Churchill students

[Anonymous]

An average decent home in Potomac is 1.2 to 1.4 million dollars.

Under a million are “wrong side of tracks” homes.

1.4 to. 1.7 million are fairly normal homes unless outer Potomac

2 million is minimum for house to hit upscale. My block is the slums of my section of Potomac. We have houses as little as one million with an average price of 1.3 million.

The next block over is 2-3 million and big difference. My block is used Chevys and public school kids.

Next block is 7 series and private school. Only American cars are the Limos.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An average decent home in Potomac is 1.2 to 1.4 million dollars.

Under a million are “wrong side of tracks” homes.

1.4 to. 1.7 million are fairly normal homes unless outer Potomac

2 million is minimum for house to hit upscale. My block is the slums of my section of Potomac. We have houses as little as one million with an average price of 1.3 million.

The next block over is 2-3 million and big difference. My block is used Chevys and public school kids.

Next block is 7 series and private school. Only American cars are the Limos.

Every time I walk out of my 900K Potomac house, I have to duck or be hit by flying bullets from rival Potomac gangs battling it out. And my car is on bricks because my tires keep getting stolen. Worse yet... some of my neighbors have... car ports! Wrong side of the tracks for sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DP. Of course it is. OP is presumably worried about being surrounded by kids who expect to jet to Europe twice a year, be given a Benz at 17, etc.

Folks living in an $800k house in Potomac aren’t doing that or anything close. They likely live comfortable lives with the occasional modest luxury, but nothing extravagant. It could easily be a two Fed family or other people with good, but not incredibly high earning jobs.

If I had a nickel for every time I've read a post like this on DCUM, I'd have a lot of nickels but still wouldn't be able to afford a $800,000 house in Potomac.

and then you hear about them complaining about those horrible kids in Scotland.

It's so funny to have them come on here and just out themselves, like nobody needs to do it for them.

And the irony is, YOU are the one who came here and brought up those kids... well well well.

No, I'm a DP, and I'm the one who mentioned Scotland. I mentioned Scotland because it's part of Montgomery County history, and because it's relevant to Churchill. I'm going to repost this link:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/2007/01/14/the-scotland-of-the-doves-span-classbankheadthis-neighborhoods-roots-too-deep-to-be-put-downspan/17b2f8b0-79e6-45c0-ac0c-b137446c0f5a/

So when the fight happened at Winston Churchill High School recently and four Scotland students were charged with assault, and Principal Joan C. Benz sent out a letter saying, "Every incident revolving around this two-month ordeal has been Black-on-Black violence," residents in the neighborhood just off Seven Locks Road knew she was talking about their community.

And the need arose once again, as in the pre-integration days, to explain why the children of Scotland deserved to attend Churchill, to sit beside the children from much wealthier parts of Potomac.

"There is a stigma on Scotland. . . . They see Scotland as a place of danger, a place they can stay away from," says the Rev. James Phifer, pastor of Scotland AME Zion Church, which was built in the community 101 years ago. "And all of that is hogwash."

So what is it like to live in a place that people use careful language to describe?

Code words. Veiled language. Words that are less distasteful, less offensive, used to say one thing but imply another. "They came from Scotland."

What does it really mean when a fight is broadened to describe the neighborhood from which the teenagers came?

"The problem is, we understand the code because she is putting Scotland down," resident Craig Dove says, referring to Benz. "What I picked up is that it is a clear sign saying they don't want our kids at that school. They are already stereotyped for being from here."

"They label Scotland kids different," says Cynthia Polite, whose son was involved in the fight. Polite says the principal has told her that she wants her son transferred. "That lady at that school, that lady is trying to get Scotland kids out of there."

Dr. Joan Benz is a moron and should have been fired YEARS ago. I'm not sure what it took to make the administration get off their asses and finally fire her, I'm just glad they did.

She's 80 years old and still has segregation way of thinking.

Dr. Benz is a hero that kept Churchill from devolving into Einstein.
Guess which neighborhood all the drugs and violence came from?

A hero??
The woman is a blatant racist, and she doesn't really dispute that fact, does she?

Good to know where you stand... white is right, huh?

She's not even there anymore.
The PP is obviously a troll. And you can't blame Churchill for Benz - plenty of parents wanted her gone and MCPS let her stay. You need to be looking at MCPS and their policies regarding their administration and leadership.

Oh, good God... seriously?

Reading comprehension skills would helped immensely here.
Please point to the exact place where I blamed either Churchill, the students or even the parents for Benz being a racist. I'll wait..

Maybe, instead of reading these posts with such a defensive lens because your kids go to Churchill, try reading with an unemotional, more neutral one.

If you had done so, you would have seen exactly where I said "I don't know what it took for the administration to get off their asses and finally fire her, but I'm glad they did" (she is truly a bitter, miserable person).

This part should have been completely obvious to you, but when I wrote "the administration", the administration = MCPS BOE.

Just for my own reference, who else would I have been referring to when I mentioned the administration?

Did you think I meant the administration at Churchill? Newsflash: Benz WAS the administration at Churchill... there was nobody higher. Who was going to fire her at Churchill?

So, I'm still not getting how or where you could have ever taken my post as being derogatory towards Churchill, it's students, parents, staff or ANYONE at Churchill, other than Joan Benz?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: sure, keep complaining about a principal who hasn't been there for 2 years. Or, be like Elsa and Let. It. Go.

I'm not sure why anyone thinks mcps can solve poverty. They can't.

I certainly have no faith in MCPS solving anything.

The reason many at Churchill keep complaining is that it was so obvious that Dr. Benz had no clue how to run the school for at least he last 6-7 years she was there.

She caused real damage to the school and morale of the teachers and the kids. The fact that they kept her in place tells you all you need to know about how MCPS operates. Ignore till they can't anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: sure, keep complaining about a principal who hasn't been there for 2 years. Or, be like Elsa and Let. It. Go.

I'm not sure why anyone thinks mcps can solve poverty. They can't.

I certainly have no faith in MCPS solving anything.

The reason many at Churchill keep complaining is that it was so obvious that Dr. Benz had no clue how to run the school for at least he last 6-7 years she was there.

She caused real damage to the school and morale of the teachers and the kids. The fact that they kept her in place tells you all you need to know about how MCPS operates. Ignore till they can't anymore.

Dr. Benz retired two years ago. No school is perfect so Churchill has Its problems. Please name one high school You think it is perfect in MCPS. Frankly speaking, there are some teachers in Churchill Doing very little to help students but it is not a unique problem in MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
One thing that bothered me about Churchill was not the wealth disparity, but the competition to get into the best colleges. This permeated academics, sports, art and music programs, and volunteer work. It was tiresome and stressful. Parents spent so much money and time to give their kids a leg up. I know I got caught up in that until I had to step back for my own sanity and that of my children.

I actually find this to be the best aspect of Churchill. The kids were competitive about getting good grades, and getting into good colleges. There are so many other distractions for teenagers, that it is easy for them to let academics slide. I am quite laid back myself, so I am glad that my kids are receiving peer pressure to do well academically.

Of course, it would be preferable for the kids to do well in chemistry because they are excited about learning chemistry. But that can come later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
One thing that bothered me about Churchill was not the wealth disparity, but the competition to get into the best colleges. This permeated academics, sports, art and music programs, and volunteer work. It was tiresome and stressful. Parents spent so much money and time to give their kids a leg up. I know I got caught up in that until I had to step back for my own sanity and that of my children.

I actually find this to be the best aspect of Churchill. The kids were competitive about getting good grades, and getting into good colleges. There are so many other distractions for teenagers, that it is easy for them to let academics slide. I am quite laid back myself, so I am glad that my kids are receiving peer pressure to do well academically.

Of course, it would be preferable for the kids to do well in chemistry because they are excited about learning chemistry. But that can come later.

Looking at the college admission stats for MoCo high-schools that Bethesda Beat publishes Churchill looks okay but not exactly stellar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
One thing that bothered me about Churchill was not the wealth disparity, but the competition to get into the best colleges. This permeated academics, sports, art and music programs, and volunteer work. It was tiresome and stressful. Parents spent so much money and time to give their kids a leg up. I know I got caught up in that until I had to step back for my own sanity and that of my children.

I actually find this to be the best aspect of Churchill. The kids were competitive about getting good grades, and getting into good colleges. There are so many other distractions for teenagers, that it is easy for them to let academics slide. I am quite laid back myself, so I am glad that my kids are receiving peer pressure to do well academically.

Of course, it would be preferable for the kids to do well in chemistry because they are excited about learning chemistry. But that can come later.

Looking at the college admission stats for MoCo high-schools that Bethesda Beat publishes Churchill looks okay but not exactly stellar.

Not everyone wants to - or can afford to - go to top private schools for college, if that's what you consider "stellar". I think there's a big misconception about the type of people who go to Churchill. As you can see in the Bethesda magazine article, the kids went to a diverse range of colleges from Montgomery College, University of Maryland, Michigan to some smaller private schools, but I think what really stands out is the range of colleges and universities the kids matriculated to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
One thing that bothered me about Churchill was not the wealth disparity, but the competition to get into the best colleges. This permeated academics, sports, art and music programs, and volunteer work. It was tiresome and stressful. Parents spent so much money and time to give their kids a leg up. I know I got caught up in that until I had to step back for my own sanity and that of my children.

I actually find this to be the best aspect of Churchill. The kids were competitive about getting good grades, and getting into good colleges. There are so many other distractions for teenagers, that it is easy for them to let academics slide. I am quite laid back myself, so I am glad that my kids are receiving peer pressure to do well academically.

Of course, it would be preferable for the kids to do well in chemistry because they are excited about learning chemistry. But that can come later.

Looking at the college admission stats for MoCo high-schools that Bethesda Beat publishes Churchill looks okay but not exactly stellar.

Not everyone wants to - or can afford to - go to top private schools for college, if that's what you consider "stellar". I think there's a big misconception about the type of people who go to Churchill. As you can see in the Bethesda magazine article, the kids went to a diverse range of colleges from Montgomery College, University of Maryland, Michigan to some smaller private schools, but I think what really stands out is the range of colleges and universities the kids matriculated to.

DP. But is that materially different than many other schools in the county? If not, what’s the benefit of the pressure cooker?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
One thing that bothered me about Churchill was not the wealth disparity, but the competition to get into the best colleges. This permeated academics, sports, art and music programs, and volunteer work. It was tiresome and stressful. Parents spent so much money and time to give their kids a leg up. I know I got caught up in that until I had to step back for my own sanity and that of my children.

I actually find this to be the best aspect of Churchill. The kids were competitive about getting good grades, and getting into good colleges. There are so many other distractions for teenagers, that it is easy for them to let academics slide. I am quite laid back myself, so I am glad that my kids are receiving peer pressure to do well academically.

Of course, it would be preferable for the kids to do well in chemistry because they are excited about learning chemistry. But that can come later.

Looking at the college admission stats for MoCo high-schools that Bethesda Beat publishes Churchill looks okay but not exactly stellar.

Not everyone wants to - or can afford to - go to top private schools for college, if that's what you consider "stellar". I think there's a big misconception about the type of people who go to Churchill. As you can see in the Bethesda magazine article, the kids went to a diverse range of colleges from Montgomery College, University of Maryland, Michigan to some smaller private schools, but I think what really stands out is the range of colleges and universities the kids matriculated to.

DP. But is that materially different than many other schools in the county? If not, what’s the benefit of the pressure cooker?

Because what you call a pressure cooker, I call friendly competition to get good grades. I know that my kids responded well to the academic competition.

We were formerly at the Richard Montgomery cluster. It is hard to compare because my kids were not yet in high school then, but I think my kids have blossomed with the academic competition at Churchill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
One thing that bothered me about Churchill was not the wealth disparity, but the competition to get into the best colleges. This permeated academics, sports, art and music programs, and volunteer work. It was tiresome and stressful. Parents spent so much money and time to give their kids a leg up. I know I got caught up in that until I had to step back for my own sanity and that of my children.

I actually find this to be the best aspect of Churchill. The kids were competitive about getting good grades, and getting into good colleges. There are so many other distractions for teenagers, that it is easy for them to let academics slide. I am quite laid back myself, so I am glad that my kids are receiving peer pressure to do well academically.

Of course, it would be preferable for the kids to do well in chemistry because they are excited about learning chemistry. But that can come later.

Looking at the college admission stats for MoCo high-schools that Bethesda Beat publishes Churchill looks okay but not exactly stellar.

Not everyone wants to - or can afford to - go to top private schools for college, if that's what you consider "stellar". I think there's a big misconception about the type of people who go to Churchill. As you can see in the Bethesda magazine article, the kids went to a diverse range of colleges from Montgomery College, University of Maryland, Michigan to some smaller private schools, but I think what really stands out is the range of colleges and universities the kids matriculated to.

DP. But is that materially different than many other schools in the county? If not, what’s the benefit of the pressure cooker?

+1 by that metric, Churchill isn't that great considering the low FARMS rate there. So, then why is Churchill consider such a "good" school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
One thing that bothered me about Churchill was not the wealth disparity, but the competition to get into the best colleges. This permeated academics, sports, art and music programs, and volunteer work. It was tiresome and stressful. Parents spent so much money and time to give their kids a leg up. I know I got caught up in that until I had to step back for my own sanity and that of my children.

I actually find this to be the best aspect of Churchill. The kids were competitive about getting good grades, and getting into good colleges. There are so many other distractions for teenagers, that it is easy for them to let academics slide. I am quite laid back myself, so I am glad that my kids are receiving peer pressure to do well academically.

Of course, it would be preferable for the kids to do well in chemistry because they are excited about learning chemistry. But that can come later.

Looking at the college admission stats for MoCo high-schools that Bethesda Beat publishes Churchill looks okay but not exactly stellar.

Not everyone wants to - or can afford to - go to top private schools for college, if that's what you consider "stellar". I think there's a big misconception about the type of people who go to Churchill. As you can see in the Bethesda magazine article, the kids went to a diverse range of colleges from Montgomery College, University of Maryland, Michigan to some smaller private schools, but I think what really stands out is the range of colleges and universities the kids matriculated to.

DP. But is that materially different than many other schools in the county? If not, what’s the benefit of the pressure cooker?

Because what you call a pressure cooker, I call friendly competition to get good grades. I know that my kids responded well to the academic competition.

We were formerly at the Richard Montgomery cluster. It is hard to compare because my kids were not yet in high school then, but I think my kids have blossomed with the academic competition at Churchill.

My kid is at RM, and DC is doing awesome. There is plenty of academic competition in RM as well, and not just in IB. RM as a lot of AP classes, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
One thing that bothered me about Churchill was not the wealth disparity, but the competition to get into the best colleges. This permeated academics, sports, art and music programs, and volunteer work. It was tiresome and stressful. Parents spent so much money and time to give their kids a leg up. I know I got caught up in that until I had to step back for my own sanity and that of my children.

I actually find this to be the best aspect of Churchill. The kids were competitive about getting good grades, and getting into good colleges. There are so many other distractions for teenagers, that it is easy for them to let academics slide. I am quite laid back myself, so I am glad that my kids are receiving peer pressure to do well academically.

Of course, it would be preferable for the kids to do well in chemistry because they are excited about learning chemistry. But that can come later.

Looking at the college admission stats for MoCo high-schools that Bethesda Beat publishes Churchill looks okay but not exactly stellar.

Not everyone wants to - or can afford to - go to top private schools for college, if that's what you consider "stellar". I think there's a big misconception about the type of people who go to Churchill. As you can see in the Bethesda magazine article, the kids went to a diverse range of colleges from Montgomery College, University of Maryland, Michigan to some smaller private schools, but I think what really stands out is the range of colleges and universities the kids matriculated to.

DP. But is that materially different than many other schools in the county? If not, what’s the benefit of the pressure cooker?

Because what you call a pressure cooker, I call friendly competition to get good grades. I know that my kids responded well to the academic competition.

We were formerly at the Richard Montgomery cluster. It is hard to compare because my kids were not yet in high school then, but I think my kids have blossomed with the academic competition at Churchill.

Fine, forget the semantics of “pressure cooker” v “friendly competition.”

If the college outcomes are comparable (and I’m not necessarily saying they are), why would there be more friendly competition at Churchill than other schools with similar college outcomes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
One thing that bothered me about Churchill was not the wealth disparity, but the competition to get into the best colleges. This permeated academics, sports, art and music programs, and volunteer work. It was tiresome and stressful. Parents spent so much money and time to give their kids a leg up. I know I got caught up in that until I had to step back for my own sanity and that of my children.

I actually find this to be the best aspect of Churchill. The kids were competitive about getting good grades, and getting into good colleges. There are so many other distractions for teenagers, that it is easy for them to let academics slide. I am quite laid back myself, so I am glad that my kids are receiving peer pressure to do well academically.

Of course, it would be preferable for the kids to do well in chemistry because they are excited about learning chemistry. But that can come later.

Looking at the college admission stats for MoCo high-schools that Bethesda Beat publishes Churchill looks okay but not exactly stellar.

Not everyone wants to - or can afford to - go to top private schools for college, if that's what you consider "stellar". I think there's a big misconception about the type of people who go to Churchill. As you can see in the Bethesda magazine article, the kids went to a diverse range of colleges from Montgomery College, University of Maryland, Michigan to some smaller private schools, but I think what really stands out is the range of colleges and universities the kids matriculated to.

DP. But is that materially different than many other schools in the county? If not, what’s the benefit of the pressure cooker?

Because what you call a pressure cooker, I call friendly competition to get good grades. I know that my kids responded well to the academic competition.

We were formerly at the Richard Montgomery cluster. It is hard to compare because my kids were not yet in high school then, but I think my kids have blossomed with the academic competition at Churchill.

Fine, forget the semantics of “pressure cooker” v “friendly competition.”

If the college outcomes are comparable (and I’m not necessarily saying they are), why would there be more friendly competition at Churchill than other schools with similar college outcomes?

Well, "pressure cooker" and "friendly competition" do have very different meanings. The former implies that the students are under stress to do well. The latter only implies that academics is a topic of conversation among students in their free time.

Why does Churchill have more competitive parents? First, I suspect the competitiveness is comparable at Whitman, Poolesville, Wootton and some other MCPS schools. I suspect there is a feedback in which the school gets a good reputation, and so more competitive families want to move there. But I don't really know.

[Anonymous]

IMHO, a school is more influenced by the families of students than its facilities. One of the reasons that the W' schools stand out, is the fact that a very large proportion of families in those schools consider education very important and, more importantly, are putting real effort to help the students succeed in their education.

Not every family is taking the same approach. It is true that, sometimes, the peer-pressure can be overwhelming, both for the students and the parents. But I take it as an opportunity for us, both the students and the parents, to learn how to be true to ourselves and do the right things that we believe in.

In terms of family income, this area is higher, and there are plenty of wealthy families. But due to the high housing cost, many, if not most, families are just living a "middle class" lifestyle that one can afford at a much lower income in other places (say, some university town.)