Reply to Option H is permanent and the old Wootton HS campus will be closed for good?

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Option H is permanent and the old Wootton HS campus will be closed for good?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It has become clear that many (not all) anti-H posters on this thread are concerned about this plan not because of walkability, or making the most fiscally prudent choice for ALL of MCPS at this moment..but rather the potential for a change in the population of students that their kids will go to school with.

In this instance, the population would shift because the geographic location of the building would shift...but really they are arguing for segregation.  I notice that nobody responded earlier when I asked if there would be similar opposition if a large low-income housing project went in close to the current building.  The "results" that some posters seem concerned about are the same.  I wonder if people would be this vocal if the county's proposal was to build more housing.[/quote]

Well, Scotland is low income housing and it’s in the heart of Potomac. Nobody has a problem with it. [/quote]

PP here.  Help me understand how this connects to my question please?[/quote]

Did you even look it up? You seem completely unaware about the makeup of the clusters that you have no problem criticizing the parents of. There is an entire set of low income housing that goes to Churchill and middle school with at least part of the Wootton cluster. Low income housing is what it is. [b]I think it’s very different than shipping kids away from their home area to help diversify other areas[/b]. So to answer your question-I would care a lot less about building a low income housing area than I would about H.[/quote]

Please see my prior response.  I understand there is a variety of housing that affects the CURRENT population.  I'm suggesting a scenario in which the housing changes to the extent that the population shifts to something more like that which people expect in Option H.

Additionally, your bolded makes an assumption that the intent of Option H is diversification.  To my knowledge that is stated nowhere, and it is about fiscal management and enrollment planning.  In any event, my question is about whether that "diversification" were to happen without "shipping kids" it appears that many would still object, based on the concerns/"harms" they are raising.[/quote]

No it’s not the same. If someone moves to the cluster-they go to the schools within that cluster. As much as you are trying to make this sound the same it’s just not. We are being moved OUT of our community into someone else’s community. That will never be the same as people who legitimately move into a cluster whether through low income housing or not.

And as for your other point-they would never say they are doing it for the diversification. Even though it is exactly why. MCPS will come up with 10 other reasons why they are doing it to hide the real reason every time.

[b]And again-the point still stands that you seem willfully uninformed of the area in question so i’m not even sure why you feel so interested in this discussion anyway[/b]. [/quote]

Your last line personal attack is unnecessary and irrelevant.

People are asserting that Option H is bad BECAUSE it will lower the aggregate test scores of the school.  That is the harm.  I am addressing that particular assertion, not all.
If that is the harm, then people should object to any change in demographics that they think will also likely affect the aggregate test scores.[/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