Why does everyone pretend school quality is about the school itself?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's only PART of the reason, OP. The other parts are:

1. Funding, management and educational direction of the school system.

2. In wealthy neighborhoods, parental pressure acting alongside teachers and staff looking to be hired in those schools, that work towards keeping the best teachers at those locations.

There are some incredibly well-funded failing schools in this country.

There's a point where no amount of money will make a difference. The underlying issue is families and values, which the state cannot legislate.

Nevertheless, even at some moderate to high FARMs schools, there are sufficiently large groups of high-performing students. Sure, an affluent school may have 8 sections of AP English whereas the higher FARMs school may have 3 but the same kid would do fine in either school since their success has more to do with family values and parental education.

[Anonymous]

My school is 25% FARMS, so not super rich, but definitely not a high poverty school. It is performing significantly worse than neighboring Title 1 schools where about 45-% of kids are on free or reduced lunch. This is in a district that spends maybe 20K per student.

Yes very high SES schools are going to perform much better than very high poverty schools. SES is a huge factor. But it’s a terrible idea to ignore other factors at play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's only PART of the reason, OP. The other parts are:

1. Funding, management and educational direction of the school system.

2. In wealthy neighborhoods, parental pressure acting alongside teachers and staff looking to be hired in those schools, that work towards keeping the best teachers at those locations.

There are some incredibly well-funded failing schools in this country.

There's a point where no amount of money will make a difference. The underlying issue is families and values, which the state cannot legislate.

Nevertheless, even at some moderate to high FARMs schools, there are sufficiently large groups of high-performing students. Sure, an affluent school may have 8 sections of AP English whereas the higher FARMs school may have 3 but the same kid would do fine in either school since their success has more to do with family values and parental education.

Values. Ha. What an obnoxious attitude.

They track performance of kids who are from economically challenged families. Their performance varies greatly based on the school.

[Anonymous]

Lead and teaching pedagogy matter, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's only PART of the reason, OP. The other parts are:

1. Funding, management and educational direction of the school system.

2. In wealthy neighborhoods, parental pressure acting alongside teachers and staff looking to be hired in those schools, that work towards keeping the best teachers at those locations.

There are some incredibly well-funded failing schools in this country.

There's a point where no amount of money will make a difference. The underlying issue is families and values, which the state cannot legislate.

Nevertheless, even at some moderate to high FARMs schools, there are sufficiently large groups of high-performing students. Sure, an affluent school may have 8 sections of AP English whereas the higher FARMs school may have 3 but the same kid would do fine in either school since their success has more to do with family values and parental education.

Values. Ha. What an obnoxious attitude.

They track performance of kids who are from economically challenged families. Their performance varies greatly based on the school.

if you made a heat map of affluence it would track that even more so... and conversely poverty

[Anonymous]

Is it because high SES families provide an atmosphere conducive to studying, or because they compensate for gaps in curriculum and teaching by tutoring their kids outside school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And not the type of families who send their kids to that school? 95% of whether a school is considered "good" or not has nothing to do with how big their budget is. Good students make a school good, not the other way around.

People pretend this because it’s not socially acceptable to say “I want to send my kids to a school without poor kids.” It’s more socially acceptable to say “I want to send my kids to a good school.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it because high SES families provide an atmosphere conducive to studying, or because they compensate for gaps in curriculum and teaching by tutoring their kids outside school?

Both. High SES families also place higher expectations on their kids.

Stereotypically, that's what makes Asians do well at school. Asian immigrant parents do not tolerate many Bs and Cs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ever been to Connecticut? New Jersey? Pennsylvania?

Give me 50 reform Jewish kids, Hindus, Koreans and han Chinese — all from two parent households and all I need is a photocopier, an overhead projector from the 80s and a one room School house / even with dirt floors.

It would be one of the highest scoring schools in the north east

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ever been to Connecticut? New Jersey? Pennsylvania?

Give me 50 reform Jewish kids, Hindus, Koreans and han Chinese — all from two parent households and all I need is a photocopier, an overhead projector from the 80s and a one room School house / even with dirt floors.

It would be one of the highest scoring schools in the north east

Why aren’t Lee or Edison HSs in FCPS thriving then? Full of refugees

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ever been to Connecticut? New Jersey? Pennsylvania?

Give me 50 reform Jewish kids, Hindus, Koreans and han Chinese — all from two parent households and all I need is a photocopier, an overhead projector from the 80s and a one room School house / even with dirt floors.

It would be one of the highest scoring schools in the north east

Too bad. You don’t get to exclude Black children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ever been to Connecticut? New Jersey? Pennsylvania?

Give me 50 reform Jewish kids, Hindus, Koreans and han Chinese — all from two parent households and all I need is a photocopier, an overhead projector from the 80s and a one room School house / even with dirt floors.

It would be one of the highest scoring schools in the north east

Why aren’t Lee or Edison HSs in FCPS thriving then? Full of refugees

Lee and Edison don’t have the mix I’m saying - what percentage of those schools are the specific backgrounds I listed?

How many Jewish kids go to those schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And not the type of families who send their kids to that school? 95% of whether a school is considered "good" or not has nothing to do with how big their budget is. Good students make a school good, not the other way around.

True, but you will never convince the self-deluded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ever been to Connecticut? New Jersey? Pennsylvania?

Give me 50 reform Jewish kids, Hindus, Koreans and han Chinese — all from two parent households and all I need is a photocopier, an overhead projector from the 80s and a one room School house / even with dirt floors.

It would be one of the highest scoring schools in the north east

Too bad. You don't get to exclude the Haredim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ever been to Connecticut? New Jersey? Pennsylvania?

Give me 50 reform Jewish kids, Hindus, Koreans and han Chinese — all from two parent households and all I need is a photocopier, an overhead projector from the 80s and a one room School house / even with dirt floors.

It would be one of the highest scoring schools in the north east

What’s Han Chinese and what’s wrong with the other kind