Instead of Changing Boundaries Add New Programs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a new high school opening. How do you propose that high school be populated, if not with a boundary study?

It's a former school re-opening. It had feeders. All those feeders are huge and over crowded. There will be more housing coming on the radio towers site, Twinbrook, and White Flite sites. Should not be hard to find students to fill a school.

And a boundary study is the process for determining which students will fill Woodward, beginning in 2024. Woodward's feeder patterns from the '80s are irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In case you didn't think racism was alive and well in MoCo... see the OP. Geez. "right type"? "punish US". Gross.

I see that from your post. When people talk about issues, you associate those with race.

I absolutely agree with PP even though you're trying to spin it.

+2

When the OP mentioned "attracting the right type of students to under-performing schools" just like the magnet program - it would be hard to associate that with racism. The analogy to the magnet programs explains it all.

Some people are simply trying to put the label "racism" on anything they could not find an easy way to argue against.

My bad, OP says she is being "punished" because there's no program to attract the "right" low income students to her school. Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I have nothing against new programs in schools and if that is the direction OP thinks the county should take -- they should make these comments to MCPS. However, let's not kid ourselves. People aren't actually concerned with under performing schools -- they are concerned with preserving boundaries.

The current boundaries are so out of wack and gerrymandered that everyone would benefit from a clean slate.

As PP -- I definitely agree -- I think an analysis of existing boundaries is a good idea.

[Anonymous]

" It might have an impact on the surrounding area over time but magnet programs are anything but diverse and the kids rarely mix with the locals.

That's not true. My DD is in a magnet and has both magnet and non-magnet friends. I have a friend who has a DD who is a non magnet student in a magnet school. Her best friend is a magnet student.

If you say so, it must be true for everyone! Thanks for clearing that up."

As if the first poster claiming "rarely mix" was true for everyone.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In case you didn't think racism was alive and well in MoCo... see the OP. Geez. "right type"? "punish US". Gross.

I see that from your post. When people talk about issues, you associate those with race.

I absolutely agree with PP even though you're trying to spin it.

+2

When the OP mentioned "attracting the right type of students to under-performing schools" just like the magnet program - it would be hard to associate that with racism. The analogy to the magnet programs explains it all.

Some people are simply trying to put the label "racism" on anything they could not find an easy way to argue against.

My bad, OP says she is being "punished" because there's no program to attract the "right" low income students to her school. Got it.

I read it as OP wanting the "right" students to go to programs at under performing schools to bring up their scores. So that the "wrong" students don't get switched to her own school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While I have nothing against new programs in schools and if that is the direction OP thinks the county should take -- they should make these comments to MCPS. However, let's not kid ourselves. People aren't actually concerned with under performing schools -- they are concerned with preserving boundaries.

Certainly them that has, are concerned with preserving boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I have nothing against new programs in schools and if that is the direction OP thinks the county should take -- they should make these comments to MCPS. However, let's not kid ourselves. People aren't actually concerned with under performing schools -- they are concerned with preserving boundaries.

Certainly them that has, are concerned with preserving boundaries.

which is why its cute that they are now coming up with all these ideas to "help" low performing schools ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I have nothing against new programs in schools and if that is the direction OP thinks the county should take -- they should make these comments to MCPS. However, let's not kid ourselves. People aren't actually concerned with under performing schools -- they are concerned with preserving boundaries.

The current boundaries are so out of wack and gerrymandered that everyone would benefit from a clean slate.

Apparently many don't agree with you.

I see no point in making yourself believe that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The programs are great for student engagement though. Student engagement is the number 1 predictor of success - at least that’s what they told us at our school. Kids are proud when their school has some sort of center of excellence. Don’t undervalue that and don’t forget that this is about the kids.

And yes, boundaries will need readjustment too.

There is overcrowding at every level, and MCPS would have to create a ton of programs at every level to alleviate the overcrowding.

So agreed..more programs aren't going to address all the overcrowding.

Why not both?

Yes, why not both?

did anyone say you can't have both?

See title of thread. It implies either/or. Of course, this is just an anonymous board and light on facts.

You're right. I as excluding OP. I'm a PP who stated we would still need redrawing boundaries to alleviate over crowding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I have nothing against new programs in schools and if that is the direction OP thinks the county should take -- they should make these comments to MCPS. However, let's not kid ourselves. People aren't actually concerned with under performing schools -- they are concerned with preserving boundaries.

Please note that different people care about different things. People from high-performing schools don't necessarily care too much about low-performing schools (why should they?); while people from low-performing schools don't care that much about the preserving boundaries.

So if we can make changes that satisfy both (groups of parents), why not?

I care, because I am a human being who cares about fellow human beings.

I care, because good-quality public education is a basic human and civil right.

I care, because these are the people who will be paying into social security in the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I have nothing against new programs in schools and if that is the direction OP thinks the county should take -- they should make these comments to MCPS. However, let's not kid ourselves. People aren't actually concerned with under performing schools -- they are concerned with preserving boundaries.

Please note that different people care about different things. People from high-performing schools don't necessarily care too much about low-performing schools (why should they?); while people from low-performing schools don't care that much about the preserving boundaries.

So if we can make changes that satisfy both (groups of parents), why not?

I care, because I am a human being who cares about fellow human beings.

I care, because good-quality public education is a basic human and civil right.

I care, because these are the people who will be paying into social security in the future.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't the board add new programs to attract the right type of students to underperforming schools? The magnet programs have done a fabulous job.

Are members of the board jealous of those us that live in good clusters? Are they doing this to punish us- seriously?

What types of programs were you thinking of OP?

There is a meeting at RM HS tonight to discuss programming. Will OP attend?

HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAMMING COMMUNITY CONVERSATION

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/calendar/index.aspx?calendarViewType=month&calendarDate=4/1/2019&filters=23,16&isAll=n&langId=1033&monthShows=1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In case you didn't think racism was alive and well in MoCo... see the OP. Geez. "right type"? "punish US". Gross.

I see that from your post. When people talk about issues, you associate those with race.

I absolutely agree with PP even though you're trying to spin it.

+2

When the OP mentioned "attracting the right type of students to under-performing schools" just like the magnet program - it would be hard to associate that with racism. The analogy to the magnet programs explains it all.

Some people are simply trying to put the label "racism" on anything they could not find an easy way to argue against.

My bad, OP says she is being "punished" because there's no program to attract the "right" low income students to her school. Got it.

I read it as OP wanting the "right" students to go to programs at under performing schools to bring up their scores. So that the "wrong" students don't get switched to her own school.

Hmm, then I'll stick with my original answer, +2.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't the board add new programs to attract the right type of students to underperforming schools? The magnet programs have done a fabulous job.

Are members of the board jealous of those us that live in good clusters? Are they doing this to punish us- seriously?

So you just ignore the masses, hoping they'll be covered up by students being bused into a magnet?

How does that solve anything, genius?

You punish yourself simply by being you.

Some underperforming schools are also underenrolled. If people voluntarily move from their high performing school to a low performing school because of a magnet program offering it does a few things. First, it solves a capacity issue. Secondly, it helps bring a better peer group into the schools. Third, it helps balance schools with out ripping communities apart. Forth- if structured correctly high performing students in a low performing school with have access to some of the programming benefits. Of course, it's easier just to call me names.

You complain people are calling you names when they say "you punish yourself by being you" but it's fine for you to say that the BOE must be trying to punish rich people by wanting to redraw boundaries to alleviate over crowding. LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I have nothing against new programs in schools and if that is the direction OP thinks the county should take -- they should make these comments to MCPS. However, let's not kid ourselves. People aren't actually concerned with under performing schools -- they are concerned with preserving boundaries.

Please note that different people care about different things. People from high-performing schools don't necessarily care too much about low-performing schools (why should they?); while people from low-performing schools don't care that much about the preserving boundaries.

So if we can make changes that satisfy both (groups of parents), why not?

I care, because I am a human being who cares about fellow human beings.

I care, because good-quality public education is a basic human and civil right.

I care, because these are the people who will be paying into social security in the future.

Of course you can care. Not all of your reasons work (e.g. "low-performing school" does not mean "bad quality public education". It can also mean that the students simply do not perform well) but you can care, no problem. I am simply pointing out, that this is not a necessity.