To all who have a problem with MO CO changing demographics

[Anonymous]

We are still waiting for your data and analysis

It seems like with your preliminary numbers and calculations your proved the poster's point all along. Great job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Ya know what? Proportionality doesn't matter, and I agree with the other PP who made this point. Heck, we can sit around and take 2nd derivatives and rates of change. But at the end of the day, what matters is the absolute number of kids who are affected. Are you seriously arguing that the white "old guard" is obsessing over "proportions" of affected kids and, in their insane vindictiveness, fail to realize their policies are hurting 16 white kids for every 8 Asian kids they hurt?

The question bears repeating: why would white MCPS leadership hurt twice as many of their own white progeny, in order to hold back half as many asians?

Somebody needs to answer this question. Otherwise, without a good answer to this, your theory truly does look crazy. To quote you: "we are still waiting for an answer."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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

Thanks. It gives a pretty clear definition of the achievement gap, and makes it clear the concern is over blacks and hispanics.

[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/leadingforequit...se-RaceAndAccountability-A.pdf

Thank you. I definetely appreciate the historical context. Can MCPS but this information in the context of the rapid changes over the last 10 years as alluded to in the Post study -- also admittedly a few years back. While I haven't been able to get a hold of the study design, methodology and analysis I found what was provided more granular and the results believeable confirming theanecdaotal impression of several of my children in your school system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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

Thanks. It gives a pretty clear definition of the achievement gap, and makes it clear the concern is over blacks and hispanics.

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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/leadingforequit...se-RaceAndAccountability-A.pdf

Thank you. I definetely appreciate the historical context. Can MCPS but this information in the context of the rapid changes over the last 10 years as alluded to in the Post study -- also admittedly a few years back. While I haven't been able to get a hold of the study design, methodology and analysis I found what was provided more granular and the results believeable confirming theanecdaotal impression of several of my children in your school system.

Wow if you could write - maybe we would understand what you are talking about

[Anonymous]

Ya know what? Proportionality doesn't matter, and I agree with the other PP who made this point. Heck, we can sit around and take 2nd derivatives and rates of change. But at the end of the day, what matters is the absolute number of kids who are affected. Are you seriously arguing that the white "old guard" is obsessing over "proportions" of affected kids and, in their insane vindictiveness, fail to realize their policies are hurting 16 white kids for every 8 Asian kids they hurt?

The question bears repeating: why would white MCPS leadership hurt twice as many of their own white progeny, in order to hold back half as many asians?

Somebody needs to answer this question. Otherwise, without a good answer to this, your theory truly does look crazy. To quote you: "we are still waiting for an answer."

I get it now. If the denominator is 100 in one instance vs. 400 in another 10 out 100 pales in comparison to 20 out of 400. Is this curriculum 2.0 mathematical thinking and problem solving techniques?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ya know what? Proportionality doesn't matter, and I agree with the other PP who made this point. Heck, we can sit around and take 2nd derivatives and rates of change. But at the end of the day, what matters is the absolute number of kids who are affected. Are you seriously arguing that the white "old guard" is obsessing over "proportions" of affected kids and, in their insane vindictiveness, fail to realize their policies are hurting 16 white kids for every 8 Asian kids they hurt?

The question bears repeating: why would white MCPS leadership hurt twice as many of their own white progeny, in order to hold back half as many asians?

Somebody needs to answer this question. Otherwise, without a good answer to this, your theory truly does look crazy. To quote you: "we are still waiting for an answer."

I get it now. If the denominator is 100 in one instance vs. 400 in another 10 out 100 pales in comparison to 20 out of 400. Is this curriculum 2.0 mathematical thinking and problem solving techniques?

Whoaaa, Bessie. This is the concept of percents. You can express percents as the number of kids out of 100. If you want, you could express it as the number of kids out of 400 kids (but in your example it would be 40 not 20). Go ahead, multiply it up till you have the total number of kids in MCPS. It won't change the relative numbers of whites and asians, though, and there will still be twice as many white kids affected as asian kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ya know what? Proportionality doesn't matter, and I agree with the other PP who made this point. Heck, we can sit around and take 2nd derivatives and rates of change. But at the end of the day, what matters is the absolute number of kids who are affected. Are you seriously arguing that the white "old guard" is obsessing over "proportions" of affected kids and, in their insane vindictiveness, fail to realize their policies are hurting 16 white kids for every 8 Asian kids they hurt?

The question bears repeating: why would white MCPS leadership hurt twice as many of their own white progeny, in order to hold back half as many asians?

Somebody needs to answer this question. Otherwise, without a good answer to this, your theory truly does look crazy. To quote you: "we are still waiting for an answer."

I get it now. If the denominator is 100 in one instance vs. 400 in another 10 out 100 pales in comparison to 20 out of 400. Is this curriculum 2.0 mathematical thinking and problem solving techniques?

Still waiting for an answer to the question. That is, an answer that doesn't mangle the concept of percentages.

[Anonymous]

Whoaaa, Bessie. This is the concept of percents. You can express percents as the number of kids out of 100. If you want, you could express it as the number of kids out of 400 kids (but in your example it would be 40 not 20). Go ahead, multiply it up till you have the total number of kids in MCPS. It won't change the relative numbers of whites and asians, though, and there will still be twice as many white kids affected as asian kids.

You're are quite right. I made an error in the transposition. I think you get the point I'm making. Thanks for picking that up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Whoaaa, Bessie. This is the concept of percents. You can express percents as the number of kids out of 100. If you want, you could express it as the number of kids out of 400 kids (but in your example it would be 40 not 20). Go ahead, multiply it up till you have the total number of kids in MCPS. It won't change the relative numbers of whites and asians, though, and there will still be twice as many white kids affected as asian kids.

You're are quite right. I made an error in the transposition. I think you get the point I'm making. Thanks for picking that up.

At this point, I'm not sure who you are, so I'm not sure what your point is....

[Anonymous]

According to the MCPS website - there are 146,497 students in the system. If 33.7% of them are white that is 49,369 students. If 14.3% of them are Asian that is 20,949 students.

Those are the absolute numbers. Now if 58% of Asian children tested as advanced - that is 12,150 students. If 48% of white children tested as advanced - that is 23,697 students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:According to the MCPS website - there are 146,497 students in the system. If 33.7% of them are white that is 49,369 students. If 14.3% of them are Asian that is 20,949 students.

Those are the absolute numbers. Now if 58% of Asian children tested as advanced - that is 12,150 students. If 48% of white children tested as advanced - that is 23,697 students.

Thank you!

Signed, the PP who ran the earlier set of numbers

[Anonymous]

So eliminating math pathways is hurting twice as many white kids as asian kids (23,697/12,150).

By the same numbers, it is hurting 11,547 more white kids than asian kids (23,697 - 12,150).

Would anyone care to explain how this fits into the theory that the white Old Guard eliminated math pathways in order to hold asian kids back?

[Anonymous]

Or:

For every asian kid who is hurt by the elimination of math pathways, 2 white kids are hurt.