Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)
Reply to "Initial boundary options for Woodward study area are up "
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I know option 3 = bad, but which option is good?[/quote] I'd say option 2 -- good utilization and reasonable looking distances/clusters. [/quote] And split elementary articulations for at least 11 schools, mostly from the DCC. No thanks. This is why there should be at least 2 more options currently on the table, offering blends. Going with 4, each of which is heavily weighted towards a single priority, doesn't allow us to see what more balanced configurations might bring. That will tip public opinion toward a best-of-the-bad one such as 2, typically expressed in the survey without nuance (most won't take the time to provide such), which inappropriately will result in a conclusion that things like continuity or diversity don't matter and, then, to a rather suboptimal decision.[/quote] This is an excellent point. [/quote] Yes. This is why our reactions and demands of the Board need to be "these are poorly done options, we need new ones that balance multiple factors" and not "option 3 (or whatever option you personally hate) sucks.". We can and should unify immediately to demand reasonable, balanced options moving forward, regardless of our differences of opinion on which of these options we like best. [/quote] Balanced how? Equal FARMS rate in each school? Same % or walkers in each school? Shortest and fewest bus rides? Same % utilization and class size in each school? Those are competing priorities. [/quote] That was the point. By presenting 4 options, each of which overweights one of those four priorities, none of the options presented is balanced...among the 4 priorities. We need a few options that are [i]better[/i] balanced. The way it is, each of the 4 is flawed enough that community feedback is likely to emphasize flaws proximate to that particular option, leading to a tyrrany-of-small-decisions suboptimal set of conclusions.[/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