College admissions from low SES

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA can find poor kids from Richmond and Newport News. They don't need Herndon kids to fill that niche.

Richmond and Tidewater also have rich kids. Plus it’s easier to stand out at a FCPS poor high school.

Nah, plenty of poor kids in FCPS but most aren't UVA/VT material.

There are plenty of low income kids who are just as capable as, if not more capable than, higher-income kids. If they can get merit-based and income-based aid/scholarships, there is no reason they "aren't UVA/VT material."

One's family income is unrelated to aptitude or work ethic. While some kids may have the economic advantage of more prep classes, that doesn't mean they are intellectually superior in any way.

Assuming that’s true, most of the kids from lower-income families who fit that profile will still end up at a GMU or VCU, not UVA or VT.

UMC parents know the advantages (academic and social) of sending their kids to top K-12 schools generally outweigh the purported advantage of being a “bigger fish in a smaller pond.” Claims to the contrary are wishful thinking that align with neither human behavior nor recent history (just look at the boundary study just conducted by our 100% Democratic School Board that moved no UMC neighborhoods to poorer schools).

Why will the low income kid still end up at VCU even if UVA material? What are these advantages at top k12 schools that UMC knows about?

Kids from poorer families attending schools with less advanced peer groups typically end up with lower test scores and less impressive academic profiles even if they have the same innate intelligence.

Most parents understand this. But if you think you can game the system by sending your kid to a school with few high performing kids, however, no one will stop you.

Poor kids end up with lesser credentials because of less wealth. A wealthy kid would have the same stats and credentials at Justice as they would at Langley. It’s not the school, it’s wealth.

In that scenario you’re implicitly conceding the wealthy kids at Justice are not going to have the same stats and credentials as the wealthy kids at Langley. There are wealthy kids in the Lake Barcroft and Sleepy Hollow areas at Justice, but they aren’t ending up as National Merit Semifinalists and Commended Students very often compared to their Langley counterparts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA can find poor kids from Richmond and Newport News. They don't need Herndon kids to fill that niche.

Richmond and Tidewater also have rich kids. Plus it’s easier to stand out at a FCPS poor high school.

Nah, plenty of poor kids in FCPS but most aren't UVA/VT material.

There are plenty of low income kids who are just as capable as, if not more capable than, higher-income kids. If they can get merit-based and income-based aid/scholarships, there is no reason they "aren't UVA/VT material."

One's family income is unrelated to aptitude or work ethic. While some kids may have the economic advantage of more prep classes, that doesn't mean they are intellectually superior in any way.

Assuming that’s true, most of the kids from lower-income families who fit that profile will still end up at a GMU or VCU, not UVA or VT.

UMC parents know the advantages (academic and social) of sending their kids to top K-12 schools generally outweigh the purported advantage of being a “bigger fish in a smaller pond.” Claims to the contrary are wishful thinking that align with neither human behavior nor recent history (just look at the boundary study just conducted by our 100% Democratic School Board that moved no UMC neighborhoods to poorer schools).

Why will the low income kid still end up at VCU even if UVA material? What are these advantages at top k12 schools that UMC knows about?

Kids from poorer families attending schools with less advanced peer groups typically end up with lower test scores and less impressive academic profiles even if they have the same innate intelligence.

Most parents understand this. But if you think you can game the system by sending your kid to a school with few high performing kids, however, no one will stop you.

Poor kids end up with lesser credentials because of less wealth. A wealthy kid would have the same stats and credentials at Justice as they would at Langley. It’s not the school, it’s wealth.

In that scenario you’re implicitly conceding the wealthy kids at Justice are not going to have the same stats and credentials as the wealthy kids at Langley. There are wealthy kids in the Lake Barcroft and Sleepy Hollow areas at Justice, but they aren’t ending up as National Merit Semifinalists and Commended Students very often compared to their Langley counterparts.

I’m not conceding anything. It’s a game of proportions. Of course a school of mostly wealthy kids will have more anecdotes for you to cherry pick

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA can find poor kids from Richmond and Newport News. They don't need Herndon kids to fill that niche.

Richmond and Tidewater also have rich kids. Plus it’s easier to stand out at a FCPS poor high school.

Nah, plenty of poor kids in FCPS but most aren't UVA/VT material.

There are plenty of low income kids who are just as capable as, if not more capable than, higher-income kids. If they can get merit-based and income-based aid/scholarships, there is no reason they "aren't UVA/VT material."

One's family income is unrelated to aptitude or work ethic. While some kids may have the economic advantage of more prep classes, that doesn't mean they are intellectually superior in any way.

Assuming that’s true, most of the kids from lower-income families who fit that profile will still end up at a GMU or VCU, not UVA or VT.

UMC parents know the advantages (academic and social) of sending their kids to top K-12 schools generally outweigh the purported advantage of being a “bigger fish in a smaller pond.” Claims to the contrary are wishful thinking that align with neither human behavior nor recent history (just look at the boundary study just conducted by our 100% Democratic School Board that moved no UMC neighborhoods to poorer schools).

Why will the low income kid still end up at VCU even if UVA material? What are these advantages at top k12 schools that UMC knows about?

Kids from poorer families attending schools with less advanced peer groups typically end up with lower test scores and less impressive academic profiles even if they have the same innate intelligence.

Most parents understand this. But if you think you can game the system by sending your kid to a school with few high performing kids, however, no one will stop you.

Poor kids end up with lesser credentials because of less wealth. A wealthy kid would have the same stats and credentials at Justice as they would at Langley. It’s not the school, it’s wealth.

In that scenario you’re implicitly conceding the wealthy kids at Justice are not going to have the same stats and credentials as the wealthy kids at Langley. There are wealthy kids in the Lake Barcroft and Sleepy Hollow areas at Justice, but they aren’t ending up as National Merit Semifinalists and Commended Students very often compared to their Langley counterparts.

I’m not conceding anything. It’s a game of proportions. Of course a school of mostly wealthy kids will have more anecdotes for you to cherry pick

It’s telling that you’d reduce empirical data on student achievement as anecdotes when it doesn’t align with your preferred narrative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA can find poor kids from Richmond and Newport News. They don't need Herndon kids to fill that niche.

Richmond and Tidewater also have rich kids. Plus it’s easier to stand out at a FCPS poor high school.

Nah, plenty of poor kids in FCPS but most aren't UVA/VT material.

There are plenty of low income kids who are just as capable as, if not more capable than, higher-income kids. If they can get merit-based and income-based aid/scholarships, there is no reason they "aren't UVA/VT material."

One's family income is unrelated to aptitude or work ethic. While some kids may have the economic advantage of more prep classes, that doesn't mean they are intellectually superior in any way.

Assuming that’s true, most of the kids from lower-income families who fit that profile will still end up at a GMU or VCU, not UVA or VT.

UMC parents know the advantages (academic and social) of sending their kids to top K-12 schools generally outweigh the purported advantage of being a “bigger fish in a smaller pond.” Claims to the contrary are wishful thinking that align with neither human behavior nor recent history (just look at the boundary study just conducted by our 100% Democratic School Board that moved no UMC neighborhoods to poorer schools).

Why will the low income kid still end up at VCU even if UVA material? What are these advantages at top k12 schools that UMC knows about?

Kids from poorer families attending schools with less advanced peer groups typically end up with lower test scores and less impressive academic profiles even if they have the same innate intelligence.

Most parents understand this. But if you think you can game the system by sending your kid to a school with few high performing kids, however, no one will stop you.

Poor kids end up with lesser credentials because of less wealth. A wealthy kid would have the same stats and credentials at Justice as they would at Langley. It’s not the school, it’s wealth.

In that scenario you’re implicitly conceding the wealthy kids at Justice are not going to have the same stats and credentials as the wealthy kids at Langley. There are wealthy kids in the Lake Barcroft and Sleepy Hollow areas at Justice, but they aren’t ending up as National Merit Semifinalists and Commended Students very often compared to their Langley counterparts.

I’m not conceding anything. It’s a game of proportions. Of course a school of mostly wealthy kids will have more anecdotes for you to cherry pick

It’s telling that you’d reduce empirical data on student achievement as anecdotes when it doesn’t align with your preferred narrative.

I don’t think you want to go down that road lol but since you did, let’s see your empirical data. Cite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA can find poor kids from Richmond and Newport News. They don't need Herndon kids to fill that niche.

Richmond and Tidewater also have rich kids. Plus it’s easier to stand out at a FCPS poor high school.

Nah, plenty of poor kids in FCPS but most aren't UVA/VT material.

There are plenty of low income kids who are just as capable as, if not more capable than, higher-income kids. If they can get merit-based and income-based aid/scholarships, there is no reason they "aren't UVA/VT material."

One's family income is unrelated to aptitude or work ethic. While some kids may have the economic advantage of more prep classes, that doesn't mean they are intellectually superior in any way.

Assuming that’s true, most of the kids from lower-income families who fit that profile will still end up at a GMU or VCU, not UVA or VT.

UMC parents know the advantages (academic and social) of sending their kids to top K-12 schools generally outweigh the purported advantage of being a “bigger fish in a smaller pond.” Claims to the contrary are wishful thinking that align with neither human behavior nor recent history (just look at the boundary study just conducted by our 100% Democratic School Board that moved no UMC neighborhoods to poorer schools).

Why will the low income kid still end up at VCU even if UVA material? What are these advantages at top k12 schools that UMC knows about?

Kids from poorer families attending schools with less advanced peer groups typically end up with lower test scores and less impressive academic profiles even if they have the same innate intelligence.

Most parents understand this. But if you think you can game the system by sending your kid to a school with few high performing kids, however, no one will stop you.

Poor kids end up with lesser credentials because of less wealth. A wealthy kid would have the same stats and credentials at Justice as they would at Langley. It’s not the school, it’s wealth.

In that scenario you’re implicitly conceding the wealthy kids at Justice are not going to have the same stats and credentials as the wealthy kids at Langley. There are wealthy kids in the Lake Barcroft and Sleepy Hollow areas at Justice, but they aren’t ending up as National Merit Semifinalists and Commended Students very often compared to their Langley counterparts.

I’m not conceding anything. It’s a game of proportions. Of course a school of mostly wealthy kids will have more anecdotes for you to cherry pick

It’s telling that you’d reduce empirical data on student achievement as anecdotes when it doesn’t align with your preferred narrative.

I don’t think you want to go down that road lol but since you did, let’s see your empirical data. Cite?

You can look at the numbers of NMSFs and Commended Students at these schools, and adjust for the non-FARMS population.

You can also look at student transfer data. Herndon and Justice have large transfers out every year. Students who can flock to Langley from other pyramids (McLean is closed to transfers) and the non-TJ transfers out of both schools is very small.

All of this is consistent with the realities that students achieve at higher levels when they attend schools with strong peer groups and that families are not pupil placing their kids to lower rated high schools to arbitrage college admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA can find poor kids from Richmond and Newport News. They don't need Herndon kids to fill that niche.

Richmond and Tidewater also have rich kids. Plus it’s easier to stand out at a FCPS poor high school.

Nah, plenty of poor kids in FCPS but most aren't UVA/VT material.

There are plenty of low income kids who are just as capable as, if not more capable than, higher-income kids. If they can get merit-based and income-based aid/scholarships, there is no reason they "aren't UVA/VT material."

One's family income is unrelated to aptitude or work ethic. While some kids may have the economic advantage of more prep classes, that doesn't mean they are intellectually superior in any way.

Assuming that’s true, most of the kids from lower-income families who fit that profile will still end up at a GMU or VCU, not UVA or VT.

UMC parents know the advantages (academic and social) of sending their kids to top K-12 schools generally outweigh the purported advantage of being a “bigger fish in a smaller pond.” Claims to the contrary are wishful thinking that align with neither human behavior nor recent history (just look at the boundary study just conducted by our 100% Democratic School Board that moved no UMC neighborhoods to poorer schools).

Why will the low income kid still end up at VCU even if UVA material? What are these advantages at top k12 schools that UMC knows about?

Kids from poorer families attending schools with less advanced peer groups typically end up with lower test scores and less impressive academic profiles even if they have the same innate intelligence.

Most parents understand this. But if you think you can game the system by sending your kid to a school with few high performing kids, however, no one will stop you.

Poor kids end up with lesser credentials because of less wealth. A wealthy kid would have the same stats and credentials at Justice as they would at Langley. It’s not the school, it’s wealth.

In that scenario you’re implicitly conceding the wealthy kids at Justice are not going to have the same stats and credentials as the wealthy kids at Langley. There are wealthy kids in the Lake Barcroft and Sleepy Hollow areas at Justice, but they aren’t ending up as National Merit Semifinalists and Commended Students very often compared to their Langley counterparts.

I’m not conceding anything. It’s a game of proportions. Of course a school of mostly wealthy kids will have more anecdotes for you to cherry pick

It’s telling that you’d reduce empirical data on student achievement as anecdotes when it doesn’t align with your preferred narrative.

I don’t think you want to go down that road lol but since you did, let’s see your empirical data. Cite?

You can look at the numbers of NMSFs and Commended Students at these schools, and adjust for the non-FARMS population.

You can also look at student transfer data. Herndon and Justice have large transfers out every year. Students who can flock to Langley from other pyramids (McLean is closed to transfers) and the non-TJ transfers out of both schools is very small.

All of this is consistent with the realities that students achieve at higher levels when they attend schools with strong peer groups and that families are not pupil placing their kids to lower rated high schools to arbitrage college admissions.

Okay. Run those numbers and get back to me. You made the claim, you run the numbers. Don’t forget to cite your sources.

[Anonymous]

We moved from a lower SES neighborhood to McLean. We thought about this gaming the system but we moved anyway. We are still in touch with some families. One kid who was equal or stronger than my kid is an average student at his high school and won’t get into VT or UVA. My kid is shooting for an Ivy and the lowest school he would go to is probably VT or UVA. Perhaps it may have been easier for my kid to get into Yale or Princeton from the lower SES school but he may not even be in a position to apply. We will never know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA can find poor kids from Richmond and Newport News. They don't need Herndon kids to fill that niche.

Richmond and Tidewater also have rich kids. Plus it’s easier to stand out at a FCPS poor high school.

Nah, plenty of poor kids in FCPS but most aren't UVA/VT material.

There are plenty of low income kids who are just as capable as, if not more capable than, higher-income kids. If they can get merit-based and income-based aid/scholarships, there is no reason they "aren't UVA/VT material."

One's family income is unrelated to aptitude or work ethic. While some kids may have the economic advantage of more prep classes, that doesn't mean they are intellectually superior in any way.

Assuming that’s true, most of the kids from lower-income families who fit that profile will still end up at a GMU or VCU, not UVA or VT.

UMC parents know the advantages (academic and social) of sending their kids to top K-12 schools generally outweigh the purported advantage of being a “bigger fish in a smaller pond.” Claims to the contrary are wishful thinking that align with neither human behavior nor recent history (just look at the boundary study just conducted by our 100% Democratic School Board that moved no UMC neighborhoods to poorer schools).

Why will the low income kid still end up at VCU even if UVA material? What are these advantages at top k12 schools that UMC knows about?

Kids from poorer families attending schools with less advanced peer groups typically end up with lower test scores and less impressive academic profiles even if they have the same innate intelligence.

Most parents understand this. But if you think you can game the system by sending your kid to a school with few high performing kids, however, no one will stop you.

Poor kids end up with lesser credentials because of less wealth. A wealthy kid would have the same stats and credentials at Justice as they would at Langley. It’s not the school, it’s wealth.

In that scenario you’re implicitly conceding the wealthy kids at Justice are not going to have the same stats and credentials as the wealthy kids at Langley. There are wealthy kids in the Lake Barcroft and Sleepy Hollow areas at Justice, but they aren’t ending up as National Merit Semifinalists and Commended Students very often compared to their Langley counterparts.

I’m not conceding anything. It’s a game of proportions. Of course a school of mostly wealthy kids will have more anecdotes for you to cherry pick

It’s telling that you’d reduce empirical data on student achievement as anecdotes when it doesn’t align with your preferred narrative.

I don’t think you want to go down that road lol but since you did, let’s see your empirical data. Cite?

You can look at the numbers of NMSFs and Commended Students at these schools, and adjust for the non-FARMS population.

You can also look at student transfer data. Herndon and Justice have large transfers out every year. Students who can flock to Langley from other pyramids (McLean is closed to transfers) and the non-TJ transfers out of both schools is very small.

All of this is consistent with the realities that students achieve at higher levels when they attend schools with strong peer groups and that families are not pupil placing their kids to lower rated high schools to arbitrage college admissions.

It’s not that simple. You would need to adjust for total wealth in addition to controlling for FARMS. In other words, it’s not just that poverty hinders Justice, the ultra wealthy helps Langley. Even after controlling for FARMS, you have to acknowledge the higher percentage of ultra wealthy also plays a role. A higher percentage of top 1% is very different from UMC.

Look, this isn’t hard. Langley and McLean are not better schools and Justice and Herndon aren’t bad schools. You wouldn’t have all the transfers if the wealth and poverty were balanced to begin with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We moved from a lower SES neighborhood to McLean. We thought about this gaming the system but we moved anyway. We are still in touch with some families. One kid who was equal or stronger than my kid is an average student at his high school and won’t get into VT or UVA.[b] My kid is shooting for an Ivy and the lowest school he would go to is probably VT or UVA. Perhaps it may have been easier for my kid to get into Yale or Princeton from the lower SES school but he may not even be in a position to apply. We will never know.

A little cheeky but good luck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA can find poor kids from Richmond and Newport News. They don't need Herndon kids to fill that niche.

Richmond and Tidewater also have rich kids. Plus it’s easier to stand out at a FCPS poor high school.

Nah, plenty of poor kids in FCPS but most aren't UVA/VT material.

There are plenty of low income kids who are just as capable as, if not more capable than, higher-income kids. If they can get merit-based and income-based aid/scholarships, there is no reason they "aren't UVA/VT material."

One's family income is unrelated to aptitude or work ethic. While some kids may have the economic advantage of more prep classes, that doesn't mean they are intellectually superior in any way.

Assuming that’s true, most of the kids from lower-income families who fit that profile will still end up at a GMU or VCU, not UVA or VT.

UMC parents know the advantages (academic and social) of sending their kids to top K-12 schools generally outweigh the purported advantage of being a “bigger fish in a smaller pond.” Claims to the contrary are wishful thinking that align with neither human behavior nor recent history (just look at the boundary study just conducted by our 100% Democratic School Board that moved no UMC neighborhoods to poorer schools).

Why will the low income kid still end up at VCU even if UVA material? What are these advantages at top k12 schools that UMC knows about?

Kids from poorer families attending schools with less advanced peer groups typically end up with lower test scores and less impressive academic profiles even if they have the same innate intelligence.

Most parents understand this. But if you think you can game the system by sending your kid to a school with few high performing kids, however, no one will stop you.

Poor kids end up with lesser credentials because of less wealth. A wealthy kid would have the same stats and credentials at Justice as they would at Langley. It’s not the school, it’s wealth.

In that scenario you’re implicitly conceding the wealthy kids at Justice are not going to have the same stats and credentials as the wealthy kids at Langley. There are wealthy kids in the Lake Barcroft and Sleepy Hollow areas at Justice, but they aren’t ending up as National Merit Semifinalists and Commended Students very often compared to their Langley counterparts.

I’m not conceding anything. It’s a game of proportions. Of course a school of mostly wealthy kids will have more anecdotes for you to cherry pick

It’s telling that you’d reduce empirical data on student achievement as anecdotes when it doesn’t align with your preferred narrative.

I don’t think you want to go down that road lol but since you did, let’s see your empirical data. Cite?

You can look at the numbers of NMSFs and Commended Students at these schools, and adjust for the non-FARMS population.

You can also look at student transfer data. Herndon and Justice have large transfers out every year. Students who can flock to Langley from other pyramids (McLean is closed to transfers) and the non-TJ transfers out of both schools is very small.

All of this is consistent with the realities that students achieve at higher levels when they attend schools with strong peer groups and that families are not pupil placing their kids to lower rated high schools to arbitrage college admissions.

It’s not that simple. You would need to adjust for total wealth in addition to controlling for FARMS. In other words, it’s not just that poverty hinders Justice, the ultra wealthy helps Langley. Even after controlling for FARMS, you have to acknowledge the higher percentage of ultra wealthy also plays a role. A higher percentage of top 1% is very different from UMC.

Look, this isn’t hard. Langley and McLean are not better schools and Justice and Herndon aren’t bad schools. You wouldn’t have all the transfers if the wealth and poverty were balanced to begin with.

The adjustments that you want to make to test your social experiment are the exact types of adjustments that FCPS has demonstrated it's not going to make.

That being the case, people will continue to seek out the strongest schools like Langley and McLean, rather than seek out schools with weaker academics and peer groups simply because someone thinks it might be a clever way to game the system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA can find poor kids from Richmond and Newport News. They don't need Herndon kids to fill that niche.

Richmond and Tidewater also have rich kids. Plus it’s easier to stand out at a FCPS poor high school.

Nah, plenty of poor kids in FCPS but most aren't UVA/VT material.

There are plenty of low income kids who are just as capable as, if not more capable than, higher-income kids. If they can get merit-based and income-based aid/scholarships, there is no reason they "aren't UVA/VT material."

One's family income is unrelated to aptitude or work ethic. While some kids may have the economic advantage of more prep classes, that doesn't mean they are intellectually superior in any way.

Assuming that’s true, most of the kids from lower-income families who fit that profile will still end up at a GMU or VCU, not UVA or VT.

UMC parents know the advantages (academic and social) of sending their kids to top K-12 schools generally outweigh the purported advantage of being a “bigger fish in a smaller pond.” Claims to the contrary are wishful thinking that align with neither human behavior nor recent history (just look at the boundary study just conducted by our 100% Democratic School Board that moved no UMC neighborhoods to poorer schools).

Why will the low income kid still end up at VCU even if UVA material? What are these advantages at top k12 schools that UMC knows about?

Kids from poorer families attending schools with less advanced peer groups typically end up with lower test scores and less impressive academic profiles even if they have the same innate intelligence.

Most parents understand this. But if you think you can game the system by sending your kid to a school with few high performing kids, however, no one will stop you.

Poor kids end up with lesser credentials because of less wealth. A wealthy kid would have the same stats and credentials at Justice as they would at Langley. It’s not the school, it’s wealth.

In that scenario you’re implicitly conceding the wealthy kids at Justice are not going to have the same stats and credentials as the wealthy kids at Langley. There are wealthy kids in the Lake Barcroft and Sleepy Hollow areas at Justice, but they aren’t ending up as National Merit Semifinalists and Commended Students very often compared to their Langley counterparts.

I’m not conceding anything. It’s a game of proportions. Of course a school of mostly wealthy kids will have more anecdotes for you to cherry pick

It’s telling that you’d reduce empirical data on student achievement as anecdotes when it doesn’t align with your preferred narrative.

I don’t think you want to go down that road lol but since you did, let’s see your empirical data. Cite?

You can look at the numbers of NMSFs and Commended Students at these schools, and adjust for the non-FARMS population.

You can also look at student transfer data. Herndon and Justice have large transfers out every year. Students who can flock to Langley from other pyramids (McLean is closed to transfers) and the non-TJ transfers out of both schools is very small.

All of this is consistent with the realities that students achieve at higher levels when they attend schools with strong peer groups and that families are not pupil placing their kids to lower rated high schools to arbitrage college admissions.

It’s not that simple. You would need to adjust for total wealth in addition to controlling for FARMS. In other words, it’s not just that poverty hinders Justice, the ultra wealthy helps Langley. Even after controlling for FARMS, you have to acknowledge the higher percentage of ultra wealthy also plays a role. A higher percentage of top 1% is very different from UMC.

Look, this isn’t hard. Langley and McLean are not better schools and Justice and Herndon aren’t bad schools. You wouldn’t have all the transfers if the wealth and poverty were balanced to begin with.

The adjustments that you want to make to test your social experiment are the exact types of adjustments that FCPS has demonstrated it's not going to make.

That being the case, people will continue to seek out the strongest schools like Langley and McLean, rather than seek out schools with weaker academics and peer groups simply because someone thinks it might be a clever way to game the system.

You’re still getting strong confused with wealthy. If you want a wealthy peer group you can pay for private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA can find poor kids from Richmond and Newport News. They don't need Herndon kids to fill that niche.

Richmond and Tidewater also have rich kids. Plus it’s easier to stand out at a FCPS poor high school.

Nah, plenty of poor kids in FCPS but most aren't UVA/VT material.

There are plenty of low income kids who are just as capable as, if not more capable than, higher-income kids. If they can get merit-based and income-based aid/scholarships, there is no reason they "aren't UVA/VT material."

One's family income is unrelated to aptitude or work ethic. While some kids may have the economic advantage of more prep classes, that doesn't mean they are intellectually superior in any way.

Assuming that’s true, most of the kids from lower-income families who fit that profile will still end up at a GMU or VCU, not UVA or VT.

UMC parents know the advantages (academic and social) of sending their kids to top K-12 schools generally outweigh the purported advantage of being a “bigger fish in a smaller pond.” Claims to the contrary are wishful thinking that align with neither human behavior nor recent history (just look at the boundary study just conducted by our 100% Democratic School Board that moved no UMC neighborhoods to poorer schools).

Why will the low income kid still end up at VCU even if UVA material? What are these advantages at top k12 schools that UMC knows about?

Kids from poorer families attending schools with less advanced peer groups typically end up with lower test scores and less impressive academic profiles even if they have the same innate intelligence.

Most parents understand this. But if you think you can game the system by sending your kid to a school with few high performing kids, however, no one will stop you.

Poor kids end up with lesser credentials because of less wealth. A wealthy kid would have the same stats and credentials at Justice as they would at Langley. It’s not the school, it’s wealth.

In that scenario you’re implicitly conceding the wealthy kids at Justice are not going to have the same stats and credentials as the wealthy kids at Langley. There are wealthy kids in the Lake Barcroft and Sleepy Hollow areas at Justice, but they aren’t ending up as National Merit Semifinalists and Commended Students very often compared to their Langley counterparts.

I’m not conceding anything. It’s a game of proportions. Of course a school of mostly wealthy kids will have more anecdotes for you to cherry pick

It’s telling that you’d reduce empirical data on student achievement as anecdotes when it doesn’t align with your preferred narrative.

I don’t think you want to go down that road lol but since you did, let’s see your empirical data. Cite?

You can look at the numbers of NMSFs and Commended Students at these schools, and adjust for the non-FARMS population.

You can also look at student transfer data. Herndon and Justice have large transfers out every year. Students who can flock to Langley from other pyramids (McLean is closed to transfers) and the non-TJ transfers out of both schools is very small.

All of this is consistent with the realities that students achieve at higher levels when they attend schools with strong peer groups and that families are not pupil placing their kids to lower rated high schools to arbitrage college admissions.

It’s not that simple. You would need to adjust for total wealth in addition to controlling for FARMS. In other words, it’s not just that poverty hinders Justice, the ultra wealthy helps Langley. Even after controlling for FARMS, you have to acknowledge the higher percentage of ultra wealthy also plays a role. A higher percentage of top 1% is very different from UMC.

Look, this isn’t hard. Langley and McLean are not better schools and Justice and Herndon aren’t bad schools. You wouldn’t have all the transfers if the wealth and poverty were balanced to begin with.

The adjustments that you want to make to test your social experiment are the exact types of adjustments that FCPS has demonstrated it's not going to make.

That being the case, people will continue to seek out the strongest schools like Langley and McLean, rather than seek out schools with weaker academics and peer groups simply because someone thinks it might be a clever way to game the system.

You’re still getting strong confused with wealthy. If you want a wealthy peer group you can pay for private.

The wealthiest do tend to send their kids to privates, but if you look upthread the poster (you?) was claiming that Langley benefits from the "ultra wealthy."

So you can't have it both ways. It's the strength of these UMC bastions like Langley and McLean that attracts families looking to send their kids to public schools rather than Sidwell, Potomac, etc., and their kids still routinely out-perform kids from similar families at schools that settle for being "good enough" or where just making sure kids pass SOLs and graduate long ago became the top priority.

[Anonymous]

You’re having trouble following along so let’s try to make this simple for you. McLean and Langley are not inherently better than low SES schools. They are just filled with the top 1% that can buy their way to success more easily than others. Therefore, they are not better, they are just wealthier. It’s foolish to think a cinderblock building is better than another cinderblock building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You’re having trouble following along so let’s try to make this simple for you. McLean and Langley are not inherently better than low SES schools. They are just filled with the top 1% that can buy their way to success more easily than others. Therefore, they are not better, they are just wealthier. It’s foolish to think a cinderblock building is better than another cinderblock building.

It's foolish to think that all these schools are no more than generic cinderblock buildings, or that the wealthy simply purchase success for their offspring. You can sputter here all you want, but it won't change the rational decisions that people continue to make in real life about schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You’re having trouble following along so let’s try to make this simple for you. McLean and Langley are not inherently better than low SES schools. They are just filled with the top 1% that can buy their way to success more easily than others. Therefore, they are not better, they are just wealthier. It’s foolish to think a cinderblock building is better than another cinderblock building.

It's foolish to think that all these schools are no more than generic cinderblock buildings, or that the wealthy simply purchase success for their offspring. You can sputter here all you want, but it won't change the rational decisions that people continue to make in real life about schools.

Somebody doesn’t like being reminded of their privilege. FCPS is literally all the same minus the SES of parents.