Initial boundary options for Woodward study area are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rosemary Hills illustrates the naive cruelty of option 3. Rosemary Hills already goes to a “good” school in BCC, but option 3 sends them 10 minutes further to Whitman. To what end?



If the answer is “to raise the FARMS rate at Whitman,” that’s sort of missing the forrest for the trees.

+1. This student population is bused to ChCh or NCC for ES and then bussed to a very distant HS out of the pyramid where they have built friendships and support. Way to put (wrongly) the burden of integration on the lower socioeconomic groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rosemary Hills illustrates the naive cruelty of option 3. Rosemary Hills already goes to a “good” school in BCC, but option 3 sends them 10 minutes further to Whitman. To what end?



If the answer is “to raise the FARMS rate at Whitman,” that’s sort of missing the forrest for the trees.

+1. This student population is bused to ChCh or NCC for ES and then bussed to a very distant HS out of the pyramid where they have built friendships and support. Way to put (wrongly) the burden of integration on the lower socioeconomic groups.

How is this squared with the idea that the benefits of integration are the resources that the poorer kids will now have access to?

But also it makes no sense to bus the RH kids to Whitman or WJ when they already go to BCC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rosemary Hills illustrates the naive cruelty of option 3. Rosemary Hills already goes to a “good” school in BCC, but option 3 sends them 10 minutes further to Whitman. To what end?

If the answer is “to raise the FARMS rate at Whitman,” that’s sort of missing the forrest for the trees.

They should necessarily raise farms and remove it from other schools as those schools loose extra funding.

They should do this by punishing the very kids this should purportedly help?

They aren’t helping kids by bussing them across town. Instead strengthen their schools. Give our kids the same opportunities as yours.

Yes, those specific kids already go to BCC and get the desired same opportunities. Why send them 10 minutes farther? Who is that helping?

I assume it's kind of a daisy chain thing. If they head 10 minutes farther, their seats at BCC can go to someone else, who might conceivably be able to reach BCC on a bus, whereas they could not reach something 10 minutes farther?

[Anonymous]

Guess I am going to stop shopping for homes in Parkwood and Garrett Park. As soon as this happens my property value will sink.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maximizing walkers is the low hanging fruit. It doesn't cost extra money, it's (usually) popular with the neighboring areas, and it's good for sustainability. Obviously some schools' walk zones will need to be larger or smaller than others, based on the building capacity, nearby highways or other barriers considered hazardous, etc. But I would really like to see them come up with new options with this as a foundational goal, and show their work.

Increasing walking zones won’t help lower the absentee rate. Kids already skip school when it is actually raining or when it’s predicted to rain on their walk home.

+1
Also, how many kids at the 1.9.mile mark actually walk to school, especially inexpensive areas? I'd wager most carpool.

Carpooling only works if parents or other kids can drive them. I know many who walk that far. Or, bike or scooter.

So….decrease the walk zones to a mile?

That would help.

Also something they can’t afford.

They can add extra stops on current buses not full.

What buses aren’t full? Some kids don’t even get seats on our bus. Yes we asked for another bus but everyone started driving their kids instead.

If MCPS is going to bus our kids 45 minutes over to Kennedy, I hope each child will get a seat (in a two seat row - not squeezing 3 teenagers into one bench and not having kids sit on floor or stand). Yes, this is how it is today. So they probably need twice as many buses because we are going to start paying more attention to things like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rosemary Hills illustrates the naive cruelty of option 3. Rosemary Hills already goes to a “good” school in BCC, but option 3 sends them 10 minutes further to Whitman. To what end?

If the answer is “to raise the FARMS rate at Whitman,” that’s sort of missing the forrest for the trees.

They should necessarily raise farms and remove it from other schools as those schools loose extra funding.

They should do this by punishing the very kids this should purportedly help?

They aren’t helping kids by bussing them across town. Instead strengthen their schools. Give our kids the same opportunities as yours.

Yes, those specific kids already go to BCC and get the desired same opportunities. Why send them 10 minutes farther? Who is that helping?

I assume it's kind of a daisy chain thing. If they head 10 minutes farther, their seats at BCC can go to someone else, who might conceivably be able to reach BCC on a bus, whereas they could not reach something 10 minutes farther?

Yes, it lets them send kids from wheaton who live ~1 miles from Northwood to BCC. Is that worth it for the Rosemary Hills kids? Is that worth it for the Wheaton kids? If it is, great!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maximizing walkers is the low hanging fruit. It doesn't cost extra money, it's (usually) popular with the neighboring areas, and it's good for sustainability. Obviously some schools' walk zones will need to be larger or smaller than others, based on the building capacity, nearby highways or other barriers considered hazardous, etc. But I would really like to see them come up with new options with this as a foundational goal, and show their work.

Increasing walking zones won’t help lower the absentee rate. Kids already skip school when it is actually raining or when it’s predicted to rain on their walk home.

+1
Also, how many kids at the 1.9.mile mark actually walk to school, especially inexpensive areas? I'd wager most carpool.

Carpooling only works if parents or other kids can drive them. I know many who walk that far. Or, bike or scooter.

What issue are you raising wrt the boundary studies?

Read the previous post. Hs kids only get a bus if it’s past two miles. Some of the walks are dangerous. We don’t have sidewalks and busy streets.

That's not a hard and fast rule. Some closer neighborhoods get bus service if the kids would have to cross a highway for example.

No, our kids pass conn, Georgia and university. We have no sidewalks on most streets. No bus.

It depends. Students that would have to cross the beltway or 270 often will get a bus.

That’s because they literally cannot cross it. But, they don’t for other unsafe situations.

Wrong. You can pass 270 via walking on old Georgetown road or Rockledge, for example. People under 2 miles get a bus to WJ from the other side. I’m 1.2 miles and get a bus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Guess I am going to stop shopping for homes in Parkwood and Garrett Park. As soon as this happens my property value will sink.

Entire WJ is at risk. It becomes 30 percent FARMS in option 3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rosemary Hills illustrates the naive cruelty of option 3. Rosemary Hills already goes to a “good” school in BCC, but option 3 sends them 10 minutes further to Whitman. To what end?

If the answer is “to raise the FARMS rate at Whitman,” that’s sort of missing the forrest for the trees.

They should necessarily raise farms and remove it from other schools as those schools loose extra funding.

They should do this by punishing the very kids this should purportedly help?

They aren’t helping kids by bussing them across town. Instead strengthen their schools. Give our kids the same opportunities as yours.

Yes, those specific kids already go to BCC and get the desired same opportunities. Why send them 10 minutes farther? Who is that helping?

And the rest of the student population? If DCUM is leaning heavily into "no bussing" and "it's unjust to subject higher-poverty populations to long bus rides" then DCUM needs to get behind making enormously differential funding per stident available so that those same opportunities are offered to all. Only 3 at Northwood interested in AP Econ? A teacher for that would need to be funded if one is funded for the 25 interested at WJ -- as we know, virtual and MC don't provide a similar enough experience.

And that might mean even higher class sizes at Whitman.

And/or higher taxes.

Or the populations can be evened out, but that generally means...bussing.

Pick your poison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rosemary Hills illustrates the naive cruelty of option 3. Rosemary Hills already goes to a “good” school in BCC, but option 3 sends them 10 minutes further to Whitman. To what end?



If the answer is “to raise the FARMS rate at Whitman,” that’s sort of missing the forrest for the trees.

+1. This student population is bused to ChCh or NCC for ES and then bussed to a very distant HS out of the pyramid where they have built friendships and support. Way to put (wrongly) the burden of integration on the lower socioeconomic groups.

How is this squared with the idea that the benefits of integration are the resources that the poorer kids will now have access to?

But also it makes no sense to bus the RH kids to Whitman or WJ when they already go to BCC.

Also it makes no sense to bus kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rosemary Hills illustrates the naive cruelty of option 3. Rosemary Hills already goes to a “good” school in BCC, but option 3 sends them 10 minutes further to Whitman. To what end?

If the answer is “to raise the FARMS rate at Whitman,” that’s sort of missing the forrest for the trees.

They should necessarily raise farms and remove it from other schools as those schools loose extra funding.

They should do this by punishing the very kids this should purportedly help?

They aren’t helping kids by bussing them across town. Instead strengthen their schools. Give our kids the same opportunities as yours.

Yes, those specific kids already go to BCC and get the desired same opportunities. Why send them 10 minutes farther? Who is that helping?

And the rest of the student population? If DCUM is leaning heavily into "no bussing" and "it's unjust to subject higher-poverty populations to long bus rides" then DCUM needs to get behind making enormously differential funding per stident available so that those same opportunities are offered to all. Only 3 at Northwood interested in AP Econ? A teacher for that would need to be funded if one is funded for the 25 interested at WJ -- as we know, virtual and MC don't provide a similar enough experience.

And that might mean even higher class sizes at Whitman.

And/or higher taxes.

Or the populations can be evened out, but that generally means...bussing.

Pick your poison.

The strategy is to reject all efforts to increase equity.

"We can't do bussing, it's not MCPS's problem to address housing segregation"

"A multifamily building does not fit in with the character of my neighborhood! This is a developer giveaway by the corrupt County Council"

and finally

"We pay the most in taxes, and we reject a tax increase for schools in lower income areas, not my problem, the real problem is the parents, they are terrible parents and that's why they have all those problems and we can't fix them"

and then everything stays the same/gets worse

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rosemary Hills illustrates the naive cruelty of option 3. Rosemary Hills already goes to a “good” school in BCC, but option 3 sends them 10 minutes further to Whitman. To what end?

If the answer is “to raise the FARMS rate at Whitman,” that’s sort of missing the forrest for the trees.

They should necessarily raise farms and remove it from other schools as those schools loose extra funding.

They should do this by punishing the very kids this should purportedly help?

They aren’t helping kids by bussing them across town. Instead strengthen their schools. Give our kids the same opportunities as yours.

Yes, those specific kids already go to BCC and get the desired same opportunities. Why send them 10 minutes farther? Who is that helping?

And the rest of the student population? If DCUM is leaning heavily into "no bussing" and "it's unjust to subject higher-poverty populations to long bus rides" then DCUM needs to get behind making enormously differential funding per stident available so that those same opportunities are offered to all. Only 3 at Northwood interested in AP Econ? A teacher for that would need to be funded if one is funded for the 25 interested at WJ -- as we know, virtual and MC don't provide a similar enough experience.

And that might mean even higher class sizes at Whitman.

And/or higher taxes.

Or the populations can be evened out, but that generally means...bussing.

Pick your poison.

The strategy is to reject all efforts to increase equity.

"We can't do bussing, it's not MCPS's problem to address housing segregation"

"A multifamily building does not fit in with the character of my neighborhood! This is a developer giveaway by the corrupt County Council"

and finally

"We pay the most in taxes, and we reject a tax increase for schools in lower income areas, not my problem, the real problem is the parents, they are terrible parents and that's why they have all those problems and we can't fix them"

and then everything stays the same/gets worse

A lack of reasonable equivalence in public school experience as provided by a local educational agency (MCPS, in this case, not individual schools/pyramids) is an equal-protections issue. Differences in housing stock/zoning is not, under current law, in any case.

[Anonymous]

I thought MCPS does fund students differentially according to need. Is that not accurate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought MCPS does fund students differentially according to need. Is that not accurate?

They do, but the formula is not very transparent. The weighted student funding formula provided for the State does include provisions for ESOL, Special Ed, and Economic Disadvantage.

[Anonymous]

I find it maddening that MCPS allows (or promotes) two disparate elements that cannot be simultaneously true:

1. The first is the claim that equal opportunities are available to every student regardless of home school. This obviously fails when the benefits of parent engagement are included. I grew up in East County, and went to Paint Branch. I now have kids in the W schools. These might as well be on a different planet.

2. Teachers are allowed significant latitude as to where they teach once they obtain tenure. I was involved on a volunteer basis for years at a school with a significant FARMS %. 2 years in and the teachers would run to either a W school or leave the county.

There is no easy answer to the 2nd issue. Teachers are human and teaching is difficult under optimal circumstances. When you are dealing with the attendant problems of poverty, it is beyond difficult. But if you're going to let them move (or not incentivize them to stay), they are never going to get better and we'll be having this discussion forever.