BOE/MCPS is a mess

[Anonymous]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2021/12/12/schools-half-days-teachers-pandemic/

More shaming of mcps…

[Anonymous]

It was so peaceful on DCUM in the last few months, when the obsessed-with-lying-about-school-buses poster was taking a break.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few malcontents post this nonsense all the time but most people will vote for the incumbents. They are fine with the way they are handling things. This is why they get reelected every time.

I also ignore the nutjobs in these threads and VOTE APPLE BALLOT!!

Actually that's a pretty irresponsible way to vote. If you really care about schools, learn about the candidates and choose the one you think is best. A lot of the times there won't be a better option than the Apple Ballot, but sometimes there is. The interests of MCEA are not the same as those of students. And that is fine but parents need to vote with that in mind.

Not really. I vote my conscience as do 90% of the public who reelect these BoE members by a landslide. It's because unlike many of the people posting here we can see the bigger picture and realize they're doing a fine job.

If all you do is vote the Apple Ballot then you don't know what you are voting for. If your conscience is telling you to be an uninformed voter , then congrats, mission accomplished.

On the contrary, if you don't vote Apple Ballot, you are backing kooky extremists who want to dismantle public education.

You realize the current board members drove 7,000 students out of MCPS, don't you?

Not that covid had anything to do with it.
B- on the DCUM Troll Scale!

Right- the board's response to COVID drove those students away. Namely, their failure to reopen schools.

Yes, the parents felt school closures were a huge inconvenience for them, and couldn't grasp why the board was following the pesky CDC guideance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2021/12/12/schools-half-days-teachers-pandemic/

More shaming of mcps…

I'm not one of the sky is falling, hate all things MCPS, society is in a state of decay, posters but in this rare instance the kooks may be right at least about the board cutting instructional days.

Is there a means for voters to introduce propositions to simply bypass the board?

[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:It seems like the posters in this thread are very out of touch with the mainstream since 90% of these folks win reelection by a landslide.

Mainstream what?

The mainstream of voter sentiment, perhaps?

Voters love teachers and vote as teachers tell them to vote.

The MCEA loves their Apple Ballot candidates that push through extra time off for employees at a time students need face to face instruction.

Parents should boycott voting for the Apple Ballot if you want independent decision making and oversight of MCPS by the Board of Ed.

I'll make my voting decisions independently, thank you.

-a parent

Agreed. I am so sick of the small minority of parents who think they run the county with their “advocacy”. They act like we should all be so thankful for all that they do. I’m sorry- you don’t speak for me so please stop acting like anyone owes you anything. These parents know who they are. They are even worse because they bully others who don’t fall in line.

Agree. 100%. This was evident with the busing plan they tried to ram through. These east county progressives said that increasing diversity was the most important thing they could do for the students. 90% of the county disagrees with them when they were asked in the boundary analysis.

Sigh. This again? 90% of a few self-selected respondents.

+1 Also, can I get a link to the busing plan? Where is it? /s

It's in the Boundary Policy, code FAA. Back in 2018, a handful of unscrupulous BOE members pushed through changes to this policy that elevated the demographics/diversity factor about the other 3 factors including proximity. They did this because they said that schools needed to be more diverse and that proximity wasn't all that important. That's a defacto busing plan. 3 month later, they resolved to conduct a boundary analysis and hired the diversity consultant WXY which had just written the busing plan for NYC.

That's not a busing plan. It's not even a plan.

OK, I'll go slowly for you.

BUSING PLAN

1. Alter the boundary policy so that any future boundary study will result in kids being moved to schools based primarily on their skin color and family income instead of proximity.

1.b. Do this without sending the policy out for public comment so no one knows until it's too late

2. Hire a diversity consultant with experience writing busing plans in major metro areas to conduct a boundary analysis.

3. Test new boundary policy in a middle class area (Clarksburg) to see how much fallout there is. They have far fewer resources than Bethesda and Potmac.

4. If the boundary analysis and test go well, order a systemwide boundary study to move all boundaries with diversity and the main driver. If the analysis and test don't go well, simply wait for natural boundary studies and the diversity-first policy will result in busing, just at a much slower pace.

So the plan is in your imagination. Thanks.

You listed a series of events, some more based in reality than others. I have yet to see MCPS's "busing plan" unless you are actually referring to the current school bus stops and schedules.

A plan is a series of events. So thank you for finally seeing the light. The question is, what are we going to do about it? Thankfully, my kids will graduate before MCPS is able to move them. But the rest of you aren't going to like having your kids shuffled around. Or at least 90% of you aren't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
A plan is a series of events. So thank you for finally seeing the light. The question is, what are we going to do about it? Thankfully, my kids will graduate before MCPS is able to move them. But the rest of you aren't going to like having your kids shuffled around. Or at least 90% of you aren't.

"We" who? I'm not going to do anything about your personal hallucinations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A plan is a series of events. So thank you for finally seeing the light. The question is, what are we going to do about it? Thankfully, my kids will graduate before MCPS is able to move them. But the rest of you aren't going to like having your kids shuffled around. Or at least 90% of you aren't.

"We" who? I'm not going to do anything about your personal hallucinations.

I don't think the other person is hallucinating at all, and name calling just shows how weak your counter-arguments are. If you take a look at the current Gaithersburg ES #8, I think you'll see the seeds of what is in store for the County long term unless changes are made at MCPS.

Why are the boundaries between ES carved up that way? I remember when that thread was initially posted on DCUMS. At the time, I shrugged and thought "meh", but it did seem strange that MCPS referred to "R10" or "R8" without including a map to show where it was. Only after the boundary was redrawn was the map included. Only after I saw the map was I shocked by what MCPS did.

Everyone in those affected school district should have been provided those maps before the decision was made, had the opportunity to comment and weigh in, and had a response why their comments were disregarded (if they were). In my book, not doing that that is deceitful and dishonest. This is what needs to stop at MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A plan is a series of events. So thank you for finally seeing the light. The question is, what are we going to do about it? Thankfully, my kids will graduate before MCPS is able to move them. But the rest of you aren't going to like having your kids shuffled around. Or at least 90% of you aren't.

"We" who? I'm not going to do anything about your personal hallucinations.

I don't think the other person is hallucinating at all, and name calling just shows how weak your counter-arguments are. If you take a look at the current Gaithersburg ES #8, I think you'll see the seeds of what is in store for the County long term unless changes are made at MCPS.

Why are the boundaries between ES carved up that way? I remember when that thread was initially posted on DCUMS. At the time, I shrugged and thought "meh", but it did seem strange that MCPS referred to "R10" or "R8" without including a map to show where it was. Only after the boundary was redrawn was the map included. Only after I saw the map was I shocked by what MCPS did.

Everyone in those affected school district should have been provided those maps before the decision was made, had the opportunity to comment and weigh in, and had a response why their comments were disregarded (if they were). In my book, not doing that that is deceitful and dishonest. This is what needs to stop at MCPS.

They are delional. They are seeing things that just aren't there and complaining about it as if it were real. This is unhelpful and confusing to many people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A plan is a series of events. So thank you for finally seeing the light. The question is, what are we going to do about it? Thankfully, my kids will graduate before MCPS is able to move them. But the rest of you aren't going to like having your kids shuffled around. Or at least 90% of you aren't.

"We" who? I'm not going to do anything about your personal hallucinations.

I don't think the other person is hallucinating at all, and name calling just shows how weak your counter-arguments are. If you take a look at the current Gaithersburg ES #8, I think you'll see the seeds of what is in store for the County long term unless changes are made at MCPS.

Why are the boundaries between ES carved up that way? I remember when that thread was initially posted on DCUMS. At the time, I shrugged and thought "meh", but it did seem strange that MCPS referred to "R10" or "R8" without including a map to show where it was. Only after the boundary was redrawn was the map included. Only after I saw the map was I shocked by what MCPS did.

Everyone in those affected school district should have been provided those maps before the decision was made, had the opportunity to comment and weigh in, and had a response why their comments were disregarded (if they were). In my book, not doing that that is deceitful and dishonest. This is what needs to stop at MCPS.

PP is making things up. You're also making things up. That's not name-calling, that's not a weak counter-argument, that's just a statement of fact. Unlike the stuff that you and the PP are posting, which ranges from uninformed misinformation to outright lies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A plan is a series of events. So thank you for finally seeing the light. The question is, what are we going to do about it? Thankfully, my kids will graduate before MCPS is able to move them. But the rest of you aren't going to like having your kids shuffled around. Or at least 90% of you aren't.

"We" who? I'm not going to do anything about your personal hallucinations.

I don't think the other person is hallucinating at all, and name calling just shows how weak your counter-arguments are. If you take a look at the current Gaithersburg ES #8, I think you'll see the seeds of what is in store for the County long term unless changes are made at MCPS.

Why are the boundaries between ES carved up that way? I remember when that thread was initially posted on DCUMS. At the time, I shrugged and thought "meh", but it did seem strange that MCPS referred to "R10" or "R8" without including a map to show where it was. Only after the boundary was redrawn was the map included. Only after I saw the map was I shocked by what MCPS did.

Everyone in those affected school district should have been provided those maps before the decision was made, had the opportunity to comment and weigh in, and had a response why their comments were disregarded (if they were). In my book, not doing that that is deceitful and dishonest. This is what needs to stop at MCPS.

They are delional. They are seeing things that just aren't there and complaining about it as if it were real. This is unhelpful and confusing to many people.

Well, if that's being "de-lion-al", then facts must be in-denial! This is the problem with MCPS. They've lied so often and gotten away with it, they don't even believe they're accountable to taxpayers and parents. They've lost their way. MCPS should be focusing on spending their billion-dollar budget IMPROVING educational programs, not moving around boundaries and kids to make their abysmal school scores higher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A plan is a series of events. So thank you for finally seeing the light. The question is, what are we going to do about it? Thankfully, my kids will graduate before MCPS is able to move them. But the rest of you aren't going to like having your kids shuffled around. Or at least 90% of you aren't.

"We" who? I'm not going to do anything about your personal hallucinations.

I don't think the other person is hallucinating at all, and name calling just shows how weak your counter-arguments are. If you take a look at the current Gaithersburg ES #8, I think you'll see the seeds of what is in store for the County long term unless changes are made at MCPS.

Why are the boundaries between ES carved up that way? I remember when that thread was initially posted on DCUMS. At the time, I shrugged and thought "meh", but it did seem strange that MCPS referred to "R10" or "R8" without including a map to show where it was. Only after the boundary was redrawn was the map included. Only after I saw the map was I shocked by what MCPS did.

Everyone in those affected school district should have been provided those maps before the decision was made, had the opportunity to comment and weigh in, and had a response why their comments were disregarded (if they were). In my book, not doing that that is deceitful and dishonest. This is what needs to stop at MCPS.

The maps with R8 and R10 etc have been part of the public documents for many months. They were presented repeatedly at community meetings, posted on the web site, links were emailed out, etc. I agree with you that more residents should have been involved and submitted comments, but it's not like MCPS was hiding the information. What are some ways to improve the level of involvement?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2021/12/12/schools-half-days-teachers-pandemic/

More shaming of mcps…

As per the article:

They aren't just cutting instructional days. They are giving front office and administration an extra full week of vacation. So teachers get a few half days, no real extra support, and kids lose sorely needed education hours, but the administration gets a paid week of vacation.

It's nuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A plan is a series of events. So thank you for finally seeing the light. The question is, what are we going to do about it? Thankfully, my kids will graduate before MCPS is able to move them. But the rest of you aren't going to like having your kids shuffled around. Or at least 90% of you aren't.

"We" who? I'm not going to do anything about your personal hallucinations.

I don't think the other person is hallucinating at all, and name calling just shows how weak your counter-arguments are. If you take a look at the current Gaithersburg ES #8, I think you'll see the seeds of what is in store for the County long term unless changes are made at MCPS.

Why are the boundaries between ES carved up that way? I remember when that thread was initially posted on DCUMS. At the time, I shrugged and thought "meh", but it did seem strange that MCPS referred to "R10" or "R8" without including a map to show where it was. Only after the boundary was redrawn was the map included. Only after I saw the map was I shocked by what MCPS did.

Everyone in those affected school district should have been provided those maps before the decision was made, had the opportunity to comment and weigh in, and had a response why their comments were disregarded (if they were). In my book, not doing that that is deceitful and dishonest. This is what needs to stop at MCPS.

The maps with R8 and R10 etc have been part of the public documents for many months. They were presented repeatedly at community meetings, posted on the web site, links were emailed out, etc. I agree with you that more residents should have been involved and submitted comments, but it's not like MCPS was hiding the information. What are some ways to improve the level of involvement?

Really? Okay, I'll call that bluff. Publish the link that shows all zones, and which ES they report to within Montgomery County that's accessible to the public? There are boundary maps by ES, but not that explain which zones are included? The first I've ever heard of a Zone was when Gaithersburg ES #8 was discussed. I've searched for it for months now. It's not published on MCPS' website and ArcGIS doesn't seem to have a link for it either. I'd love to see how the neighborhoods are carved up and match that to the ES boundaries. I'd love to see this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/opinion/opinion-school-boards-calendar-change-was-unprofessional-disrespected-community/

Timely Op-Ed on how mcps/boe is a mess…

Thanks for the heads up, Nikki!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A plan is a series of events. So thank you for finally seeing the light. The question is, what are we going to do about it? Thankfully, my kids will graduate before MCPS is able to move them. But the rest of you aren't going to like having your kids shuffled around. Or at least 90% of you aren't.

"We" who? I'm not going to do anything about your personal hallucinations.

I don't think the other person is hallucinating at all, and name calling just shows how weak your counter-arguments are. If you take a look at the current Gaithersburg ES #8, I think you'll see the seeds of what is in store for the County long term unless changes are made at MCPS.

Why are the boundaries between ES carved up that way? I remember when that thread was initially posted on DCUMS. At the time, I shrugged and thought "meh", but it did seem strange that MCPS referred to "R10" or "R8" without including a map to show where it was. Only after the boundary was redrawn was the map included. Only after I saw the map was I shocked by what MCPS did.

Everyone in those affected school district should have been provided those maps before the decision was made, had the opportunity to comment and weigh in, and had a response why their comments were disregarded (if they were). In my book, not doing that that is deceitful and dishonest. This is what needs to stop at MCPS.

The maps with R8 and R10 etc have been part of the public documents for many months. They were presented repeatedly at community meetings, posted on the web site, links were emailed out, etc. I agree with you that more residents should have been involved and submitted comments, but it's not like MCPS was hiding the information. What are some ways to improve the level of involvement?

Really? Okay, I'll call that bluff. Publish the link that shows all zones, and which ES they report to within Montgomery County that's accessible to the public? There are boundary maps by ES, but not that explain which zones are included? The first I've ever heard of a Zone was when Gaithersburg ES #8 was discussed. I've searched for it for months now. It's not published on MCPS' website and ArcGIS doesn't seem to have a link for it either. I'd love to see how the neighborhoods are carved up and match that to the ES boundaries. I'd love to see this.

The maps with the zones for the Gaithersburg ES #8 study was first shown at the October 2020 community meeting:

https://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/GaithersburgES8_1stRoundOptions.pdf

A map showing additional options was shown in November 2020. The boundary was set a year later, in November 2021. All the meeting documents are available here:

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/planning/gaithersburgcluster8boundarystudy.aspx


If you are asking for a comparable map covering the whole county, no, that doesn't exist, because the smaller zones are only created when a boundary study happens.