Reply to Sign Petition Asking for Boundaries Now, Programs Later

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Sign Petition Asking for Boundaries Now, Programs Later"

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]I am an MCPS teacher and want to highlight here that MCEA just put out a press release opposing MCPS Region Model.

MCEA is concerned that the region model is proceeding too quickly and is not informed by sufficient stakeholder input. More information here: https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/11/06/mcea-opposes-mcps-region-model/

For those still on the fence about signing the petition to MCPS requesting that they delay the regional program model rollout, and instead focus on the boundaries please consider signing the petition in support of your teachers.

The petition mentions DCC, but the primary ask (pause regional rollout) is important for our entire county.

https://form.jotform.com/onestepatatime/fairboundaries
[/quote]

The dcc petition is not written in a way that everyone will support it.  [/quote]

Which quotes from the petition do you find off-putting? If you can't give us specific quotes I think we can assume you just have a beef with the DCC.[/quote]

I'm not the PP you're responding to, but my issue with the petition is that it asks MCPS to separate the boundary studies from the academic program analysis, but then the feedback/concerns on current proposals conflates the two. There was no petition after the first round of boundary options, even though Whitman and the wealthier side of B-CC (Westland MS) were also largely untouched. If the issue is with the program analysis, focus on that! I'm all for scrapping that altogether. I think school choice (incl. DCC) is inequitable in that it tends to pull the families with the most resources away from their neighborhood schools. [/quote]

I honestly can't follow this. It sounds like you have a bizarre grudge about the DCC's reaction to the boundary study and its timing. Just be straight with us - you like the second round options and won't sign a petition that questions them.[/quote]

I do like the second round of options because it doesn't split Silver Creek MS. My kids are at RHPS, which splits into CCES and NCC in 3rd grade. Pretty much all of the first set of options then further split CCES and NCC for middle school, so my kids would have two split articulations by the time they are in 6th grade. I'm glad the second round of options doesn't do that and I don't think that has anything to do with the academic programs study. [/quote]

You aren't in the DCC and assuming you are at BCC, which has the course offerings your kids need.  Forcing kids in the DCC to their home schools, which do not have the classes they need, is inequitable.  If your kids went to a DCC school, you would be using the lottery to move your kids to a school that had what they needed.  Let's be real.  Instead, you moved.

Split articulation is really bizzare to me but its not a big deal as friend groups change in MS and HS.[/quote]

My point is that you are conflating the boundary study and academic program study while saying you want MCPS to separate the two. I agree that all schools should have the same offerings, in which case it shouldn't matter if Whitman and B-CC borders don't change. Focus on that and you'd have a lot more signatures for the petition. BTW, the person who started this petition and has been all over local media lives in the DCC but has her kids in the B-CC cluster through the elementary school Spanish immersion program. I'm not the one using the lottery to get my kids out of the DCC! [/quote]

Wow. That’s a bombshell. [/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