Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is absurd and a complete straw-man. The real issue, which has been spoken many times, is that people are afraid they will be moved to a lower performing school, not that kids from a lower performing school will be moved to their school. The former will have real economic consequences for many families, split kids from their friends, and simultaneously rob parents of the choice they made for their kids school when they chose to live in a certain area. The later will do none of that, and other than internet trolls I have heard a total of zero actual concerns about moving kids from lower performing schools into higher performing schools. Conversely everyone talks about the later because its much easier to demagogue the issue in terms of racism then it is to criticize parents who don't want to be wiped out financially and want their kids to go to the school they expected when they chose a neighborhood.

The information and maps this application provides are only a guide to MCPS school assignments. The information provided is unofficial. MCPS has made substantial efforts to ensure the accuracy of the information. However school service areas are subject to change. Also school assignments may be unreliable for residents in new subdivisions or residents near a school service area boundary.

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/SchoolAssignmentTool2/Index.xhtml

Everyone knows this; however these boundaries have not changed for decades in some instances. Its not unreasonable for parents to rely upon them when choosing a school for their child. Nor it is unreasonable for them to fight when someone tries to take that choice away, especially if it means losing hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is absurd and a complete straw-man. The real issue, which has been spoken many times, is that people are afraid they will be moved to a lower performing school, not that kids from a lower performing school will be moved to their school. The former will have real economic consequences for many families, split kids from their friends, and simultaneously rob parents of the choice they made for their kids school when they chose to live in a certain area. The later will do none of that, and other than internet trolls I have heard a total of zero actual concerns about moving kids from lower performing schools into higher performing schools. Conversely everyone talks about the later because its much easier to demagogue the issue in terms of racism then it is to criticize parents who don't want to be wiped out financially and want their kids to go to the school they expected when they chose a neighborhood.

The information and maps this application provides are only a guide to MCPS school assignments. The information provided is unofficial. MCPS has made substantial efforts to ensure the accuracy of the information. However school service areas are subject to change. Also school assignments may be unreliable for residents in new subdivisions or residents near a school service area boundary.

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/SchoolAssignmentTool2/Index.xhtml

I'm really amazed at the parents who don't understand this. Just because your house was assigned to certain schools when you bought it does not guarantee those will be the same in 5, 10, or 15 years. We certainly considered our neighborhood schools when we bought our house, but I was only pregnant with our first at the time and mainly focused on ES because so much can change by MS/HS. Even then I understood nothing was guaranteed and familiarized myself with the neighboring ESs as well. I wonder how many of these parents who are fretting stretched themselves financially to buy in Potomac and now are concerned about letting a few Rockville/Gaithersberg riffraff coming in and causing a drop in the Great Schools rating from a 10 to a 9.

Anonymous wrote:The unspoken issue and reason for parental alarm is due to a lack of discipline and control in MCPS schools. People in the Ws are afraid that kids from less wealthy areas will come with more issues that could harm there own kids, such as disruptive behavior in the classroom and throughout the school, including catcalling, physical and emotional violence.

The fact is, MCPS must drop its “no consequences” behavioural conduct system before people in low poverty schools will be welcome. Living in this area for years, I cannot believe the issue is skin color. Most of these same residents voted for Ike Leggett and Barack Obama, for pete’s sake. The issue is that if these kids come and bring bad behavior with them, the existing neighborhood schools will suffer.

Feedback?

Great point.

Anonymous wrote:

This is absurd and a complete straw-man. The real issue, which has been spoken many times, is that people are afraid they will be moved to a lower performing school, not that kids from a lower performing school will be moved to their school. The former will have real economic consequences for many families, split kids from their friends, and simultaneously rob parents of the choice they made for their kids school when they chose to live in a certain area. The later will do none of that, and other than internet trolls I have heard a total of zero actual concerns about moving kids from lower performing schools into higher performing schools. Conversely everyone talks about the later because its much easier to demagogue the issue in terms of racism then it is to criticize parents who don't want to be wiped out financially and want their kids to go to the school they expected when they chose a neighborhood.

The information and maps this application provides are only a guide to MCPS school assignments. The information provided is unofficial. MCPS has made substantial efforts to ensure the accuracy of the information. However school service areas are subject to change. Also school assignments may be unreliable for residents in new subdivisions or residents near a school service area boundary.

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/SchoolAssignmentTool2/Index.xhtml

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why should parents who worked hard so their UMC kids could attend Churchill have to listen to Tadikonda tell them where their kids should go to school. She's in the IB magnet at Richard Montgomery, and not exactly mixing it up every day with kids from Springbrook or Paint Branch.

Because she's a member of the Board of Education.

If you don't like it, you go and run for a seat on the Board of Education.

Because it’s her college app fodder. Get some more press and tweets going! More victim culture!

Victim culture? You mean like the UMC parents collapsing in hysterics at the very idea of a talking about boundaries? The ones freaking out that something will be taken from them and their lives endangered by the presence of undesirables?

I’d say you fit the bill. Thx for the real-time example of a raging lunatic.

You are making less and less sense. But, keep attacking an active and engaged high school student. It's a great look for you.

Anonymous wrote:The unspoken issue and reason for parental alarm is due to a lack of discipline and control in MCPS schools. People in the Ws are afraid that kids from less wealthy areas will come with more issues that could harm there own kids, such as disruptive behavior in the classroom and throughout the school, including catcalling, physical and emotional violence.

The fact is, MCPS must drop its “no consequences” behavioural conduct system before people in low poverty schools will be welcome. Living in this area for years, I cannot believe the issue is skin color. Most of these same residents voted for Ike Leggett and Barack Obama, for pete’s sake. The issue is that if these kids come and bring bad behavior with them, the existing neighborhood schools will suffer.

Feedback?

This is absurd and a complete straw-man. The real issue, which has been spoken many times, is that people are afraid they will be moved to a lower performing school, not that kids from a lower performing school will be moved to their school. The former will have real economic consequences for many families, split kids from their friends, and simultaneously rob parents of the choice they made for their kids school when they chose to live in a certain area. The later will do none of that, and other than internet trolls I have heard a total of zero actual concerns about moving kids from lower performing schools into higher performing schools. Conversely everyone talks about the later because its much easier to demagogue the issue in terms of racism then it is to criticize parents who don't want to be wiped out financially and want their kids to go to the school they expected when they chose a neighborhood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why should parents who worked hard so their UMC kids could attend Churchill have to listen to Tadikonda tell them where their kids should go to school. She's in the IB magnet at Richard Montgomery, and not exactly mixing it up every day with kids from Springbrook or Paint Branch.

Because she's a member of the Board of Education.

If you don't like it, you go and run for a seat on the Board of Education.

If that is the only reason you can think of - I regret to say - she's only going to be on the board until 6/30/2019 as a student member, and there is really no need to go and run for a seat for that purpose.

Oh come on, lots of school districts have a token student body rep. It’s good press and good leadership activity for the kid. New student rep each year or two.

What does that have to do with the PP not wanting people to listen to Tadikonda?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why should parents who worked hard so their UMC kids could attend Churchill have to listen to Tadikonda tell them where their kids should go to school. She's in the IB magnet at Richard Montgomery, and not exactly mixing it up every day with kids from Springbrook or Paint Branch.

Because she's a member of the Board of Education.

If you don't like it, you go and run for a seat on the Board of Education.

If that is the only reason you can think of - I regret to say - she's only going to be on the board until 6/30/2019 as a student member, and there is really no need to go and run for a seat for that purpose.

Oh come on, lots of school districts have a token student body rep. It’s good press and good leadership activity for the kid. New student rep each year or two.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why should parents who worked hard so their UMC kids could attend Churchill have to listen to Tadikonda tell them where their kids should go to school. She's in the IB magnet at Richard Montgomery, and not exactly mixing it up every day with kids from Springbrook or Paint Branch.

Because she's a member of the Board of Education.

If you don't like it, you go and run for a seat on the Board of Education.

Because it’s her college app fodder. Get some more press and tweets going! More victim culture!

Victim culture? You mean like the UMC parents collapsing in hysterics at the very idea of a talking about boundaries? The ones freaking out that something will be taken from them and their lives endangered by the presence of undesirables?

I’d say you fit the bill. Thx for the real-time example of a raging lunatic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why should parents who worked hard so their UMC kids could attend Churchill have to listen to Tadikonda tell them where their kids should go to school. She's in the IB magnet at Richard Montgomery, and not exactly mixing it up every day with kids from Springbrook or Paint Branch.

Because she's a member of the Board of Education.

If you don't like it, you go and run for a seat on the Board of Education.

If that is the only reason you can think of - I regret to say - she's only going to be on the board until 6/30/2019 as a student member, and there is really no need to go and run for a seat for that purpose.

Yes, after that there will be a new student member, and it looks like the new student member will also be very interested in the subject.

But actually, assuming that the PP is not a student, the PP would run for a regular four-year term on the Board of Education, in 2020.

Why? Becoming a member gives one the authority to stop the student member from making these comments?

If not, wouldn't that make the situation worse? He/she would have to listen to more of these kind of comments from the "student member" as a board member who needs to go to board meetings.

The lack of basic knowledge about civic society from some of the supposedly education-valuing, high-IQ posters on this forum is depressing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why should parents who worked hard so their UMC kids could attend Churchill have to listen to Tadikonda tell them where their kids should go to school. She's in the IB magnet at Richard Montgomery, and not exactly mixing it up every day with kids from Springbrook or Paint Branch.

Because she's a member of the Board of Education.

If you don't like it, you go and run for a seat on the Board of Education.

If that is the only reason you can think of - I regret to say - she's only going to be on the board until 6/30/2019 as a student member, and there is really no need to go and run for a seat for that purpose.

Yes, after that there will be a new student member, and it looks like the new student member will also be very interested in the subject.

But actually, assuming that the PP is not a student, the PP would run for a regular four-year term on the Board of Education, in 2020.

Why? Becoming a member gives one the authority to stop the student member from making these comments?

If not, wouldn't that make the situation worse? He/she would have to listen to more of these kind of comments from the "student member" as a board member who needs to go to board meetings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why should parents who worked hard so their UMC kids could attend Churchill have to listen to Tadikonda tell them where their kids should go to school. She's in the IB magnet at Richard Montgomery, and not exactly mixing it up every day with kids from Springbrook or Paint Branch.

Because she's a member of the Board of Education.

If you don't like it, you go and run for a seat on the Board of Education.

If that is the only reason you can think of - I regret to say - she's only going to be on the board until 6/30/2019 as a student member, and there is really no need to go and run for a seat for that purpose.

Yes, after that there will be a new student member, and it looks like the new student member will also be very interested in the subject.

But actually, assuming that the PP is not a student, the PP would run for a regular four-year term on the Board of Education, in 2020.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why should parents who worked hard so their UMC kids could attend Churchill have to listen to Tadikonda tell them where their kids should go to school. She's in the IB magnet at Richard Montgomery, and not exactly mixing it up every day with kids from Springbrook or Paint Branch.

Because she's a member of the Board of Education.

If you don't like it, you go and run for a seat on the Board of Education.

Because it’s her college app fodder. Get some more press and tweets going! More victim culture!

You don't want to work that hard, eh? Easier just to comment anonymously online. It's ok, I don't want to work that hard either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why should parents who worked hard so their UMC kids could attend Churchill have to listen to Tadikonda tell them where their kids should go to school. She's in the IB magnet at Richard Montgomery, and not exactly mixing it up every day with kids from Springbrook or Paint Branch.

Because she's a member of the Board of Education.

If you don't like it, you go and run for a seat on the Board of Education.

If that is the only reason you can think of - I regret to say - she's only going to be on the board until 6/30/2019 as a student member, and there is really no need to go and run for a seat for that purpose.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why should parents who worked hard so their UMC kids could attend Churchill have to listen to Tadikonda tell them where their kids should go to school. She's in the IB magnet at Richard Montgomery, and not exactly mixing it up every day with kids from Springbrook or Paint Branch.

Because she's a member of the Board of Education.

If you don't like it, you go and run for a seat on the Board of Education.

Because it’s her college app fodder. Get some more press and tweets going! More victim culture!

Victim culture? You mean like the UMC parents collapsing in hysterics at the very idea of a talking about boundaries? The ones freaking out that something will be taken from them and their lives endangered by the presence of undesirables?