Why do parents from high FARMS school

[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.

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.

What? Look I’m trying to tell you what the columns mean since clearly you or someone else is not interpreting it correctly. Read what is written versus assuming you are talking to a single person.

[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.

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.

What? Look I’m trying to tell you what the columns mean since clearly you or someone else is not interpreting it correctly. Read what is written versus assuming you are talking to a single person.

Let's get back on track to the fact that high poverty high schools do not get a ton of extra money based on their poverty rates. This table is not helpful. It doesn't matter what the columns mean because the amounts are miniscule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

How much money do you want to give them to “address racism?” Where is this money coming from? What would it pay for??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

What? Look I’m trying to tell you what the columns mean since clearly you or someone else is not interpreting it correctly. Read what is written versus assuming you are talking to a single person.

Let's get back on track to the fact that high poverty high schools do not get a ton of extra money based on their poverty rates. This table is not helpful. It doesn't matter what the columns mean because the amounts are miniscule.

Instead of saying high poverty, how about stop looking at family income so much as the needs of the students and address those. You cannot wait till HS to fix this. It's too little too late.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

What? Look I’m trying to tell you what the columns mean since clearly you or someone else is not interpreting it correctly. Read what is written versus assuming you are talking to a single person.

Let's get back on track to the fact that high poverty high schools do not get a ton of extra money based on their poverty rates. This table is not helpful. It doesn't matter what the columns mean because the amounts are miniscule.

Instead of saying high poverty, how about stop looking at family income so much as the needs of the students and address those. You cannot wait till HS to fix this. It's too little too late.

If you really want to get back on track, reminder that this thread is about advanced magnets in high FARMS schools to I guess offer MVC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

What? Look I’m trying to tell you what the columns mean since clearly you or someone else is not interpreting it correctly. Read what is written versus assuming you are talking to a single person.

Let's get back on track to the fact that high poverty high schools do not get a ton of extra money based on their poverty rates. This table is not helpful. It doesn't matter what the columns mean because the amounts are miniscule.

DP. I don't know. If a school gets another $50K a year to buy more books, that seems helpful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

What? Look I’m trying to tell you what the columns mean since clearly you or someone else is not interpreting it correctly. Read what is written versus assuming you are talking to a single person.

Let's get back on track to the fact that high poverty high schools do not get a ton of extra money based on their poverty rates. This table is not helpful. It doesn't matter what the columns mean because the amounts are miniscule.

Instead of saying high poverty, how about stop looking at family income so much as the needs of the students and address those. You cannot wait till HS to fix this. It's too little too late.

If you really want to get back on track, reminder that this thread is about advanced magnets in high FARMS schools to I guess offer MVC.

We want the students in our struggling school to catch up and be on grade level or above so they can acces the magnets and advanced math classes. And, to do that it doesn't start in HS, it starts in ES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

What? Look I’m trying to tell you what the columns mean since clearly you or someone else is not interpreting it correctly. Read what is written versus assuming you are talking to a single person.

Let's get back on track to the fact that high poverty high schools do not get a ton of extra money based on their poverty rates. This table is not helpful. It doesn't matter what the columns mean because the amounts are miniscule.

DP. I don't know. If a school gets another $50K a year to buy more books, that seems helpful.

It would be very helpful. We mostly get pdf's and not actual books.

[Anonymous]

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.

Yes - DCC parent here who wants MCPS to eliminate all these special programs and focus on: same course offerings in each school; cohorted by ability. There is a decent sized chunk of high performing kids in my zoned high school but special programs incentivize them to leave whereas cohorts would incentivize them to stay with their similarly academically-abled friends they’ve grown up with. Why can’t we do this? I don’t care if there’s only one AP Calculus class in my school and four of them in Whitman as long as any kids in my school who qualify to take AP Calculus can do so without having to take a 45 minute bus ride each way.

I agree with this. I think the problem starts with CES and continues all the way up.

DP and another DCC parent: I could not agree more. Enough already.

Just getting rid of the special programs is not going to convince MCPS to cohort classes locally, though... there is a lot of internal opposition to that-- it's not just about lack of resources or adequately-sized cohorts. Instead, there needs to be advocacy specifically focused on offering advanced classes in all subjects, starting in middle school.

The problem is that having multiple levels generally makes racial and SES disparities more visible, and addressing those disparities the right way is hard. Just putting everyone in the same level classes is much easier, so MCPS prefers to do it that way.

When you say internal opposition to cohorting, is that from teachers, parents, or MCPS CO staff?

I disagree with the earlier PP that they can’t cohort locally. They already do it with compacted math. They already do it with ckla at my kid’s high FARMs school. They do it with HIGH and advanced math in middle school. This is a strawman argument. I don’t know why they stopped doing it with English in middle through 9th grade, but they do it for earlier and later grades and for other subjects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

What? Look I’m trying to tell you what the columns mean since clearly you or someone else is not interpreting it correctly. Read what is written versus assuming you are talking to a single person.

Let's get back on track to the fact that high poverty high schools do not get a ton of extra money based on their poverty rates. This table is not helpful. It doesn't matter what the columns mean because the amounts are miniscule.

DP. I don't know. If a school gets another $50K a year to buy more books, that seems helpful.

But $50k is not the difference between high poverty and low poverty schools in that table. Why do you keep making stuff up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

What? Look I’m trying to tell you what the columns mean since clearly you or someone else is not interpreting it correctly. Read what is written versus assuming you are talking to a single person.

Let's get back on track to the fact that high poverty high schools do not get a ton of extra money based on their poverty rates. This table is not helpful. It doesn't matter what the columns mean because the amounts are miniscule.

DP. I don't know. If a school gets another $50K a year to buy more books, that seems helpful.

It would be very helpful. We mostly get pdf's and not actual books.

All schools have budgets for materials and it looks like the amounts in these budgets are based primarily on the size of the student body. For example, in total Kennedy HS got less than BCC. They basically put a line in the budget that makes it look like they care about equity in high schools, but the differential based on FARMS is not large at all. Extra books are nice but they get much, much more from the state based on the FARMS student enrollment and it is clear those state funds are not allocated to high schools based on FARMS rates. Basically they throw scraps at high poverty high schools and say look! Equity!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

What? Look I’m trying to tell you what the columns mean since clearly you or someone else is not interpreting it correctly. Read what is written versus assuming you are talking to a single person.

Let's get back on track to the fact that high poverty high schools do not get a ton of extra money based on their poverty rates. This table is not helpful. It doesn't matter what the columns mean because the amounts are miniscule.

DP. I don't know. If a school gets another $50K a year to buy more books, that seems helpful.

But $50k is not the difference between high poverty and low poverty schools in that table. Why do you keep making stuff up?

Strawman

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

What? Look I’m trying to tell you what the columns mean since clearly you or someone else is not interpreting it correctly. Read what is written versus assuming you are talking to a single person.

Let's get back on track to the fact that high poverty high schools do not get a ton of extra money based on their poverty rates. This table is not helpful. It doesn't matter what the columns mean because the amounts are miniscule.

DP. I don't know. If a school gets another $50K a year to buy more books, that seems helpful.

It would be very helpful. We mostly get pdf's and not actual books.

All schools have budgets for materials and it looks like the amounts in these budgets are based primarily on the size of the student body. For example, in total Kennedy HS got less than BCC. They basically put a line in the budget that makes it look like they care about equity in high schools, but the differential based on FARMS is not large at all. Extra books are nice but they get much, much more from the state based on the FARMS student enrollment and it is clear those state funds are not allocated to high schools based on FARMS rates. Basically they throw scraps at high poverty high schools and say look! Equity!!

Strawman again

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

What? Look I’m trying to tell you what the columns mean since clearly you or someone else is not interpreting it correctly. Read what is written versus assuming you are talking to a single person.

Let's get back on track to the fact that high poverty high schools do not get a ton of extra money based on their poverty rates. This table is not helpful. It doesn't matter what the columns mean because the amounts are miniscule.

DP. I don't know. If a school gets another $50K a year to buy more books, that seems helpful.

But $50k is not the difference between high poverty and low poverty schools in that table. Why do you keep making stuff up?

Strawman

Non sequitur

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

What? Look I’m trying to tell you what the columns mean since clearly you or someone else is not interpreting it correctly. Read what is written versus assuming you are talking to a single person.

Let's get back on track to the fact that high poverty high schools do not get a ton of extra money based on their poverty rates. This table is not helpful. It doesn't matter what the columns mean because the amounts are miniscule.

DP. I don't know. If a school gets another $50K a year to buy more books, that seems helpful.

It would be very helpful. We mostly get pdf's and not actual books.

All schools have budgets for materials and it looks like the amounts in these budgets are based primarily on the size of the student body. For example, in total Kennedy HS got less than BCC. They basically put a line in the budget that makes it look like they care about equity in high schools, but the differential based on FARMS is not large at all. Extra books are nice but they get much, much more from the state based on the FARMS student enrollment and it is clear those state funds are not allocated to high schools based on FARMS rates. Basically they throw scraps at high poverty high schools and say look! Equity!!

Strawman again

Non sequitur again