti-busing side knows what the intent of the boundary policy changes and boundary analysis were because we watched the BOE meetings and heard the words of the BOE members themselves and we want the public to keep a close eye on this process. Which side sounds more democratic?
Forum Index
»
Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}