Tells us about the Gen Ed classes at Langley HS and how they compare to GenEd at other FCPS HS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading another thread made me wonder. Are Langley HS Gen Ed classes filled with ruffians like other HS in certain parts of western Fairfax?

There are problem kids in both GE and AP classes, OP - you can't avoid them, in any school, including LHS. The more you know.....

I’m a parent in a much maligned school pyramid. Like everywhere in FCPS there are problems but there is a lot more good. So many people here have a Langley (McLean, …) or bust attitude about the schools. Even I. This thread someone is claiming that the gen Ed / non-Honors classes at Langley are more rigorous than the AP classes at places like Herndon. I don’t know if they are being sarcastic, but plenty DCUMers are not. FWIW I came from a rough inner city neighborhood that makes FCPS look like the Emerald City. -OP

[Anonymous]

Obviously, OP, the less-academically-inclined population in a school is going to be in the gen-ed/non-honors classes. So, use what you know about the overall population at Langley vs. Hayfield or other school, and then think about what kids make up the lower tier in that school... and there's your gen. ed. population.

Now, my kid goes to one of the upper tier schools, and he was in AAP in ES, and scores a 98% on the PSAT verbal exam... and yet, he insists on taking gen-ed English at his HS. So, yes, there are some normal/smart kids in gen ed in the upper tier HSs. BUT, when you go to the lower tier HSs, there is no way I'd let me son be in gen ed. We moved out of the Hayfield zone, and know plenty of parents from there. The "normal" kids are not able to learn in the gen ed classes b/c the teachers are not able to teach... because the lowest tier of kids in certain schools choose to harass the teacher and other students and generally ruin it for everyone.

So, gen-ed at some schools is fine (although DS does say that most kids are not paying attention during class in gen ed. They aren't "disruptive" -- but they are purposely not engaged at his school. He never feels unsafe and isn't seeing rude/harassing behavior in gen ed Eng.) Gen-ed in other schools is not somewhere you would want your kid to be.

Look at the neighborhoods and you know what kind of kids are going to the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Obviously, OP, the less-academically-inclined population in a school is going to be in the gen-ed/non-honors classes. So, use what you know about the overall population at Langley vs. Hayfield or other school, and then think about what kids make up the lower tier in that school... and there's your gen. ed. population.

Now, my kid goes to one of the upper tier schools, and he was in AAP in ES, and scores a 98% on the PSAT verbal exam... and yet, he insists on taking gen-ed English at his HS. So, yes, there are some normal/smart kids in gen ed in the upper tier HSs. BUT, when you go to the lower tier HSs, there is no way I'd let me son be in gen ed. We moved out of the Hayfield zone, and know plenty of parents from there. The "normal" kids are not able to learn in the gen ed classes b/c the teachers are not able to teach... because the lowest tier of kids in certain schools choose to harass the teacher and other students and generally ruin it for everyone.

So, gen-ed at some schools is fine (although DS does say that most kids are not paying attention during class in gen ed. They aren't "disruptive" -- but they are purposely not engaged at his school. He never feels unsafe and isn't seeing rude/harassing behavior in gen ed Eng.) Gen-ed in other schools is not somewhere you would want your kid to be.

Look at the neighborhoods and you know what kind of kids are going to the school.

Wow. I’m not sure where to begin.

[Anonymous]

I mean isn't the average house in that pyramid 1.5m or so? And there aren't any apartments or townhouses districted to it? Then sure, the gen ed kids are going to be better. Even the dumb kids in rich families get tutored. If their parents are too busy to parent, they pay other people to do it.

We're at a title one school and there are a lot of problems that come with poverty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously, OP, the less-academically-inclined population in a school is going to be in the gen-ed/non-honors classes. So, use what you know about the overall population at Langley vs. Hayfield or other school, and then think about what kids make up the lower tier in that school... and there's your gen. ed. population.

Now, my kid goes to one of the upper tier schools, and he was in AAP in ES, and scores a 98% on the PSAT verbal exam... and yet, he insists on taking gen-ed English at his HS. So, yes, there are some normal/smart kids in gen ed in the upper tier HSs. BUT, when you go to the lower tier HSs, there is no way I'd let me son be in gen ed. We moved out of the Hayfield zone, and know plenty of parents from there. The "normal" kids are not able to learn in the gen ed classes b/c the teachers are not able to teach... because the lowest tier of kids in certain schools choose to harass the teacher and other students and generally ruin it for everyone.

So, gen-ed at some schools is fine (although DS does say that most kids are not paying attention during class in gen ed. They aren't "disruptive" -- but they are purposely not engaged at his school. He never feels unsafe and isn't seeing rude/harassing behavior in gen ed Eng.) Gen-ed in other schools is not somewhere you would want your kid to be.

Look at the neighborhoods and you know what kind of kids are going to the school.

Wow. I’m not sure where to begin.

Last PP, where do you think the kids from each school come from? Mars? Maryland? Loudoun County? I mean, the neighborhood housing story tells you what is happening in the schools! It's not rocket science. But, sure, clutch your pearls and pretend to be hold some faux equality argument. Household income is tightly correlated with SAT scores. You think the kids from the public housing projects are just as academically inclined/interested as the kids at Langley????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously, OP, the less-academically-inclined population in a school is going to be in the gen-ed/non-honors classes. So, use what you know about the overall population at Langley vs. Hayfield or other school, and then think about what kids make up the lower tier in that school... and there's your gen. ed. population.

Now, my kid goes to one of the upper tier schools, and he was in AAP in ES, and scores a 98% on the PSAT verbal exam... and yet, he insists on taking gen-ed English at his HS. So, yes, there are some normal/smart kids in gen ed in the upper tier HSs. BUT, when you go to the lower tier HSs, there is no way I'd let me son be in gen ed. We moved out of the Hayfield zone, and know plenty of parents from there. The "normal" kids are not able to learn in the gen ed classes b/c the teachers are not able to teach... because the lowest tier of kids in certain schools choose to harass the teacher and other students and generally ruin it for everyone.

So, gen-ed at some schools is fine (although DS does say that most kids are not paying attention during class in gen ed. They aren't "disruptive" -- but they are purposely not engaged at his school. He never feels unsafe and isn't seeing rude/harassing behavior in gen ed Eng.) Gen-ed in other schools is not somewhere you would want your kid to be.

Look at the neighborhoods and you know what kind of kids are going to the school.

Wow. I’m not sure where to begin.

Last PP, where do you think the kids from each school come from? Mars? Maryland? Loudoun County? I mean, the neighborhood housing story tells you what is happening in the schools! It's not rocket science. But, sure, clutch your pearls and pretend to be hold some faux equality argument. Household income is tightly correlated with SAT scores. You think the kids from the public housing projects are just as academically inclined/interested as the kids at Langley????

+1,000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously, OP, the less-academically-inclined population in a school is going to be in the gen-ed/non-honors classes. So, use what you know about the overall population at Langley vs. Hayfield or other school, and then think about what kids make up the lower tier in that school... and there's your gen. ed. population.

Now, my kid goes to one of the upper tier schools, and he was in AAP in ES, and scores a 98% on the PSAT verbal exam... and yet, he insists on taking gen-ed English at his HS. So, yes, there are some normal/smart kids in gen ed in the upper tier HSs. BUT, when you go to the lower tier HSs, there is no way I'd let me son be in gen ed. We moved out of the Hayfield zone, and know plenty of parents from there. The "normal" kids are not able to learn in the gen ed classes b/c the teachers are not able to teach... because the lowest tier of kids in certain schools choose to harass the teacher and other students and generally ruin it for everyone.

So, gen-ed at some schools is fine (although DS does say that most kids are not paying attention during class in gen ed. They aren't "disruptive" -- but they are purposely not engaged at his school. He never feels unsafe and isn't seeing rude/harassing behavior in gen ed Eng.) Gen-ed in other schools is not somewhere you would want your kid to be.

Look at the neighborhoods and you know what kind of kids are going to the school.

Wow. I’m not sure where to begin.

Last PP, where do you think the kids from each school come from? Mars? Maryland? Loudoun County? I mean, the neighborhood housing story tells you what is happening in the schools! It's not rocket science. But, sure, clutch your pearls and pretend to be hold some faux equality argument. Household income is tightly correlated with SAT scores. You think the kids from the public housing projects are just as academically inclined/interested as the kids at Langley????

Listen — my kids are in the so-called poor neighborhood. There are no pearls here. I grew up a block from an inner city housing project.I’m not looking to move. My kids are in an excellent situation here. Not ideal but very, very good. Moved out of FCC. Too homogenous which does not foster a good understanding of the real world. They have friends with truly diverse backgrounds — not just racial. -OP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously, OP, the less-academically-inclined population in a school is going to be in the gen-ed/non-honors classes. So, use what you know about the overall population at Langley vs. Hayfield or other school, and then think about what kids make up the lower tier in that school... and there's your gen. ed. population.

Now, my kid goes to one of the upper tier schools, and he was in AAP in ES, and scores a 98% on the PSAT verbal exam... and yet, he insists on taking gen-ed English at his HS. So, yes, there are some normal/smart kids in gen ed in the upper tier HSs. BUT, when you go to the lower tier HSs, there is no way I'd let me son be in gen ed. We moved out of the Hayfield zone, and know plenty of parents from there. The "normal" kids are not able to learn in the gen ed classes b/c the teachers are not able to teach... because the lowest tier of kids in certain schools choose to harass the teacher and other students and generally ruin it for everyone.

So, gen-ed at some schools is fine (although DS does say that most kids are not paying attention during class in gen ed. They aren't "disruptive" -- but they are purposely not engaged at his school. He never feels unsafe and isn't seeing rude/harassing behavior in gen ed Eng.) Gen-ed in other schools is not somewhere you would want your kid to be.

Look at the neighborhoods and you know what kind of kids are going to the school.

Wow. I’m not sure where to begin.

Last PP, where do you think the kids from each school come from? Mars? Maryland? Loudoun County? I mean, the neighborhood housing story tells you what is happening in the schools! It's not rocket science. But, sure, clutch your pearls and pretend to be hold some faux equality argument. Household income is tightly correlated with SAT scores. You think the kids from the public housing projects are just as academically inclined/interested as the kids at Langley????

The PP’s post was elitist if nit racist which is why I cannot find the words to respond properly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously, OP, the less-academically-inclined population in a school is going to be in the gen-ed/non-honors classes. So, use what you know about the overall population at Langley vs. Hayfield or other school, and then think about what kids make up the lower tier in that school... and there's your gen. ed. population.

Now, my kid goes to one of the upper tier schools, and he was in AAP in ES, and scores a 98% on the PSAT verbal exam... and yet, he insists on taking gen-ed English at his HS. So, yes, there are some normal/smart kids in gen ed in the upper tier HSs. BUT, when you go to the lower tier HSs, there is no way I'd let me son be in gen ed. We moved out of the Hayfield zone, and know plenty of parents from there. The "normal" kids are not able to learn in the gen ed classes b/c the teachers are not able to teach... because the lowest tier of kids in certain schools choose to harass the teacher and other students and generally ruin it for everyone.

So, gen-ed at some schools is fine (although DS does say that most kids are not paying attention during class in gen ed. They aren't "disruptive" -- but they are purposely not engaged at his school. He never feels unsafe and isn't seeing rude/harassing behavior in gen ed Eng.) Gen-ed in other schools is not somewhere you would want your kid to be.

Look at the neighborhoods and you know what kind of kids are going to the school.

Wow. I’m not sure where to begin.

Last PP, where do you think the kids from each school come from? Mars? Maryland? Loudoun County? I mean, the neighborhood housing story tells you what is happening in the schools! It's not rocket science. But, sure, clutch your pearls and pretend to be hold some faux equality argument. Household income is tightly correlated with SAT scores. You think the kids from the public housing projects are just as academically inclined/interested as the kids at Langley????

The PP’s post was elitist if nit racist which is why I cannot find the words to respond properly.

Reality is what reality is. If poor kids make great classmates, then everyone should be running to get their kids into Lewis and Mount Vernon HSs. Haven't seen that happen in the last 20 yrs.

[Anonymous]

And if apartment living really brings out the highest academic performance -- then bring on the apartments! But, we don't see that. We see that the type of housing in a school zone reflects the income level of the population who will move into that school zone and ultimately send their kids to that school. When Fairfax County clusters lower-cost housing in certain HS zones, they are ensuring that those schools will have certain demographics... and therefore certain achievement profiles.

It's not elitist or racist to state the connection. Housing reflects income. Income correlates with academic achievement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And if apartment living really brings out the highest academic performance -- then bring on the apartments! But, we don't see that. We see that the type of housing in a school zone reflects the income level of the population who will move into that school zone and ultimately send their kids to that school. When Fairfax County clusters lower-cost housing in certain HS zones, they are ensuring that those schools will have certain demographics... and therefore certain achievement profiles.

It's not elitist or racist to state the connection. Housing reflects income. Income correlates with academic achievement.

It is 1000% elitist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of Langley kids take “gen ed” classes. I can’t tell you if regular classes are full of ruffians, but both of my older kids took regular classes alongside Honors and APs, and I don’t think they are ruffians. My DD took regular Pre-Calculus/Trig after getting a B- in Algebra II Honors during the pandemic, and then AP Calculus as a senior. She did say the regular math class was easy, but it still set her up nicely for AP Calc.

+1
My kids also took a mix of regular, honors, and APs. There are all kinds of kids in all the classes. Also, how would we compare to other high schools if our kids only go to this one? Strange thread, probably trolling (as usual).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean isn't the average house in that pyramid 1.5m or so? And there aren't any apartments or townhouses districted to it? Then sure, the gen ed kids are going to be better. Even the dumb kids in rich families get tutored. If their parents are too busy to parent, they pay other people to do it.

We're at a title one school and there are a lot of problems that come with poverty.

There are townhouse communities that are in-boundary for Langley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And if apartment living really brings out the highest academic performance -- then bring on the apartments! But, we don't see that. We see that the type of housing in a school zone reflects the income level of the population who will move into that school zone and ultimately send their kids to that school. When Fairfax County clusters lower-cost housing in certain HS zones, they are ensuring that those schools will have certain demographics... and therefore certain achievement profiles.

It's not elitist or racist to state the connection. Housing reflects income. Income correlates with academic achievement.

+1 I don’t get why it’s so bad to state the obvious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean isn't the average house in that pyramid 1.5m or so? And there aren't any apartments or townhouses districted to it? Then sure, the gen ed kids are going to be better. Even the dumb kids in rich families get tutored. If their parents are too busy to parent, they pay other people to do it.

We're at a title one school and there are a lot of problems that come with poverty.

There are townhouse communities that are in-boundary for Langley.

Basically just two townhouse developments and they start at $800K. Plus Langley areas have lobbied before to keep apartments out.