Where are all you families of high performing students planning on moving to?

[Anonymous]

Glad I found this forum. Now I know that DC could grow up and attend Trump University or Tri-Valley University and still do very well. Why should we be bothered about the school or the peers when my kid could can reach their potential irrespective of the educational institution they attend?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Glad I found this forum. Now I know that DC could grow up and attend Trump University or Tri-Valley University and still do very well. Why should we be bothered about the school or the peers when my kid could can reach their potential irrespective of the educational institution they attend?

Nobody has recommended attending unaccredited colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids graduated from W cluster, my youngest last year. I always thought MCPS was great and I didn't notice any recent changes. What is making families now reevaluate MCPS? Sincere question - I must have missed something, or it must've happened after my kids were out. Thanks.

People are (over-)reacting to the upcoming systemwide boundary analysis.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/publicinfo/boundary-analysis/

Would you prefer parents under-react? I’d rather have over active community members anytime.

I would prefer that parents react to the consultant's actual report and any subsequent decisions MCPS may make.

MCPS wants you to shut up and keeping taking it up the you-know-what. And keep paying your ever-increasing taxes of course.

homegrown BS curriculum 2.0, 2 level grading scale (A or B), test retakes, ESOL bonanza, BS studies every week, no differentiation, teeny tiny CES/Magnet programs with socially engineered admit pools, bloated incompetent Administration, 30 mins A WEEK of PE in elementary school (min of all U.S. states, counties, or city schools), 2-3 hours of chromebook time starting in K onward.

I mean, turn OP's question around, and give us a few good reasons why we should move to MoCo and MCPS. We both work, and don't have time to babysit and un-navigateable, untransparent huge county school district that only cares about one segment of students (underperforming). What about teaching all segments to potential?

MCPS is still the best in the area and one of the bests in the nation
Leads the nation in AP passing scores. All groups in MCPS do better than anywhere else.
https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/press/index.aspx?pagetype=showrelease&id=8161&type=archive&startYear=2017&pageNumber=3&mode=

More MCPS leading. ..
https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/mcps-takes-first-place-in-ranking-on-college-preparedness-stem-career-readiness/

For "high performing " students, there is no better place than MCPS. 15 of MD 20 Regeneron scholars this year are from MCPS and one MCPS school lead the whole nation
https://student.societyforscience.org/regeneron-sts-2019-scholars

As you can see, I posted FACTS not anecdotes or delusions.
I know private parents, NoVa parents and the other wannabes don't want hear them but these are facts, real world facts not DCUM delusions

I can't believe anyone would post hard facts! This board is supposed to be about complaining and posting lots of personal anecdotes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Glad I found this forum. Now I know that DC could grow up and attend Trump University or Tri-Valley University and still do very well. Why should we be bothered about the school or the peers when my kid could can reach their potential irrespective of the educational institution they attend?

You are comparing unaccredited fake universities with MCPS public schools. You are apparently saying Whitman is Harvard and Wheaton is a fly-by-night correspondence college.

Wake up: all MCPS schools hire the same teachers and pay them the same, share the same budget, and have the same curriculum. Your rich school down the street is actually not an institution of its own. It is part of MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I mean, turn OP's question around, and give us a few good reasons why we should move to MoCo and MCPS. We both work, and don't have time to babysit and un-navigateable, untransparent huge county school district that only cares about one segment of students (underperforming). What about teaching all segments to potential? [/b]

MCPS is still the best in the area and one of the bests in the nation
Leads the nation in AP passing scores. All groups in MCPS do better than anywhere else.
https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/press/index.aspx?pagetype=showrelease&id=8161&type=archive&startYear=2017&pageNumber=3&mode=

More MCPS leading. ..
https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/mcps-takes-first-place-in-ranking-on-college-preparedness-stem-career-readiness/

For "high performing " students, there is no better place than MCPS. 15 of MD 20 Regeneron scholars this year are from MCPS and one MCPS school lead the whole nation
https://student.societyforscience.org/regeneron-sts-2019-scholars

As you can see, I posted FACTS not anecdotes or delusions.
I know private parents, NoVa parents and the other wannabes don't want hear them but these are facts, real world facts not DCUM delusions

What you posted are facts that would encourage high performing students to come to MCPS because there are many of their peers and programs offered for them to become more competitive.

Yet many people on DCUM seem to think that they need to speak out for the low performing students. So your facts mean nothing to them - these facts are not related to their interest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Glad I found this forum. Now I know that DC could grow up and attend Trump University or Tri-Valley University and still do very well. Why should we be bothered about the school or the peers when my kid could can reach their potential irrespective of the educational institution they attend?

You are comparing unaccredited fake universities with MCPS public schools. You are apparently saying Whitman is Harvard and Wheaton is a fly-by-night correspondence college.

Wake up: all MCPS schools hire the same teachers and pay them the same, share the same budget, an[b]d have the same curriculum[/b]. Your rich school down the street is actually not an institution of its own. It is part of MCPS.

So there is nothing to fix. Awesome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Glad I found this forum. Now I know that DC could grow up and attend Trump University or Tri-Valley University and still do very well. Why should we be bothered about the school or the peers when my kid could can reach their potential irrespective of the educational institution they attend?

You are comparing unaccredited fake universities with MCPS public schools. You are apparently saying Whitman is Harvard and Wheaton is a fly-by-night correspondence college.

Wake up: all MCPS schools hire the same teachers and pay them the same, share the same budget, an[b]d have the same curriculum[/b]. Your rich school down the street is actually not an institution of its own. It is part of MCPS.

So there is nothing to fix. Awesome.

That would be true, if the goal were to make sure that every school in MCPS has the same curriculum and is funded out of the MCPS budget. But it's not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What you posted are facts that would encourage high performing students to come to MCPS because there are many of their peers and programs offered for them to become more competitive.

Yet many people on DCUM seem to think that they need to speak out for the low performing students. So your facts mean nothing to them - these facts are not related to their interest.

No, that's you who's insisting that this is not about students from families with different household incomes, but rather about "high performing" and "low performing" students.

[Anonymous]

I wonder how much DCUM affects real estate prices. I was just reading someone in the real estate forum who was changing plans just based on these threads. I hope people would realize they need to do some more thorough research.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Glad I found this forum. Now I know that DC could grow up and attend Trump University or Tri-Valley University and still do very well. Why should we be bothered about the school or the peers when my kid could can reach their potential irrespective of the educational institution they attend?

You are comparing unaccredited fake universities with MCPS public schools. You are apparently saying Whitman is Harvard and Wheaton is a fly-by-night correspondence college.

Wake up: all MCPS schools hire the same teachers and pay them the same, share the same budget, and have the same curriculum. Your rich school down the street is actually not an institution of its own. It is part of MCPS.

True.

And there are existing rules. For example, school boundaries exist for a reason. If you want to change it, of course in most cases some people may be happy and some not.

The attitude of many posters here is: the change is for the public (who is this "public") good, so any opposition view is not valid, selfish, on low moral ground, etc.

Come on! People's own interests are at stake, yet some people here want parents to think about "public good" instead of their own interests?

Apparently BoE members are not that out of touch. Little tweaks? Maybe. But most likely nothing significant would happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

True.

And there are existing rules. For example, school boundaries exist for a reason. If you want to change it, of course in most cases some people may be happy and some not.

The attitude of many posters here is: the change is for the public (who is this "public") good, so any opposition view is not valid, selfish, on low moral ground, etc.

Come on! People's own interests are at stake, yet some people here want parents to think about "public good" instead of their own interests?

Apparently BoE members are not that out of touch. Little tweaks? Maybe. But most likely nothing significant would happen.

The attitude of many posters here is: THE SKY IS FALLING!

The attitude of many other posters here is: No, the sky is not falling.

Why would you care whether anonymous posters on the internet think your opinions are not valid, selfish, on low moral ground, or whatever? You do you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What you posted are facts that would encourage high performing students to come to MCPS because there are many of their peers and programs offered for them to become more competitive.

Yet many people on DCUM seem to think that they need to speak out for the low performing students. So your facts mean nothing to them - these facts are not related to their interest.

No, that's you who's insisting that this is not about students from families with different household incomes, but rather about "high performing" and "low performing" students.

In case you did not realize - the matter can be about both.

I tend to argue from the performance perspective, and I find my arguments reasonable and strong. The proposed boundary change, started because of the overcrowding issue. But if a change is needed, the choice would eventually fall on performance - demographic or incoming levels, they consider those because they believe (or claim) these are useful to boost performance.

In other words, they want measures that can help improve the performance (of low-performing students of course). That is why the above facts do not matter much to those people.

If you want to argue from income perspective, that is your choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What you posted are facts that would encourage high performing students to come to MCPS because there are many of their peers and programs offered for them to become more competitive.

Yet many people on DCUM seem to think that they need to speak out for the low performing students. So your facts mean nothing to them - these facts are not related to their interest.

No, that's you who's insisting that this is not about students from families with different household incomes, but rather about "high performing" and "low performing" students.

In case you did not realize - the matter can be about both.

I tend to argue from the performance perspective, and I find my arguments reasonable and strong. The proposed boundary change, started because of the overcrowding issue. But if a change is needed, the choice would eventually fall on performance - demographic or incoming levels, they consider those because they believe (or claim) these are useful to boost performance.

In other words, they want measures that can help improve the performance (of low-performing students of course). That is why the above facts do not matter much to those people.

If you want to argue from income perspective, that is your choice.

The income perspective is the perspective the BoE is paying the consultant to look at. And demographics are one of the 4 factors in boundary studies. Test scores are not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

True.

And there are existing rules. For example, school boundaries exist for a reason. If you want to change it, of course in most cases some people may be happy and some not.

The attitude of many posters here is: the change is for the public (who is this "public") good, so any opposition view is not valid, selfish, on low moral ground, etc.

Come on! People's own interests are at stake, yet some people here want parents to think about "public good" instead of their own interests?

Apparently BoE members are not that out of touch. Little tweaks? Maybe. But most likely nothing significant would happen.

The attitude of many posters here is: THE SKY IS FALLING!

The attitude of many other posters here is: No, the sky is not falling.

Why would you care whether anonymous posters on the internet think your opinions are not valid, selfish, on low moral ground, or whatever? You do you.

The sky is not falling. Even if they make the proposed boundary changes, the sky is not falling either.

As for why I care (about other posters opinions) - just the same as why you would post here. I don't care that much, just enough so that I would post something to show what I think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What you posted are facts that would encourage high performing students to come to MCPS because there are many of their peers and programs offered for them to become more competitive.

Yet many people on DCUM seem to think that they need to speak out for the low performing students. So your facts mean nothing to them - these facts are not related to their interest.

No, that's you who's insisting that this is not about students from families with different household incomes, but rather about "high performing" and "low performing" students.

In case you did not realize - the matter can be about both.

I tend to argue from the performance perspective, and I find my arguments reasonable and strong. The proposed boundary change, started because of the overcrowding issue. But if a change is needed, the choice would eventually fall on performance - demographic or incoming levels, they consider those because they believe (or claim) these are useful to boost performance.

In other words, they want measures that can help improve the performance (of low-performing students of course). That is why the above facts do not matter much to those people.

If you want to argue from income perspective, that is your choice.

The income perspective is the perspective the BoE is paying the consultant to look at. And demographics are one of the 4 factors in boundary studies. Test scores are not.

Because they have already claimed links between income/demographics to performance.

I don't have a problem when people use these perspectives to support their views. People have different views, sometimes due to different perspectives.

I am simply pointing out that this is also (if you do not like the word "truly") about boosting the performance of certain students - clearly not something related to the facts in the PP.