With only 2.5 weeks left, has anyone heard any updates? When will we hear of our child will be switching classes? We are running out of time!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh OK. I'll put it all together for you. We got the notion that MPCS was going to start busing from the BOE, the superintendent, the former MCCPTA president and some of its current officers, posts from woke progressives, and from these two: https://s19499.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/featured-image-mcps-boundary-study-walter-johnson-300x234.jpg

They've said they'd like to balance adjacent clusters. They haven't said anything about "going to start busing" beyond that.

But you keep on with your delusions. They seem comforting to you.

Of course they won't say they're going to start busing. Busing was a disaster. But a rose by any other name is still a rose. And moving kids from one school to another to race balance the schools is still busing. So "balance adjacent clusters" = busing. Luckily, the boundary analysis shows that 85 to 95% of Montgomery County doesn't want anything even close to busing. What they really want is to be left in their current schools. Schools attend by poorer families would probably say they could use some more resources. And despite the fact that these schools already receive millions of dollars more than schools in wealthier areas, I still support giving them more money.

Balancing adjacent clusters by moving students an 1/8 of mile hardly rises to "busing" as you've been using it. Unless anytime a kid hops on a bus it's "busing".

You're just trying, again and again, to stir controversy where there's none apparent. MCPS does plenty of things to get up in arms over, but this isn't one of them.

Exactly and in many cases it's moving people to closer schools like kids being bussed to Wootton or WJ who live much closer to other schools.

Yet no one wants this. If you look at the boundary analysis starting on page 107, you'll see that MoCo is in lock-step on wanting to remain in their current schools.

That's not true at all most people are currently not at the closest school and poor utilizaiton is another matter. Most people would prefer they do exactly what the board has stated and consider many factors to reowrk the boundaries that have been neglected for 40 years.

That may be what most people at the Takoma Park Co-op want. But that's not what most people in MoCo want. The boundary analysis is clear...the most important factors to people in every area in the county are stability, walkability, proximity, and cohort stability. The least important factor by quite a large margin is diversity. Most people in MoCo are happy with the diversity in their schools. They are not interested in having their kids moved elsewhere just so MCPS can pretend it matters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh OK. I'll put it all together for you. We got the notion that MPCS was going to start busing from the BOE, the superintendent, the former MCCPTA president and some of its current officers, posts from woke progressives, and from these two: https://s19499.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/featured-image-mcps-boundary-study-walter-johnson-300x234.jpg

They've said they'd like to balance adjacent clusters. They haven't said anything about "going to start busing" beyond that.

But you keep on with your delusions. They seem comforting to you.

Of course they won't say they're going to start busing. Busing was a disaster. But a rose by any other name is still a rose. And moving kids from one school to another to race balance the schools is still busing. So "balance adjacent clusters" = busing. Luckily, the boundary analysis shows that 85 to 95% of Montgomery County doesn't want anything even close to busing. What they really want is to be left in their current schools. Schools attend by poorer families would probably say they could use some more resources. And despite the fact that these schools already receive millions of dollars more than schools in wealthier areas, I still support giving them more money.

Balancing adjacent clusters by moving students an 1/8 of mile hardly rises to "busing" as you've been using it. Unless anytime a kid hops on a bus it's "busing".

You're just trying, again and again, to stir controversy where there's none apparent. MCPS does plenty of things to get up in arms over, but this isn't one of them.

Exactly and in many cases it's moving people to closer schools like kids being bussed to Wootton or WJ who live much closer to other schools.

Yet no one wants this. If you look at the boundary analysis starting on page 107, you'll see that MoCo is in lock-step on wanting to remain in their current schools.

That's not true at all most people are currently not at the closest school and poor utilizaiton is another matter. Most people would prefer they do exactly what the board has stated and consider many factors to reowrk the boundaries that have been neglected for 40 years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh OK. I'll put it all together for you. We got the notion that MPCS was going to start busing from the BOE, the superintendent, the former MCCPTA president and some of its current officers, posts from woke progressives, and from these two: https://s19499.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/featured-image-mcps-boundary-study-walter-johnson-300x234.jpg

They've said they'd like to balance adjacent clusters. They haven't said anything about "going to start busing" beyond that.

But you keep on with your delusions. They seem comforting to you.

Of course they won't say they're going to start busing. Busing was a disaster. But a rose by any other name is still a rose. And moving kids from one school to another to race balance the schools is still busing. So "balance adjacent clusters" = busing. Luckily, the boundary analysis shows that 85 to 95% of Montgomery County doesn't want anything even close to busing. What they really want is to be left in their current schools. Schools attend by poorer families would probably say they could use some more resources. And despite the fact that these schools already receive millions of dollars more than schools in wealthier areas, I still support giving them more money.

Balancing adjacent clusters by moving students an 1/8 of mile hardly rises to "busing" as you've been using it. Unless anytime a kid hops on a bus it's "busing".

You're just trying, again and again, to stir controversy where there's none apparent. MCPS does plenty of things to get up in arms over, but this isn't one of them.

Exactly and in many cases it's moving people to closer schools like kids being bussed to Wootton or WJ who live much closer to other schools.

Yet no one wants this. If you look at the boundary analysis starting on page 107, you'll see that MoCo is in lock-step on wanting to remain in their current schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh OK. I'll put it all together for you. We got the notion that MPCS was going to start busing from the BOE, the superintendent, the former MCCPTA president and some of its current officers, posts from woke progressives, and from these two: https://s19499.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/featured-image-mcps-boundary-study-walter-johnson-300x234.jpg

They've said they'd like to balance adjacent clusters. They haven't said anything about "going to start busing" beyond that.

But you keep on with your delusions. They seem comforting to you.

Of course they won't say they're going to start busing. Busing was a disaster. But a rose by any other name is still a rose. And moving kids from one school to another to race balance the schools is still busing. So "balance adjacent clusters" = busing. Luckily, the boundary analysis shows that 85 to 95% of Montgomery County doesn't want anything even close to busing. What they really want is to be left in their current schools. Schools attend by poorer families would probably say they could use some more resources. And despite the fact that these schools already receive millions of dollars more than schools in wealthier areas, I still support giving them more money.

Balancing adjacent clusters by moving students an 1/8 of mile hardly rises to "busing" as you've been using it. Unless anytime a kid hops on a bus it's "busing".

You're just trying, again and again, to stir controversy where there's none apparent. MCPS does plenty of things to get up in arms over, but this isn't one of them.

Race-integration busing in the United States (also known as simply busing or by its critics as forced busing) was the practice of assigning and transporting students to schools within or outside their local school districts in an effort to diversify the racial make-up of schools. So no matter the distance, if they move kids for the purposes of race-balancing, it's busing. Conversely, the kids who are assigned to schools slightly farther away because of capacity reasons ISN'T busing. See the differencce? Probably not but other people will. And that 1/8 mile applies if they only move the absolute best cases. If they try to diversity the rest of the schools, kids will be on buses for many more hours a week.

And again, the people of MoCo made their voices heard loud and clear. They don't want their kids moved AT ALL, especially not just for the progressive fantasy of every MCPS school looking racially identical.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh OK. I'll put it all together for you. We got the notion that MPCS was going to start busing from the BOE, the superintendent, the former MCCPTA president and some of its current officers, posts from woke progressives, and from these two: https://s19499.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/featured-image-mcps-boundary-study-walter-johnson-300x234.jpg

They've said they'd like to balance adjacent clusters. They haven't said anything about "going to start busing" beyond that.

But you keep on with your delusions. They seem comforting to you.

Of course they won't say they're going to start busing. Busing was a disaster. But a rose by any other name is still a rose. And moving kids from one school to another to race balance the schools is still busing. So "balance adjacent clusters" = busing. Luckily, the boundary analysis shows that 85 to 95% of Montgomery County doesn't want anything even close to busing. What they really want is to be left in their current schools. Schools attend by poorer families would probably say they could use some more resources. And despite the fact that these schools already receive millions of dollars more than schools in wealthier areas, I still support giving them more money.

Balancing adjacent clusters by moving students an 1/8 of mile hardly rises to "busing" as you've been using it. Unless anytime a kid hops on a bus it's "busing".

You're just trying, again and again, to stir controversy where there's none apparent. MCPS does plenty of things to get up in arms over, but this isn't one of them.

Exactly and in many cases it's moving people to closer schools like kids being bussed to Wootton or WJ who live much closer to other schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh OK. I'll put it all together for you. We got the notion that MPCS was going to start busing from the BOE, the superintendent, the former MCCPTA president and some of its current officers, posts from woke progressives, and from these two: https://s19499.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/featured-image-mcps-boundary-study-walter-johnson-300x234.jpg

They've said they'd like to balance adjacent clusters. They haven't said anything about "going to start busing" beyond that.

But you keep on with your delusions. They seem comforting to you.

Of course they won't say they're going to start busing. Busing was a disaster. But a rose by any other name is still a rose. And moving kids from one school to another to race balance the schools is still busing. So "balance adjacent clusters" = busing. Luckily, the boundary analysis shows that 85 to 95% of Montgomery County doesn't want anything even close to busing. What they really want is to be left in their current schools. Schools attend by poorer families would probably say they could use some more resources. And despite the fact that these schools already receive millions of dollars more than schools in wealthier areas, I still support giving them more money.

Balancing adjacent clusters by moving students an 1/8 of mile hardly rises to "busing" as you've been using it. Unless anytime a kid hops on a bus it's "busing".

You're just trying, again and again, to stir controversy where there's none apparent. MCPS does plenty of things to get up in arms over, but this isn't one of them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh OK. I'll put it all together for you. We got the notion that MPCS was going to start busing from the BOE, the superintendent, the former MCCPTA president and some of its current officers, posts from woke progressives, and from these two: https://s19499.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/featured-image-mcps-boundary-study-walter-johnson-300x234.jpg

They've said they'd like to balance adjacent clusters. They haven't said anything about "going to start busing" beyond that.

But you keep on with your delusions. They seem comforting to you.

Of course they won't say they're going to start busing. Busing was a disaster. But a rose by any other name is still a rose. And moving kids from one school to another to race balance the schools is still busing. So "balance adjacent clusters" = busing. Luckily, the boundary analysis shows that 85 to 95% of Montgomery County doesn't want anything even close to busing. What they really want is to be left in their current schools. Schools attend by poorer families would probably say they could use some more resources. And despite the fact that these schools already receive millions of dollars more than schools in wealthier areas, I still support giving them more money.

Anonymous wrote:

There was a meeting for principals about this the day after it leaked on DCUM. It’s possible some principals didn’t tell teachers because they didn’t want to alarm them if they thought the directive might change if they complained enough? I emailed Nikki Hazelton after reading it here and she did not deny it, although she also didn’t confirm it. If it was a crazy rumor, I would think she would have told me that. I suggest asking your principal and emailing Ms. Hazelton to see what they say.

It's Hazel, not Hazelton.

Anonymous wrote:Oh OK. I'll put it all together for you. We got the notion that MPCS was going to start busing from the BOE, the superintendent, the former MCCPTA president and some of its current officers, posts from woke progressives, and from these two: https://s19499.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/featured-image-mcps-boundary-study-walter-johnson-300x234.jpg

They've said they'd like to balance adjacent clusters. They haven't said anything about "going to start busing" beyond that.

But you keep on with your delusions. They seem comforting to you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was just addressing PP who said "People claimed they wanted diversity." That's simply not true. A handful of race-obsessed zealots convinced the BOE it's what people wanted back in 2018 when the elevated diversity in the boundary policy. But most of those people have faded into irrelevance. And the people of MoCo have spoken loud and clear. And we all agree that we don't want our kids moved. I still think we should all email the BOE to let them know this to remind them of our wishes.

Which is why Stephen Austin won with such overwhelming support!

Oh, wait. Damn, another narrative blown up.

Yes yes. An upstart Republican who began his campaign just a few months before the primary lost in the primary. No surprise there. What is surprising is that the WXY, the consultant that MCPS paid to usher in busing, wasn't able to fudge the numbers enough to show support for busing.

You keep saying "WXY, the consultant that MCPS paid to usher in busing" without evidence.

The study seems reasonably well done and completely credible. Wonder why they'd get these tin foil hat notions?

From the BOE, superintendent, the former MCCPTA president and some of its current officers, posts from woke progressives, and from these two: https://s19499.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/featured-image-mcps-boundary-study-walter-johnson-300x234.jpg

Their point stands since you post doesn't mean anything.

Oh OK. I'll put it all together for you. We got the notion that MPCS was going to start busing from the BOE, the superintendent, the former MCCPTA president and some of its current officers, posts from woke progressives, and from these two: https://s19499.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/featured-image-mcps-boundary-study-walter-johnson-300x234.jpg

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was just addressing PP who said "People claimed they wanted diversity." That's simply not true. A handful of race-obsessed zealots convinced the BOE it's what people wanted back in 2018 when the elevated diversity in the boundary policy. But most of those people have faded into irrelevance. And the people of MoCo have spoken loud and clear. And we all agree that we don't want our kids moved. I still think we should all email the BOE to let them know this to remind them of our wishes.

Which is why Stephen Austin won with such overwhelming support!

Oh, wait. Damn, another narrative blown up.

Yes yes. An upstart Republican who began his campaign just a few months before the primary lost in the primary. No surprise there. What is surprising is that the WXY, the consultant that MCPS paid to usher in busing, wasn't able to fudge the numbers enough to show support for busing.

You keep saying "WXY, the consultant that MCPS paid to usher in busing" without evidence.

The study seems reasonably well done and completely credible. Wonder why they'd get these tin foil hat notions?

From the BOE, superintendent, the former MCCPTA president and some of its current officers, posts from woke progressives, and from these two: https://s19499.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/featured-image-mcps-boundary-study-walter-johnson-300x234.jpg

Their point stands since you post doesn't mean anything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was just addressing PP who said "People claimed they wanted diversity." That's simply not true. A handful of race-obsessed zealots convinced the BOE it's what people wanted back in 2018 when the elevated diversity in the boundary policy. But most of those people have faded into irrelevance. And the people of MoCo have spoken loud and clear. And we all agree that we don't want our kids moved. I still think we should all email the BOE to let them know this to remind them of our wishes.

Which is why Stephen Austin won with such overwhelming support!

Oh, wait. Damn, another narrative blown up.

Yes yes. An upstart Republican who began his campaign just a few months before the primary lost in the primary. No surprise there. What is surprising is that the WXY, the consultant that MCPS paid to usher in busing, wasn't able to fudge the numbers enough to show support for busing.

You keep saying "WXY, the consultant that MCPS paid to usher in busing" without evidence.

The study seems reasonably well done and completely credible. Wonder why they'd get these tin foil hat notions?

From the BOE, superintendent, the former MCCPTA president and some of its current officers, posts from woke progressives, and from these two: https://s19499.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/featured-image-mcps-boundary-study-walter-johnson-300x234.jpg

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was just addressing PP who said "People claimed they wanted diversity." That's simply not true. A handful of race-obsessed zealots convinced the BOE it's what people wanted back in 2018 when the elevated diversity in the boundary policy. But most of those people have faded into irrelevance. And the people of MoCo have spoken loud and clear. And we all agree that we don't want our kids moved. I still think we should all email the BOE to let them know this to remind them of our wishes.

Which is why Stephen Austin won with such overwhelming support!

Oh, wait. Damn, another narrative blown up.

Yes yes. An upstart Republican who began his campaign just a few months before the primary lost in the primary. No surprise there. What is surprising is that the WXY, the consultant that MCPS paid to usher in busing, wasn't able to fudge the numbers enough to show support for busing.

You keep saying "WXY, the consultant that MCPS paid to usher in busing" without evidence.

WXY is a diversity consultant whose last project was writing a busing plan for NYC's District 15. They were hired on the heels of a change to the boundary policy that elevated diversity above the other three factors. And the boundary analysis resolution itself reads like a call for busing. https://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/B8C2XD77A17C/$file/20190108%20ADOPTED%20Rev%20Boundary%20Assessment%20Study-FAA.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was just addressing PP who said "People claimed they wanted diversity." That's simply not true. A handful of race-obsessed zealots convinced the BOE it's what people wanted back in 2018 when the elevated diversity in the boundary policy. But most of those people have faded into irrelevance. And the people of MoCo have spoken loud and clear. And we all agree that we don't want our kids moved. I still think we should all email the BOE to let them know this to remind them of our wishes.

Which is why Stephen Austin won with such overwhelming support!

Oh, wait. Damn, another narrative blown up.

Yes yes. An upstart Republican who began his campaign just a few months before the primary lost in the primary. No surprise there. What is surprising is that the WXY, the consultant that MCPS paid to usher in busing, wasn't able to fudge the numbers enough to show support for busing.

You keep saying "WXY, the consultant that MCPS paid to usher in busing" without evidence.

The study seems reasonably well done and completely credible. Wonder why they'd get these tin foil hat notions?