Cliff Notes summary of MCPS boundary study fight?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cliff notes version of the boundary study fight is this map:

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/ServiceAreaMaps/WalterJohnsonHS.pdf

plus a search of values of homes in in southern Kensington that currently feed into Walter Johnson but are unlikely to continue as such since they are much closer to Einstein.

Sounds like the solution is to fix Einstein so it's a more desirable school.

Define "fix" and "desirable."

The county believes the redistricting will "fix" issues with reputation.

yawn Einstein has a cohort of top performing kids. can someone explain what the issue is.... oh wait property values

These cohorts are in bubbles. I've taught cohorts. They travel in groups throughout the day. Furthermore, these cohorts are a small part of the school population. So what's your point?

That's basically what a cohort is. Otherwise it's not a cohort.

no sh*t, Sherlock

schools w/in schools - not exactly a way to reinforce the strategy behind redistricting . . .

All the studies indicate it will improve things.

what? cohorts? (You certainly know the reason we have magnets in MCPS, yes?)

or redistricting?

If it's the latter, only time will tell. Until then, let's study Ho Co very closely.

Yes, the BOE believes redistricting will improve their ability to educate based on mountains of data. I know some people are afraid that their property values might be affected and are using all kinds of excuses to deny the need, but its mostly just misguided fear-mongering.

wow traction from my post haha

to be entirely clear. If your kids are high performing they will be fine in Einstein since there is a high performing cohort. At the same time, I don't believe switching kids will change much. The lower performing kids will still be lower performing and high performing kids will be higher performing wherever they go. It's the parents/home environment not a specific high school that impacts performance. So all of this is about nothing and won't accomplish jack. It will impact property values and I would be upset if I was going to be impacted negatively.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cliff notes version of the boundary study fight is this map:

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/ServiceAreaMaps/WalterJohnsonHS.pdf

plus a search of values of homes in in southern Kensington that currently feed into Walter Johnson but are unlikely to continue as such since they are much closer to Einstein.

Sounds like the solution is to fix Einstein so it's a more desirable school.

Define "fix" and "desirable."

The county believes the redistricting will "fix" issues with reputation.

yawn Einstein has a cohort of top performing kids. can someone explain what the issue is.... oh wait property values

These cohorts are in bubbles. I've taught cohorts. They travel in groups throughout the day. Furthermore, these cohorts are a small part of the school population. So what's your point?

That's basically what a cohort is. Otherwise it's not a cohort.

no sh*t, Sherlock

schools w/in schools - not exactly a way to reinforce the strategy behind redistricting . . .

All the studies indicate it will improve things.

what? cohorts? (You certainly know the reason we have magnets in MCPS, yes?)

or redistricting?

If it's the latter, only time will tell. Until then, let's study Ho Co very closely.

Yes, the BOE believes redistricting will improve their ability to educate based on mountains of data. I know some people are afraid that their property values might be affected and are using all kinds of excuses to deny the need, but its mostly just misguided fear-mongering.

wow traction from my post haha

to be entirely clear. If your kids are high performing they will be fine in Einstein since there is a high performing cohort. At the same time, I don't believe switching kids will change much. The lower performing kids will still be lower performing and high performing kids will be higher performing wherever they go. It's the parents/home environment not a specific high school that impacts performance. So all of this is about nothing and won't accomplish jack. It will impact property values and I would be upset if I was going to be impacted negatively.

+100 and I would add that many of the higher performing kids, if redistricted to a "bad school," will likely be moved to private school, therefore having no impact on the "bad school's" test scores.

[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:Cliff notes version of the boundary study fight is this map:

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/ServiceAreaMaps/WalterJohnsonHS.pdf

plus a search of values of homes in in southern Kensington that currently feed into Walter Johnson but are unlikely to continue as such since they are much closer to Einstein.

Sounds like the solution is to fix Einstein so it's a more desirable school.

Define "fix" and "desirable."

The county believes the redistricting will "fix" issues with reputation.

yawn Einstein has a cohort of top performing kids. can someone explain what the issue is.... oh wait property values

These cohorts are in bubbles. I've taught cohorts. They travel in groups throughout the day. Furthermore, these cohorts are a small part of the school population. So what's your point?

That's basically what a cohort is. Otherwise it's not a cohort.

no sh*t, Sherlock

schools w/in schools - not exactly a way to reinforce the strategy behind redistricting . . .

All the studies indicate it will improve things.

what? cohorts? (You certainly know the reason we have magnets in MCPS, yes?)

or redistricting?

If it's the latter, only time will tell. Until then, let's study Ho Co very closely.

Yes, the BOE believes redistricting will improve their ability to educate based on mountains of data. I know some people are afraid that their property values might be affected and are using all kinds of excuses to deny the need, but its mostly just misguided fear-mongering.

wow traction from my post haha

to be entirely clear. If your kids are high performing they will be fine in Einstein since there is a high performing cohort. At the same time, I don't believe switching kids will change much. The lower performing kids will still be lower performing and high performing kids will be higher performing wherever they go. It's the parents/home environment not a specific high school that impacts performance. So all of this is about nothing and won't accomplish jack. It will impact property values and I would be upset if I was going to be impacted negatively.

+100 and I would add that many of the higher performing kids, if redistricted to a "bad school," will likely be moved to private school, therefore having no impact on the "bad school's" test scores.

https://tcf.org/content/commentary/concentrated-poverty-impacts-student-achievement/

"A 2010 TCF study of Montgomery County, Maryland schools by Heather Schwartz, depicts the county’s inclusionary zoning laws, which allow a reserved portion of all developed homes to be rented or purchased at below-market prices.

As such, low-income families—who would otherwise be relegated to lesser schools in poorer neighborhoods—can afford to live in Montgomery County, which boasts high-quality schools. Schwartz found that the low-income students assigned randomly to low-poverty schools produced better test scores than did their peers in high-poverty districts."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
+100 and I would add that many of the higher performing kids, if redistricted to a "bad school," will likely be moved to private school, therefore having no impact on the "bad school's" test scores.

Where are all of these private schools that kids will apparently be moved to in large groups, and how much capacity do they have?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

+100 and I would add that many of the higher performing kids, if redistricted to a "bad school," will likely be moved to private school, therefore having no impact on the "bad school's" test scores.

That's a win/win situation in my book. You pay taxes for public schools, and those schools will be less overcrowded, thereby providing more money and resources to the students while you get your precieved stellar private school education that you also pay for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+100 and I would add that many of the higher performing kids, if redistricted to a "bad school," will likely be moved to private school, therefore having no impact on the "bad school's" test scores.

That's a win/win situation in my book. You pay taxes for public schools, and those schools will be less overcrowded, thereby providing more money and resources to the students while you get your precieved stellar private school education that you also pay for.

Who wins from the longer bus ride?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+100 and I would add that many of the higher performing kids, if redistricted to a "bad school," will likely be moved to private school, therefore having no impact on the "bad school's" test scores.

That's a win/win situation in my book. You pay taxes for public schools, and those schools will be less overcrowded, thereby providing more money and resources to the students while you get your precieved stellar private school education that you also pay for.

Who wins from the longer bus ride?

That's kind of a false question since in many cases the bus rides could end up being shorter. Consider the neighborhood near Wheaton that ends up at Walter Johnson. The reality is these boundaries are terribly out of date and need to be updated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is really going to be helped by this kind of musical chairs approach to redistricting? Are kids who move from WJ to Churchill , or Churchill to Wootton, really going to be better off? Will it signficantly change the FARMS mix of the various schools? Seems like a lot of inconvenience to families for not much in the way of concrete results.

Shift people around as little as possible to deal with disparities in capacity in the various schools --- which even critics will find defensible, even if it is not something that they welcome -- and leave it at that.

DP... despite what some people think, the boundary analysis is not just about diversity. It's taking a look at our current boundaries, and even in the western side of the county, some of the boundaries are wacky. Those need to be redrawn, too.

Why fix boundaries where there isn’t a problem? Do you want them to all be a perfect circle? Never going to happen. It’s wasteful and harms communities and kids to break up schools.

Because there are several problems that have been discussed ad museum already.

But not all clusters have problems. Some PPs seem to want a perfectly symmetrical map.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is really going to be helped by this kind of musical chairs approach to redistricting? Are kids who move from WJ to Churchill , or Churchill to Wootton, really going to be better off? Will it signficantly change the FARMS mix of the various schools? Seems like a lot of inconvenience to families for not much in the way of concrete results.

Shift people around as little as possible to deal with disparities in capacity in the various schools --- which even critics will find defensible, even if it is not something that they welcome -- and leave it at that.

DP... despite what some people think, the boundary analysis is not just about diversity. It's taking a look at our current boundaries, and even in the western side of the county, some of the boundaries are wacky. Those need to be redrawn, too.

Why fix boundaries where there isn’t a problem? Do you want them to all be a perfect circle? Never going to happen. It’s wasteful and harms communities and kids to break up schools.

Because there are several problems that have been discussed ad museum already.

But not all clusters have problems. Some PPs seem to want a perfectly symmetrical map.

Who wants a perfectly symmetrical map?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+100 and I would add that many of the higher performing kids, if redistricted to a "bad school," will likely be moved to private school, therefore having no impact on the "bad school's" test scores.

That's a win/win situation in my book. You pay taxes for public schools, and those schools will be less overcrowded, thereby providing more money and resources to the students while you get your precieved stellar private school education that you also pay for.

Who wins from the longer bus ride?

That's kind of a false question since in many cases the bus rides could end up being shorter. Consider the neighborhood near Wheaton that ends up at Walter Johnson. The reality is these boundaries are terribly out of date and need to be updated.

I am the PP who asked about the bus ride. I fully support basing the redistricting decisions on geography, maximizing walkers and keeping neighborhood kids going to neighborhood schools. The Wheaton boundary change you mention is the kind that makes sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+100 and I would add that many of the higher performing kids, if redistricted to a "bad school," will likely be moved to private school, therefore having no impact on the "bad school's" test scores.

That's a win/win situation in my book. You pay taxes for public schools, and those schools will be less overcrowded, thereby providing more money and resources to the students while you get your precieved stellar private school education that you also pay for.

Who wins from the longer bus ride?

That's kind of a false question since in many cases the bus rides could end up being shorter. Consider the neighborhood near Wheaton that ends up at Walter Johnson. The reality is these boundaries are terribly out of date and need to be updated.

I am the PP who asked about the bus ride. I fully support basing the redistricting decisions on geography, maximizing walkers and keeping neighborhood kids going to neighborhood schools. The Wheaton boundary change you mention is the kind that makes sense.

I don't necessarily agree that such a redistricting makes sense, unless one school is significantly more crowded than the other, or if redistricting provides a significant increase in the number kids able to walk to school. The existing boundaries were known to the families when they moved to the neighborhood, Changing school district boundaries means that kids won't go to the same school as their older siblings, and that parents and students must adjust to a new school with new teachers and administration.

I see no reason for county-wide redistricting, but rather individual district boundaries should be adjusted as needed to address overcrowding and new school construction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+100 and I would add that many of the higher performing kids, if redistricted to a "bad school," will likely be moved to private school, therefore having no impact on the "bad school's" test scores.

That's a win/win situation in my book. You pay taxes for public schools, and those schools will be less overcrowded, thereby providing more money and resources to the students while you get your precieved stellar private school education that you also pay for.

Who wins from the longer bus ride?

That's kind of a false question since in many cases the bus rides could end up being shorter. Consider the neighborhood near Wheaton that ends up at Walter Johnson. The reality is these boundaries are terribly out of date and need to be updated.

I am the PP who asked about the bus ride. I fully support basing the redistricting decisions on geography, maximizing walkers and keeping neighborhood kids going to neighborhood schools. The Wheaton boundary change you mention is the kind that makes sense.

I don't necessarily agree that such a redistricting makes sense, unless one school is significantly more crowded than the other, or if redistricting provides a significant increase in the number kids able to walk to school. The existing boundaries were known to the families when they moved to the neighborhood, Changing school district boundaries means that kids won't go to the same school as their older siblings, and that parents and students must adjust to a new school with new teachers and administration.

I see no reason for county-wide redistricting, but rather individual district boundaries should be adjusted as needed to address overcrowding and new school construction.

Change is a thing that happens.

Also, the purpose of the boundary analysis is to look at the possibilities for boundary adjustments where appropriate. If people are calling for every school boundary to be changed, I sure haven't heard it.

[Anonymous]

I don't necessarily agree that such a redistricting makes sense, unless one school is significantly more crowded than the other, or if redistricting provides a significant increase in the number kids able to walk to school. The existing boundaries were known to the families when they moved to the neighborhood, Changing school district boundaries means that kids won't go to the same school as their older siblings, and that parents and students must adjust to a new school with new teachers and administration.

I see no reason for county-wide redistricting, but rather individual district boundaries should be adjusted as needed to address overcrowding and new school construction.

Lots of kids go to different schools than their siblings did, particularly in a place as transient and with as many different options as Montgomery County. I'm confident some zones will remain intact as a result of this study and the eventual boundary revisions. Maybe even most. But the thing about a comprehensive study is that it opens up options that a more limited analysis does not.

If they need to move some kids out of an existing zone to fill another zone (Woodward), then it makes sense to look comprehensively at whether the first school needs a revision to relieve crowding one school over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't necessarily agree that such a redistricting makes sense, unless one school is significantly more crowded than the other, or if redistricting provides a significant increase in the number kids able to walk to school. The existing boundaries were known to the families when they moved to the neighborhood, Changing school district boundaries means that kids won't go to the same school as their older siblings, and that parents and students must adjust to a new school with new teachers and administration.

I see no reason for county-wide redistricting, but rather individual district boundaries should be adjusted as needed to address overcrowding and new school construction.

Lots of kids go to different schools than their siblings did, particularly in a place as transient and with as many different options as Montgomery County. I'm confident some zones will remain intact as a result of this study and the eventual boundary revisions. Maybe even most. But the thing about a comprehensive study is that it opens up options that a more limited analysis does not.

If they need to move some kids out of an existing zone to fill another zone (Woodward), then it makes sense to look comprehensively at whether the first school needs a revision to relieve crowding one school over.

So you are saying that we need a county wide boundary study every time a new school is built?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is really going to be helped by this kind of musical chairs approach to redistricting? Are kids who move from WJ to Churchill , or Churchill to Wootton, really going to be better off? Will it signficantly change the FARMS mix of the various schools? Seems like a lot of inconvenience to families for not much in the way of concrete results.

Shift people around as little as possible to deal with disparities in capacity in the various schools --- which even critics will find defensible, even if it is not something that they welcome -- and leave it at that.

DP... despite what some people think, the boundary analysis is not just about diversity. It's taking a look at our current boundaries, and even in the western side of the county, some of the boundaries are wacky. Those need to be redrawn, too.

Why fix boundaries where there isn’t a problem? Do you want them to all be a perfect circle? Never going to happen. It’s wasteful and harms communities and kids to break up schools.

Because there are several problems that have been discussed ad museum already.

But not all clusters have problems. Some PPs seem to want a perfectly symmetrical map.

Some clusters may not but the neighboring ones do. Your cluster does not exist in a silo. Therefore, even if *you* think your cluster has no issues, it may still get its boundary redrawn. That's how we got into this mess of lopsided capacities... because MCPS decided that they would continue to build/add for over crowded clusters instead of redrawing boundaries with the neighboring clusters.