Reply to Taylor's Feb Rec for Crown Boundary Study

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Taylor's Feb Rec for Crown Boundary Study"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]great thoughtful perspective today from Brow Station ES. Basically Brown Station and Northwest High School are getting screwed by option H. https://moderatelymoco.com/brown-station-community-raises-segregation-concerns-over-mcps-boundary-proposal/ Increased FARMs, getting cut off from special programs, bussing longer distances. MCPS is segregating black and brown kids to Germantown. [/quote]

The same way Darnestown got segregated to Northwest despite being so close to QO? And now Poolesville? Spare me.[/quote]

Yeah I feel for Brown Station but I think this is really more of an issue of real segregation in neighborhoods than of MCPS manufacturing school based segregation. Diamond and Darnestown are both closer to QO than Brown Station is, so it’s certainly a bit odd that Darnestown and Diamond have been districted to Northwest and Brown Station to QO.

And the Clemente thing isn’t about concentrating lower income students - in fact Clemente’s FARMS % is going slightly down now - but is rather because of the new regional programming, where Brown Station needs to attend a region 6 MS and not a region 5 one. 
[/quote]

I’ll give you Darnestown and, of course, housing segregation is at the root of so much of this. But Diamond and Brown Station are literally walking distance from each other and, even though Diamond is slightly closer distance-wise, drive times are nearly identical for at least some of the communities given how Diamond is tucked back in a neighborhood and Brown Station is on a main road. Half of Diamond is at Northwest now and the FARMS rate significantly decreases at QO and significantly increases at Northwest (and not solely due to the Brown Station move). I tend to agree with you that MCPS isn’t deliberately trying to concentrate poverty - I lean more toward thinking this is coming from their fixation on contiguous boundaries and what looks good on a map. But given the move is basically neutral on two of the FAA factors (proximity and utilization) and clear net negative on the other two (demographic balance and stability) this feels like dereliction of duty. [/quote]

+1 on the fixation of contiguous boundaries and what looks good on a map

In many cases, it seems they don’t even know the geography that well and haven’t driven or walked it themselves so its reliance on the map. Which is where community input or other ways of gathering “on the ground” perspective is good. Or, that BOE members elected to represent their people would actually know their turf and represent their people…

This said as a pro H person who is disappointed by some of the specifics of ES and MS articulation with H. [/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