Boundary Study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you're a kid. Things aren't so black and white. Personally, we chose a diverse area of MoCo to raise our kids. I am for a boundary change because the current boundaries are outdated and unsustainable. BUT some parents bought houses that were priced higher because they are in a W neighborhood. They did it because they wanted to give their kids the best, and avoid problems they believe will result in more diverse schools. Now they have several hundreds of thousands of dollars to lose if the boundaries change. While they might support integration in principle, their finances are tied to the status quo. Kind of like how Thomas Jefferson's kids were slaves, and he advocated for slavery to end, all the while owning like 600 slaves and only freeing his kids and wife. The rest of his slaves, he sold. Sometimes doing the right thing is complicated. Moral of the story for you, as you grow up-- if you don't put yourself in a moral quandary to begin with, you won't have these problems. Figure out what kind of morals you have now and then live by them even when it sucks. Develop your character when you're young, because you will need it when you're older.

It's rude to say I am a kid because I'm not. So your dismissed and I dont care if they bought their house for higher prices. All schools need diversity and you can go somewhere else if you disagree. Point blank and the period.

DP

Can you explain why you think this?

I’m not White an my kids attend a non-W school. I don’t care at all how ‘diverse’ my kids school is. I want good teachers, a solid curriculum and small class sizes.

We are an interracial family and my kids get ‘diversity’ in our own family. I don’t care what color/race/religion my kids’ teachers are. I don’t care what color/race/religion my kids’ friends are.

Why does it matter?

It matters because kids tend to learn better in an environment of diversity than just one race. It exposes them to peers of different backgrounds also. Diversity enhances everyone's potential to be successful. Anything else?

Yah no kids learn anything in all those elite private schools and colleges who go on to run the world

Now Kennedy & Einstein High schools, those are genius mills

Einstein is a prettu good school soo.. your point??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live in the Churchill district and feel pretty safe. Our boundaries are just more W schools for the most part lol.

You live in the Montgomery County Public Schools district.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It all starts with the families people. If the family supports education, then the child will thrive. If the family just wants to sit back and coast and not support their kid, then the kid will fail. The reason kids in the W district succeed is because their families support them by getting involved with volunteering and supporting them with homework, etc. Sadly a lot of the lower income families either are overwhelmed with work schedules or are dealing with addiction problems. I've seen both situations.

"Families should be involved in their children's education" is not a policy, it's a desire.

Also, if the kid can't succeed at school unless the parent volunteers (with what? chaperoning? organizing staff appreciation lunches? selling wrapping paper?), then there's a problem with the education system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live in the Churchill district and feel pretty safe. Our boundaries are just more W schools for the most part lol.

You live in the Montgomery County Public Schools district.

Yes that is correct, but my house is in the Churchill cluster...right smack in the middle. I am safe. Our houses are selling fast and many Asians moving in. That also makes me feel safe, because Asians are generally serious about education and will never tolerate mediocrity. Of course, my kids are in private, so I am even better off than everyone around me, but want to make sure my house value continues to improve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It all starts with the families people. If the family supports education, then the child will thrive. If the family just wants to sit back and coast and not support their kid, then the kid will fail. The reason kids in the W district succeed is because their families support them by getting involved with volunteering and supporting them with homework, etc. Sadly a lot of the lower income families either are overwhelmed with work schedules or are dealing with addiction problems. I've seen both situations.

"Families should be involved in their children's education" is not a policy, it's a desire.

Also, if the kid can't succeed at school unless the parent volunteers (with what? chaperoning? organizing staff appreciation lunches? selling wrapping paper?), then there's a problem with the education system.

Here is a perfect example of the root problem. Blaming policy for kids failure in school. People, when will you wake up. Any kid with half a brain can succeed in school if he has people around him or her who are supporting and encouraging him or her. That is the way it has always worked. The only thing that has changed is that people have become complacent and expect to much from government, when all you have to do is work hard. A parent volunteering doesn't accomplish it, but the fact the parent volunteers is a sign that the parent cares. Too many parents in this world who don't care and want to blame the system for their poor parenting. Pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live in the Churchill district and feel pretty safe. Our boundaries are just more W schools for the most part lol.

You live in the Montgomery County Public Schools district.

Yes that is correct, but my house is in the Churchill cluster...right smack in the middle. I am safe. Our houses are selling fast and many Asians moving in. That also makes me feel safe, because Asians are generally serious about education and will never tolerate mediocrity. Of course, my kids are in private, so I am even better off than everyone around me, but want to make sure my house value continues to improve.

Troll grade B-.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It all starts with the families people. If the family supports education, then the child will thrive. If the family just wants to sit back and coast and not support their kid, then the kid will fail. The reason kids in the W district succeed is because their families support them by getting involved with volunteering and supporting them with homework, etc. Sadly a lot of the lower income families either are overwhelmed with work schedules or are dealing with addiction problems. I've seen both situations.

"Families should be involved in their children's education" is not a policy, it's a desire.

Also, if the kid can't succeed at school unless the parent volunteers (with what? chaperoning? organizing staff appreciation lunches? selling wrapping paper?), then there's a problem with the education system.

Here is a perfect example of the root problem. Blaming policy for kids failure in school. People, when will you wake up. Any kid with half a brain can succeed in school if he has people around him or her who are supporting and encouraging him or her. That is the way it has always worked. The only thing that has changed is that people have become complacent and expect to much from government, when all you have to do is work hard. A parent volunteering doesn't accomplish it, but the fact the parent volunteers is a sign that the parent cares. Too many parents in this world who don't care and want to blame the system for their poor parenting. Pathetic.

Kids fail in school because they think their parents don't care about education because their parents don't volunteer at school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It all starts with the families people. If the family supports education, then the child will thrive. If the family just wants to sit back and coast and not support their kid, then the kid will fail. The reason kids in the W district succeed is because their families support them by getting involved with volunteering and supporting them with homework, etc. Sadly a lot of the lower income families either are overwhelmed with work schedules or are dealing with addiction problems. I've seen both situations.

"Families should be involved in their children's education" is not a policy, it's a desire.

Also, if the kid can't succeed at school unless the parent volunteers (with what? chaperoning? organizing staff appreciation lunches? selling wrapping paper?), then there's a problem with the education system.

Here is a perfect example of the root problem. Blaming policy for kids failure in school. People, when will you wake up. Any kid with half a brain can succeed in school if he has people around him or her who are supporting and encouraging him or her. That is the way it has always worked. The only thing that has changed is that people have become complacent and expect to much from government, when all you have to do is work hard. A parent volunteering doesn't accomplish it, but the fact the parent volunteers is a sign that the parent cares. Too many parents in this world who don't care and want to blame the system for their poor parenting. Pathetic.

Kids fail in school because they think their parents don't care about education because their parents don't volunteer at school?

Yes. Kids who have parents who don't care, don't care. It's called role modeling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then, who is pushing for the bounary redrawing, the kids in Kennedy or the kids in Whitman?

Started by the former SMOB, Board of Education voted for it, since then picked up by Students against Gun Violence. And various people on this Board.

Anyone who says anything against it gets labeled a bigot/racist/elitist who only cares about property values and not kids.

The arguments against the boundary analysis are:

1. "My property values!"
2. "Bringing poor kids into my kid's school will harm my kid's education."
3. "I don't want my kid bused across the county!"

#1 is unrelated to education. #2 is empirically false (just ask those of us with kids at high schools where there are poor kids - to say nothing of those of us who have poor kids!) And nobody is proposing #3.

So what's left?

BS

This is actually a major argument for me.

My kids are currently being bused to a MS that is over two miles away. Despite the fact that there is a MS that is WALKING distance from us. It makes ZERO sense. If they want to re-zone everyone to the closest ES/MS/HS, I could get on board with that. It would save money and make sense. However, that doesn't seem to be the case from anything I've heard.

Based on school size and location, this is almost certainly completely impossible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Kids fail in school because they think their parents don't care about education because their parents don't volunteer at school?

Yes. Kids who have parents who don't care, don't care. It's called role modeling.

Huh. I don't volunteer at school beyond the occasional chaperoning (I volunteer plenty at other things). My mother might have been on the PTA one year. My father hardly ever even set foot in the schools. My kids would be surprised to hear that I don't care about education, and my parents' kids all have doctoral degrees from fancy-pants universities. What went wrong?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Kids fail in school because they think their parents don't care about education because their parents don't volunteer at school?

Yes. Kids who have parents who don't care, don't care. It's called role modeling.

Huh. I don't volunteer at school beyond the occasional chaperoning (I volunteer plenty at other things). My mother might have been on the PTA one year. My father hardly ever even set foot in the schools. My kids would be surprised to hear that I don't care about education, and my parents' kids all have doctoral degrees from fancy-pants universities. What went wrong?

Two options:

1. (more likely) you and your siblings attended a school system that actually taught you amd challenged you. I did, and my education resultes similarly to yours despite minimal input from my parents after first grade.
I believe that while true genius is rare, basic competence and professionalism can be taught to most.

2. (Less likely imho, but if true, somewhat more depressive for society as a whole) intelligence is fully genetically determined. Cue the Bell Curve etc

What is your best guess?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Kids fail in school because they think their parents don't care about education because their parents don't volunteer at school?

Yes. Kids who have parents who don't care, don't care. It's called role modeling.

Huh. I don't volunteer at school beyond the occasional chaperoning (I volunteer plenty at other things). My mother might have been on the PTA one year. My father hardly ever even set foot in the schools. My kids would be surprised to hear that I don't care about education, and my parents' kids all have doctoral degrees from fancy-pants universities. What went wrong?

Two options:

1. (more likely) you and your siblings attended a school system that actually taught you amd challenged you. I did, and my education resultes similarly to yours despite minimal input from my parents after first grade.
I believe that while true genius is rare, basic competence and professionalism can be taught to most.

2. (Less likely imho, but if true, somewhat more depressive for society as a whole) intelligence is fully genetically determined. Cue the Bell Curve etc

What is your best guess?

My best guess is that it is not actually necessary for parents to volunteer at school in order for their kids to know that the parents care about education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Kids fail in school because they think their parents don't care about education because their parents don't volunteer at school?

Yes. Kids who have parents who don't care, don't care. It's called role modeling.

Huh. I don't volunteer at school beyond the occasional chaperoning (I volunteer plenty at other things). My mother might have been on the PTA one year. My father hardly ever even set foot in the schools. My kids would be surprised to hear that I don't care about education, and my parents' kids all have doctoral degrees from fancy-pants universities. What went wrong?

Two options:

1. (more likely) you and your siblings attended a school system that actually taught you amd challenged you. I did, and my education resultes similarly to yours despite minimal input from my parents after first grade.
I believe that while true genius is rare, basic competence and professionalism can be taught to most

2. (Less likely imho, but if true, somewhat more depressive for society as a whole) intelligence is fully genetically determined. Cue the Bell Curve etc

What is your best guess?

My best guess is that it is not actually necessary for parents to volunteer at school in order for their kids to know that the parents care about education.

LOL, you people are so literal. I used volunteering as one example of being involved in your child's education. I don't volunteer much, but I am on top of my kids to do their homework and provide help when needed. My husband and I were involved in helping my son apply to colleges this past summer. He got into a very tippy top school. This is a result of parental involvement in education and does not necessarily mean you will be in the school as a volunteer. Don't be so dense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Kids fail in school because they think their parents don't care about education because their parents don't volunteer at school?

Yes. Kids who have parents who don't care, don't care. It's called role modeling.

Huh. I don't volunteer at school beyond the occasional chaperoning (I volunteer plenty at other things). My mother might have been on the PTA one year. My father hardly ever even set foot in the schools. My kids would be surprised to hear that I don't care about education, and my parents' kids all have doctoral degrees from fancy-pants universities. What went wrong?

Two options:

1. (more likely) you and your siblings attended a school system that actually taught you amd challenged you. I did, and my education resultes similarly to yours despite minimal input from my parents after first grade.
I believe that while true genius is rare, basic competence and professionalism can be taught to most

2. (Less likely imho, but if true, somewhat more depressive for society as a whole) intelligence is fully genetically determined. Cue the Bell Curve etc

What is your best guess?

My best guess is that it is not actually necessary for parents to volunteer at school in order for their kids to know that the parents care about education.

LOL, you people are so literal. I used volunteering as one example of being involved in your child's education. I don't volunteer much, but I am on top of my kids to do their homework and provide help when needed. My husband and I were involved in helping my son apply to colleges this past summer. He got into a very tippy top school. This is a result of parental involvement in education and does not necessarily mean you will be in the school as a volunteer. Don't be so dense.

I will add, this is a quote from my previous post. Please...a little reading comprehension goes a long way. "The only thing that has changed is that people have become complacent and expect to much from government, when all you have to do is work hard. A parent volunteering doesn't accomplish it, but the fact the parent volunteers is a sign that the parent cares. Too many parents in this world who don't care and want to blame the system for their poor parenting."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

LOL, you people are so literal. I used volunteering as one example of being involved in your child's education. I don't volunteer much, but I am on top of my kids to do their homework and provide help when needed. My husband and I were involved in helping my son apply to colleges this past summer. He got into a very tippy top school. This is a result of parental involvement in education and does not necessarily mean you will be in the school as a volunteer. Don't be so dense.

Parents like to tell themselves that you can raise kids on the input-output model, but it really doesn't work that way.