Option B Alternate - Adding extra ES to WJ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New VM family here. I can't catch up on all the 12 pages here, but did read the last few.

What the VM PTA board member said is right. Most of us prefer Woodward and not WJ. I am a VM PTA member who at least listens in and responds for requests for feedback. It's weird someone is trying to gaslight them, but so goes this forum.

I like the Superintendent's recommendation. I welcome joining Wheaton Woods at new Woodward. FARMS is not very high there. It will be nice for my kid to be in the majority-minority. I don't want them to go to WJ. It's simple. And no, going to a school with 10% FARMS will not drastically change the outcome for any child. The argument is silly.

You can literally compare outcomes for FARMS kids across schools on the MD school report card - they do best in schools with the lowest FARMS rates and the difference is significant. This is consistent with nationally recognized research that was actually done in MoCo

Cite your data sources. I grew up a FARMS kid and know what’s best for my kid and WJ is NOT it. If I wanted something like WJ I would have put my kids in private school.

If you don't want to look at the MD school report card that is not my problem

Here is the research I was referencing: https://tcf.org/content/commentary/housing-policy-is-school-policy/

Building on the strength of the random assignment of children to schools, I examine the longitudinal school performance from 2001 to 2007 of approximately 850 students in public housing who attended elementary schools and lived in neighborhoods that fell along a spectrum of very-low-poverty to moderate-poverty rates. In brief, I find that over a period of five to seven years, children in public housing who attended the school district’s
most-advantaged schools (as measured by either subsidized lunch status or the district’s own criteria) far outperformed in math and reading those chil-
dren in public housing who attended the district’s least-advantaged elementary schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New VM family here. I can't catch up on all the 12 pages here, but did read the last few.

What the VM PTA board member said is right. Most of us prefer Woodward and not WJ. I am a VM PTA member who at least listens in and responds for requests for feedback. It's weird someone is trying to gaslight them, but so goes this forum.

I like the Superintendent's recommendation. I welcome joining Wheaton Woods at new Woodward. FARMS is not very high there. It will be nice for my kid to be in the majority-minority. I don't want them to go to WJ. It's simple. And no, going to a school with 10% FARMS will not drastically change the outcome for any child. The argument is silly.

You can literally compare outcomes for FARMS kids across schools on the MD school report card - they do best in schools with the lowest FARMS rates and the difference is significant. This is consistent with nationally recognized research that was actually done in MoCo

Cite your data sources. I grew up a FARMS kid and know what’s best for my kid and WJ is NOT it. If I wanted something like WJ I would have put my kids in private school.

WJ is nothing like a private school. But don't let you your misconceptions stop you in forming opinions.

Strong correlation between average test scores and FARMS can be seen on every school ranking site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think anyone is trying to stick it to Luxmanor or Farmland. I don’t get that impression. That being said, there are ideas floating around that would clearly benefit them. These ideas are narrowly applied to “balance” FARMs in their favor. That is what is being called out.

It is fine that they are advocating for lower FARMs for themselves or for maintaining property values. But, it would be refreshing if they were honest about the actual reasons. That way, we don’t have to go in circles.

Of course, it isn’t clear who is writing any of this. So I use “they” loosely.

Of course it isn't clear..it's an anonymous forum. You don't know who I am and clearly don't care..you want me to be from particular community so you can use that to subtly argue in favor of perpetuating racial segregation. I am from Silver Spring and not directly impacted by this, but I have an opinion. That doesn't fit your disgusting narrative, so you just pretend it's not true.

I wrote the quoted text, but nothing prior. I’m not sure what narrative you're following, as this thread is a mess. Do what you want with that information.

You know exactly which narrative I am referring to. That narrative is that the people who want to balance FARMS between Walter Johnson and Woodward are all people set on Taylor's recommendation to be zoned to Woodward and facing a higher FARMS rate unless this is changed.

That is not true. I know because I am one of the posters who wants them to balance FARMS between WJ and Woodward, and my child is and will continue to be zoned for Einstein.

Oddly you are insisting that everyone reveal their personal interests in what they are advocating for, but you aren't revealing yours.

I am in RM cluster. I wrote an email to BOE about balancing FARMS in WJ and Woodward as well. I will have no direct impact from any scenario.

Sure, most Woodward families will prefer lower FARMS and it will benefit house value as well, but for a minute lets forget about house value and who is giving ideas. Just do what's best for kids. I don't think concentrating poverty in one HS is good when we can easily balance FARMS between WJ and Woodward.

Just becasue idea is coming from Woodward community, which benefits them, we shouldn't be ignoring it. We should see if idea has any merit. Merit of ideas should be discussed and not who is bringing the ideas.

Yes, the idea shouldn’t be ignored. But its sincerity should be in question. Were they advocating before the issue directly impacted them? I would hope so, but doubt it.

RM pp here. That's fair enough.

[Anonymous]

OK, so you are trying to equate three months of feedback about different options and one week of feedback since the recommendation. I really hope VM PTA doesn't rely on you to do any statistical analysis on the feedback.

As a part of the process, you probably know that VM PTA currently has discussions with other affected PTAs so you will get a chance to provide your take.

Also, VM will be absorbed into a different community, one way or the other. You will not be the part of Wheaton community anymore. It will be either new Woodward community (Tilden MS plus WW; the recommendation) or WJ community (NBMS; the proposed modification). It is on VM families to evaluate which one is better for their kids.

I’m not in the VM PRA board but attend meetings. PP is telling the truth that we don’t want WJ. It was never even part of our conversations.

Also, Taylor’s recommendation keeps us at Loeiderman, not Tilden. WW stays at Parkland.

You misunderstood the point. Nothing changes for VM at ES and MS level under both options. But once you are at high school, everything changes one way or the other. You won't be sharing your HS environment with current Wheaton elementary schools anymore. It will be elementary schools from Tilden plus WW or elementary schools from NBMS. Either way you will be joining a new community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New VM family here. I can't catch up on all the 12 pages here, but did read the last few.

What the VM PTA board member said is right. Most of us prefer Woodward and not WJ. I am a VM PTA member who at least listens in and responds for requests for feedback. It's weird someone is trying to gaslight them, but so goes this forum.

I like the Superintendent's recommendation. I welcome joining Wheaton Woods at new Woodward. FARMS is not very high there. It will be nice for my kid to be in the majority-minority. I don't want them to go to WJ. It's simple. And no, going to a school with 10% FARMS will not drastically change the outcome for any child. The argument is silly.

20% difference.

[Anonymous]

Not only are these Farmland families trying to speak for VM and WW, they're speaking for Ashburton and Wynngate families. How do those families feel about Taylor’s recommendation for WJ? They are the families that should be asking questions about building utilization and demographics of their building, not Farmland/Luxmanor families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New VM family here. I can't catch up on all the 12 pages here, but did read the last few.

What the VM PTA board member said is right. Most of us prefer Woodward and not WJ. I am a VM PTA member who at least listens in and responds for requests for feedback. It's weird someone is trying to gaslight them, but so goes this forum.

I like the Superintendent's recommendation. I welcome joining Wheaton Woods at new Woodward. FARMS is not very high there. It will be nice for my kid to be in the majority-minority. I don't want them to go to WJ. It's simple. And no, going to a school with 10% FARMS will not drastically change the outcome for any child. The argument is silly.

20% difference.

No, it's about 10%.
Woodward recommendation 35% for Woodward, 13% for WJ.
Farmland agitator recommendation strives woodward about 30% for Woodward, and 26% for WJ.

Moving from a 35% Woodward to a 26% WJ isn't worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not only are these Farmland families trying to speak for VM and WW, they're speaking for Ashburton and Wynngate families. How do those families feel about Taylor’s recommendation for WJ? They are the families that should be asking questions about building utilization and demographics of their building, not Farmland/Luxmanor families.

I personally don't think boundary should be decided based on voting by all communities. BOE job is to make decision what's best over all by keeping negative and positive in mind. I can clearyl see positive in balancing FARMS and I see no negative in doing it when schools are less than than miles away. Now I may be missing something so stakeholders should present negative and positive both. Goal should be to get the best possible boundary keeping FAA policies in mind.


- RM Parent.

[Anonymous]

to the poster who said "Wheaton Woods literally has Wheaton in the name" insinuating that we should stay at Wheaton, to you I said, it literally has "Wood in the name too". Woodward he we come.

WW and VM should come together to support the Superintendent. It is in our favor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New VM family here. I can't catch up on all the 12 pages here, but did read the last few.

What the VM PTA board member said is right. Most of us prefer Woodward and not WJ. I am a VM PTA member who at least listens in and responds for requests for feedback. It's weird someone is trying to gaslight them, but so goes this forum.

I like the Superintendent's recommendation. I welcome joining Wheaton Woods at new Woodward. FARMS is not very high there. It will be nice for my kid to be in the majority-minority. I don't want them to go to WJ. It's simple. And no, going to a school with 10% FARMS will not drastically change the outcome for any child. The argument is silly.

20% difference.

No, it's about 10%.
Woodward recommendation 35% for Woodward, 13% for WJ.
Farmland agitator recommendation strives woodward about 30% for Woodward, and 26% for WJ.

Moving from a 35% Woodward to a 26% WJ isn't worth it.

22% FARMS difference between WJ and Woodward should be narrowed because schools are close to each other on the same road.

4% FARMS difference between WJ and Woodward is far better situation.

It may not make difference to you personally, but it's best to balance it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not only are these Farmland families trying to speak for VM and WW, they're speaking for Ashburton and Wynngate families. How do those families feel about Taylor’s recommendation for WJ? They are the families that should be asking questions about building utilization and demographics of their building, not Farmland/Luxmanor families.

I personally don't think boundary should be decided based on voting by all communities. BOE job is to make decision what's best over all by keeping negative and positive in mind. I can clearyl see positive in balancing FARMS and I see no negative in doing it when schools are less than than miles away. Now I may be missing something so stakeholders should present negative and positive both. Goal should be to get the best possible boundary keeping FAA policies in mind.


- RM Parent.

+1000

The problem is that this entire process is about being reactive to whatever community screams the loudest instead of listening to people's concerns, having that inform the ultimate decision but ultimately basing it on what is good for the kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not only are these Farmland families trying to speak for VM and WW, they're speaking for Ashburton and Wynngate families. How do those families feel about Taylor’s recommendation for WJ? They are the families that should be asking questions about building utilization and demographics of their building, not Farmland/Luxmanor families.

This argument is silly. Farmland / Luxmanor families are speaking for themselves and nobody else. Taylor made a recommendation that heavily favors Ashburton and Wyngate over them and they are making a noise about it, like any other negatively impacted community would have done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not only are these Farmland families trying to speak for VM and WW, they're speaking for Ashburton and Wynngate families. How do those families feel about Taylor’s recommendation for WJ? They are the families that should be asking questions about building utilization and demographics of their building, not Farmland/Luxmanor families.

I personally don't think boundary should be decided based on voting by all communities. BOE job is to make decision what's best over all by keeping negative and positive in mind. I can clearyl see positive in balancing FARMS and I see no negative in doing it when schools are less than than miles away. Now I may be missing something so stakeholders should present negative and positive both. Goal should be to get the best possible boundary keeping FAA policies in mind.


- RM Parent.

+1000

The problem is that this entire process is about being reactive to whatever community screams the loudest instead of listening to people's concerns, having that inform the ultimate decision but ultimately basing it on what is good for the kids

-1000 there have been so many surveys, public testimony, opportunities to comment. i do think they factored in public feedback which is the right thing to do for public schools. parents should have a say in the education of their kids. right now it is the farmland who is screaming the loudest hoping to change the decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New VM family here. I can't catch up on all the 12 pages here, but did read the last few.

What the VM PTA board member said is right. Most of us prefer Woodward and not WJ. I am a VM PTA member who at least listens in and responds for requests for feedback. It's weird someone is trying to gaslight them, but so goes this forum.

I like the Superintendent's recommendation. I welcome joining Wheaton Woods at new Woodward. FARMS is not very high there. It will be nice for my kid to be in the majority-minority. I don't want them to go to WJ. It's simple. And no, going to a school with 10% FARMS will not drastically change the outcome for any child. The argument is silly.

20% difference.

No, it's about 10%.
Woodward recommendation 35% for Woodward, 13% for WJ.
Farmland agitator recommendation strives woodward about 30% for Woodward, and 26% for WJ.

Moving from a 35% Woodward to a 26% WJ isn't worth it.

22% FARMS difference between WJ and Woodward should be narrowed because schools are close to each other on the same road.

4% FARMS difference between WJ and Woodward is far better situation.

It may not make difference to you personally, but it's best to balance it.

not at the expense of VM families being relegated to token minority. it's small difference.

and nobody can really illustrate the data for this Farmland option. It's all sepculating.

For instance, why does farmland want to pull in GP too? Those people want WJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New VM family here. I can't catch up on all the 12 pages here, but did read the last few.

What the VM PTA board member said is right. Most of us prefer Woodward and not WJ. I am a VM PTA member who at least listens in and responds for requests for feedback. It's weird someone is trying to gaslight them, but so goes this forum.

I like the Superintendent's recommendation. I welcome joining Wheaton Woods at new Woodward. FARMS is not very high there. It will be nice for my kid to be in the majority-minority. I don't want them to go to WJ. It's simple. And no, going to a school with 10% FARMS will not drastically change the outcome for any child. The argument is silly.

20% difference.

No, it's about 10%.
Woodward recommendation 35% for Woodward, 13% for WJ.
Farmland agitator recommendation strives woodward about 30% for Woodward, and 26% for WJ.

Moving from a 35% Woodward to a 26% WJ isn't worth it.

22% FARMS difference between WJ and Woodward should be narrowed because schools are close to each other on the same road.

4% FARMS difference between WJ and Woodward is far better situation.

It may not make difference to you personally, but it's best to balance it.

not at the expense of VM families being relegated to token minority. it's small difference.

and nobody can really illustrate the data for this Farmland option. It's all sepculating.

For instance, why does farmland want to pull in GP too? Those people want WJ.

This is 100% about the Farmland/Luxmanor homeowners worried about their propertly value, but they need to frame it as caring about VM and WW "equity" because they can't come out and say: "Hey Taylor, we are jealous that Wyngate and Ashburton homes will be more than us! "