Reply to Sign Petition Asking for Boundaries Now, Programs Later

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Sign Petition Asking for Boundaries Now, Programs Later"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Can someone please explain how the regional program model restricts meaningful boundary adjustments? I'm not sure I'm following that line of argument. Thanks.[/quote]

I think (grain of salt there) that the regional program relies on treating all regions the same, which means ending the consortia.  The consortia lead to much larger school-to-school commutes than the regions would, such that they lead to measurable impacts on utilization.  So the consortia are really the sticking point here.  I think it's a path forward to say "hey we are ending the consortia, period, and adopting new boundaries.  We can wait a year to figure out the regional programs."  But the issue is more that the consortia and the regional model is tied bc the consortia people are mad that something is being taken away and nothing else is being provided.[/quote]

OK, but I still don't see how the regional lines are restricting boundary adjustments. The regional map they've been sharing is based on the current boundaries, yes, but once the new boundaries are approved, the regional map will change accordingly.[/quote]

ah, I now see what you are saying.  I don't really know.  Is that what MCPS is saying?[/quote]

The OP is saying "We hope to avoid prematurely locking in regional program boundaries that restrict meaningful boundary adjustments, to ensure the process is transparent, data-driven, and inclusive of historically underserved communities." I'm looking for more information on how they are being prematurely locked in.[/quote]

This is why all of this doesn't make any sense. Originally, they were working on boundaries. Then, all of a sudden they drew the finalized regional maps. I've asked the same question -- why can't they finish the boundaries, then make the regions based on the boundaries. But no, for some reason, they made the regions, and now claim that they cannot adjust boundaries because the regional boundaries are decided.

PP wrote" "The regional map they've been sharing is based on the current boundaries, yes, but once the new boundaries are approved, the regional map will change accordingly." They have consistently said that the regions are decided and then boundaries must fit within them. So then, that limits the boundaries![/quote]

But that isn't the case. For example, in the current options, Kemp Mill ES is reassigned from Northwood (region 1) to Kennedy (region 3). If that becomes the new assignment, then the region 1/3 boundary line would shift.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics