All the boundary options are bad for the DCC-- how do we organize against that? (Any ideas for alternative options?)

[Anonymous]

I agree that the DCC schools are getting screwed in all this. We had all these options and because other schools did not, they changed things up totally and now... we have fewer options, but more students at other schools have better/more options.

It sucks. And of course they listened to the powerful/rich voices at BCC and Whitman more than us DCC parents. If you know how Central office works, they definitely responded to the west/white/rich pressure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that the DCC schools are getting screwed in all this. We had all these options and because other schools did not, they changed things up totally and now... we have fewer options, but more students at other schools have better/more options.

It sucks. And of course they listened to the powerful/rich voices at BCC and Whitman more than us DCC parents. If you know how Central office works, they definitely responded to the west/white/rich pressure.

+1 they said they were going to offer "refined" options but it doesn't look like they refined the initial options. They are totally different. It looks like they will choose something from these new options which are so limited and don't really address the priorities the BOE is supposed to address. They even changed the capacity of Wheaton HS which is total BS. WTAF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that the DCC schools are getting screwed in all this. We had all these options and because other schools did not, they changed things up totally and now... we have fewer options, but more students at other schools have better/more options.

It sucks. And of course they listened to the powerful/rich voices at BCC and Whitman more than us DCC parents. If you know how Central office works, they definitely responded to the west/white/rich pressure.

It's interesting as most of the central office is not white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s all innuendo and rumor. This board is pretty baseless frequently.

You don't need DCUM to look at the second round options and see quite clearly who is being catered to and who is being screwed over.

The dcc seems far far more upset about the regional programs than the boundaries.

Quoting the OP:

Looking at the boundary options, it's pretty clear that all 4 of them benefit BCC, WJ, and Whitman at the expense of DCC schools. Their boundaries barely change (except WJ which gets Woodward as basically a WJ overflow school) whereas DCC boundaries change a lot. They have almost no split articulation (just Garrett Park and Kensington-Parkwood) while DCC schools have tons. Some DCC schools will remain overcrowded in some of these options, but their schools will not. It seems like they basically decided to give those schools everything they want and then let DCC families argue amongst ourselves for or against certain options that benefit some DCC neighborhoods and schools more than others.

but also look at the 16 threads about the regional programming. or even a lot of this thread. this is not a nefarious statement. it is trying to say that perhaps the problems with the dcc could be helped through changing (or not adopting) the regional programming model, rather than the boundary issues.

on the boundary issues, though, it seems like option D is best for getting utilization normalized.

Oh so it's fine with you if only the boundary changes screw over the DCC and the regional changes just don't make things THAT much worse? What a generous kind person you are s/ As it is kids have to lottery in to other schools to access the same programs that Whitman and BCC have at their home schools. Now they are proposing limiting our kids' access even more. On top of getting the short end of the stick on utilization, demographics and split articulation wrt the boundary study.

eye roll. yeah so trying to discern what the people in the DCC would like under the set of proposed options is actually trying to understand what could make the problem BETTER. i agree that a certain set of courses should be offered at all schools, and i support making all neighborhood schools better. but that doesn't seem to be in the specific set of possibilities right now.

They did specify a minimum but that's the minimum we have now and it's not enough. Why should we pay increased taxes and get less while other families get more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:the other option besides supplementation is to move. We did that due to dissatisfaction with our previous public school. We aren't religious so didn't want a parochial (and less expensive) private, and can't afford the local non-parochials. The most affordable thing to do was relocate.

For us, an expensive private will be cheaper than moving when you do the numbers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s all innuendo and rumor. This board is pretty baseless frequently.

You don't need DCUM to look at the second round options and see quite clearly who is being catered to and who is being screwed over.

The dcc seems far far more upset about the regional programs than the boundaries.

Quoting the OP:

Looking at the boundary options, it's pretty clear that all 4 of them benefit BCC, WJ, and Whitman at the expense of DCC schools. Their boundaries barely change (except WJ which gets Woodward as basically a WJ overflow school) whereas DCC boundaries change a lot. They have almost no split articulation (just Garrett Park and Kensington-Parkwood) while DCC schools have tons. Some DCC schools will remain overcrowded in some of these options, but their schools will not. It seems like they basically decided to give those schools everything they want and then let DCC families argue amongst ourselves for or against certain options that benefit some DCC neighborhoods and schools more than others.

but also look at the 16 threads about the regional programming. or even a lot of this thread. this is not a nefarious statement. it is trying to say that perhaps the problems with the dcc could be helped through changing (or not adopting) the regional programming model, rather than the boundary issues.

on the boundary issues, though, it seems like option D is best for getting utilization normalized.

Oh so it's fine with you if only the boundary changes screw over the DCC and the regional changes just don't make things THAT much worse? What a generous kind person you are s/ As it is kids have to lottery in to other schools to access the same programs that Whitman and BCC have at their home schools. Now they are proposing limiting our kids' access even more. On top of getting the short end of the stick on utilization, demographics and split articulation wrt the boundary study.

eye roll. yeah so trying to discern what the people in the DCC would like under the set of proposed options is actually trying to understand what could make the problem BETTER. i agree that a certain set of courses should be offered at all schools, and i support making all neighborhood schools better. but that doesn't seem to be in the specific set of possibilities right now.

Well people in the DCc have different ideas for how to make it better which have been discussed in this and other threads. Stop pretending it hasn't. We aren't a monolith, we are a very diverse community with lots of different strengths and needs. MCPS has chosen to outsource any actual community engagement or analysis to PTAs, which surprise surprise results in super inequitable "solutions".

What could make the problem better? To realize it's 2025 and MCPS needs to do a LOT better on community engagement and do some actual analysis.

Its ok to outsource it to the PTA's but the DCC PTA's are not being listened to. Nothing changes for the W schools, much changes for the DCC and other schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that the DCC schools are getting screwed in all this. We had all these options and because other schools did not, they changed things up totally and now... we have fewer options, but more students at other schools have better/more options.

It sucks. And of course they listened to the powerful/rich voices at BCC and Whitman more than us DCC parents. If you know how Central office works, they definitely responded to the west/white/rich pressure.

It's interesting as most of the central office is not white.

Even if it were true that only White people perpetuate racism (it's not), the current Superintendent and Chief of Staff are both White.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that the DCC schools are getting screwed in all this. We had all these options and because other schools did not, they changed things up totally and now... we have fewer options, but more students at other schools have better/more options.

It sucks. And of course they listened to the powerful/rich voices at BCC and Whitman more than us DCC parents. If you know how Central office works, they definitely responded to the west/white/rich pressure.

It's interesting as most of the central office is not white.

Even if it were true that only White people perpetuate racism (it's not), the current Superintendent and Chief of Staff are both White.

I don't think Taylor and his family even live here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s all innuendo and rumor. This board is pretty baseless frequently.

You don't need DCUM to look at the second round options and see quite clearly who is being catered to and who is being screwed over.

The dcc seems far far more upset about the regional programs than the boundaries.

Quoting the OP:

Looking at the boundary options, it's pretty clear that all 4 of them benefit BCC, WJ, and Whitman at the expense of DCC schools. Their boundaries barely change (except WJ which gets Woodward as basically a WJ overflow school) whereas DCC boundaries change a lot. They have almost no split articulation (just Garrett Park and Kensington-Parkwood) while DCC schools have tons. Some DCC schools will remain overcrowded in some of these options, but their schools will not. It seems like they basically decided to give those schools everything they want and then let DCC families argue amongst ourselves for or against certain options that benefit some DCC neighborhoods and schools more than others.

but also look at the 16 threads about the regional programming. or even a lot of this thread. this is not a nefarious statement. it is trying to say that perhaps the problems with the dcc could be helped through changing (or not adopting) the regional programming model, rather than the boundary issues.

on the boundary issues, though, it seems like option D is best for getting utilization normalized.

Oh so it's fine with you if only the boundary changes screw over the DCC and the regional changes just don't make things THAT much worse? What a generous kind person you are s/ As it is kids have to lottery in to other schools to access the same programs that Whitman and BCC have at their home schools. Now they are proposing limiting our kids' access even more. On top of getting the short end of the stick on utilization, demographics and split articulation wrt the boundary study.

eye roll. yeah so trying to discern what the people in the DCC would like under the set of proposed options is actually trying to understand what could make the problem BETTER. i agree that a certain set of courses should be offered at all schools, and i support making all neighborhood schools better. but that doesn't seem to be in the specific set of possibilities right now.

Well people in the DCc have different ideas for how to make it better which have been discussed in this and other threads. Stop pretending it hasn't. We aren't a monolith, we are a very diverse community with lots of different strengths and needs. MCPS has chosen to outsource any actual community engagement or analysis to PTAs, which surprise surprise results in super inequitable "solutions".

What could make the problem better? To realize it's 2025 and MCPS needs to do a LOT better on community engagement and do some actual analysis.

Honest question, why reach out to communities that do nothing but complain? It isn't just the poor DCC communities the Rich ones do nothing but complain too. Nobody likes to change and DCC will still be poor and burdened no matter how the apple is sliced. So 26 pages of gripes and the only thing is why do we have to shift when the rich schools didn't isn't exactly a strong argument to shift around other schools which only amplifies the complaining now with people the might be forced to listen to. Did you just answer your own question?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that the DCC schools are getting screwed in all this. We had all these options and because other schools did not, they changed things up totally and now... we have fewer options, but more students at other schools have better/more options.

It sucks. And of course they listened to the powerful/rich voices at BCC and Whitman more than us DCC parents. If you know how Central office works, they definitely responded to the west/white/rich pressure.

+1 they said they were going to offer "refined" options but it doesn't look like they refined the initial options. They are totally different. It looks like they will choose something from these new options which are so limited and don't really address the priorities the BOE is supposed to address. They even changed the capacity of Wheaton HS which is total BS. WTAF.

they also said that the original four options would be possibilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that the DCC schools are getting screwed in all this. We had all these options and because other schools did not, they changed things up totally and now... we have fewer options, but more students at other schools have better/more options.

It sucks. And of course they listened to the powerful/rich voices at BCC and Whitman more than us DCC parents. If you know how Central office works, they definitely responded to the west/white/rich pressure.

+1 they said they were going to offer "refined" options but it doesn't look like they refined the initial options. They are totally different. It looks like they will choose something from these new options which are so limited and don't really address the priorities the BOE is supposed to address. They even changed the capacity of Wheaton HS which is total BS. WTAF.

they also said that the original four options would be possibilities.

Are they though? How do you compare options that are not even consistent in the capacities that they list for the schools? Of course the second round options will look better! Wheaton has an extra 500 seats that magically appeared from some consultant's rectum.

[Anonymous]

I like how no one has brought up Kennedy going over capacity at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like how no one has brought up Kennedy going over capacity at all.

Because Kennedy is one of the most neglected schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like how no one has brought up Kennedy going over capacity at all.

It is literally in the very first post of this thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like how no one has brought up Kennedy going over capacity at all.

It is literally in the very first post of this thread?

my mistake. there are two comments about kennedy in 26 pages.