Initial boundary options for Crown/Damascus study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just hope they don't redistrict QO with any striver schools. Purposely avoided buying in Wootton and Walter Johnson because of all the tiger moms and academic culture. Football, D1 sports, and parents who like to hang out at the beach and tanning salons for fun is the vibe. I think everyone chose their school and neighborhood because it matched their vibe, and they should be allowed to say.

No I choose our school for the best education you suck as a parent .

Not so my kid could go to the University of Alabama

[Anonymous]

Everyone knows the only reason RPES goes to RM is to help RM’s FARMS numbers. It’s reverse discrimination in the name of “equity”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone knows the only reason RPES goes to RM is to help RM’s FARMS numbers. It’s reverse discrimination in the name of “equity”

Oh just stop move to Arkansas where your daughters can marry an old white dude by age 10 or Missouri or Alabama or Idaho with its new maternity homes popping up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moving Wayside out of Churchill helps with utilization. How else will they get Churchill below 100%?

It’s a BS utilization at Churchill. They’ve reduced capacity by 100 seats from when it first opened. What happened did the school shrink? Churchill has just had a period of a few years with higher enrollment which was consistently in lower figures and never had a portable until a year or two I believe. Kids there have stated it’s not crowded aside from the portable there’s no evidence to that.

Churchill parent here. There's no problem with Churchill being overcapacity. Yes, there are a couple of portables and I'm sure those teachers aren't excited about them. But I've never felt Churchill had too many kids generally. It's not hurting education or the social environment. And there's not much new construction in this area, so I wouldn't expect the problem to become worse in the next decade.

I have always wondered, though, why there are kids sooo far west that come to Churchill. Those are largely Wayside kids, and some Potomac kids. So yes, to drive from Wayside ES to Wootton HS, it may be about the same distance as going to from Wayside ES to Churchill HS. But a huge part of that geography is far closer to Wootton than to Churchill. Same with the Northern part of the Potomac ES boundaries. The culprit is that they're not looking at ES boundaries. I'd be interested in knowing the *average* student's bus time to both high schools-- there is certainly some house that is closer to Churchill and some house that is closer to Wootton. In sum, I think, capacity-wise, it would be fine for Wayside to continue to go to Churchill. But I think the quality of life for the average Wayside kid might improve by going to the closer school.

Wayside families definitely closer to Churchill for the most part. For us, it is 3 miles more to Wootton than to Churchill and an additional 10 minutes (give or take) round trip. Not horrible but doesn't make sense.

The Wayside families that should never been zoned to Wayside in the first place are in the Potomac Glen area. There are three other elementary schools closer to that neighborhood, namely Lakewood, Stone Mill, and Travilah. Why they were ever zoned for Wayside/Churchill is bizarre, but from what I understand the contractor that built that development had some connections with Montgomery County politicians who made it happen. That is the only area that should be rezoned to Wootton and to the appropriate elementary school. The rest of Wayside belongs at Churchill.

But they're not changing ES boundaries. And ES split articulation to different middle schools sounds terrible. And you're citing a 5 minute increase (one way) for part of the school zone to go to Wootton where another part of the school zone would probably save 2 or 3 times that by going to Wootton. And MCPS is trying to put together a big jigsaw puzzle in which not every household will benefit, but the overall system is better. So all in all, adding 5 minuts to a commute for some people isn't going to be a deal-changer in the overall puzzle.

Based on what you said, if we could invent a time machine, people here might push for the school zone to have been created differently 20 years ago. And it sounds like there are a lot of people here who would favor looking at ES boundaries but that doesn't seem like it's going to happen. So this is where we are.

Why is ES split articulation so bad? As someone who went to a MS and then split that wasn’t ideal, but at least I gained about 60-70 peers in MS to join my ES cohort to HS. However we were def lopsided as my MS was like 120 strong out of 450-500 total 9th grade.

I feel like if say an ES consists of on average 70 kids per graduating class, if about 30-40 were split to two different middle schools, that’s not the end of the world. At that age ALL of the kids in a MS are coming together from small cohorts. So a MS class of 300-400 could consist of 4-6 groups of 30-100 kids. So the 30-40 split could be very similar to another 40-50 from ES #2 and another 60-70 from ES #3 and another 100 from ES #4 for example.

If those kids do NOT split again for HS that gives 7 years together grades 6-12 which is a year more than time together in ES and often times kids are closest with those from those later years.

Worse would be a tiny split (less than 25 kids for example) from an ES to MS, even worse would be then splitting both ES to MS and MS to HS. Worst of all would be going together to MS but then a subset of an ES splitting as a tiny portion of a MS to HS. For example 100 ES kids go to MS with a total of 400 kids. If 50 of those ES kids by themselves go to HS while the other 350 go to HS thats awful. Peer groups are super formed by HS though def changed for me and others.

I bristle at the idea of split articulation for ES students because MS is so damned hard, socially. Pretty much everyone looks back on MS and views it negatively because it's just a hard and awkward age. That said, ES kids tend to be pretty resilient with moves and making new friends. So perhaps creating disruption between 5th and 6th grades would be favorable to creating it between 8th and 9th. Neither is great, but maybe earlier is the lesser evil. It would also create a motivation for MCPS to redraw ES boundaries-- they could split-articulate now in a way that would allow them to sew things back up in a few years with an ES boundary study (getting rid of the split articulation at that point.).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moving Wayside out of Churchill helps with utilization. How else will they get Churchill below 100%?

It’s a BS utilization at Churchill. They’ve reduced capacity by 100 seats from when it first opened. What happened did the school shrink? Churchill has just had a period of a few years with higher enrollment which was consistently in lower figures and never had a portable until a year or two I believe. Kids there have stated it’s not crowded aside from the portable there’s no evidence to that.

Churchill parent here. There's no problem with Churchill being overcapacity. Yes, there are a couple of portables and I'm sure those teachers aren't excited about them. But I've never felt Churchill had too many kids generally. It's not hurting education or the social environment. And there's not much new construction in this area, so I wouldn't expect the problem to become worse in the next decade.

I have always wondered, though, why there are kids sooo far west that come to Churchill. Those are largely Wayside kids, and some Potomac kids. So yes, to drive from Wayside ES to Wootton HS, it may be about the same distance as going to from Wayside ES to Churchill HS. But a huge part of that geography is far closer to Wootton than to Churchill. Same with the Northern part of the Potomac ES boundaries. The culprit is that they're not looking at ES boundaries. I'd be interested in knowing the *average* student's bus time to both high schools-- there is certainly some house that is closer to Churchill and some house that is closer to Wootton. In sum, I think, capacity-wise, it would be fine for Wayside to continue to go to Churchill. But I think the quality of life for the average Wayside kid might improve by going to the closer school.

Wayside families definitely closer to Churchill for the most part. For us, it is 3 miles more to Wootton than to Churchill and an additional 10 minutes (give or take) round trip. Not horrible but doesn't make sense.

The Wayside families that should never been zoned to Wayside in the first place are in the Potomac Glen area. There are three other elementary schools closer to that neighborhood, namely Lakewood, Stone Mill, and Travilah. Why they were ever zoned for Wayside/Churchill is bizarre, but from what I understand the contractor that built that development had some connections with Montgomery County politicians who made it happen. That is the only area that should be rezoned to Wootton and to the appropriate elementary school. The rest of Wayside belongs at Churchill.

But they're not changing ES boundaries. And ES split articulation to different middle schools sounds terrible. And you're citing a 5 minute increase (one way) for part of the school zone to go to Wootton where another part of the school zone would probably save 2 or 3 times that by going to Wootton. And MCPS is trying to put together a big jigsaw puzzle in which not every household will benefit, but the overall system is better. So all in all, adding 5 minuts to a commute for some people isn't going to be a deal-changer in the overall puzzle.

Based on what you said, if we could invent a time machine, people here might push for the school zone to have been created differently 20 years ago. And it sounds like there are a lot of people here who would favor looking at ES boundaries but that doesn't seem like it's going to happen. So this is where we are.

Why is ES split articulation so bad? As someone who went to a MS and then split that wasn’t ideal, but at least I gained about 60-70 peers in MS to join my ES cohort to HS. However we were def lopsided as my MS was like 120 strong out of 450-500 total 9th grade.

I feel like if say an ES consists of on average 70 kids per graduating class, if about 30-40 were split to two different middle schools, that’s not the end of the world. At that age ALL of the kids in a MS are coming together from small cohorts. So a MS class of 300-400 could consist of 4-6 groups of 30-100 kids. So the 30-40 split could be very similar to another 40-50 from ES #2 and another 60-70 from ES #3 and another 100 from ES #4 for example.

If those kids do NOT split again for HS that gives 7 years together grades 6-12 which is a year more than time together in ES and often times kids are closest with those from those later years.

Worse would be a tiny split (less than 25 kids for example) from an ES to MS, even worse would be then splitting both ES to MS and MS to HS. Worst of all would be going together to MS but then a subset of an ES splitting as a tiny portion of a MS to HS. For example 100 ES kids go to MS with a total of 400 kids. If 50 of those ES kids by themselves go to HS while the other 350 go to HS thats awful. Peer groups are super formed by HS though def changed for me and others.

I bristle at the idea of split articulation for ES students because MS is so damned hard, socially. Pretty much everyone looks back on MS and views it negatively because it's just a hard and awkward age. That said, ES kids tend to be pretty resilient with moves and making new friends. So perhaps creating disruption between 5th and 6th grades would be favorable to creating it between 8th and 9th. Neither is great, but maybe earlier is the lesser evil. It would also create a motivation for MCPS to redraw ES boundaries-- they could split-articulate now in a way that would allow them to sew things back up in a few years with an ES boundary study (getting rid of the split articulation at that point.).

That's when they sneak up and do it a second time for 9th grade just to spite

[Anonymous]

Viers Mill ES (and possibly others that I don't know about) has split articulation into 3 feeder middle schools. It is HORRIBLE. Kids lose their friends. There is no sense of community. It should not be the goal for any school. I hate that MCPS is not prioritizing community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone knows the only reason RPES goes to RM is to help RM’s FARMS numbers. It’s reverse discrimination in the name of “equity”

Oh just stop move to Arkansas where your daughters can marry an old white dude by age 10 or Missouri or Alabama or Idaho with its new maternity homes popping up

dp.. what ^PP stated is true. I stated the same thing, and this is the reason why MCPS will not move RPES out of RM.

It is the sole reason why RPES was moved to RMHS many decades ago.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1987/06/05/busing-ruling-saddens-ritchie-park-parents/cc3b67e6-b596-4247-ba3d-b4c076d37de8/

Ironically, around that same year, they closed Woodward HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone knows the only reason RPES goes to RM is to help RM’s FARMS numbers. It’s reverse discrimination in the name of “equity”

Oh just stop move to Arkansas where your daughters can marry an old white dude by age 10 or Missouri or Alabama or Idaho with its new maternity homes popping up

dp.. what ^PP stated is true. I stated the same thing, and this is the reason why MCPS will not move RPES out of RM.

It is the sole reason why RPES was moved to RMHS many decades ago.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1987/06/05/busing-ruling-saddens-ritchie-park-parents/cc3b67e6-b596-4247-ba3d-b4c076d37de8/

Ironically, around that same year, they closed Woodward HS.

We RPES parents don’t want to leave RM. we just don’t want to split articulate multiple times (or at all)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Suddenly, I feel like QO high school is shining great among all 4 options. It is within walking distance, no busing and kids stay together from ES/MS.

Great as long as you are not in Kentlands.

why

Busing the Kentlands to Gaithersburg or Crown is just absurd. Not that I’m not enjoying the maga there whose tiny racist brain cells are exploding about these new boundaries but because they are fiscally irresponsible of the county and stupid. Kentlands walks to QO there is no reality sending them to the other HS makes sense logistically or fiscally.

As for Dufief yes

As for Stonemill out of W again no because W is already under enrolled. And the mapping logic makes no sense either.

They will do the worst possible senerio people get ready for major bussing.

You realize parts of dufief, stone mill and Travilah of basically equidistant to Wootton? And Dufief has maybe 35 kids per grade TOTAL. Dufief is part of the Wootton community, has been since forever. They don’t want to move schools. Moving them doesn’t help anything. Wootton is under enrolled, as you said. Just leave dufief alone.

How about just leaving Wootton alone. Why does MCPS create 4 options just to generate fights between different ES within Wootton? That’s pure evil and community dividing. Crown is built to alleviate overcrowding of other schools and Wootton is not overcrowded. None of the four options change diversity of any school so just leave Wootton alone. Don’t make the poorer neighborhoods in Wootton to pay the price just to satisfy this diversity game.

I am PP of above- yes, totally agree. Leave Wootton alone. But they won’t.

Everyone supporting leaving Wootton alone, I stand with you as I went to CJMS/WCHS but had so many friends go to Wootton.

Anyway as a resident of Wayside now who is across the street from the proposed border, I want to stay at WCHS.

Wootton folks, if you can sign this petition it can’t hurt your case the less likely they are to shift Churchill to Wootton the less likely they are to shift schools from Wootton to elsewhere.

https://chng.it/SNLndcftLR

I will not be signing that. You guys are nothing but a bunch of Karens. You talk about your “community” as if you’re an indigenous tribe or something. Your kids will be fine and will attend a less crowded school, which directly helps all the concerns listed on the petition.

Joke's on you because Karen Drive remains zoned for Churchill in all four options.

😂 as someone who grew up nearby I totally forgot about that even though I pass that street everyday being in the Wayside district.

I feel sorry for genuinely nice people who were named Karen.

100%
I find it misogynistic anyway. The last thing our culture needs is another way to shame and belittle women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The families crying because their kids have to go to Wootton instead of Churchill are so shameful. Please get over it. I hope MCPS doesn’t give a damn and passes that proposal.

Where are you supposed to go? How would you want your kids going to a 55 year old school with asbestos and mold?

It's so sad! The state of the Wootton building is on all of us at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The irony that a few decades ago Ritchie Park families went BALLISTIC when they were moved from Wootton to Richard Montgomery because they were almost all walkers and then were bussed instead.

But the board is like hmmm, let’s move Wayside to Wootton and not even consider Ritchie Park right up the street and convert them back to walkers, tells you everything you need to know about how f’d up this entire thing is.

+1

I am shocked how many of these plans have walkers less than 1/2 mile (way less than the 2 mile) getting bused to other high schools.

I honestly thought they were going to clean up a lot of congestion and all of these plans make it worse for almost every high school.

The biggest shock is that 2 of the 4 options keep the Rio area bused all the way to Wootton instead of walking across Fields to attend Crown HS. Dumbest thing I’ve seen.

While I'm not a big fan of split articulation, I do see the argument for moving the Fallsmead triangle since they can walk to Crown. What worries me is that if they move the Fallsmead triangle to Crown, that could mean they are choosing one of their pro-split articulation options (options 2 and 4) that also involve things like breaking up Lakewood to send a small group to Crown that most definitely cannot walk there. I'm wondering how much they see these options as grouped together such that making one change will imply others, particularly for schools currently in the same cluster like Fallsmead and Lakewood.

I think the reason they are sending that small Lakewood group to Crown along with the Fallsmead triangle in those pro-split articulation options is because they *do* think the Lakewood group is walking distance to Crown. Despite it being a 45 minute walk along busy/dangerous roads. It's insanity!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The irony that a few decades ago Ritchie Park families went BALLISTIC when they were moved from Wootton to Richard Montgomery because they were almost all walkers and then were bussed instead.

But the board is like hmmm, let’s move Wayside to Wootton and not even consider Ritchie Park right up the street and convert them back to walkers, tells you everything you need to know about how f’d up this entire thing is.

+1

I am shocked how many of these plans have walkers less than 1/2 mile (way less than the 2 mile) getting bused to other high schools.

I honestly thought they were going to clean up a lot of congestion and all of these plans make it worse for almost every high school.

The biggest shock is that 2 of the 4 options keep the Rio area bused all the way to Wootton instead of walking across Fields to attend Crown HS. Dumbest thing I’ve seen.

While I'm not a big fan of split articulation, I do see the argument for moving the Fallsmead triangle since they can walk to Crown. What worries me is that if they move the Fallsmead triangle to Crown, that could mean they are choosing one of their pro-split articulation options (options 2 and 4) that also involve things like breaking up Lakewood to send a small group to Crown that most definitely cannot walk there. I'm wondering how much they see these options as grouped together such that making one change will imply others, particularly for schools currently in the same cluster like Fallsmead and Lakewood.

I think the reason they are sending that small Lakewood group to Crown along with the Fallsmead triangle in those pro-split articulation options is because they *do* think the Lakewood group is walking distance to Crown. Despite it being a 45 minute walk along busy/dangerous roads. It's insanity!!!

They also believe Fallsgrove can walk across Key West Ave to be walkers to Crown, but somehow cant be walkers to Lakewood or Wootton...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone knows the only reason RPES goes to RM is to help RM’s FARMS numbers. It’s reverse discrimination in the name of “equity”

Oh just stop move to Arkansas where your daughters can marry an old white dude by age 10 or Missouri or Alabama or Idaho with its new maternity homes popping up

dp.. what ^PP stated is true. I stated the same thing, and this is the reason why MCPS will not move RPES out of RM.

It is the sole reason why RPES was moved to RMHS many decades ago.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1987/06/05/busing-ruling-saddens-ritchie-park-parents/cc3b67e6-b596-4247-ba3d-b4c076d37de8/

Ironically, around that same year, they closed Woodward HS.

We RPES parents don’t want to leave RM. we just don’t want to split articulate multiple times (or at all)

PP here.. I live in the RPES cluster. I do agree with you. And we like RM, too. No one wants to be part of split articulation, but based on the options, someone is going to have to. However, Option 2 split articulation for RPES is terrible. No one cluster should have double split articulation like RPES has in option 2.

[Anonymous]

RM is a good school but RPES students shouldn’t be used as pawns to fill a racial quota

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:RM is a good school but RPES students shouldn’t be used as pawns to fill a racial quota

mcps has been doing this for years, and not just for RPES. It's part of the four factors: demographics.