Initial boundary options for Woodward study area are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m just not a fan of the modified option 4. Option 3 works best for my children and property values so I have to go with that.

lol you said property values.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m just not a fan of the modified option 4. Option 3 works best for my children and property values so I have to go with that.

Wondering where you live and how you reason option 3 is good for your property values and kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any kind of meaningful difference in, say, a FARMS rate of 45% versus a FARMS rate of 55%? Is there some tipping point that yields the best outcomes for low income kids?

20-25% is tipping point. RM cluster went through boundary change some time back and some one had research done on by MIT or some univ like that. BOE student member was the one who paid attention to that research at that time.

45% or 55% makes no differece. That's my recollection. I am in RM cluster but not the RM parent you guys are citing.

Tipping point how? We are at a 40%ish FARMS elementary school we're very happy with, and have heard good things about the middle and high schools which have roughly similar rates. What is it that's supposed to be negative about these schools because they're not under 25%?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any kind of meaningful difference in, say, a FARMS rate of 45% versus a FARMS rate of 55%? Is there some tipping point that yields the best outcomes for low income kids?

20-25% is tipping point. RM cluster went through boundary change some time back and some one had research done on by MIT or some univ like that. BOE student member was the one who paid attention to that research at that time.

45% or 55% makes no differece. That's my recollection. I am in RM cluster but not the RM parent you guys are citing.

Tipping point how? We are at a 40%ish FARMS elementary school we're very happy with, and have heard good things about the middle and high schools which have roughly similar rates. What is it that's supposed to be negative about these schools because they're not under 25%?

but are you yourself FARMS eligible? I think the idea is that FARMS kids in high-FARMS schools do worse than FARMS kids in 20% or lower FARMS schools.

I don't think the goal is happiness for BOE; I think the idea is to help student achievement for FARMS kids.

[Anonymous]

some data on FARMS and differences for low income kids in high-versus-low poverty schools:

https://mldscenter.maryland.gov/egov/Publications/Presentations/MLDSCenterDataandProcesses/MakingtheMostofFarmsDatatoExploreEffectsofStudentandSchoolPoverty.pdf

[Anonymous]

trying to find the research on the 20%, here's one about FCPS, but covering a lot of other ground as well:

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/9DG4KP71B0DB/$file/fcps_tipping-point.pdf

see p. 7 for discussion of study results mentioning the 20%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:trying to find the research on the 20%, here's one about FCPS, but covering a lot of other ground as well:

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/9DG4KP71B0DB/$file/fcps_tipping-point.pdf

see p. 7 for discussion of study results mentioning the 20%

Helpful. There have not to be others out there too. Someone mentioned MIT had a study?

Need to write up this proposal as an Option 5/stalking horse that solves a lot of problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any kind of meaningful difference in, say, a FARMS rate of 45% versus a FARMS rate of 55%? Is there some tipping point that yields the best outcomes for low income kids?

20-25% is tipping point. RM cluster went through boundary change some time back and some one had research done on by MIT or some univ like that. BOE student member was the one who paid attention to that research at that time.

45% or 55% makes no differece. That's my recollection. I am in RM cluster but not the RM parent you guys are citing.

Then I like the idea of having 20% seats for FARMS in Whitman and CHurchill by magnet like voluntary bussing to allow as many as FARMS kids in 20% FARMS school enviornment,

I don’t know how many takers you will get. Many FARMS kids are offered magnet spots in CES and middle school and it is my understanding that folks often turn down the offers, preferring somewhere closer to home with families they know in their home communities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any kind of meaningful difference in, say, a FARMS rate of 45% versus a FARMS rate of 55%? Is there some tipping point that yields the best outcomes for low income kids?

20-25% is tipping point. RM cluster went through boundary change some time back and some one had research done on by MIT or some univ like that. BOE student member was the one who paid attention to that research at that time.

45% or 55% makes no differece. That's my recollection. I am in RM cluster but not the RM parent you guys are citing.

Then I like the idea of having 20% seats for FARMS in Whitman and CHurchill by magnet like voluntary bussing to allow as many as FARMS kids in 20% FARMS school enviornment,

I don’t know how many takers you will get. Many FARMS kids are offered magnet spots in CES and middle school and it is my understanding that folks often turn down the offers, preferring somewhere closer to home with families they know in their home communities.

We aren’t farms. We turned it down due to transportation and I don’t see the advantage when we supplement at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any kind of meaningful difference in, say, a FARMS rate of 45% versus a FARMS rate of 55%? Is there some tipping point that yields the best outcomes for low income kids?

20-25% is tipping point. RM cluster went through boundary change some time back and some one had research done on by MIT or some univ like that. BOE student member was the one who paid attention to that research at that time.

45% or 55% makes no differece. That's my recollection. I am in RM cluster but not the RM parent you guys are citing.

Then I like the idea of having 20% seats for FARMS in Whitman and CHurchill by magnet like voluntary bussing to allow as many as FARMS kids in 20% FARMS school enviornment,

I don’t know how many takers you will get. Many FARMS kids are offered magnet spots in CES and middle school and it is my understanding that folks often turn down the offers, preferring somewhere closer to home with families they know in their home communities.

Presumably they won’t have a choice in long bus rides under option 3, it that’s what is necessary to help them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:and also, none of the options factor in behavioral change as people move based on the boundaries. so you are likely to end up with different outcomes than predicted when there are big changes to busing/boundaries.

This is exactly right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m just not a fan of the modified option 4. Option 3 works best for my children and property values so I have to go with that.

You don't get to vote. You get to provide feedback on each of the options. This is not a popularity competition -- though if it were, yours would lose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:trying to find the research on the 20%, here's one about FCPS, but covering a lot of other ground as well:

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/9DG4KP71B0DB/$file/fcps_tipping-point.pdf

see p. 7 for discussion of study results mentioning the 20%

Helpful. There have not to be others out there too. Someone mentioned MIT had a study?

Need to write up this proposal as an Option 5/stalking horse that solves a lot of problems.

They are not going to do that. You do not help low income kids by making them travel 40 minutes to a "centralized bus stop" to take them 40 minutes to Whitman.

From the above link is research on Montgomery County based on our inclusionary zoning program. If you really want to help, fight like hell for affordable apartments in wealthy areas. Oh wait, do you not want to do that?

Swartz (2010) then found that students living in public housing and attending schools with 20 percent or less poverty outperformed public housing students who attended schools with more than 20 percent in reading. For math, Swartz found that the students attending schools with a poverty level below 35 percent outperformed students at schools with a poverty level above 35 percent. In this study, the researcher provided evidence for the existence of a tipping point; but, there was no particular plan of action taken. This lack of action was also due to the fact that Montgomery County already has a means to ensure economic integration through their housing policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:trying to find the research on the 20%, here's one about FCPS, but covering a lot of other ground as well:

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/9DG4KP71B0DB/$file/fcps_tipping-point.pdf

see p. 7 for discussion of study results mentioning the 20%

Helpful. There have not to be others out there too. Someone mentioned MIT had a study?

Need to write up this proposal as an Option 5/stalking horse that solves a lot of problems.

They are not going to do that. You do not help low income kids by making them travel 40 minutes to a "centralized bus stop" to take them 40 minutes to Whitman.

From the above link is research on Montgomery County based on our inclusionary zoning program. If you really want to help, fight like hell for affordable apartments in wealthy areas. Oh wait, do you not want to do that?

Swartz (2010) then found that students living in public housing and attending schools with 20 percent or less poverty outperformed public housing students who attended schools with more than 20 percent in reading. For math, Swartz found that the students attending schools with a poverty level below 35 percent outperformed students at schools with a poverty level above 35 percent. In this study, the researcher provided evidence for the existence of a tipping point; but, there was no particular plan of action taken. This lack of action was also due to the fact that Montgomery County already has a means to ensure economic integration through their housing policy.

Don’t create strawmen just to argue.

[Anonymous]

Agree. If you don’t want your kids bussed please fight for getting more low income housing in your area. That will help increase FARMS levels. If you don’t want that then please be quiet.