MCPS Hosts Boundary Assessment Community Conversations
Montgomery County Public Schools is hosting four community conversations to seek input about a systemwide school boundary analysis.
The school board requested that MCPS’s superintendent use “external consultants to conduct an in-depth review an analysis of how existing school and cluster boundaries support or hinder the effective use of school facilities in MCPS.”
The conversations will help school officials understand how to best focus their analysis.
All of the conversations are held from 7 to 9 p.m. Here are the locations and times of each meeting.
- April 4 – Quince Orchard High School in Gaithersburg
- April 10 – John F. Kennedy High School in Silver Spring
- April 11 – Earle B. Wood Middle School in Rockville
- April 23 – Walter Johnson High School in Bethesda
People can RSVP to one of these conversations at this link. Anyone who wants to provide feedback but can’t attend the meeting can do so here.
About Deirdre Byrne
Deirdre Byrne is a social media coordinator for Montgomery Community Media. She can be reached at dbyrne@mymcmedia.org or on twitter at @DeirdreByrneMCM.
This meeting last night was not truly a conversation at all. The county presented three pre-drafted questions as the sole parameters for “discussion” without any interest in hearing what parents had to say regarding other solutions to the underlying problem that began this whole process in the first place. What a shame that we cannot be heard unless what we have to say is an answer to their three questions. These questions assume the premise that the review of cluster boundaries is the answer to the alleged disparity in schools currently. I disagree but the county doesn’t even want to go there and shut down anyone who raised that topic last evening. Let’s just say thisndid not go over well with most parents that attended. Why even engage in parent conversation when it is a one-way closely guided discussion? A conversation is an open two-way discussion. The county’s format is a carefully crafted and narrow, almost predetermined formality. The county is purporting to seek “input and engagement at every stage of the process.” Well it seems that many stages have already been implemented without any input and engagement, and that on which the county is seeking engagement is limited to their three questions only. A boundary change is not the simple answer to the bigger more complex issues, but somehow the board has adopted the idea that the boundary changes will magically solve problems plaguing some of the schools in the county. Many of us are concerned that our children will be deeply impacted by this so-called boundary analysis so forgive me if we have thoughts and concerns that extend beyond the three limited questions that the county poses. (The questions I’m referring to are paraphrased as follows for sake of brevity: 1. As a resident what issues are important in boundary analysis; 2. What are greatest concerns among parents about current zones; 3. What do you want to learn from boundary analysis.)
I don’t think these questions are that bad. They just seem too open-ended. I suspect your answers probably align with my own:
1. As a resident what issues are important in boundary analysis: Ensuring that all students are given the best opportunity to succeed and are treated fairly, including allowing students to go to the school closest to their home.
2. What are greatest concerns among parents about current zones: The potential for adjustments that might move students to schools that are too far away.
3. What do you want to learn from boundary analysis: Whether adjustments can be made consistent with my priorities.