Quince Orchard community meeting for Boundary Analysis

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For most sane parents, this is an entirely financial debate because none of us would ever consider actually sending our children to failing schools if rezoned. It would just be expensive to move, that's all.

I hope the BOE understands that it can change boundaries, but it will never get our kids.

You keep saying that. Who's we, and how will the BoE get whoever-we-are's kids?

My child is not a social experiment.
My child is not a full-time tutor.
My child is not a stairstep as the education politicians look for a promotion.
My family will not play your game.

Your kid is a social experiment because s/he has benefited from a racist system that lifts him/her up by keeping others down.

Why do Asians make 30% more than whites when America put the Japanese in internment camps, wouldn’t even let Chinese people buy property after they were treated horribly in the 19th and early 20th Century? If it’s such a racist system why was it set up so that white people are doing so poorly compared to Asians? Sounds like a pretty poorly planned racist system.

[Anonymous]

People from Ghana and Nigeria are making more on average per household than whites as of 2016. They must have missed the “racist system” memo.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

[Anonymous]

Yes, there was racism 50 years ago, but gradually it has become less and less. We even elected Obama as our president.

It's time to work hard and improve. Victim mentality in all issues won't help. Comparing segregation of past to current situation in MCPS is absurd. Everyone is allowed to buy property anywhere and attend any school.

MCPS can still try to have diverse schools as much as possible, but let's not use segregation and compare it to past.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For most sane parents, this is an entirely financial debate because none of us would ever consider actually sending our children to failing schools if rezoned. It would just be expensive to move, that's all.

I hope the BOE understands that it can change boundaries, but it will never get our kids.

You keep saying that. Who's we, and how will the BoE get whoever-we-are's kids?

My child is not a social experiment.
My child is not a full-time tutor.
My child is not a stairstep as the education politicians look for a promotion.
My family will not play your game.

Your kid is a social experiment because s/he has benefited from a racist system that lifts him/her up by keeping others down.

Why do Asians make 30% more than whites when America put the Japanese in internment camps, wouldn’t even let Chinese people buy property after they were treated horribly in the 19th and early 20th Century? If it’s such a racist system why was it set up so that white people are doing so poorly compared to Asians? Sounds like a pretty poorly planned racist system.

Chinese and Korean immigrants do well. They are the model minorities. Other Asians like Vietnamese and Cambodian and Thai have high poverty rates. In Montgomery County,mejores actually make more than Asians. Because what matters more is why certain immigrant populations came here. For education? Or as refugees? And studies show second generation Asians do no better than whites. So the effects are only temporary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People from Ghana and Nigeria are making more on average per household than whites as of 2016. They must have missed the “racist system” memo.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

They are immigrants, who likely had resources in their home countries, unlike African Americans who have systematically been denied the opportunity to accumulate wealth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For most sane parents, this is an entirely financial debate because none of us would ever consider actually sending our children to failing schools if rezoned. It would just be expensive to move, that's all.

I hope the BOE understands that it can change boundaries, but it will never get our kids.

You keep saying that. Who's we, and how will the BoE get whoever-we-are's kids?

My child is not a social experiment.
My child is not a full-time tutor.
My child is not a stairstep as the education politicians look for a promotion.
My family will not play your game.

Your kid is a social experiment because s/he has benefited from a racist system that lifts him/her up by keeping others down.

Too bad you were not able to do the same for your kid, despite every affirmative action advantage in this great land.

Somehow I managed as a child of a divorced recent immigrant mother who made $7.50 per hour while I attended college.

I did. Because I’m white. I got out of poverty relatively easily. Because the system works to my advantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

1. scores - I asked this before. How is being around a few more lower performing kids going to make your kids dumber? If the boundaries are changed, don't you think the FARMs rate and performance of the student body will change accordingly? You're thinking that only your child will be going to the new school surrounded by dumber kids. Where's the logic here?

2. reputation - what is the rep based on? First hand knowldedge? Gossip? GS scores? That goes back to #1 above.

For example, many W parents think that non W schools are terrible because they have "low" test scores, and so those schools have a terrible reputation amongst those parents, yet, many parents like those in the QO cluster will say that's not true. QO is a great school. Right? Example of reputation not based on first hand knowledge but on test scores.

These are not immoral reasons and I am just pointing these out against some hypocrisy from people who define "not willing to ..." as immoral.
Whether these are good reasons that can convince you (so that you could support their objectives) or BoE, is an entirely different issue - which I have no intention to do.


The thing that people need to think about is WHY are these schools underperforming? I say it is the parents. The kids get no support from parents who do not put a high priority on education. The reason the W schools are so successful is because the kids have strong family support. By the way, it has nothing to do with money. I am sure there are some successful kids at these poorer performing schools who have parental support. Look at the Asian population. Many of them can't really afford to live in the W neighborhoods and buy the cheapest, smallest homes they can and cram multi generations into those homes. They are hyper focused on getting ahead through education. This is why they are successful. The parents of the kids in the schools that are failing are the exact opposite. Many just have no clue or don't care. Some don't have time because of multiple jobs. But what happens is that these kids get swallowed up by a culture of mediocrity and consider that normal and fine. Moving these kids with poor family life/parenting to a W school won't change a thing because public schools are not required to parent in addition to educating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having more low performing kids at your school doesn’t hurt your kid. The biggest predictors of educational achievement are household income and the mother’s education level. Those won’t change for your family regardless of who your kids go to school with.

What bring more low income/performing kids into a wealthier school does, though, is expose those kids to more resources, and a parent body that has both the knowledge and opportunity to advocate for more resources for that particular school.

Yeah sure. For example, getting paired in a project with someone who simply does not study at all, that does not hurt your kid. It may be annoying but that is fine. The teachers and other students know how these kids do things so it is not going to affect your kid's grade. Ask your kids if they would enjoy that.

Again, low income is fine. Many low income kids do fine because they work hard - they may get achieve even more if provided the opportunities but even without those, they can do fine. I would think providing opportunities to them would be useful

But "low performing" kids? you certainly have more bad apples in that group.

Please. There are always slackers in team projects. Part of what your kid will learn is how to cope. Because that’s real life. If you shield them from real life in the real world, you are the one doing your kid a disservice. Most MCPS kids WANT more diversity. Thank goodness the kids are not as fearful as the parents.

I hope you are not saying that based on handpicked students at testimony who were pretty much related to small group of MCCPTA leadership having their own agenda.

Exactly. Those kids who testified were brainwashed and coached.

[Anonymous]

Yeah...those kids do not know what it took to buy the houses in the areas they live in and the mortgage still left to be paid. Nice to have the luxury of being idealistic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People from Ghana and Nigeria are making more on average per household than whites as of 2016. They must have missed the “racist system” memo.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

They are immigrants, who likely had resources in their home countries, unlike African Americans who have systematically been denied the opportunity to accumulate wealth.

There is a big difference in historical and societal pressures that affect AAs and immigrants from Nigeria and Ghana, especially historical and societal legacies from Jim Crow and slavery. But it’s hard to argue that a system is a racist, white supremacist, wholly oppressive system when some groups of blacks actually make more money per household than whites and other racial groups like Asians make 30% more. It’s even harder to make an argument that Hispanics are suffering from this “racist” system when Japanese people, whose forefathers were put in camps, make more than 20% more than whites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having more low performing kids at your school doesn’t hurt your kid. The biggest predictors of educational achievement are household income and the mother’s education level. Those won’t change for your family regardless of who your kids go to school with.

What bring more low income/performing kids into a wealthier school does, though, is expose those kids to more resources, and a parent body that has both the knowledge and opportunity to advocate for more resources for that particular school.

Yeah sure. For example, getting paired in a project with someone who simply does not study at all, that does not hurt your kid. It may be annoying but that is fine. The teachers and other students know how these kids do things so it is not going to affect your kid's grade. Ask your kids if they would enjoy that.

Again, low income is fine. Many low income kids do fine because they work hard - they may get achieve even more if provided the opportunities but even without those, they can do fine. I would think providing opportunities to them would be useful

But "low performing" kids? you certainly have more bad apples in that group.

Please. There are always slackers in team projects. Part of what your kid will learn is how to cope. Because that’s real life. If you shield them from real life in the real world, you are the one doing your kid a disservice. Most MCPS kids WANT more diversity. Thank goodness the kids are not as fearful as the parents.

I hope you are not saying that based on handpicked students at testimony who were pretty much related to small group of MCCPTA leadership having their own agenda.

Exactly. Those kids who testified were brainwashed and coached.

it's equally plausible that the parents were brainwashed and coached.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Why do Asians make 30% more than whites when America put the Japanese in internment camps, wouldn’t even let Chinese people buy property after they were treated horribly in the 19th and early 20th Century? If it’s such a racist system why was it set up so that white people are doing so poorly compared to Asians? Sounds like a pretty poorly planned racist system.

Good recent article here on the Asian "model minority" stereotype: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/magazine/wp/2019/03/18/feature/does-affirmative-action-help-or-hurt-asians-who-dont-fit-the-model-minority-stereotype/?utm_term=.67529adc685b

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having more low performing kids at your school doesn’t hurt your kid. The biggest predictors of educational achievement are household income and the mother’s education level. Those won’t change for your family regardless of who your kids go to school with.

What bring more low income/performing kids into a wealthier school does, though, is expose those kids to more resources, and a parent body that has both the knowledge and opportunity to advocate for more resources for that particular school.

Yeah sure. For example, getting paired in a project with someone who simply does not study at all, that does not hurt your kid. It may be annoying but that is fine. The teachers and other students know how these kids do things so it is not going to affect your kid's grade. Ask your kids if they would enjoy that.

Again, low income is fine. Many low income kids do fine because they work hard - they may get achieve even more if provided the opportunities but even without those, they can do fine. I would think providing opportunities to them would be useful

But "low performing" kids? you certainly have more bad apples in that group.

Sure, that sucks. My kids have had to deal with it. That's life. Hasn't that happened to you at work? In college? Do you honestly think that sh1t like this doesn't happen in higher performing schools? My kid went to an HGC, and this happened to DC there, too. Didn't hurt my kid. In fact, it taught my kid to be more resilient. I don't subscribe to the "lawnmower", "snowplow" parent where I think it's my job to remove every road block from my kids' successes.

Also, in HS, if your kid is high performing, your kid will be separated from the riff raff if your kid takes AP/honors courses. No worries there.

Of course it does too.

But who would like to deliberately and willingly increase the chance of that happening?

Because your kids learn from it too. And they won’t be able to slack themselves. They will have to innovate, be creative, be a problem solver, and work hard. All good things.

OK, so would you like to deliberately and willingly increasing the chance of having "bad apples" around your kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

OK, so would you like to deliberately and willingly increasing the chance of having "bad apples" around your kids?

Increasing "bad apples" around your kids, how? Are you saying that there are more "bad apples" among poor kids than among non-poor kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Why do Asians make 30% more than whites when America put the Japanese in internment camps, wouldn’t even let Chinese people buy property after they were treated horribly in the 19th and early 20th Century? If it’s such a racist system why was it set up so that white people are doing so poorly compared to Asians? Sounds like a pretty poorly planned racist system.

Because they work harder than your average white person and did well for themselves in spite of America's racist past.

So, what you are saying is that URM should work harder in spite of some people's racism?

That's some white privilege there.

BTW, Asian Americans are *still* being discriminated against in higher education. But, that's another topic.