Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't farms students be allowed to attend any school that is under capacity? it seems more dynamic, if their parents are willing to drive them, what's the harm in opening the boundaries for families with low means can attend any school that is under capacity. If they feel they cannot get the same education at a high farms school, why can't they go to any school in the cluster that is under capacity. If my school had capacity, I think those students would be a great addition to our school

Thought is a good one here. One issue may be not many FARMs family having means to private transport. I do appreciate your thinking here though. I was a FARMs kids growing up. It's not about those fmilies not having money. When you are struggling with so little money, many other families issues starts surfacing. I had one abusing and alcoholic parent. My life was hell.

I wish folks can see some point from FARMs students well being as well rather than simply thinking about themselves. Well do families have enough voice. WG did all this just to not change to another walk able school. They shouted loudly to ignore FAMRS issue and even threatened BOE to not focus on SES diversity.

FARMs kids have virtually no voice. Only voice they had was from TB and one speaker from RP2 who advocated strongly for keeping RP2 kids in RP. Her reason was that more schools with 20% FARMS helping FARMs kids will help more FARMs kids in our country. That way other schools can also serve rest of the FARMs kids whenever it's possible. I don't think it's always possible to do in Potomac or Silver Spring due to nature of housing.

Folks don't have to agree with TB or RP2 speakers, but we can we take few minutes to think about FARMs kids who face 10 times hardship in their daily life. I know it's hard to imagine, but many things taken for granted by regular families are simply a dream for FARMs kids. I will not add more comments here, but I always appreciate any thoughtful comments to help the least privileged kids in our society. May be I am biased, but we all are biased based on our upbringings.

PP thanks again for being thoughtful here for how we can help FARMs kids. I will point out one thing here. There is research done within MCPS that it helps FARMs kids to improve their reading and math level if they attend schools around 20% or lower FARMs. None of us have to go by our feelings here.

I grew up low income. There was a woman who spoke who grew up low income. I agree with what she said... having your neighborhood within a walking distance ES , or at least as close as possible, is extremely important as well. Parents don't have the means or time to pickup the child for after school activities and such. If the parents don't have their own transportation, it will be much more difficult for the parent to pick up a sick child.

I do understand about the "magic" FARMs number, but people shouldn't discount the hardship for low income families having to live further away from their ES, either.

I also want to point out that there are FARMs kids in RP5, too, though I don't know how many there are. I know it's not that big, but what about them in terms of the extra commute time, even if it is a few minutes. If they rely on before/after care, they will have to spend that much more time and money (on gas) to go a bit further out, too. It's not like ES#5 is on everyone's way to work. Some people may have to backtrack.

It sucks for anyone who has a longer commute because of the move.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why are you framing this as RP2 isn't "welcome to stay" at Ritchie Park??? RP6 is also moving in the same scenarios - is RP6 also not welcome at Ritchie Park? In the scenarios where RP5 moves, is it because Fallsgrove is not welcome at Ritchie Park???

RP6 is welcome anywhere (so basically a non-factor) because there are few FARMS students. Please don't be this dense.

It's not being dense, it's calling people out on faulty and hate-mongering assumptions. If a zone has a higher FARMS rate and is slated to move schools, it is framed by some people that they are being moved because the other school is kicking them out or they are unwanted at the school. Zones with lower FARMS that are zoned to move are not viewed as being kicked out or unwanted at their schools. Because a zone slated to move to another school happens to have a higher percentage of FARMS doesn't mean it is being moved because it is unwanted.

Boundaries for the schools have not been drawn yet. RP2 was not zoned to RMES5 yet. You want it zoned to RMES5 for the benefit of proximity. Others want it to stay to RPES (including people from B2 - see http://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/AT5QU86AE74C/$file/Laurie%20Brooks.pdf) for the benefit in potential student achievement.

DP.. you are pointing out one vocal person from RP2 who wants to stay in RP for the benefit of FARMs kids. I'm not even sure her kids are on FARMs, but how do those people who are FARMs families feel?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't farms students be allowed to attend any school that is under capacity? it seems more dynamic, if their parents are willing to drive them, what's the harm in opening the boundaries for families with low means can attend any school that is under capacity. If they feel they cannot get the same education at a high farms school, why can't they go to any school in the cluster that is under capacity. If my school had capacity, I think those students would be a great addition to our school

Thought is a good one here. One issue may be not many FARMs family having means to private transport. I do appreciate your thinking here though. I was a FARMs kids growing up. It's not about those fmilies not having money. When you are struggling with so little money, many other families issues starts surfacing. I had one abusing and alcoholic parent. My life was hell.

I wish folks can see some point from FARMs students well being as well rather than simply thinking about themselves. Well do families have enough voice. WG did all this just to not change to another walk able school. They shouted loudly to ignore FAMRS issue and even threatened BOE to not focus on SES diversity.

FARMs kids have virtually no voice. Only voice they had was from TB and one speaker from RP2 who advocated strongly for keeping RP2 kids in RP. Her reason was that more schools with 20% FARMS helping FARMs kids will help more FARMs kids in our country. That way other schools can also serve rest of the FARMs kids whenever it's possible. I don't think it's always possible to do in Potomac or Silver Spring due to nature of housing.

Folks don't have to agree with TB or RP2 speakers, but we can we take few minutes to think about FARMs kids who face 10 times hardship in their daily life. I know it's hard to imagine, but many things taken for granted by regular families are simply a dream for FARMs kids. I will not add more comments here, but I always appreciate any thoughtful comments to help the least privileged kids in our society. May be I am biased, but we all are biased based on our upbringings.

PP thanks again for being thoughtful here for how we can help FARMs kids. I will point out one thing here. There is research done within MCPS that it helps FARMs kids to improve their reading and math level if they attend schools around 20% or lower FARMs. None of us have to go by our feelings here.

I grew up low income. There was a woman who spoke who grew up low income. I agree with what she said... having your neighborhood within a walking distance ES , or at least as close as possible, is extremely important as well. Parents don't have the means or time to pickup the child for after school activities and such. If the parents don't have their own transportation, it will be much more difficult for the parent to pick up a sick child.

I do understand about the "magic" FARMs number, but people shouldn't discount the hardship for low income families having to live further away from their ES, either.

I also want to point out that there are FARMs kids in RP5, too, though I don't know how many there are. I know it's not that big, but what about them in terms of the extra commute time, even if it is a few minutes. If they rely on before/after care, they will have to spend that much more time and money (on gas) to go a bit further out, too. It's not like ES#5 is on everyone's way to work. Some people may have to backtrack.

It sucks for anyone who has a longer commute because of the move.

Exactly. 8% of Fallsgrove is FARMS too. They too would have to move further in Option C, D and E.

[Anonymous]

I believe boe is still accepting comments via email. Please write to them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The FARMS rate in regular classes at RMES5 would be 32%. There is a statistical difference between 24.5% and 32% , as studies show:
• Low-income students attending schools with a FARMs rate of less than 20% showed a math test score advantage over low-income students in other schools after just three years of attendance;
• Move that threshold to 25%, and it takes four years of attendance for low-income students to benefit from lower-poverty schools;
• At 30%, low-income students did not benefit until close to the end of their elementary years, and
• there was no performance difference at all between low-income students attending schools with less than 35% of peers eligible for FARMs and up to 85% eligible.

No, you can continue to bring up one person's testimony based on one 57 page study that actually backs Options A or B if you read it all. Saying that building low income housing in all neighborhoods and keeping proximinity is the best way. That is exactly what MC is starting to do. It never says to bus them further. It actually argues against it.

24.5 to 31.5% is about 30 kids more in FARMS in the entire 6 grades. So about 5 more kids in every grade for IN-CLASS, since that seems to be so important to Hungerford. So about 1, maybe 2 kids per 28 kid classroom. You think that stat is so drastic that RP2 shouldn't be allowed to walk to their neighborhood school? If they pulled you from walking to your new neighborhood school with this stat, you would flip.

Not to mention the new Tower Oaks development that starts construction in the Spring with 30 single family homes in the 1.2 million, 225 town homes in the high 900K, and 120 condos in the high 500K are going to decrease that FARMS rate even more. Only 4 MPDU are going to be in that new development. In Option E, RM5 will have an overall FARMS rate in the very low teens in about 5 years. It will be brand new and bring on a MASSIVE increase in home value to the Hungerford neighborhood. That is their priority. That is why they are okay with letting their neighbors go. They will gain the most in home values by far in the whole cluster. Meanwhile their bussed neighbors home values will stay the same or decrease as the map CLEARLY shows they were botched up to bring FARMS to RP higher. They will see Elwood Smith community center being used for before/after care but that neighborhood isn't involved with that school. It is just not right. Ironically, I think Hungerford will see the most home price increases even with A and B. But they are all eyeing up E because it cuts their rates 50% more than initially projected.

If RP5 was so interested in FARMS, they would want Option E too. It gives them very low FARMS. Lower than they currently have at RP where they are very happy. But they don't care about FARMS. They don't want a longer community than they have so a walkable area to the same school they are being bussed to, gets bussed to the school they want to stay in.

Why would you bring house prices in a discussion about children's education? That's just poor judgement. Actually, this post is full of poor judgement. Saying that RP5 should prefer to go to RMES5 based on FARMS is just ridiculous. They have to choose between 7.5% in Options A and B and 21.6% in Option E. If FAMRS would be the only factor, of course they would choose to stay in Ritchie Park.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I grew up low income. There was a woman who spoke who grew up low income. I agree with what she said... having your neighborhood within a walking distance ES , or at least as close as possible, is extremely important as well. Parents don't have the means or time to pickup the child for after school activities and such. If the parents don't have their own transportation, it will be much more difficult for the parent to pick up a sick child.

I do understand about the "magic" FARMs number, but people shouldn't discount the hardship for low income families having to live further away from their ES, either.

I also want to point out that there are FARMs kids in RP5, too, though I don't know how many there are. I know it's not that big, but what about them in terms of the extra commute time, even if it is a few minutes. If they rely on before/after care, they will have to spend that much more time and money (on gas) to go a bit further out, too. It's not like ES#5 is on everyone's way to work. Some people may have to backtrack.

It sucks for anyone who has a longer commute because of the move.

It's a matter of proximity vs. concentration of FARMS students. Proximity is important, but achieving education goals should trump it. RP2 already goes to RPES, so the parents are integrated in that community and have things figured out. The woman who spoke at the boundary meeting said she wanted to give a voice to a few families who were in front holding signs saying that they want to stay at RPES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP.. you are pointing out one vocal person from RP2 who wants to stay in RP for the benefit of FARMs kids. I'm not even sure her kids are on FARMs, but how do those people who are FARMs families feel?

She wasn't vocal, she was quite emotional. Look at the video and you will see. She was speaking on behalf of a few families who were sitting in front with signs saying that they want to go to RPES. She did her research and her speech was very eloquent. She was called an idiot on this board by RP parents who did not agree that RP2 should stay in RPES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well I guess some of you CG parents should have shown up to testify on your school's behalf. Every CG presenter was for Option A.

CGES iss only affected if they don't lose capacity. Those testifying were the whiny CG3 people. They took as many spots as possible so other people can hear them whine.

57 people spoke...was anyone denied a chance?

Yes. There was a wait list.

[Anonymous]

I think we should start breaking down farms by grade level as well. Because we are taking about a few kids here or there in some of these scenarios. And what if some schools only have 2 farms kids in one grade but 15 in another. Parents should know that. Because it is the farms in your literal classroom that makes all the difference here. Studies show.

[Anonymous]

In my view RP5 parents rallied behind a weak argument. It is obvious that RP wants the relatively well off neighborhood to fill up their capacity and provide some diversity figures. But whats best for RP5 is to leave this cluster where they will be pawns in future redistricting games. Whatever the outome of this "boundary study" pales in comparison with the wars ahead over the new HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Exactly. 8% of Fallsgrove is FARMS too. They too would have to move further in Option C, D and E.

They are already assigned to RPES. They would have a 2 minute longer commute. I agree that they should have been assigned to CGES or Beall and not impose that "no domino effect" clause. That clause was intentionally introduced so RP5 would not be assigned to CGES or Beall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there's a lot of "it's fine for your kids but not mine" going on.

People who think it's ok to bus kids all over (RP5 to #5), but if it was his/her own kids, that same person would be raising hell.

King farm parent who wants CG3 to leave. I'd guess if king farm was slated to move, the KF association would have mobilized and raised hell.

It is a two minute difference for RP5. B7 has a bigger increase in travel time and the same bus time overall from moving to the new school. We have not heard a peep from them. It is a ridiculous argument.

i wish people would stop saying that it’s a 2 min difference. that is under ideal conditions

I just drove the route from Falls Road to RM ES 5 under ideal conditions (sunny, no traffic). I only hit 1 red light out of 5 possible lights. It was an additional 4 min 40 seconds. Under ideal conditions. It will be at least am extra 10 minutes on weekday mornings with traffic - on top of the 10-15 minutes it would take to get to the intersection of Wootton & Falls from Fallsgrove. Total traffic commute time = 25 min on the bus each morning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP.. you are pointing out one vocal person from RP2 who wants to stay in RP for the benefit of FARMs kids. I'm not even sure her kids are on FARMs, but how do those people who are FARMs families feel?

She wasn't vocal, she was quite emotional. Look at the video and you will see. She was speaking on behalf of a few families who were sitting in front with signs saying that they want to go to RPES. She did her research and her speech was very eloquent. She was called an idiot on this board by RP parents who did not agree that RP2 should stay in RPES.

She was called an "idiot" simply because she stated that FARMs kids would be better served at a school with 24% vs 26%. It's a 2% difference scattered by grade. I wasn't one who called her that, but that was the point some people were making.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think we should start breaking down farms by grade level as well. Because we are taking about a few kids here or there in some of these scenarios. And what if some schools only have 2 farms kids in one grade but 15 in another. Parents should know that. Because it is the farms in your literal classroom that makes all the difference here. Studies show.

That's one of the smartest idea I've read today on this board. This guy is a genius.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly. 8% of Fallsgrove is FARMS too. They too would have to move further in Option C, D and E.

They are already assigned to RPES. They would have a 2 minute longer commute. I agree that they should have been assigned to CGES or Beall and not impose that "no domino effect" clause. That clause was intentionally introduced so RP5 would not be assigned to CGES or Beall.

I drive down Wootton Pkw from RP and pass Edmonston on a regularly basis during peak traffic times in the evening. I've never timed it, though, but it gets backed up pretty regularly.