Hypocrisy about diverse schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree on re-evaluating the boundaries and making the necessary adjustments but I saw somewhere in California (I can't find the article anymore) where they shifted schools so that they have a theme-based curriculum (a lot like the down county consortium) - such as performing arts, tech, health, etc. Enrollment at these schools, primary and secondary, would be voluntary, with roughly equal numbers of low-income and middle-class students. It really improved outcomes. It's high time that we do this for the entire county.

this is hard too. if these schools do not perform, then it doesn't matter. If they do and people start to try hard to get in, how would the county select who gets in and who does not?

They sort of do this for the DCC now. We can do it for the rest of the county.

[Anonymous]

It is a big problem that the affluent high SES kids march off to the AP and honors classes while the low income students are separated into basic classes. The affluent parents claiming that they just want their kids with the right "academic" cohort are making the EXACT same argument that parents who move into high scoring schools are making. I don't think either group is intentionally racist but they are exactly the same except the first set is hypocritical about it.

Socially, the UMC and poor students don't mix and the UMC parents are generally relieved by this. The UMC parents in schools with more FARMS kids absolutely push to make sure that their kids don't end up with the wrong mix. UMC parents will push for differentiation as early as they can and pressure the schools as much as they can to divert resources back to their kids. In a school with higher FARMS, the poor kids needs the resources much more than the wealthy parents but they have a quieter voice.

UMC kids get 504s and IEPs when they have learning disabilities and most of these kids still get into AP and honors classes. URM students are just seen as bad students and barely pass. I know that without a 504 my DS would have been a D/F student rather than a A/B student. I had the resources to get outside testing and stay on top of MCPS. A poor family does not have those resources. Poverty and limited prenatal care are significant drivers for pre-term birth which increases the likelihood of learning disabilities. Learning disabilities do not mean low IQ but a child needs to be diagnosed and given the appropriate accommodations to succeed. If MCPS would stop fighting making accommodations for kids with learning disabilities, you would see many more low income students rise up into AP and honors classes .It wouldn't solve the entire problem but it would even the playing field a little more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is a big problem that the affluent high SES kids march off to the AP and honors classes while the low income students are separated into basic classes. The affluent parents claiming that they just want their kids with the right "academic" cohort are making the EXACT same argument that parents who move into high scoring schools are making. I don't think either group is intentionally racist but they are exactly the same except the first set is hypocritical about it.

Socially, the UMC and poor students don't mix and the UMC parents are generally relieved by this. The UMC parents in schools with more FARMS kids absolutely push to make sure that their kids don't end up with the wrong mix. UMC parents will push for differentiation as early as they can and pressure the schools as much as they can to divert resources back to their kids. In a school with higher FARMS, the poor kids needs the resources much more than the wealthy parents but they have a quieter voice.

UMC kids get 504s and IEPs when they have learning disabilities and most of these kids still get into AP and honors classes. URM students are just seen as bad students and barely pass. I know that without a 504 my DS would have been a D/F student rather than a A/B student. I had the resources to get outside testing and stay on top of MCPS. A poor family does not have those resources. Poverty and limited prenatal care are significant drivers for pre-term birth which increases the likelihood of learning disabilities. Learning disabilities do not mean low IQ but a child needs to be diagnosed and given the appropriate accommodations to succeed. If MCPS would stop fighting making accommodations for kids with learning disabilities, you would see many more low income students rise up into AP and honors classes .It wouldn't solve the entire problem but it would even the playing field a little more.

The is a gross oversimplification. It's not an either-or proposition. "High scoring schools" avoid many low performers boosting their average. It doesn't mean they have a monopoly on the high-achieving cohort. This exists in many diverse schools too. The difference is one school may have 4 sections of AP English while the other just has 3.

[Anonymous]

The argument is not that they want their kids in the "right" academic cohort, but rather that there IS an academic cohort, even in the high schools DCUM regards as Fort Apache the Bronx.

As for the idea that APs are all upper-middle-class students - even the math doesn't work on that one.

[Anonymous]

High performing schools have more high performing students than low performing schools. Yes, this is obvious. There are some high performing and many more average performing students in low performing schools.

The affluent ones all segregate within the school into a different set of classes than the ones the attended by the poor students. The diversity experience goes out the window because the kids are not being friends with other kids who have a very a different lifestyle than they do. They aren't studying together or taking the same classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:High performing schools have more high performing students than low performing schools. Yes, this is obvious. There are some high performing and many more average performing students in low performing schools.

The affluent ones all segregate within the school into a different set of classes than the ones the attended by the poor students. The diversity experience goes out the window because the kids are not being friends with other kids who have a very a different lifestyle than they do. They aren't studying together or taking the same classes.

It's annoying to read descriptions of what my kid's high school is supposedly like, over and over and over on DCUM, from people who have no idea what my kid's high school is like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is a big problem that the affluent high SES kids march off to the AP and honors classes while the low income students are separated into basic classes. The affluent parents claiming that they just want their kids with the right "academic" cohort are making the EXACT same argument that parents who move into high scoring schools are making. I don't think either group is intentionally racist but they are exactly the same except the first set is hypocritical about it.

Socially, the UMC and poor students don't mix and the UMC parents are generally relieved by this. The UMC parents in schools with more FARMS kids absolutely push to make sure that their kids don't end up with the wrong mix. UMC parents will push for differentiation as early as they can and pressure the schools as much as they can to divert resources back to their kids. In a school with higher FARMS, the poor kids needs the resources much more than the wealthy parents but they have a quieter voice.

UMC kids get 504s and IEPs when they have learning disabilities and most of these kids still get into AP and honors classes. URM students are just seen as bad students and barely pass. I know that without a 504 my DS would have been a D/F student rather than a A/B student. I had the resources to get outside testing and stay on top of MCPS. A poor family does not have those resources. Poverty and limited prenatal care are significant drivers for pre-term birth which increases the likelihood of learning disabilities. Learning disabilities do not mean low IQ but a child needs to be diagnosed and given the appropriate accommodations to succeed. If MCPS would stop fighting making accommodations for kids with learning disabilities, you would see many more low income students rise up into AP and honors classes .It wouldn't solve the entire problem but it would even the playing field a little more.

So again.. how do you suppose MCPS can force parents to test their children for LD, assuming that it's free? How do you force parents to make their kids take AP classes?

I don't live in a w cluster. I grew up low income, and I took AP classes. My parents didn't force me to take those close. They didn't know how to speak English and worked low wage jobs. I was also a premie.

In MD, low income people qualify for low cost healthcare. Mcps has many issues, but the one thing they are trying really hard to do is reach out to non English speaking parents and low income parents. They are trying everything they can to level the playing field a lot more -- see magnet "peer cohort" admission change.

At some point, low income parents and/or students have to take the initiative. MCPS can only do so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:High performing schools have more high performing students than low performing schools. Yes, this is obvious. There are some high performing and many more average performing students in low performing schools.

The affluent ones all segregate within the school into a different set of classes than the ones the attended by the poor students. The diversity experience goes out the window because the kids are not being friends with other kids who have a very a different lifestyle than they do. They aren't studying together or taking the same classes.

Clubs, sports, PE, electives aren't segregated. Kids who have similar interests and values will hang out with each other. I went to a diverse school and I hung out with lots of girls on the cheer squad as I was on it, and kids on the football and basketball teams. It was a diverse group of friends and most of us were middle class, but some were wealthy, and others were low income. No one gave a crap how much our parents made.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High performing schools have more high performing students than low performing schools. Yes, this is obvious. There are some high performing and many more average performing students in low performing schools.

The affluent ones all segregate within the school into a different set of classes than the ones the attended by the poor students. The diversity experience goes out the window because the kids are not being friends with other kids who have a very a different lifestyle than they do. They aren't studying together or taking the same classes.

It's annoying to read descriptions of what my kid's high school is supposedly like, over and over and over on DCUM, from people who have no idea what my kid's high school is like.

+1

I don't know where fols get this idea of what integrated schools are like, but it is not at all reflective of my experience as a parent or my children's experience as students. When I talk about an "academic peer group" at our integrated school, I speak from a place of years of experience. That peer group is racially and economically diverse. It is whiter and richer than the school population, but by no means exclusively white or exclusively UMC.

[Anonymous]

So again.. how do you suppose MCPS can force parents to test their children for LD, assuming that it's free?

You don't have a kid with a learning disability do you? I do and I have been a teacher. MCPS avoids testing at all costs and usually only does it when forced by the parent. MCPS tests are often biased which is why parents will seek out reputable outside testing at universities. Poor kids can't afford this but they seldom get tested in the first place.

Part of this is inappropriate bias as the school admin and teacher assumes that the URM kid is just a poor students due to poverty. Part of this is intentional which is even worse. A 504 or IEP means more work for the school and the schools are loath to put any more kids than they are forced to on them. Low income kids get the short end of the stick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

So again.. how do you suppose MCPS can force parents to test their children for LD, assuming that it's free?

You don't have a kid with a learning disability do you? I do and I have been a teacher. MCPS avoids testing at all costs and usually only does it when forced by the parent. MCPS tests are often biased which is why parents will seek out reputable outside testing at universities. Poor kids can't afford this but they seldom get tested in the first place.

Part of this is inappropriate bias as the school admin and teacher assumes that the URM kid is just a poor students due to poverty. Part of this is intentional which is even worse. A 504 or IEP means more work for the school and the schools are loath to put any more kids than they are forced to on them. Low income kids get the short end of the stick.

Even if MCPS did, how do you force a parent to do this?

I don't disagree that low income students are at a disadvantage, but MCPS does everything it can to help low income students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's not "SES peer cohort".. it's "academic peer cohort" which doesn't mean that they are all not low income. Calm down. You're making a big stink out of nothing.

Yeah no, it has zero to do with academic cohort. Its about SES, making sure that their kids are around kids with educated parents, not food insecure, no drop out siblings, parents are employed/not in jail etc There was a thread a while back with someone asking about New Hampshire Estates and all the posters nearby made a huge deal that the school is too poor so the OP's kids would have a hard time finding friends.

I don't know about that thread, or what a New Hampshire Estate is. But, there is a tipping point in schools wrt low income kids, and there are empirical studies that show that if the low SES percentage stays below it, the high SES kids will generally perform well, no matter what. But if a school gets past that tipping point, the performance of *all* students seems to suffer. For most people, it's about outcomes, not finding rich friends.

And no, I don't have a link to the studies. Sorry.

Up to 20% doesn't matter 20-40% starts taking a hit over 40% the school has to focus on dealing with kids who need help so much the rest of the school population takes a dramatic hit and it actaully does harm to the kids who don't need extra support due to the lack of attention and focus by the school

WHy can't the county give school vouchers to poor families and let them choose a school to attend as long as the school isn't overcrowded or that it hasn't reached the max limit (whatever that % is, let's say 20%) for FARMS?

Think about other parts of our country where the schools are not managed by counties, but as individual school districts. Should a school district just send kids to other districts just because the FARM rate is too high?

If one thinks (or a study shows) high FARM rate for a school is a problem, that is a problem that needs to be dealt with by people managing that school and people living in that community. Shifting the burden to others is not the right way to do it.

But we're not like other parts of the country. We are one county and we have poor schools, rich schools, and those in between in this one county. We've already established that schools with a high number of poor kids are not good for all students at the school; regardless of what the school does or what programs are established at that school. WHy would school vouchers be a burden to other schools as long as they don't significantly drive up the FARM rates and cause overcrowding?

Put it this way: if you can just "voucher" students to other schools without burdening those schools taking these students, why not just re-zone the clusters to reflect that? Also does county funding go with these students to the schools accepting them? If not, that is unfair.

I would feel even giving more funding to high FARM rate schools (so that they can get more manpower etc.) would be better justified.

Title I schools already get additional funds.

I agree with redefining clusters so you get a better cross section of students at schools.

Well MCPS agrees with you on that one because there's a current study going on about a county-wide boundary reassignment. I would love to see this come to fruition but I don't see this happening for many many years.

I don't see how we can come close to evenly distributing FARMS unless we change housing policy. Many of the wealthier schools don't serve areas that have lots of multi-family housing.

"Evenly distributing" is of course, not possible.

Change it somehow, is possible. For example, one can shift part of a high farm region of school cluster A into a neighboring school cluster B. And then shift some of the low FARM region of B into the next cluster C, and then on...

There it is, it always boils down to silver spring wanted to offload a large chuck of it’s poor kids to the west because it is what is best for them err the poor kids. Even you bus some poor kids they will still be way more in the DCC because that’s where they live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

There it is, it always boils down to silver spring wanted to offload a large chuck of it’s poor kids to the west because it is what is best for them err the poor kids. Even you bus some poor kids they will still be way more in the DCC because that’s where they live.

No, that's what you would want to do, if you lived there, but you don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
So again.. how do you suppose MCPS can force parents to test their children for LD, assuming that it's free?

You don't have a kid with a learning disability do you? I do and I have been a teacher. MCPS avoids testing at all costs and usually only does it when forced by the parent. MCPS tests are often biased which is why parents will seek out reputable outside testing at universities. Poor kids can't afford this but they seldom get tested in the first place.

Part of this is inappropriate bias as the school admin and teacher assumes that the URM kid is just a poor students due to poverty. Part of this is intentional which is even worse. A 504 or IEP means more work for the school and the schools are loath to put any more kids than they are forced to on them. Low income kids get the short end of the stick.

Even if MCPS did, how do you force a parent to do this?

I don't disagree that low income students are at a disadvantage, but MCPS does everything it can to help low income students.

BS that MCPS does everything it can to help poor students! MCPS is terrible at actually helping poor students. Its criminal how MCPS ignores special needs in poor children!

A parent does not have to do anything for a child to receive special ed or appropriate accommodations. A parent doesn't have to agree to the testing. For the parents that never respond, the school simply needs to keep a record that they sent home the notifications 504 and IEP accommodations are executed within the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So again.. how do you suppose MCPS can force parents to test their children for LD, assuming that it's free?

You don't have a kid with a learning disability do you? I do and I have been a teacher. MCPS avoids testing at all costs and usually only does it when forced by the parent. MCPS tests are often biased which is why parents will seek out reputable outside testing at universities. Poor kids can't afford this but they seldom get tested in the first place.

Part of this is inappropriate bias as the school admin and teacher assumes that the URM kid is just a poor students due to poverty. Part of this is intentional which is even worse. A 504 or IEP means more work for the school and the schools are loath to put any more kids than they are forced to on them. Low income kids get the short end of the stick.

Even if MCPS did, how do you force a parent to do this?

I don't disagree that low income students are at a disadvantage, but MCPS does everything it can to help low income students.

BS that MCPS does everything it can to help poor students! MCPS is terrible at actually helping poor students. Its criminal how MCPS ignores special needs in poor children!

A parent does not have to do anything for a child to receive special ed or appropriate accommodations. A parent doesn't have to agree to the testing. For the parents that never respond, the school simply needs to keep a record that they sent home the notifications 504 and IEP accommodations are executed within the school.

So how can the school put an IEP together without parent input?