Initial boundary options for Woodward study area are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve read all 43 pages of this thread and am pretty disheartened. I have not seen one comment in favor of the more disruptive (to the current status quo) options say a single thing about the prospective quality of education improvement that the potential new Whitman and BCC students would receive. Instead, it’s all about sending Whitman and BCC bus loads of poor kids to somehow stick it to them? If those poor kids have to spend 45 minutes on a bus to (somehow?) upset the rich kids, great!

The kids being bussed from poor communities? Those are kids, not props in your vendetta fantasies. The rich kids you’re sticking it to? Also, just kids. The “foolish” communities that want to stay together? Communities of people (that just want to stay together).

Let’s make every school better and every kid’s life better. Let’s not use them as props against each other.

+10000000000000000000000

Kids, they are all kids worthy of respect and kindness

Huh? The neighborhood of kids you’re referring to already goes to BCC

Huh? All the kids in MCPS go to BCC?

The specific conversation around new Whitman students was about a neighborhood already zoned for BCC. Clearly the PP who felt disheartened didn’t realize the students were already at one of the two schools she mentioned as having a new higher quality of education.

All 43 pages aren’t about one neighborhood

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe what makes the most sense is to create more low income housing in the west part of the county then the farms rates at those schools will increase and it will be balanced.

I live in west county and agree. Diversify neighborhoods through housing policy and send kids to schools that minimize commuting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe what makes the most sense is to create more low income housing in the west part of the county then the farms rates at those schools will increase and it will be balanced.

I live in west county and agree. Diversify neighborhoods through housing policy and send kids to schools that minimize commuting

Agreed. But so far there is a ton of pushback on this. So it's left to MCPS to do the work the county can't manage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe what makes the most sense is to create more low income housing in the west part of the county then the farms rates at those schools will increase and it will be balanced.

I live in west county and agree. Diversify neighborhoods through housing policy and send kids to schools that minimize commuting

Agreed. But so far there is a ton of pushback on this. So it's left to MCPS to do the work the county can't manage.

What? No. That’s not the role of the schools.

[Anonymous]

How much would busing in Option 3 cost? Does increased traffic factor into decision making? Carbon emissions? Air pollution?

[Anonymous]

They need to take the Aspen Hill island and bus those kids to Whitman. Kennedy and Whitman are the disparate schools for demographics.

Wouldn’t be that much further than Woodward. Think more creatively MCPS. Be bold in what you are trying to do!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How much would busing in Option 3 cost? Does increased traffic factor into decision making? Carbon emissions? Air pollution?

Yes, in the past they have ruled out the options with the lengthiest bus routes due to cost and sustainability reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve read all 43 pages of this thread and am pretty disheartened. I have not seen one comment in favor of the more disruptive (to the current status quo) options say a single thing about the prospective quality of education improvement that the potential new Whitman and BCC students would receive. Instead, it’s all about sending Whitman and BCC bus loads of poor kids to somehow stick it to them? If those poor kids have to spend 45 minutes on a bus to (somehow?) upset the rich kids, great!

The kids being bussed from poor communities? Those are kids, not props in your vendetta fantasies. The rich kids you’re sticking it to? Also, just kids. The “foolish” communities that want to stay together? Communities of people (that just want to stay together).

Let’s make every school better and every kid’s life better. Let’s not use them as props against each other.

As a poor family. I sorry you don’t want our kids. Actually some of us aren’t that poor, we make different life choices. The best solution would be to open up another hs lower dcc.

Want to give you a big hug. Your kids are wanted. All kids are wanted. To be fair, from what I have read, I think everyone here welcomes diversity of income, culture and race. The problem is that no one of any income level wants to be bused away from their neighborhoods and rightfully so. Every school needs to be stronger and some underperforming schools need more money, support and staff. Whatever it takes, they should get it.

We are wanted as long as we are not in your schools or competition for your kids. No one wants their kids bussed but maybe this will give those kids opportunities they don’t have to get ahead. Our kids don’t have the same opportunities.

Unfortunately it’s a zero sum game and we don’t get do overs with our kids’ education. I’d support funding more opportunities for your kids through modestly higher property taxes but not at the expense of my own kids’ opportunities or busing them across town. Everyone wants the best opportunities for their children (which is why most of us moved to the best place we could afford) and are looking to preserve that as much as possible in an increasingly uncertain world.

Lower performing schools already get more funding. Some considerably more. MCPS has learned no amount of money will fix student performance. That's why they are considering these more radical measures. They want schools that are all appear equal so they can look at the average grades and call that a victory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve read all 43 pages of this thread and am pretty disheartened. I have not seen one comment in favor of the more disruptive (to the current status quo) options say a single thing about the prospective quality of education improvement that the potential new Whitman and BCC students would receive. Instead, it’s all about sending Whitman and BCC bus loads of poor kids to somehow stick it to them? If those poor kids have to spend 45 minutes on a bus to (somehow?) upset the rich kids, great!

The kids being bussed from poor communities? Those are kids, not props in your vendetta fantasies. The rich kids you’re sticking it to? Also, just kids. The “foolish” communities that want to stay together? Communities of people (that just want to stay together).

Let’s make every school better and every kid’s life better. Let’s not use them as props against each other.

As a poor family. I sorry you don’t want our kids. Actually some of us aren’t that poor, we make different life choices. The best solution would be to open up another hs lower dcc.

Want to give you a big hug. Your kids are wanted. All kids are wanted. To be fair, from what I have read, I think everyone here welcomes diversity of income, culture and race. The problem is that no one of any income level wants to be bused away from their neighborhoods and rightfully so. Every school needs to be stronger and some underperforming schools need more money, support and staff. Whatever it takes, they should get it.

We are wanted as long as we are not in your schools or competition for your kids. No one wants their kids bussed but maybe this will give those kids opportunities they don’t have to get ahead. Our kids don’t have the same opportunities.

Unfortunately it’s a zero sum game and we don’t get do overs with our kids’ education. I’d support funding more opportunities for your kids through modestly higher property taxes but not at the expense of my own kids’ opportunities or busing them across town. Everyone wants the best opportunities for their children (which is why most of us moved to the best place we could afford) and are looking to preserve that as much as possible in an increasingly uncertain world.

Wow we are all on the same team PP. it’s not a zero sum game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve read all 43 pages of this thread and am pretty disheartened. I have not seen one comment in favor of the more disruptive (to the current status quo) options say a single thing about the prospective quality of education improvement that the potential new Whitman and BCC students would receive. Instead, it’s all about sending Whitman and BCC bus loads of poor kids to somehow stick it to them? If those poor kids have to spend 45 minutes on a bus to (somehow?) upset the rich kids, great!

The kids being bussed from poor communities? Those are kids, not props in your vendetta fantasies. The rich kids you’re sticking it to? Also, just kids. The “foolish” communities that want to stay together? Communities of people (that just want to stay together).

Let’s make every school better and every kid’s life better. Let’s not use them as props against each other.

As a poor family. I sorry you don’t want our kids. Actually some of us aren’t that poor, we make different life choices. The best solution would be to open up another hs lower dcc.

Want to give you a big hug. Your kids are wanted. All kids are wanted. To be fair, from what I have read, I think everyone here welcomes diversity of income, culture and race. The problem is that no one of any income level wants to be bused away from their neighborhoods and rightfully so. Every school needs to be stronger and some underperforming schools need more money, support and staff. Whatever it takes, they should get it.

We are wanted as long as we are not in your schools or competition for your kids. No one wants their kids bussed but maybe this will give those kids opportunities they don’t have to get ahead. Our kids don’t have the same opportunities.

Unfortunately it’s a zero sum game and we don’t get do overs with our kids’ education. I’d support funding more opportunities for your kids through modestly higher property taxes but not at the expense of my own kids’ opportunities or busing them across town. Everyone wants the best opportunities for their children (which is why most of us moved to the best place we could afford) and are looking to preserve that as much as possible in an increasingly uncertain world.

Lower performing schools already get more funding. Some considerably more. MCPS has learned no amount of money will fix student performance. That's why they are considering these more radical measures. They want schools that are all appear equal so they can look at the average grades and call that a victory.

Not sure they get more funding at the high school level. I think we need better explanation of how MCPS uses Title 1 funds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe what makes the most sense is to create more low income housing in the west part of the county then the farms rates at those schools will increase and it will be balanced.

I live in west county and agree. Diversify neighborhoods through housing policy and send kids to schools that minimize commuting

Agreed. But so far there is a ton of pushback on this. So it's left to MCPS to do the work the county can't manage.

What? No. That’s not the role of the schools.

Well these choices impact the schools and the quality of education that students receive.

The most offensive thing about this thread is how people talk about low income kids (which we all know in this county are mainly Black and Latino but of course some are White and Asian), as though they are all the same. They are all disruptive, none of them want to learn, their families are all bad. The rich White and Asian (and some Latino) kids are well-behaved and come from good families. GMAFB.

Most low-income kids come from families that care about their kids' education. Most low-income kids want to learn. But they are disproportionately placed in schools with much higher percentages of kids that are disruptive, whose home circumstances prevent them from learning. And in these schools there are numerous kids that want and can do advanced classes, but the numbers aren't quite enough to have the variety of classes that are available in the wealthier schools. These are tangible ways that MCPS education is directly impacted by housing segregation. Not to mention, having less diversity at the wealthy schools is not great for those kids either. I attended one of those school many years ago. I very much wish it had been more diverse.

I don't know what the answer is. I very much sympathize with families (of all backgrounds) that do not want their kids to have a long bus ride to school. I would not want that for my kid. But let's stop pretending that segregation doesn't impact education or that low-income kids don't want to learn. That's a pretty offensive and blatantly incorrect assumption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe what makes the most sense is to create more low income housing in the west part of the county then the farms rates at those schools will increase and it will be balanced.

I live in west county and agree. Diversify neighborhoods through housing policy and send kids to schools that minimize commuting

Agreed. But so far there is a ton of pushback on this. So it's left to MCPS to do the work the county can't manage.

What? No. That’s not the role of the schools.

Well these choices impact the schools and the quality of education that students receive.

The most offensive thing about this thread is how people talk about low income kids (which we all know in this county are mainly Black and Latino but of course some are White and Asian), as though they are all the same. They are all disruptive, none of them want to learn, their families are all bad. The rich White and Asian (and some Latino) kids are well-behaved and come from good families. GMAFB.

Most low-income kids come from families that care about their kids' education. Most low-income kids want to learn. But they are disproportionately placed in schools with much higher percentages of kids that are disruptive, whose home circumstances prevent them from learning. And in these schools there are numerous kids that want and can do advanced classes, but the numbers aren't quite enough to have the variety of classes that are available in the wealthier schools. These are tangible ways that MCPS education is directly impacted by housing segregation. Not to mention, having less diversity at the wealthy schools is not great for those kids either. I attended one of those school many years ago. I very much wish it had been more diverse.

I don't know what the answer is. I very much sympathize with families (of all backgrounds) that do not want their kids to have a long bus ride to school. I would not want that for my kid. But let's stop pretending that segregation doesn't impact education or that low-income kids don't want to learn. That's a pretty offensive and blatantly incorrect assumption.

Maybe there should be a choice program for these kids who want to learn and don’t mind commuting then. Swapping them with other kids is not the answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe what makes the most sense is to create more low income housing in the west part of the county then the farms rates at those schools will increase and it will be balanced.

I live in west county and agree. Diversify neighborhoods through housing policy and send kids to schools that minimize commuting

Agreed. But so far there is a ton of pushback on this. So it's left to MCPS to do the work the county can't manage.

What? No. That’s not the role of the schools.

Well these choices impact the schools and the quality of education that students receive.

The most offensive thing about this thread is how people talk about low income kids (which we all know in this county are mainly Black and Latino but of course some are White and Asian), as though they are all the same. They are all disruptive, none of them want to learn, their families are all bad. The rich White and Asian (and some Latino) kids are well-behaved and come from good families. GMAFB.

Most low-income kids come from families that care about their kids' education. Most low-income kids want to learn. But they are disproportionately placed in schools with much higher percentages of kids that are disruptive, whose home circumstances prevent them from learning. And in these schools there are numerous kids that want and can do advanced classes, but the numbers aren't quite enough to have the variety of classes that are available in the wealthier schools. These are tangible ways that MCPS education is directly impacted by housing segregation. Not to mention, having less diversity at the wealthy schools is not great for those kids either. I attended one of those school many years ago. I very much wish it had been more diverse.

I don't know what the answer is. I very much sympathize with families (of all backgrounds) that do not want their kids to have a long bus ride to school. I would not want that for my kid. But let's stop pretending that segregation doesn't impact education or that low-income kids don't want to learn. That's a pretty offensive and blatantly incorrect assumption.

Fwiw I’ve read all pages of this thread and no one has stated anything like what you said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve read all 43 pages of this thread and am pretty disheartened. I have not seen one comment in favor of the more disruptive (to the current status quo) options say a single thing about the prospective quality of education improvement that the potential new Whitman and BCC students would receive. Instead, it’s all about sending Whitman and BCC bus loads of poor kids to somehow stick it to them? If those poor kids have to spend 45 minutes on a bus to (somehow?) upset the rich kids, great!

The kids being bussed from poor communities? Those are kids, not props in your vendetta fantasies. The rich kids you’re sticking it to? Also, just kids. The “foolish” communities that want to stay together? Communities of people (that just want to stay together).

Let’s make every school better and every kid’s life better. Let’s not use them as props against each other.

As a poor family. I sorry you don’t want our kids. Actually some of us aren’t that poor, we make different life choices. The best solution would be to open up another hs lower dcc.

Want to give you a big hug. Your kids are wanted. All kids are wanted. To be fair, from what I have read, I think everyone here welcomes diversity of income, culture and race. The problem is that no one of any income level wants to be bused away from their neighborhoods and rightfully so. Every school needs to be stronger and some underperforming schools need more money, support and staff. Whatever it takes, they should get it.

We are wanted as long as we are not in your schools or competition for your kids. No one wants their kids bussed but maybe this will give those kids opportunities they don’t have to get ahead. Our kids don’t have the same opportunities.

Unfortunately it’s a zero sum game and we don’t get do overs with our kids’ education. I’d support funding more opportunities for your kids through modestly higher property taxes but not at the expense of my own kids’ opportunities or busing them across town. Everyone wants the best opportunities for their children (which is why most of us moved to the best place we could afford) and are looking to preserve that as much as possible in an increasingly uncertain world.

Wow we are all on the same team PP. it’s not a zero sum game.

Are we? There's only one (or few) valedictorians and there's an implicit quota in how many kids from each school matriculate to a particular university. We're not in this together and that's been apparent since I set foot in this county or on DCUM and seen others asking questions about the "preferred preschool to get into the Ivy League" or "my DD has the following stats but they don't have a hook and therefore, didn't get into [insert highly selective university]", especially as our kids get closer and closer to high school. We're more like participants running the gauntlet in The Hunger Games where "may the odds ever be in your favor". This is the meritocracy that we find ourselves in and the system that each of us has to face (or ignore). So forgive me if I don't want my kids being bussed across town to a different school and not the neighborhood school I've already paid a high cost entry fee to get into.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe what makes the most sense is to create more low income housing in the west part of the county then the farms rates at those schools will increase and it will be balanced.

I live in west county and agree. Diversify neighborhoods through housing policy and send kids to schools that minimize commuting

Agreed. But so far there is a ton of pushback on this. So it's left to MCPS to do the work the county can't manage.

What? No. That’s not the role of the schools.

Well these choices impact the schools and the quality of education that students receive.

The most offensive thing about this thread is how people talk about low income kids (which we all know in this county are mainly Black and Latino but of course some are White and Asian), as though they are all the same. They are all disruptive, none of them want to learn, their families are all bad. The rich White and Asian (and some Latino) kids are well-behaved and come from good families. GMAFB.

Most low-income kids come from families that care about their kids' education. Most low-income kids want to learn. But they are disproportionately placed in schools with much higher percentages of kids that are disruptive, whose home circumstances prevent them from learning. And in these schools there are numerous kids that want and can do advanced classes, but the numbers aren't quite enough to have the variety of classes that are available in the wealthier schools. These are tangible ways that MCPS education is directly impacted by housing segregation. Not to mention, having less diversity at the wealthy schools is not great for those kids either. I attended one of those school many years ago. I very much wish it had been more diverse.

I don't know what the answer is. I very much sympathize with families (of all backgrounds) that do not want their kids to have a long bus ride to school. I would not want that for my kid. But let's stop pretending that segregation doesn't impact education or that low-income kids don't want to learn. That's a pretty offensive and blatantly incorrect assumption.

Fwiw I’ve read all pages of this thread and no one has stated anything like what you said.

I have definitely seen these attitudes in this thread and commonly expressed on DCUM