BOE/MCPS is a mess

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash : we do not currently and will never have a system where all children can attend the closest school to them. We currently bus many kids to school. This idea that "busing" is some new and dangerous idea is preposterous. And the idea that reducing segregation has no benefits goes against decades of research. The "anti-busing" movement is racist at its core. I know many of you have convinced yourselves you just want "neighborhood schools" but that is simply not a coherent argument.

You're right. People are fine with busing when they feel it serves their ends. Examples are schools like Wootton with its gerrymandered boundaries where the vast majority of its students live closer to another school or families in Kensignton being bused to WJ when they're much closer to Einstein. Nobody seems to mind busing for these instances. Also, I don't believe for one instant they're will be more busing than there is now in the future. However, I do think the boundaries are in desperate need of being updated since it's been over 40 years since this was done. I know there are people trying to fearmonger make up all kinds of crazy stuff that just isn't true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash : we do not currently and will never have a system where all children can attend the closest school to them. We currently bus many kids to school. This idea that "busing" is some new and dangerous idea is preposterous. And the idea that reducing segregation has no benefits goes against decades of research. The "anti-busing" movement is racist at its core. I know many of you have convinced yourselves you just want "neighborhood schools" but that is simply not a coherent argument.

The "anti-busing" people could advocate for more sidewalks, safer street crossings, and safe routes to school in general. That would reduce the number of children being bused! So it's odd that they're not doing that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash : we do not currently and will never have a system where all children can attend the closest school to them. We currently bus many kids to school. This idea that "busing" is some new and dangerous idea is preposterous. And the idea that reducing segregation has no benefits goes against decades of research. The "anti-busing" movement is racist at its core. I know many of you have convinced yourselves you just want "neighborhood schools" but that is simply not a coherent argument.

You're right. People are fine with busing when they feel it serves their ends. Examples are schools like Wootton with its gerrymandered boundaries where the vast majority of its students live closer to another school or families in Kensignton being bused to WJ when they're much closer to Einstein. Nobody seems to mind busing for these instances. Also, I don't believe for one instant they're will be more busing than there is now in the future. However, I do think the boundaries are in desperate need of being updated since it's been over 40 years since this was done. I know there are people trying to fearmonger make up all kinds of crazy stuff that just isn't true.

Here's the thing though. I agree that boundaries need to be adjusted. There are some school assignment areas that don't make any sense whatsoever; and instead of doing it piecemeal the way they do it today, they need a big one to readjust everything. But even then, families with means will just move to their desired school assignment area. THat's why they need to get rid of the magnet programs and bring them into the individual schools and allow school choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash : we do not currently and will never have a system where all children can attend the closest school to them. We currently bus many kids to school. This idea that "busing" is some new and dangerous idea is preposterous. And the idea that reducing segregation has no benefits goes against decades of research. The "anti-busing" movement is racist at its core. I know many of you have convinced yourselves you just want "neighborhood schools" but that is simply not a coherent argument.

You're right. People are fine with busing when they feel it serves their ends. Examples are schools like Wootton with its gerrymandered boundaries where the vast majority of its students live closer to another school or families in Kensignton being bused to WJ when they're much closer to Einstein. Nobody seems to mind busing for these instances. Also, I don't believe for one instant they're will be more busing than there is now in the future. However, I do think the boundaries are in desperate need of being updated since it's been over 40 years since this was done. I know there are people trying to fearmonger make up all kinds of crazy stuff that just isn't true.

Here's the thing though. I agree that boundaries need to be adjusted. There are some school assignment areas that don't make any sense whatsoever; and instead of doing it piecemeal the way they do it today, they need a big one to readjust everything. But even then, families with means will just move to their desired school assignment area. THat's why they need to get rid of the magnet programs and bring them into the individual schools and allow school choice.

Even families with means base their housing decisions on more than just GreatSchools ratings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Northwood HS, Woodward HS and Crown HS coming on line in just a few years, the time is now for a county wide boundary study. But that would be too much common sense, so no, MCPS won't do it.

How would that be common sense? Common sense would be to conduct two smaller (but still quite large) boundary studies, one for each set of schools that will be affected by the construction of these new buildings: in 2023-24, a Woodward study to include WJ, Blair, Einstein, Kennedy, Northwood, and Wheaton; and in 2024-25, a Crown study to include Gaithersburg, Northwest, Quince Orchard, RM, and Wootton.

I can't see anything sensible about throwing in all other schools' boundaries too.

In either case, I think we can agree that one way or the other, there will be busing on a large scale after these two studies are complete unless we elect candidates who will comit to sending kids to their nearest school like 90% of the county wants.

Schools are too overcrowded for this to occur.

This person who keeps trying to make imaginary busing a thing is kind of annoying.

Ah right. Sorry. I know you pro-busers hate the term busing. I'll edit.

In either case I think we can agree that, one way or the other, there will be a lot of kids sent to schools a lot farther from home because of the color of their skin and their family's income on a large scale after these two studies are complete unless we elect candidates who will comit to sending kids to their nearest school like 90% of the county wants.

Fear mongering at it's best

Fear of what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Northwood HS, Woodward HS and Crown HS coming on line in just a few years, the time is now for a county wide boundary study. But that would be too much common sense, so no, MCPS won't do it.

How would that be common sense? Common sense would be to conduct two smaller (but still quite large) boundary studies, one for each set of schools that will be affected by the construction of these new buildings: in 2023-24, a Woodward study to include WJ, Blair, Einstein, Kennedy, Northwood, and Wheaton; and in 2024-25, a Crown study to include Gaithersburg, Northwest, Quince Orchard, RM, and Wootton.

I can't see anything sensible about throwing in all other schools' boundaries too.

In either case, I think we can agree that one way or the other, there will be busing on a large scale after these two studies are complete unless we elect candidates who will comit to sending kids to their nearest school like 90% of the county wants.

Schools are too overcrowded for this to occur.

And the boundary analysis report found that doing this would nearly double the number of overcrowded elementary schools:

Rezoning students to their closest school has a drastic negative impact on utilization rates

Rezoning elementary school students to their closest school in Step One widens the total range of utilization rates from 62% - 200% to 34% - 225%. This increases the total number of overutilized elementary schools from 20 to 38. The effect is similar at the middle and high school levels, with more schools becoming significantly under- and overutilized.

And yet no one on the BOE thought that utilization rate should be the priority...or proximity. The elevated the one factor hardly anyone cares about, diversity. This shows how woefully out of touch the BOE is with the overwhelming majority of residents in MoCo.

Of course they did/do. In every boundary study, utilization has always been a priority, both before and after the policy revision. One could even argue it is the top priority, because this factor has been used to support or reject most of the options presented. The selected option is always a compromise among the four factors, but in most cases, utilization rates are improved.

When you have 4 competing priorities you have no priorities unless you call one out with a line like especially strive. This is what the BOE did in 2018 when they elevated diversity to the top priority in the boundary policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash : we do not currently and will never have a system where all children can attend the closest school to them. We currently bus many kids to school. This idea that "busing" is some new and dangerous idea is preposterous. And the idea that reducing segregation has no benefits goes against decades of research. The "anti-busing" movement is racist at its core. I know many of you have convinced yourselves you just want "neighborhood schools" but that is simply not a coherent argument.

The bolded is true, but there is not a large body of research showing that involuntary school reassignment meaningfully improves student outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Northwood HS, Woodward HS and Crown HS coming on line in just a few years, the time is now for a county wide boundary study. But that would be too much common sense, so no, MCPS won't do it.

How would that be common sense? Common sense would be to conduct two smaller (but still quite large) boundary studies, one for each set of schools that will be affected by the construction of these new buildings: in 2023-24, a Woodward study to include WJ, Blair, Einstein, Kennedy, Northwood, and Wheaton; and in 2024-25, a Crown study to include Gaithersburg, Northwest, Quince Orchard, RM, and Wootton.

I can't see anything sensible about throwing in all other schools' boundaries too.

In either case, I think we can agree that one way or the other, there will be busing on a large scale after these two studies are complete unless we elect candidates who will comit to sending kids to their nearest school like 90% of the county wants.

Schools are too overcrowded for this to occur.

This person who keeps trying to make imaginary busing a thing is kind of annoying.

Ah right. Sorry. I know you pro-busers hate the term busing. I'll edit.

In either case I think we can agree that, one way or the other, there will be a lot of kids sent to schools a lot farther from home because of the color of their skin and their family's income on a large scale after these two studies are complete unless we elect candidates who will comit to sending kids to their nearest school like 90% of the county wants.

This. But honestly, how else can we fix it? We know that schools with a significant number of poor students experience a lot more challenges than schools with low FARMS. We also know that the neighborhood you live in for the most part is a reflection of your SES. I think it's appalling that a school can have a 15% FARMS rate and a few miles away, there's one that is 60%. I get why people are furious at the idea that their kids must be bussed further away to resolve this issue but I just don't see how else to fix it unless we implement school choice which I personally think is a much better and equitable approach.

You say "schools with a significant number of poor students experience a lot more challenges than schools with low FARMS" as if the poor kids themselves aren't the challenges. As someone who isn't poor, I don't want my kids dragged down by those challenges. And I certainly don't want them bused an extra 10-20 minutes each way in addition. MCPS needs to find a way to teach poor kids without sacrificing middle and upper class kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Northwood HS, Woodward HS and Crown HS coming on line in just a few years, the time is now for a county wide boundary study. But that would be too much common sense, so no, MCPS won't do it.

How would that be common sense? Common sense would be to conduct two smaller (but still quite large) boundary studies, one for each set of schools that will be affected by the construction of these new buildings: in 2023-24, a Woodward study to include WJ, Blair, Einstein, Kennedy, Northwood, and Wheaton; and in 2024-25, a Crown study to include Gaithersburg, Northwest, Quince Orchard, RM, and Wootton.

I can't see anything sensible about throwing in all other schools' boundaries too.

In either case, I think we can agree that one way or the other, there will be busing on a large scale after these two studies are complete unless we elect candidates who will comit to sending kids to their nearest school like 90% of the county wants.

Schools are too overcrowded for this to occur.

This person who keeps trying to make imaginary busing a thing is kind of annoying.

Ah right. Sorry. I know you pro-busers hate the term busing. I'll edit.

In either case I think we can agree that, one way or the other, there will be a lot of kids sent to schools a lot farther from home because of the color of their skin and their family's income on a large scale after these two studies are complete unless we elect candidates who will comit to sending kids to their nearest school like 90% of the county wants.

Fear mongering at it's best

Fear of what?

The poors!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash : we do not currently and will never have a system where all children can attend the closest school to them. We currently bus many kids to school. This idea that "busing" is some new and dangerous idea is preposterous. And the idea that reducing segregation has no benefits goes against decades of research. The "anti-busing" movement is racist at its core. I know many of you have convinced yourselves you just want "neighborhood schools" but that is simply not a coherent argument.

OK, so you're a pro-buser. Thank you for admitting it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash : we do not currently and will never have a system where all children can attend the closest school to them. We currently bus many kids to school. This idea that "busing" is some new and dangerous idea is preposterous. And the idea that reducing segregation has no benefits goes against decades of research. The "anti-busing" movement is racist at its core. I know many of you have convinced yourselves you just want "neighborhood schools" but that is simply not a coherent argument.

You're right. People are fine with busing when they feel it serves their ends. Examples are schools like Wootton with its gerrymandered boundaries where the vast majority of its students live closer to another school or families in Kensignton being bused to WJ when they're much closer to Einstein. Nobody seems to mind busing for these instances. Also, I don't believe for one instant they're will be more busing than there is now in the future. However, I do think the boundaries are in desperate need of being updated since it's been over 40 years since this was done. I know there are people trying to fearmonger make up all kinds of crazy stuff that just isn't true.

So you support moving boundaries which will be moved primarily based on race and family income (this busing) but you don't think busing will happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash : we do not currently and will never have a system where all children can attend the closest school to them. We currently bus many kids to school. This idea that "busing" is some new and dangerous idea is preposterous. And the idea that reducing segregation has no benefits goes against decades of research. The "anti-busing" movement is racist at its core. I know many of you have convinced yourselves you just want "neighborhood schools" but that is simply not a coherent argument.

The "anti-busing" people could advocate for more sidewalks, safer street crossings, and safe routes to school in general. That would reduce the number of children being bused! So it's odd that they're not doing that.

Sidewalks have nothing to do with the BOE underhandedly altering the boundary policy to prioritize diversity above the other 3 factors which will lead to busing. That said, I still support more sidewalks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Northwood HS, Woodward HS and Crown HS coming on line in just a few years, the time is now for a county wide boundary study. But that would be too much common sense, so no, MCPS won't do it.

How would that be common sense? Common sense would be to conduct two smaller (but still quite large) boundary studies, one for each set of schools that will be affected by the construction of these new buildings: in 2023-24, a Woodward study to include WJ, Blair, Einstein, Kennedy, Northwood, and Wheaton; and in 2024-25, a Crown study to include Gaithersburg, Northwest, Quince Orchard, RM, and Wootton.

I can't see anything sensible about throwing in all other schools' boundaries too.

In either case, I think we can agree that one way or the other, there will be busing on a large scale after these two studies are complete unless we elect candidates who will comit to sending kids to their nearest school like 90% of the county wants.

Schools are too overcrowded for this to occur.

This person who keeps trying to make imaginary busing a thing is kind of annoying.

Ah right. Sorry. I know you pro-busers hate the term busing. I'll edit.

In either case I think we can agree that, one way or the other, there will be a lot of kids sent to schools a lot farther from home because of the color of their skin and their family's income on a large scale after these two studies are complete unless we elect candidates who will comit to sending kids to their nearest school like 90% of the county wants.

Fear mongering at it's best

Fear of what?

The poors!

PP is afraid of the poors? Is that what you're saying?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash : we do not currently and will never have a system where all children can attend the closest school to them. We currently bus many kids to school. This idea that "busing" is some new and dangerous idea is preposterous. And the idea that reducing segregation has no benefits goes against decades of research. The "anti-busing" movement is racist at its core. I know many of you have convinced yourselves you just want "neighborhood schools" but that is simply not a coherent argument.

You're right. People are fine with busing when they feel it serves their ends. Examples are schools like Wootton with its gerrymandered boundaries where the vast majority of its students live closer to another school or families in Kensignton being bused to WJ when they're much closer to Einstein. Nobody seems to mind busing for these instances. Also, I don't believe for one instant they're will be more busing than there is now in the future. However, I do think the boundaries are in desperate need of being updated since it's been over 40 years since this was done. I know there are people trying to fearmonger make up all kinds of crazy stuff that just isn't true.

So you support moving boundaries which will be moved primarily based on race and family income (this busing) but you don't think busing will happen?

Busing already occurs and will always occur as stated above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash : we do not currently and will never have a system where all children can attend the closest school to them. We currently bus many kids to school. This idea that "busing" is some new and dangerous idea is preposterous. And the idea that reducing segregation has no benefits goes against decades of research. The "anti-busing" movement is racist at its core. I know many of you have convinced yourselves you just want "neighborhood schools" but that is simply not a coherent argument.

The "anti-busing" people could advocate for more sidewalks, safer street crossings, and safe routes to school in general. That would reduce the number of children being bused! So it's odd that they're not doing that.

Sidewalks have nothing to do with the BOE underhandedly altering the boundary policy to prioritize diversity above the other 3 factors which will lead to busing. That said, I still support more sidewalks.

Hating diversity this much is called racism.