Did anyone attend the Choice survey community meeting yesterday?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The school system has a completely different goal than most of the parents on here. Parents on DCUM are usually success stories in the alleged meritocracy of our education system. They believe the schools should also be meritocracies so their kids can become successful under the same system. But the school system sees its job as providing the best education possible to all students -- not just the best students. If your superstar kid wins and many other students lose, you're still happy. But if 20% of MCPS students win and 80% lose, MCPS is not happy.

So, they should focus on showing IMPROVEMENT in ALL kids. Stop wasting all this time on trying to 'closing the achievement gap'. Focus on showing that all kids are getting something out of their time in MCPS. Demonstrate that the ESOL kids are learning English, and learning to read. Demonstrate that the kids at lower math levels are showing improvement, even if they're not at grade level. Challenge ALL kids - gifted kids, and kids who need extra help.

Stop trying to achieve 'equity' (whatever MCPS thinks that means).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hey, my kids are short and weak. Can they get an extra boost when playing school sponsored sports?

I am short. From what I remember, during PE, I could not get over those damned hurdles no matter how hard I tried. I got an F for that section of my PE class. How come they don't adjust for height and physicality in PE or school sponsored sports? I could never get an A in PE. It affected my overall GPA.

OMG, this! So true. Art and PE were the bain of my school existence. There was no way I was going to make my school's varsity basketball team. Where is the 'equity' in that?? Can this translate into all aspects of school then? Can my 5'4" DS get on the varsity basketball team? Maybe MCPS can sponsor a study to show why there is an achievement gap in HS athletes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hey, my kids are short and weak. Can they get an extra boost when playing school sponsored sports?

I am short. From what I remember, during PE, I could not get over those damned hurdles no matter how hard I tried. I got an F for that section of my PE class. How come they don't adjust for height and physicality in PE or school sponsored sports? I could never get an A in PE. It affected my overall GPA.

Fortunately there have been improvements in PE since you were in school, and people no longer get As simply for being tall (or Fs simply for being short).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The school system has a completely different goal than most of the parents on here. Parents on DCUM are usually success stories in the alleged meritocracy of our education system. They believe the schools should also be meritocracies so their kids can become successful under the same system. But the school system sees its job as providing the best education possible to all students -- not just the best students. If your superstar kid wins and many other students lose, you're still happy. But if 20% of MCPS students win and 80% lose, MCPS is not happy.

I nthought MCPS spend lot more money per student in schools in RED zoon. Smaller classroom size in all grade. That 80% students are not learning at the same level as the 20% students is not mcps did not provide education to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey, my kids are short and weak. Can they get an extra boost when playing school sponsored sports?

I am short. From what I remember, during PE, I could not get over those damned hurdles no matter how hard I tried. I got an F for that section of my PE class. How come they don't adjust for height and physicality in PE or school sponsored sports? I could never get an A in PE. It affected my overall GPA.

Fortunately there have been improvements in PE since you were in school, and people no longer get As simply for being tall (or Fs simply for being short).

It's still a lot easier for taller people to get over those hurdles than us shorties. We were born with a disadvantage so we should get a "boost" in PE and school athletics for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey, my kids are short and weak. Can they get an extra boost when playing school sponsored sports?

I am short. From what I remember, during PE, I could not get over those damned hurdles no matter how hard I tried. I got an F for that section of my PE class. How come they don't adjust for height and physicality in PE or school sponsored sports? I could never get an A in PE. It affected my overall GPA.

Fortunately there have been improvements in PE since you were in school, and people no longer get As simply for being tall (or Fs simply for being short).

It's still a lot easier for taller people to get over those hurdles than us shorties. We were born with a disadvantage so we should get a "boost" in PE and school athletics for it.

There are plenty of people who are short who are better at hurdles than people who are tall -- or who would be, if the hurdles were proportional to the hurdler's size. What's the skill you're trying to assess in a PE class in school? I think it's hurdling, not getting over a bar that is 1 m tall.

[Anonymous]

So a child with very high scores needs a different course then a child with lowerr ones even though both are learning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey, my kids are short and weak. Can they get an extra boost when playing school sponsored sports?

I am short. From what I remember, during PE, I could not get over those damned hurdles no matter how hard I tried. I got an F for that section of my PE class. How come they don't adjust for height and physicality in PE or school sponsored sports? I could never get an A in PE. It affected my overall GPA.

Fortunately there have been improvements in PE since you were in school, and people no longer get As simply for being tall (or Fs simply for being short).

It's still a lot easier for taller people to get over those hurdles than us shorties. We were born with a disadvantage so we should get a "boost" in PE and school athletics for it.

Another PE analogy: The PE class is assessing running ability, defined as who crosses the finish line first. Runner A starts 40 yards from the finish line. Runners B and C start 50 yards from the finish line. Runner D starts 100 yards from the finish line. Runner A crosses the finish line first, and Runner D crosses the finish line last. So Runner A is the best and Runner D is the worst -- right? Wrong. "Who crosses the finish line first" is not an appropriate measure of running ability when the runners start in different places.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So a child with very high scores needs a different course then a child with lowerr ones even though both are learning.

No, actually, so the measure of ability (test scores, in your example) is not necessarily a good measure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey, my kids are short and weak. Can they get an extra boost when playing school sponsored sports?

I am short. From what I remember, during PE, I could not get over those damned hurdles no matter how hard I tried. I got an F for that section of my PE class. How come they don't adjust for height and physicality in PE or school sponsored sports? I could never get an A in PE. It affected my overall GPA.

Fortunately there have been improvements in PE since you were in school, and people no longer get As simply for being tall (or Fs simply for being short).

It's still a lot easier for taller people to get over those hurdles than us shorties. We were born with a disadvantage so we should get a "boost" in PE and school athletics for it.

There are plenty of people who are short who are better at hurdles than people who are tall -- or who would be, if the hurdles were proportional to the hurdler's size. What's the skill you're trying to assess in a PE class in school? I think it's hurdling, not getting over a bar that is 1 m tall.

But the benchmark for everyone is the same, regardless of the person's height. Everyone still has to jump over the hurdle at the same height. No one mentioned that maybe we should lower the bar for us short people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey, my kids are short and weak. Can they get an extra boost when playing school sponsored sports?

I am short. From what I remember, during PE, I could not get over those damned hurdles no matter how hard I tried. I got an F for that section of my PE class. How come they don't adjust for height and physicality in PE or school sponsored sports? I could never get an A in PE. It affected my overall GPA.

Fortunately there have been improvements in PE since you were in school, and people no longer get As simply for being tall (or Fs simply for being short).

It's still a lot easier for taller people to get over those hurdles than us shorties. We were born with a disadvantage so we should get a "boost" in PE and school athletics for it.

Another PE analogy: The PE class is assessing running ability, defined as who crosses the finish line first. Runner A starts 40 yards from the finish line. Runners B and C start 50 yards from the finish line. Runner D starts 100 yards from the finish line. Runner A crosses the finish line first, and Runner D crosses the finish line last. So Runner A is the best and Runner D is the worst -- right? Wrong. "Who crosses the finish line first" is not an appropriate measure of running ability when the runners start in different places.

MCPS already provides a boost to those who "start further back" by providing smaller class sizes and more services in such schools. What you are saying here is to not only provide the extra boost to have them start at the same place, but make their finish line closer so that they don't have to run as far.

Here's another example:

Case 1:
Kid A comes from an upper/middle class home - parents could be lawyers, earning six figures.
Kid B comes from a lower SES, parents don't speak English, don't have higher than a MS, maybe ES level education.

Should this Kid A be allowed to have lower test scores than Kid B to get into a test in magnet? Absolutely not, right?

Case 2:
But, what if Kid A (from a high SES) is Black or Hispanic and Kid B (low SES) is Asian or White?
Now, should Kid A be allowed to have lower test scores than Kid B to get into a test in magnet?

If they base it purely on race, then case 2 is what they are saying should happen. In what world does this make sense?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey, my kids are short and weak. Can they get an extra boost when playing school sponsored sports?

I am short. From what I remember, during PE, I could not get over those damned hurdles no matter how hard I tried. I got an F for that section of my PE class. How come they don't adjust for height and physicality in PE or school sponsored sports? I could never get an A in PE. It affected my overall GPA.

Fortunately there have been improvements in PE since you were in school, and people no longer get As simply for being tall (or Fs simply for being short).

This is just simply untrue. My DS is short and has been playing basketball since 2nd grade. He works hard, and plays well, but there is no way he can match the taller kids - at least the tall kids who work equally hard). He enjoys the game and has stuck with it, but he has no dreams of pro ball, mostly due to his height.

We all have limits. Yes, provide resources for the kids who need extra help in math/reading, so they can get up to speed. But, don't make up stupid guidelines that a certain number of people of a certain race/background need to be in a certain program. That's just ludicrous. It's like adding in something that says 10% of the varsity bball team needs to be 5'7" or shorter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

MCPS already provides a boost to those who "start further back" by providing smaller class sizes and more services in such schools. What you are saying here is to not only provide the extra boost to have them start at the same place, but make their finish line closer so that they don't have to run as far.

If the smaller class sizes in Title I or Focus schools are so great, how come the DCUMmies aren't all clamoring to send their children to Title I schools? Also, it is a fact that there are very many poor children in MCPS who are not in Title I or Focus schools.

DCUM's insistence that the CogAT is a true and unbiased assessment of intellectual ability is baffling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This is just simply untrue. My DS is short and has been playing basketball since 2nd grade. He works hard, and plays well, but there is no way he can match the taller kids - at least the tall kids who work equally hard). He enjoys the game and has stuck with it, but he has no dreams of pro ball, mostly due to his height.

We all have limits. Yes, provide resources for the kids who need extra help in math/reading, so they can get up to speed. But, don't make up stupid guidelines that a certain number of people of a certain race/background need to be in a certain program. That's just ludicrous. It's like adding in something that says 10% of the varsity bball team needs to be 5'7" or shorter.

Nobody is doing this. To repeat, nobody is doing this. Nobody. Nobody is doing this, nobody is recommending doing this, nobody can legally do it anyway. Nobody. MCPS cannot legally do it.

The Metis report said -- let's make sure that more poor/brown/black kids apply to the HGCs. DCUM reflexively and consistently translates this as -- let's admit unqualified poor/brown/black kids to the HGCs for being poor/brown/black. Why does DCUM does this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

MCPS already provides a boost to those who "start further back" by providing smaller class sizes and more services in such schools. What you are saying here is to not only provide the extra boost to have them start at the same place, but make their finish line closer so that they don't have to run as far.

If the smaller class sizes in Title I or Focus schools are so great, how come the DCUMmies aren't all clamoring to send their children to Title I schools? Also, it is a fact that there are very many poor children in MCPS who are not in Title I or Focus schools.

DCUM's insistence that the CogAT is a true and unbiased assessment of intellectual ability is baffling.

Actually, some DCUMers do move out that way for the smaller class sizes. It's been mentioned on this forum a few times.

I agree, not all poor children go to Title 1 or Focus schools, but like I stated earlier, not all URM are poor, and not all Asian/Whites are wealthy. So to lower the criteria for URM is a slap in the face to poorer white/Asians kids who start off far back in the race, especially some Asian kids whose parents don't speak English. These kids are even more at a disadvantage than lower income kids whose parents speak English.

They don't just look at CoGat scores; they also look at other things. If it was just purely scores, you'd probably see a lot more Asian kids.