People who ruin neighborhoods (like tkpk) by putting their kids in private school

[Anonymous]

Once again, my kid is not your kids social worker/social experiment. My kid, like your kid, gets one shot at it, one childhood. It is my job as a parent to maximize his/her potential so they can go on to be productive and positive citizens in this country, and ultimately, and most importantly, lead a fulfilling life. I find that people like Op are all for a less rigorous curriculum, as an example, in the name of equality. This has never been about economic diversity, it has always been about making everyone equal on the academic level. Too bad if a kid is gifted in math, they need to sit there and take what math is provided to all students and deal with it, no reaching that child's potential. Complete bs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be blunt, poverty isn’t concentrated enough around here. The school district I was educated in was & is approximately 1.5% low-income. 100% single family homes.

So because some districts are more segregated, MCPS is not highly segregated? Give me a break.

MCPS is not highly segregated.

Yes, it is. If it weren't, there wouldn't be schools with less than a 5% FARMS rate and schools with more than 50% FARMS rates. That is segregation.

I wish they would put all the low-income kids in their own school(s). I’ll pay more in taxes for it. Distribute food, vaccines, winter clothing, dinners, medicine, baby clothes, on-site daycare, parenting classes, school supplies etc right there. Very efficient. All the non-FARMs kids should have their own school(s) focused on acceleration & enrichment.

pp you are the worst

DP. I don’t agree with this approach, but I have heard advocates making the argument that it’s easier to deliver services if all the low-income kids are together. And these are people who live and work in the communities they serve. I do believe they mean well. But I don’t agree with this approach and this is when we realized we needed to pull our kids from the school system.

Busing & rezoning low-income kids away from their neighborhood school hurts them the most. It becomes difficult for low-income parents to be involved in their child’s education if you decide to bus them to Whitman 40 minutes each way in the name of “equity.” That low-income student’s parents might have one car at most. Many are completely reliant on public transit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be blunt, poverty isn’t concentrated enough around here. The school district I was educated in was & is approximately 1.5% low-income. 100% single family homes.

So because some districts are more segregated, MCPS is not highly segregated? Give me a break.

MCPS is not highly segregated.

Yes, it is. If it weren't, there wouldn't be schools with less than a 5% FARMS rate and schools with more than 50% FARMS rates. That is segregation.

I wish they would put all the low-income kids in their own school(s). I’ll pay more in taxes for it. Distribute food, vaccines, winter clothing, dinners, medicine, baby clothes, on-site daycare, parenting classes, school supplies etc right there. Very efficient. All the non-FARMs kids should have their own school(s) focused on acceleration & enrichment.

pp you are the worst

DP. I don’t agree with this approach, but I have heard advocates making the argument that it’s easier to deliver services if all the low-income kids are together. And these are people who live and work in the communities they serve. I do believe they mean well. But I don’t agree with this approach and this is when we realized we needed to pull our kids from the school system.

It's easier FOR THEM to deliver services to one place, obviously, just as its easier for MCPS to deal with discipline issues if there are SROs in the schools. Doesn't mean it's what's best for the kids. Everyone is self-serving.

WOW. You think that having SRO’s is “self-serving”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be blunt, poverty isn’t concentrated enough around here. The school district I was educated in was & is approximately 1.5% low-income. 100% single family homes.

So because some districts are more segregated, MCPS is not highly segregated? Give me a break.

MCPS is not highly segregated.

Yes, it is. If it weren't, there wouldn't be schools with less than a 5% FARMS rate and schools with more than 50% FARMS rates. That is segregation.

I wish they would put all the low-income kids in their own school(s). I’ll pay more in taxes for it. Distribute food, vaccines, winter clothing, dinners, medicine, baby clothes, on-site daycare, parenting classes, school supplies etc right there. Very efficient. All the non-FARMs kids should have their own school(s) focused on acceleration & enrichment.

pp you are the worst

+1 ridiculous

Lots of low income kids are well behaved and high achieving but PP doesn't think they deserve a strong peer cohort

I didn’t say they are poorly-behaved or low-achieving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be blunt, poverty isn’t concentrated enough around here. The school district I was educated in was & is approximately 1.5% low-income. 100% single family homes.

So because some districts are more segregated, MCPS is not highly segregated? Give me a break.

MCPS is not highly segregated.

Yes, it is. If it weren't, there wouldn't be schools with less than a 5% FARMS rate and schools with more than 50% FARMS rates. That is segregation.

I wish they would put all the low-income kids in their own school(s). I’ll pay more in taxes for it. Distribute food, vaccines, winter clothing, dinners, medicine, baby clothes, on-site daycare, parenting classes, school supplies etc right there. Very efficient. All the non-FARMs kids should have their own school(s) focused on acceleration & enrichment.

pp you are the worst

DP. I don’t agree with this approach, but I have heard advocates making the argument that it’s easier to deliver services if all the low-income kids are together. And these are people who live and work in the communities they serve. I do believe they mean well. But I don’t agree with this approach and this is when we realized we needed to pull our kids from the school system.

It's easier FOR THEM to deliver services to one place, obviously, just as its easier for MCPS to deal with discipline issues if there are SROs in the schools. Doesn't mean it's what's best for the kids. Everyone is self-serving.

WOW. You think that having SRO’s is “self-serving”?

Yes, I do

[Anonymous]

Public schools, high schools especially, should be tiny (under 1300 kids/high school) and no kid should have to walk more than a mile to school. Nobody should have to drive. Neighborhood schools foster a sense of community, are more responsive & personalized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be blunt, poverty isn’t concentrated enough around here. The school district I was educated in was & is approximately 1.5% low-income. 100% single family homes.

So because some districts are more segregated, MCPS is not highly segregated? Give me a break.

MCPS is not highly segregated.

Yes, it is. If it weren't, there wouldn't be schools with less than a 5% FARMS rate and schools with more than 50% FARMS rates. That is segregation.

I wish they would put all the low-income kids in their own school(s). I’ll pay more in taxes for it. Distribute food, vaccines, winter clothing, dinners, medicine, baby clothes, on-site daycare, parenting classes, school supplies etc right there. Very efficient. All the non-FARMs kids should have their own school(s) focused on acceleration & enrichment.

pp you are the worst

DP. I don’t agree with this approach, but I have heard advocates making the argument that it’s easier to deliver services if all the low-income kids are together. And these are people who live and work in the communities they serve. I do believe they mean well. But I don’t agree with this approach and this is when we realized we needed to pull our kids from the school system.

It's easier FOR THEM to deliver services to one place, obviously, just as its easier for MCPS to deal with discipline issues if there are SROs in the schools. Doesn't mean it's what's best for the kids. Everyone is self-serving.

WOW. You think that having SRO’s is “self-serving”?

Yes, I do

You’re completely wrong. They’re for the kids’ safety.

[Anonymous]

Throughout the history of education it has been a push and pull between people who believe segregation is better because it makes THEIR lives easier and people who recognize that segregation is terrible for kids.

That's why the IDEA defines the least restrictive environment (LRE) as disabled students learning alongside non-disabled peers. Of course it is easier to have all the disabled kids together so the services can be provided more efficiently, but that is bad for many kids and the law recognizes this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Throughout the history of education it has been a push and pull between people who believe segregation is better because it makes THEIR lives easier and people who recognize that segregation is terrible for kids.

That's why the IDEA defines the least restrictive environment (LRE) as disabled students learning alongside non-disabled peers. Of course it is easier to have all the disabled kids together so the services can be provided more efficiently, but that is bad for many kids and the law recognizes this.

One of the reasons why kid is in private now. No more having to hear kids scream uncontrollably in class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be blunt, poverty isn’t concentrated enough around here. The school district I was educated in was & is approximately 1.5% low-income. 100% single family homes.

So because some districts are more segregated, MCPS is not highly segregated? Give me a break.

MCPS is not highly segregated.

Yes, it is. If it weren't, there wouldn't be schools with less than a 5% FARMS rate and schools with more than 50% FARMS rates. That is segregation.

I wish they would put all the low-income kids in their own school(s). I’ll pay more in taxes for it. Distribute food, vaccines, winter clothing, dinners, medicine, baby clothes, on-site daycare, parenting classes, school supplies etc right there. Very efficient. All the non-FARMs kids should have their own school(s) focused on acceleration & enrichment.

pp you are the worst

DP. I don’t agree with this approach, but I have heard advocates making the argument that it’s easier to deliver services if all the low-income kids are together. And these are people who live and work in the communities they serve. I do believe they mean well. But I don’t agree with this approach and this is when we realized we needed to pull our kids from the school system.

Busing & rezoning low-income kids away from their neighborhood school hurts them the most. It becomes difficult for low-income parents to be involved in their child’s education if you decide to bus them to Whitman 40 minutes each way in the name of “equity.” That low-income student’s parents might have one car at most. Many are completely reliant on public transit.

This is the politically convenient answer. With technology, creativity, and drawing boundaries that don’t just bus the low income kids further, things could be different. There are school districts where boundaries could be changed that would only add 10 minutes each way to a kids school commute. But there’s no political will to do it.

[Anonymous]

I agree that putting my (upper class) children in public school aligns with my communitarian/pro-social values. Research verifies that children with advantages suffer no ill effects from being in diverse/lower performing schools, while disadvantaged children experience a lot of benefits from the resources that follow privileged children. Plus the experience helps keep my wealthy children from being snobby, out of touch, unable to relate to others, etc.

My school district did a rezoning a few years back and you should have seen the way that UMC people lost their minds over being sent to a less wealthy/less white school. I'm not saying I was all blase about my kids changing schools - obviously it means a transition for your kids to deal with - but I wasn't going to wail and gnash my teeth. Our children really show us whether we live our values or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Throughout the history of education it has been a push and pull between people who believe segregation is better because it makes THEIR lives easier and people who recognize that segregation is terrible for kids.

That's why the IDEA defines the least restrictive environment (LRE) as disabled students learning alongside non-disabled peers. Of course it is easier to have all the disabled kids together so the services can be provided more efficiently, but that is bad for many kids and the law recognizes this.

One of the reasons why kid is in private now. No more having to hear kids scream uncontrollably in class.

I'm starting to understand why my public school classmates are more successful than the private school ones. There is something to be said for learning to deal with difficult situations. Academics isn't everything.in fact I would argue soft skills and resiliency are far more important.

[Anonymous]

I grew up in New Rochelle & as kids, my classmates and I aspired to buy houses in Scarsdale one day. There needs to be something excellent to aspire to in life. You can’t just make everything average/mediocre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Throughout the history of education it has been a push and pull between people who believe segregation is better because it makes THEIR lives easier and people who recognize that segregation is terrible for kids.

That's why the IDEA defines the least restrictive environment (LRE) as disabled students learning alongside non-disabled peers. Of course it is easier to have all the disabled kids together so the services can be provided more efficiently, but that is bad for many kids and the law recognizes this.

One of the reasons why kid is in private now. No more having to hear kids scream uncontrollably in class.

I'm starting to understand why my public school classmates are more successful than the private school ones. There is something to be said for learning to deal with difficult situations. Academics isn't everything.in fact I would argue soft skills and resiliency are far more important.

Lol cope

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be blunt, poverty isn’t concentrated enough around here. The school district I was educated in was & is approximately 1.5% low-income. 100% single family homes.

So because some districts are more segregated, MCPS is not highly segregated? Give me a break.

MCPS is not highly segregated.

Yes, it is. If it weren't, there wouldn't be schools with less than a 5% FARMS rate and schools with more than 50% FARMS rates. That is segregation.

I wish they would put all the low-income kids in their own school(s). I’ll pay more in taxes for it. Distribute food, vaccines, winter clothing, dinners, medicine, baby clothes, on-site daycare, parenting classes, school supplies etc right there. Very efficient. All the non-FARMs kids should have their own school(s) focused on acceleration & enrichment.

pp you are the worst

DP. I don’t agree with this approach, but I have heard advocates making the argument that it’s easier to deliver services if all the low-income kids are together. And these are people who live and work in the communities they serve. I do believe they mean well. But I don’t agree with this approach and this is when we realized we needed to pull our kids from the school system.

Busing & rezoning low-income kids away from their neighborhood school hurts them the most. It becomes difficult for low-income parents to be involved in their child’s education if you decide to bus them to Whitman 40 minutes each way in the name of “equity.” That low-income student’s parents might have one car at most. Many are completely reliant on public transit.

This is the politically convenient answer. With technology, creativity, and drawing boundaries that don’t just bus the low income kids further, things could be different. There are school districts where boundaries could be changed that would only add 10 minutes each way to a kids school commute. But there’s no political will to do it.

10 minutes each way is a lot.