Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was in an elementary down south where they bused in kids from the projects to integrate. There were days when it was like a scene out of Lord of the Flies. No way would I put any child of mine through that. I seriously doubt it would do much of anything to reduce any gap, and would be very expensive. The schools in the good districts are good because of the kids that go there. I read one study where the performance of poor children improved when they went to a school in a more affluent neighborhood, but only if the percentages were <20%. Since 40% of MoCo qualifies for FARMs, it's hard to see it being effective. In addition, it's been shown that bringing in poorer children also has a detrimental effect on the acheivement of higher performing children. Not sure how to fix the problem, but bussing sure isn't it.

That's not really an accurate summary. The data showed that poor children improved even when the percentages were >20%. Just not as much. Here's the study:

http://tcf.org/work/education/detail/housing-policy-is-school-policy/

And I bolded the part that doesn't seem to be a finding of the study.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was in an elementary down south where they bused in kids from the projects to integrate. There were days when it was like a scene out of Lord of the Flies. No way would I put any child of mine through that. I seriously doubt it would do much of anything to reduce any gap, and would be very expensive. The schools in the good districts are good because of the kids that go there. I read one study where the performance of poor children improved when they went to a school in a more affluent neighborhood, but only if the percentages were <20%. Since 40% of MoCo qualifies for FARMs, it's hard to see it being effective. In addition, it's been shown that bringing in poorer children also has a detrimental effect on the acheivement of higher performing children. Not sure how to fix the problem, but bussing sure isn't it.

That's not really an accurate summary. The data showed that poor children improved even when the percentages were >20%. Just not as much. Here's the study:

http://tcf.org/work/education/detail/housing-policy-is-school-policy/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We came from a state that gave parents school choice. It went something like this:

All under-enrolled schools were placed on a list, and if you wanted to change your child's school placement, you were able to select from the list. The list showed each under-enrolled school and the number of open seats in each grade level. You applied by a deadline (usually mid-April), and if there were more applicants than seats, a lottery was held. You were notified of the decision in early summer. Once your child got into the school, he/she would be able to complete the entire matriculation, but had to start the school choice process again at the next school level. Siblings weren't guaranteed placement, and the family was responsible for transportation to and from school.

That sounds fair to me, except the sibling part. That would be hard on most families.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was in an elementary down south where they bused in kids from the projects to integrate. There were days when it was like a scene out of Lord of the Flies. No way would I put any child of mine through that. I seriously doubt it would do much of anything to reduce any gap, and would be very expensive. The schools in the good districts are good because of the kids that go there. I read one study where the performance of poor children improved when they went to a school in a more affluent neighborhood, but only if the percentages were <20%. Since 40% of MoCo qualifies for FARMs, it's hard to see it being effective. In addition, it's been shown that bringing in poorer children also has a detrimental effect on the acheivement of higher performing children. Not sure how to fix the problem, but bussing sure isn't it.

That's not really an accurate summary. The data showed that poor children improved even when the percentages were >20%. Just not as much. Here's the study:

http://tcf.org/work/education/detail/housing-policy-is-school-policy/

And I bolded the part that doesn't seem to be a finding of the study.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was in an elementary down south where they bused in kids from the projects to integrate. There were days when it was like a scene out of Lord of the Flies. No way would I put any child of mine through that. I seriously doubt it would do much of anything to reduce any gap, and would be very expensive. The schools in the good districts are good because of the kids that go there. I read one study where the performance of poor children improved when they went to a school in a more affluent neighborhood, but only if the percentages were <20%. Since 40% of MoCo qualifies for FARMs, it's hard to see it being effective. In addition, it's been shown that bringing in poorer children also has a detrimental effect on the acheivement of higher performing children. Not sure how to fix the problem, but bussing sure isn't it.

That's not really an accurate summary. The data showed that poor children improved even when the percentages were >20%. Just not as much. Here's the study:

http://tcf.org/work/education/detail/housing-policy-is-school-policy/

Anonymous wrote:We came from a state that gave parents school choice. It went something like this:

All under-enrolled schools were placed on a list, and if you wanted to change your child's school placement, you were able to select from the list. The list showed each under-enrolled school and the number of open seats in each grade level. You applied by a deadline (usually mid-April), and if there were more applicants than seats, a lottery was held. You were notified of the decision in early summer. Once your child got into the school, he/she would be able to complete the entire matriculation, but had to start the school choice process again at the next school level. Siblings weren't guaranteed placement, and the family was responsible for transportation to and from school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL!

Because I paid several million dollars to live in Potomac, and I don't want some illegal ESOL kid intermingling with my precious snowflake.


(I'm with you OP, I think they should either do a lottery, or let kids choose. Or level the playing field by making sure ALL schools are the same across the county, at least facility-wise. None of this crap where one school looks like a beautiful college campus, and another a depressing wasteland.)

Agree. And while they're at it, even out the overcrowding. If a school is under enrolled, bus some kids from one of the trailer park elementary schools. But as a PP said, elites in MoCo would scream to their "elected" officials to stop this.

This would be Cold Spring ES. They have empty classrooms and had to let some teachers go due to low enrollment. Projected enrollment is not much better. Meanwhile, next door at Ritchie Park ES (literally like a mile away), there are 2 portables. Is this rocket science?

What prompts the county to redistrict? I know they did this about 20 yrs ago. Have they redistricted since then?

If a school is really underenrolled, I agree that extra capacity should be made available to open enrollment. Are there many schools like that? Just Cold Spring? In our "W" cluster, most ES schools seem hideously overenrolled with classroom sizes ranging from 25-30.

I don't agree, though, that kids that are out of boundary should unseat kids who are in-boundary.

Most ESs are over-capacity. There are only a handful that are under capacity or at capacity. You can check out MCPS website for more information.

Anonymous wrote:I was in an elementary down south where they bused in kids from the projects to integrate. There were days when it was like a scene out of Lord of the Flies. No way would I put any child of mine through that. I seriously doubt it would do much of anything to reduce any gap, and would be very expensive. The schools in the good districts are good because of the kids that go there. I read one study where the performance of poor children improved when they went to a school in a more affluent neighborhood, but only if the percentages were <20%. Since 40% of MoCo qualifies for FARMs, it's hard to see it being effective. In addition, it's been shown that bringing in poorer children also has a detrimental effect on the acheivement of higher performing children. Not sure how to fix the problem, but bussing sure isn't it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL!

Because I paid several million dollars to live in Potomac, and I don't want some illegal ESOL kid intermingling with my precious snowflake.


(I'm with you OP, I think they should either do a lottery, or let kids choose. Or level the playing field by making sure ALL schools are the same across the county, at least facility-wise. None of this crap where one school looks like a beautiful college campus, and another a depressing wasteland.)

Agree. And while they're at it, even out the overcrowding. If a school is under enrolled, bus some kids from one of the trailer park elementary schools. But as a PP said, elites in MoCo would scream to their "elected" officials to stop this.

This would be Cold Spring ES. They have empty classrooms and had to let some teachers go due to low enrollment. Projected enrollment is not much better. Meanwhile, next door at Ritchie Park ES (literally like a mile away), there are 2 portables. Is this rocket science?

What prompts the county to redistrict? I know they did this about 20 yrs ago. Have they redistricted since then?

If a school is really underenrolled, I agree that extra capacity should be made available to open enrollment. Are there many schools like that? Just Cold Spring? In our "W" cluster, most ES schools seem hideously overenrolled with classroom sizes ranging from 25-30.

I don't agree, though, that kids that are out of boundary should unseat kids who are in-boundary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL!

Because I paid several million dollars to live in Potomac, and I don't want some illegal ESOL kid intermingling with my precious snowflake.


(I'm with you OP, I think they should either do a lottery, or let kids choose. Or level the playing field by making sure ALL schools are the same across the county, at least facility-wise. None of this crap where one school looks like a beautiful college campus, and another a depressing wasteland.)

Agree. And while they're at it, even out the overcrowding. If a school is under enrolled, bus some kids from one of the trailer park elementary schools. But as a PP said, elites in MoCo would scream to their "elected" officials to stop this.

This would be Cold Spring ES. They have empty classrooms and had to let some teachers go due to low enrollment. Projected enrollment is not much better. Meanwhile, next door at Ritchie Park ES (literally like a mile away), there are 2 portables. Is this rocket science?

What prompts the county to redistrict? I know they did this about 20 yrs ago. Have they redistricted since then?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because parents like myself would take their kids out of school sooner than see them bussed to some failing school in Wheaton as part of some social experiment.

Anyone who lives in a million dollar house in Chevy Chase has a choice - and most of us choose to support public schools. But if you started bussing to radically change the demographics, then we would just go private. You wouldn't eliminate the attainment gap, you would make it much worse.

I have to agree. The higher SES folks can afford to send their children to private. If you tell them that they have to go to a lower performing school than they are currently zoned for, most probably will. They what...you will have the lower SES folks bussed into a building in Bethesda, Potomac, Chevy Chases but their classmates will also be bussed in lower SES students. The parent support, motivated students will flee and you'll be left with a Wheaton HS demographic and motivation in the Churchill building.

Bussing kids hither and yon is not without cost. We didn't even bother to apply to magnets, no matter how lauded, because we did not want our child to spent 2+ hours in transit each day in lieu of playtime and after-school activities. We came from DC, and in our neighborhood, kids went to something like 15 different DCPS, charter, private/parochial schools. That's just for ES, not MS or HS...neighbor kids rarely went to school together. So much for having a neighborhood school that the whole community could invest in. Choice in theory was great, but it was highly stressful to have to apply every year (because the high-performing schools had obscene waitlists and you had to try over and over again), and to possibly subject your child to a new school every year -- and maybe switch them mid-year when new options arose. We came to MCPS because we were tired of all the shuffling, uncertainty, and disruption. And imagine what it was like for the kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because parents like myself would take their kids out of school sooner than see them bussed to some failing school in Wheaton as part of some social experiment.

Anyone who lives in a million dollar house in Chevy Chase has a choice - and most of us choose to support public schools. But if you started bussing to radically change the demographics, then we would just go private. You wouldn't eliminate the attainment gap, you would make it much worse.

I have to agree. The higher SES folks can afford to send their children to private. If you tell them that they have to go to a lower performing school than they are currently zoned for, most probably will. They what...you will have the lower SES folks bussed into a building in Bethesda, Potomac, Chevy Chases but their classmates will also be bussed in lower SES students. The parent support, motivated students will flee and you'll be left with a Wheaton HS demographic and motivation in the Churchill building.