MCPS High School Boundary Map? Current.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about we start with the basics here- that many schools are terribly overcrowded and need rezoning to balance out the school population. But the (rich, obnoxious, NIMBY) parents/property owners in other school catchments are so afraid of brown and black and poor people that they created a narrative about bussing across the county and massive redistribution of students that isn’t remotely grounded in truth. Which has now riled up others and made it a struggle to get a study done —a study that would not even recommend specific boundary changes— that would ultimately help those kids in the massively overcrowded schools. regardless of whether you think having kids from FARMs families in higher-income schools is better, we should all agree that kids do better in schools that are not massively overcrowded and beyond physical capacity.

I think we all agree that students and staff do better in schools that are not overcrowded. So why sling the insults? Not necessary, really divisive, and makes me question why PP wants the study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we start with the basics here- that many schools are terribly overcrowded and need rezoning to balance out the school population. But the (rich, obnoxious, NIMBY) parents/property owners in other school catchments are so afraid of brown and black and poor people that they created a narrative about bussing across the county and massive redistribution of students that isn’t remotely grounded in truth. Which has now riled up others and made it a struggle to get a study done —a study that would not even recommend specific boundary changes— that would ultimately help those kids in the massively overcrowded schools. regardless of whether you think having kids from FARMs families in higher-income schools is better, we should all agree that kids do better in schools that are not massively overcrowded and beyond physical capacity.

I think we all agree that students and staff do better in schools that are not overcrowded. So why sling the insults? Not necessary, really divisive, and makes me question why PP wants the study.

The PP assessment seems accurate, but sure, sometimes the truth hurts.

[Anonymous]

It is also the truth that the privileged, progressive left desperately wants this study to culminate in a county-wide boundary study with county-wide changes to clusters.

It is also the truth that many MC families have two-income families and race to get home from work in time to pick up their children from after-care at their local school. They can’t conceive of how they might be able to do that if their children are forced to attend another school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is also the truth that the privileged, progressive left desperately wants this study to culminate in a county-wide boundary study with county-wide changes to clusters.

It is also the truth that many MC families have two-income families and race to get home from work in time to pick up their children from after-care at their local school. They can’t conceive of how they might be able to do that if their children are forced to attend another school.

...they would pick their children up from after-care at the other school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is also the truth that the privileged, progressive left desperately wants this study to culminate in a county-wide boundary study with county-wide changes to clusters.

It is also the truth that many MC families have two-income families and race to get home from work in time to pick up their children from after-care at their local school. They can’t conceive of how they might be able to do that if their children are forced to attend another school.

...they would pick their children up from after-care at the other school?

...which might be far out of their way and inconvenient.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is also the truth that the privileged, progressive left desperately wants this study to culminate in a county-wide boundary study with county-wide changes to clusters.

It is also the truth that many MC families have two-income families and race to get home from work in time to pick up their children from after-care at their local school. They can’t conceive of how they might be able to do that if their children are forced to attend another school.

...they would pick their children up from after-care at the other school?

...which might be far out of their way and inconvenient.

Or might be closer, since we know they are making adjustments to contiguous zones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is also the truth that the privileged, progressive left desperately wants this study to culminate in a county-wide boundary study with county-wide changes to clusters.

It is also the truth that many MC families have two-income families and race to get home from work in time to pick up their children from after-care at their local school. They can’t conceive of how they might be able to do that if their children are forced to attend another school.

...they would pick their children up from after-care at the other school?

...which might be far out of their way and inconvenient.

Or it might be closer and more convenient.

There are EIGHT elementary schools that are closer (by driving distance) than our assigned MCPS elementary school.

[Anonymous]

There is so much MIS-information coming from both sides, and MCPS hasn't helped themselves in the matter. Or maybe they have, since parents are so busy finger pointing at each other instead of turning the spotlight on MCPS.

[Anonymous]

You know what, I think MCPS is doing pretty well with a tough hand. They’ve put really good initiatives in place, it just takes time for positive signs to show up.

The progressive left is too impatient for change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You know what, I think MCPS is doing pretty well with a tough hand. They’ve put really good initiatives in place, it just takes time for positive signs to show up.

The progressive left is too impatient for change.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about we start with the basics here- that many schools are terribly overcrowded and need rezoning to balance out the school population. But the (rich, obnoxious, NIMBY) parents/property owners in other school catchments are so afraid of brown and black and poor people that they created a narrative about bussing across the county and massive redistribution of students that isn’t remotely grounded in truth. Which has now riled up others and made it a struggle to get a study done —a study that would not even recommend specific boundary changes— that would ultimately help those kids in the massively overcrowded schools. regardless of whether you think having kids from FARMs families in higher-income schools is better, we should all agree that kids do better in schools that are not massively overcrowded and beyond physical capacity.

Totally agree that the boundary study and any subsequent redistricting changes ought to be driven by school capacity concerns, as opposed to diversity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we start with the basics here- that many schools are terribly overcrowded and need rezoning to balance out the school population. But the (rich, obnoxious, NIMBY) parents/property owners in other school catchments are so afraid of brown and black and poor people that they created a narrative about bussing across the county and massive redistribution of students that isn’t remotely grounded in truth. Which has now riled up others and made it a struggle to get a study done —a study that would not even recommend specific boundary changes— that would ultimately help those kids in the massively overcrowded schools. regardless of whether you think having kids from FARMs families in higher-income schools is better, we should all agree that kids do better in schools that are not massively overcrowded and beyond physical capacity.

Totally agree that the boundary study and any subsequent redistricting changes ought to be driven by school capacity concerns, as opposed to diversity.

How about being driven by

1. school capacity
2. demographics
3. geography/transportation

just like the policy says?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we start with the basics here- that many schools are terribly overcrowded and need rezoning to balance out the school population. But the (rich, obnoxious, NIMBY) parents/property owners in other school catchments are so afraid of brown and black and poor people that they created a narrative about bussing across the county and massive redistribution of students that isn’t remotely grounded in truth. Which has now riled up others and made it a struggle to get a study done —a study that would not even recommend specific boundary changes— that would ultimately help those kids in the massively overcrowded schools. regardless of whether you think having kids from FARMs families in higher-income schools is better, we should all agree that kids do better in schools that are not massively overcrowded and beyond physical capacity.

Totally agree that the boundary study and any subsequent redistricting changes ought to be driven by school capacity concerns, as opposed to diversity.

How about being driven by

1. school capacity
2. demographics
3. geography/transportation

just like the policy says?

Well, that's what all the fuss is about, isn't it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ultimate logic disconnect

upper income kids going to crappy schools no change

lower income kids going to better schools massive change

lol

what those of us with common sense know, the school environment doesn't matter it's all about the parents/home environment

taking 100 low income kids to a higher income school won't do jack for most of the lower income kids period

DCUM: The school environment is very important! (When it comes to spending $$$ to make sure that your child goes to "good" schools.)
Also DCUM: The school environment doesn't matter! (When it comes to potential boundary changes that would reassign more kids from low-income families to "good" schools and/or reassign DCUM kids to "bad" schools.)

Evidently

But you forget what makes a good school a good school. If kids with low prospects and no support end up at the W’s then they might as well be the DCC

[Anonymous]

Watch the videos explaining the process and objectives (link is in another thread). I found them convincing.