Wootton or Churchill or RM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP ,

Even Mayor voted for building more apartments in RM cluster despite schools being at 120%.

She made a U turn regarding overcrowding. She voted to oppose the increase from 110% to 120% few years ago. But now she thinks it's perfectly all right to keep building more even after 120%.

Just avoid RM cluster. It's not for families who value education. With 3 kids, we made a poor choice and it will be hard to move out, but you don't need to make the same mistake.

Which schools in the Richard Montgomery cluster are currently at 120%?

The RM cluster lobbied for years to get a new elementary school to alleviate overcrowding. Until this current school year, 3 of the 4 cluster ES were at 130%+
According to statistics from last year's boundary study, without the new school being built, this year's projected enrollment at Beall would have been 133%, College Gardens 129%, and Ritchie Park 141%. Twinbrook was lowest at just over 100% Overcrowding at these schools has been problem for a long time and was finally JUST alleviated this year. Why re-create the problem all over again?? RM is overcrowded with MCPS projections showing it as increasingly overcrowded in the next 5 years. There is already an issue with portables and science classrooms - why make it even worse for current and future students?

Mark Pierzchala and Virginia D. Onley ran election based on simply building more. They have made it clear that overcrowding is not an issue at all. None of the above numbers are 150% which is a desired outcome for both. Stop complaining. City elected both of them to make hard choices and they are making it by supporting building more houses even if schools are over crowded. APFS was an obstacle and they got rid of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Which schools in the Richard Montgomery cluster are currently at 120%?

APFO was there to stop building if schools are at 120% within 5 years.

Virginia D. Onley & Mark Pierzchala have made it very clear that they don't care about over crowding at all. One of them even said that 150% is perfectly fine giving example of her daughter.

Mayor had made a U turn on overcrowding.

End result, APFO means nothing. Developers are always going to win.

No. It's there to stop accepting further building applications if the schools are projected to be at 120% within 5 years ASSUMING THAT EVERYTHING ALREADY APPROVED IS BUILT BY THEN. Which it almost certainly won't be.

The O in APFO is ordinance. It's a law passed by the elected City Council. If you don't like the City Council's decisions, then you should work to elect different candidates in November 2019. In 2015, only 6,468 people voted in the city elections. Start knocking on doors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP ,

Even Mayor voted for building more apartments in RM cluster despite schools being at 120%.

She made a U turn regarding overcrowding. She voted to oppose the increase from 110% to 120% few years ago. But now she thinks it's perfectly all right to keep building more even after 120%.

Just avoid RM cluster. It's not for families who value education. With 3 kids, we made a poor choice and it will be hard to move out, but you don't need to make the same mistake.

1. they are not all coming at once.
2. The wegman development mostly impacts WJ cluster, not RM
3. it will take few years
4. .. at which point, MCPS may well rezone this entire area

They sky isn't falling quite yet. Take a breath.

There is no rezoning scheduled in few years. Stop spreading misinformation.

Crown HS will be built in a few years. The entire area will be rezoned.

I guess city leaders are as irrational as you. MCPS takes minimum of 8 years to build a HS after it's funded. It's not even funded.

Even before this development came to be, MCPS CIP had RMHS over 120% in 5 years, and thus they knew they were going to have to do something about the HS. They were looking at building an addition to the HS. Instead, because of Crown HS, they are holding off on the addition because RM will be rezoned once Crown HS is built, so the numbers will look different. Again, this was before this development.

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/cipmasterpdfs/CIP20_Chap4_RM.pdf

Projections indicate enrollment at Richard Montgomery High School will exceed capacity by 200 seats or more by the end of the six-year planning period. An FY 2016
appropriation was approved for facility planning to determine the feasibility, scope, and cost for a classroom addition. In lieu of the addition, the approved CIP includes expenditures in
the six-year period to open a new high school on the Crown Farm site to address overutilization in the mid-county region.

Again.. even before this development, if Crown HS would not be built before the five year lookout, MCPS would have to address RM over utilization. Now.. *if* RM cluster goes above 120% before the 5 year period, then MCPS will have to address the over utilization earlier. Yes... the cluster may be a bit over 120% for one or two years before Crown HS is built.

As I stated, I am not happy about the development, and I have sent emails to the city about it, but I'm also not panicking thinking the sky is falling.

MCPS is not going to build anything early. They have their time line and budget. They were on record on this during a work session.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Which schools in the Richard Montgomery cluster are currently at 120%?

APFO was there to stop building if schools are at 120% within 5 years.

Virginia D. Onley & Mark Pierzchala have made it very clear that they don't care about over crowding at all. One of them even said that 150% is perfectly fine giving example of her daughter.

Mayor had made a U turn on overcrowding.

End result, APFO means nothing. Developers are always going to win.

No. It's there to stop accepting further building applications if the schools are projected to be at 120% within 5 years ASSUMING THAT EVERYTHING ALREADY APPROVED IS BUILT BY THEN. Which it almost certainly won't be.

The O in APFO is ordinance. It's a law passed by the elected City Council. If you don't like the City Council's decisions, then you should work to elect different candidates in November 2019. In 2015, only 6,468 people voted in the city elections. Start knocking on doors.

Great points raised. Anyone complaining about school overcrowding should take 10 minutes of their time to go vote in election. Otherwise it's pointless to feel disappointed about city not caring regarding overcrowding.

[Anonymous]

My kids attended RM few years ago. I don't have kids in RM anymore, but based on city leaders actions, I will recommend other options.

If you don't have school kids or plan to send them private then Rockville is a great place. If you can't afford private then you should think hard before buying in RM cluster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Aren't these basically the same school already?

Yes, the differences involve hair-splitting which is a popular activity in this forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RM doesn't belong in this comparison if you are comparing schools. It's over crowded with poor test scores despite having magnets.

Yes because RM has poor kids and the other schools don't. Ripe for boundary redrawing. What will W parents do when more poor kids come into their schools and bring down the test scores? I guess you will move to private because the poor kids might infect your kid and bring down your kid's test scores.

I would prefer lower test scores as it makes it less stressful and of course the smart but not perfect kids will be ranked higher. That said, I don’t want all the fights, sex in hallways, anti-semitism, and asylum seekers with a 3rd grade education in my school to get those higher ranks.

Churchill boundaries won’t be changed. They already have every low income area in their area and there really isn’t any others around them.

So, pp, I guess you will be moving out of Churchill now since it's anti-semitic.

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/784059.page

[Anonymous]

I would steer clear of RM unless they plan to install metal detectors in the near future.

[Anonymous]

I have a friend that was bullied at Wooton and the administration tried to expel her for not doing well enough on tests. She was able to switch schools and did fine there.

Add that to this:
https://mobile.twitter.com/k8siegel/status/1123426053752418310

That’s all you need to know about Wooton.

[Anonymous]

You can't go wrong with either school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a friend that was bullied at Wooton and the administration tried to expel her for not doing well enough on tests. She was able to switch schools and did fine there.

Add that to this:
https://mobile.twitter.com/k8siegel/status/1123426053752418310

That’s all you need to know about Wooton.

I see. So an actress twitted about her being bullied in Wootton before 2000.
And you add something about " the administration tried to expel her for not doing well enough on tests"?
no surprising... it is bit stereotyping but many people in the actor/actress industry do not do well at school.
Whether "not doing well" would deserve being expelled, of course depends on how bad she did. I would personally support schools taking more strict measures and expel more students who simply don't want to do school work, but MCPS is clearly not doing that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a friend that was bullied at Wooton and the administration tried to expel her for not doing well enough on tests. She was able to switch schools and did fine there.

Add that to this:
https://mobile.twitter.com/k8siegel/status/1123426053752418310

That’s all you need to know about Wooton.

I see. So an actress twitted about her being bullied in Wootton before 2000.
And you add something about " the administration tried to expel her for not doing well enough on tests"?
no surprising... it is bit stereotyping but many people in the actor/actress industry do not do well at school.
Whether "not doing well" would deserve being expelled, of course depends on how bad she did. I would personally support schools taking more strict measures and expel more students who simply don't want to do school work, but MCPS is clearly not doing that.

No, the person that they tried to expel was a friend, not the actress. That’s two separate black marks for Wootton. My friend changed schools and was a solid B/C student but Wootton wanted her out because all they care about are test scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a friend that was bullied at Wooton and the administration tried to expel her for not doing well enough on tests. She was able to switch schools and did fine there.

Add that to this:
https://mobile.twitter.com/k8siegel/status/1123426053752418310

That’s all you need to know about Wooton.

I see. So an actress twitted about her being bullied in Wootton before 2000.
And you add something about " the administration tried to expel her for not doing well enough on tests"?
no surprising... it is bit stereotyping but many people in the actor/actress industry do not do well at school.
Whether "not doing well" would deserve being expelled, of course depends on how bad she did. I would personally support schools taking more strict measures and expel more students who simply don't want to do school work, but MCPS is clearly not doing that.

No, the person that they tried to expel was a friend, not the actress. That’s two separate black marks for Wootton. My friend changed schools and was a solid B/C student but Wootton wanted her out because all they care about are test scores.

I think we have no reason to question the credibility of the actress, probably she did get bullied at Wootton.

For your friend, we also have no reason to question your credibility - it might be a fact that she was a solid B/C student, and Wootton might want her out. However, it is not that clear whether your judgement on
WHY Wootton wanted her out is the right one, especially when you told us : "That’s all you need to know about Wooton."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a friend that was bullied at Wooton and the administration tried to expel her for not doing well enough on tests. She was able to switch schools and did fine there.

Add that to this:
https://mobile.twitter.com/k8siegel/status/1123426053752418310

That’s all you need to know about Wooton.

I see. So an actress twitted about her being bullied in Wootton before 2000.
And you add something about " the administration tried to expel her for not doing well enough on tests"?
no surprising... it is bit stereotyping but many people in the actor/actress industry do not do well at school.
Whether "not doing well" would deserve being expelled, of course depends on how bad she did. I would personally support schools taking more strict measures and expel more students who simply don't want to do school work, but MCPS is clearly not doing that.

No, the person that they tried to expel was a friend, not the actress. That’s two separate black marks for Wootton. My friend changed schools and was a solid B/C student but Wootton wanted her out because all they care about are test scores.

I think we have no reason to question the credibility of the actress, probably she did get bullied at Wootton.

For your friend, we also have no reason to question your credibility - it might be a fact that she was a solid B/C student, and Wootton might want her out. However, it is not that clear whether your judgement on
WHY Wootton wanted her out is the right one, especially when you told us : "That’s all you need to know about Wooton."

There may very well be more to it than my friend told me, I’m just relating what I was told. She attended around the time the actress did so it may be less toxic these days. I certainly hope so.

The actress is obviously still bothered by it even twenty years later. Stuff like that can take a while to heal.

[Anonymous]

The administration that pushed out your friend over 19 years ago is long gone. Whoever was the principal was before 2000 would have be gone by 2002 when Dr Doran became the principal. He was amazing and so loved by the community. Dr Doran is the last principal that would have pressured a student to leave for poor scores! He was always trying to encourage kids that they don't have to take all AP classes. He was a big reason why the theater and band thrived so much over the decade he was there. He was always looking for ways to support the students in finding their passions. Its been a few years since he died but the community still misses him.

The new principal is not test score crazy. These days central office is more on the backs of schools with failing scores. They aren't pressuring principals in high performing schools to do even better, in fact they would prefer it if they did worse.