Maury Capitol Hill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At the end of the day some of us are trying to engage with human behavior as it actually is and make our predictions data-based and realistic. Are you?

Absolutely and data shows that kids who go to a more diverse school (whether racially, socioeconomically, or academically) can benefit ALL the students.

No it does not. Busing (which is basically what this is) is pretty much universally accepted to be a failure by all sides. In contrast, creating diversity through actual community participation - ie creating schools where IB families chose to go - can result in positive impacts. But at the end of the day there are not enough rich white kids to be the medicine to fix DCPS - and that it what fundamentally makes this a PR exercise and not a legitimate attempt for DCPS to solve its problems.

This is not "basically" busing. If they cluster the schools, no one will be bussed. They will go to their IB, neighborhood school unless they choose to lottery out or go private.

Bussing is when you take kids in one neighborhood and put them on an actual bus to send them to a school in another neighborhood. It has nothing to do with this situation at all.

You clearly don’t understand the analogy, and therefore, also must not understand the history.

Busing was used to integrate schools that were experiencing de facto segregation. Literally NOTHING was done to address racially segregated neighborhoods. Bad leaders simply said, hey, if we swap these kids over here for some over there, then the schools no longer *seem* segregated! Except that ended up ruining the communities of both schools, and many families, including a high percentage of MC black families, ended up choosing parochial schools in their own neighborhoods over their public schools. Busing was most certainly a failed experiment, and led to a steady decline in public education as MC and UMC families exited the public schools. A better, long-term strategy would have been to work on policies to improve racial integration in housing.

Here, you have the same lazy approach, minus physical buses. Hey, there is a low number of at-risk kids over here, with high IB attendance, and a large number over there with low IB attendance. Let’s just mix them together so that the average *seems* better.

Get it? This is not a proposal based on equitable principles and goals. It is lazy governance at its finest.

(By the way, there should be a drinking game for every person who mentions equity and has no actual understanding of it or intention of actually solving problems. The race baiters are so manipulative and evil.)

The notion that Maury families think families at Miner are race baiters who know nothing about equity and are “manipulative and evil” is literally the problem we Miner families have been talking about all along.

You think less of us.

You look down on us.

You insult us and then somehow turn it to sound like WE are the ones insulting YOU.

I would say it’s unbelievable but we are on page 95 of two groups of people fighting—the ones at Maury selfishly caring about only their own kids and the ones at Miner actually giving a damn about all of them. And THAT is equity. Making sure every kid gets what they need to succeed, even if it’s not equal.

PS I know this is not all Maury families but this thread sucks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We’ll check back in 5 years and we’ll have two terrible school. Mark it.

But at least we'll have closed the achievement gap.

[Anonymous]

I’ll follow Billy’s lead here. My name is Chris Deutsch and in the last seven years I’ve sent three kids through Miner. I moved recently for reasons beyond my control and not because of school. If any Maury parent wants to reach out for an honest conversation about Miner feel free, [e-mail]. Or just ask and as long as I can tolerate this thread, which won't be long, I'll answer.

Here’s the gist. Like many schools, Miner has had ups and downs the last few years. What never changed was my kids love of school and their teachers/classmates. My son was in 2nd grade during the shutdown and learned to read virtually because of the heroism of his teacher. I’ve never once worried they would fall behind or weren’t having a positive school experience. So I turned my attention to doing what I could to help other members of the school community.

I’d also caution that there is more to be learned in school than reading and math. Our experience at Miner led to conversations we may never have had, and a broadening of my boys' worldview that will serve them well.

Cities are all about connection and the contract you make when you choose to live here is that you are immediately interconnected with your community. That means success is not how your kids are doing but about how all the kids in the community are doing. It also means occasional sacrifice and discomfort in service of a greater good.

In other words, don’t move here and talk about diversity and equity in a general sense. Do the goddamn work. And always remember there were generations living here before you and they’ll be here after you leave. So try show some decency and respect.

[Anonymous]

Mic drop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maury is not integrated socio-economically, unless by "integrated" you mean "we do have a few poor kids here."

And Maury is 58% white and 20% black in a district that is 17% white and 57% black. Now, I don't think that's automatically a problem -- if we were talking about a neighborhood that was majority white. But we're not. Hill East is majority black. It's just that Maury is a little island of white people who just happen to have their own school. The only other majority white schools on the Hill are SWS and Brent. SWS is an all-city school with all seats awarded via lottery, so there's clearly some self-selection bias going on, but regardless SWS comes in for plenty of criticism for this and an EA preference is in the works for them to address it. And Brent is in a part of Ward 6 that actually is much more overwhelmingly white, so its demographics are less surprising.

So every time someone says integration is impossible, I am confused. LT is a good school and it's 49% white. Payne and Tyler are minority white and they are good schools. Why does Maury's goodness depend on it being majority white with a very small black population?

so 49% white is ok but 58% white is not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At the end of the day some of us are trying to engage with human behavior as it actually is and make our predictions data-based and realistic. Are you?

Absolutely and data shows that kids who go to a more diverse school (whether racially, socioeconomically, or academically) can benefit ALL the students.

No it does not. Busing (which is basically what this is) is pretty much universally accepted to be a failure by all sides. In contrast, creating diversity through actual community participation - ie creating schools where IB families chose to go - can result in positive impacts. But at the end of the day there are not enough rich white kids to be the medicine to fix DCPS - and that it what fundamentally makes this a PR exercise and not a legitimate attempt for DCPS to solve its problems.

This is not "basically" busing. If they cluster the schools, no one will be bussed. They will go to their IB, neighborhood school unless they choose to lottery out or go private.

Bussing is when you take kids in one neighborhood and put them on an actual bus to send them to a school in another neighborhood. It has nothing to do with this situation at all.

You clearly don’t understand the analogy, and therefore, also must not understand the history.

Busing was used to integrate schools that were experiencing de facto segregation. Literally NOTHING was done to address racially segregated neighborhoods. Bad leaders simply said, hey, if we swap these kids over here for some over there, then the schools no longer *seem* segregated! Except that ended up ruining the communities of both schools, and many families, including a high percentage of MC black families, ended up choosing parochial schools in their own neighborhoods over their public schools. Busing was most certainly a failed experiment, and led to a steady decline in public education as MC and UMC families exited the public schools. A better, long-term strategy would have been to work on policies to improve racial integration in housing.

Here, you have the same lazy approach, minus physical buses. Hey, there is a low number of at-risk kids over here, with high IB attendance, and a large number over there with low IB attendance. Let’s just mix them together so that the average *seems* better.

Get it? This is not a proposal based on equitable principles and goals. It is lazy governance at its finest.

(By the way, there should be a drinking game for every person who mentions equity and has no actual understanding of it or intention of actually solving problems. The race baiters are so manipulative and evil.)

The notion that Maury families think families at Miner are race baiters who know nothing about equity and are “manipulative and evil” is literally the problem we Miner families have been talking about all along.

You think less of us.

You look down on us.

You insult us and then somehow turn it to sound like WE are the ones insulting YOU.

I would say it’s unbelievable but we are on page 95 of two groups of people fighting—the ones at Maury selfishly caring about only their own kids and the ones at Miner actually giving a damn about all of them. And THAT is equity. Making sure every kid gets what they need to succeed, even if it’s not equal.

PS I know this is not all Maury families but this thread sucks.

Oh please. You are a Hill East transplant who wants access to Maury so you don’t have to lottery for Two Rivers or move. You don’t care about all children. What a joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ll follow Billy’s lead here. My name is Chris Deutsch and in the last seven years I’ve sent three kids through Miner. I moved recently for reasons beyond my control and not because of school. If any Maury parent wants to reach out for an honest conversation about Miner feel free, [e-mail]. Or just ask and as long as I can tolerate this thread, which won't be long, I'll answer.

Here’s the gist. Like many schools, Miner has had ups and downs the last few years. What never changed was my kids love of school and their teachers/classmates. My son was in 2nd grade during the shutdown and learned to read virtually because of the heroism of his teacher. I’ve never once worried they would fall behind or weren’t having a positive school experience. So I turned my attention to doing what I could to help other members of the school community.

I’d also caution that there is more to be learned in school than reading and math. Our experience at Miner led to conversations we may never have had, and a broadening of my boys' worldview that will serve them well.

Cities are all about connection and the contract you make when you choose to live here is that you are immediately interconnected with your community. That means success is not how your kids are doing but about how all the kids in the community are doing. It also means occasional sacrifice and discomfort in service of a greater good.

In other words, don’t move here and talk about diversity and equity in a general sense. Do the goddamn work. And always remember there were generations living here before you and they’ll be here after you leave. So try show some decency and respect.

If your kid didn’t learn to read until 2nd grade that doesn’t speak very highly of Miner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At the end of the day some of us are trying to engage with human behavior as it actually is and make our predictions data-based and realistic. Are you?

Absolutely and data shows that kids who go to a more diverse school (whether racially, socioeconomically, or academically) can benefit ALL the students.

No it does not. Busing (which is basically what this is) is pretty much universally accepted to be a failure by all sides. In contrast, creating diversity through actual community participation - ie creating schools where IB families chose to go - can result in positive impacts. But at the end of the day there are not enough rich white kids to be the medicine to fix DCPS - and that it what fundamentally makes this a PR exercise and not a legitimate attempt for DCPS to solve its problems.

This is not "basically" busing. If they cluster the schools, no one will be bussed. They will go to their IB, neighborhood school unless they choose to lottery out or go private.

Bussing is when you take kids in one neighborhood and put them on an actual bus to send them to a school in another neighborhood. It has nothing to do with this situation at all.

You clearly don’t understand the analogy, and therefore, also must not understand the history.

Busing was used to integrate schools that were experiencing de facto segregation. Literally NOTHING was done to address racially segregated neighborhoods. Bad leaders simply said, hey, if we swap these kids over here for some over there, then the schools no longer *seem* segregated! Except that ended up ruining the communities of both schools, and many families, including a high percentage of MC black families, ended up choosing parochial schools in their own neighborhoods over their public schools. Busing was most certainly a failed experiment, and led to a steady decline in public education as MC and UMC families exited the public schools. A better, long-term strategy would have been to work on policies to improve racial integration in housing.

Here, you have the same lazy approach, minus physical buses. Hey, there is a low number of at-risk kids over here, with high IB attendance, and a large number over there with low IB attendance. Let’s just mix them together so that the average *seems* better.

Get it? This is not a proposal based on equitable principles and goals. It is lazy governance at its finest.

(By the way, there should be a drinking game for every person who mentions equity and has no actual understanding of it or intention of actually solving problems. The race baiters are so manipulative and evil.)

The notion that Maury families think families at Miner are race baiters who know nothing about equity and are “manipulative and evil” is literally the problem we Miner families have been talking about all along.

You think less of us.

You look down on us.

You insult us and then somehow turn it to sound like WE are the ones insulting YOU.

I would say it’s unbelievable but we are on page 95 of two groups of people fighting—the ones at Maury selfishly caring about only their own kids and the ones at Miner actually giving a damn about all of them. And THAT is equity. Making sure every kid gets what they need to succeed, even if it’s not equal.

PS I know this is not all Maury families but this thread sucks.

Just to clarify, many people posting do not have kids at Miner, including me! I’m explaining - as others are - that simply combining schools with no plans to actually address the needs of the at-risk kids is a huge problem, and one that anyone who cares about equity should be focused on. The Mayor, DME, and DCPS do not care about equity. Not really. They care about data on spreadsheets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At the end of the day some of us are trying to engage with human behavior as it actually is and make our predictions data-based and realistic. Are you?

Absolutely and data shows that kids who go to a more diverse school (whether racially, socioeconomically, or academically) can benefit ALL the students.

No it does not. Busing (which is basically what this is) is pretty much universally accepted to be a failure by all sides. In contrast, creating diversity through actual community participation - ie creating schools where IB families chose to go - can result in positive impacts. But at the end of the day there are not enough rich white kids to be the medicine to fix DCPS - and that it what fundamentally makes this a PR exercise and not a legitimate attempt for DCPS to solve its problems.

This is not "basically" busing. If they cluster the schools, no one will be bussed. They will go to their IB, neighborhood school unless they choose to lottery out or go private.

Bussing is when you take kids in one neighborhood and put them on an actual bus to send them to a school in another neighborhood. It has nothing to do with this situation at all.

You clearly don’t understand the analogy, and therefore, also must not understand the history.

Busing was used to integrate schools that were experiencing de facto segregation. Literally NOTHING was done to address racially segregated neighborhoods. Bad leaders simply said, hey, if we swap these kids over here for some over there, then the schools no longer *seem* segregated! Except that ended up ruining the communities of both schools, and many families, including a high percentage of MC black families, ended up choosing parochial schools in their own neighborhoods over their public schools. Busing was most certainly a failed experiment, and led to a steady decline in public education as MC and UMC families exited the public schools. A better, long-term strategy would have been to work on policies to improve racial integration in housing.

Here, you have the same lazy approach, minus physical buses. Hey, there is a low number of at-risk kids over here, with high IB attendance, and a large number over there with low IB attendance. Let’s just mix them together so that the average *seems* better.

Get it? This is not a proposal based on equitable principles and goals. It is lazy governance at its finest.

(By the way, there should be a drinking game for every person who mentions equity and has no actual understanding of it or intention of actually solving problems. The race baiters are so manipulative and evil.)

The notion that Maury families think families at Miner are race baiters who know nothing about equity and are “manipulative and evil” is literally the problem we Miner families have been talking about all along.

You think less of us.

You look down on us.

You insult us and then somehow turn it to sound like WE are the ones insulting YOU.

I would say it’s unbelievable but we are on page 95 of two groups of people fighting—the ones at Maury selfishly caring about only their own kids and the ones at Miner actually giving a damn about all of them. And THAT is equity. Making sure every kid gets what they need to succeed, even if it’s not equal.

PS I know this is not all Maury families but this thread sucks.

Just to clarify, many people posting do not have kids at Miner, including me! I’m explaining - as others are - that simply combining schools with no plans to actually address the needs of the at-risk kids is a huge problem, and one that anyone who cares about equity should be focused on. The Mayor, DME, and DCPS do not care about equity. Not really. They care about data on spreadsheets.

Edited:
Just to clarify, many people posting here do not have kids at Miner or Maury, including me! I’m explaining - as others are - that simply combining schools with no plans to actually address the needs of the at-risk kids is a huge problem, and one that anyone who cares about equity should be focused on. The Mayor, DME, and DCPS do not care about equity. Not really. They care about data on spreadsheets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Miner does have parents that are trying their hardest to improve the school. All parents automatically join PTA and even donate their entire month’s salary to the PTA.
The PTA at Miner were able to obtain additional faculty because they paid their salary. These folks want the best for their child and their classmates no matter where they attend. So please, can we stop with the Miner parents don’t try hard enough stuff?

This is inaccurate. The Miner PTO has never raised enough money to fund staff.

I was told that the 2nd gym teacher was hired because of PTA funding.

That’s not accurate. He was hired several years ago when the District told the schools that k-5 students had to start having two PE classes a week. The LSAT made hiring that position a budget priority so even PreK students could have PE twice a week. The PTO works very hard but they do not raise $100k per year which is the approximate value assigned to a teacher salary.

Thank you, my apologies for spreading misinformation.
I will point out that it is a fact the PTA encourages its members to donate an equivalent to their monthly salary and parents do care and try hard to improve school.

Not the most important thing, but is this for real? I have never, ever heard of a school requesting that size of donation or even close. So like a family of two GS15s is supposed to be donating $25,000 to the PTA each year?!? WTAF. No, that is not the right way to grow community engagement in a school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hey all. Billy Lynch here, your local fair housing attorney who specializes in housing and school integration. Thought I’d drop some evidenced-based research into this riveting anonymous discussion. TLDR- integrated schools help all students and do not affect white student performance.

http://school-diversity.org/pdf/DiversityResearchBriefNo10.pdf

Integrationists in this thread: I see you and applaud you.

I do really appreciate you engaging non-anonymously.

Some of the studies referenced in this write-up seem to actually lend support to some of the concerns being aired. Here is one excerpt that really stuck out to me (though it's about high school students):

**

The results can also be used to show what would happen if students were redistributed among low-, middle-, and high-SES schools, assuming that nothing else about the schools changed, an assumption we relax below. First, moving students from low-SES to middle-SES schools appears to have little potential impact on their achievement. For example, the achievement growth of a disadvantaged Black student would likely increase by .3 points, or about 2 months of learning; the achievement growth of an average Black student would increase by .4 points, and the achievement growth of an advantaged Black student would increase by .8 points. Whites would experience similar small improvements. Second, much greater impact would occur by moving students to high-SES, or affluent, schools. For example, the achievement of an average Black student would increase by 2 points, or about 1 full year of learning. Whites would also experience substantial improvements, but less than Blacks (1.5 points for an average White student vs. 2 points for an average Black student). . . .

Although moving small numbers of students from middle- to high-SES schools would have little impact on the social composition and the advantages that they enjoy, any large-scale integration of high-SES schools would effectively lower their SES composition and could lower their achievement advantage relative to middle-class schools by altering the school processes that make them so successful (e.g., lowering teacher expectations). If this occurred (an issue we discuss below), the achievement advantages enjoyed by White students in high-SES schools could decline, whereas the potential benefits to Black students in moving to high-SES schools would be less than the present simulations suggest. In the extreme and unlikely case that all low-SES and all high-SES schools were integrated and consequently transformed into middle-class schools, the present analysis suggests that gains in achievement to predominantly minority students moving from low-SES to middle-class schools would be less than the declines in achievement of White students moving from high-SES to middle-class schools. This suggests that integration would lower the achievement gap between Whites and Blacks, but it could also lower overall achievement levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll follow Billy’s lead here. My name is Chris Deutsch and in the last seven years I’ve sent three kids through Miner. I moved recently for reasons beyond my control and not because of school. If any Maury parent wants to reach out for an honest conversation about Miner feel free, [e-mail]. Or just ask and as long as I can tolerate this thread, which won't be long, I'll answer.

Here’s the gist. Like many schools, Miner has had ups and downs the last few years. What never changed was my kids love of school and their teachers/classmates. My son was in 2nd grade during the shutdown and learned to read virtually because of the heroism of his teacher. I’ve never once worried they would fall behind or weren’t having a positive school experience. So I turned my attention to doing what I could to help other members of the school community.

I’d also caution that there is more to be learned in school than reading and math. Our experience at Miner led to conversations we may never have had, and a broadening of my boys' worldview that will serve them well.

Cities are all about connection and the contract you make when you choose to live here is that you are immediately interconnected with your community. That means success is not how your kids are doing but about how all the kids in the community are doing. It also means occasional sacrifice and discomfort in service of a greater good.

In other words, don’t move here and talk about diversity and equity in a general sense. Do the goddamn work. And always remember there were generations living here before you and they’ll be here after you leave. So try show some decency and respect.

If your kid didn’t learn to read until 2nd grade that doesn’t speak very highly of Miner.

From a Maury parent: This comment seems uncivil and unnecessary.

I really appreciate Chris taking part in the conversation and putting himself out there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At the end of the day some of us are trying to engage with human behavior as it actually is and make our predictions data-based and realistic. Are you?

Absolutely and data shows that kids who go to a more diverse school (whether racially, socioeconomically, or academically) can benefit ALL the students.

No it does not. Busing (which is basically what this is) is pretty much universally accepted to be a failure by all sides. In contrast, creating diversity through actual community participation - ie creating schools where IB families chose to go - can result in positive impacts. But at the end of the day there are not enough rich white kids to be the medicine to fix DCPS - and that it what fundamentally makes this a PR exercise and not a legitimate attempt for DCPS to solve its problems.

This is not "basically" busing. If they cluster the schools, no one will be bussed. They will go to their IB, neighborhood school unless they choose to lottery out or go private.

Bussing is when you take kids in one neighborhood and put them on an actual bus to send them to a school in another neighborhood. It has nothing to do with this situation at all.

Combining schools like this to redistribute demographics is just busing on a small scale. Obviously.

Busing as a concept requires that the district physically transport kids to another school. If you can walk to the school in question, it's not busing.

When opponents to the cluster plan say stuff like "this is basically busing" in outrage, it becomes harder to argue that there is not a racial component to their objections. Read a freaking book about desegregation.

I mean, this is a plan intended to move kids around to change the racial demographics of the school. It’s the same thing. There’s absolutely NOTHING racist in questioning whether this helps black kids. What does seem oddly racist is the DME’s belief that a majority black school cannot be a good school, and that the only way for it to be “improved” is to add white kids. PS Maury is desegregated.

Well, that was literally the theory in Brown v. Board—not because a majority black school can’t be great, but because those schools are chronically under-resourced, and whites kids and their parents bring resources (and demands for resources that get responses) with them. So take it up with Thurgood Marshall, I guess. And that’s what is happening at Miner, by the way. There are tons of wonderful, dedicated parents there, but the segregation also means it is a higher proportion of parents who don’t have things like regular work hours or any extra help, or paid leave, so it’s just harder to keep tabs on the school and even do things like volunteer and lobby for changes. It’s not just about the money the PTA can bring, it’s a critical mass of watchful and involved parents who—busy as they may be—have the privilege and flexibility to participate in the school.

Except the Mayor is the one making this decision … so you’d think if Miner lacks resources the Mayor could just fix that directly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey all. Billy Lynch here, your local fair housing attorney who specializes in housing and school integration. Thought I’d drop some evidenced-based research into this riveting anonymous discussion. TLDR- integrated schools help all students and do not affect white student performance.

http://school-diversity.org/pdf/DiversityResearchBriefNo10.pdf

Integrationists in this thread: I see you and applaud you.

I do really appreciate you engaging non-anonymously.

Some of the studies referenced in this write-up seem to actually lend support to some of the concerns being aired. Here is one excerpt that really stuck out to me (though it's about high school students):

**

The results can also be used to show what would happen if students were redistributed among low-, middle-, and high-SES schools, assuming that nothing else about the schools changed, an assumption we relax below. First, moving students from low-SES to middle-SES schools appears to have little potential impact on their achievement. For example, the achievement growth of a disadvantaged Black student would likely increase by .3 points, or about 2 months of learning; the achievement growth of an average Black student would increase by .4 points, and the achievement growth of an advantaged Black student would increase by .8 points. Whites would experience similar small improvements. Second, much greater impact would occur by moving students to high-SES, or affluent, schools. For example, the achievement of an average Black student would increase by 2 points, or about 1 full year of learning. Whites would also experience substantial improvements, but less than Blacks (1.5 points for an average White student vs. 2 points for an average Black student). . . .

Although moving small numbers of students from middle- to high-SES schools would have little impact on the social composition and the advantages that they enjoy, any large-scale integration of high-SES schools would effectively lower their SES composition and could lower their achievement advantage relative to middle-class schools by altering the school processes that make them so successful (e.g., lowering teacher expectations). If this occurred (an issue we discuss below), the achievement advantages enjoyed by White students in high-SES schools could decline, whereas the potential benefits to Black students in moving to high-SES schools would be less than the present simulations suggest. In the extreme and unlikely case that all low-SES and all high-SES schools were integrated and consequently transformed into middle-class schools, the present analysis suggests that gains in achievement to predominantly minority students moving from low-SES to middle-class schools would be less than the declines in achievement of White students moving from high-SES to middle-class schools. This suggests that integration would lower the achievement gap between Whites and Blacks, but it could also lower overall achievement levels.

This lowering of overall achievement has occurred at several schools in DC, including Watkins. If anyone has access to the historical data (which is hard to find in DC - I used to have it more easily available when my children attended the school, but have since deleted most files; perhaps there are blogs that have it readily available), you can actually track the decline when the focus in teaching moved from teaching all kids evenly (which resulted in a relatively large number of high achievers and middle achievers) to focusing nearly entirely on at-risk students (and led to minimal gains for them, but a decline in overall achievement, particularly with high achievers). If anyone tells you this plan will lift all boats, they are lying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey all. Billy Lynch here, your local fair housing attorney who specializes in housing and school integration. Thought I’d drop some evidenced-based research into this riveting anonymous discussion. TLDR- integrated schools help all students and do not affect white student performance.

http://school-diversity.org/pdf/DiversityResearchBriefNo10.pdf

Integrationists in this thread: I see you and applaud you.

Bless you, but these people do not care about that. They don't want the yucky poor people diluting their pure, good, rich person school.

We are reading different threads somehow. By far the nastiest comments have been about (presumed) Maury parents.

Saying "wow some of these comments and reactions are very nasty and hurtful to Miner families" is not, in itself, nasty.

I mean, in the last few pages, we had people pointing out that the comment from a Maury parent that combining with Miner would "dilute" Maury's population was a seriously offensive statement, and it's apparent from some of the responses that people aren't even sure why. Like some of the Maury parents on here actually DEFENDED language that sounds like a quote from a white person in Alabama in 1956. And now I'm sure you'll tell me that saying that is nasty. But it's not! Talking about how how all the poor black kids from Miner will "dilute" your school if they merge is nasty. I cannot believe people don't see this.

Thank you. Not only has the language been defended, but repeated.

the plan is to dilute the percentage of black students at Miner. that’s literally the stated goal. (well they claim it is SES but we know that’s not actually it). this is the underlying theory - too many black kids together make a bad school and they need to be diluted.