Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is remarkable is that RMES#5 is already picking up several low income apartment complexes in the area. This whole debate is about RP keeping ONE that is currently attending RP in order to improve the whole cluster outcomes.

All else is noise brought up by forum trolls.

+1

The debate is about proximity vs FARMs.

Absolutely not. The debate is about FARMs only, proximity is just a way to misdirect and disguise true motivations.

Again, let me point out the four factors that the BOE are supposed to look at, which does indeed include proximity. So what I stated holds true... it's proximity vs FARMs.

• Facility utilization
• Demographic characteristics of student population
• Geographic proximity of communities to schools
• Stability of school assignments over time

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess we all better move out of our own cluster then. The middle and high school must me just terrible.

Richard Montgomery just dropped from 8 to 7: https://www.greatschools.org/maryland/rockville/943-Richard-Montgomery-High-School/
Julius West just dropped from 9 to 8: https://www.greatschools.org/maryland/rockville/912-Julius-West-Middle-School/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess we all better move out of our own cluster then. The middle and high school must me just terrible.

Richard Montgomery just dropped from 8 to 7: https://www.greatschools.org/maryland/rockville/943-Richard-Montgomery-High-School/
Julius West just dropped from 9 to 8: https://www.greatschools.org/maryland/rockville/912-Julius-West-Middle-School/

So are you moving out PP?

Yes, it dropped because GS changed its rating. Did you know that Whitman dropped to a 4 at one point?

[Anonymous]

^ I meant GS changed the way they do their rating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP... you are making assumptions that the 24 vs 30% is within every class. As a PP noted, if you REALLY want to understand how the numbers play out per grade, you have to figure out the FARMs rate per grade, and not just apply a flat 24% or 30% across all grades.

This will be the average. Some will have more, some will have less. You are welcome to do the analysis per class if you have the data. Don't forget to tell us the result.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP... you are making assumptions that the 24 vs 30% is within every class. As a PP noted, if you REALLY want to understand how the numbers play out per grade, you have to figure out the FARMs rate per grade, and not just apply a flat 24% or 30% across all grades.

This will be the average. Some will have more, some will have less. You are welcome to do the analysis per class if you have the data. Don't forget to tell us the result.

You seem to be the one doing the math, and insisting it's 6 kids out of 24 or 8 out of 24, so I will leave the hard math to you. Yes, some classes will have less and some more. That was the point, so I don't know why you're insisting the 6 out 24 or 8 out of 24 numbers. It's unrealistic. That's my point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP... you are making assumptions that the 24 vs 30% is within every class. As a PP noted, if you REALLY want to understand how the numbers play out per grade, you have to figure out the FARMs rate per grade, and not just apply a flat 24% or 30% across all grades.

This will be the average. Some will have more, some will have less. You are welcome to do the analysis per class if you have the data. Don't forget to tell us the result.

You seem to be the one doing the math, and insisting it's 6 kids out of 24 or 8 out of 24, so I will leave the hard math to you. Yes, some classes will have less and some more. That was the point, so I don't know why you're insisting the 6 out 24 or 8 out of 24 numbers. It's unrealistic. That's my point.

Would be unrealistic if you want to figure out every class and every kid. However, there is a tool that can give us a realistic picture even if you can't go to class level: it's called statistics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP... you are making assumptions that the 24 vs 30% is within every class. As a PP noted, if you REALLY want to understand how the numbers play out per grade, you have to figure out the FARMs rate per grade, and not just apply a flat 24% or 30% across all grades.

This will be the average. Some will have more, some will have less. You are welcome to do the analysis per class if you have the data. Don't forget to tell us the result.

You seem to be the one doing the math, and insisting it's 6 kids out of 24 or 8 out of 24, so I will leave the hard math to you. Yes, some classes will have less and some more. That was the point, so I don't know why you're insisting the 6 out 24 or 8 out of 24 numbers. It's unrealistic. That's my point.

Would be unrealistic if you want to figure out every class and every kid. However, there is a tool that can give us a realistic picture even if you can't go to class level: it's called statistics.

And that realistic picture paints a portrait for the whole school, not a given classroom. Yes, it would be difficult to gather per grade FARMs, but applying a broad based statistic to a given classroom is unrealistic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP... you are making assumptions that the 24 vs 30% is within every class. As a PP noted, if you REALLY want to understand how the numbers play out per grade, you have to figure out the FARMs rate per grade, and not just apply a flat 24% or 30% across all grades.

This will be the average. Some will have more, some will have less. You are welcome to do the analysis per class if you have the data. Don't forget to tell us the result.

You seem to be the one doing the math, and insisting it's 6 kids out of 24 or 8 out of 24, so I will leave the hard math to you. Yes, some classes will have less and some more. That was the point, so I don't know why you're insisting the 6 out 24 or 8 out of 24 numbers. It's unrealistic. That's my point.

Would be unrealistic if you want to figure out every class and every kid. However, there is a tool that can give us a realistic picture even if you can't go to class level: it's called statistics.

And that realistic picture paints a portrait for the whole school, not a given classroom. Yes, it would be difficult to gather per grade FARMs, but applying a broad based statistic to a given classroom is unrealistic.

Are you claiming that - because we cannot figure out what happens in every class - it is unrealistic to make assumptions and figure out average values? I can't believe I am even debating this. Do you have a high school degree?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP... you are making assumptions that the 24 vs 30% is within every class. As a PP noted, if you REALLY want to understand how the numbers play out per grade, you have to figure out the FARMs rate per grade, and not just apply a flat 24% or 30% across all grades.

This will be the average. Some will have more, some will have less. You are welcome to do the analysis per class if you have the data. Don't forget to tell us the result.

You seem to be the one doing the math, and insisting it's 6 kids out of 24 or 8 out of 24, so I will leave the hard math to you. Yes, some classes will have less and some more. That was the point, so I don't know why you're insisting the 6 out 24 or 8 out of 24 numbers. It's unrealistic. That's my point.

Would be unrealistic if you want to figure out every class and every kid. However, there is a tool that can give us a realistic picture even if you can't go to class level: it's called statistics.

And that realistic picture paints a portrait for the whole school, not a given classroom. Yes, it would be difficult to gather per grade FARMs, but applying a broad based statistic to a given classroom is unrealistic.

Are you claiming that - because we cannot figure out what happens in every class - it is unrealistic to make assumptions and figure out average values? I can't believe I am even debating this. Do you have a high school degree?

It's unrealistic to think there's going to be 8 out of 24 students who are FARMs in a given classroom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

If you only focus on proximity then that will always result in concentrating FARMs in one and not having in another. Whole point of this debate is to not focus solely on proximity to avoid segregation.

C exclusively focuses on FARMs at expense of proximity - Bad option

D keeps a balance for proximity and FARMs - Difficuolt due to TB

E leans towards proximity and does some job of FARMs diversity. - Not ideal, but a decent option

Are we now saying that let's focus only on proximity and just forget about FARMs diversity? Option A and B only focuses on proximity. Proximity is a important factor and ideally if TB was not facing trouble, option D does the best job of balancing proximity and FARMs diversity. Hopefully, BOE can fund some program for Twinbrook and go with option D.

The bolded point above is simply UNTRUE. It is untrue because the very neighborhood you are talking about bussing the most is the epitome of what the author of the study points to as the kind of neighborhood that allows for integrated schools and is held up in the study as a model of how to achieve this. I did not read every single sentence of the study (though I read a lot), and I don't recall the author suggesting ANYWHERE that economically integrated neighborhoods should be bussed out to other schools willy nilly to fix their insufficient diversity problems. The whole point of integrated neighborhoods is to AVOID bussing children long distances because the diversity already exists in their community.

Fallsgrove has MPDU homes for sale (12.5 % MPDU purchase units) as well as rentals, as well as low-income housing units run by Rockville Enterprises. However, everyone's perception of the neighborhood is that it is very high income (for the most part, it is). It is literally the definition of the type of housing that the study's author recommends as leading to integrated schools and better outcomes for kids using FARMS. So why are we contemplating bussing this progressively designed neighborhood far away to compensate for older communities that did not have these progressive policies in place?

Also, relatedly: http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Beat/2017/Council-Member-Wants-To-Increase-Affordable-Housing-in-Development-Projects-in-Wealthy-Areas/#.WhA53nIZ5Rg.facebook

Both MoCo and the City of Rockville have their own, but very similar, MPDU and low-income housing policies.

Everyone who is touting that study about FARMS rates and student outcomes should be advocating for more integrated housing models, not bussing children all over the cluster.

That's why no one advocating for option C.

But some people are supporting E which includes extra busing for Fallsgrove and RP2 & 6.

Do you realize that all options involve extra busing for one zone or another?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP... you are making assumptions that the 24 vs 30% is within every class. As a PP noted, if you REALLY want to understand how the numbers play out per grade, you have to figure out the FARMs rate per grade, and not just apply a flat 24% or 30% across all grades.

This will be the average. Some will have more, some will have less. You are welcome to do the analysis per class if you have the data. Don't forget to tell us the result.

You seem to be the one doing the math, and insisting it's 6 kids out of 24 or 8 out of 24, so I will leave the hard math to you. Yes, some classes will have less and some more. That was the point, so I don't know why you're insisting the 6 out 24 or 8 out of 24 numbers. It's unrealistic. That's my point.

Would be unrealistic if you want to figure out every class and every kid. However, there is a tool that can give us a realistic picture even if you can't go to class level: it's called statistics.

And that realistic picture paints a portrait for the whole school, not a given classroom. Yes, it would be difficult to gather per grade FARMs, but applying a broad based statistic to a given classroom is unrealistic.

Are you claiming that - because we cannot figure out what happens in every class - it is unrealistic to make assumptions and figure out average values? I can't believe I am even debating this. Do you have a high school degree?

It's unrealistic to think there's going to be 8 out of 24 students who are FARMs in a given classroom.

This is a NP and I agree that you are correct in saying that you can not say there will be exactly 8 kids receiving FARMS in each classroom. Some may have 5 but then another may gave 11. Either way, the school will have less success in this case than if the statistical average was 5. In that case, one class may gave 3 and another 7.

[Anonymous]

please drive from fallsgrove to rm5 in the morning and tell me that you’d be ok with your kid doing that commute to school.

[Anonymous]

You can't consider ONLY proximity. That's one out of 4 criterion. Also, you can't take just FARMs and say that let's go with option C.

It's unrealistic to expect just one extreme with only one factor driving this. BOE has duty to consider all 4 factors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:please drive from fallsgrove to rm5 in the morning and tell me that you’d be ok with your kid doing that commute to school.

Fallsgrove is screwed regardless of its school assignment in this cluster. RMES#5 or RPES are very similar.