Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now what about CG3 siblings..do they have to attend different schools?

They might depending on age the same as any other zone that was moved. The BOE did agree to provide additional funding for busses and portables so that kids in CG3 could stay at College Gardens ES if they are rising 3rd graders. Meanwhile Twinbrook remains in disrepair.

The IB program needs to be moved to a school like Twinbrook or canceled. There is no reason to provide this kind of extra funding and additional advantage for one of the wealthier schools in the cluster. Why is the BOE dedicating so much extra funding to an already advantaged school?

I don't get this kind of thinking at all. Should we cancel all special programs at every MCPS school? I may wish that certain programs/activities exist at my kids' school, but would never think no one should have them if my kids can't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the person referring to some of the BOE members by their first names.... specifically Jill and Rebecca... please use their last names. Or first and last names together. I literally had "Rebecca" mixed up with another BOE member because I don't think of Smondrowski as "Rebecca." The members nearly always refer to each other as Mr. So-and-So and Ms. So-and-So, only rarely do you hear a "Jill" comment.

Are you also calling the City Council member from CG1 by his first name? People who don't follow Rockville Mayor & City Council literally may have no idea who "Mark" refers to.

I was also confused because I am not familiar with city council names. I had to look it up.

Sorry for confusion.

Mark Pierzchala - Rockville city council referred as Mark in out community. He lives in WG(CG3) and I may have used his name as Mark some time in this thread.

Actually, Pierzchala lives in CG1. Definitely not CG3. Please stop misrepresenting his neighborhood of residence. He has strong voter support from CG 1 and CG 3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now what about CG3 siblings..do they have to attend different schools?

They might depending on age the same as any other zone that was moved. The BOE did agree to provide additional funding for busses and portables so that kids in CG3 could stay at College Gardens ES if they are rising 3rd graders. Meanwhile Twinbrook remains in disrepair.

The IB program needs to be moved to a school like Twinbrook or canceled. There is no reason to provide this kind of extra funding and additional advantage for one of the wealthier schools in the cluster. Why is the BOE dedicating so much extra funding to an already advantaged school?

I am not an expert on the IB program, but I feel like having IB at twinbrook could be a terrible idea. With a 55% ESOL rate, learning both English and another language for IB could be pretty tough. I know some may not choose to take the option, but would sufficient numbers choose to take the language option? How many who choose would be also leaning English ?

Did anyone see what they did at brown station? I believe this is also a title 1 school, they renovated and expanded last year, made it into a Spanish immersion program this year. I've heard many good things, even morale has improved and (GS ratings). They actually improved and parents are more engaged. TB should have a renovation but the management should also.make sure that they have a plan to improve and engage parents otherwise any improvement would only be a facade.

[Anonymous]

The IB program needs to be moved to a school like Twinbrook or canceled. There is no reason to provide this kind of extra funding and additional advantage for one of the wealthier schools in the cluster. Why is the BOE dedicating so much extra funding to an already advantaged school?

A better idea would be to advocate for the expansion of of the IB Primary Years Program to all of the elementary schools in the cluster. This would be a natural flow, since JW is already MYP and RM is MYP/IB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The IB program needs to be moved to a school like Twinbrook or canceled. There is no reason to provide this kind of extra funding and additional advantage for one of the wealthier schools in the cluster. Why is the BOE dedicating so much extra funding to an already advantaged school?

A better idea would be to advocate for the expansion of of the IB Primary Years Program to all of the elementary schools in the cluster. This would be a natural flow, since JW is already MYP and RM is MYP/IB.

ITA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The IB program needs to be moved to a school like Twinbrook or canceled. There is no reason to provide this kind of extra funding and additional advantage for one of the wealthier schools in the cluster. Why is the BOE dedicating so much extra funding to an already advantaged school?

A better idea would be to advocate for the expansion of of the IB Primary Years Program to all of the elementary schools in the cluster. This would be a natural flow, since JW is already MYP and RM is MYP/IB.

ITA

Is there any data regarding the success of the PYP program compared to regular MCPS? Do CGES kids do better then their peers? Are the more likley to be in RMIB? Higher SAT scores? My child left CGES after a move and we were surprised to see that many "PYP" units were actually regular MCPS curriculum components as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The IB program needs to be moved to a school like Twinbrook or canceled. There is no reason to provide this kind of extra funding and additional advantage for one of the wealthier schools in the cluster. Why is the BOE dedicating so much extra funding to an already advantaged school?

A better idea would be to advocate for the expansion of of the IB Primary Years Program to all of the elementary schools in the cluster. This would be a natural flow, since JW is already MYP and RM is MYP/IB.

ITA

Is there any data regarding the success of the PYP program compared to regular MCPS? Do CGES kids do better then their peers? Are the more likley to be in RMIB? Higher SAT scores? My child left CGES after a move and we were surprised to see that many "PYP" units were actually regular MCPS curriculum components as well.

We're CG alums and are now at JW. The JW guidance counselors say that there are more 8th graders accepted into RM's IB program from JW than other schools. But I really doubt that the CGES kids have a serious leg up over the non PYP elem schools.

I figured out a few years back that the PYP "curriculum" is the same as regular MCPS, but has special names attached to it. (My "a-ha" moment courtesy of Facebook when I saw other kids at other schools had a butterfly release in 2nd grade!) I don't think that PYP is really all that earth shattering, but I know many families feel like attending CGES is "special."

[Anonymous]

IB in elementary is not special.

[Anonymous]

None of the ESs in Wootton, Whitman, or Churhill clusters get extra funding for a special in-school programs. I am not sure if any ES in WJ has any program. All the expansion in ES enrichment/gift programs happened in east or upcounty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:None of the ESs in Wootton, Whitman, or Churhill clusters get extra funding for a special in-school programs. I am not sure if any ES in WJ has any program. All the expansion in ES enrichment/gift programs happened in east or upcounty.

That is where they are needed or all the white people move away

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The IB program needs to be moved to a school like Twinbrook or canceled. There is no reason to provide this kind of extra funding and additional advantage for one of the wealthier schools in the cluster. Why is the BOE dedicating so much extra funding to an already advantaged school?

A better idea would be to advocate for the expansion of of the IB Primary Years Program to all of the elementary schools in the cluster. This would be a natural flow, since JW is already MYP and RM is MYP/IB.

ITA

Is there any data regarding the success of the PYP program compared to regular MCPS? Do CGES kids do better then their peers? Are the more likley to be in RMIB? Higher SAT scores? My child left CGES after a move and we were surprised to see that many "PYP" units were actually regular MCPS curriculum components as well.

Exactly. Don’t drink the MCPS kool-aid. Even 11th graders can easily get into IB at RM and graduate with the same degree the crazies went after starting in 9th. Parents are nuts for these special programs. The only one that truly stands out is Blair magnet and the history and English classes are the pits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The IB program needs to be moved to a school like Twinbrook or canceled. There is no reason to provide this kind of extra funding and additional advantage for one of the wealthier schools in the cluster. Why is the BOE dedicating so much extra funding to an already advantaged school?

A better idea would be to advocate for the expansion of of the IB Primary Years Program to all of the elementary schools in the cluster. This would be a natural flow, since JW is already MYP and RM is MYP/IB.

No, save the money and let’s get Twinbrook modernized and expanded.

[Anonymous]

So let's see who actually outsmarted others here.

Pretty much everyone supported TB to keep their boundaries. RP2/RP6 had split voice. Let's look at strong voices here.

Hungerford and NMC lost.

B5, B6 and CG3 lost.

HH and RP5 won.

Argument used was 160 entry, where 50% entry was from one school, representing the will of the RM cluster. Also a claim to have support of Mayor's office, . That was strongly denied by Mayors office. Who cares if claims were plucked out of thin air, it did influence BOE members.


Now HH/RP5 went further by misleading BOE that FARMs has no correlation with school's performance. I couldn't stop laughing when one of the BOE members emailed me their analysis. Either some nut cases are representing RP5/HH who don't really understand the situation or they do understand but know how to BS to get the outcome they want. Take you pick.


Lessons here: Either you learn how to play this game or simply buy a house in HH/RP5. With all the focus on FARMs, and yet RP managed to reduce from 20% to 7%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So let's see who actually outsmarted others here.

Pretty much everyone supported TB to keep their boundaries. RP2/RP6 had split voice. Let's look at strong voices here.

Hungerford and NMC lost.

B5, B6 and CG3 lost.

HH and RP5 won.

Argument used was 160 entry, where 50% entry was from one school, representing the will of the RM cluster. Also a claim to have support of Mayor's office, . That was strongly denied by Mayors office. Who cares if claims were plucked out of thin air, it did influence BOE members.


Now HH/RP5 went further by misleading BOE that FARMs has no correlation with school's performance. I couldn't stop laughing when one of the BOE members emailed me their analysis. Either some nut cases are representing RP5/HH who don't really understand the situation or they do understand but know how to BS to get the outcome they want. Take you pick.


Lessons here: Either you learn how to play this game or simply buy a house in HH/RP5. With all the focus on FARMs, and yet RP managed to reduce from 20% to 7%.

FFS... not again. HH doesn't care about 24% FARMs. HH didn't want their kids bussed far out, just like every parent who didn't want their kids bussed further out. If people cared so much about 24% FARMs I don't think they'd choose to live in this cluster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let's see who actually outsmarted others here.

Pretty much everyone supported TB to keep their boundaries. RP2/RP6 had split voice. Let's look at strong voices here.

Hungerford and NMC lost.

B5, B6 and CG3 lost.

HH and RP5 won.

Argument used was 160 entry, where 50% entry was from one school, representing the will of the RM cluster. Also a claim to have support of Mayor's office, . That was strongly denied by Mayors office. Who cares if claims were plucked out of thin air, it did influence BOE members.


Now HH/RP5 went further by misleading BOE that FARMs has no correlation with school's performance. I couldn't stop laughing when one of the BOE members emailed me their analysis. Either some nut cases are representing RP5/HH who don't really understand the situation or they do understand but know how to BS to get the outcome they want. Take you pick.


Lessons here: Either you learn how to play this game or simply buy a house in HH/RP5. With all the focus on FARMs, and yet RP managed to reduce from 20% to 7%.

FFS... not again. HH doesn't care about 24% FARMs. HH didn't want their kids bussed far out, just like every parent who didn't want their kids bussed further out. If people cared so much about 24% FARMs I don't think they'd choose to live in this cluster.

Sure, it was a choice between 2-3 minutes extra ride( which many zones will be doing in chosen option) vs FARMs of 7 or 24%.

It's simple facts here. Oh, yeah, an misleading analysis showing that FARMs kids do the same no matter where they go had to do with busing? Right?