Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Because Beall and Twinbrook were the only ones over 100% after most of the options. Are there any other Beall sections that are less FARMS, not in walking distance to Beall, that can move to RM#5? I honestly do not know.

Rose Hills have a negligible farm rate. Moving it to RM#5 will surely balance the farm rate.


It's also possible to come up with more than one option to keep schools below 100% and also distribute SES. It will mean doing some work to change and play with different options which doesn't start with option 1-8. If you always start with option 1-8 then it it may be harder to come up with a good option. Option 1-8 was also not really drawn by consensus. I meant to say that it's not like everyone sat together and came up with those options. It was just drawn by one person from MCPS who was conducting the meeting. PTA and everyone else could only comment on those options.

The county had surveys to take prior to implementing the options. It then started with 4 options and it has been almost a year of tweaks, changes, and more options. Do you think they are going back to the drawing board and move more neighborhoods because one school in a lower income neighborhood has a FARMS rate of 42?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The county had surveys to take prior to implementing the options. It then started with 4 options and it has been almost a year of tweaks, changes, and more options. Do you think they are going back to the drawing board and move more neighborhoods because one school in a lower income neighborhood has a FARMS rate of 42?

8 options were drawn by one person from MCPS and all numbers were put without considering extra capacity at Rm#5.

Recommended option is with extra capacity at RM#5. Entire situation is different. MCPS doesn't need to do any elaborate process. Some one simply has to make sure that schools are as much balanced as possible. One person from MCPS can again draw new boundary. MCPS has all the inputs already.

There has been cases where BOE has ignored the recommendations. I do think that BOE should do the same here, because suggested option is a poor option with a 53% farm rate in all regular class.

[Anonymous]

Study of Montgomery County schools shows benefits of economic integration

Low-income students in Montgomery County performed better when they attended affluent elementary schools instead of ones with higher concentrations of poverty according to a new study that suggests economic integration is a powerful but neglected school-reform tool.

....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/14/AR2010101407577.html

-------------------------

MCPS knows about it and now knowingly want to put all high poverty kids in one school? Beall and RP had equal distribution of farm kids. Why not create balanced schools to make Beall, RP and RM#5 balanced? Why create a situation where RP/Beall is reducing to 10-17% from 25% and at the same time RM#5 starts with 53%? Poor kids moving from Beall/RP to RM#5 is getting bad deal.

[Anonymous]

The community process was a waste since they decided to change the size of the school after it was done. We are supposed to care about the achievement gap and diversity in Montgomery county. If this recommendation were to be implemented it shows that is just talk and we really do not care. This is really bad for the entire cluster. There are things that could be done that would very minimal if any effects on current bus times. I hope the school board requires a better option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Study of Montgomery County schools shows benefits of economic integration

Low-income students in Montgomery County performed better when they attended affluent elementary schools instead of ones with higher concentrations of poverty according to a new study that suggests economic integration is a powerful but neglected school-reform tool.

....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/14/AR2010101407577.html

-------------------------

MCPS knows about it and now knowingly want to put all high poverty kids in one school? Beall and RP had equal distribution of farm kids. Why not create balanced schools to make Beall, RP and RM#5 balanced? Why create a situation where RP/Beall is reducing to 10-17% from 25% and at the same time RM#5 starts with 53%? Poor kids moving from Beall/RP to RM#5 is getting bad deal.

You must be the same person. You are SO annoying! If MCPS cared so much about FARMS over proximity, they would redo all the boundaries from Chevy Chase to Damascus. They would have redone the boundaries for Twinbrook years ago (funny how Beall, RP or CG residents didn't care before)

For one study you post about it makes a difference, there are the same that says it doesn't. The FARMS kids at the other 3 cluster schools do just as poorly as Twinbrook FARMS kids. It doesn't matter where they go to school.

The only ones complaining are a small group of the 58% non FARMS going to the new school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You must be the same person. You are SO annoying! If MCPS cared so much about FARMS over proximity, they would redo all the boundaries from Chevy Chase to Damascus. They would have redone the boundaries for Twinbrook years ago (funny how Beall, RP or CG residents didn't care before)

For one study you post about it makes a difference, there are the same that says it doesn't. The FARMS kids at the other 3 cluster schools do just as poorly as Twinbrook FARMS kids. It doesn't matter where they go to school.

The only ones complaining are a small group of the 58% non FARMS going to the new school.

DP. Could you please post some links to studies that show that low-income kids do the same whether they go to high-poverty schools or low-poverty schools?

I'm not even in the RM cluster, so I am not the same person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Study of Montgomery County schools shows benefits of economic integration

Low-income students in Montgomery County performed better when they attended affluent elementary schools instead of ones with higher concentrations of poverty according to a new study that suggests economic integration is a powerful but neglected school-reform tool.

....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/14/AR2010101407577.html

-------------------------

MCPS knows about it and now knowingly want to put all high poverty kids in one school? Beall and RP had equal distribution of farm kids. Why not create balanced schools to make Beall, RP and RM#5 balanced? Why create a situation where RP/Beall is reducing to 10-17% from 25% and at the same time RM#5 starts with 53%? Poor kids moving from Beall/RP to RM#5 is getting bad deal.

You must be the same person. You are SO annoying! If MCPS cared so much about FARMS over proximity, they would redo all the boundaries from Chevy Chase to Damascus. They would have redone the boundaries for Twinbrook years ago (funny how Beall, RP or CG residents didn't care before)

For one study you post about it makes a difference, there are the same that says it doesn't. The FARMS kids at the other 3 cluster schools do just as poorly as Twinbrook FARMS kids. It doesn't matter where they go to school.

The only ones complaining are a small group of the 58% non FARMS going to the new school.

I did a quick glance at PARCC scores after reading the arguments in this thread and the bolded does appear to be true. There really is no notable difference in the performance of FARMS students at the other feeder schools vs the overall performance at Twinbrook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Study of Montgomery County schools shows benefits of economic integration

Low-income students in Montgomery County performed better when they attended affluent elementary schools instead of ones with higher concentrations of poverty according to a new study that suggests economic integration is a powerful but neglected school-reform tool.

....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/14/AR2010101407577.html

-------------------------

MCPS knows about it and now knowingly want to put all high poverty kids in one school? Beall and RP had equal distribution of farm kids. Why not create balanced schools to make Beall, RP and RM#5 balanced? Why create a situation where RP/Beall is reducing to 10-17% from 25% and at the same time RM#5 starts with 53%? Poor kids moving from Beall/RP to RM#5 is getting bad deal.

You must be the same person. You are SO annoying! If MCPS cared so much about FARMS over proximity, they would redo all the boundaries from Chevy Chase to Damascus. They would have redone the boundaries for Twinbrook years ago (funny how Beall, RP or CG residents didn't care before)

For one study you post about it makes a difference, there are the same that says it doesn't. The FARMS kids at the other 3 cluster schools do just as poorly as Twinbrook FARMS kids. It doesn't matter where they go to school.

The only ones complaining are a small group of the 58% non FARMS going to the new school.

I did a quick glance at PARCC scores after reading the arguments in this thread and the bolded does appear to be true. There really is no notable difference in the performance of FARMS students at the other feeder schools vs the overall performance at Twinbrook.

That isn't even the right way to approach answering the question. The scientific way would be to statistically analyze the effect of school walkability for those receiving FARMS benefits. Then do the same to determine the effects of balancing the overall population receiving FARMS benefits. Then determine the cost (if any and if positive) to achieve additional benefits of balancing vs. walkability (if there are such additional benefits). Then perform an opportunity-cost analysis on the money spent to do that.

[Anonymous]

I would like to provide evidence that contradicts the previous posters who claim that FARMS performance does not depend on where they go to school. I also did a ‘quick glance’ at the PARCC scores and here is what I found, verify for yourself:

2017 PARCC Results - English Grade 5 – Met Expectations
http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/

Non-FARMS FARMS TOTAL
Richie Park 65.5 34.8 57.1
Beall 58.4 39.1 49.1
College Gardens 52.3 38.9 50.7
Twinbrook 38.4 27.3 31.4

From this is becomes apparent that FARMS students have a poorer performance when they are located in a high FARMS school (Twinbrook). In addition, Non-FARMS students do significantly worse when in a high FARMS school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would like to provide evidence that contradicts the previous posters who claim that FARMS performance does not depend on where they go to school. I also did a ‘quick glance’ at the PARCC scores and here is what I found, verify for yourself:

2017 PARCC Results - English Grade 5 – Met Expectations
http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/

Non-FARMS FARMS TOTAL
Richie Park 65.5 34.8 57.1
Beall 58.4 39.1 49.1
College Gardens 52.3 38.9 50.7
Twinbrook 38.4 27.3 31.4

From this is becomes apparent that FARMS students have a poorer performance when they are located in a high FARMS school (Twinbrook). In addition, Non-FARMS students do significantly worse when in a high FARMS school.

This is insufficient data to draw a correlation--let alone causation. The sampling size is too small to run a t-test to determine whether the difference is significant. Moreover, it is not possible to isolate other variables out of the equation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to provide evidence that contradicts the previous posters who claim that FARMS performance does not depend on where they go to school. I also did a ‘quick glance’ at the PARCC scores and here is what I found, verify for yourself:

2017 PARCC Results - English Grade 5 – Met Expectations
http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/

Non-FARMS FARMS TOTAL
Richie Park 65.5 34.8 57.1
Beall 58.4 39.1 49.1
College Gardens 52.3 38.9 50.7
Twinbrook 38.4 27.3 31.4

From this is becomes apparent that FARMS students have a poorer performance when they are located in a high FARMS school (Twinbrook). In addition, Non-FARMS students do significantly worse when in a high FARMS school.

This is insufficient data to draw a correlation--let alone causation. The sampling size is too small to run a t-test to determine whether the difference is significant. Moreover, it is not possible to isolate other variables out of the equation.

DP. However, it is enough to say that it's not true that the FARMS students at Ritchie Park, Beall,and College Gardens score the same as the FARMS students at Twinbrook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would like to provide evidence that contradicts the previous posters who claim that FARMS performance does not depend on where they go to school. I also did a ‘quick glance’ at the PARCC scores and here is what I found, verify for yourself:

2017 PARCC Results - English Grade 5 – Met Expectations
http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/

Non-FARMS FARMS TOTAL
Richie Park 65.5 34.8 57.1
Beall 58.4 39.1 49.1
College Gardens 52.3 38.9 50.7
Twinbrook 38.4 27.3 31.4

From this is becomes apparent that FARMS students have a poorer performance when they are located in a high FARMS school (Twinbrook). In addition, Non-FARMS students do significantly worse when in a high FARMS school.

The entire area of Twinbrook is low to low/middle income. Even if you aren't on FARMS, there are people struggling.

It is all a matter of home life. Whose parents make education a priority and whose do not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would like to provide evidence that contradicts the previous posters who claim that FARMS performance does not depend on where they go to school. I also did a ‘quick glance’ at the PARCC scores and here is what I found, verify for yourself:

2017 PARCC Results - English Grade 5 – Met Expectations
http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/

Non-FARMS FARMS TOTAL
Richie Park 65.5 34.8 57.1
Beall 58.4 39.1 49.1
College Gardens 52.3 38.9 50.7
Twinbrook 38.4 27.3 31.4

From this is becomes apparent that FARMS students have a poorer performance when they are located in a high FARMS school (Twinbrook). In addition, Non-FARMS students do significantly worse when in a high FARMS school.

This assumes that all non_FARMS students are equally prepared for school. It is a HUGE range.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to provide evidence that contradicts the previous posters who claim that FARMS performance does not depend on where they go to school. I also did a ‘quick glance’ at the PARCC scores and here is what I found, verify for yourself:

2017 PARCC Results - English Grade 5 – Met Expectations
http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/

Non-FARMS FARMS TOTAL
Richie Park 65.5 34.8 57.1
Beall 58.4 39.1 49.1
College Gardens 52.3 38.9 50.7
Twinbrook 38.4 27.3 31.4

From this is becomes apparent that FARMS students have a poorer performance when they are located in a high FARMS school (Twinbrook). In addition, Non-FARMS students do significantly worse when in a high FARMS school.

This is insufficient data to draw a correlation--let alone causation. The sampling size is too small to run a t-test to determine whether the difference is significant. Moreover, it is not possible to isolate other variables out of the equation.

DP. However, it is enough to say that it's not true that the FARMS students at Ritchie Park, Beall,and College Gardens score the same as the FARMS students at Twinbrook.

How do FARM students at the other schools compare against Twinbrook as a whole (which is majority low income)? I don't see much of a difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to provide evidence that contradicts the previous posters who claim that FARMS performance does not depend on where they go to school. I also did a ‘quick glance’ at the PARCC scores and here is what I found, verify for yourself:

2017 PARCC Results - English Grade 5 – Met Expectations
http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/

Non-FARMS FARMS TOTAL
Richie Park 65.5 34.8 57.1
Beall 58.4 39.1 49.1
College Gardens 52.3 38.9 50.7
Twinbrook 38.4 27.3 31.4

From this is becomes apparent that FARMS students have a poorer performance when they are located in a high FARMS school (Twinbrook). In addition, Non-FARMS students do significantly worse when in a high FARMS school.

This is insufficient data to draw a correlation--let alone causation. The sampling size is too small to run a t-test to determine whether the difference is significant. Moreover, it is not possible to isolate other variables out of the equation.

DP. However, it is enough to say that it's not true that the FARMS students at Ritchie Park, Beall,and College Gardens score the same as the FARMS students at Twinbrook.

How do FARM students at the other schools compare against Twinbrook as a whole (which is majority low income)? I don't see much of a difference.

You don't see much of a difference between 27% of FARM students being proficient and 39% of FARM students being proficient? I think that's a meaningful difference.

I also think it's interesting that, of the three schools that aren't Twinbrook, FARM students did the worst at the most affluent one (Ritchie Park).