Woodward HS boundary study - BCC, Blair, Einstein, WJ, Kennedy, Northwood, Wheaton, Whitman impacts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boundaries are decided based on neighborhoods, not individuals. This isn’t selective admissions. The SC case isn’t going to be a driver in this boundary decision.

Correct. In case folks are curious, there is plenty of case law around this, most of which boils down to the fact that the State government can not substitute its judgement for that of a local governing body in matter of local policy unless that policy is capricious or illegal.

Plenty of folks have tested this theory, including recently in MCPS, and the outcome has been the same.

Now, when school districts have attempted to assign *individual* students on the basis of race (Parents Involved v. Seattle Schools), SCOTUS has struck that down, but in the same ruling they affirmed the right of school districts to utlize their own discretion to avoid racial isolation.

From the majority ruling:

A compelling interest exists in avoiding racial isolation, an interest that a school district, in its discretion and expertise, may choose to pursue. Likewise, a district may consider it a compelling interest to achieve a diverse student population. Race may be one component of that diversity, but other demographic factors, plus special talents and needs, should also be considered. What the government is not permitted to do, absent a showing of necessity not made here, is to classify every student on the basis of race and to assign each of them to schools based on that classification.

Now, someone might choose to file a lawsuit, but under both Maryland statute and settled case law, they are very very unlikely to succeed and under both MCPS is within its rights to conduct and act on a boundary analysis as long as individual students are not assigned base on race (no racial quotas for admission) and as long as other factors such as FARMS status and proximity are also considered.

Not sure what your point is. A lot of lawsuits also created caselaw around Roe v Wade, and it was overturned.

Maybe its possible to challenge the local school district on the basis that it took race into consideration when drawing boundaries? At the pre-college level, boundaries are the same as "school admissions" - no difference at all. There's ton's of materials published on MCPS website that show statistics about the quantity of children's ethnicity and race at a particular school, as well as (as you point out) use it as the basis for making boundary decisions.

The Court's opinion employs broad language against racial preferences, reasoning that “[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

The way I read that is race cannot be a factor of decision-making, subject to very narrow exceptions?

What?! Those are not at all the same.

Are you saying that the MCPS CO and the BOE has never publicly stated / documented that it makes boundary decisions, in part, based upon race and ethnicity (ex. when it considers the demographics and ethnic / racial diversity of the school)? And that School Assignment / Boundary decision is not enforced by the School Locator by a resident's address? In order to change this school assignment, it's by individual student through a COSA.

How is that not discriminating based upon race?

“[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

They aren't selecting individual students based on race. They aren't saying, you are White so you can't go to this school. They are trying to balance demographics through their boundary decisions but don't control which specific students live in those areas and attend those schools.

Why is it necessary to "balance demographics" if all racial discrimination is eliminated? Aren't you proving the point?

I could be wrong, but I don't recall the Supreme Court making a distinction that their decision was solely limited to "selecting individual students based on race"? Can you provide the exact legal citation, page and paragraph please? Honestly, I feel you're making things up to suit your opinion?

For example, the next time MCPS and the BOE redraws school boundaries, what was the legally sustainable compelling interest and when will it end? Was it provide a benefit to some but not to others? Did it necessarily provide advantages to a new group at the expense of the former group? I might ask, when a family purchased a home in a school assignment whose boundaries changed, were they provided the option to remain in their old school assignment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boundaries are decided based on neighborhoods, not individuals. This isn’t selective admissions. The SC case isn’t going to be a driver in this boundary decision.

Correct. In case folks are curious, there is plenty of case law around this, most of which boils down to the fact that the State government can not substitute its judgement for that of a local governing body in matter of local policy unless that policy is capricious or illegal.

Plenty of folks have tested this theory, including recently in MCPS, and the outcome has been the same.

Now, when school districts have attempted to assign *individual* students on the basis of race (Parents Involved v. Seattle Schools), SCOTUS has struck that down, but in the same ruling they affirmed the right of school districts to utlize their own discretion to avoid racial isolation.

From the majority ruling:

A compelling interest exists in avoiding racial isolation, an interest that a school district, in its discretion and expertise, may choose to pursue. Likewise, a district may consider it a compelling interest to achieve a diverse student population. Race may be one component of that diversity, but other demographic factors, plus special talents and needs, should also be considered. What the government is not permitted to do, absent a showing of necessity not made here, is to classify every student on the basis of race and to assign each of them to schools based on that classification.

Now, someone might choose to file a lawsuit, but under both Maryland statute and settled case law, they are very very unlikely to succeed and under both MCPS is within its rights to conduct and act on a boundary analysis as long as individual students are not assigned base on race (no racial quotas for admission) and as long as other factors such as FARMS status and proximity are also considered.

Not sure what your point is. A lot of lawsuits also created caselaw around Roe v Wade, and it was overturned.

Maybe its possible to challenge the local school district on the basis that it took race into consideration when drawing boundaries? At the pre-college level, boundaries are the same as "school admissions" - no difference at all. There's ton's of materials published on MCPS website that show statistics about the quantity of children's ethnicity and race at a particular school, as well as (as you point out) use it as the basis for making boundary decisions.

The Court's opinion employs broad language against racial preferences, reasoning that “[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

The way I read that is race cannot be a factor of decision-making, subject to very narrow exceptions?

What?! Those are not at all the same.

Are you saying that the MCPS CO and the BOE has never publicly stated / documented that it makes boundary decisions, in part, based upon race and ethnicity (ex. when it considers the demographics and ethnic / racial diversity of the school)? And that School Assignment / Boundary decision is not enforced by the School Locator by a resident's address? In order to change this school assignment, it's by individual student through a COSA.

How is that not discriminating based upon race?

“[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

They aren't selecting individual students based on race. They aren't saying, you are White so you can't go to this school. They are trying to balance demographics through their boundary decisions but don't control which specific students live in those areas and attend those schools.

Why is it necessary to "balance demographics" if all racial discrimination is eliminated? Aren't you proving the point?

I could be wrong, but I don't recall the Supreme Court making a distinction that their decision was solely limited to "selecting individual students based on race"? Can you provide the exact legal citation, page and paragraph please? Honestly, I feel you're making things up to suit your opinion?

For example, the next time MCPS and the BOE redraws school boundaries, what was the legally sustainable compelling interest and when will it end? Was it provide a benefit to some but not to others? Did it necessarily provide advantages to a new group at the expense of the former group? I might ask, when a family purchased a home in a school assignment whose boundaries changed, were they provided the option to remain in their old school assignment?

The only students who remain in the old school assignment are those who are about to finish up at that school (like rising 8th, 11th and 12th graders), or in some cases if that school had a special program a student had already started.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Students can also take the ride-on bus to school if there is no school bus..

If the routes match up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boundaries are decided based on neighborhoods, not individuals. This isn’t selective admissions. The SC case isn’t going to be a driver in this boundary decision.

Correct. In case folks are curious, there is plenty of case law around this, most of which boils down to the fact that the State government can not substitute its judgement for that of a local governing body in matter of local policy unless that policy is capricious or illegal.

Plenty of folks have tested this theory, including recently in MCPS, and the outcome has been the same.

Now, when school districts have attempted to assign *individual* students on the basis of race (Parents Involved v. Seattle Schools), SCOTUS has struck that down, but in the same ruling they affirmed the right of school districts to utlize their own discretion to avoid racial isolation.

From the majority ruling:

A compelling interest exists in avoiding racial isolation, an interest that a school district, in its discretion and expertise, may choose to pursue. Likewise, a district may consider it a compelling interest to achieve a diverse student population. Race may be one component of that diversity, but other demographic factors, plus special talents and needs, should also be considered. What the government is not permitted to do, absent a showing of necessity not made here, is to classify every student on the basis of race and to assign each of them to schools based on that classification.

Now, someone might choose to file a lawsuit, but under both Maryland statute and settled case law, they are very very unlikely to succeed and under both MCPS is within its rights to conduct and act on a boundary analysis as long as individual students are not assigned base on race (no racial quotas for admission) and as long as other factors such as FARMS status and proximity are also considered.

Not sure what your point is. A lot of lawsuits also created caselaw around Roe v Wade, and it was overturned.

Maybe its possible to challenge the local school district on the basis that it took race into consideration when drawing boundaries? At the pre-college level, boundaries are the same as "school admissions" - no difference at all. There's ton's of materials published on MCPS website that show statistics about the quantity of children's ethnicity and race at a particular school, as well as (as you point out) use it as the basis for making boundary decisions.

The Court's opinion employs broad language against racial preferences, reasoning that “[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

The way I read that is race cannot be a factor of decision-making, subject to very narrow exceptions?

What?! Those are not at all the same.

Are you saying that the MCPS CO and the BOE has never publicly stated / documented that it makes boundary decisions, in part, based upon race and ethnicity (ex. when it considers the demographics and ethnic / racial diversity of the school)? And that School Assignment / Boundary decision is not enforced by the School Locator by a resident's address? In order to change this school assignment, it's by individual student through a COSA.

How is that not discriminating based upon race?

“[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

They aren't selecting individual students based on race. They aren't saying, you are White so you can't go to this school. They are trying to balance demographics through their boundary decisions but don't control which specific students live in those areas and attend those schools.

Why is it necessary to "balance demographics" if all racial discrimination is eliminated? Aren't you proving the point?

I could be wrong, but I don't recall the Supreme Court making a distinction that their decision was solely limited to "selecting individual students based on race"? Can you provide the exact legal citation, page and paragraph please? Honestly, I feel you're making things up to suit your opinion?

For example, the next time MCPS and the BOE redraws school boundaries, what was the legally sustainable compelling interest and when will it end? Was it provide a benefit to some but not to others? Did it necessarily provide advantages to a new group at the expense of the former group? I might ask, when a family purchased a home in a school assignment whose boundaries changed, were they provided the option to remain in their old school assignment?

I might ask why you think that children of property owners should have an option to stay at the previously-assigned school while the children of renters should not?

When you buy a property, you buy the property; you don't buy the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boundaries are decided based on neighborhoods, not individuals. This isn’t selective admissions. The SC case isn’t going to be a driver in this boundary decision.

Correct. In case folks are curious, there is plenty of case law around this, most of which boils down to the fact that the State government can not substitute its judgement for that of a local governing body in matter of local policy unless that policy is capricious or illegal.

Plenty of folks have tested this theory, including recently in MCPS, and the outcome has been the same.

Now, when school districts have attempted to assign *individual* students on the basis of race (Parents Involved v. Seattle Schools), SCOTUS has struck that down, but in the same ruling they affirmed the right of school districts to utlize their own discretion to avoid racial isolation.

From the majority ruling:

A compelling interest exists in avoiding racial isolation, an interest that a school district, in its discretion and expertise, may choose to pursue. Likewise, a district may consider it a compelling interest to achieve a diverse student population. Race may be one component of that diversity, but other demographic factors, plus special talents and needs, should also be considered. What the government is not permitted to do, absent a showing of necessity not made here, is to classify every student on the basis of race and to assign each of them to schools based on that classification.

Now, someone might choose to file a lawsuit, but under both Maryland statute and settled case law, they are very very unlikely to succeed and under both MCPS is within its rights to conduct and act on a boundary analysis as long as individual students are not assigned base on race (no racial quotas for admission) and as long as other factors such as FARMS status and proximity are also considered.

Not sure what your point is. A lot of lawsuits also created caselaw around Roe v Wade, and it was overturned.

Maybe its possible to challenge the local school district on the basis that it took race into consideration when drawing boundaries? At the pre-college level, boundaries are the same as "school admissions" - no difference at all. There's ton's of materials published on MCPS website that show statistics about the quantity of children's ethnicity and race at a particular school, as well as (as you point out) use it as the basis for making boundary decisions.

The Court's opinion employs broad language against racial preferences, reasoning that “[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

The way I read that is race cannot be a factor of decision-making, subject to very narrow exceptions?

What?! Those are not at all the same.

Are you saying that the MCPS CO and the BOE has never publicly stated / documented that it makes boundary decisions, in part, based upon race and ethnicity (ex. when it considers the demographics and ethnic / racial diversity of the school)? And that School Assignment / Boundary decision is not enforced by the School Locator by a resident's address? In order to change this school assignment, it's by individual student through a COSA.

How is that not discriminating based upon race?

“[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

They aren't selecting individual students based on race. They aren't saying, you are White so you can't go to this school. They are trying to balance demographics through their boundary decisions but don't control which specific students live in those areas and attend those schools.

Why is it necessary to "balance demographics" if all racial discrimination is eliminated? Aren't you proving the point?

I could be wrong, but I don't recall the Supreme Court making a distinction that their decision was solely limited to "selecting individual students based on race"? Can you provide the exact legal citation, page and paragraph please? Honestly, I feel you're making things up to suit your opinion?

For example, the next time MCPS and the BOE redraws school boundaries, what was the legally sustainable compelling interest and when will it end? Was it provide a benefit to some but not to others? Did it necessarily provide advantages to a new group at the expense of the former group? I might ask, when a family purchased a home in a school assignment whose boundaries changed, were they provided the option to remain in their old school assignment?

Racial and/or ethnic groups are only one component of "demographics." They are more interested in looking at FARMS rates in the latest boundary studies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Why is it necessary to "balance demographics" if all racial discrimination is eliminated? Aren't you proving the point?

I could be wrong, but I don't recall the Supreme Court making a distinction that their decision was solely limited to "selecting individual students based on race"? Can you provide the exact legal citation, page and paragraph please? Honestly, I feel you're making things up to suit your opinion?

For example, the next time MCPS and the BOE redraws school boundaries, what was the legally sustainable compelling interest and when will it end? Was it provide a benefit to some but not to others? Did it necessarily provide advantages to a new group at the expense of the former group? I might ask, when a family purchased a home in a school assignment whose boundaries changed, were they provided the option to remain in their old school assignment?

All racial discrimination has been eliminated? Hallelujah!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boundaries are decided based on neighborhoods, not individuals. This isn’t selective admissions. The SC case isn’t going to be a driver in this boundary decision.

Correct. In case folks are curious, there is plenty of case law around this, most of which boils down to the fact that the State government can not substitute its judgement for that of a local governing body in matter of local policy unless that policy is capricious or illegal.

Plenty of folks have tested this theory, including recently in MCPS, and the outcome has been the same.

Now, when school districts have attempted to assign *individual* students on the basis of race (Parents Involved v. Seattle Schools), SCOTUS has struck that down, but in the same ruling they affirmed the right of school districts to utlize their own discretion to avoid racial isolation.

From the majority ruling:

A compelling interest exists in avoiding racial isolation, an interest that a school district, in its discretion and expertise, may choose to pursue. Likewise, a district may consider it a compelling interest to achieve a diverse student population. Race may be one component of that diversity, but other demographic factors, plus special talents and needs, should also be considered. What the government is not permitted to do, absent a showing of necessity not made here, is to classify every student on the basis of race and to assign each of them to schools based on that classification.

Now, someone might choose to file a lawsuit, but under both Maryland statute and settled case law, they are very very unlikely to succeed and under both MCPS is within its rights to conduct and act on a boundary analysis as long as individual students are not assigned base on race (no racial quotas for admission) and as long as other factors such as FARMS status and proximity are also considered.

Not sure what your point is. A lot of lawsuits also created caselaw around Roe v Wade, and it was overturned.

Maybe its possible to challenge the local school district on the basis that it took race into consideration when drawing boundaries? At the pre-college level, boundaries are the same as "school admissions" - no difference at all. There's ton's of materials published on MCPS website that show statistics about the quantity of children's ethnicity and race at a particular school, as well as (as you point out) use it as the basis for making boundary decisions.

The Court's opinion employs broad language against racial preferences, reasoning that “[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

The way I read that is race cannot be a factor of decision-making, subject to very narrow exceptions?

What?! Those are not at all the same.

Are you saying that the MCPS CO and the BOE has never publicly stated / documented that it makes boundary decisions, in part, based upon race and ethnicity (ex. when it considers the demographics and ethnic / racial diversity of the school)? And that School Assignment / Boundary decision is not enforced by the School Locator by a resident's address? In order to change this school assignment, it's by individual student through a COSA.

How is that not discriminating based upon race?

“[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

They aren't selecting individual students based on race. They aren't saying, you are White so you can't go to this school. They are trying to balance demographics through their boundary decisions but don't control which specific students live in those areas and attend those schools.

Why is it necessary to "balance demographics" if all racial discrimination is eliminated? Aren't you proving the point?

I could be wrong, but I don't recall the Supreme Court making a distinction that their decision was solely limited to "selecting individual students based on race"? Can you provide the exact legal citation, page and paragraph please? Honestly, I feel you're making things up to suit your opinion?

For example, the next time MCPS and the BOE redraws school boundaries, what was the legally sustainable compelling interest and when will it end? Was it provide a benefit to some but not to others? Did it necessarily provide advantages to a new group at the expense of the former group? I might ask, when a family purchased a home in a school assignment whose boundaries changed, were they provided the option to remain in their old school assignment?

Racial and/or ethnic groups are only one component of "demographics." They are more interested in looking at FARMS rates in the latest boundary studies.

My take.

If someone says 'historical' this or that, it's history. It's rear-view mirror. The question is whether a child, starting fresh, has the same educational opportunities as the child in the seat next to them; or whether something or someone will hold them back.

What bothers me is when children aren't equal or treated equally. That's an issue. Treat everyone equally and they're equal. Provide resources equally so all students are able to access them. Ensure supports are available for all students that need them. Select the best students so that children learn there is no favoritism. Draw boundaries by whether the bus route is shorter, or kids can walk to school safely without getting hit by a car. If a school doesn't have enough this-or-that, provide this-or-that.

But that also means no personal preferences, no set-asides, no pets, no favors. All children are equal and "Education is Blind" the way Justice should be. And when inequality is introduced, call it out. Don't stand by and let it happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boundaries are decided based on neighborhoods, not individuals. This isn’t selective admissions. The SC case isn’t going to be a driver in this boundary decision.

Correct. In case folks are curious, there is plenty of case law around this, most of which boils down to the fact that the State government can not substitute its judgement for that of a local governing body in matter of local policy unless that policy is capricious or illegal.

Plenty of folks have tested this theory, including recently in MCPS, and the outcome has been the same.

Now, when school districts have attempted to assign *individual* students on the basis of race (Parents Involved v. Seattle Schools), SCOTUS has struck that down, but in the same ruling they affirmed the right of school districts to utlize their own discretion to avoid racial isolation.

From the majority ruling:

A compelling interest exists in avoiding racial isolation, an interest that a school district, in its discretion and expertise, may choose to pursue. Likewise, a district may consider it a compelling interest to achieve a diverse student population. Race may be one component of that diversity, but other demographic factors, plus special talents and needs, should also be considered. What the government is not permitted to do, absent a showing of necessity not made here, is to classify every student on the basis of race and to assign each of them to schools based on that classification.

Now, someone might choose to file a lawsuit, but under both Maryland statute and settled case law, they are very very unlikely to succeed and under both MCPS is within its rights to conduct and act on a boundary analysis as long as individual students are not assigned base on race (no racial quotas for admission) and as long as other factors such as FARMS status and proximity are also considered.

Not sure what your point is. A lot of lawsuits also created caselaw around Roe v Wade, and it was overturned.

Maybe its possible to challenge the local school district on the basis that it took race into consideration when drawing boundaries? At the pre-college level, boundaries are the same as "school admissions" - no difference at all. There's ton's of materials published on MCPS website that show statistics about the quantity of children's ethnicity and race at a particular school, as well as (as you point out) use it as the basis for making boundary decisions.

The Court's opinion employs broad language against racial preferences, reasoning that “[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

The way I read that is race cannot be a factor of decision-making, subject to very narrow exceptions?

What?! Those are not at all the same.

Are you saying that the MCPS CO and the BOE has never publicly stated / documented that it makes boundary decisions, in part, based upon race and ethnicity (ex. when it considers the demographics and ethnic / racial diversity of the school)? And that School Assignment / Boundary decision is not enforced by the School Locator by a resident's address? In order to change this school assignment, it's by individual student through a COSA.

How is that not discriminating based upon race?

“[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

They aren't selecting individual students based on race. They aren't saying, you are White so you can't go to this school. They are trying to balance demographics through their boundary decisions but don't control which specific students live in those areas and attend those schools.

Why is it necessary to "balance demographics" if all racial discrimination is eliminated? Aren't you proving the point?

I could be wrong, but I don't recall the Supreme Court making a distinction that their decision was solely limited to "selecting individual students based on race"? Can you provide the exact legal citation, page and paragraph please? Honestly, I feel you're making things up to suit your opinion?

For example, the next time MCPS and the BOE redraws school boundaries, what was the legally sustainable compelling interest and when will it end? Was it provide a benefit to some but not to others? Did it necessarily provide advantages to a new group at the expense of the former group? I might ask, when a family purchased a home in a school assignment whose boundaries changed, were they provided the option to remain in their old school assignment?

Racial and/or ethnic groups are only one component of "demographics." They are more interested in looking at FARMS rates in the latest boundary studies.

My take.

If someone says 'historical' this or that, it's history. It's rear-view mirror. The question is whether a child, starting fresh, has the same educational opportunities as the child in the seat next to them; or whether something or someone will hold them back.

What bothers me is when children aren't equal or treated equally. That's an issue. Treat everyone equally and they're equal. Provide resources equally so all students are able to access them. Ensure supports are available for all students that need them. Select the best students so that children learn there is no favoritism. Draw boundaries by whether the bus route is shorter, or kids can walk to school safely without getting hit by a car. If a school doesn't have enough this-or-that, provide this-or-that.

But that also means no personal preferences, no set-asides, no pets, no favors. All children are equal and "Education is Blind" the way Justice should be. And when inequality is introduced, call it out. Don't stand by and let it happen.

"The past is never dead. It's not even past."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boundaries are decided based on neighborhoods, not individuals. This isn’t selective admissions. The SC case isn’t going to be a driver in this boundary decision.

Correct. In case folks are curious, there is plenty of case law around this, most of which boils down to the fact that the State government can not substitute its judgement for that of a local governing body in matter of local policy unless that policy is capricious or illegal.

Plenty of folks have tested this theory, including recently in MCPS, and the outcome has been the same.

Now, when school districts have attempted to assign *individual* students on the basis of race (Parents Involved v. Seattle Schools), SCOTUS has struck that down, but in the same ruling they affirmed the right of school districts to utlize their own discretion to avoid racial isolation.

From the majority ruling:

A compelling interest exists in avoiding racial isolation, an interest that a school district, in its discretion and expertise, may choose to pursue. Likewise, a district may consider it a compelling interest to achieve a diverse student population. Race may be one component of that diversity, but other demographic factors, plus special talents and needs, should also be considered. What the government is not permitted to do, absent a showing of necessity not made here, is to classify every student on the basis of race and to assign each of them to schools based on that classification.

Now, someone might choose to file a lawsuit, but under both Maryland statute and settled case law, they are very very unlikely to succeed and under both MCPS is within its rights to conduct and act on a boundary analysis as long as individual students are not assigned base on race (no racial quotas for admission) and as long as other factors such as FARMS status and proximity are also considered.

Not sure what your point is. A lot of lawsuits also created caselaw around Roe v Wade, and it was overturned.

Maybe its possible to challenge the local school district on the basis that it took race into consideration when drawing boundaries? At the pre-college level, boundaries are the same as "school admissions" - no difference at all. There's ton's of materials published on MCPS website that show statistics about the quantity of children's ethnicity and race at a particular school, as well as (as you point out) use it as the basis for making boundary decisions.

The Court's opinion employs broad language against racial preferences, reasoning that “[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

The way I read that is race cannot be a factor of decision-making, subject to very narrow exceptions?

What?! Those are not at all the same.

Are you saying that the MCPS CO and the BOE has never publicly stated / documented that it makes boundary decisions, in part, based upon race and ethnicity (ex. when it considers the demographics and ethnic / racial diversity of the school)? And that School Assignment / Boundary decision is not enforced by the School Locator by a resident's address? In order to change this school assignment, it's by individual student through a COSA.

How is that not discriminating based upon race?

“[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

They aren't selecting individual students based on race. They aren't saying, you are White so you can't go to this school. They are trying to balance demographics through their boundary decisions but don't control which specific students live in those areas and attend those schools.

Why is it necessary to "balance demographics" if all racial discrimination is eliminated? Aren't you proving the point?

I could be wrong, but I don't recall the Supreme Court making a distinction that their decision was solely limited to "selecting individual students based on race"? Can you provide the exact legal citation, page and paragraph please? Honestly, I feel you're making things up to suit your opinion?

For example, the next time MCPS and the BOE redraws school boundaries, what was the legally sustainable compelling interest and when will it end? Was it provide a benefit to some but not to others? Did it necessarily provide advantages to a new group at the expense of the former group? I might ask, when a family purchased a home in a school assignment whose boundaries changed, were they provided the option to remain in their old school assignment?

Racial and/or ethnic groups are only one component of "demographics." They are more interested in looking at FARMS rates in the latest boundary studies.

My take.

If someone says 'historical' this or that, it's history. It's rear-view mirror. The question is whether a child, starting fresh, has the same educational opportunities as the child in the seat next to them; or whether something or someone will hold them back.

What bothers me is when children aren't equal or treated equally. That's an issue. Treat everyone equally and they're equal. Provide resources equally so all students are able to access them. Ensure supports are available for all students that need them. Select the best students so that children learn there is no favoritism. Draw boundaries by whether the bus route is shorter, or kids can walk to school safely without getting hit by a car. If a school doesn't have enough this-or-that, provide this-or-that.

But that also means no personal preferences, no set-asides, no pets, no favors. All children are equal and "Education is Blind" the way Justice should be. And when inequality is introduced, call it out. Don't stand by and let it happen.

Boundary studies that take demographics into account aren't "special treatment" or "favors". Anyone with the money can move anywhere they want and get assigned to the school within that boundary. What is special treatment is putting all the rich neighborhoods together so that all the kids there have more resources (their parents can afford tutoring, therapy if they need it etc.) while all the low income kids, most of whom are smart and hardworking, share teachers with all the kids that can't get the help they need because their families don't have enough money (due to structural racism perpetuated by the government).

And as an FYI: It's not all history. Racism and racial discrimination is alive and kicking right now.

A new Northwestern study finds that teachers tend to complain more about Black students and identify their behavior as problematic compared to white students — even though researchers found no differences when the children observed in a laboratory setting designed to elicit typical vs. atypical patterns of misbehavior. The researchers’ work builds on the well-known fact that Black children are disproportionally excluded from preschool because of biases in disciplinary practices.

https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2021/september/study-finds-discipline-disparities-in-preschool-driven-by-racial-bias/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boundaries are decided based on neighborhoods, not individuals. This isn’t selective admissions. The SC case isn’t going to be a driver in this boundary decision.

Correct. In case folks are curious, there is plenty of case law around this, most of which boils down to the fact that the State government can not substitute its judgement for that of a local governing body in matter of local policy unless that policy is capricious or illegal.

Plenty of folks have tested this theory, including recently in MCPS, and the outcome has been the same.

Now, when school districts have attempted to assign *individual* students on the basis of race (Parents Involved v. Seattle Schools), SCOTUS has struck that down, but in the same ruling they affirmed the right of school districts to utlize their own discretion to avoid racial isolation.

From the majority ruling:

A compelling interest exists in avoiding racial isolation, an interest that a school district, in its discretion and expertise, may choose to pursue. Likewise, a district may consider it a compelling interest to achieve a diverse student population. Race may be one component of that diversity, but other demographic factors, plus special talents and needs, should also be considered. What the government is not permitted to do, absent a showing of necessity not made here, is to classify every student on the basis of race and to assign each of them to schools based on that classification.

Now, someone might choose to file a lawsuit, but under both Maryland statute and settled case law, they are very very unlikely to succeed and under both MCPS is within its rights to conduct and act on a boundary analysis as long as individual students are not assigned base on race (no racial quotas for admission) and as long as other factors such as FARMS status and proximity are also considered.

Not sure what your point is. A lot of lawsuits also created caselaw around Roe v Wade, and it was overturned.

Maybe its possible to challenge the local school district on the basis that it took race into consideration when drawing boundaries? At the pre-college level, boundaries are the same as "school admissions" - no difference at all. There's ton's of materials published on MCPS website that show statistics about the quantity of children's ethnicity and race at a particular school, as well as (as you point out) use it as the basis for making boundary decisions.

The Court's opinion employs broad language against racial preferences, reasoning that “[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

The way I read that is race cannot be a factor of decision-making, subject to very narrow exceptions?

What?! Those are not at all the same.

Are you saying that the MCPS CO and the BOE has never publicly stated / documented that it makes boundary decisions, in part, based upon race and ethnicity (ex. when it considers the demographics and ethnic / racial diversity of the school)? And that School Assignment / Boundary decision is not enforced by the School Locator by a resident's address? In order to change this school assignment, it's by individual student through a COSA.

How is that not discriminating based upon race?

“[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

They aren't selecting individual students based on race. They aren't saying, you are White so you can't go to this school. They are trying to balance demographics through their boundary decisions but don't control which specific students live in those areas and attend those schools.

Why is it necessary to "balance demographics" if all racial discrimination is eliminated? Aren't you proving the point?

I could be wrong, but I don't recall the Supreme Court making a distinction that their decision was solely limited to "selecting individual students based on race"? Can you provide the exact legal citation, page and paragraph please? Honestly, I feel you're making things up to suit your opinion?

For example, the next time MCPS and the BOE redraws school boundaries, what was the legally sustainable compelling interest and when will it end? Was it provide a benefit to some but not to others? Did it necessarily provide advantages to a new group at the expense of the former group? I might ask, when a family purchased a home in a school assignment whose boundaries changed, were they provided the option to remain in their old school assignment?

Racial and/or ethnic groups are only one component of "demographics." They are more interested in looking at FARMS rates in the latest boundary studies.

My take.

If someone says 'historical' this or that, it's history. It's rear-view mirror. The question is whether a child, starting fresh, has the same educational opportunities as the child in the seat next to them; or whether something or someone will hold them back.

What bothers me is when children aren't equal or treated equally. That's an issue. Treat everyone equally and they're equal. Provide resources equally so all students are able to access them. Ensure supports are available for all students that need them. Select the best students so that children learn there is no favoritism. Draw boundaries by whether the bus route is shorter, or kids can walk to school safely without getting hit by a car. If a school doesn't have enough this-or-that, provide this-or-that.

But that also means no personal preferences, no set-asides, no pets, no favors. All children are equal and "Education is Blind" the way Justice should be. And when inequality is introduced, call it out. Don't stand by and let it happen.

Who is supposed to "select the best students", for what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boundaries are decided based on neighborhoods, not individuals. This isn’t selective admissions. The SC case isn’t going to be a driver in this boundary decision.

Correct. In case folks are curious, there is plenty of case law around this, most of which boils down to the fact that the State government can not substitute its judgement for that of a local governing body in matter of local policy unless that policy is capricious or illegal.

Plenty of folks have tested this theory, including recently in MCPS, and the outcome has been the same.

Now, when school districts have attempted to assign *individual* students on the basis of race (Parents Involved v. Seattle Schools), SCOTUS has struck that down, but in the same ruling they affirmed the right of school districts to utlize their own discretion to avoid racial isolation.

From the majority ruling:

A compelling interest exists in avoiding racial isolation, an interest that a school district, in its discretion and expertise, may choose to pursue. Likewise, a district may consider it a compelling interest to achieve a diverse student population. Race may be one component of that diversity, but other demographic factors, plus special talents and needs, should also be considered. What the government is not permitted to do, absent a showing of necessity not made here, is to classify every student on the basis of race and to assign each of them to schools based on that classification.

Now, someone might choose to file a lawsuit, but under both Maryland statute and settled case law, they are very very unlikely to succeed and under both MCPS is within its rights to conduct and act on a boundary analysis as long as individual students are not assigned base on race (no racial quotas for admission) and as long as other factors such as FARMS status and proximity are also considered.

Not sure what your point is. A lot of lawsuits also created caselaw around Roe v Wade, and it was overturned.

Maybe its possible to challenge the local school district on the basis that it took race into consideration when drawing boundaries? At the pre-college level, boundaries are the same as "school admissions" - no difference at all. There's ton's of materials published on MCPS website that show statistics about the quantity of children's ethnicity and race at a particular school, as well as (as you point out) use it as the basis for making boundary decisions.

The Court's opinion employs broad language against racial preferences, reasoning that “[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

The way I read that is race cannot be a factor of decision-making, subject to very narrow exceptions?

What?! Those are not at all the same.

Are you saying that the MCPS CO and the BOE has never publicly stated / documented that it makes boundary decisions, in part, based upon race and ethnicity (ex. when it considers the demographics and ethnic / racial diversity of the school)? And that School Assignment / Boundary decision is not enforced by the School Locator by a resident's address? In order to change this school assignment, it's by individual student through a COSA.

How is that not discriminating based upon race?

“[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

They aren't selecting individual students based on race. They aren't saying, you are White so you can't go to this school. They are trying to balance demographics through their boundary decisions but don't control which specific students live in those areas and attend those schools.

Why is it necessary to "balance demographics" if all racial discrimination is eliminated? Aren't you proving the point?

I could be wrong, but I don't recall the Supreme Court making a distinction that their decision was solely limited to "selecting individual students based on race"? Can you provide the exact legal citation, page and paragraph please? Honestly, I feel you're making things up to suit your opinion?

For example, the next time MCPS and the BOE redraws school boundaries, what was the legally sustainable compelling interest and when will it end? Was it provide a benefit to some but not to others? Did it necessarily provide advantages to a new group at the expense of the former group? I might ask, when a family purchased a home in a school assignment whose boundaries changed, were they provided the option to remain in their old school assignment?

Racial and/or ethnic groups are only one component of "demographics." They are more interested in looking at FARMS rates in the latest boundary studies.

My take.

If someone says 'historical' this or that, it's history. It's rear-view mirror. The question is whether a child, starting fresh, has the same educational opportunities as the child in the seat next to them; or whether something or someone will hold them back.

What bothers me is when children aren't equal or treated equally. That's an issue. Treat everyone equally and they're equal. Provide resources equally so all students are able to access them. Ensure supports are available for all students that need them. Select the best students so that children learn there is no favoritism. Draw boundaries by whether the bus route is shorter, or kids can walk to school safely without getting hit by a car. If a school doesn't have enough this-or-that, provide this-or-that.

But that also means no personal preferences, no set-asides, no pets, no favors. All children are equal and "Education is Blind" the way Justice should be. And when inequality is introduced, call it out. Don't stand by and let it happen.

Who is supposed to "select the best students", for what?

Easy - does the kid qualify? If yes, then give that kid a slot.

See how easy that was? Done.

[Anonymous]

Who cares about some study by Northwestern.

McKnight spent a lot of time and energy on the racism study, yet I didn't hear the world was coming to an end?

Either all kids are equal, or they're not. If they're not, that's discrimination.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone have any idea on the timeline for the official boundary study? If the school opens in 2026, it must be almost time!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have any idea on the timeline for the official boundary study? If the school opens in 2026, it must be almost time!

"Early 2024-Fall 2024" is what the BOE-approved resolution said for the boundary study process, with the final hearings and voting happening in February-March 2025.

[Anonymous]

Whitman is unlikely to be impacted significantly due to its location. What will most likely happen there is some students may be shifted to BCC, and maybe---hard maybe, some students living closer to the mall could be redistricted to Woodward. I don't see anything else being possible, nor do I see the likelihood of any students being moved into Whitman from other schools