Second round options for Woodward boundary study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I perosnally don't get the logic of reserving seats for home school. It puts kids from other schools at disadvantage. No one should have reserved seats.

+100

It's just ridiculous to have that in regional model. Any kid in region should have equal chance to get a seat in regional program and it should have nothing to do with if they get lucky with home school having some specific program. Entire region should be at equal footings.

I wonder if this reservation system has to do with MCPS trying to figure out transportation routes/capacity in the new regions/regional programming. This is the weakest link in an initiative full of weak links.

It will spell disaster for the community. Here is a look at what happened at Thomas Taylor's last school district, which was left to pick up the pieces after he introduced regional programming at the school districts FOUR high schools, and then left to take the job with MCPS. Now imagine what will happen in a school district the size of MCPS.

https://www.fox5dc.com/news/thousands-of-students-without-a-bus-route-in-stafford-county

Whatever be the reaosn, I don't like to see reserve for this or reserve for that. All kids should be at equal footings when it cmes to getting a seat. kids are not chosing which program gets assigned to specific school. They shouldn't be penalized for program not being in their home shcool. I am in RM cluster and I never liked the idea of RM kids getting resrved seat in RM IB magnet.

Oh wow I didn’t know that about RMIB, that’s terrible. That could be fixed next year.

Yes, it should be fixed immediately. No point in providing reservation of seats for anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with abiove posters.

DCC and reserved seats in home schools, both are poor ideas. Both ideas benefit selected few and unfair to many others.

DCC makes sense if they will not offer advanced classes at all schools. At least we could cosa to another school.

COSA to over crowdwed/in demand schools were getting denied. That's not a solution.

Solution is to provide good course offering in every school even if only 10-12 students are taking the course.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:I like option B. Balances everyone needs. Just go with that one. option B = option best.

B and C are the wacky ones for us, but I get that this is super local.

We were untouched by the first boundary study.

DCC family here. C is best for us personally, B is worst, A and D are in the middle. But I don't want us DCC families to get stuck fighting against each other on which one is worst for our particular neighborhood, while the richer schools just get almost everything they want. These options are rigged.

They aready have everything. Instead of funding the schools who have less to have more they are shuffling everyone.

Schools get the same funding per student except for title 1 schools who get more.

Exactly and it should be based on need as the dcc schools have more kids struggling and the resources go to catch them up and help them and with one pot of money the principal’s have to make choices and the more academic kids lose out as the other kids have more needs to get them to graduate.

And yet even those extra resources don’t appear to be enough to move the needle on those kids who are struggling.

The problem is by the time you do catch up in MS or HS, its too late. They need to allocate far more resources in elementary schools to make sure every child who can be is on grade level. Do real evaluations, remediate any disabilities or SN with supports, therapies and reading teachers, have a better curriculum, and bring back the free online tutoring. By the time you get to high school, often its too late as these kids are struggling and have low self esteem and hate school.

Do you have any idea how expensive that is? There is neither the budget nor the political will do this. Sorry. And all of those “miracle” schools and programs like KIPP or in movies like “Waiting for Superman” are just cream skimming or culling through suspensions or sometimes outright kicking kids out to make the numbers look good. There are no easy fixes. And you’re right, those kids are cooked by that point.

There are already so many more resources poured into farms schools.

You are completely diminishing inputs such as the education level of the mother.

No, there aren’t. The funding goes into resource classes and other things. The smarter high performing kids equal to yours get very little.

Yeah. That isn’t good. Maybe we should give those higher performing kids options to attend better schools. You know like some of programs we already have. That certainly seems to be a better and more affordable option for MCPS than trying to make all the resource and curriculum options the same, especially if they’re going to be underutilized.

That's what regional programs are doing.

Bussing 1/3rd of high school population outside of theirhome school is waste of money which is being done right now for DCC model. Just have stronger course at home school and for top 10% kids have regional programs.

They’ve shared the math. It’s actually more expensive to run these regional programs compared to a consortium model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with abiove posters.

DCC and reserved seats in home schools, both are poor ideas. Both ideas benefit selected few and unfair to many others.

DCC makes sense if they will not offer advanced classes at all schools. At least we could cosa to another school.

COSA to over crowdwed/in demand schools were getting denied. That's not a solution.

Solution is to provide good course offering in every school even if only 10-12 students are taking the course.

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like option B. Balances everyone needs. Just go with that one. option B = option best.

B and C are the wacky ones for us, but I get that this is super local.

We were untouched by the first boundary study.

DCC family here. C is best for us personally, B is worst, A and D are in the middle. But I don't want us DCC families to get stuck fighting against each other on which one is worst for our particular neighborhood, while the richer schools just get almost everything they want. These options are rigged.

They aready have everything. Instead of funding the schools who have less to have more they are shuffling everyone.

Schools get the same funding per student except for title 1 schools who get more.

Exactly and it should be based on need as the dcc schools have more kids struggling and the resources go to catch them up and help them and with one pot of money the principal’s have to make choices and the more academic kids lose out as the other kids have more needs to get them to graduate.

And yet even those extra resources don’t appear to be enough to move the needle on those kids who are struggling.

The problem is by the time you do catch up in MS or HS, its too late. They need to allocate far more resources in elementary schools to make sure every child who can be is on grade level. Do real evaluations, remediate any disabilities or SN with supports, therapies and reading teachers, have a better curriculum, and bring back the free online tutoring. By the time you get to high school, often its too late as these kids are struggling and have low self esteem and hate school.

Do you have any idea how expensive that is? There is neither the budget nor the political will do this. Sorry. And all of those “miracle” schools and programs like KIPP or in movies like “Waiting for Superman” are just cream skimming or culling through suspensions or sometimes outright kicking kids out to make the numbers look good. There are no easy fixes. And you’re right, those kids are cooked by that point.

There are already so many more resources poured into farms schools.

You are completely diminishing inputs such as the education level of the mother.

You think all of us are not educated. Think again.

To the contrary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I perosnally don't get the logic of reserving seats for home school. It puts kids from other schools at disadvantage. No one should have reserved seats.

+100

It's just ridiculous to have that in regional model. Any kid in region should have equal chance to get a seat in regional program and it should have nothing to do with if they get lucky with home school having some specific program. Entire region should be at equal footings.

Has MCPS said somewhere that they want to do it that way? I’ve seen posters here saying they heard the plan was to give 30% of seats to students already at the school, but is that in writing, or from a previous meeting?

It was from a previous meeting. Of course, all the information they’re giving is partial and inconsistent so it’s possible they’ve changed that. But I would like to be damn sure that’s the case before I stop drawing folks’ attention to this issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I perosnally don't get the logic of reserving seats for home school. It puts kids from other schools at disadvantage. No one should have reserved seats.

My understanding is that traditionally magnets have had some slots reserved for local kids to avoid dynamics where a very selective academic magnet is placed at a low SES school where few or no local kids would score high enough to make it in if they were in the general eligibility pool.

I can see some value in that-- there are definitely issues with having a school which has one set of classes for the local low-SES kids and a whole higher tier available for magnet kids which the local kids rarely or never get to access. But I feel like MCPS central office is performing, like, a cargo cult version of that by parroting "Local set-asides are more equitable and important for helping programs feel like part of the school community rather than a school-within-a-school" without stopping to think about whether giving disproportionate seats in a desirable magnet to kids from a rich school is actually really equitable.

If they really want to do local set-asides, they should just calculate the number of seats the local school should get proportional to the total number of kids in the region, and make that the set-aside. If you want to actively make sure the local kids get their "fair share" of seats, fine. But they should not get any extra.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with abiove posters.

DCC and reserved seats in home schools, both are poor ideas. Both ideas benefit selected few and unfair to many others.

DCC makes sense if they will not offer advanced classes at all schools. At least we could cosa to another school.

COSA to over crowdwed/in demand schools were getting denied. That's not a solution.

Solution is to provide good course offering in every school even if only 10-12 students are taking the course.

Agree, but it isn't going to happen. We had to cosa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I perosnally don't get the logic of reserving seats for home school. It puts kids from other schools at disadvantage. No one should have reserved seats.

My understanding is that traditionally magnets have had some slots reserved for local kids to avoid dynamics where a very selective academic magnet is placed at a low SES school where few or no local kids would score high enough to make it in if they were in the general eligibility pool.

I can see some value in that-- there are definitely issues with having a school which has one set of classes for the local low-SES kids and a whole higher tier available for magnet kids which the local kids rarely or never get to access. But I feel like MCPS central office is performing, like, a cargo cult version of that by parroting "Local set-asides are more equitable and important for helping programs feel like part of the school community rather than a school-within-a-school" without stopping to think about whether giving disproportionate seats in a desirable magnet to kids from a rich school is actually really equitable.

If they really want to do local set-asides, they should just calculate the number of seats the local school should get proportional to the total number of kids in the region, and make that the set-aside. If you want to actively make sure the local kids get their "fair share" of seats, fine. But they should not get any extra.

Arguing over magnets is silly. Right now there are only what, two magnets and they each take 100 students.

The real issue is providing enough classes to meet graduation requirements and interests.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like option B. Balances everyone needs. Just go with that one. option B = option best.

B and C are the wacky ones for us, but I get that this is super local.

We were untouched by the first boundary study.

DCC family here. C is best for us personally, B is worst, A and D are in the middle. But I don't want us DCC families to get stuck fighting against each other on which one is worst for our particular neighborhood, while the richer schools just get almost everything they want. These options are rigged.

They aready have everything. Instead of funding the schools who have less to have more they are shuffling everyone.

Schools get the same funding per student except for title 1 schools who get more.

Exactly and it should be based on need as the dcc schools have more kids struggling and the resources go to catch them up and help them and with one pot of money the principal’s have to make choices and the more academic kids lose out as the other kids have more needs to get them to graduate.

And yet even those extra resources don’t appear to be enough to move the needle on those kids who are struggling.

The problem is by the time you do catch up in MS or HS, its too late. They need to allocate far more resources in elementary schools to make sure every child who can be is on grade level. Do real evaluations, remediate any disabilities or SN with supports, therapies and reading teachers, have a better curriculum, and bring back the free online tutoring. By the time you get to high school, often its too late as these kids are struggling and have low self esteem and hate school.

Do you have any idea how expensive that is? There is neither the budget nor the political will do this. Sorry. And all of those “miracle” schools and programs like KIPP or in movies like “Waiting for Superman” are just cream skimming or culling through suspensions or sometimes outright kicking kids out to make the numbers look good. There are no easy fixes. And you’re right, those kids are cooked by that point.

There are already so many more resources poured into farms schools.

You are completely diminishing inputs such as the education level of the mother.

No, there aren’t. The funding goes into resource classes and other things. The smarter high performing kids equal to yours get very little.

Yeah. That isn’t good. Maybe we should give those higher performing kids options to attend better schools. You know like some of programs we already have. That certainly seems to be a better and more affordable option for MCPS than trying to make all the resource and curriculum options the same, especially if they’re going to be underutilized.

That's what regional programs are doing.

Bussing 1/3rd of high school population outside of theirhome school is waste of money which is being done right now for DCC model. Just have stronger course at home school and for top 10% kids have regional programs.

They’ve shared the math. It’s actually more expensive to run these regional programs compared to a consortium model.

Question is degree of increase in cost which benefits entire county as oppossed to only DCC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I perosnally don't get the logic of reserving seats for home school. It puts kids from other schools at disadvantage. No one should have reserved seats.

My understanding is that traditionally magnets have had some slots reserved for local kids to avoid dynamics where a very selective academic magnet is placed at a low SES school where few or no local kids would score high enough to make it in if they were in the general eligibility pool.

I can see some value in that-- there are definitely issues with having a school which has one set of classes for the local low-SES kids and a whole higher tier available for magnet kids which the local kids rarely or never get to access. But I feel like MCPS central office is performing, like, a cargo cult version of that by parroting "Local set-asides are more equitable and important for helping programs feel like part of the school community rather than a school-within-a-school" without stopping to think about whether giving disproportionate seats in a desirable magnet to kids from a rich school is actually really equitable.

If they really want to do local set-asides, they should just calculate the number of seats the local school should get proportional to the total number of kids in the region, and make that the set-aside. If you want to actively make sure the local kids get their "fair share" of seats, fine. But they should not get any extra.

Yes, that would work. Local kids should only compete for those set aside and it shouldn;t be the case where they can get set asude and then also take spots outside of it. It should be a hard limit. If you are getting a set aside then that's the maximum number of kids you can get in your home school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I perosnally don't get the logic of reserving seats for home school. It puts kids from other schools at disadvantage. No one should have reserved seats.

My understanding is that traditionally magnets have had some slots reserved for local kids to avoid dynamics where a very selective academic magnet is placed at a low SES school where few or no local kids would score high enough to make it in if they were in the general eligibility pool.

I can see some value in that-- there are definitely issues with having a school which has one set of classes for the local low-SES kids and a whole higher tier available for magnet kids which the local kids rarely or never get to access. But I feel like MCPS central office is performing, like, a cargo cult version of that by parroting "Local set-asides are more equitable and important for helping programs feel like part of the school community rather than a school-within-a-school" without stopping to think about whether giving disproportionate seats in a desirable magnet to kids from a rich school is actually really equitable.

If they really want to do local set-asides, they should just calculate the number of seats the local school should get proportional to the total number of kids in the region, and make that the set-aside. If you want to actively make sure the local kids get their "fair share" of seats, fine. But they should not get any extra.

Yes, I think they are embarrassing themselves by using the term equity to describe the regional model they are proposing. It's disgraceful.

[Anonymous]

^ especially if they actually put TWO academic magnets at BCC! That’s actually funny how obvious that is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^ especially if they actually put TWO academic magnets at BCC! That’s actually funny how obvious that is.

That's where the superintendent went. It's human nature to want the best for your alma mater.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't love all of the split articulation but the high school map is better for South Kensington.

I thought split articulations were generally not favored as a feedback last cycle

That was my understanding as well. The articulation charts are hard to understand and compare if you are at a “split articulation” elementary school (ES).