Reply to Proposed New Regions

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Proposed New Regions"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Just noodling...

Will W students have more or fewer magnet opportunities?  It would seem if Blair retains the SMCS magnet, there would be more slots available there, with its only drawing from 1/3 to 1/4 of the population it currently serves.  It would be no further away. [b] It would seem that the switch of IB available from RM to B-CC would, likewise, offer more seats to Whitman for a similar reason while being considerably closer.[/b]

Are Whitman students heavily favoring Poolesville Ecology over their own Social Justice and worrying about the loss of that specific opportunity?  (Might these sunset, in any case?)

Am I missing something about the above?  Or is it just that those in the Whitman-zoned area are hoping that, with enough complaint, the move to regionalization will result in placement of one or more of the highest-academic-caliber magnets at the school within that region which consistently has demonstrated the highest academic results from their in-bounds population?  If that is an option, does it present a solution that better meets overall need across the region, or does it do the opposite?[/quote]
RM and BCC are not in the same region, so your point is moot.

Whitman won't get a program.   The program will be placed in the lower performing schools. That's why it's called  a "magnet".[/quote]

Each school will have 1-2 programs.[/quote]

5 schools each hosting 1-2 programs and offer bus routes to the rest of 4 schools in the same region. That’s like at least 10-20 buses added each region and then multiplies by 6.
[/quote]

Yeah it’s insanity. They should add zero special new programs to schools like Whitman, Churchill, WJ, Wootton, BCC, even QO and Northwest. Instead they should have 2 schools per region housing programs (and perhaps just 3 maybe 4 regions). I’d go as far as saying that Crown and Woodward to a lesser extent should house a significant number of programs. Reduces number of busses, helps get kids going to a fewer number of schools causing less traffic.[/quote]

I venture to say you have no idea how transportation is working now and how many programs exist.  There are central stops, buses drop off/pickup at more than one school.[/quote]
And the new model will create more bus routes. [/quote]

Maybe. But if the DCC and NEC are ending that will reduce the number of bus routes too.[/quote]

And boundary option 3 for Woodward will increase bus routes.

Overall it would have been nice if anyone thought about transportation times and costs, and the overlap of the boundary and program analyses.[/quote]

This was brought up in this meeting with a Julie Yang and a Chevy Chase group. https://youtu.be/sBTZM3Au00w?si=P7VUd7omsTuV8fnb Questions start about 17 minutes in.

I was struck by the comments from a mom that did work with transportation on the Silver Creek boundary study. Transportation said it absolutely was not feasible to transport kids east/west yet that’s all over the boundary and program changes.

[/quote]

Thanks for posting that meeting link. Very helpful to watch.[/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