Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I read Schwartz's paper. As has been pointed out on this board repeatedly, the study is not relevant to the situation of the cluster; it is about the placement of public housing. Additionally, poverty ? FARMS, and Schwartz further states, "The differences suggest the shortcoming of the free and reduced-price meal metric as a single indicator of school need." Even if the study were relevant, it did not consider the influence of ESOL. Only 16% of the children living in public housing in the study were Hispanic.

You can say that "the study is not relevant" as many times as you want, that won't make it true. It still gives us a lot of guidance on what are the FARMS levels that offer academic advantages. You think that there were no FARMS kids bused in the study? What difference would it make if you simply bus the FARMS kids to a more affluent school? There would be no advantages because the kids don't live in an integrated neighborhood?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, actually. It has been mentioned on this board before. There are families in RP2 without cars and a few parents who DO have cars volunteer to drive these parents to school events. Otherwise, they cannot participate in school meetings, events, etc. The PTA is even considering following the lead of Jones Lane and implementing the Lyft program to help these families.

And you think participation in school meetings and events is more important than getting a better education? You must be kidding me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: MCPS BOE members also need to read everything. That way they can focus on narrowing the achievement gaps.

So in D

What about the 400+ kids who remain at Twinbrook in a school with identified infrastructure needs that will still be over 50% FARMS. The remaining kids loose Title I funding and the after and summer care that provides. Where are the studies for those kids?

Also, what about the 100+ kids that will be bused into Twinbrook from the towncenter and other areas east of the pike. Those kids go from a school with a rate of 25% to one of 50%. How will they be affected?

FARMs kids have an out sized impact on them . Non-FARMs kids don't have the same impact. We won't worry about non-FARMs kids here when it comes to performance, but we will still not want them to travel too much extra. I don't think that TB is that far from the Town center. I am looking at MCPS estimated travel time right now. B5 is 12 minutes for current school. TB for B5 zone will be 15 minutes. Not a huge increase.

Yes, D does leave TB with 50% FARMs and it's not ideal. We already saw that C takes it to a bit lower level , but causes too much hardship in terms of travel times. So C is not a viable option. D is viable, and the best option. MCPS doesn't think that TB will be without support at 50%.

If you are talking about D still not solving everything, then yes it doesn't solve everything, but it does the best job. You got to take whatever best you can get.

E is not really helping with narrowing the achievement gaps, but keeping it the same.

A and B are simply widening the achievement gaps by pulling RP2 kids out of an affluent school. We saw many speakers supporting A or B. That will be taking a back step by MCPS. MCPS needs to move forward and not backward. Support for A or B is coming due to various reasons and MCPS needs to decide where it wants t

Won't Twinbrook lose title I in C and D. The federally provided funds for before and aftercare as well as free or subsidized summer programs in the Twinbrrook community won't be lost? MCPS does not provide this support for Focus schools.

Those questions do worry us and we want to make sure that we don't put TB at disadvantage. We are not likely to support C anyway because it's adding lots of extra commute for lots of kids. You have to strike some balance. D looks a good option. Some more clarification from MCPS is needed, but based on initial feedback, it looked a good option. We totally oppose A and B because neighborhood argument is simply a code word for keeping community segregated and A/B is simply a neighborhood argument. We neither support or oppose E. E just keeps the current status when it comes to achievement gaps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
<<snip>>

Those questions do worry us and we want to make sure that we don't put TB at disadvantage. We are not likely to support C anyway because it's adding lots of extra commute for lots of kids. You have to strike some balance. D looks a good option. Some more clarification from MCPS is needed, but based on initial feedback, it looked a good option. We totally oppose A and B because neighborhood argument is simply a code word for keeping community segregated and A/B is simply a neighborhood argument. We neither support or oppose E. E just keeps the current status when it comes to achievement gaps.

Who is the "We" who is speaking?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
<<snip>>

Those questions do worry us and we want to make sure that we don't put TB at disadvantage. We are not likely to support C anyway because it's adding lots of extra commute for lots of kids. You have to strike some balance. D looks a good option. Some more clarification from MCPS is needed, but based on initial feedback, it looked a good option. We totally oppose A and B because neighborhood argument is simply a code word for keeping community segregated and A/B is simply a neighborhood argument. We neither support or oppose E. E just keeps the current status when it comes to achievement gaps.

Who is the "We" who is speaking?

More than one organizations. Why don't you focus on message and not on messengers?

[Anonymous]

Many outside parties are watching this development closely to see what direction MCPS takes here.

A neighborhood argument goes hand in hand with segregation.

MCPS can either integrate more, leave it unchanged or make it more segregated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many outside parties are watching this development closely to see what direction MCPS takes here.

A neighborhood argument goes hand in hand with segregation.

MCPS can either integrate more, leave it unchanged or make it more segregated.

NP. Who exactly are you. You are attempting to force your own agenda here in a community that you don’t even belong to you. If the twinbrook community are asking to be kept together how is that code for segregation by the “elite, which IMO is kind of a joke in the RM cluster. Most of us are not filthy rich. If they want to stay as a community it’s not advocating for segregation but if other neighborhoods that are more well off want the same thing then it is advocating for segregation? Quite a double standard there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
<<snip>>

Those questions do worry us and we want to make sure that we don't put TB at disadvantage. We are not likely to support C anyway because it's adding lots of extra commute for lots of kids. You have to strike some balance. D looks a good option. Some more clarification from MCPS is needed, but based on initial feedback, it looked a good option. We totally oppose A and B because neighborhood argument is simply a code word for keeping community segregated and A/B is simply a neighborhood argument. We neither support or oppose E. E just keeps the current status when it comes to achievement gaps.

Who is the "We" who is speaking?

More than one organizations. Why don't you focus on message and not on messengers?

Why not be honest. This is the NAACP. If other organizations are supporting you, you should name them, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, actually. It has been mentioned on this board before. There are families in RP2 without cars and a few parents who DO have cars volunteer to drive these parents to school events. Otherwise, they cannot participate in school meetings, events, etc. The PTA is even considering following the lead of Jones Lane and implementing the Lyft program to help these families.

And you think participation in school meetings and events is more important than getting a better education? You must be kidding me.

Why do you think the students at TBES haven't received good education? They have small classes comparing to non title one school, they have dedicated teachers and pronciples, and they have very supprtive PTA . Are you sure the FARM and ESOL would receive same level of support?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, actually. It has been mentioned on this board before. There are families in RP2 without cars and a few parents who DO have cars volunteer to drive these parents to school events. Otherwise, they cannot participate in school meetings, events, etc. The PTA is even considering following the lead of Jones Lane and implementing the Lyft program to help these families.

And you think participation in school meetings and events is more important than getting a better education? You must be kidding me.

Keeping the families involved in conferences, volunteering, education update meetings, family school functions, indeed gives the child a better education. You aren’t that naive. Are you kidding me?

We aren’t talking 80% FARMS to 10%. We are talking less than 7% difference to walk or not? Come on now.

You are on some strange agenda - complete outsider of the cluster thinking you know best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many outside parties are watching this development closely to see what direction MCPS takes here.

A neighborhood argument goes hand in hand with segregation.

MCPS can either integrate more, leave it unchanged or make it more segregated.

No they aren’t. No one cares about boundary lines outside of their cluster. Just you. You are a strange troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many outside parties are watching this development closely to see what direction MCPS takes here.

A neighborhood argument goes hand in hand with segregation.

MCPS can either integrate more, leave it unchanged or make it more segregated.

No they aren’t. No one cares about boundary lines outside of their cluster. Just you. You are a strange troll.

No one cares from outside and yet we are told to shut up and not worry about RM cluster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many outside parties are watching this development closely to see what direction MCPS takes here.

A neighborhood argument goes hand in hand with segregation.

MCPS can either integrate more, leave it unchanged or make it more segregated.

MCPS always goes for integration whenever possible. They have stated goal to bridge the achievement gaps and one tool in their hand is to provide the best conditions for FARMs students as long as no one faces hardship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I live in an MPDU in an economically integrated neighborhood in Rockville. Please explain to me again how I am in support of economic segregation??

Where do you live in economically integrated MPDU?

We have talked to over 50+ FARMs parents . If you want, we can come to your zone and talk to you and any other families.

My zone doesn't need the NAACP to come and talk to us, we are in support of Alternatives A & B as being best for our neighborhood and the cluster as a whole.

Are you unaware that the City of Rockville is FULL of MPDU units throughout all of its new developments??? 12.5% of all units in every new development in Rockville is required to be set aside as an MPDU. I bought my MPDU 15 years ago - there's no way I would be able to afford a market-rate home in my neighborhood. Since you seem unaware, here is the full program information: http://www.rockvillemd.gov/index.aspx?NID=194

We are fully aware of 12.5% rule. Having those in affluent neighborhoods gives you a far better chance than having them in poverty filled neighborhoods. You may be fine due to where you are , but you are making sure that FARMs kids in higher poverty area won't get the benefit by trying to segregate them. If you benefited from this then you should understand it very well.

I personally grew up in one of those units as well. Having them in rich neighborhood and poor neighborhood is not the same thing.

RP2 is NOT a poor neighborhood. Have you visited that community???

This lady is just an embarrassment who knows nothing. A troll. Just ignore

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many outside parties are watching this development closely to see what direction MCPS takes here.

A neighborhood argument goes hand in hand with segregation.

MCPS can either integrate more, leave it unchanged or make it more segregated.

MCPS always goes for integration whenever possible. They have stated goal to bridge the achievement gaps and one tool in their hand is to provide the best conditions for FARMs students as long as no one faces hardship.

Which is C, D, and E options. All hardships for RP5 FARMS, T2 FARMS, T5 FARMS, RP2 FARMS, and B5 FARMS