BOE/MCPS is a mess

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I wish you were right. Unfortunately, during the largest boundary student to date under the new policy (Clarksburg), Sup. Smith said he couldn't choose one of the options most people preferred because it didn't advance the diversity factor enough. And that was in one of the most diverse areas of the county. Just imagine what they'll do I'm places like Bethesda, Damascus, and Silver Spring.

First of all, you are moving the goalposts. What you said above in bold above isn't the same thing as what you just said. Second, you conveniently omitted that Smith also said he couldn't choose other options because they didn't advance the proximity factor or they didn't advance the utilization factor. Which is how the process works.

Right. He didn't choose the worst busing option. He chose the second worst busing option.

Well then MCPS isn't all that interested in "busing."

Stop responding to the busing troll. Nobody is interested in busing. They just enjoy fearmongering.

Fearmongering about what though?

That troll seems to think that posting fiction about busing will help their political agenda.

What political agenda?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DP. Of course MCPS is and will bus kids to further schools than where they live to achieve a more balanced demographics. Those who are debating this are not paying attention whether willfully or not.
The issue is that families either agree with busing or they don't and while I wish kids can all go to schools close to them, it's ridiculous that some schools are 10% FARMS and some are 70%. That's MESSED UP as the challenges that are facing schools with such high poverty are real. What they really need to do is to stop with this piecemeal crap. In the Upcounty boundary study, there are still significant variances in FARMS rates among schools that are a few miles away from each other because some schools were omitted from the study. They need to just do a whole county boundary update and call it a day.

That would be an unwieldy nightmare.

That poster is nuts. MCPS wants to do nothing of the kind. They just enjoy making up this stuff.

What are you talking about? Do you think MCPS hired an outside consultant to do a county-wide boundary analysis for nothing? Don't doubt that this was their intent. It was the outcry and the backlash from families already in high-rated schools that made them back off; so MCPS is going to try to do this little by little when schools are built or renovated and they'll only look at those schools that are part of the study. That's stupid.

Yes, they hired a consultant to perform some analysis for a 40-year overdue boundary study. This didn't result in a plan that involved any more busing than what exists today. The busing poster is a fearmongering nutcase.

After elevating diversity in the boundary policy without due process, the BOE hired a diversity consultant to perform a boundary analysis with the aspirational goal of changing all boundaries. This didn't result in a plan that involved any more busing than what exists today because people found out about the plan and pushed back against it. Anyone who denies that MCPS has a busing plan is a nutcase.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DP. Of course MCPS is and will bus kids to further schools than where they live to achieve a more balanced demographics. Those who are debating this are not paying attention whether willfully or not.
The issue is that families either agree with busing or they don't and while I wish kids can all go to schools close to them, it's ridiculous that some schools are 10% FARMS and some are 70%. That's MESSED UP as the challenges that are facing schools with such high poverty are real. What they really need to do is to stop with this piecemeal crap. In the Upcounty boundary study, there are still significant variances in FARMS rates among schools that are a few miles away from each other because some schools were omitted from the study. They need to just do a whole county boundary update and call it a day.

That would be an unwieldy nightmare.

That poster is nuts. MCPS wants to do nothing of the kind. They just enjoy making up this stuff.

What are you talking about? Do you think MCPS hired an outside consultant to do a county-wide boundary analysis for nothing? Don't doubt that this was their intent. It was the outcry and the backlash from families already in high-rated schools that made them back off; so MCPS is going to try to do this little by little when schools are built or renovated and they'll only look at those schools that are part of the study. That's stupid.

You've just described how boundary studies work. This has been the case for decades.

Yes, but diversity wasn't the top priority in the boundary policy like it is now. So these future studies will lead to a lot more busing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I wish you were right. Unfortunately, during the largest boundary student to date under the new policy (Clarksburg), Sup. Smith said he couldn't choose one of the options most people preferred because it didn't advance the diversity factor enough. And that was in one of the most diverse areas of the county. Just imagine what they'll do I'm places like Bethesda, Damascus, and Silver Spring.

First of all, you are moving the goalposts. What you said above in bold above isn't the same thing as what you just said. Second, you conveniently omitted that Smith also said he couldn't choose other options because they didn't advance the proximity factor or they didn't advance the utilization factor. Which is how the process works.

Right. He didn't choose the worst busing option. He chose the second worst busing option.

Well then MCPS isn't all that interested in "busing."

Of course they are. Didn't you watch any of the BOE meetings? They said that increasing diversity was the most important thing they could do for the students. Busing is the only way to make that happen.

Yes, in fact it's because I've watched the BOE meetings that I know there is no "busing plan." And because I've read the all the recent boundary study reports and superintendent recommendations I know that diversity is just one of the four factors being considered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I wish you were right. Unfortunately, during the largest boundary student to date under the new policy (Clarksburg), Sup. Smith said he couldn't choose one of the options most people preferred because it didn't advance the diversity factor enough. And that was in one of the most diverse areas of the county. Just imagine what they'll do I'm places like Bethesda, Damascus, and Silver Spring.

First of all, you are moving the goalposts. What you said above in bold above isn't the same thing as what you just said. Second, you conveniently omitted that Smith also said he couldn't choose other options because they didn't advance the proximity factor or they didn't advance the utilization factor. Which is how the process works.

Right. He didn't choose the worst busing option. He chose the second worst busing option.

Well then MCPS isn't all that interested in "busing."

Of course they are. Didn't you watch any of the BOE meetings? They said that increasing diversity was the most important thing they could do for the students. Busing is the only way to make that happen.

Yes, in fact it's because I've watched the BOE meetings that I know there is no "busing plan." And because I've read the all the recent boundary study reports and superintendent recommendations I know that diversity is just one of the four factors being considered.

If you were looking for something called a busing plan, you wouldn't find it. But "increasing diversity" is a dog whistle for busing and that's all they talked about when they altered the boundary policy to elevate diversity and then ordered the boundary analysis. I mean, how else would the BOE make schools more diverse WITHOUT busing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I wish you were right. Unfortunately, during the largest boundary student to date under the new policy (Clarksburg), Sup. Smith said he couldn't choose one of the options most people preferred because it didn't advance the diversity factor enough. And that was in one of the most diverse areas of the county. Just imagine what they'll do I'm places like Bethesda, Damascus, and Silver Spring.

First of all, you are moving the goalposts. What you said above in bold above isn't the same thing as what you just said. Second, you conveniently omitted that Smith also said he couldn't choose other options because they didn't advance the proximity factor or they didn't advance the utilization factor. Which is how the process works.

Right. He didn't choose the worst busing option. He chose the second worst busing option.

Well then MCPS isn't all that interested in "busing."

Of course they are. Didn't you watch any of the BOE meetings? They said that increasing diversity was the most important thing they could do for the students. Busing is the only way to make that happen.

Yes, in fact it's because I've watched the BOE meetings that I know there is no "busing plan." And because I've read the all the recent boundary study reports and superintendent recommendations I know that diversity is just one of the four factors being considered.

If you were looking for something called a busing plan, you wouldn't find it. But "increasing diversity" is a dog whistle for busing and that's all they talked about when they altered the boundary policy to elevate diversity and then ordered the boundary analysis. I mean, how else would the BOE make schools more diverse WITHOUT busing?

I will try to say this as clearly as I can, for the benefit of others who may actually be interested. If a student does not live within the walk zone of any school, then they will ride a bus. This is the case for tens of thousands of students. Many of these students' neighborhoods without a closeby school are comparably distant from two or three schools to which they could reasonably ride a bus. When determining which of these non-walkable but also not-far schools a neighborhood should attend, MCPS looks at demographic characteristics so that the adjacent schools can have similarly diverse student bodies, when possible.

[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:

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.

I wish you were right. Unfortunately, during the largest boundary student to date under the new policy (Clarksburg), Sup. Smith said he couldn't choose one of the options most people preferred because it didn't advance the diversity factor enough. And that was in one of the most diverse areas of the county. Just imagine what they'll do I'm places like Bethesda, Damascus, and Silver Spring.

First of all, you are moving the goalposts. What you said above in bold above isn't the same thing as what you just said. Second, you conveniently omitted that Smith also said he couldn't choose other options because they didn't advance the proximity factor or they didn't advance the utilization factor. Which is how the process works.

Right. He didn't choose the worst busing option. He chose the second worst busing option.

Well then MCPS isn't all that interested in "busing."

Of course they are. Didn't you watch any of the BOE meetings? They said that increasing diversity was the most important thing they could do for the students. Busing is the only way to make that happen.

Yes, in fact it's because I've watched the BOE meetings that I know there is no "busing plan." And because I've read the all the recent boundary study reports and superintendent recommendations I know that diversity is just one of the four factors being considered.

If you were looking for something called a busing plan, you wouldn't find it. But "increasing diversity" is a dog whistle for busing and that's all they talked about when they altered the boundary policy to elevate diversity and then ordered the boundary analysis. I mean, how else would the BOE make schools more diverse WITHOUT busing?

I will try to say this as clearly as I can, for the benefit of others who may actually be interested. If a student does not live within the walk zone of any school, then they will ride a bus. This is the case for tens of thousands of students. Many of these students' neighborhoods without a closeby school are comparably distant from two or three schools to which they could reasonably ride a bus. When determining which of these non-walkable but also not-far schools a neighborhood should attend, MCPS looks at demographic characteristics so that the adjacent schools can have similarly diverse student bodies, when possible.

Thank you for finally agreeing that MCPS will race-balance schools with busing. Now what are we going to do about it? Because 90% of the people in the county value their closest school and don't value diversity very much. The BOE got it exactly wrong when they prioritized diversity in the boundary policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I will try to say this as clearly as I can, for the benefit of others who may actually be interested. If a student does not live within the walk zone of any school, then they will ride a bus. This is the case for tens of thousands of students. Many of these students' neighborhoods without a closeby school are comparably distant from two or three schools to which they could reasonably ride a bus. When determining which of these non-walkable but also not-far schools a neighborhood should attend, MCPS looks at demographic characteristics so that the adjacent schools can have similarly diverse student bodies, when possible.

Which, actually, raises a question: How come we never hear a peep from the obsessed PP about the large number of students who live within walking distance of their school (1.0 mile for ES, 1.5 miles for MS, 2.0 miles for HS) but nonetheless get bused because it's not safe for them to walk?

[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.
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.

I wish you were right. Unfortunately, during the largest boundary student to date under the new policy (Clarksburg), Sup. Smith said he couldn't choose one of the options most people preferred because it didn't advance the diversity factor enough. And that was in one of the most diverse areas of the county. Just imagine what they'll do I'm places like Bethesda, Damascus, and Silver Spring.

First of all, you are moving the goalposts. What you said above in bold above isn't the same thing as what you just said. Second, you conveniently omitted that Smith also said he couldn't choose other options because they didn't advance the proximity factor or they didn't advance the utilization factor. Which is how the process works.
Right. He didn't choose the worst busing option. He chose the second worst busing option.

Well then MCPS isn't all that interested in "busing."
Of course they are. Didn't you watch any of the BOE meetings? They said that increasing diversity was the most important thing they could do for the students. Busing is the only way to make that happen.

Yes, in fact it's because I've watched the BOE meetings that I know there is no "busing plan." And because I've read the all the recent boundary study reports and superintendent recommendations I know that diversity is just one of the four factors being considered.
If you were looking for something called a busing plan, you wouldn't find it. But "increasing diversity" is a dog whistle for busing and that's all they talked about when they altered the boundary policy to elevate diversity and then ordered the boundary analysis. I mean, how else would the BOE make schools more diverse WITHOUT busing?

I will try to say this as clearly as I can, for the benefit of others who may actually be interested. If a student does not live within the walk zone of any school, then they will ride a bus. This is the case for tens of thousands of students. Many of these students' neighborhoods without a closeby school are comparably distant from two or three schools to which they could reasonably ride a bus. When determining which of these non-walkable but also not-far schools a neighborhood should attend, MCPS looks at demographic characteristics so that the adjacent schools can have similarly diverse student bodies, when possible.
Thank you for finally agreeing that MCPS will race-balance schools with busing. Now what are we going to do about it? Because 90% of the people in the county value their closest school and don't value diversity very much. The BOE got it exactly wrong when they prioritized diversity in the boundary policy.

Actually only about a third of respondents to the wildly unrepresentative survey actually went so far as to say diversity was "unimportant" to them. There are your Steve Austin supporters. Guess what, Steve Austin lost. Most people do want diversity.

Thanks for admitting what you mean by "busin". To you, "busing" doesn't refer to busing kids across the county, it doesn't mean busing kids particularly far, it just means changing school boundaries to reduce segregation, and you REALLY hate the idea of reducing segregation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you for finally agreeing that MCPS will race-balance schools with busing. Now what are we going to do about it? Because 90% of the people in the county value their closest school and don't value diversity very much. The BOE got it exactly wrong when they prioritized diversity in the boundary policy.

Actually only about a third of respondents to the wildly unrepresentative survey actually went so far as to say diversity was "unimportant" to them. There are your Steve Austin supporters. Guess what, Steve Austin lost. Most people do want diversity.

Thanks for admitting what you mean by "busing". To you, "busing" doesn't refer to busing kids across the county, it doesn't mean busing kids particularly far, it just means changing school boundaries to reduce segregation, and you REALLY hate the idea of reducing segregation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I will try to say this as clearly as I can, for the benefit of others who may actually be interested. If a student does not live within the walk zone of any school, then they will ride a bus. This is the case for tens of thousands of students. Many of these students' neighborhoods without a closeby school are comparably distant from two or three schools to which they could reasonably ride a bus. When determining which of these non-walkable but also not-far schools a neighborhood should attend, MCPS looks at demographic characteristics so that the adjacent schools can have similarly diverse student bodies, when possible.

Thank you for finally agreeing that MCPS will race-balance schools with busing. Now what are we going to do about it? Because 90% of the people in the county value their closest school and don't value diversity very much. The BOE got it exactly wrong when they prioritized diversity in the boundary policy.

I would love to see a real statistically sound survey asking about the above scenario, which is what has been happening in the past several studies. I bet most people would be in favor of continuing the practice as described.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I wish you were right. Unfortunately, during the largest boundary student to date under the new policy (Clarksburg), Sup. Smith said he couldn't choose one of the options most people preferred because it didn't advance the diversity factor enough. And that was in one of the most diverse areas of the county. Just imagine what they'll do I'm places like Bethesda, Damascus, and Silver Spring.

First of all, you are moving the goalposts. What you said above in bold above isn't the same thing as what you just said. Second, you conveniently omitted that Smith also said he couldn't choose other options because they didn't advance the proximity factor or they didn't advance the utilization factor. Which is how the process works.

Right. He didn't choose the worst busing option. He chose the second worst busing option.

Well then MCPS isn't all that interested in "busing."

Of course they are. Didn't you watch any of the BOE meetings? They said that increasing diversity was the most important thing they could do for the students. Busing is the only way to make that happen.

You're extrapolating there.

That's a C- on the DCUM Trolling scale

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I will try to say this as clearly as I can, for the benefit of others who may actually be interested. If a student does not live within the walk zone of any school, then they will ride a bus. This is the case for tens of thousands of students. Many of these students' neighborhoods without a closeby school are comparably distant from two or three schools to which they could reasonably ride a bus. When determining which of these non-walkable but also not-far schools a neighborhood should attend, MCPS looks at demographic characteristics so that the adjacent schools can have similarly diverse student bodies, when possible.

Dang. Clarity and accuracy is so unlike the usual DCUM miasma.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I will try to say this as clearly as I can, for the benefit of others who may actually be interested. If a student does not live within the walk zone of any school, then they will ride a bus. This is the case for tens of thousands of students. Many of these students' neighborhoods without a closeby school are comparably distant from two or three schools to which they could reasonably ride a bus. When determining which of these non-walkable but also not-far schools a neighborhood should attend, MCPS looks at demographic characteristics so that the adjacent schools can have similarly diverse student bodies, when possible.

Which, actually, raises a question: How come we never hear a peep from the obsessed PP about the large number of students who live within walking distance of their school (1.0 mile for ES, 1.5 miles for MS, 2.0 miles for HS) but nonetheless get bused because it's not safe for them to walk?

Are those kids bused based on the color of their skin?

[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.

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

I wish you were right. Unfortunately, during the largest boundary student to date under the new policy (Clarksburg), Sup. Smith said he couldn't choose one of the options most people preferred because it didn't advance the diversity factor enough. And that was in one of the most diverse areas of the county. Just imagine what they'll do I'm places like Bethesda, Damascus, and Silver Spring.

First of all, you are moving the goalposts. What you said above in bold above isn't the same thing as what you just said. Second, you conveniently omitted that Smith also said he couldn't choose other options because they didn't advance the proximity factor or they didn't advance the utilization factor. Which is how the process works.
Right. He didn't choose the worst busing option. He chose the second worst busing option.

Well then MCPS isn't all that interested in "busing."
Of course they are. Didn't you watch any of the BOE meetings? They said that increasing diversity was the most important thing they could do for the students. Busing is the only way to make that happen.

Yes, in fact it's because I've watched the BOE meetings that I know there is no "busing plan." And because I've read the all the recent boundary study reports and superintendent recommendations I know that diversity is just one of the four factors being considered.
If you were looking for something called a busing plan, you wouldn't find it. But "increasing diversity" is a dog whistle for busing and that's all they talked about when they altered the boundary policy to elevate diversity and then ordered the boundary analysis. I mean, how else would the BOE make schools more diverse WITHOUT busing?

I will try to say this as clearly as I can, for the benefit of others who may actually be interested. If a student does not live within the walk zone of any school, then they will ride a bus. This is the case for tens of thousands of students. Many of these students' neighborhoods without a closeby school are comparably distant from two or three schools to which they could reasonably ride a bus. When determining which of these non-walkable but also not-far schools a neighborhood should attend, MCPS looks at demographic characteristics so that the adjacent schools can have similarly diverse student bodies, when possible.
Thank you for finally agreeing that MCPS will race-balance schools with busing. Now what are we going to do about it? Because 90% of the people in the county value their closest school and don't value diversity very much. The BOE got it exactly wrong when they prioritized diversity in the boundary policy.

Actually only about a third of respondents to the wildly unrepresentative survey actually went so far as to say diversity was "unimportant" to them. There are your Steve Austin supporters. Guess what, Steve Austin lost. Most people do want diversity.

Thanks for admitting what you mean by "busin". To you, "busing" doesn't refer to busing kids across the county, it doesn't mean busing kids particularly far, it just means changing school boundaries to reduce segregation, and you REALLY hate the idea of reducing segregation.
You're right. Only a 1/3 said it was important. Another 1/3 said it wasn't very important while a 1/4 said it was meh. Meanwhile 90% said that being as close to home as possible was very important. That shows you where the county's priorities lie and just how woefully out of touch the BOE was when the elevated diversity.

As but busing, I use Wiki's definition - Race-integration busing in the United States (also known as simply busing or by its critics as forced busing) was the practice of assigning and transporting students to schools within or outside their local school districts in an effort to diversify the racial make-up of schools. As for segregation, it hasn't been legal in over 50 years. So what you really mean is, you want to force people of all races to send their kids to schools other then the ones they chose when they chose a place to live. Your progressive white saviorism prevents you from seeing that the people who want to be moved the least are poor ESOL parents who rely on their kids attending the school that they know and that knows them. You won't find them at the co-op though, so I know you don't know anyone like this.