Woodward boundary study public hearing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

I’ve been told this poster is going around spreading lies on all the message boards. I am that woman who testified my child literally has a student ID and will be attending VMES starting in August. Jesus Christ

My guess is it's a bunch of future WJ people who are gleefully calling the Farmland and Luxmanor people "racists", trying to discredit you with vague and ridiculous accusations while hiding behind the anonymity of DCUM

Disagree. WJ family here. Stronger high schools in the region benefit everyone. And Woodward will be fine with any of the options. Though, a better magnet would be something with a direct benefit to my family and a broad benefit to the whole region.

You are probably right in the long run, but not in the short run. That particular poster doesn't strike me as someone with a strong relationship to any school, and is more likely property value obsessed that he then projects on everybody else.

Taylor with his recommendation made, completely unnecessary I would add, a very sharp line in North Bethesda. If you are zoned for WJ and next to a weak Woodward, and you plan to sell in the next year or two, you may gain a lot. This is the area that attracts educated families that are known to open their wallets when they see 9/10 vs 7/10 school. This could be a difference of $100k or more in sale proceeds for someone. So why not spend hours trolling on DCUM. It doesn't cost anything.

In the long run, I don't think it will matter much. The whole region has many good things going on.

With respect to property values, the recommendation helps WJ much more than it hurts Woodward.

On the other hand, with respect to school, the proposal hurts Woodward much more than it helps WJ.

Sorry you made a bad financial decision and overpaid. Thank goodness some of us didn’t and that’s the bigger issue for you. It’s not going to drop because of Woodward.

My issue is with people with no kids in any of the schools affected being vocal about what boundaries should be because of their 'financial decisions'. They should be exposed as such and given zero consideration when making boundary decisions.

I moved into the area before the latest boom, like it here and don't plan on going anywhere anytime soon. I do, however, care care if Woodward will turn out to be a good school or not.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process. The people with financial stake are going to be inclined to ask questions and have opinions. The boundary decision should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process, but if they are more interested in their property value than the public good of quality education for students, nobody should care.

They clearly care about the quality of education for the school they are zoned to because it plays a factor in the value of the home they’re invested in.

And the school system should be delivering quality of education such that it doesn't matter, from that educational perspective, where in the county a person lives. Let people pay for size, design, quality of construction, proximity to work, etc., not the expectation of preferential services from the common wealth.

School quality and school ratings are not the same. There are quality schools throughout the county. People do pay for a higher school rating since it is tied to home resale value.

Please, give us some examples of schools with poor ratings that provide quality education. We would love to know those hidden gems.

Look at any school that houses a large program for students with special needs (must be a diploma tracked program) where there are academic deficits. Those schools are going to have lower ratings but it is not related to the quality of education.

Ok but you can't provide specific examples?

DP but school rankings and ratings are affected by the surrounding income levels. So how would you compare and measure school quality in a meaningful way? That is why no one can answer your question.

PP stated that there are schools throughout the county with poor ratings that provide quality education. It would be interesting to get some examples even with their own definition of 'quality education'.

BTW, WJ doesn't count as the school has good ranking.

I am not trying to be difficult. I would love to hear some with examples (ES, MS, HS) where a school has poor ranking on some of the major ranking sites but is actually quite good and numbers don't tell the whole story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

I’ve been told this poster is going around spreading lies on all the message boards. I am that woman who testified my child literally has a student ID and will be attending VMES starting in August. Jesus Christ

My guess is it's a bunch of future WJ people who are gleefully calling the Farmland and Luxmanor people "racists", trying to discredit you with vague and ridiculous accusations while hiding behind the anonymity of DCUM

Disagree. WJ family here. Stronger high schools in the region benefit everyone. And Woodward will be fine with any of the options. Though, a better magnet would be something with a direct benefit to my family and a broad benefit to the whole region.

You are probably right in the long run, but not in the short run. That particular poster doesn't strike me as someone with a strong relationship to any school, and is more likely property value obsessed that he then projects on everybody else.

Taylor with his recommendation made, completely unnecessary I would add, a very sharp line in North Bethesda. If you are zoned for WJ and next to a weak Woodward, and you plan to sell in the next year or two, you may gain a lot. This is the area that attracts educated families that are known to open their wallets when they see 9/10 vs 7/10 school. This could be a difference of $100k or more in sale proceeds for someone. So why not spend hours trolling on DCUM. It doesn't cost anything.

In the long run, I don't think it will matter much. The whole region has many good things going on.

With respect to property values, the recommendation helps WJ much more than it hurts Woodward.

On the other hand, with respect to school, the proposal hurts Woodward much more than it helps WJ.

Sorry you made a bad financial decision and overpaid. Thank goodness some of us didn’t and that’s the bigger issue for you. It’s not going to drop because of Woodward.

My issue is with people with no kids in any of the schools affected being vocal about what boundaries should be because of their 'financial decisions'. They should be exposed as such and given zero consideration when making boundary decisions.

I moved into the area before the latest boom, like it here and don't plan on going anywhere anytime soon. I do, however, care care if Woodward will turn out to be a good school or not.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process. The people with financial stake are going to be inclined to ask questions and have opinions. The boundary decision should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process, but if they are more interested in their property value than the public good of quality education for students, nobody should care.

They clearly care about the quality of education for the school they are zoned to because it plays a factor in the value of the home they’re invested in.

And the school system should be delivering quality of education such that it doesn't matter, from that educational perspective, where in the county a person lives. Let people pay for size, design, quality of construction, proximity to work, etc., not the expectation of preferential services from the common wealth.

School quality and school ratings are not the same. There are quality schools throughout the county. People do pay for a higher school rating since it is tied to home resale value.

Please, give us some examples of schools with poor ratings that provide quality education. We would love to know those hidden gems.

Look at any school that houses a large program for students with special needs (must be a diploma tracked program) where there are academic deficits. Those schools are going to have lower ratings but it is not related to the quality of education.

Ok but you can't provide specific examples?

DP but school rankings and ratings are affected by the surrounding income levels. So how would you compare and measure school quality in a meaningful way? That is why no one can answer your question.

PP stated that there are schools throughout the county with poor ratings that provide quality education. It would be interesting to get some examples even with their own definition of 'quality education'.

BTW, WJ doesn't count as the school has good ranking.

I am not trying to be difficult. I would love to hear some with examples (ES, MS, HS) where a school has poor ranking on some of the major ranking sites but is actually quite good and numbers don't tell the whole story.

Loiederman MS - incredible program, great principal, and dedicated teachers with a strong cohort of highly achieving/highly able students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

I’ve been told this poster is going around spreading lies on all the message boards. I am that woman who testified my child literally has a student ID and will be attending VMES starting in August. Jesus Christ

My guess is it's a bunch of future WJ people who are gleefully calling the Farmland and Luxmanor people "racists", trying to discredit you with vague and ridiculous accusations while hiding behind the anonymity of DCUM

Disagree. WJ family here. Stronger high schools in the region benefit everyone. And Woodward will be fine with any of the options. Though, a better magnet would be something with a direct benefit to my family and a broad benefit to the whole region.

You are probably right in the long run, but not in the short run. That particular poster doesn't strike me as someone with a strong relationship to any school, and is more likely property value obsessed that he then projects on everybody else.

Taylor with his recommendation made, completely unnecessary I would add, a very sharp line in North Bethesda. If you are zoned for WJ and next to a weak Woodward, and you plan to sell in the next year or two, you may gain a lot. This is the area that attracts educated families that are known to open their wallets when they see 9/10 vs 7/10 school. This could be a difference of $100k or more in sale proceeds for someone. So why not spend hours trolling on DCUM. It doesn't cost anything.

In the long run, I don't think it will matter much. The whole region has many good things going on.

With respect to property values, the recommendation helps WJ much more than it hurts Woodward.

On the other hand, with respect to school, the proposal hurts Woodward much more than it helps WJ.

Sorry you made a bad financial decision and overpaid. Thank goodness some of us didn’t and that’s the bigger issue for you. It’s not going to drop because of Woodward.

My issue is with people with no kids in any of the schools affected being vocal about what boundaries should be because of their 'financial decisions'. They should be exposed as such and given zero consideration when making boundary decisions.

I moved into the area before the latest boom, like it here and don't plan on going anywhere anytime soon. I do, however, care care if Woodward will turn out to be a good school or not.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process. The people with financial stake are going to be inclined to ask questions and have opinions. The boundary decision should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process, but if they are more interested in their property value than the public good of quality education for students, nobody should care.

They clearly care about the quality of education for the school they are zoned to because it plays a factor in the value of the home they’re invested in.

And the school system should be delivering quality of education such that it doesn't matter, from that educational perspective, where in the county a person lives. Let people pay for size, design, quality of construction, proximity to work, etc., not the expectation of preferential services from the common wealth.

School quality and school ratings are not the same. There are quality schools throughout the county. People do pay for a higher school rating since it is tied to home resale value.

Please, give us some examples of schools with poor ratings that provide quality education. We would love to know those hidden gems.

Look at any school that houses a large program for students with special needs (must be a diploma tracked program) where there are academic deficits. Those schools are going to have lower ratings but it is not related to the quality of education.

Ok but you can't provide specific examples?

DP but school rankings and ratings are affected by the surrounding income levels. So how would you compare and measure school quality in a meaningful way? That is why no one can answer your question.

PP stated that there are schools throughout the county with poor ratings that provide quality education. It would be interesting to get some examples even with their own definition of 'quality education'.

BTW, WJ doesn't count as the school has good ranking.

I am not trying to be difficult. I would love to hear some with examples (ES, MS, HS) where a school has poor ranking on some of the major ranking sites but is actually quite good and numbers don't tell the whole story.

You seriously don't already know this is true and need examples? Silver Spring schools tend to top out around 6/10 on Great Schools (with only a tiny handful of exceptions, most of those with magnets) and yet lots of them are fantastic. Do you not think any of the Silver Spring schools are any good?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

I’ve been told this poster is going around spreading lies on all the message boards. I am that woman who testified my child literally has a student ID and will be attending VMES starting in August. Jesus Christ

My guess is it's a bunch of future WJ people who are gleefully calling the Farmland and Luxmanor people "racists", trying to discredit you with vague and ridiculous accusations while hiding behind the anonymity of DCUM

Disagree. WJ family here. Stronger high schools in the region benefit everyone. And Woodward will be fine with any of the options. Though, a better magnet would be something with a direct benefit to my family and a broad benefit to the whole region.

You are probably right in the long run, but not in the short run. That particular poster doesn't strike me as someone with a strong relationship to any school, and is more likely property value obsessed that he then projects on everybody else.

Taylor with his recommendation made, completely unnecessary I would add, a very sharp line in North Bethesda. If you are zoned for WJ and next to a weak Woodward, and you plan to sell in the next year or two, you may gain a lot. This is the area that attracts educated families that are known to open their wallets when they see 9/10 vs 7/10 school. This could be a difference of $100k or more in sale proceeds for someone. So why not spend hours trolling on DCUM. It doesn't cost anything.

In the long run, I don't think it will matter much. The whole region has many good things going on.

With respect to property values, the recommendation helps WJ much more than it hurts Woodward.

On the other hand, with respect to school, the proposal hurts Woodward much more than it helps WJ.

Sorry you made a bad financial decision and overpaid. Thank goodness some of us didn’t and that’s the bigger issue for you. It’s not going to drop because of Woodward.

My issue is with people with no kids in any of the schools affected being vocal about what boundaries should be because of their 'financial decisions'. They should be exposed as such and given zero consideration when making boundary decisions.

I moved into the area before the latest boom, like it here and don't plan on going anywhere anytime soon. I do, however, care care if Woodward will turn out to be a good school or not.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process. The people with financial stake are going to be inclined to ask questions and have opinions. The boundary decision should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process, but if they are more interested in their property value than the public good of quality education for students, nobody should care.

They clearly care about the quality of education for the school they are zoned to because it plays a factor in the value of the home they’re invested in.

And the school system should be delivering quality of education such that it doesn't matter, from that educational perspective, where in the county a person lives. Let people pay for size, design, quality of construction, proximity to work, etc., not the expectation of preferential services from the common wealth.

School quality and school ratings are not the same. There are quality schools throughout the county. People do pay for a higher school rating since it is tied to home resale value.

Please, give us some examples of schools with poor ratings that provide quality education. We would love to know those hidden gems.

Look at any school that houses a large program for students with special needs (must be a diploma tracked program) where there are academic deficits. Those schools are going to have lower ratings but it is not related to the quality of education.

Ok but you can't provide specific examples?

DP but school rankings and ratings are affected by the surrounding income levels. So how would you compare and measure school quality in a meaningful way? That is why no one can answer your question.

PP stated that there are schools throughout the county with poor ratings that provide quality education. It would be interesting to get some examples even with their own definition of 'quality education'.

BTW, WJ doesn't count as the school has good ranking.

I am not trying to be difficult. I would love to hear some with examples (ES, MS, HS) where a school has poor ranking on some of the major ranking sites but is actually quite good and numbers don't tell the whole story.

NP - The numbers don't tell the whole story at *any* school, "good" or "bad" or in-between. Thinking otherwise is naive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

I’ve been told this poster is going around spreading lies on all the message boards. I am that woman who testified my child literally has a student ID and will be attending VMES starting in August. Jesus Christ

My guess is it's a bunch of future WJ people who are gleefully calling the Farmland and Luxmanor people "racists", trying to discredit you with vague and ridiculous accusations while hiding behind the anonymity of DCUM

Disagree. WJ family here. Stronger high schools in the region benefit everyone. And Woodward will be fine with any of the options. Though, a better magnet would be something with a direct benefit to my family and a broad benefit to the whole region.

You are probably right in the long run, but not in the short run. That particular poster doesn't strike me as someone with a strong relationship to any school, and is more likely property value obsessed that he then projects on everybody else.

Taylor with his recommendation made, completely unnecessary I would add, a very sharp line in North Bethesda. If you are zoned for WJ and next to a weak Woodward, and you plan to sell in the next year or two, you may gain a lot. This is the area that attracts educated families that are known to open their wallets when they see 9/10 vs 7/10 school. This could be a difference of $100k or more in sale proceeds for someone. So why not spend hours trolling on DCUM. It doesn't cost anything.

In the long run, I don't think it will matter much. The whole region has many good things going on.

With respect to property values, the recommendation helps WJ much more than it hurts Woodward.

On the other hand, with respect to school, the proposal hurts Woodward much more than it helps WJ.

Sorry you made a bad financial decision and overpaid. Thank goodness some of us didn’t and that’s the bigger issue for you. It’s not going to drop because of Woodward.

My issue is with people with no kids in any of the schools affected being vocal about what boundaries should be because of their 'financial decisions'. They should be exposed as such and given zero consideration when making boundary decisions.

I moved into the area before the latest boom, like it here and don't plan on going anywhere anytime soon. I do, however, care care if Woodward will turn out to be a good school or not.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process. The people with financial stake are going to be inclined to ask questions and have opinions. The boundary decision should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process, but if they are more interested in their property value than the public good of quality education for students, nobody should care.

They clearly care about the quality of education for the school they are zoned to because it plays a factor in the value of the home they’re invested in.

And the school system should be delivering quality of education such that it doesn't matter, from that educational perspective, where in the county a person lives. Let people pay for size, design, quality of construction, proximity to work, etc., not the expectation of preferential services from the common wealth.

School quality and school ratings are not the same. There are quality schools throughout the county. People do pay for a higher school rating since it is tied to home resale value.

Please, give us some examples of schools with poor ratings that provide quality education. We would love to know those hidden gems.

Look at any school that houses a large program for students with special needs (must be a diploma tracked program) where there are academic deficits. Those schools are going to have lower ratings but it is not related to the quality of education.

Ok but you can't provide specific examples?

DP but school rankings and ratings are affected by the surrounding income levels. So how would you compare and measure school quality in a meaningful way? That is why no one can answer your question.

PP stated that there are schools throughout the county with poor ratings that provide quality education. It would be interesting to get some examples even with their own definition of 'quality education'.

BTW, WJ doesn't count as the school has good ranking.

I am not trying to be difficult. I would love to hear some with examples (ES, MS, HS) where a school has poor ranking on some of the major ranking sites but is actually quite good and numbers don't tell the whole story.

You seriously don't already know this is true and need examples? Silver Spring schools tend to top out around 6/10 on Great Schools (with only a tiny handful of exceptions, most of those with magnets) and yet lots of them are fantastic. Do you not think any of the Silver Spring schools are any good?

+1

Math/ELA proficiency rates for White kids at Wheaton HS: 75%/81%
Math/ELA proficiency rates for White kids at Churchill HS: 71%/70%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

I’ve been told this poster is going around spreading lies on all the message boards. I am that woman who testified my child literally has a student ID and will be attending VMES starting in August. Jesus Christ

My guess is it's a bunch of future WJ people who are gleefully calling the Farmland and Luxmanor people "racists", trying to discredit you with vague and ridiculous accusations while hiding behind the anonymity of DCUM

Disagree. WJ family here. Stronger high schools in the region benefit everyone. And Woodward will be fine with any of the options. Though, a better magnet would be something with a direct benefit to my family and a broad benefit to the whole region.

You are probably right in the long run, but not in the short run. That particular poster doesn't strike me as someone with a strong relationship to any school, and is more likely property value obsessed that he then projects on everybody else.

Taylor with his recommendation made, completely unnecessary I would add, a very sharp line in North Bethesda. If you are zoned for WJ and next to a weak Woodward, and you plan to sell in the next year or two, you may gain a lot. This is the area that attracts educated families that are known to open their wallets when they see 9/10 vs 7/10 school. This could be a difference of $100k or more in sale proceeds for someone. So why not spend hours trolling on DCUM. It doesn't cost anything.

In the long run, I don't think it will matter much. The whole region has many good things going on.

With respect to property values, the recommendation helps WJ much more than it hurts Woodward.

On the other hand, with respect to school, the proposal hurts Woodward much more than it helps WJ.

Sorry you made a bad financial decision and overpaid. Thank goodness some of us didn’t and that’s the bigger issue for you. It’s not going to drop because of Woodward.

My issue is with people with no kids in any of the schools affected being vocal about what boundaries should be because of their 'financial decisions'. They should be exposed as such and given zero consideration when making boundary decisions.

I moved into the area before the latest boom, like it here and don't plan on going anywhere anytime soon. I do, however, care care if Woodward will turn out to be a good school or not.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process. The people with financial stake are going to be inclined to ask questions and have opinions. The boundary decision should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process, but if they are more interested in their property value than the public good of quality education for students, nobody should care.

They clearly care about the quality of education for the school they are zoned to because it plays a factor in the value of the home they’re invested in.

And the school system should be delivering quality of education such that it doesn't matter, from that educational perspective, where in the county a person lives. Let people pay for size, design, quality of construction, proximity to work, etc., not the expectation of preferential services from the common wealth.

School quality and school ratings are not the same. There are quality schools throughout the county. People do pay for a higher school rating since it is tied to home resale value.

Please, give us some examples of schools with poor ratings that provide quality education. We would love to know those hidden gems.

Look at any school that houses a large program for students with special needs (must be a diploma tracked program) where there are academic deficits. Those schools are going to have lower ratings but it is not related to the quality of education.

Ok but you can't provide specific examples?

DP but school rankings and ratings are affected by the surrounding income levels. So how would you compare and measure school quality in a meaningful way? That is why no one can answer your question.

PP stated that there are schools throughout the county with poor ratings that provide quality education. It would be interesting to get some examples even with their own definition of 'quality education'.

BTW, WJ doesn't count as the school has good ranking.

I am not trying to be difficult. I would love to hear some with examples (ES, MS, HS) where a school has poor ranking on some of the major ranking sites but is actually quite good and numbers don't tell the whole story.

You seriously don't already know this is true and need examples? Silver Spring schools tend to top out around 6/10 on Great Schools (with only a tiny handful of exceptions, most of those with magnets) and yet lots of them are fantastic. Do you not think any of the Silver Spring schools are any good?

DP. Do they all offer reasonably similar academic opportunities to those offered to students attending Whitman?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

I’ve been told this poster is going around spreading lies on all the message boards. I am that woman who testified my child literally has a student ID and will be attending VMES starting in August. Jesus Christ

My guess is it's a bunch of future WJ people who are gleefully calling the Farmland and Luxmanor people "racists", trying to discredit you with vague and ridiculous accusations while hiding behind the anonymity of DCUM

Disagree. WJ family here. Stronger high schools in the region benefit everyone. And Woodward will be fine with any of the options. Though, a better magnet would be something with a direct benefit to my family and a broad benefit to the whole region.

You are probably right in the long run, but not in the short run. That particular poster doesn't strike me as someone with a strong relationship to any school, and is more likely property value obsessed that he then projects on everybody else.

Taylor with his recommendation made, completely unnecessary I would add, a very sharp line in North Bethesda. If you are zoned for WJ and next to a weak Woodward, and you plan to sell in the next year or two, you may gain a lot. This is the area that attracts educated families that are known to open their wallets when they see 9/10 vs 7/10 school. This could be a difference of $100k or more in sale proceeds for someone. So why not spend hours trolling on DCUM. It doesn't cost anything.

In the long run, I don't think it will matter much. The whole region has many good things going on.

With respect to property values, the recommendation helps WJ much more than it hurts Woodward.

On the other hand, with respect to school, the proposal hurts Woodward much more than it helps WJ.

Sorry you made a bad financial decision and overpaid. Thank goodness some of us didn’t and that’s the bigger issue for you. It’s not going to drop because of Woodward.

My issue is with people with no kids in any of the schools affected being vocal about what boundaries should be because of their 'financial decisions'. They should be exposed as such and given zero consideration when making boundary decisions.

I moved into the area before the latest boom, like it here and don't plan on going anywhere anytime soon. I do, however, care care if Woodward will turn out to be a good school or not.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process. The people with financial stake are going to be inclined to ask questions and have opinions. The boundary decision should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process, but if they are more interested in their property value than the public good of quality education for students, nobody should care.

They clearly care about the quality of education for the school they are zoned to because it plays a factor in the value of the home they’re invested in.

And the school system should be delivering quality of education such that it doesn't matter, from that educational perspective, where in the county a person lives. Let people pay for size, design, quality of construction, proximity to work, etc., not the expectation of preferential services from the common wealth.

School quality and school ratings are not the same. There are quality schools throughout the county. People do pay for a higher school rating since it is tied to home resale value.

Please, give us some examples of schools with poor ratings that provide quality education. We would love to know those hidden gems.

Look at any school that houses a large program for students with special needs (must be a diploma tracked program) where there are academic deficits. Those schools are going to have lower ratings but it is not related to the quality of education.

Ok but you can't provide specific examples?

DP but school rankings and ratings are affected by the surrounding income levels. So how would you compare and measure school quality in a meaningful way? That is why no one can answer your question.

PP stated that there are schools throughout the county with poor ratings that provide quality education. It would be interesting to get some examples even with their own definition of 'quality education'.

BTW, WJ doesn't count as the school has good ranking.

I am not trying to be difficult. I would love to hear some with examples (ES, MS, HS) where a school has poor ranking on some of the major ranking sites but is actually quite good and numbers don't tell the whole story.

You seriously don't already know this is true and need examples? Silver Spring schools tend to top out around 6/10 on Great Schools (with only a tiny handful of exceptions, most of those with magnets) and yet lots of them are fantastic. Do you not think any of the Silver Spring schools are any good?

DP. Do they all offer reasonably similar academic opportunities to those offered to students attending Whitman?

DP

The average number of AP courses in US high schools is 10.

Whitman offered 35 AP courses in Spring 2025. Overall, the wealthiest schools in MCPS offer an average of 33 AP courses. Blair, in Silver Spring, offers 34 AP classes, and is not a wealthy school but benefits from its magnet programs.

Most other MCPS high schools offer at least 20 AP courses, which is double the US average. However, Seneca Valley, Watkins Mill and Kennedy offer only 10, 12 and 11 AP courses, respectively. Part of this is that these are IB schools, but there are other MCPS IB schools that still offer more than double the AP courses (e.g. BCC has an IB program as well as 27 AP courses)

https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OLO/Resources/Files/2026_Reports/OLOReport%202026-2.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

I’ve been told this poster is going around spreading lies on all the message boards. I am that woman who testified my child literally has a student ID and will be attending VMES starting in August. Jesus Christ

My guess is it's a bunch of future WJ people who are gleefully calling the Farmland and Luxmanor people "racists", trying to discredit you with vague and ridiculous accusations while hiding behind the anonymity of DCUM

Disagree. WJ family here. Stronger high schools in the region benefit everyone. And Woodward will be fine with any of the options. Though, a better magnet would be something with a direct benefit to my family and a broad benefit to the whole region.

You are probably right in the long run, but not in the short run. That particular poster doesn't strike me as someone with a strong relationship to any school, and is more likely property value obsessed that he then projects on everybody else.

Taylor with his recommendation made, completely unnecessary I would add, a very sharp line in North Bethesda. If you are zoned for WJ and next to a weak Woodward, and you plan to sell in the next year or two, you may gain a lot. This is the area that attracts educated families that are known to open their wallets when they see 9/10 vs 7/10 school. This could be a difference of $100k or more in sale proceeds for someone. So why not spend hours trolling on DCUM. It doesn't cost anything.

In the long run, I don't think it will matter much. The whole region has many good things going on.

With respect to property values, the recommendation helps WJ much more than it hurts Woodward.

On the other hand, with respect to school, the proposal hurts Woodward much more than it helps WJ.

Sorry you made a bad financial decision and overpaid. Thank goodness some of us didn’t and that’s the bigger issue for you. It’s not going to drop because of Woodward.

My issue is with people with no kids in any of the schools affected being vocal about what boundaries should be because of their 'financial decisions'. They should be exposed as such and given zero consideration when making boundary decisions.

I moved into the area before the latest boom, like it here and don't plan on going anywhere anytime soon. I do, however, care care if Woodward will turn out to be a good school or not.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process. The people with financial stake are going to be inclined to ask questions and have opinions. The boundary decision should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process, but if they are more interested in their property value than the public good of quality education for students, nobody should care.

They clearly care about the quality of education for the school they are zoned to because it plays a factor in the value of the home they’re invested in.

And the school system should be delivering quality of education such that it doesn't matter, from that educational perspective, where in the county a person lives. Let people pay for size, design, quality of construction, proximity to work, etc., not the expectation of preferential services from the common wealth.

School quality and school ratings are not the same. There are quality schools throughout the county. People do pay for a higher school rating since it is tied to home resale value.

Please, give us some examples of schools with poor ratings that provide quality education. We would love to know those hidden gems.

Look at any school that houses a large program for students with special needs (must be a diploma tracked program) where there are academic deficits. Those schools are going to have lower ratings but it is not related to the quality of education.

Ok but you can't provide specific examples?

DP but school rankings and ratings are affected by the surrounding income levels. So how would you compare and measure school quality in a meaningful way? That is why no one can answer your question.

PP stated that there are schools throughout the county with poor ratings that provide quality education. It would be interesting to get some examples even with their own definition of 'quality education'.

BTW, WJ doesn't count as the school has good ranking.

I am not trying to be difficult. I would love to hear some with examples (ES, MS, HS) where a school has poor ranking on some of the major ranking sites but is actually quite good and numbers don't tell the whole story.

You seriously don't already know this is true and need examples? Silver Spring schools tend to top out around 6/10 on Great Schools (with only a tiny handful of exceptions, most of those with magnets) and yet lots of them are fantastic. Do you not think any of the Silver Spring schools are any good?

DP. Do they all offer reasonably similar academic opportunities to those offered to students attending Whitman?

DP

The average number of AP courses in US high schools is 10.

Whitman offered 35 AP courses in Spring 2025. Overall, the wealthiest schools in MCPS offer an average of 33 AP courses. Blair, in Silver Spring, offers 34 AP classes, and is not a wealthy school but benefits from its magnet programs.

Most other MCPS high schools offer at least 20 AP courses, which is double the US average. However, Seneca Valley, Watkins Mill and Kennedy offer only 10, 12 and 11 AP courses, respectively. Part of this is that these are IB schools, but there are other MCPS IB schools that still offer more than double the AP courses (e.g. BCC has an IB program as well as 27 AP courses)

https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OLO/Resources/Files/2026_Reports/OLOReport%202026-2.pdf

Just because they are listed, doesn't mean they actually have them. They got this listed from the course guide, but just because its listed doesn't mean its actually offered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

I’ve been told this poster is going around spreading lies on all the message boards. I am that woman who testified my child literally has a student ID and will be attending VMES starting in August. Jesus Christ

My guess is it's a bunch of future WJ people who are gleefully calling the Farmland and Luxmanor people "racists", trying to discredit you with vague and ridiculous accusations while hiding behind the anonymity of DCUM

Disagree. WJ family here. Stronger high schools in the region benefit everyone. And Woodward will be fine with any of the options. Though, a better magnet would be something with a direct benefit to my family and a broad benefit to the whole region.

You are probably right in the long run, but not in the short run. That particular poster doesn't strike me as someone with a strong relationship to any school, and is more likely property value obsessed that he then projects on everybody else.

Taylor with his recommendation made, completely unnecessary I would add, a very sharp line in North Bethesda. If you are zoned for WJ and next to a weak Woodward, and you plan to sell in the next year or two, you may gain a lot. This is the area that attracts educated families that are known to open their wallets when they see 9/10 vs 7/10 school. This could be a difference of $100k or more in sale proceeds for someone. So why not spend hours trolling on DCUM. It doesn't cost anything.

In the long run, I don't think it will matter much. The whole region has many good things going on.

With respect to property values, the recommendation helps WJ much more than it hurts Woodward.

On the other hand, with respect to school, the proposal hurts Woodward much more than it helps WJ.

Sorry you made a bad financial decision and overpaid. Thank goodness some of us didn’t and that’s the bigger issue for you. It’s not going to drop because of Woodward.

My issue is with people with no kids in any of the schools affected being vocal about what boundaries should be because of their 'financial decisions'. They should be exposed as such and given zero consideration when making boundary decisions.

I moved into the area before the latest boom, like it here and don't plan on going anywhere anytime soon. I do, however, care care if Woodward will turn out to be a good school or not.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process. The people with financial stake are going to be inclined to ask questions and have opinions. The boundary decision should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process, but if they are more interested in their property value than the public good of quality education for students, nobody should care.

They clearly care about the quality of education for the school they are zoned to because it plays a factor in the value of the home they’re invested in.

And the school system should be delivering quality of education such that it doesn't matter, from that educational perspective, where in the county a person lives. Let people pay for size, design, quality of construction, proximity to work, etc., not the expectation of preferential services from the common wealth.

School quality and school ratings are not the same. There are quality schools throughout the county. People do pay for a higher school rating since it is tied to home resale value.

Please, give us some examples of schools with poor ratings that provide quality education. We would love to know those hidden gems.

Look at any school that houses a large program for students with special needs (must be a diploma tracked program) where there are academic deficits. Those schools are going to have lower ratings but it is not related to the quality of education.

Ok but you can't provide specific examples?

DP but school rankings and ratings are affected by the surrounding income levels. So how would you compare and measure school quality in a meaningful way? That is why no one can answer your question.

PP stated that there are schools throughout the county with poor ratings that provide quality education. It would be interesting to get some examples even with their own definition of 'quality education'.

BTW, WJ doesn't count as the school has good ranking.

I am not trying to be difficult. I would love to hear some with examples (ES, MS, HS) where a school has poor ranking on some of the major ranking sites but is actually quite good and numbers don't tell the whole story.

You seriously don't already know this is true and need examples? Silver Spring schools tend to top out around 6/10 on Great Schools (with only a tiny handful of exceptions, most of those with magnets) and yet lots of them are fantastic. Do you not think any of the Silver Spring schools are any good?

DP. Do they all offer reasonably similar academic opportunities to those offered to students attending Whitman?

No one is saying that going to Whitman is exactly the same as going to every other high school.

But if people really think that all the 9/10 Bethesda and Potomac elementary schools are head and shoulders above all the 5/10 Silver Spring schools because Great Schools says so, and the reason for the disparities in rankings and test scores has nothing to do with demographics and is all about the teachers at the richer schools being way better, you're deeply misguided.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

I’ve been told this poster is going around spreading lies on all the message boards. I am that woman who testified my child literally has a student ID and will be attending VMES starting in August. Jesus Christ

My guess is it's a bunch of future WJ people who are gleefully calling the Farmland and Luxmanor people "racists", trying to discredit you with vague and ridiculous accusations while hiding behind the anonymity of DCUM

Disagree. WJ family here. Stronger high schools in the region benefit everyone. And Woodward will be fine with any of the options. Though, a better magnet would be something with a direct benefit to my family and a broad benefit to the whole region.

You are probably right in the long run, but not in the short run. That particular poster doesn't strike me as someone with a strong relationship to any school, and is more likely property value obsessed that he then projects on everybody else.

Taylor with his recommendation made, completely unnecessary I would add, a very sharp line in North Bethesda. If you are zoned for WJ and next to a weak Woodward, and you plan to sell in the next year or two, you may gain a lot. This is the area that attracts educated families that are known to open their wallets when they see 9/10 vs 7/10 school. This could be a difference of $100k or more in sale proceeds for someone. So why not spend hours trolling on DCUM. It doesn't cost anything.

In the long run, I don't think it will matter much. The whole region has many good things going on.

With respect to property values, the recommendation helps WJ much more than it hurts Woodward.

On the other hand, with respect to school, the proposal hurts Woodward much more than it helps WJ.

Sorry you made a bad financial decision and overpaid. Thank goodness some of us didn’t and that’s the bigger issue for you. It’s not going to drop because of Woodward.

My issue is with people with no kids in any of the schools affected being vocal about what boundaries should be because of their 'financial decisions'. They should be exposed as such and given zero consideration when making boundary decisions.

I moved into the area before the latest boom, like it here and don't plan on going anywhere anytime soon. I do, however, care care if Woodward will turn out to be a good school or not.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process. The people with financial stake are going to be inclined to ask questions and have opinions. The boundary decision should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process, but if they are more interested in their property value than the public good of quality education for students, nobody should care.

They clearly care about the quality of education for the school they are zoned to because it plays a factor in the value of the home they’re invested in.

And the school system should be delivering quality of education such that it doesn't matter, from that educational perspective, where in the county a person lives. Let people pay for size, design, quality of construction, proximity to work, etc., not the expectation of preferential services from the common wealth.

School quality and school ratings are not the same. There are quality schools throughout the county. People do pay for a higher school rating since it is tied to home resale value.

Please, give us some examples of schools with poor ratings that provide quality education. We would love to know those hidden gems.

Look at any school that houses a large program for students with special needs (must be a diploma tracked program) where there are academic deficits. Those schools are going to have lower ratings but it is not related to the quality of education.

Ok but you can't provide specific examples?

DP but school rankings and ratings are affected by the surrounding income levels. So how would you compare and measure school quality in a meaningful way? That is why no one can answer your question.

PP stated that there are schools throughout the county with poor ratings that provide quality education. It would be interesting to get some examples even with their own definition of 'quality education'.

BTW, WJ doesn't count as the school has good ranking.

I am not trying to be difficult. I would love to hear some with examples (ES, MS, HS) where a school has poor ranking on some of the major ranking sites but is actually quite good and numbers don't tell the whole story.

You seriously don't already know this is true and need examples? Silver Spring schools tend to top out around 6/10 on Great Schools (with only a tiny handful of exceptions, most of those with magnets) and yet lots of them are fantastic. Do you not think any of the Silver Spring schools are any good?

DP. Do they all offer reasonably similar academic opportunities to those offered to students attending Whitman?

No one is saying that going to Whitman is exactly the same as going to every other high school.

But if people really think that all the 9/10 Bethesda and Potomac elementary schools are head and shoulders above all the 5/10 Silver Spring schools because Great Schools says so, and the reason for the disparities in rankings and test scores has nothing to do with demographics and is all about the teachers at the richer schools being way better, you're deeply misguided.

The schools could offer one section of each AP class but the principals refuse to allocate the staff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

I’ve been told this poster is going around spreading lies on all the message boards. I am that woman who testified my child literally has a student ID and will be attending VMES starting in August. Jesus Christ

My guess is it's a bunch of future WJ people who are gleefully calling the Farmland and Luxmanor people "racists", trying to discredit you with vague and ridiculous accusations while hiding behind the anonymity of DCUM

Disagree. WJ family here. Stronger high schools in the region benefit everyone. And Woodward will be fine with any of the options. Though, a better magnet would be something with a direct benefit to my family and a broad benefit to the whole region.

You are probably right in the long run, but not in the short run. That particular poster doesn't strike me as someone with a strong relationship to any school, and is more likely property value obsessed that he then projects on everybody else.

Taylor with his recommendation made, completely unnecessary I would add, a very sharp line in North Bethesda. If you are zoned for WJ and next to a weak Woodward, and you plan to sell in the next year or two, you may gain a lot. This is the area that attracts educated families that are known to open their wallets when they see 9/10 vs 7/10 school. This could be a difference of $100k or more in sale proceeds for someone. So why not spend hours trolling on DCUM. It doesn't cost anything.

In the long run, I don't think it will matter much. The whole region has many good things going on.

With respect to property values, the recommendation helps WJ much more than it hurts Woodward.

On the other hand, with respect to school, the proposal hurts Woodward much more than it helps WJ.

Sorry you made a bad financial decision and overpaid. Thank goodness some of us didn’t and that’s the bigger issue for you. It’s not going to drop because of Woodward.

My issue is with people with no kids in any of the schools affected being vocal about what boundaries should be because of their 'financial decisions'. They should be exposed as such and given zero consideration when making boundary decisions.

I moved into the area before the latest boom, like it here and don't plan on going anywhere anytime soon. I do, however, care care if Woodward will turn out to be a good school or not.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process. The people with financial stake are going to be inclined to ask questions and have opinions. The boundary decision should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process, but if they are more interested in their property value than the public good of quality education for students, nobody should care.

They clearly care about the quality of education for the school they are zoned to because it plays a factor in the value of the home they’re invested in.

And the school system should be delivering quality of education such that it doesn't matter, from that educational perspective, where in the county a person lives. Let people pay for size, design, quality of construction, proximity to work, etc., not the expectation of preferential services from the common wealth.

School quality and school ratings are not the same. There are quality schools throughout the county. People do pay for a higher school rating since it is tied to home resale value.

Please, give us some examples of schools with poor ratings that provide quality education. We would love to know those hidden gems.

Look at any school that houses a large program for students with special needs (must be a diploma tracked program) where there are academic deficits. Those schools are going to have lower ratings but it is not related to the quality of education.

Ok but you can't provide specific examples?

DP but school rankings and ratings are affected by the surrounding income levels. So how would you compare and measure school quality in a meaningful way? That is why no one can answer your question.

PP stated that there are schools throughout the county with poor ratings that provide quality education. It would be interesting to get some examples even with their own definition of 'quality education'.

BTW, WJ doesn't count as the school has good ranking.

I am not trying to be difficult. I would love to hear some with examples (ES, MS, HS) where a school has poor ranking on some of the major ranking sites but is actually quite good and numbers don't tell the whole story.

You seriously don't already know this is true and need examples? Silver Spring schools tend to top out around 6/10 on Great Schools (with only a tiny handful of exceptions, most of those with magnets) and yet lots of them are fantastic. Do you not think any of the Silver Spring schools are any good?

DP. Do they all offer reasonably similar academic opportunities to those offered to students attending Whitman?

DP

The average number of AP courses in US high schools is 10.

Whitman offered 35 AP courses in Spring 2025. Overall, the wealthiest schools in MCPS offer an average of 33 AP courses. Blair, in Silver Spring, offers 34 AP classes, and is not a wealthy school but benefits from its magnet programs.

Most other MCPS high schools offer at least 20 AP courses, which is double the US average. However, Seneca Valley, Watkins Mill and Kennedy offer only 10, 12 and 11 AP courses, respectively. Part of this is that these are IB schools, but there are other MCPS IB schools that still offer more than double the AP courses (e.g. BCC has an IB program as well as 27 AP courses)

https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OLO/Resources/Files/2026_Reports/OLOReport%202026-2.pdf

Just because they are listed, doesn't mean they actually have them. They got this listed from the course guide, but just because its listed doesn't mean its actually offered.

Not so, it's based on enrolled students in spring 2025.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

I’ve been told this poster is going around spreading lies on all the message boards. I am that woman who testified my child literally has a student ID and will be attending VMES starting in August. Jesus Christ

My guess is it's a bunch of future WJ people who are gleefully calling the Farmland and Luxmanor people "racists", trying to discredit you with vague and ridiculous accusations while hiding behind the anonymity of DCUM

Disagree. WJ family here. Stronger high schools in the region benefit everyone. And Woodward will be fine with any of the options. Though, a better magnet would be something with a direct benefit to my family and a broad benefit to the whole region.

You are probably right in the long run, but not in the short run. That particular poster doesn't strike me as someone with a strong relationship to any school, and is more likely property value obsessed that he then projects on everybody else.

Taylor with his recommendation made, completely unnecessary I would add, a very sharp line in North Bethesda. If you are zoned for WJ and next to a weak Woodward, and you plan to sell in the next year or two, you may gain a lot. This is the area that attracts educated families that are known to open their wallets when they see 9/10 vs 7/10 school. This could be a difference of $100k or more in sale proceeds for someone. So why not spend hours trolling on DCUM. It doesn't cost anything.

In the long run, I don't think it will matter much. The whole region has many good things going on.

With respect to property values, the recommendation helps WJ much more than it hurts Woodward.

On the other hand, with respect to school, the proposal hurts Woodward much more than it helps WJ.

Sorry you made a bad financial decision and overpaid. Thank goodness some of us didn’t and that’s the bigger issue for you. It’s not going to drop because of Woodward.

My issue is with people with no kids in any of the schools affected being vocal about what boundaries should be because of their 'financial decisions'. They should be exposed as such and given zero consideration when making boundary decisions.

I moved into the area before the latest boom, like it here and don't plan on going anywhere anytime soon. I do, however, care care if Woodward will turn out to be a good school or not.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process. The people with financial stake are going to be inclined to ask questions and have opinions. The boundary decision should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process, but if they are more interested in their property value than the public good of quality education for students, nobody should care.

They clearly care about the quality of education for the school they are zoned to because it plays a factor in the value of the home they’re invested in.

And the school system should be delivering quality of education such that it doesn't matter, from that educational perspective, where in the county a person lives. Let people pay for size, design, quality of construction, proximity to work, etc., not the expectation of preferential services from the common wealth.

School quality and school ratings are not the same. There are quality schools throughout the county. People do pay for a higher school rating since it is tied to home resale value.

Please, give us some examples of schools with poor ratings that provide quality education. We would love to know those hidden gems.

Look at any school that houses a large program for students with special needs (must be a diploma tracked program) where there are academic deficits. Those schools are going to have lower ratings but it is not related to the quality of education.

Ok but you can't provide specific examples?

DP but school rankings and ratings are affected by the surrounding income levels. So how would you compare and measure school quality in a meaningful way? That is why no one can answer your question.

PP stated that there are schools throughout the county with poor ratings that provide quality education. It would be interesting to get some examples even with their own definition of 'quality education'.

BTW, WJ doesn't count as the school has good ranking.

I am not trying to be difficult. I would love to hear some with examples (ES, MS, HS) where a school has poor ranking on some of the major ranking sites but is actually quite good and numbers don't tell the whole story.

You seriously don't already know this is true and need examples? Silver Spring schools tend to top out around 6/10 on Great Schools (with only a tiny handful of exceptions, most of those with magnets) and yet lots of them are fantastic. Do you not think any of the Silver Spring schools are any good?

DP. Do they all offer reasonably similar academic opportunities to those offered to students attending Whitman?

No one is saying that going to Whitman is exactly the same as going to every other high school.

But if people really think that all the 9/10 Bethesda and Potomac elementary schools are head and shoulders above all the 5/10 Silver Spring schools because Great Schools says so, and the reason for the disparities in rankings and test scores has nothing to do with demographics and is all about the teachers at the richer schools being way better, you're deeply misguided.

The schools could offer one section of each AP class but the principals refuse to allocate the staff.

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fyi there was a VMES parent who testified in support of moving VMES to WJ (see 2nd video testimony)

She doesn’t even really have a child in MCPS so put that one in the category of Farmland realtors looking at property value preservation

I’ve been told this poster is going around spreading lies on all the message boards. I am that woman who testified my child literally has a student ID and will be attending VMES starting in August. Jesus Christ

My guess is it's a bunch of future WJ people who are gleefully calling the Farmland and Luxmanor people "racists", trying to discredit you with vague and ridiculous accusations while hiding behind the anonymity of DCUM

Disagree. WJ family here. Stronger high schools in the region benefit everyone. And Woodward will be fine with any of the options. Though, a better magnet would be something with a direct benefit to my family and a broad benefit to the whole region.

You are probably right in the long run, but not in the short run. That particular poster doesn't strike me as someone with a strong relationship to any school, and is more likely property value obsessed that he then projects on everybody else.

Taylor with his recommendation made, completely unnecessary I would add, a very sharp line in North Bethesda. If you are zoned for WJ and next to a weak Woodward, and you plan to sell in the next year or two, you may gain a lot. This is the area that attracts educated families that are known to open their wallets when they see 9/10 vs 7/10 school. This could be a difference of $100k or more in sale proceeds for someone. So why not spend hours trolling on DCUM. It doesn't cost anything.

In the long run, I don't think it will matter much. The whole region has many good things going on.

With respect to property values, the recommendation helps WJ much more than it hurts Woodward.

On the other hand, with respect to school, the proposal hurts Woodward much more than it helps WJ.

Sorry you made a bad financial decision and overpaid. Thank goodness some of us didn’t and that’s the bigger issue for you. It’s not going to drop because of Woodward.

My issue is with people with no kids in any of the schools affected being vocal about what boundaries should be because of their 'financial decisions'. They should be exposed as such and given zero consideration when making boundary decisions.

I moved into the area before the latest boom, like it here and don't plan on going anywhere anytime soon. I do, however, care care if Woodward will turn out to be a good school or not.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process. The people with financial stake are going to be inclined to ask questions and have opinions. The boundary decision should be able to stand up to the scrutiny.

Any taxpayer should be able to comment on the process, but if they are more interested in their property value than the public good of quality education for students, nobody should care.

They clearly care about the quality of education for the school they are zoned to because it plays a factor in the value of the home they’re invested in.

And the school system should be delivering quality of education such that it doesn't matter, from that educational perspective, where in the county a person lives. Let people pay for size, design, quality of construction, proximity to work, etc., not the expectation of preferential services from the common wealth.

School quality and school ratings are not the same. There are quality schools throughout the county. People do pay for a higher school rating since it is tied to home resale value.

Please, give us some examples of schools with poor ratings that provide quality education. We would love to know those hidden gems.

Look at any school that houses a large program for students with special needs (must be a diploma tracked program) where there are academic deficits. Those schools are going to have lower ratings but it is not related to the quality of education.

Ok but you can't provide specific examples?

DP but school rankings and ratings are affected by the surrounding income levels. So how would you compare and measure school quality in a meaningful way? That is why no one can answer your question.

PP stated that there are schools throughout the county with poor ratings that provide quality education. It would be interesting to get some examples even with their own definition of 'quality education'.

BTW, WJ doesn't count as the school has good ranking.

I am not trying to be difficult. I would love to hear some with examples (ES, MS, HS) where a school has poor ranking on some of the major ranking sites but is actually quite good and numbers don't tell the whole story.

You seriously don't already know this is true and need examples? Silver Spring schools tend to top out around 6/10 on Great Schools (with only a tiny handful of exceptions, most of those with magnets) and yet lots of them are fantastic. Do you not think any of the Silver Spring schools are any good?

DP. Do they all offer reasonably similar academic opportunities to those offered to students attending Whitman?

No one is saying that going to Whitman is exactly the same as going to every other high school.

But if people really think that all the 9/10 Bethesda and Potomac elementary schools are head and shoulders above all the 5/10 Silver Spring schools because Great Schools says so, and the reason for the disparities in rankings and test scores has nothing to do with demographics and is all about the teachers at the richer schools being way better, you're deeply misguided.

Don't twist "reasonably similar" (a standard to which MCPS should be held if they at all wish to claim to adhere to their equity principles) into "exactly the same" (a standard that may be impossible on multiple fronts. Reactionary justifications of that sort were used to support "separate but equal," too.

Also, the question was about the offerings/ opportunities, not the rankings or test scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rita Montoya stated the truth at the end! All those Farmland people speaking ill about our poor neighbors and children who receive Free and Reduced Meals. Shame on you!!!! Farmland just cares about their property values. That was clear.

What’s wrong with that? I mean everyone cares about their property values

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh please, the farmland and luxmanor parents came across as classist and racist. The one mom whining that her child wouldn't get his gifted needs met at a 36% FARMS school?

I am sure if it was your kid not getting their needs met you would be “whining” just as much