BOE/MCPS is a mess

[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.

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

Unsupported conclusion.

C- on the DCUM Troll Scale!

[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.

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

Unsupported conclusion.

C- on the DCUM Troll Scale!

I appreciate you sticking up for me, but I am a "pro-buser". Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, not every student can live close enough to their school to walk to it. I think it's important for the school system to provide bus transportation so that students can get to school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

There will be far more busing now that the boundary policy boxes the BOE is to more diverse options despite 90% of the county opposing this. We need to vote in a BOE who better aligns with what people want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

What?

[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.

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

Unsupported conclusion.

C- on the DCUM Troll Scale!

I mean, you said "The "anti-busing" movement is racist at its core."
Any reasonable person would deduce that if you're against anti-busing that much, you must be pro-busing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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

Unsupported conclusion.

C- on the DCUM Troll Scale!

I appreciate you sticking up for me, but I am a "pro-buser". Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, not every student can live close enough to their school to walk to it. I think it's important for the school system to provide bus transportation so that students can get to school.

Ah, I think you're confused. Busing isn't simply the act of riding a bus. Busing is the act of assigning kids to schools based on their skin color and family income like the MCPS boundary policy directs the BOE to do. Do you support that kind of busing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

There will be far more busing now that the boundary policy boxes the BOE is to more diverse options despite 90% of the county opposing this. We need to vote in a BOE who better aligns with what people want.

From the boundary analysis report:

survey data show that tool users were not fully representative of the county’s population. Approximately 54% of respondents reside in the southwest region of the county (Bethesda, Chevy Chase, and Potomac), 40% identify as White/Caucasian (another 29% chose not to identify their race), and the great majority of respondents were parents of past, present, or future MCPS students (64%).

and

Targeted engagement showed key differences in priorities among underrepresented groups (i.e. Latino/a communities, immigrant groups, African American, low- and moderate-income families, and those living inless represented regions of the county). Key differences in underrepresented groups include greater support for the regular review of school boundaries, a greater emphasis on the impacts of over- and underutilization, and greater emphasis on the importance of diversity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

There will be far more busing now that the boundary policy boxes the BOE is to more diverse options despite 90% of the county opposing this. We need to vote in a BOE who better aligns with what people want.

From the boundary analysis report:

survey data show that tool users were not fully representative of the county’s population. Approximately 54% of respondents reside in the southwest region of the county (Bethesda, Chevy Chase, and Potomac), 40% identify as White/Caucasian (another 29% chose not to identify their race), and the great majority of respondents were parents of past, present, or future MCPS students (64%).

and

Targeted engagement showed key differences in priorities among underrepresented groups (i.e. Latino/a communities, immigrant groups, African American, low- and moderate-income families, and those living inless represented regions of the county). Key differences in underrepresented groups include greater support for the regular review of school boundaries, a greater emphasis on the impacts of over- and underutilization, and greater emphasis on the importance of diversity.

The part that you left out is that, in every corner of the county, people said they overwhelmingly supported sending kids to their nearest school and that diversity wasn't that important to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

There will be far more busing now that the boundary policy boxes the BOE is to more diverse options despite 90% of the county opposing this. We need to vote in a BOE who better aligns with what people want.

From the boundary analysis report:

survey data show that tool users were not fully representative of the county’s population. Approximately 54% of respondents reside in the southwest region of the county (Bethesda, Chevy Chase, and Potomac), 40% identify as White/Caucasian (another 29% chose not to identify their race), and the great majority of respondents were parents of past, present, or future MCPS students (64%).

and

Targeted engagement showed key differences in priorities among underrepresented groups (i.e. Latino/a communities, immigrant groups, African American, low- and moderate-income families, and those living inless represented regions of the county). Key differences in underrepresented groups include greater support for the regular review of school boundaries, a greater emphasis on the impacts of over- and underutilization, and greater emphasis on the importance of diversity.

The part that you left out is that, in every corner of the county, people said they overwhelmingly supported sending kids to their nearest school and that diversity wasn't that important to them.

Targeted engagement. Lol. I'm other words, we didn't get the answers we expected or wanted so we're going to pretend to talk with people and just publish what the BOE paid us to. Conversely, all the targeted engagement I did with the Latino community showed an even greater want for neighborhood schools. The LAST thing an ESOL family with questionable immigration status wants is to have their kids bused to Bethesda to attend a "white school."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The part that you left out is that, in every corner of the county, people said they overwhelmingly supported sending kids to their nearest school and that diversity wasn't that important to them.

You don't understand how surveys work do you?

You also don't care to concern yourself with the reality that currently, many students do not attend the school closest to them, the boundaries do not make sense even if you ignore diversity, and it is possible to improve utilization of existing space AND reduce segregation. The problem is, you think reducing segregation is inherently bad, which is why you keep prattling on about a wildly unrepresentative survey while completely ignoring decades of research showing why segregation in education is bad. But, nevermind all that, 90% of the people who filled out this online thing want to go to the school closest to them. Guess that's settled then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The part that you left out is that, in every corner of the county, people said they overwhelmingly supported sending kids to their nearest school and that diversity wasn't that important to them.

You don't understand how surveys work do you?

You also don't care to concern yourself with the reality that currently, many students do not attend the school closest to them, the boundaries do not make sense even if you ignore diversity, and it is possible to improve utilization of existing space AND reduce segregation. The problem is, you think reducing segregation is inherently bad, which is why you keep prattling on about a wildly unrepresentative survey while completely ignoring decades of research showing why segregation in education is bad. But, nevermind all that, 90% of the people who filled out this online thing want to go to the school closest to them. Guess that's settled then.

I do. And I underatnad that if we look at the breakdown of each individual are of the county, proximity was overwhelmingly supported. Conversely, diversity was marked as not that important.

And I would have supported a countywide boundary study if the boundary policy hadn't been altered to prioritize diversity. Under the current diversity-priorotozed policy, kids cannot be moved to a closer school if it make the school less divers. Because of where people live, almost every move will be farther which is busing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

There will be far more busing now that the boundary policy boxes the BOE is to more diverse options despite 90% of the county opposing this. We need to vote in a BOE who better aligns with what people want.

You keep repeating that 90% canard. It was 90% of a small group of self selected respondents to an online survey.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The part that you left out is that, in every corner of the county, people said they overwhelmingly supported sending kids to their nearest school and that diversity wasn't that important to them.

You don't understand how surveys work do you?

You also don't care to concern yourself with the reality that currently, many students do not attend the school closest to them, the boundaries do not make sense even if you ignore diversity, and it is possible to improve utilization of existing space AND reduce segregation. The problem is, you think reducing segregation is inherently bad, which is why you keep prattling on about a wildly unrepresentative survey while completely ignoring decades of research showing why segregation in education is bad. But, nevermind all that, 90% of the people who filled out this online thing want to go to the school closest to them. Guess that's settled then.

I do. And I underatnad that if we look at the breakdown of each individual are of the county, proximity was overwhelmingly supported. Conversely, diversity was marked as not that important.

And I would have supported a countywide boundary study if the boundary policy hadn't been altered to prioritize diversity. Under the current diversity-priorotozed policy, kids cannot be moved to a closer school if it make the school less divers. Because of where people live, almost every move will be farther which is busing.

When you have a survey that is not representative, that means you can't make conclusions like the ones you are making. But you're insisting on making them anyway. Okay. If people really were as upset as you have imagined, then they would have selected Steve Austin to represent them. But they didn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Wootton was gerrymandered for more diversity. You can fault MCPS for not redistricting fast enough but please get your facts straight. Wootton neighborhoods that are far away were because there weren’t ENOUGH kids in ‘69 when building was first designed. It was all farms. It got filled up since then...and the ‘far’ hoods remained.

There will be far more busing now that the boundary policy boxes the BOE is to more diverse options despite 90% of the county opposing this. We need to vote in a BOE who better aligns with what people want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The part that you left out is that, in every corner of the county, people said they overwhelmingly supported sending kids to their nearest school and that diversity wasn't that important to them.

You don't understand how surveys work do you?

You also don't care to concern yourself with the reality that currently, many students do not attend the school closest to them, the boundaries do not make sense even if you ignore diversity, and it is possible to improve utilization of existing space AND reduce segregation. The problem is, you think reducing segregation is inherently bad, which is why you keep prattling on about a wildly unrepresentative survey while completely ignoring decades of research showing why segregation in education is bad. But, nevermind all that, 90% of the people who filled out this online thing want to go to the school closest to them. Guess that's settled then.

I do. And I underatnad that if we look at the breakdown of each individual are of the county, proximity was overwhelmingly supported. Conversely, diversity was marked as not that important.

And I would have supported a countywide boundary study if the boundary policy hadn't been altered to prioritize diversity. Under the current diversity-priorotozed policy, kids cannot be moved to a closer school if it make the school less divers. Because of where people live, almost every move will be farther which is busing.

That is absolutely false. Nowhere in the policy does it say that.