To all who have a problem with MO CO changing demographics

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Ooops, messed up on the formating. To be completely clear.

So, this means that for every 100 kids, 33.7 kids are white and 14.3 kids are Asian. Using the WP's stat's, 48% of the 33.7 white kids tested at advanced levels, which means that 16.2 white kids (= 48% times 33.7 white kids) tested at advanced levels. For Asians, 58% of the 14.3 asian kids tested at advanced levels, in other words, 8.29 asian kids (= 58% times 14.3 asian kids) tested at advanced levels.

In plain english: for every 100 kids in MoCo, 16.2 white kids and 8.29 asian kids will be hurt by the elimination of math pathways. Again, more white kids than asian kids.

So you are wrong, wrong, wrong. . Please go away now.

Correct you messed up all right.

The poster was not referring to absolute numbers but proportional numbers based on a widening gap from data many years several years old. Today, if we had the real numbers I totally agree with the previous assertion.

You ("the poster") should know that proportional numbers are meaningless in any discussion of who is affected by a given policy. Absolute numbers are what count here. And it's beyond silly to build an argument on numbers that don't exist yet ("today, if we had the real numbers...."), especially if you're suggesting that MCPS is projecting future asian success rates in its collective head.

You're welcome.

[Anonymous]

Given the Post evidence is based on ancient study data describing a widening achievement gap between Asian Americans and Whites -- on a County-wide proportional basis of students in the MCPS public school system I have no doubts the original poster is correct in the "back of envelope" assessment. I'm sure MCPS has more accurate data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ooops, messed up on the formating. To be completely clear.

So, this means that for every 100 kids, 33.7 kids are white and 14.3 kids are Asian. Using the WP's stat's, 48% of the 33.7 white kids tested at advanced levels, which means that 16.2 white kids (= 48% times 33.7 white kids) tested at advanced levels. For Asians, 58% of the 14.3 asian kids tested at advanced levels, in other words, 8.29 asian kids (= 58% times 14.3 asian kids) tested at advanced levels.

In plain english: for every 100 kids in MoCo, 16.2 white kids and 8.29 asian kids will be hurt by the elimination of math pathways. Again, more white kids than asian kids.

So you are wrong, wrong, wrong. . Please go away now.

Correct you messed up all right.

The poster was not referring to absolute numbers but proportional numbers based on a widening gap from data many years several years old. Today, if we had the real numbers I totally agree with the previous assertion.

If you have some different numbers to share - we are all ears.

+1. Although it looks like the real numbers don't exist yet, they only exist in her imagination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Given the Post evidence is based on ancient study data describing a widening achievement gap between Asian Americans and Whites -- on a County-wide proportional basis of students in the MCPS public school system I have no doubts the original poster is correct in the "back of envelope" assessment. I'm sure MCPS has more accurate data.

Actually, the voices in my head are telling me that the hispanics and AAs are kicking everyone else's butts. And I'll put my imaginary data up against your imaginary data any day.

[Anonymous]

You ("the poster") should know that proportional numbers are meaningless in any discussion of who is affected by a given policy. Absolute numbers are what count here. And it's beyond silly to build an argument on numbers that don't exist yet ("today, if we had the real numbers...."), especially if you're suggesting that MCPS is projecting future asian success rates in its collective head.

You're welcome.

You could not be further from the truth in your analysis. Proportional analysis is critical here. Absolute numbers are a smoke screen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You ("the poster") should know that proportional numbers are meaningless in any discussion of who is affected by a given policy. Absolute numbers are what count here. And it's beyond silly to build an argument on numbers that don't exist yet ("today, if we had the real numbers...."), especially if you're suggesting that MCPS is projecting future asian success rates in its collective head.

You're welcome.

You could not be further from the truth in your analysis. Proportional analysis is critical here. Absolute numbers are a smoke screen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Ooops, messed up on the formating. To be completely clear.

So, this means that for every 100 kids, 33.7 kids are white and 14.3 kids are Asian. Using the WP's stat's, 48% of the 33.7 white kids tested at advanced levels, which means that 16.2 white kids (= 48% times 33.7 white kids) tested at advanced levels. For Asians, 58% of the 14.3 asian kids tested at advanced levels, in other words, 8.29 asian kids (= 58% times 14.3 asian kids) tested at advanced levels.

In plain english: for every 100 kids in MoCo, 16.2 white kids and 8.29 asian kids will be hurt by the elimination of math pathways. Again, more white kids than asian kids.

So you are wrong, wrong, wrong. . Please go away now.

Correct you messed up all right.

The poster was not referring to absolute numbers but proportional numbers based on a widening gap from data many years several years old. Today, if we had the real numbers I totally agree with the previous assertion.

The only thing that matters are the absolute numbers. They tell the real impact of the policy.

Gaps do not expand indefinately you do realize.. At some point they equilibrate. The subject group does not have the current numbers nor the numbers from immigration to have cause for concern.

Futhermore, another point to drop into the discussion. The US is in competition with the world not itself internally. They need high acheivers across the board no matter where they come from or they will be the worse off in the end globally. The hypothesis defies logic.

[Anonymous]

Actually, the voices in my head are telling me that the hispanics and AAs are kicking everyone else's butts. And I'll put my imaginary data up against your imaginary data any day.

Nice try. Can you find any data like the previous posters to support your claim? Other posters have but you haven't.

[Anonymous]

The only thing that matters are the absolute numbers. They tell the real impact of the policy.
Gaps do not expand indefinately you do realize.. At some point they equilibrate. The subject group does not have the current numbers nor the numbers from immigration to have cause for concern.

Futhermore, another point to drop into the discussion. The US is in competition with the world not itself internally. They need high acheivers across the board no matter where they come from or they will be the worse off in the end globally. The hypothesis defies logic.

Nonsense. Are you the expert graduate with a Masters degree in public policy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Actually, the voices in my head are telling me that the hispanics and AAs are kicking everyone else's butts. And I'll put my imaginary data up against your imaginary data any day.

Nice try. Can you find any data like the previous posters to support your claim? Other posters have but you haven't.

I was the one who put your two bits of data (WP and demographics) together to prove you wrong. You're welcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given the Post evidence is based on ancient study data describing a widening achievement gap between Asian Americans and Whites -- on a County-wide proportional basis of students in the MCPS public school system I have no doubts the original poster is correct in the "back of envelope" assessment. I'm sure MCPS has more accurate data.

Actually, the voices in my head are telling me that the hispanics and AAs are kicking everyone else's butts. And I'll put my imaginary data up against your imaginary data any day.

LMAO!!!

[Anonymous]

I was the one who put your two bits of data (WP and demographics) together to prove you wrong. You're welcome.

You are brave for owning up to improper analyses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I was the one who put your two bits of data (WP and demographics) together to prove you wrong. You're welcome.

You are brave for owning up to improper analyses.

We are still waiting for your data and analysis

[Anonymous]

A ratio (in absolute numbers) of 8 (AA) : 16 Whites to use your numbers. This is a 1 to 2 ratio. One AA for every 2 Whites. Are there 1/2 as many AAs than Whites in the MCPS? or Are there twice as many whites than Asians in our MCPS schools? My friends tell me this ratio is higher in MCPS. I have no skin in this game but there are more than twice the number of whites than Asians in MCPS schools. Therefore based on proportional representation Asians are potentially hurt the most in MCPS by the prohibitive policy. Note the achievement gap was widening at the time the Post study was done so the adverse effect is likely worse today. Just using your numbers and calculations here.

[Anonymous]

In 2006, I think, the Public Education Leadership Project at Harvard published a paper called Race, Accountability, and the Achievement Gap:

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/leadingforequity/pdf/HarvardCase-RaceAndAccountability-A.pdf