Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries

[Anonymous]

RP2 is walkable. Anything else costs the school district more money and keeps that section getting bussed whole all surrounding neighborhoods are going to new school.

If RP wasn’t go down to lower FARMS everyone here would be flipping out saying how unfair it is to NOT let RP2 walk to their new school. Instead they make it seem like RP5 are elitists because they don’t want to move further. If they were high FARMS people would be complaining they can’t make it further. Well guess what? 15% of RP5 is FARMS. Who here is fighting for them?

FARMS numbers is getting ridiculous. They all go to the same middle and high school. Just keep the neighborhoods together and the kids commutes low.

[Anonymous]

MCPS should focus on bridging the achievement gaps as much as possible and then make sure that capacity is not crossing in any school. That will take care of boundary assignment. Everything else is noise.

Diversity and proximity, if not related to achievement gaps, are not going to help any student. Finals outcome for students should get the most emphasis.

I think option C or D is the best for closing the achievement gaps. By not seriously considering these two options . MCPS will simply show that achievement gaps can be widened and widening it doesn't matter for MCPS.

I am not from RM cluster, but I am closely following this FARMs debate in RM cluster. It's good that it became a point of discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MCPS should focus on bridging the achievement gaps as much as possible and then make sure that capacity is not crossing in any school. That will take care of boundary assignment. Everything else is noise.

Diversity and proximity, if not related to achievement gaps, are not going to help any student. Finals outcome for students should get the most emphasis.

I think option C or D is the best for closing the achievement gaps. By not seriously considering these two options . MCPS will simply show that achievement gaps can be widened and widening it doesn't matter for MCPS.

I am not from RM cluster, but I am closely following this FARMs debate in RM cluster. It's good that it became a point of discussion.

Have you looked at PARCC scores or other standardized testing in each of these schools? If not, what specific data are you basing your achievement gap argument on??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Just keep the neighborhoods together

Famous words used for only one purpose and it gets used in every city, not just in Rockville. Earlier it was used for segregating based on race and now days it is used for segregation based on money.

Neighborhood argument and segregation goes hand in hand. You may not have said it with that intention, but it is used for that by most folks.


- Not in RM cluster, but following it closely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS should focus on bridging the achievement gaps as much as possible and then make sure that capacity is not crossing in any school. That will take care of boundary assignment. Everything else is noise.

Diversity and proximity, if not related to achievement gaps, are not going to help any student. Finals outcome for students should get the most emphasis.

I think option C or D is the best for closing the achievement gaps. By not seriously considering these two options . MCPS will simply show that achievement gaps can be widened and widening it doesn't matter for MCPS.

I am not from RM cluster, but I am closely following this FARMs debate in RM cluster. It's good that it became a point of discussion.

Have you looked at PARCC scores or other standardized testing in each of these schools? If not, what specific data are you basing your achievement gap argument on??

You don't have to look at each of these schools. You can look at research done within entire MCPS or research done in any other school system to come to conclusion. That will give you a good sample size.

It's a simple conclusion. FARMs kids do best when they are in affluent schools. Their reading scores and math scores keep getting better when compared to FARMs kids who attend schools with high FARMs rate.

Interesting times for MCPS here and it will set the tone for future boundary decisions. If MCPS exclusively focuses on neighborhood then they will have to follow it for all other boundaries in future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS should focus on bridging the achievement gaps as much as possible and then make sure that capacity is not crossing in any school. That will take care of boundary assignment. Everything else is noise.

Diversity and proximity, if not related to achievement gaps, are not going to help any student. Finals outcome for students should get the most emphasis.

I think option C or D is the best for closing the achievement gaps. By not seriously considering these two options . MCPS will simply show that achievement gaps can be widened and widening it doesn't matter for MCPS.

I am not from RM cluster, but I am closely following this FARMs debate in RM cluster. It's good that it became a point of discussion.

Have you looked at PARCC scores or other standardized testing in each of these schools? If not, what specific data are you basing your achievement gap argument on??

You don't have to look at each of these schools. You can look at research done within entire MCPS or research done in any other school system to come to conclusion. That will give you a good sample size.

It's a simple conclusion. FARMs kids do best when they are in affluent schools. Their reading scores and math scores keep getting better when compared to FARMs kids who attend schools with high FARMs rate.

Interesting times for MCPS here and it will set the tone for future boundary decisions. If MCPS exclusively focuses on neighborhood then they will have to follow it for all other boundaries in future.

Not the PP but yes you do look at this school and their scores because this isn’t about all other schools. It is about THIS cluster. And yes you do look at the needs of the people and not what is best on paper from vague research that doesn’t even come close to describing what is going on here. Twinbrook doesn’t want to be bussed 5 miles away from their neighborhood school and community center. Not at all.

Also, what research says bussing kids out of safe neighborhood schools to schools 5 miles away is easier for FARMS families and a positive outlook for kids? Please post that research.

What cluster do you live in where you think C and D would be a positive?

[Anonymous]

Not the PP but yes you do look at this school and their scores because this isn’t about all other schools. It is about THIS cluster. And yes you do look at the needs of the people and not what is best on paper from vague research that doesn’t even come close to describing what is going on here. Twinbrook doesn’t want to be bussed 5 miles away from their neighborhood school and community center. Not at all.

Also, what research says bussing kids out of safe neighborhood schools to schools 5 miles away is easier for FARMS families and a positive outlook for kids? Please post that research.

What cluster do you live in where you think C and D would be a positive?

Can you show many how many FARMs families are bused 5 miles in these options?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS should focus on bridging the achievement gaps as much as possible and then make sure that capacity is not crossing in any school. That will take care of boundary assignment. Everything else is noise.

Diversity and proximity, if not related to achievement gaps, are not going to help any student. Finals outcome for students should get the most emphasis.

I think option C or D is the best for closing the achievement gaps. By not seriously considering these two options . MCPS will simply show that achievement gaps can be widened and widening it doesn't matter for MCPS.

I am not from RM cluster, but I am closely following this FARMs debate in RM cluster. It's good that it became a point of discussion.

Have you looked at PARCC scores or other standardized testing in each of these schools? If not, what specific data are you basing your achievement gap argument on??

You don't have to look at each of these schools. You can look at research done within entire MCPS or research done in any other school system to come to conclusion. That will give you a good sample size.

It's a simple conclusion. FARMs kids do best when they are in affluent schools. Their reading scores and math scores keep getting better when compared to FARMs kids who attend schools with high FARMs rate.

Interesting times for MCPS here and it will set the tone for future boundary decisions. If MCPS exclusively focuses on neighborhood then they will have to follow it for all other boundaries in future.

Not the PP but yes you do look at this school and their scores because this isn’t about all other schools. It is about THIS cluster. And yes you do look at the needs of the people and not what is best on paper from vague research that doesn’t even come close to describing what is going on here. Twinbrook doesn’t want to be bussed 5 miles away from their neighborhood school and community center. Not at all.

Also, what research says bussing kids out of safe neighborhood schools to schools 5 miles away is easier for FARMS families and a positive outlook for kids? Please post that research.

What cluster do you live in where you think C and D would be a positive?

This cluster is not unique. All researches are done with a wider sample size involving entire school district. Research is not vague at all. If Twin brook zones are unwilling to move and keep FARMs level very high in Twin brook then only option E is left which does very little for FARMs. Option E doesn't attempt to do anything, but simply keeps all FARMs kids in their current schools in other 4 schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Also, what research says bussing kids out of safe neighborhood schools to schools 5 miles away .....

No school belongs to any Neighborhood. MCPS owns all schools.

Safe Neighborhood schools?? Will those safe neighborhood schools become unsafe when some outside kids come to make neighborhood more integrated?

I said it earlier, this neighborhood argument has been used by many to maintain segregation. Earlier it was about race and now it's about money.

[Anonymous]

Pretty sure the "safe neighborhood schools" comment referred to Twinbrook.

I would like to see actual evidence (not vague references to "research") that shows that any FARMS kid performs better in any non-FARMS school. Also, compare FARMS students to FARMS students, not FARMS students to non-FARMS students. For the RM cluster, the actual data (PARCC scores) indicates that FARMS students are performing about the same in all 4 schools; Twinbrook FARMS kids, for instance, are neither appreciably better or worse than FARMS kids at CG, RP, or B.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS should focus on bridging the achievement gaps as much as possible and then make sure that capacity is not crossing in any school. That will take care of boundary assignment. Everything else is noise.

Diversity and proximity, if not related to achievement gaps, are not going to help any student. Finals outcome for students should get the most emphasis.

I think option C or D is the best for closing the achievement gaps. By not seriously considering these two options . MCPS will simply show that achievement gaps can be widened and widening it doesn't matter for MCPS.

I am not from RM cluster, but I am closely following this FARMs debate in RM cluster. It's good that it became a point of discussion.

Have you looked at PARCC scores or other standardized testing in each of these schools? If not, what specific data are you basing your achievement gap argument on??

You don't have to look at each of these schools. You can look at research done within entire MCPS or research done in any other school system to come to conclusion. That will give you a good sample size.

It's a simple conclusion. FARMs kids do best when they are in affluent schools. Their reading scores and math scores keep getting better when compared to FARMs kids who attend schools with high FARMs rate.

Interesting times for MCPS here and it will set the tone for future boundary decisions. If MCPS exclusively focuses on neighborhood then they will have to follow it for all other boundaries in future.

Not the PP but yes you do look at this school and their scores because this isn’t about all other schools. It is about THIS cluster. And yes you do look at the needs of the people and not what is best on paper from vague research that doesn’t even come close to describing what is going on here. Twinbrook doesn’t want to be bussed 5 miles away from their neighborhood school and community center. Not at all.

Also, what research says bussing kids out of safe neighborhood schools to schools 5 miles away is easier for FARMS families and a positive outlook for kids? Please post that research.

What cluster do you live in where you think C and D would be a positive?

This cluster is not unique. All researches are done with a wider sample size involving entire school district. Research is not vague at all. If Twin brook zones are unwilling to move and keep FARMs level very high in Twin brook then only option E is left which does very little for FARMs. Option E doesn't attempt to do anything, but simply keeps all FARMs kids in their current schools in other 4 schools.

Tragic part is that even option E is unacceptable to many, including a council member in city of Rockville, Mark Pierzchala. He has advocated for neighborhood argument in email which went to 100s of Rockville resident. Some one sent me a copy of that email. Not sure where City of Rockvill is headed with all this. I am going to follow up with Mayor's office.

Neighborhood argument pushed by a council member in city of Rockville, Mark Pierzchala does very little for integrating society. His stance is to actually widen the segregation from the current level. Not sure why he strongly supports segregation. Some groups need to pay attention here and make sure to raise this issue at all levels. Mark Pierzchala kind of folks used to rule 60 years back, but they should have no place in current time.

Whenever I see anyone using neighborhood argument and keeping neighborhood safe, my antenna goes up. Kids attending from outside is not going to make neighborhood unsafe. Many residents may not mean it for widening the segregation, but elected officials calling everyone to rally to widen the segregation should be troubling for everyone. Yes, he used worlds like protecting neighborhood, but we all get the meaning here. Neighborhoods don't need protection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I would like to see actual evidence (not vague references to "research") that shows that any FARMS kid performs better in any non-FARMS school. Also, compare FARMS students to FARMS students, not FARMS students to non-FARMS students.

There is one done within MCPS.

https://tcf.org/assets/downloads/tcf-Schwartz.pdf

If you don't want to read the entire research,

It's only talks about FARMs students in public housing. It has nothing to do with non-FARM students.

Look at their math scores and reading scores after spending couple of years in affluent schools vs non-affluent schools. Page 18 and Page 20 has clear graph which show FARMs kids performance in two different scenarios.

I am glad that you actually asked for it and didn't simply brushed me aside.


There are many more studies in different schools systems, but one done within MCPS should be enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pretty sure the "safe neighborhood schools" comment referred to Twinbrook.

I would like to see actual evidence (not vague references to "research") that shows that any FARMS kid performs better in any non-FARMS school. Also, compare FARMS students to FARMS students, not FARMS students to non-FARMS students. For the RM cluster, the actual data (PARCC scores) indicates that FARMS students are performing about the same in all 4 schools; Twinbrook FARMS kids, for instance, are neither appreciably better or worse than FARMS kids at CG, RP, or B.

+1 Twinbrook is arguing for neighborhood schools, too. If you read their boundary study position, they actually call Twinbrook the "quintessential neighborhood school." It is not a code word for racism and classism. It is an important aspect of elementary schools for many people regardless of race, class, or socio economic status.

I live in an affordable housing unit in the RM cluster, and am from a minority religion (interestingly not one of the diversity benchmarks listed) and I think that Options A and B are the best of the 5 (imperfect) options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS should focus on bridging the achievement gaps as much as possible and then make sure that capacity is not crossing in any school. That will take care of boundary assignment. Everything else is noise.

Diversity and proximity, if not related to achievement gaps, are not going to help any student. Finals outcome for students should get the most emphasis.

I think option C or D is the best for closing the achievement gaps. By not seriously considering these two options . MCPS will simply show that achievement gaps can be widened and widening it doesn't matter for MCPS.

I am not from RM cluster, but I am closely following this FARMs debate in RM cluster. It's good that it became a point of discussion.

Have you looked at PARCC scores or other standardized testing in each of these schools? If not, what specific data are you basing your achievement gap argument on??

You don't have to look at each of these schools. You can look at research done within entire MCPS or research done in any other school system to come to conclusion. That will give you a good sample size.

It's a simple conclusion. FARMs kids do best when they are in affluent schools. Their reading scores and math scores keep getting better when compared to FARMs kids who attend schools with high FARMs rate.

Interesting times for MCPS here and it will set the tone for future boundary decisions. If MCPS exclusively focuses on neighborhood then they will have to follow it for all other boundaries in future.

Not the PP but yes you do look at this school and their scores because this isn’t about all other schools. It is about THIS cluster. And yes you do look at the needs of the people and not what is best on paper from vague research that doesn’t even come close to describing what is going on here. Twinbrook doesn’t want to be bussed 5 miles away from their neighborhood school and community center. Not at all.

Also, what research says bussing kids out of safe neighborhood schools to schools 5 miles away is easier for FARMS families and a positive outlook for kids? Please post that research.

What cluster do you live in where you think C and D would be a positive?

This cluster is not unique. All researches are done with a wider sample size involving entire school district. Research is not vague at all. If Twin brook zones are unwilling to move and keep FARMs level very high in Twin brook then only option E is left which does very little for FARMs. Option E doesn't attempt to do anything, but simply keeps all FARMs kids in their current schools in other 4 schools.

Tragic part is that even option E is unacceptable to many, including a council member in city of Rockville, Mark Pierzchala. He has advocated for neighborhood argument in email which went to 100s of Rockville resident. Some one sent me a copy of that email. Not sure where City of Rockvill is headed with all this. I am going to follow up with Mayor's office.

Neighborhood argument pushed by a council member in city of Rockville, Mark Pierzchala does very little for integrating society. His stance is to actually widen the segregation from the current level. Not sure why he strongly supports segregation. Some groups need to pay attention here and make sure to raise this issue at all levels. Mark Pierzchala kind of folks used to rule 60 years back, but they should have no place in current time.

Whenever I see anyone using neighborhood argument and keeping neighborhood safe, my antenna goes up. Kids attending from outside is not going to make neighborhood unsafe. Many residents may not mean it for widening the segregation, but elected officials calling everyone to rally to widen the segregation should be troubling for everyone. Yes, he used worlds like protecting neighborhood, but we all get the meaning here. Neighborhoods don't need protection.

I didn't know about this. Can you post his email about protecting neighborhoods? I was in few earlier meetings of boundary study. I recall him advocating for Woodley Gardens to remain in CG, but that was pretty much ignored in Superintendent's recommendation. Now discussion has started again. I will be interested to see what arguments are used by Mark Pierzchala. Based on what you wrote it sounds inappropriate for an elected officials. Although everyone is free to voice their opinions. It's a free world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Not the PP but yes you do look at this school and their scores because this isn’t about all other schools. It is about THIS cluster. And yes you do look at the needs of the people and not what is best on paper from vague research that doesn’t even come close to describing what is going on here. Twinbrook doesn’t want to be bussed 5 miles away from their neighborhood school and community center. Not at all.

Also, what research says bussing kids out of safe neighborhood schools to schools 5 miles away is easier for FARMS families and a positive outlook for kids? Please post that research.

What cluster do you live in where you think C and D would be a positive?

T2 to Ritchie Park and T5 to College Gardens are both likely in the 3-5 mile range.

Can you show many how many FARMs families are bused 5 miles in these options?