Second community meeting on Choice Study?

[Anonymous]

No, the 2.718 PP was me, and I am not the person complaining about an exponential number of people. I was just making a dumb joke. I apologize for the confusion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes but virtually the group called Hispanics is multiracial, a large chunk of AA are multiracial even though they don't identify as such. What is it about identifying as multiracial changes the outcome.

My guess is that there's a good correlation between higher SES and identifying as multiracial.

Interesting

[Anonymous]

the report group URM into black/latino/ELL/low SEC/
I wonder where to put poor white or ELL Asian?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:the report group URM into black/latino/ELL/low SEC/
I wonder where to put poor white or ELL Asian?

No, not SES. MCPS has no data on socioeconomic status. MCPS only has data on qualifying for free or reduced meals (FARMS).

Poor people are poor people, even when they are white non-Hispanic poor people. Likewise, English-language learners are English-language learners, even when they are Asian non-Hispanic English-language learners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the report group URM into black/latino/ELL/low SEC/
I wonder where to put poor white or ELL Asian?

No, not SES. MCPS has no data on socioeconomic status. MCPS only has data on qualifying for free or reduced meals (FARMS).

Poor people are poor people, even when they are white non-Hispanic poor people. Likewise, English-language learners are English-language learners, even when they are Asian non-Hispanic English-language learners.

The report does present all these categories at once which I think leads to confusion. However, what they really have is a total which is then broken down into four racial groups: White, Asian, Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino (and some leftover that's never mentioned), these groups don't overlap. Then they give the numbers for FARMS, Limited English Proficiency, Special Ed, these groups do overlap and they also overlap with the racial breakdown. Presumably MCPS has data on the intersections, but given the small numbers involved, it would be either not much use, or considered identifiable information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:the report group URM into black/latino/ELL/low SEC/
I wonder where to put poor white or ELL Asian?

Just to clarify, A poor white would appear twice, once for white, once for FARMS (assuming they qualify). An ELL Asian would appear twice, once for Asian, once as LEP (Limited English Proficiency). Blacks and Latino's can also appear in the other three categories: FARMS, LEP, Special Ed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes but virtually the group called Hispanics is multiracial, a large chunk of AA are multiracial even though they don't identify as such. What is it about identifying as multiracial changes the outcome.

My guess is that there's a good correlation between higher SES and identifying as multiracial.

Interesting

In addition to the numbers just being small, I think this is why multiple race isn't mentioned in the report. If you look at the data (some is in the appendix) this category bucks the narrative. E.g. Exhibit D5 page 196, "FARMS enrollment by Race/Ethnic Group 2014-2015": AA 33.9%, Asian 7.7%, Hispanic 51.3%, White 4.7%, Two or More 2.2%.

[Anonymous]

Why have Special Ed programs? Why have ESOL programs? Why have sports in school?

All of this costs money and if we remove ESOL and Sp Ed programs then we will have more money for general education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why have Special Ed programs? Why have ESOL programs? Why have sports in school?

All of this costs money and if we remove ESOL and Sp Ed programs then we will have more money for general education.

Of course they do and money is always tight and people have to fight for special programs in every budget cycle. But ESOL and Special Ed have mandates and federal money behind them. Anyone who wants to maintain or expand magnets needs to have a better argument than money is spent other places why not here. Anyway, the costs and justifications are spelled out in the Choice Study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why have Special Ed programs? Why have ESOL programs? Why have sports in school?

All of this costs money and if we remove ESOL and Sp Ed programs then we will have more money for general education.

Of course they do and money is always tight and people have to fight for special programs in every budget cycle. But ESOL and Special Ed have mandates and federal money behind them. Anyone who wants to maintain or expand magnets needs to have a better argument than money is spent other places why not here. Anyway, the costs and justifications are spelled out in the Choice Study.

I think having special programs is great. It really makes a school district attractive to parents that want more than just a standard education for their kids. It's one of the reasons we moved here. I like that we have different options, whether we use them or not. I hope they don't gut it. Our previous school district has very little in the way of magnet, gifted, special programs, yet it's a pretty wealthy area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why have Special Ed programs? Why have ESOL programs? Why have sports in school?

All of this costs money and if we remove ESOL and Sp Ed programs then we will have more money for general education.

Of course they do and money is always tight and people have to fight for special programs in every budget cycle. But ESOL and Special Ed have mandates and federal money behind them. Anyone who wants to maintain or expand magnets needs to have a better argument than money is spent other places why not here. Anyway, the costs and justifications are spelled out in the Choice Study.

I think having special programs is great. It really makes a school district attractive to parents that want more than just a standard education for their kids. It's one of the reasons we moved here. I like that we have different options, whether we use them or not. I hope they don't gut it. Our previous school district has very little in the way of magnet, gifted, special programs, yet it's a pretty wealthy area.

So far, nothing about the Choice Study has been about eliminating the programs. Still similar programs have been slashed across the country and the privates and the expensive summer camps are expanding into gifted education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why have Special Ed programs? Why have ESOL programs? Why have sports in school?

All of this costs money and if we remove ESOL and Sp Ed programs then we will have more money for general education.

Of course they do and money is always tight and people have to fight for special programs in every budget cycle. But ESOL and Special Ed have mandates and federal money behind them. Anyone who wants to maintain or expand magnets needs to have a better argument than money is spent other places why not here. Anyway, the costs and justifications are spelled out in the Choice Study.

If it's because the funding is so tight that MCPS have to decide between special education programs and gift programs. I support SE wholeheartedly. If there is funding allocated for gifted program, I want it be a fair game by that I mean the county can decide whatever criteria to use for admission, or allocate more funding to support the preparation of the URM group, but the criteria must be objective, and skin-color be out of the picture completely. My 5 grader Asian boy thinks he is "black" in summer and "white" in winter, call him dumb but the fact is kids are not born with race consciousness. It's the adults who keep reminding and reinforcing they each belongs to a specific group. One of my friends of mixed Asian/Black always fills "black" for their kids race because a simple thing as to check a different box will instantly broaden the opportunities of their kids. Some may think it's fair and is as the compensation to the black/latino's suffering in the past. I just think it's absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why have Special Ed programs? Why have ESOL programs? Why have sports in school?

All of this costs money and if we remove ESOL and Sp Ed programs then we will have more money for general education.

Of course they do and money is always tight and people have to fight for special programs in every budget cycle. But ESOL and Special Ed have mandates and federal money behind them. Anyone who wants to maintain or expand magnets needs to have a better argument than money is spent other places why not here. Anyway, the costs and justifications are spelled out in the Choice Study.

I think having special programs is great. It really makes a school district attractive to parents that want more than just a standard education for their kids. It's one of the reasons we moved here. I like that we have different options, whether we use them or not. I hope they don't gut it. Our previous school district has very little in the way of magnet, gifted, special programs, yet it's a pretty wealthy area.

So far, nothing about the Choice Study has been about eliminating the programs. Still similar programs have been slashed across the country and the privates and the expensive summer camps are expanding into gifted education.

And this hurts low/middle income kids more than the wealthy kids, which would probably increase the achievement gap. Even more reason to expand programs in public schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why have Special Ed programs? Why have ESOL programs? Why have sports in school?

All of this costs money and if we remove ESOL and Sp Ed programs then we will have more money for general education.

Of course they do and money is always tight and people have to fight for special programs in every budget cycle. But ESOL and Special Ed have mandates and federal money behind them. Anyone who wants to maintain or expand magnets needs to have a better argument than money is spent other places why not here. Anyway, the costs and justifications are spelled out in the Choice Study.

If it's because the funding is so tight that MCPS have to decide between special education programs and gift programs. I support SE wholeheartedly. If there is funding allocated for gifted program, I want it be a fair game by that I mean the county can decide whatever criteria to use for admission, or allocate more funding to support the preparation of the URM group, but the criteria must be objective, and skin-color be out of the picture completely. My 5 grader Asian boy thinks he is "black" in summer and "white" in winter, call him dumb but the fact is kids are not born with race consciousness. It's the adults who keep reminding and reinforcing they each belongs to a specific group. One of my friends of mixed Asian/Black always fills "black" for their kids race because a simple thing as to check a different box will instantly broaden the opportunities of their kids. Some may think it's fair and is as the compensation to the black/latino's suffering in the past. I just think it's absurd.

lol.. my half Asian kid kind of thinks the same, since in the summer, they get really dark.

I am going to tell my kids to not check Asian when applying for college. Sad, but, it's how it is.

I don't think Latinos have historically suffered to the same degree as Blacks in this country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's laughable that someone would think the magnet program should reflect the demographics of the county. If that's what mcps is after, then those programs should be removed indeed.

I'll translate - we don't need to spend resources outside of what benefits my child.
Or more to the point -I don't care about brown kids. If the program is 100 % white and Asian all the better.

Bingo.