Anonymous
12/08/2025 23:29
Subject: Crown boundary study Option H
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Honestly, MCPS could do a mini-renovation at Wootton to fix many of the more egregious issues. If there are classrooms that are problematic, then temporary classrooms for a few years is the answer until permanent fixes can be made. Based on what a PP indicated about the age of all of the other high schools in the area, Wootton doesn't seem like an outlier at all.
The idea that Wootton has been crumbling for years (more than a decade), yet MCPS now can't find the money to do a full scale renovation until 2035 appears intentional. The Wootton -> Crown -> rename Crown to Wootton seems like a transparent attempt to transplant all of the high-achieving kids from Wootton to Crown (by dangling a new building), then steal the reputation of Wootton as a high-achieving school. FYI, Wootton gained significant national recognition in the early 2000s, particularly when it was named a National Blue Ribbon School of Excellence in 2002.
Option H - MCPS creates a high-achieving school without the 20-30 years that it takes to develop one organically. Pats itself on the back for meeting its goals....
I mean, it would basically be the same school in a different location/building? I don't see how it would be stealing another school's reputation-- how do you steal from yourself?
Nope. The new Wootton would be a mix of the old Wootton and the kids that would have gone to Crown.
Okay, but how is that "stealing a reputation'? It's just, like, a relatively minor boundary change and a school building change. When those things happen at other schools people don't act like the school is no longer the same school, so why now? I mean, granted, those things don't usually happen at the same time, but I still don't really follow why it's that big a deal...
Anonymous
12/08/2025 22:52
Subject: Crown boundary study Option H
Anonymous wrote:Do their projections include the development that is supposed to happen along Research Blvd? That would be a route many Wootton kids would take to Crown. Before these new options came along, I was wondering if the future Research Blvd students were being into the boundary study and if so, which schools...
Where is the new development on Research Blvd?
Looking at the high school large map for option H, it looks like everything on Research blvd between Shady Grove Road and 28 is zoned for Richard Montgomery in yellow.
It looks like the section of Research Blvd to the west of Shady Grove Road belongs to Crown.
Anonymous
12/08/2025 22:27
Subject: Re:Crown boundary study Option H
Anonymous wrote:The Crown/Decoverly side is definitely a more affluent area in terms of those that attend Rosemont so I am not surprised it doesn't move the needle much in terms of numbers/Farms. There are not a ton of Rosemont students on the Crown side. More come from the other side of 270/Frederick and those Farm rates are higher. The Rio side goes to Fallsmead and the lines to get on that bus are huge. I think more kids go there then to Rosemont. Also, looking around the Crown area in the Spring, I see many more "proud graduate of Wootton" signs as well as those for private high schools. I don't recall ever seeing one for Gaithersburg HS.
I sort of question the effects tables.
For Option H, it's saying moving the Crown/Decloverly/Rio area that currently goes to Rosemont to the new Crown School won't really change Gaithersburg HS's numbers:
2031-32 projection: 2497->2456
FARMS: 49.6 pct->49.5 pct
EML: 27.8 pct->28.5 pct
Then for Wootton/Crown absorbing that area:
2031-32 projection: 1937->1999
FARMS: 14 pct->14.8 pct
EML: 3.1 pct->3.3 pct
Are there really that little amount of students in the Crown/Decloverly/Rio area?
Then the current Rosemont boundaries looks like it's a couple of islands and the school has 62.4 percent FARMS.
If the resulting FARMS numbers don't change that much for the high schools, are they pulling from the nonFARMS population of Rosemont to send them to the new Crown school? Or are the numbers so small that they just get absorbed by the larger high school numbers/population? According to mdreportcard at Rosemont 354 out of the 567 students are eligible for FARMS.
Rio students go to Fallsmead then Frost then Wootton. So we are talking only about Crown students here. Yes, moving the school there means that there will be very few walkers, more bussing, carpool etc and extra congestion in the that area.
Anonymous
12/08/2025 21:32
Subject: Re:Crown boundary study Option H
The Crown/Decoverly side is definitely a more affluent area in terms of those that attend Rosemont so I am not surprised it doesn't move the needle much in terms of numbers/Farms. There are not a ton of Rosemont students on the Crown side. More come from the other side of 270/Frederick and those Farm rates are higher. The Rio side goes to Fallsmead and the lines to get on that bus are huge. I think more kids go there then to Rosemont. Also, looking around the Crown area in the Spring, I see many more "proud graduate of Wootton" signs as well as those for private high schools. I don't recall ever seeing one for Gaithersburg HS.
I sort of question the effects tables.
For Option H, it's saying moving the Crown/Decloverly/Rio area that currently goes to Rosemont to the new Crown School won't really change Gaithersburg HS's numbers:
2031-32 projection: 2497->2456
FARMS: 49.6 pct->49.5 pct
EML: 27.8 pct->28.5 pct
Then for Wootton/Crown absorbing that area:
2031-32 projection: 1937->1999
FARMS: 14 pct->14.8 pct
EML: 3.1 pct->3.3 pct
Are there really that little amount of students in the Crown/Decloverly/Rio area?
Then the current Rosemont boundaries looks like it's a couple of islands and the school has 62.4 percent FARMS.
If the resulting FARMS numbers don't change that much for the high schools, are they pulling from the nonFARMS population of Rosemont to send them to the new Crown school? Or are the numbers so small that they just get absorbed by the larger high school numbers/population? According to mdreportcard at Rosemont 354 out of the 567 students are eligible for FARMS.
I sort of question the effects tables.
For Option H, it's saying moving the Crown/Decloverly/Rio area that currently goes to Rosemont to the new Crown School won't really change Gaithersburg HS's numbers:
2031-32 projection: 2497->2456
FARMS: 49.6 pct->49.5 pct
EML: 27.8 pct->28.5 pct
Then for Wootton/Crown absorbing that area:
2031-32 projection: 1937->1999
FARMS: 14 pct->14.8 pct
EML: 3.1 pct->3.3 pct
Are there really that little amount of students in the Crown/Decloverly/Rio area?
Then the current Rosemont boundaries looks like it's a couple of islands and the school has 62.4 percent FARMS.
If the resulting FARMS numbers don't change that much for the high schools, are they pulling from the nonFARMS population of Rosemont to send them to the new Crown school? Or are the numbers so small that they just get absorbed by the larger high school numbers/population? According to mdreportcard at Rosemont 354 out of the 567 students are eligible for FARMS.
Anonymous
12/08/2025 21:27
Subject: Crown boundary study Option H
Anonymous wrote:Former admin in Moco. For all those saying great things about Churchill- you should spend a day there. That school is not what it used to be and it’s gone down hill significantly. I can’t see why the Potomac parents wouldn’t have loved their kids at wootton which ranks higher now
Churchill parent here. I don't know if it's gone downhill (my third kid is there and I've not noticed anything, and I love the current principal). That said, I'd be happy for my kids to go to Wootton. In fact, I think it might have been better for them.
Anonymous
12/08/2025 21:25
Subject: Crown boundary study Option H
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Honestly, MCPS could do a mini-renovation at Wootton to fix many of the more egregious issues. If there are classrooms that are problematic, then temporary classrooms for a few years is the answer until permanent fixes can be made. Based on what a PP indicated about the age of all of the other high schools in the area, Wootton doesn't seem like an outlier at all.
The idea that Wootton has been crumbling for years (more than a decade), yet MCPS now can't find the money to do a full scale renovation until 2035 appears intentional. The Wootton -> Crown -> rename Crown to Wootton seems like a transparent attempt to transplant all of the high-achieving kids from Wootton to Crown (by dangling a new building), then steal the reputation of Wootton as a high-achieving school. FYI, Wootton gained significant national recognition in the early 2000s, particularly when it was named a National Blue Ribbon School of Excellence in 2002.
Option H - MCPS creates a high-achieving school without the 20-30 years that it takes to develop one organically. Pats itself on the back for meeting its goals....
I mean, it would basically be the same school in a different location/building? I don't see how it would be stealing another school's reputation-- how do you steal from yourself?
Nope. The new Wootton would be a mix of the old Wootton and the kids that would have gone to Crown.
Anonymous
12/08/2025 21:18
Subject: Crown boundary study Option H
Anonymous wrote:Honestly, MCPS could do a mini-renovation at Wootton to fix many of the more egregious issues. If there are classrooms that are problematic, then temporary classrooms for a few years is the answer until permanent fixes can be made. Based on what a PP indicated about the age of all of the other high schools in the area, Wootton doesn't seem like an outlier at all.
The idea that Wootton has been crumbling for years (more than a decade), yet MCPS now can't find the money to do a full scale renovation until 2035 appears intentional. The Wootton -> Crown -> rename Crown to Wootton seems like a transparent attempt to transplant all of the high-achieving kids from Wootton to Crown (by dangling a new building), then steal the reputation of Wootton as a high-achieving school. FYI, Wootton gained significant national recognition in the early 2000s, particularly when it was named a National Blue Ribbon School of Excellence in 2002.
Option H - MCPS creates a high-achieving school without the 20-30 years that it takes to develop one organically. Pats itself on the back for meeting its goals....
I mean, it would basically be the same school in a different location/building? I don't see how it would be stealing another school's reputation-- how do you steal from yourself?
Anonymous
12/08/2025 21:14
Subject: Crown boundary study Option H
Honestly, MCPS could do a mini-renovation at Wootton to fix many of the more egregious issues. If there are classrooms that are problematic, then temporary classrooms for a few years is the answer until permanent fixes can be made. Based on what a PP indicated about the age of all of the other high schools in the area, Wootton doesn't seem like an outlier at all.
The idea that Wootton has been crumbling for years (more than a decade), yet MCPS now can't find the money to do a full scale renovation until 2035 appears intentional. The Wootton -> Crown -> rename Crown to Wootton seems like a transparent attempt to transplant all of the high-achieving kids from Wootton to Crown (by dangling a new building), then steal the reputation of Wootton as a high-achieving school. FYI, Wootton gained significant national recognition in the early 2000s, particularly when it was named a National Blue Ribbon School of Excellence in 2002.
Option H - MCPS creates a high-achieving school without the 20-30 years that it takes to develop one organically. Pats itself on the back for meeting its goals....
The idea that Wootton has been crumbling for years (more than a decade), yet MCPS now can't find the money to do a full scale renovation until 2035 appears intentional. The Wootton -> Crown -> rename Crown to Wootton seems like a transparent attempt to transplant all of the high-achieving kids from Wootton to Crown (by dangling a new building), then steal the reputation of Wootton as a high-achieving school. FYI, Wootton gained significant national recognition in the early 2000s, particularly when it was named a National Blue Ribbon School of Excellence in 2002.
Option H - MCPS creates a high-achieving school without the 20-30 years that it takes to develop one organically. Pats itself on the back for meeting its goals....
Anonymous
12/08/2025 18:51
Subject: Crown boundary study Option H
Former admin in Moco. For all those saying great things about Churchill- you should spend a day there. That school is not what it used to be and it’s gone down hill significantly. I can’t see why the Potomac parents wouldn’t have loved their kids at wootton which ranks higher now
Anonymous
12/08/2025 17:10
Subject: Crown boundary study Option H
Do their projections include the development that is supposed to happen along Research Blvd? That would be a route many Wootton kids would take to Crown. Before these new options came along, I was wondering if the future Research Blvd students were being into the boundary study and if so, which schools...
Anonymous
12/08/2025 16:51
Subject: Crown boundary study Option H
How is Washingtonian Woods feeling about possibly going to Gaithersburg? They thought they’d be going to Crown, but now Gaithersburg seems more likely.
Anonymous
12/08/2025 11:39
Subject: Re:Crown boundary study Option H
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:RM has 10 portables in use. There is still overcrowding at RM unless a plan addresses moving some students out of the RM cluster.
If you look at their projections, RM is capacity would be under 100% in the future.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FlFkN1iSGBikRuYzg7Q36XpHb4p2qc9P/view
I don't know if these projections are accurate (I'm very suspect of any numbers MCPS puts out), but if it is accurate, then it makes total sense to not redraw the RM boundary, and move Wootton to Crown.
I sort of question the effects tables.
For Option H, it's saying moving the Crown/Decloverly/Rio area that currently goes to Rosemont to the new Crown School won't really change Gaithersburg HS's numbers:
2031-32 projection: 2497->2456
FARMS: 49.6 pct->49.5 pct
EML: 27.8 pct->28.5 pct
Then for Wootton/Crown absorbing that area:
2031-32 projection: 1937->1999
FARMS: 14 pct->14.8 pct
EML: 3.1 pct->3.3 pct
Are there really that little amount of students in the Crown/Decloverly/Rio area?
Then the current Rosemont boundaries looks like it's a couple of islands and the school has 62.4 percent FARMS.
If the resulting FARMS numbers don't change that much for the high schools, are they pulling from the nonFARMS population of Rosemont to send them to the new Crown school? Or are the numbers so small that they just get absorbed by the larger high school numbers/population? According to mdreportcard at Rosemont 354 out of the 567 students are eligible for FARMS.
Under option H, the area for Fields ES would go to Gaithersburg HS. Fields Road ES has 52.7 percent FARMS and might explain why Gaitherburg HS's FARMS numbers won't change much if swapping out the Crown area for Fields Road ES. QO's FARMS rate goes down by 10 percent with having the Fields Road ES area get reassigned to another high school.
Anonymous
12/08/2025 10:31
Subject: Re:Crown boundary study Option H
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:RM has 10 portables in use. There is still overcrowding at RM unless a plan addresses moving some students out of the RM cluster.
If you look at their projections, RM is capacity would be under 100% in the future.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FlFkN1iSGBikRuYzg7Q36XpHb4p2qc9P/view
I don't know if these projections are accurate (I'm very suspect of any numbers MCPS puts out), but if it is accurate, then it makes total sense to not redraw the RM boundary, and move Wootton to Crown.
I sort of question the effects tables.
For Option H, it's saying moving the Crown/Decloverly/Rio area that currently goes to Rosemont to the new Crown School won't really change Gaithersburg HS's numbers:
2031-32 projection: 2497->2456
FARMS: 49.6 pct->49.5 pct
EML: 27.8 pct->28.5 pct
Then for Wootton/Crown absorbing that area:
2031-32 projection: 1937->1999
FARMS: 14 pct->14.8 pct
EML: 3.1 pct->3.3 pct
Are there really that little amount of students in the Crown/Decloverly/Rio area?
Then the current Rosemont boundaries looks like it's a couple of islands and the school has 62.4 percent FARMS.
If the resulting FARMS numbers don't change that much for the high schools, are they pulling from the nonFARMS population of Rosemont to send them to the new Crown school? Or are the numbers so small that they just get absorbed by the larger high school numbers/population? According to mdreportcard at Rosemont 354 out of the 567 students are eligible for FARMS.
Anonymous
12/08/2025 09:46
Subject: Re:Crown boundary study Option H
Anonymous wrote:RM has 10 portables in use. There is still overcrowding at RM unless a plan addresses moving some students out of the RM cluster.
If you look at their projections, RM is capacity would be under 100% in the future.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FlFkN1iSGBikRuYzg7Q36XpHb4p2qc9P/view
I don't know if these projections are accurate (I'm very suspect of any numbers MCPS puts out), but if it is accurate, then it makes total sense to not redraw the RM boundary, and move Wootton to Crown.
Anonymous
12/08/2025 09:36
Subject: Crown boundary study Option H
Anonymous wrote: Lmao. What a load of garbage to say “MCPS is looking at things holistically.”
We wouldn’t have been in this discussion if they are competent and professional! Bunch of politicians care about their own political agenda more than getting everyone prepared for college!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Idk, this makes a lot of sense to me.
+1 MCPS is looking at things holistically. Parents are looking at this as it impacts them directly, which is understandable. But, closing Wootton and moving them to Crown makes total sense given the declining enrollment overall and budgetary constraints.
And how does building 2 new HS, expanding some existing HS, and fixing up a crumbling HS in a cluster that is under capacity, all with declining enrollment and budget cuts a smart move?