Why do parents from high FARMS school

[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:I would love to hear what deranged level of course offerings should be offered at every school.

How about offering the same exact classes at all schools. You are ok with this because your kids have access. You bash other parents whose kids don’t have access why? You are the problem.

I think your child’s needs should be met, but I don’t think you are being realistic or reasonable in thinking you can buy a home in an under resourced school pyramid and expect that your outlier child, who is not a family on FARMS or an EML student, should get bespoke treatment/allocation of school resources when the majority of your school needs different classes and remediation. I think mcps should provide you transportation to mc or to a nearby high school so you can access those classes they can’t provide at yours. I don’t think your under resourced over crowded school should have to cater to a very small subset.

I think that's a mis-reading of the student population at these high FARMS schools. It's not like 90% are below grade level. There's a substantial cohort of able learners, and they should be able to have their needs met at their home school.

Honestly, this is perhaps a topic for another thread, but the simplest way to do that IMO is less about super-advanced AP or post-AP classes, but to go back to cohorted Grade 9-10 English and Social Studies classes so that teachers aren't scrambling trying to teach to such a wide range of abilities in one classroom, an approach that I don't think helps students at any level.

They are about 30-50% below grade level and 50-70% grade level. Very few above grade level.

But let’s all focus on super advanced coursework….

Sure, because your kids got advanced coursework, who cares about the kids who don't? You want to talk about farms and yet, you don't live in a neighborhood with lower income and they aren't welcome. The better solution is to cut funding from the schools that have more to make it more equal and use that funding to provide more supports in ES and MS to get these kids reading and writing better. There is no fix at the HS level. The fix has to come at the ES level.

School funding is managed by the county, and high FARMs schools already get more funding than other schools (as they should).

Wealthier parents provide outside enrichment. The school district doesn't provide that.

-dp

There are no Title 1 or focus high schools in MCPS. They don't get money based on FARMS rates. If they do get extra money it is probably for EML and students with disabilities (low income kids have higher rates of disability). These funds do not address the specific issues associated with poverty nor do they address racism in education, which is a real, documented issue that affects Black and Brown (especially Black) students of all income levels. In addition, MCPS's budget numbers do not distinguish between teachers. As you know, more experienced teachers get paid more. High income schools have more experienced teachers. Therefore, teachers in high income schools get paid more than teachers in low income schools.

Teacher in high income schools do not get paid more just because the school is in a high income area. They are paid more because they are more senior and have more experience. The teachers with the same seniority/experience get paid the same amount regardless of where the school is located in the county and regardless of socioeconomics of population.

And while there is no Title1 or Focus in High school, MCPS did change their resource allocation to schools. So the PP is correct that High Farms schools are getting more.

Huh? What does this even mean? Which schools are getting extra funding due to their FARMS rates (that is, funding that is not for EML or special education)?

DP. I think this refers to a part of Taylor's new operating budget. I'll look for a link.

It's this chart:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gDlOYGuJHgMS8Orz2GQnQ6tMygY49xPY/view

linked to Exhibit 33 here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-q0uQO2SNtPctS3GptsRbeansTeG0ffQwAp-oDnBWVA/edit?usp=sharing

Does this mean that for this current school year, Einstein which is listed as having 847 FARMS students, gets an equity allocation of $267,273 (which is about 2 teachers salaries and benefits) and Churchill, which is listed as having 241 FARMS students, gets $276,194? In what way is this promoting equity? BCC is even worse! Kennedy gets less than all of these. WTAF.

This isn't for salaries and benefits, it's instructional materials and "other program costs."

For which Churchill and BCC got more money than Einstein and Kennedy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to hear what deranged level of course offerings should be offered at every school.

How about offering the same exact classes at all schools. You are ok with this because your kids have access. You bash other parents whose kids don’t have access why? You are the problem.

I think your child’s needs should be met, but I don’t think you are being realistic or reasonable in thinking you can buy a home in an under resourced school pyramid and expect that your outlier child, who is not a family on FARMS or an EML student, should get bespoke treatment/allocation of school resources when the majority of your school needs different classes and remediation. I think mcps should provide you transportation to mc or to a nearby high school so you can access those classes they can’t provide at yours. I don’t think your under resourced over crowded school should have to cater to a very small subset.

I think that's a mis-reading of the student population at these high FARMS schools. It's not like 90% are below grade level. There's a substantial cohort of able learners, and they should be able to have their needs met at their home school.

Honestly, this is perhaps a topic for another thread, but the simplest way to do that IMO is less about super-advanced AP or post-AP classes, but to go back to cohorted Grade 9-10 English and Social Studies classes so that teachers aren't scrambling trying to teach to such a wide range of abilities in one classroom, an approach that I don't think helps students at any level.

They are about 30-50% below grade level and 50-70% grade level. Very few above grade level.

But let’s all focus on super advanced coursework….

Sure, because your kids got advanced coursework, who cares about the kids who don't? You want to talk about farms and yet, you don't live in a neighborhood with lower income and they aren't welcome. The better solution is to cut funding from the schools that have more to make it more equal and use that funding to provide more supports in ES and MS to get these kids reading and writing better. There is no fix at the HS level. The fix has to come at the ES level.

School funding is managed by the county, and high FARMs schools already get more funding than other schools (as they should).

Wealthier parents provide outside enrichment. The school district doesn't provide that.

-dp

Many of us worked with our kids/tutors/outside enrichment but that's not why these kids are struggling. MCPS needs to be required to provide additional supports to any child not on grade level. BY HS, it’s too little too late. The funding for FAMRS is not enough to accomplish that.

No what they need is a humanities magnet and MVC.

Two separate issues but if you provide support early on, some of those can may be able to do better in humanities and math. Why is it that your kids should get access to MVC and AP sciences and other classes and ours shouldn't? Segretation at its finest.

[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:I would love to hear what deranged level of course offerings should be offered at every school.

How about offering the same exact classes at all schools. You are ok with this because your kids have access. You bash other parents whose kids don’t have access why? You are the problem.

I think your child’s needs should be met, but I don’t think you are being realistic or reasonable in thinking you can buy a home in an under resourced school pyramid and expect that your outlier child, who is not a family on FARMS or an EML student, should get bespoke treatment/allocation of school resources when the majority of your school needs different classes and remediation. I think mcps should provide you transportation to mc or to a nearby high school so you can access those classes they can’t provide at yours. I don’t think your under resourced over crowded school should have to cater to a very small subset.

I think that's a mis-reading of the student population at these high FARMS schools. It's not like 90% are below grade level. There's a substantial cohort of able learners, and they should be able to have their needs met at their home school.

Honestly, this is perhaps a topic for another thread, but the simplest way to do that IMO is less about super-advanced AP or post-AP classes, but to go back to cohorted Grade 9-10 English and Social Studies classes so that teachers aren't scrambling trying to teach to such a wide range of abilities in one classroom, an approach that I don't think helps students at any level.

They are about 30-50% below grade level and 50-70% grade level. Very few above grade level.

But let’s all focus on super advanced coursework….

Sure, because your kids got advanced coursework, who cares about the kids who don't? You want to talk about farms and yet, you don't live in a neighborhood with lower income and they aren't welcome. The better solution is to cut funding from the schools that have more to make it more equal and use that funding to provide more supports in ES and MS to get these kids reading and writing better. There is no fix at the HS level. The fix has to come at the ES level.

School funding is managed by the county, and high FARMs schools already get more funding than other schools (as they should).

Wealthier parents provide outside enrichment. The school district doesn't provide that.

-dp

There are no Title 1 or focus high schools in MCPS. They don't get money based on FARMS rates. If they do get extra money it is probably for EML and students with disabilities (low income kids have higher rates of disability). These funds do not address the specific issues associated with poverty nor do they address racism in education, which is a real, documented issue that affects Black and Brown (especially Black) students of all income levels. In addition, MCPS's budget numbers do not distinguish between teachers. As you know, more experienced teachers get paid more. High income schools have more experienced teachers. Therefore, teachers in high income schools get paid more than teachers in low income schools.

Teacher in high income schools do not get paid more just because the school is in a high income area. They are paid more because they are more senior and have more experience. The teachers with the same seniority/experience get paid the same amount regardless of where the school is located in the county and regardless of socioeconomics of population.

And while there is no Title1 or Focus in High school, MCPS did change their resource allocation to schools. So the PP is correct that High Farms schools are getting more.

Huh? What does this even mean? Which schools are getting extra funding due to their FARMS rates (that is, funding that is not for EML or special education)?

DP. I think this refers to a part of Taylor's new operating budget. I'll look for a link.

It's this chart:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gDlOYGuJHgMS8Orz2GQnQ6tMygY49xPY/view

linked to Exhibit 33 here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-q0uQO2SNtPctS3GptsRbeansTeG0ffQwAp-oDnBWVA/edit?usp=sharing

Does this mean that for this current school year, Einstein which is listed as having 847 FARMS students, gets an equity allocation of $267,273 (which is about 2 teachers salaries and benefits) and Churchill, which is listed as having 241 FARMS students, gets $276,194? In what way is this promoting equity? BCC is even worse! Kennedy gets less than all of these. WTAF.

You are misreading it. The equity allocation is the “Equity add on” column.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to hear what deranged level of course offerings should be offered at every school.

How about offering the same exact classes at all schools. You are ok with this because your kids have access. You bash other parents whose kids don’t have access why? You are the problem.

I think your child’s needs should be met, but I don’t think you are being realistic or reasonable in thinking you can buy a home in an under resourced school pyramid and expect that your outlier child, who is not a family on FARMS or an EML student, should get bespoke treatment/allocation of school resources when the majority of your school needs different classes and remediation. I think mcps should provide you transportation to mc or to a nearby high school so you can access those classes they can’t provide at yours. I don’t think your under resourced over crowded school should have to cater to a very small subset.

I think that's a mis-reading of the student population at these high FARMS schools. It's not like 90% are below grade level. There's a substantial cohort of able learners, and they should be able to have their needs met at their home school.

Honestly, this is perhaps a topic for another thread, but the simplest way to do that IMO is less about super-advanced AP or post-AP classes, but to go back to cohorted Grade 9-10 English and Social Studies classes so that teachers aren't scrambling trying to teach to such a wide range of abilities in one classroom, an approach that I don't think helps students at any level.

They are about 30-50% below grade level and 50-70% grade level. Very few above grade level.

But let’s all focus on super advanced coursework….

Sure, because your kids got advanced coursework, who cares about the kids who don't? You want to talk about farms and yet, you don't live in a neighborhood with lower income and they aren't welcome. The better solution is to cut funding from the schools that have more to make it more equal and use that funding to provide more supports in ES and MS to get these kids reading and writing better. There is no fix at the HS level. The fix has to come at the ES level.

School funding is managed by the county, and high FARMs schools already get more funding than other schools (as they should).

Wealthier parents provide outside enrichment. The school district doesn't provide that.

-dp

Many of us worked with our kids/tutors/outside enrichment but that's not why these kids are struggling. MCPS needs to be required to provide additional supports to any child not on grade level. BY HS, its too little too late. The funding for FAMRS is not enough to accomplish that.

Has anyone reckoned with how much this actually would cost? There have been plenty of studies showing preschool and certain early childhood benefits fade over time. So tell me, what is the cost to keep all of these kids on grade level from kindergarten (or even before) through high school without watering down the curriculum or creme skimming to “juice” the stats, because that’s what needs to be evaluated. And then we need to decide whether we have the budget to do it. I, for one, am pessimistic about the true costs much less the political wherewithal to see it through.

It's hard to say, but I would imagine extremely expensive, but isn't it worth investing in students when they are younger, as if you catch issues early and remediate, they may not need the help in MS or HS. It shouldn't be one or the other, but if kids don't have a strong foundation, they are going to struggle starting in 3rd/4th and its very hard to catch up and it hurts kids self-esteem and they give up. Some of it is MCPS curriculum.

[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:I would love to hear what deranged level of course offerings should be offered at every school.

How about offering the same exact classes at all schools. You are ok with this because your kids have access. You bash other parents whose kids don’t have access why? You are the problem.

I think your child’s needs should be met, but I don’t think you are being realistic or reasonable in thinking you can buy a home in an under resourced school pyramid and expect that your outlier child, who is not a family on FARMS or an EML student, should get bespoke treatment/allocation of school resources when the majority of your school needs different classes and remediation. I think mcps should provide you transportation to mc or to a nearby high school so you can access those classes they can’t provide at yours. I don’t think your under resourced over crowded school should have to cater to a very small subset.

I think that's a mis-reading of the student population at these high FARMS schools. It's not like 90% are below grade level. There's a substantial cohort of able learners, and they should be able to have their needs met at their home school.

Honestly, this is perhaps a topic for another thread, but the simplest way to do that IMO is less about super-advanced AP or post-AP classes, but to go back to cohorted Grade 9-10 English and Social Studies classes so that teachers aren't scrambling trying to teach to such a wide range of abilities in one classroom, an approach that I don't think helps students at any level.

They are about 30-50% below grade level and 50-70% grade level. Very few above grade level.

But let’s all focus on super advanced coursework….

Sure, because your kids got advanced coursework, who cares about the kids who don't? You want to talk about farms and yet, you don't live in a neighborhood with lower income and they aren't welcome. The better solution is to cut funding from the schools that have more to make it more equal and use that funding to provide more supports in ES and MS to get these kids reading and writing better. There is no fix at the HS level. The fix has to come at the ES level.

School funding is managed by the county, and high FARMs schools already get more funding than other schools (as they should).

Wealthier parents provide outside enrichment. The school district doesn't provide that.

-dp

There are no Title 1 or focus high schools in MCPS. They don't get money based on FARMS rates. If they do get extra money it is probably for EML and students with disabilities (low income kids have higher rates of disability). These funds do not address the specific issues associated with poverty nor do they address racism in education, which is a real, documented issue that affects Black and Brown (especially Black) students of all income levels. In addition, MCPS's budget numbers do not distinguish between teachers. As you know, more experienced teachers get paid more. High income schools have more experienced teachers. Therefore, teachers in high income schools get paid more than teachers in low income schools.

Teacher in high income schools do not get paid more just because the school is in a high income area. They are paid more because they are more senior and have more experience. The teachers with the same seniority/experience get paid the same amount regardless of where the school is located in the county and regardless of socioeconomics of population.

And while there is no Title1 or Focus in High school, MCPS did change their resource allocation to schools. So the PP is correct that High Farms schools are getting more.

Huh? What does this even mean? Which schools are getting extra funding due to their FARMS rates (that is, funding that is not for EML or special education)?

DP. I think this refers to a part of Taylor's new operating budget. I'll look for a link.

It's this chart:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gDlOYGuJHgMS8Orz2GQnQ6tMygY49xPY/view

linked to Exhibit 33 here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-q0uQO2SNtPctS3GptsRbeansTeG0ffQwAp-oDnBWVA/edit?usp=sharing

Does this mean that for this current school year, Einstein which is listed as having 847 FARMS students, gets an equity allocation of $267,273 (which is about 2 teachers salaries and benefits) and Churchill, which is listed as having 241 FARMS students, gets $276,194? In what way is this promoting equity? BCC is even worse! Kennedy gets less than all of these. WTAF.

This isn't for salaries and benefits, it's instructional materials and "other program costs."

For which Churchill and BCC got more money than Einstein and Kennedy.

The "equity add-on" is in the next to last column.

Einstein: $37,602
BCC: $27,813
Kennedy: $51,238
Churchill: $17,507

[Anonymous]

The equity add on is roughly in line across schools and is related to the number of FARMS kids. But I don’t know how they did the allocation (it likely adjusts for things other than FARMS).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The equity add on is roughly in line across schools and is related to the number of FARMS kids. But I don’t know how they did the allocation (it likely adjusts for things other than FARMS).

On the spreadsheet it says "Funds are added to the budget to provide additional materials allocations to schools for all students with disabilities, students impacted by poverty, and Emergent Multi-Lingual Learners."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The equity add on is roughly in line across schools and is related to the number of FARMS kids. But I don’t know how they did the allocation (it likely adjusts for things other than FARMS).

On the spreadsheet it says "Funds are added to the budget to provide additional materials allocations to schools for all students with disabilities, students impacted by poverty, and Emergent Multi-Lingual Learners."

Yeah so there is some factor for each of the FARMS, SWD, and EML columns, to get to the equity add-on number. Eg all schools were treated the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The equity add on is roughly in line across schools and is related to the number of FARMS kids. But I don’t know how they did the allocation (it likely adjusts for things other than FARMS).

I thought that at first, but I do not think that is accurate. First of all that amount is tiny to the point of being insulting if it is indeed the equity add on. Moreover, what is it being added to? The number they are adding it to is not the total funding for the school. You can't staff a high school on $300k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The equity add on is roughly in line across schools and is related to the number of FARMS kids. But I don’t know how they did the allocation (it likely adjusts for things other than FARMS).

I thought that at first, but I do not think that is accurate. First of all that amount is tiny to the point of being insulting if it is indeed the equity add on. Moreover, what is it being added to? The number they are adding it to is not the total funding for the school. You can't staff a high school on $300k.

The instructional materials budget per school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The equity add on is roughly in line across schools and is related to the number of FARMS kids. But I don’t know how they did the allocation (it likely adjusts for things other than FARMS).

I thought that at first, but I do not think that is accurate. First of all that amount is tiny to the point of being insulting if it is indeed the equity add on. Moreover, what is it being added to? The number they are adding it to is not the total funding for the school. You can't staff a high school on $300k.

This is not the total for the school. See the other document.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The equity add on is roughly in line across schools and is related to the number of FARMS kids. But I don’t know how they did the allocation (it likely adjusts for things other than FARMS).

I thought that at first, but I do not think that is accurate. First of all that amount is tiny to the point of being insulting if it is indeed the equity add on. Moreover, what is it being added to? The number they are adding it to is not the total funding for the school. You can't staff a high school on $300k.

The instructional materials budget per school.

Okay, I'm sorry but are you really saying high poverty schools get more funding based on this? This is pennies, this is not significant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The equity add on is roughly in line across schools and is related to the number of FARMS kids. But I don’t know how they did the allocation (it likely adjusts for things other than FARMS).

I thought that at first, but I do not think that is accurate. First of all that amount is tiny to the point of being insulting if it is indeed the equity add on. Moreover, what is it being added to? The number they are adding it to is not the total funding for the school. You can't staff a high school on $300k.

This is not the total for the school. See the other document.

the fact you are still trying to say high poverty schools get any significant funding based on their FARMS rates is actually insulting at this point. Please stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The equity add on is roughly in line across schools and is related to the number of FARMS kids. But I don’t know how they did the allocation (it likely adjusts for things other than FARMS).

I thought that at first, but I do not think that is accurate. First of all that amount is tiny to the point of being insulting if it is indeed the equity add on. Moreover, what is it being added to? The number they are adding it to is not the total funding for the school. You can't staff a high school on $300k.

The instructional materials budget per school.

Okay, I'm sorry but are you really saying high poverty schools get more funding based on this? This is pennies, this is not significant.

Pennies are significant at that particular school, it's not to the entire budget. Some of the schools have students with severe disabilities. Could it be for those programs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The equity add on is roughly in line across schools and is related to the number of FARMS kids. But I don’t know how they did the allocation (it likely adjusts for things other than FARMS).

I thought that at first, but I do not think that is accurate. First of all that amount is tiny to the point of being insulting if it is indeed the equity add on. Moreover, what is it being added to? The number they are adding it to is not the total funding for the school. You can't staff a high school on $300k.

The instructional materials budget per school.

Okay, I'm sorry but are you really saying high poverty schools get more funding based on this? This is pennies, this is not significant.

Pennies are significant at that particular school, it's not to the entire budget. Some of the schools have students with severe disabilities. Could it be for those programs?

You're just distracting from the reality that high poverty high schools in MCPS do not get any significant funding to address the specific challenges associated with poverty or racism.