Cliff Notes summary of MCPS boundary study fight?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

My attitude is that I'm suspicious of the BOE's intentions. Adjusting boundaries in adjoining clusters to address imbalances in school capacity, while still prioritizing neighborhood schools, is sometimes unpopular, but it makes sense. Going beyond that, and making kids (of all economic backgrounds and races) ride buses for long distances/commute times to balance out FARMS rates across schools and paper over the fact that MCPS has thrown in the towel on improving neighborhood schools in poorer neighborhoods, is not acceptable.

This is not a fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My attitude is that I'm suspicious of the BOE's intentions. Adjusting boundaries in adjoining clusters to address imbalances in school capacity, while still prioritizing neighborhood schools, is sometimes unpopular, but it makes sense. Going beyond that, and making kids (of all economic backgrounds and races) ride buses for long distances/commute times to balance out FARMS rates across schools and paper over the fact that MCPS has thrown in the towel on improving neighborhood schools in poorer neighborhoods, is not acceptable.

This is not a fact.

They throw more at teachers in these schools, expecting results.

know what will get results?
smaller class sizes
more planning time, fewer meetings
more sped and ESOL support
half the BS paperwork

That's a start.

But think about the BS with the innovative schools - Nix and Arcola. What a joke that is! It's just another band aid measure Jack will use to pad his resume.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My attitude is that I'm suspicious of the BOE's intentions. Adjusting boundaries in adjoining clusters to address imbalances in school capacity, while still prioritizing neighborhood schools, is sometimes unpopular, but it makes sense. Going beyond that, and making kids (of all economic backgrounds and races) ride buses for long distances/commute times to balance out FARMS rates across schools and paper over the fact that MCPS has thrown in the towel on improving neighborhood schools in poorer neighborhoods, is not acceptable.

This is not a fact.

They throw more at teachers in these schools, expecting results.

know what will get results?
smaller class sizes
more planning time, fewer meetings
more sped and ESOL support
half the BS paperwork

That's a start.

But think about the BS with the innovative schools - Nix and Arcola. What a joke that is! It's just another band aid measure Jack will use to pad his resume.

it's chasing the wind. Things need to be fixed at home period. PP nailed it. Teachers aren't social workers or counselors expecting schools to fix neglect and indifference at home is a fools errand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

it's chasing the wind. Things need to be fixed at home period. PP nailed it. Teachers aren't social workers or counselors expecting schools to fix neglect and indifference at home is a fools errand.

It's always a joy to read on DCUM that poor, black, and Hispanic parents are neglectful and indifferent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

it's chasing the wind. Things need to be fixed at home period. PP nailed it. Teachers aren't social workers or counselors expecting schools to fix neglect and indifference at home is a fools errand.

It's always a joy to read on DCUM that poor, black, and Hispanic parents are neglectful and indifferent.

once again your side is adding words

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

it's chasing the wind. Things need to be fixed at home period. PP nailed it. Teachers aren't social workers or counselors expecting schools to fix neglect and indifference at home is a fools errand.

It's always a joy to read on DCUM that poor, black, and Hispanic parents are neglectful and indifferent.

If the majority of kids failing are minorities, whose fault is it?

Should we blame the teachers? the curriculum? a combination of the two?

What role do parents play?

I've spend 90% of my time in DCC and NEC schools. I would often say that we ARE the gap. Now, I'm at a school with whites who are underperforming - kids who would rather work than attend school, kids with poor attendance, kids with gaps in skills.

Should we blame the teachers? the curriculum? a combination of the two?

And again, what role do parents play?

See where I'm going with this?

DCUM doesn't see parts of the county where there are poor whites!

You all need to get out more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

it's chasing the wind. Things need to be fixed at home period. PP nailed it. Teachers aren't social workers or counselors expecting schools to fix neglect and indifference at home is a fools errand.

It's always a joy to read on DCUM that poor, black, and Hispanic parents are neglectful and indifferent.

If the majority of kids failing are minorities, whose fault is it?

Should we blame the teachers? the curriculum? a combination of the two?

What role do parents play?

I've spend 90% of my time in DCC and NEC schools. I would often say that we ARE the gap. Now, I'm at a school with whites who are underperforming - kids who would rather work than attend school, kids with poor attendance, kids with gaps in skills.

Should we blame the teachers? the curriculum? a combination of the two?

And again, what role do parents play?

See where I'm going with this?

DCUM doesn't see parts of the county where there are poor whites!

You all need to get out more.

County or country?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

it's chasing the wind. Things need to be fixed at home period. PP nailed it. Teachers aren't social workers or counselors expecting schools to fix neglect and indifference at home is a fools errand.

It's always a joy to read on DCUM that poor, black, and Hispanic parents are neglectful and indifferent.

once again your side is adding words

The PP was talking about the achievement gap. PP's comment was about teachers/schools inability to "fix neglect and indifference at home." Please explain what else the PP could have meant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

it's chasing the wind. Things need to be fixed at home period. PP nailed it. Teachers aren't social workers or counselors expecting schools to fix neglect and indifference at home is a fools errand.

It's always a joy to read on DCUM that poor, black, and Hispanic parents are neglectful and indifferent.

If the majority of kids failing are minorities, whose fault is it?

Should we blame the teachers? the curriculum? a combination of the two?

What role do parents play?

I've spend 90% of my time in DCC and NEC schools. I would often say that we ARE the gap. Now, I'm at a school with whites who are underperforming - kids who would rather work than attend school, kids with poor attendance, kids with gaps in skills.

Should we blame the teachers? the curriculum? a combination of the two?

And again, what role do parents play?

See where I'm going with this?

DCUM doesn't see parts of the county where there are poor whites!

You all need to get out more.

Where?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm the PP who opposes long bus rides and I'd agree with you that, if the BOE is going to make boundary changes, the kind that make the most sense deal with balancing capacity issues in adjacent clusters. Will some people complain? Of course. If the BOE assures the public that any school assignment changes will be limited to shifting kids among adjacent clusters and gives some iron-clad guarantees that kids will not be bused beyond "X" miles or "X" number of minutes, I think fewer people would be suspicious of the BOE's intentions, though for sure some would still be upset.

They have said that they are looking at adjacent clusters.

They can't give iron-clad guarantees about time and distance. It's a big county. One might almost say that it's a big and diverse county. And my guess is, whatever miles/number of minutes to the assigned school you consider intolerable, there are kids in MCPS who have that as their current reality.

If you read their wording: it says at a MINIMUM they will look at adjacent clusters. They also said they would not bus kids from ONE end of the County to the OTHER end. They choose their words carefully

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm the PP who opposes long bus rides and I'd agree with you that, if the BOE is going to make boundary changes, the kind that make the most sense deal with balancing capacity issues in adjacent clusters. Will some people complain? Of course. If the BOE assures the public that any school assignment changes will be limited to shifting kids among adjacent clusters and gives some iron-clad guarantees that kids will not be bused beyond "X" miles or "X" number of minutes, I think fewer people would be suspicious of the BOE's intentions, though for sure some would still be upset.

They have said that they are looking at adjacent clusters.

They can't give iron-clad guarantees about time and distance. It's a big county. One might almost say that it's a big and diverse county. And my guess is, whatever miles/number of minutes to the assigned school you consider intolerable, there are kids in MCPS who have that as their current reality.

If you read their wording: it says at a MINIMUM they will look at adjacent clusters. They also said they would not bus kids from ONE end of the County to the OTHER end. They choose their words carefully

Let's look at one example.

Magruder and Sherwood are about 7 miles apart.
very close to each other

Sherwood has about 300 more students than MHS.
Magruder has twice the number of FARMs (15% vs. 33%).
Oddly enough, at the time of publication, ESOL numbers were the same at 12%. Sherwood, however, has an ESOL program "given" to them after opting out of the NEC.

Racial breakdown is drastically different. Sherwood is 50% white; Magruder is 39% Hispanic. Black population is fairly close. SPED population is close, too.

This is a perfect example of an easy "swap."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm the PP who opposes long bus rides and I'd agree with you that, if the BOE is going to make boundary changes, the kind that make the most sense deal with balancing capacity issues in adjacent clusters. Will some people complain? Of course. If the BOE assures the public that any school assignment changes will be limited to shifting kids among adjacent clusters and gives some iron-clad guarantees that kids will not be bused beyond "X" miles or "X" number of minutes, I think fewer people would be suspicious of the BOE's intentions, though for sure some would still be upset.

They have said that they are looking at adjacent clusters.

They can't give iron-clad guarantees about time and distance. It's a big county. One might almost say that it's a big and diverse county. And my guess is, whatever miles/number of minutes to the assigned school you consider intolerable, there are kids in MCPS who have that as their current reality.

If you read their wording: it says at a MINIMUM they will look at adjacent clusters. They also said they would not bus kids from ONE end of the County to the OTHER end. They choose their words carefully

Let's look at one example.

Magruder and Sherwood are about 7 miles apart.
very close to each other

Sherwood has about 300 more students than MHS.
Magruder has twice the number of FARMs (15% vs. 33%).
Oddly enough, at the time of publication, ESOL numbers were the same at 12%. Sherwood, however, has an ESOL program "given" to them after opting out of the NEC.

Racial breakdown is drastically different. Sherwood is 50% white; Magruder is 39% Hispanic. Black population is fairly close. SPED population is close, too.

This is a perfect example of an easy "swap."

Maybe so. But one can hardly claim that a school that is 50 percent white with FARMS 15 percent is a bastion of white wealthy privilege that needs to be "desegregated." If these are the kind of changes the BOE wants to make, then fine, But proponents need to drop the rhetoric.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm the PP who opposes long bus rides and I'd agree with you that, if the BOE is going to make boundary changes, the kind that make the most sense deal with balancing capacity issues in adjacent clusters. Will some people complain? Of course. If the BOE assures the public that any school assignment changes will be limited to shifting kids among adjacent clusters and gives some iron-clad guarantees that kids will not be bused beyond "X" miles or "X" number of minutes, I think fewer people would be suspicious of the BOE's intentions, though for sure some would still be upset.

They have said that they are looking at adjacent clusters.

They can't give iron-clad guarantees about time and distance. It's a big county. One might almost say that it's a big and diverse county. And my guess is, whatever miles/number of minutes to the assigned school you consider intolerable, there are kids in MCPS who have that as their current reality.

If you read their wording: it says at a MINIMUM they will look at adjacent clusters. They also said they would not bus kids from ONE end of the County to the OTHER end. They choose their words carefully

You remind me of my kid, telling me that I never told them not to do [this ridiculous thing that I never told them not to do because WHO WOULD DO THAT SUCH A RIDICULOUS THING IN THE FIRST PLACE].

Nothing MCPS/BoE could say would persuade you of their non-perfidious intent. I wouldn't even bother trying, if I were them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm the PP who opposes long bus rides and I'd agree with you that, if the BOE is going to make boundary changes, the kind that make the most sense deal with balancing capacity issues in adjacent clusters. Will some people complain? Of course. If the BOE assures the public that any school assignment changes will be limited to shifting kids among adjacent clusters and gives some iron-clad guarantees that kids will not be bused beyond "X" miles or "X" number of minutes, I think fewer people would be suspicious of the BOE's intentions, though for sure some would still be upset.

They have said that they are looking at adjacent clusters.

They can't give iron-clad guarantees about time and distance. It's a big county. One might almost say that it's a big and diverse county. And my guess is, whatever miles/number of minutes to the assigned school you consider intolerable, there are kids in MCPS who have that as their current reality.

If you read their wording: it says at a MINIMUM they will look at adjacent clusters. They also said they would not bus kids from ONE end of the County to the OTHER end. They choose their words carefully

Let's look at one example.

Magruder and Sherwood are about 7 miles apart.
very close to each other

Sherwood has about 300 more students than MHS.
Magruder has twice the number of FARMs (15% vs. 33%).
Oddly enough, at the time of publication, ESOL numbers were the same at 12%. Sherwood, however, has an ESOL program "given" to them after opting out of the NEC.

Racial breakdown is drastically different. Sherwood is 50% white; Magruder is 39% Hispanic. Black population is fairly close. SPED population is close, too.

This is a perfect example of an easy "swap."

Maybe so. But one can hardly claim that a school that is 50 percent white with FARMS 15 percent is a bastion of white wealthy privilege that needs to be "desegregated." If these are the kind of changes the BOE wants to make, then fine, But proponents need to drop the rhetoric.

When there's one school that's 50% white and has 29% students who now receive FARMs or have done so in the past, and there's an adjacent school that's 26% white and has 56% students who now receive FARMs or have done so in the past, that looks a lot like segregation.

[Anonymous]

Why are you conflating race and FARMs?

If you want to talk about FARMs and non-FARMs, we can do that.