They went after Ortman-fouse again... I coined the word Triad and even I'm embarrassed for you all... shameful!

Anonymous wrote:And yeah - I am a parent that gives about 400 dollars a year in direct donations to the PTA and about 400 in supplies to teachers and books for staff during the book drive, holiday gifts to staff, teacher appreciation....,

Oh my word, those are not exceptional donation levels.

Anonymous wrote:So all of you RCF parents think it is ok to have an empty white priveledged school and a an over crowded brown school? A school with abundant resources and a school without. Segregated schools? All because of proximity?

Proximity to a school most parents will never set foot in because it is a middle school. Parents don't volunteer in middle school.

People with means will drive a long way and pay a lot of money to get to private schools with small enrollment and class sizes for a quailty education. RCF clearly doesn't understand this concept and is shooting themselves in the foot. In 5 years the new middle will be an old overcrowded disaster with portables. That's when RCF and everyone else will want out.

You RCF people are insane!!!

Not an RCF parent, but your presumptions about Westland demographics and especially capacity will probably not bear themselves out over time.

Westland will become 99 percent white and like 99 percent 1 perceneter. All the economic diversity and racial diversity will be at middle school number 2. It will make a difference in resources, in teachers, in classroom supplies,,,,,,, Westland will be a racially identifiable school (white). Maybe not enough to be completely off the rails unequal - but widely different experience between the two middle schools. If u analyze the school bus times, traffic to both sites is about the same difference. Kiids close to Westland have as long a ride as kids far away due to variable density. Look at the schedules and do the math. The choice is coming down to convenience of parents of middle school kids who do not go to school on a daily basis. I think rcf parents and kids will be shocked when they learn what extras the Westland PTA provides to that school that middle school number 2 won't be getting.

The supplies that Westland has and middle school number 2 won't get. Artist in residence and other pluses thatwestland will have and middle school does not. The free tutoring that Westland will have and middle school number 2 will not. The furled trips that Westland will have and middle school number two won't have because the PTA will lack the funds to pay for the kids who can't afford not to go. The deeper academic offerings that Westland will have and middle school number 2 will not.

I'll give middle school number 2 a shot but just in case will also tour some private schools this winter. And yeah - I am a parent that gives about 400 dollars a year in direct donations to the PTA and about 400 in supplies to teachers and books for staff during the book drive, holiday gifts to staff, teacher appreciation...., If I walk to private school that annual 1000 annual donation walks with along with my family.

Finally - federal dollars are going to evaporate during the next 4 years - so if families think equivalent PTA dollars fonts matter you are soooo very very naive.

Anonymous wrote:Well we can all agree someone is a little off the rails at least.

I am starting to suspect that the CCES poster above is actually the same crazy guy from the hearing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched the hearing tonight, and was cracking up to see in the CCES PTA testimony that they finally clued in to the effective tactic their opponent has been using to crush them so completely. Too bad they didn’t figure it out until a week before the decision comes down. See what kind of magic can happen when you actually talk with, involve, and even (gasp!) empower your under-resourced, diverse community members? Imagine what might have been had they grasped this concept much earlier in the game, and expanded it beyond one father to their Silver Spring communities as a whole…

This made me find the video and watch it myself. I am watching the testimony from the 10th, although it sounds like the testimony on the 3rd was more lively.

I am not really sure what your post is referring to.

I would just add that holy hell, I just arrived at the crazy guy. He is out of control.

In last night's hearing CCES had a minority dad from their Silver Spring community talk about why he's opposed to Option 7. In my opinion it was more persuasive than any other testimony made so far by RH, CCES, or NCC. But it's likely it was too little, too late, and they were stupid and arrogant not to involve their underserved communities earlier in an organized fashion. RCF's voice has been so powerful because from the beginning the Hispanic community was organized, coordinated, and vocal, and it's clear that the Superintendent and other BOE members heard them. It's much more powerful to have the communities being discussed and bandied about ("the diverse community") speak directly about what they want and what's good for them.

Crazy guy from last week was quite amazing. A spitting mad white guy up there ranting about the privilege being enjoyed by Rock Creek, the school where half the kids are poor and the majority are brown, was such a great idea. SMH

So all of you RCF parents think it is ok to have an empty white priveledged school and a an over crowded brown school? A school with abundant resources and a school without. Segregated schools? All because of proximity?

Proximity to a school most parents will never set foot in because it is a middle school. Parents don't volunteer in middle school.

People with means will drive a long way and pay a lot of money to get to private schools with small enrollment and class sizes for a quailty education. RCF clearly doesn't understand this concept and is shooting themselves in the foot. In 5 years the new middle will be an old overcrowded disaster with portables. That's when RCF and everyone else will want out.

You RCF people are insane!!!

RCF only chooses from the options available which none of them we particularly like. Your superintendent actually brought #7 to light. Not our first choice certainly but preferable to other options which are largely supported.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched the hearing tonight, and was cracking up to see in the CCES PTA testimony that they finally clued in to the effective tactic their opponent has been using to crush them so completely. Too bad they didn’t figure it out until a week before the decision comes down. See what kind of magic can happen when you actually talk with, involve, and even (gasp!) empower your under-resourced, diverse community members? Imagine what might have been had they grasped this concept much earlier in the game, and expanded it beyond one father to their Silver Spring communities as a whole…

This made me find the video and watch it myself. I am watching the testimony from the 10th, although it sounds like the testimony on the 3rd was more lively.

I am not really sure what your post is referring to.

I would just add that holy hell, I just arrived at the crazy guy. He is out of control.

In last night's hearing CCES had a minority dad from their Silver Spring community talk about why he's opposed to Option 7. In my opinion it was more persuasive than any other testimony made so far by RH, CCES, or NCC. But it's likely it was too little, too late, and they were stupid and arrogant not to involve their underserved communities earlier in an organized fashion. RCF's voice has been so powerful because from the beginning the Hispanic community was organized, coordinated, and vocal, and it's clear that the Superintendent and other BOE members heard them. It's much more powerful to have the communities being discussed and bandied about ("the diverse community") speak directly about what they want and what's good for them.

Crazy guy from last week was quite amazing. A spitting mad white guy up there ranting about the privilege being enjoyed by Rock Creek, the school where half the kids are poor and the majority are brown, was such a great idea. SMH

PP here. I do agree with you somewhat. However, I think RCF just had the better argument. "We're poor, why should you single us out because we are poor? We don't have cars, why make it even harder for us to be engaged members of the school community? We have that engagement at RCF, we're doing well and we deserve to go to the closest school like the rich people too. Plus, the outcome will not exactly be catastrophic unless you consider that 75% of MCPS schools have catastrophic FARMS rates and the capacity is well within the acceptable range." The CC/NCC argument basically came down "Option 7 leaves us with too many poor kids, which is unfair. We are already doing our part."

Just trying to be rational through all of this, the third rail is that substantial boundary changes are needed. The Lyttonsville community should probably just all go to RHES K-5 and then on to a MS in Silver Spring. MS#2 should probably take NCC, RCF and E. Bethesda. They'll need the extra capacity for Chevy Chase Lake anyway and it is a small site. E. Bethesda should probably just get their own ES at Lynnbrook. Westland would take CCES, Westbrook, Somerset and a revised BES boundary that is fully west of Wisconsin and maybe takes back some of the boundary that was given to Bradley Hills & the Whitman cluster or else the school will have 90% kids in apartments. The Whitman cluster needs that anyway because Westbard.

But why be rational when we can fight each other to the death?

Well we can all agree someone is a little off the rails at least.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched the hearing tonight, and was cracking up to see in the CCES PTA testimony that they finally clued in to the effective tactic their opponent has been using to crush them so completely. Too bad they didn’t figure it out until a week before the decision comes down. See what kind of magic can happen when you actually talk with, involve, and even (gasp!) empower your under-resourced, diverse community members? Imagine what might have been had they grasped this concept much earlier in the game, and expanded it beyond one father to their Silver Spring communities as a whole…

This made me find the video and watch it myself. I am watching the testimony from the 10th, although it sounds like the testimony on the 3rd was more lively.

I am not really sure what your post is referring to.

I would just add that holy hell, I just arrived at the crazy guy. He is out of control.

In last night's hearing CCES had a minority dad from their Silver Spring community talk about why he's opposed to Option 7. In my opinion it was more persuasive than any other testimony made so far by RH, CCES, or NCC. But it's likely it was too little, too late, and they were stupid and arrogant not to involve their underserved communities earlier in an organized fashion. RCF's voice has been so powerful because from the beginning the Hispanic community was organized, coordinated, and vocal, and it's clear that the Superintendent and other BOE members heard them. It's much more powerful to have the communities being discussed and bandied about ("the diverse community") speak directly about what they want and what's good for them.

Crazy guy from last week was quite amazing. A spitting mad white guy up there ranting about the privilege being enjoyed by Rock Creek, the school where half the kids are poor and the majority are brown, was such a great idea. SMH

So all of you RCF parents think it is ok to have an empty white priveledged school and a an over crowded brown school? A school with abundant resources and a school without. Segregated schools? All because of proximity?

Proximity to a school most parents will never set foot in because it is a middle school. Parents don't volunteer in middle school.

People with means will drive a long way and pay a lot of money to get to private schools with small enrollment and class sizes for a quailty education. RCF clearly doesn't understand this concept and is shooting themselves in the foot. In 5 years the new middle will be an old overcrowded disaster with portables. That's when RCF and everyone else will want out.

You RCF people are insane!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was a non RCF parent who posted here that he/she could tell the deck was stacked against the Immersion families when he/she saw the testimony. How could a school recommend that their own school be split? That did not come from an immersion family so all the comments asking why immersion families feel the deck is stacked against them are misdirected. That being said, Immersion families are being thrown under the bus when the PTA supports a recommendation that splits the school and while you throw out your statistics of 55 % you don't mention that only 1/3 of immersion families were included in that vote. My child's vote came back in his yellow folder and he said he forgot to turn it in so our vote never made it in for the vote tally. I wonder how many other votes if 2/3 of the families that were not included actually had their votes counted - it would have resulted in a different outcome. It's so sad to be part of a school that actually votes against itself.

I think the school is crazy to include Immersion in the discussion at all. My child was in French Immersion at Sligo Creek ES five or six years ago during their boundary study and the immersion program wasn't considered in the boundary study. I got that because it was a BOUNDARY discussion about neighborhood lines, and has nothing at all to do with special or choice programs. What's sad is that you think your wishes should matter more than that of the people who live within the cluster boundaries. Why did MCPS let immersion be considered in this boundary study?

Just to be clear, the result in essence takes immersion out of the equation. RCF wants to go to the closer middle school. Under the option proposed by the Superintendent, they get that and the immersion program is staying put at Westland. Immersion has to be SOME part of the equation, because with a new middle school, people are going to wonder what will happen with it (especially since the local neighborhood wants to go to the new middle). I also think it is a fair position for the school to advocate not splitting up the school - why not? And now it turns out they can't have both proximity and staying together, so most people are putting an emphasis on proximity. And FYI, many, many immersion parents are fine just deferring to what the neighborhood kids want to do. Just because someone is saying that immersion was thrown under the bus, doesn't mean that reflects the views of many immersion parents.

There are bizarre leaps of logic here. Let's provide another example to help clarify things. CCES has HGC for 4th and 5th. At 6th grade those kids go back to their home schools or perhaps go to a magnet. Is that unfair? Should they all just continue to MS#2 because the rest of the student body will? Give it a rest already. As PPs have noted, 9/10 kids in the program are OOB. I personally don't have a problem with that, but the real reason the immersion people want MS#2 is because they probably are coming from DCC and also want to be closer to home. Just like the PPs above complaining about transport. This is all that it is. Everyone that lives in boundary should be inconvenienced because people out of boundary in a special program should be more convenience. It is rank entitlement.

Huh?!?! Apples and oranges... Immersion starts in Kindergarten while HGC starts in 4th grade. Immersion continues to 8th grade for a total of 9 years of program while HGC ends at 5th, does not continue into middle school and is a total of 2 years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched the hearing tonight, and was cracking up to see in the CCES PTA testimony that they finally clued in to the effective tactic their opponent has been using to crush them so completely. Too bad they didn’t figure it out until a week before the decision comes down. See what kind of magic can happen when you actually talk with, involve, and even (gasp!) empower your under-resourced, diverse community members? Imagine what might have been had they grasped this concept much earlier in the game, and expanded it beyond one father to their Silver Spring communities as a whole…

This made me find the video and watch it myself. I am watching the testimony from the 10th, although it sounds like the testimony on the 3rd was more lively.

I am not really sure what your post is referring to.

I would just add that holy hell, I just arrived at the crazy guy. He is out of control.

In last night's hearing CCES had a minority dad from their Silver Spring community talk about why he's opposed to Option 7. In my opinion it was more persuasive than any other testimony made so far by RH, CCES, or NCC. But it's likely it was too little, too late, and they were stupid and arrogant not to involve their underserved communities earlier in an organized fashion. RCF's voice has been so powerful because from the beginning the Hispanic community was organized, coordinated, and vocal, and it's clear that the Superintendent and other BOE members heard them. It's much more powerful to have the communities being discussed and bandied about ("the diverse community") speak directly about what they want and what's good for them.

Crazy guy from last week was quite amazing. A spitting mad white guy up there ranting about the privilege being enjoyed by Rock Creek, the school where half the kids are poor and the majority are brown, was such a great idea. SMH

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched the hearing tonight, and was cracking up to see in the CCES PTA testimony that they finally clued in to the effective tactic their opponent has been using to crush them so completely. Too bad they didn’t figure it out until a week before the decision comes down. See what kind of magic can happen when you actually talk with, involve, and even (gasp!) empower your under-resourced, diverse community members? Imagine what might have been had they grasped this concept much earlier in the game, and expanded it beyond one father to their Silver Spring communities as a whole…

This made me find the video and watch it myself. I am watching the testimony from the 10th, although it sounds like the testimony on the 3rd was more lively.

I am not really sure what your post is referring to.

I would just add that holy hell, I just arrived at the crazy guy. He is out of control.

Anonymous wrote:I watched the hearing tonight, and was cracking up to see in the CCES PTA testimony that they finally clued in to the effective tactic their opponent has been using to crush them so completely. Too bad they didn’t figure it out until a week before the decision comes down. See what kind of magic can happen when you actually talk with, involve, and even (gasp!) empower your under-resourced, diverse community members? Imagine what might have been had they grasped this concept much earlier in the game, and expanded it beyond one father to their Silver Spring communities as a whole…

This made me find the video and watch it myself. I am watching the testimony from the 10th, although it sounds like the testimony on the 3rd was more lively.

I am not really sure what your post is referring to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Get off your high horse with threats. Please do lobby to have it removed. The BCC cluster does not welcome the program that is the most sought after in the county and the BCC cluster doesn't deserve to have it. I'd love to see it somewhere else!

NP. Immersion is a dantastic program which many BCC parents welcome and try to get into! But since it is a lottery the odds are slim. I would be sad to see it go. A vocal minority of BCC parents is against immersion because they somehow feel that immersion kids are getting something for free that a BCC parent had to pay a lot for. There is a lot of financial snobbery in our cluster.

Ha ha!

OK, no, that's just not true. I would never in a million years send my kid to an immersion school in MCPS. They're not how immersion should be, which is learning about the history and culture of the countries that speak the language. One cannot simply dissociate language from culture like this. I went to a bilingual school where we studied literature, history and geography from both countries. It was a ton of extra work, but worth it to become fully bilingual and bicultural. In addition, these immersion kids rarely become fully bilingual. I understand parents wanting to send their kids to an immersion if the overall academic level is higher for some reason than in the surrounding schools... but it doesn't look like that's the case in the situation we're discussing.

I have no opinion on where the immersion part of RCF should go. I just wanted to chime in to say that not everyone is a fan of MCPS immersion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was a non RCF parent who posted here that he/she could tell the deck was stacked against the Immersion families when he/she saw the testimony. How could a school recommend that their own school be split? That did not come from an immersion family so all the comments asking why immersion families feel the deck is stacked against them are misdirected. That being said, Immersion families are being thrown under the bus when the PTA supports a recommendation that splits the school and while you throw out your statistics of 55 % you don't mention that only 1/3 of immersion families were included in that vote. My child's vote came back in his yellow folder and he said he forgot to turn it in so our vote never made it in for the vote tally. I wonder how many other votes if 2/3 of the families that were not included actually had their votes counted - it would have resulted in a different outcome. It's so sad to be part of a school that actually votes against itself.

I think the school is crazy to include Immersion in the discussion at all. My child was in French Immersion at Sligo Creek ES five or six years ago during their boundary study and the immersion program wasn't considered in the boundary study. I got that because it was a BOUNDARY discussion about neighborhood lines, and has nothing at all to do with special or choice programs. What's sad is that you think your wishes should matter more than that of the people who live within the cluster boundaries. Why did MCPS let immersion be considered in this boundary study?

Just to be clear, the result in essence takes immersion out of the equation. RCF wants to go to the closer middle school. Under the option proposed by the Superintendent, they get that and the immersion program is staying put at Westland. Immersion has to be SOME part of the equation, because with a new middle school, people are going to wonder what will happen with it (especially since the local neighborhood wants to go to the new middle). I also think it is a fair position for the school to advocate not splitting up the school - why not? And now it turns out they can't have both proximity and staying together, so most people are putting an emphasis on proximity. And FYI, many, many immersion parents are fine just deferring to what the neighborhood kids want to do. Just because someone is saying that immersion was thrown under the bus, doesn't mean that reflects the views of many immersion parents.

There are bizarre leaps of logic here. Let's provide another example to help clarify things. CCES has HGC for 4th and 5th. At 6th grade those kids go back to their home schools or perhaps go to a magnet. Is that unfair? Should they all just continue to MS#2 because the rest of the student body will? Give it a rest already. As PPs have noted, 9/10 kids in the program are OOB. I personally don't have a problem with that, but the real reason the immersion people want MS#2 is because they probably are coming from DCC and also want to be closer to home. Just like the PPs above complaining about transport. This is all that it is. Everyone that lives in boundary should be inconvenienced because people out of boundary in a special program should be more convenience. It is rank entitlement.