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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

:roll; is not an argument. you don't have one. deep down you know the fact that you shelter your kid so much is hurting them in the end. they will be fine because you can given them lots of advantages. not because you prepared them well for life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

But this is only true up to a point. When you have high poverty schools (60, 70, 80 percent FARMS), everyone’s performance suffers. Yes the UMC kids may ultimately be ok, but there’s a big difference in the day to day of a school that’s say 30 percent FARMS verses 80.

[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.

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.

Disagree. If it’s segregated schools or 20 extra mins a day, I know what I would pick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

But this is only true up to a point. When you have high poverty schools (60, 70, 80 percent FARMS), everyone’s performance suffers. Yes the UMC kids may ultimately be ok, but there’s a big difference in the day to day of a school that’s say 30 percent FARMS verses 80.

Takoma park is under 40% FARM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Disagree. If it’s segregated schools or 20 extra mins a day, I know what I would pick.

I know I would pick walkable neighborhood schools for everyone.

[Anonymous]

The length of this thread reflects the state of public schools.

[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.

You can attribute busing to the fact that there are not economically diverse neighborhoods within 1 mile of most schools. You are seeing the outcome of every other facet of the American experience play out in schools.
For your proposed problem, the solution would be to bus the high-income kids so that the rich parents with 2 cars could be involved, but that's a bridge too far eh?
I don't know many parents who can afford to be "actively" involved in their kid's school. My kid has school from 815-235. I am working, just like most parents, regardless of income. The difference is that working-class or higher income have more flexibility and earn paid leave.

[Anonymous]

In those European countries DCUM worships, illegals aren’t allowed to just show up fresh off the boat & enroll in the local school.

[Anonymous]

OP here. I think this thread should be moved to the other topic forum or political forum in the end. My vent was not well placed for a real estate forum

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

:roll; is not an argument. you don't have one. deep down you know the fact that you shelter your kid so much is hurting them in the end. they will be fine because you can given them lots of advantages. not because you prepared them well for life.

Getting a shit education because of class room disruptions are preparing you well for life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I think this thread should be moved to the other topic forum or political forum in the end. My vent was not well placed for a real estate forum

Getting too much attention, OP?

[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.

You can attribute busing to the fact that there are not economically diverse neighborhoods within 1 mile of most schools. You are seeing the outcome of every other facet of the American experience play out in schools.
For your proposed problem, the solution would be to bus the high-income kids so that the rich parents with 2 cars could be involved, but that's a bridge too far eh?
I don't know many parents who can afford to be "actively" involved in their kid's school. My kid has school from 815-235. I am working, just like most parents, regardless of income. The difference is that working-class or higher income have more flexibility and earn paid leave.

No, the solution would be to just have small neighborhood schools that are walkable for all students. No busing. Simple. No expecting low-income parents to drive 45 minutes with their only household car so they can attend back-to-school night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

:roll; is not an argument. you don't have one. deep down you know the fact that you shelter your kid so much is hurting them in the end. they will be fine because you can given them lots of advantages. not because you prepared them well for life.

Getting a shit education because of class room disruptions are preparing you well for life.

You don't like that your child was exposed to a child with disabilities. Sorry about that, that must of been really hard for them.

[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.

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.

You can attribute busing to the fact that there are not economically diverse neighborhoods within 1 mile of most schools. You are seeing the outcome of every other facet of the American experience play out in schools.
For your proposed problem, the solution would be to bus the high-income kids so that the rich parents with 2 cars could be involved, but that's a bridge too far eh?
I don't know many parents who can afford to be "actively" involved in their kid's school. My kid has school from 815-235. I am working, just like most parents, regardless of income. The difference is that working-class or higher income have more flexibility and earn paid leave.

No, the solution would be to just have small neighborhood schools that are walkable for all students. No busing. Simple. No expecting low-income parents to drive 45 minutes with their only household car so they can attend back-to-school night.

Nothing about this is simple or it would be solved already. Btw a once a year back to school night isn’t a reason to segregate schools.

[Anonymous]

NP. It’s so blindingly obvious to me that OP and OPs supporters are bizarrely sheltered. I had my kid in a public school that OP would never put a foot in. We pulled my kid to private eventually because of reasons of physical safety. And when I say that, I don’t mean a little shove here and there.

People like OP are cute but so, so naive and sheltered. Sort of amusing and entitled but goodness.