Ludlow-Taylor getting a new a new Principal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think there is a difference between a child who qualifies for FARM in an area which has a huge newly immigrant community which may not have huge resources but does have a stable family life and values education (disclaimer, when we first immigrated I was a FARMs kid despite my father being a pHD and my mother being college-educated, simply because it took them some time to find jobs; my best friend in college, whose parents immigrated from a different country was in a similar situation. But this was not DC). But DCPS does not have this situation - most kids eligible for FARMs here come from systemic, multi-generational poverty which is not going to go away any time soon. And I don't know how much value that environment places on education but I do know that the stressors and instability that brings are different and harder to overcome when it's not a temporary thing. Those kids are absolutely entitled to a good education but toold to educate them can and should be different than educating little Suzie who has her parents hiring tutors for her to get her ahead.

This is one of the best responses in this whole thread. There is a segment of DC's population that have been stuck in "multi-generational" poverty. We all know the reason why this vicious cycle continues. It starts with a child being born to young mother without an education and without the means to support the child. The child is much more likely then to grow up in single parent, dysfunctional environment where certain values are not instilled in the child. The child can be manageable at 5 or 6 years old, but as the child grows older, the level of dysfunction around the child becomes the child's only reality. It is very difficult for this type of child to be anywhere near the level of a child that comes from an educated two parent household, where they have been nurtured, cared for, and shown the importance of education.

FYI, I'm an black husband and father of two living in Capitol Hill. There is no way I want my children surrounded a classroom full of kids from "multi-generational" poverty families. I want my kids surrounded by kids who come from families like mine. This also has nothing to do with race to me either. I wouldn't want my kids surrounded by "Honey Boo Boo's" family, and I wouldn't want my kids surrounded by families housed in DC General Hospital either.

PP, I believe you just said gospel. You have re-newed my faith in America and the L-T community. Thank you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think there is a difference between a child who qualifies for FARM in an area which has a huge newly immigrant community which may not have huge resources but does have a stable family life and values education (disclaimer, when we first immigrated I was a FARMs kid despite my father being a pHD and my mother being college-educated, simply because it took them some time to find jobs; my best friend in college, whose parents immigrated from a different country was in a similar situation. But this was not DC). But DCPS does not have this situation - most kids eligible for FARMs here come from systemic, multi-generational poverty which is not going to go away any time soon. And I don't know how much value that environment places on education but I do know that the stressors and instability that brings are different and harder to overcome when it's not a temporary thing. Those kids are absolutely entitled to a good education but toold to educate them can and should be different than educating little Suzie who has her parents hiring tutors for her to get her ahead.

This is one of the best responses in this whole thread. There is a segment of DC's population that have been stuck in "multi-generational" poverty. We all know the reason why this vicious cycle continues. It starts with a child being born to young mother without an education and without the means to support the child. The child is much more likely then to grow up in single parent, dysfunctional environment where certain values are not instilled in the child. The child can be manageable at 5 or 6 years old, but as the child grows older, the level of dysfunction around the child becomes the child's only reality. It is very difficult for this type of child to be anywhere near the level of a child that comes from an educated two parent household, where they have been nurtured, cared for, and shown the importance of education.

FYI, I'm an black husband and father of two living in Capitol Hill. There is no way I want my children surrounded a classroom full of kids from "multi-generational" poverty families. I want my kids surrounded by kids who come from families like mine. This also has nothing to do with race to me either. I wouldn't want my kids surrounded by "Honey Boo Boo's" family, and I wouldn't want my kids surrounded by families housed in DC General Hospital either.

The key point is that poor kids are not going away. And while it's true that they may need a different approach than kids from affluent households, there is no way to segregate by SES without creating worse outcomes for the poorer strata.

And there's no need to do so in order to have a quality school. There are several examples of charters and DCPS that have figured it out; parents put these schools at the top of their lottery lists regardless of middling CAS scores. Gentrification is helping to raise the bar in a lot of neighborhood schools and better school administrations are figuring out how to balance needs of a diverse student body.

I have to say, as a married black parent, I also wouldn't want my kid surrounded by impoverished kids. In fact, I don't want him in a homogenous environment of any kind, including wealthy and white. But something that would concern me more is a school where a group of parents believes that the school can only be a good once it's rid of the poor kids, and expects the principal to hold the same view. I can't bear the idea that even one adult - be it principal, teacher or parent - would be disappointed to see him a classroom because they see a brown face and make assumptions.

If poor people don't value education, you have to wonder why they would bother to show up at a PTA meeting. I don't expect many of them are reading DCUM, but it sounds like they do feel the views that have been expressed here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

FYI, I'm an black husband and father of two living in Capitol Hill. There is no way I want my children surrounded a classroom full of kids from "multi-generational" poverty families. I want my kids surrounded by kids who come from families like mine. This also has nothing to do with race to me either. I wouldn't want my kids surrounded by "Honey Boo Boo's" family, and I wouldn't want my kids surrounded by families housed in DC General Hospital either.

Yes, this.

[Anonymous]

I am fairly close, as neighbors can be, with my low-SES neighbors. I have tutored for free a few of the kids that they watch over while their mums work 2 or 3 low paying jobs.
They do value education in general terms, and that's why they asked me if I could help the kids with homework...but that is the extent of it.

For example, I see the kids milling about after school while the relatives who are supposed to watch over them drink beer and play cards in the middle if the afternoon. One day one of the kids was complaining it was too hot and he was bored (I was going to the store and said hi, how are you). I suggested he could ask his aunt to take him to the museum - it's free and their is AC there. He hardly knew what a museum was and that idea had never occurred to anybody there. We live close to the metro and it would not have been that hard to do...I can help a little but can't be a parent to all!

[Anonymous]

^sorry for the typos- iPhone autocorrect sucks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am fairly close, as neighbors can be, with my low-SES neighbors. I have tutored for free a few of the kids that they watch over while their mums work 2 or 3 low paying jobs.
They do value education in general terms, and that's why they asked me if I could help the kids with homework...but that is the extent of it.

For example, I see the kids milling about after school while the relatives who are supposed to watch over them drink beer and play cards in the middle if the afternoon. One day one of the kids was complaining it was too hot and he was bored (I was going to the store and said hi, how are you). I suggested he could ask his aunt to take him to the museum - it's free and their is AC there. He hardly knew what a museum was and that idea had never occurred to anybody there. We live close to the metro and it would not have been that hard to do...I can help a little but can't be a parent to all!

So, people like this should just . . . get up and get out? And go . . .where?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The key point is that poor kids are not going away. And while it's true that they may need a different approach than kids from affluent households, there is no way to segregate by SES without creating worse outcomes for the poorer strata.

The poor kids are going away around Stanton Park, slowly but surely. Dive into US Census data for 1990, 2000 and 2010 if you doubt this. You can see that that the juvenile low SES population of the catchment area for L-T went from around two-thirds low SES to one-third low SES over a 20-year period. On current trends, by 2020 the catchment area juvenile pop will be roughly 15% low SES. In US Census data, kids are a lot more likely to be counted where their mothers reside than in DCPS stats.

How can you argue the above when the best test scores for low SES kids in the aggregate in this city, and others, are not in fact found at socioeconomically diverse schools but at those segregated by SES? When you consider DC CAS scores by subgroup, you see that the best results for low SES kids are found in KIPP schools, like DC Key Academy, and at Achievement Prep, vs. in desegregated schools like Maury and Watkins, and by a long shot. The truth is that kids in the the best "segregated" charter programs, serving only poor children of color, score proficient or advanced on the DC-CAS are rates approaching high SES kids elsehwere in the city, in the 70s and 80s.

What the best charter programs are doing is keeping low SES kids away from dysfunctional families, tough home lives and families who can't offer much in the way of intellectual stimulation many more hours a week than traditional public schools like L-T do. KIPP requires significantly longer school days (as well as Saturday school), and shorter vacations than DCPS schools do.

If we want to help poor kids, maybe we need to deal with the awkward truth that voluntary segregation by SES is creating significantly better academic outcomes for the poorer strata, at least at the elementary and middle school levels, than integration outside GT programs. We have no evidence that it's creating better social outcomes, but that's another conversation.

Point this out and you'll surely be called a racist many times over in any discussion relating to L-T's future, but the data are there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am fairly close, as neighbors can be, with my low-SES neighbors. I have tutored for free a few of the kids that they watch over while their mums work 2 or 3 low paying jobs.
They do value education in general terms, and that's why they asked me if I could help the kids with homework...but that is the extent of it.

For example, I see the kids milling about after school while the relatives who are supposed to watch over them drink beer and play cards in the middle if the afternoon. One day one of the kids was complaining it was too hot and he was bored (I was going to the store and said hi, how are you). I suggested he could ask his aunt to take him to the museum - it's free and their is AC there. He hardly knew what a museum was and that idea had never occurred to anybody there. We live close to the metro and it would not have been that hard to do...I can help a little but can't be a parent to all!

So, people like this should just . . . get up and get out? And go . . .where?

To a school that can serve their needs best. LT is one of them, thanks to the excellent effort by Cobbs and teachers, from what I read here; now however, it appears that the IB patents want LT to cater to their needs, not the low-SES kids anymore. It is really really hard to do that. I don't want to send the current kids anywhere (besides I live on the Hill but my baby is only 6mo old, and I am not immediately concerned with the issue) but overtime the new classes will be of a different SES composition, and what's worked in the past might not work anymore.

I think studies suggest that poor kids benefit from being around high-SES kids in school up to a certain threshold (20-30%). After that, it is actually better to be in a school that caters to only low-SES needs. The problem with the gentrifying schools is that some are trending towards at a 'mix' that is not good for anyone. I have taught briefly and there is nothing more challenging than a class with a bi-modal distribution in skills/knowledge (granted I was not a great teacher).

[Anonymous]

Above, I meant to write it is really really hard to do both (cater to high and low-SES).

[Anonymous]

Well I have a great idea...let's all try to live and be educated in harmony. Hahahaha. Hard to say that with a straight face. But in all honesty once folks have children they start to suck way worse than before. These crazy views about SES and education that never existed before come out once the babies start popping out. Glad I don't have children yet so I can remain positive and idealistic.

[Anonymous]

I am tired hearing about the behavior aspect of SES. Bad parenting exists on all ends of the spectrum. I have worked with low SES children and high SES children and there are behavioral problems equally bad on both ends. Maybe little Tyrone has heard the F word, but litle Suzie thinks it is ok to hit mommy when she does not get her way.

[Anonymous]

Tyrone being the iconic black child that is

[Anonymous]

i would rather my child hear fuck then observe a child hitting a parent (which I have seen). "Honey do you think you want to maybe stop please?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The key point is that poor kids are not going away. And while it's true that they may need a different approach than kids from affluent households, there is no way to segregate by SES without creating worse outcomes for the poorer strata.

The poor kids are going away around Stanton Park, slowly but surely. Dive into US Census data for 1990, 2000 and 2010 if you doubt this. You can see that that the juvenile low SES population of the catchment area for L-T went from around two-thirds low SES to one-third low SES over a 20-year period. On current trends, by 2020 the catchment area juvenile pop will be roughly 15% low SES. In US Census data, kids are a lot more likely to be counted where their mothers reside than in DCPS stats.

How can you argue the above when the best test scores for low SES kids in the aggregate in this city, and others, are not in fact found at socioeconomically diverse schools but at those segregated by SES? When you consider DC CAS scores by subgroup, you see that the best results for low SES kids are found in KIPP schools, like DC Key Academy, and at Achievement Prep, vs. in desegregated schools like Maury and Watkins, and by a long shot. The truth is that kids in the the best "segregated" charter programs, serving only poor children of color, score proficient or advanced on the DC-CAS are rates approaching high SES kids elsehwere in the city, in the 70s and 80s.

What the best charter programs are doing is keeping low SES kids away from dysfunctional families, tough home lives and families who can't offer much in the way of intellectual stimulation many more hours a week than traditional public schools like L-T do. KIPP requires significantly longer school days (as well as Saturday school), and shorter vacations than DCPS schools do.

If we want to help poor kids, maybe we need to deal with the awkward truth that voluntary segregation by SES is creating significantly better academic outcomes for the poorer strata, at least at the elementary and middle school levels, than integration outside GT programs. We have no evidence that it's creating better social outcomes, but that's another conversation.

Point this out and you'll surely be called a racist many times over in any discussion relating to L-T's future, but the data are there.

The secret to kipp success is a lot of drill and kill and a boot camp like atmosphere. It's a prison like atmosphere. Th3y basucally condition the kids into behaving in a certain way. Those who can't handle it get kicked back to their home school and kipp gets all the credit for succeeding in teaching the well behaved, non special ed students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am tired hearing about the behavior aspect of SES. Bad parenting exists on all ends of the spectrum. I have worked with low SES children and high SES children and there are behavioral problems equally bad on both ends. Maybe little Tyrone has heard the F word, but litle Suzie thinks it is ok to hit mommy when she does not get her way.

And I am tired if people who use anecdotes/extremes as opposed to real data. There is no question whatsoever that behavioral problems are more common in children growing in disadvantaged circumstances. Does it mean all of them have problems? No. Does it mean that only they have problems? No.
It is just a big risk factor that can not be ignored.