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 "Option B Alternate - Adding extra ES to WJ? "
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]From the realtor lobby at Luxmanor -Farmland and a person who will have no children impacted by this (based on the signatory email at the end). Lots of words and outrage, little substance. The recent testimony: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DREJJ84D5DF9/$file/LCA%20Testimony.pdf It says they are OK with original B, which had Woodward at 73% utilization and Wheaton at 96% utilization. The VM switch to Woodward ameliorated that and balanced that one ...talk about equity/parity : https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oArFYgC_oD8I798hzzyyo3JzwyJPyT4h/view It also says they are OK with original option F, which had Woodward at 91% utilization and WJ at 78%. Nearly identical to what Taylor proposed. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ibX2JMWG2hzFUVO3kBcupsvN4SK45yOB/view So it really boils down to having about an extra 5% poor kids at Woodward that causes the outrage. And the color of their skin.[/quote] Thank you for sharing. I just read the letter. I wonder if you think there is any validity to balancing FARMS rates and/or utilization between the schools? Like, if it did not offend you personally could you see the reason to support it. And if so, do you also agree that this particular lobby of people likely saw the need to point to existing options in the course of making their point? If not, I would love to hear why.[/quote] Different poster. While not a panacea, reducing intense concentration of poverty in specific school is generally supported for improving educational opportunities. However, I would not describe Woodward as an intense concentration of poverty. Research suggests that focusing on creating better resourced, high quality schools in all neighborhoods (Wheaton, Kennedy, Woodward, WJ, all MCPS), may be more effective than simply reassigning students to achieve specific demographic balance. Consider focus on the program analysis which the Woodward families are ignoring. Shifting student populations (eg, VM parents say they like the Hispanic majority in their current schools like Wheaton and they wouldn’t get that at WJ, but do with Woodward) is complex but feel compelling.[/quote] All of this makes sense to me and I personally think the needs of Hispanic majority schools should be considered in this process. All kids in our county deserve a great education in a supportive community. I also think 1 in 3 FARMs is a significant amount of kids and I would not leap to a conclusion that this has *only* positive ramifications for Woodward. I think it is reasonable for communities to question whether a large shift in student body demographics (or programs) will impact their kids. Finally, if people participated in this comment process in good faith with an understanding that they will need to compromise with other communities, I can also understand being upset at an un-vetted change being made in the 11th hour. [/quote] 1 in 3 FARMS is low for MCPS high schools. Only 9 of 25 high schools are under 30%, with 8 above 50%, and 8 between 30 and 50. 11/40 middle schools are under 30%, with 17 above 50%. https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/siteassets/district/departments/food-and-nutrition/meal-payments/mcpsofficialfarms2025-2026.pdf[/quote] You are speaking in relative terms, which is not relevant to the point being made. [/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