Reply to Wootton or Churchill or RM

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Wootton or Churchill or RM"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]https://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/B894FY5336CA/$file/20190108%20Rev%20Boundary%20Assessment%20Study-FAA.pdf

[quote]WHEREAS,  There  is  significant  evidence  that  greater  racial  and  socioeconomic  diversity  in  schools provides academic and social/emotional benefits for all students; and

WHEREAS,  Policy  FAA,  Educational  Facilities  Planning,now  permits  the  superintendent  and Board of Education to consider boundary options that involve not only schools within a high school cluster, but also other adjacent schools to alleviate the need for additions and portable classrooms;

and

WHEREAS,  The  Board  of  Education  revised  Policy  FAA, Educational  Facilities  Planning, to  consider  various  factors  when  changing  school  boundaries,  particularly  developing  options  that maximize facility utilization and strive to create a diverse student body; now therefore be it  [/quote]

sounds to me like BOE is stressing diversity, and Churchill could have its boundary redrawn along with RM.[/quote]

Nope, diversity has always been a criteria when redrawing boundaries. They just added it on the BOE docs this time specifically the word, "strive" to ensure that it is always considered whenever possible. The fact is, it is only one of four factors and they all have equal weight. Diversity, geography, facility utilization, stability of school assignment. Received all this information during the Seneca Valley, Clarksburg, NW boundary study meeting.[/quote]

DP. I heard that too.[/quote]
Why would they call this one tenant out over the others, and "strive" to achieve this?  Yes, "whenever possible".. which, as I stated, means not sending kids from one side of the county to another but, as indicated on the BOE docs, looking at *neighboring* clusters to achieve balance, both in overcrowding and diversity.  Churchill is a neighboring cluster to RM.

Of course BOE isn't going to state publicly that they want to focus on "diversity" more. People from wealthier clusters would be up in arms, just like BOE wouldn't say publicly that changing the magnet criteria wasn't about "diversity" (even though that's what Metis report focused on) it was about "peer cohort".

Whatever findings come out of the boundary report, you can be sure there will be focus on "diversity" just as the Metis report did, and just as the Metis report precipitated changes to the magnet acceptance, this boundary report will produce some changes to the wealthier clusters.[/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