Study: "Discussions of D.C. public school options in an online forum" (yes, this one)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If this was really about race, you'd see daycares being segregated too. (Why would all these supposedly racist people wait until elementary or high school to start being racist?)

But has anyone ever heard of a black daycare? Or a predominantly white daycare?

No, no one has ever heard of that.

That's because this isn't about race. This is about public schools in DC being awful and people not wanting to send their kids to awful schools.

Oh, but that discussion is about nannies v. daycare.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:YIKES! Just read Jeff's blog on the front page, and then the study. As a sociologist familiar with content analysis (including qualitative analysis software like NVivo), I'm appalled at the methodology (and lack of its discussion) of this report. The whole thing should be retracted. If the authors tried having this peer reviewed properly by submitting to a decent journal, they would get some (free) lessons on how to properly design a qualitative study using anonymous Internet forums as a source.

I can also highly recommend this textbook:
https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/the-sage-handbook-of-online-research-methods/book245027

It has become clear to me that the methodology was a sideshow. They just wanted enough data to serve as window dressing. All that was important to them were the main conclusions that DCUM posters support segregation. The data just needed to be sufficient to get others to talk about that top line, and it has mostly worked for them. Very few people are rejecting the conclusions because the analysis is bad and most don't even care to examine it.

It is interesting that they conclude:

The conversations on DC Urban Moms illustrate what other research has also shown: When privileged parents choose, they tend to choose segregation.

But then Williamson told the Washington Post:

Williamson said that the study does not reach any quantitative conclusions on how the forum may contribute to school segregation.

So which is it?

DC public schools face a horrendous number of obstacles. But among the most disappointing is the tremendous number charlatans who are making a living off the poorly-educated children of DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this was really about race, you'd see daycares being segregated too. (Why would all these supposedly racist people wait until elementary or high school to start being racist?)

But has anyone ever heard of a black daycare? Or a predominantly white daycare?

No, no one has ever heard of that.

That's because this isn't about race. This is about public schools in DC being awful and people not wanting to send their kids to awful schools.

Oh, but that discussion is about nannies v. daycare.

i have kids and honestly ive never met anyone who has a nanny. people with nannies seem rare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If this was really about race, you'd see daycares being segregated too. (Why would all these supposedly racist people wait until elementary or high school to start being racist?)

But has anyone ever heard of a black daycare? Or a predominantly white daycare?

No, no one has ever heard of that.

Wow--that's not true at all.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just a funny observation- shining stars comes up several times as a frequently mentioned school... but I’m pretty sure every post I’ve ever seen about it is negative

No, it used to be popular then met a downfall. I should know we listed it third on our list once, got great number, matched, then the negative posts started and we panicked.

This is why this site is so broken.

Shining Stars is a three star school. There are plenty of better alternatives. It sounds to me like the site worked.

Oh yeah, it did. In the following years many families left the school as it encountered some real challenges. The posts on here were an early warning (and no, they did not cause this flight - there were families with years of attendance who left due to issues they were having there in real life).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this was really about race, you'd see daycares being segregated too. (Why would all these supposedly racist people wait until elementary or high school to start being racist?)

But has anyone ever heard of a black daycare? Or a predominantly white daycare?

No, no one has ever heard of that.

That's because this isn't about race. This is about public schools in DC being awful and people not wanting to send their kids to awful schools.

Oh, but that discussion is about nannies v. daycare.

i have kids and honestly ive never met anyone who has a nanny. people with nannies seem rare.

That's because we aren't rich. The people who I know with nannies are like my ob/gyn, my boss, etc. Or maybe think not individual nannies, but nanny-shares. Or maybe think au pairs.

But the dialogue there seems to be that the BEST thing is to have a nanny or au pair, then the next is to have a nanny share, then daycares. These discussions are likely also racially coded, in the sense that race and class go hand-in-hand, particularly in DC.

[Anonymous]

It is a very disappointing study. I can’t believe some people get paid to compile this drivel. There is no historical context in this study or any background about the sad state of DC Public Schools and how DCPS has failed millions of kids who have passed through its doors. The authors have not set foot in schools like Anacostia HS and Ballou HS and Kramer MS. As an educator, I have spent time in many ward 7 and ward 8 schools and I weep for the kids who have to go there because DCPS finds it acceptable to do such a poor job at these schools. Many of the top administrators at DCPS are racist - they have very low expectations for poor minority children. Blaming white parents is a red herring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this was really about race, you'd see daycares being segregated too. (Why would all these supposedly racist people wait until elementary or high school to start being racist?)

But has anyone ever heard of a black daycare? Or a predominantly white daycare?

No, no one has ever heard of that.

That's because this isn't about race. This is about public schools in DC being awful and people not wanting to send their kids to awful schools.

Oh, but that discussion is about nannies v. daycare.

i have kids and honestly ive never met anyone who has a nanny. people with nannies seem rare.

That's because we aren't rich. The people who I know with nannies are like my ob/gyn, my boss, etc. Or maybe think not individual nannies, but nanny-shares. Or maybe think au pairs.

But the dialogue there seems to be that the BEST thing is to have a nanny or au pair, then the next is to have a nanny share, then daycares. These discussions are likely also racially coded, in the sense that race and class go hand-in-hand, particularly in DC.

uhh. The daycares around here can cost the same as a nanny share. what ward do you live in that you don't know anyone with a nanny? Anyways - this is really off topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this was really about race, you'd see daycares being segregated too. (Why would all these supposedly racist people wait until elementary or high school to start being racist?)

But has anyone ever heard of a black daycare? Or a predominantly white daycare?

No, no one has ever heard of that.

That's because this isn't about race. This is about public schools in DC being awful and people not wanting to send their kids to awful schools.

Oh, but that discussion is about nannies v. daycare.

i have kids and honestly ive never met anyone who has a nanny. people with nannies seem rare.

That's because we aren't rich. The people who I know with nannies are like my ob/gyn, my boss, etc. Or maybe think not individual nannies, but nanny-shares. Or maybe think au pairs.

But the dialogue there seems to be that the BEST thing is to have a nanny or au pair, then the next is to have a nanny share, then daycares. These discussions are likely also racially coded, in the sense that race and class go hand-in-hand, particularly in DC.

I think you're missing the point. The larger point here is that daycares are extremely diverse (at least all the ones I've ever come into contact with), and that shouldnt be the case if everyone is supposedly as racist as people on this thread to seem assume.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You fundamentally misunderstand the point of reports like these. It's descriptive; the goal is to describe a problem, not to offer solutions in the same report. I was patient in several earlier posts in trying to explain this, but you have doubled down on your complaints. You don't like that your site has been portrayed in this light (which is understandable) and so have characterized the report as shaming and name-calling, instead of perhaps considering some of the points made. White people do indeed make decisions influenced by racial dynamics as discussed in prior research; this is uncontroversial.

It is frustrating because you are completing rigid in your defensiveness and will cede nothing, over several days of posting. Perhaps it's possible that parents want to do what's best for their kids AND their decisions are impacted by unconscious or conscious biases and assumptions about what makes a good school? I'm a black parent who has visited this site for years, and the racism and classism is entirely clear to me and others, some of whom I know have stopped even visiting this site. I'm not sure what else to say at this point except good luck in complaining about what you see as unfair treatment instead of considering some of the issues raised.

This is what it boils down to:

Perhaps it's possible that parents want to do what's best for their kids AND their decisions are impacted by unconscious or conscious biases and assumptions about what makes a good school?

This statement clearly displays just how uninformed you are about the people with whom you are trying to engage. The vast majority of the posters in this forum do want to do what's best for their kids AND consider their assumptions and biases. You simply cannot dispute that most of the schools that are popular in this forum are objectively "good" by most definitions of good. There are a few blindspots and addressing those blindspots would be helpful. But, you show no interest in being helpful. Your only interest is to shame us.

I really don't now how you can expect people to change without being able to offer any ideas about how they should change. If you don't know the answer, why do you expect others to know it? This is plain common sense. Don't you think that it might be possible that people have struggled with the moral and ethnical issues, reflected about them, but still concluded that their choice was the best despite that it wasn't perfect?

I am happy to work with you to improve the disparities in DC public schools to the extend that I have any ability to do that at all (and I suspect my ability is very limited). But you are going to have to move beyond the name-calling and shaming.

I actually think that both views are right to some extent. No, a research paper need not identify solutions, but only problems - however, it's also true that the problems that are identified (poorly, because, shoddy research) are MUCH more complex than a simple racial analysis. As others have pointed out, a dearth of good schools leads everyone who can to try to hoard that resource - of every race. Lottery helps make it slightly more accessible to all.

But, for white parents, I think most of us do feel unfairly targeted by the "problem analysis" which seems to tell us that our only motivating choice factor is racial composition, we just don't realize it. Jeff's insistence that someone say what we should do instead is valid. What it shows is that the problem itself is not properly analyzed. The problem statement implies free choice and uncomplicated choice. No, this is not free choice - we are bound by lottery results, income, and more. It is also not uncomplicated - we consider MANY factors, we do not decide based on one.

The apparent OUTCOME may be segregation beyond what the authors want, but, they are trying to assign CAUSATION - they cannot. They can only assume causation in this study.

Normally I would agree that yes, white parents seem to cluster toward each other and create bubbles - that's UNW for you. But, this study is a totally facile swipe at all white parents district-wide, total clickbait. It's not that it needs to identify solutions, but if it had tried, some of the conclusions would begin to quickly unravel and - shocker! - the SYSTEMIC problems at play which the city government, not individual white parents, need to solve, will become much more apparent.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:YIKES! Just read Jeff's blog on the front page, and then the study. As a sociologist familiar with content analysis (including qualitative analysis software like NVivo), I'm appalled at the methodology (and lack of its discussion) of this report. The whole thing should be retracted. If the authors tried having this peer reviewed properly by submitting to a decent journal, they would get some (free) lessons on how to properly design a qualitative study using anonymous Internet forums as a source.

I can also highly recommend this textbook:
https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/the-sage-handbook-of-online-research-methods/book245027

It has become clear to me that the methodology was a sideshow. They just wanted enough data to serve as window dressing. All that was important to them were the main conclusions that DCUM posters support segregation. The data just needed to be sufficient to get others to talk about that top line, and it has mostly worked for them. Very few people are rejecting the conclusions because the analysis is bad and most don't even care to examine it.

It is interesting that they conclude:

The conversations on DC Urban Moms illustrate what other research has also shown: When privileged parents choose, they tend to choose segregation.

But then Williamson told the Washington Post:

Williamson said that the study does not reach any quantitative conclusions on how the forum may contribute to school segregation.

So which is it?

DC public schools face a horrendous number of obstacles. But among the most disappointing is the tremendous number charlatans who are making a living off the poorly-educated children of DC.

I'm the PP, and unfortunately it sure seems like this is a PR piece made to be plugged into the racial dialogue of the day as a way to generate attention for Brookings and the authors. That they do it on the back of DCPS kids, and most of all on the back of disadvantaged DCPS kids is unfortunately as unsurprising to me as it is despicable.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:YIKES! Just read Jeff's blog on the front page, and then the study. As a sociologist familiar with content analysis (including qualitative analysis software like NVivo), I'm appalled at the methodology (and lack of its discussion) of this report. The whole thing should be retracted. If the authors tried having this peer reviewed properly by submitting to a decent journal, they would get some (free) lessons on how to properly design a qualitative study using anonymous Internet forums as a source.

I can also highly recommend this textbook:
https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/the-sage-handbook-of-online-research-methods/book245027

It has become clear to me that the methodology was a sideshow. They just wanted enough data to serve as window dressing. All that was important to them were the main conclusions that DCUM posters support segregation. The data just needed to be sufficient to get others to talk about that top line, and it has mostly worked for them. Very few people are rejecting the conclusions because the analysis is bad and most don't even care to examine it.

It is interesting that they conclude:

The conversations on DC Urban Moms illustrate what other research has also shown: When privileged parents choose, they tend to choose segregation.

But then Williamson told the Washington Post:

Williamson said that the study does not reach any quantitative conclusions on how the forum may contribute to school segregation.

So which is it?

DC public schools face a horrendous number of obstacles. But among the most disappointing is the tremendous number charlatans who are making a living off the poorly-educated children of DC.

those quotes mean the same thing. "does not reach any quantitative conclusions" is a fancy way of saying "illustrate".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this was really about race, you'd see daycares being segregated too. (Why would all these supposedly racist people wait until elementary or high school to start being racist?)

But has anyone ever heard of a black daycare? Or a predominantly white daycare?

No, no one has ever heard of that.

That's because this isn't about race. This is about public schools in DC being awful and people not wanting to send their kids to awful schools.

Oh, but that discussion is about nannies v. daycare.

i have kids and honestly ive never met anyone who has a nanny. people with nannies seem rare.

That's because we aren't rich. The people who I know with nannies are like my ob/gyn, my boss, etc. Or maybe think not individual nannies, but nanny-shares. Or maybe think au pairs.

But the dialogue there seems to be that the BEST thing is to have a nanny or au pair, then the next is to have a nanny share, then daycares. These discussions are likely also racially coded, in the sense that race and class go hand-in-hand, particularly in DC.

I think you're missing the point. The larger point here is that daycares are extremely diverse (at least all the ones I've ever come into contact with), and that shouldnt be the case if everyone is supposedly as racist as people on this thread to seem assume.

DP. One can opt to send their 8 month old to a diverse daycare or even have a black nanny. I am a “what’s wrong with Banneker poster” and I have to say, I still don’t think people opting out of Banneker are outright racist. Again, they wouldn’t live in DC, Petworth, Columbia Heights if that were the case. They wouldn’t send their kid to even Wilson. The issue is, there is definitely something racially motivating driving some white families to not look at Banneker. I see it happen all the time. White people are fine with a safe number of people that don’t look like them, but when it gets closer to 75-80%, the comfort level changes. There have been many studies in here that show white families, all things equal, will choose to self-segregate or even have racial components e a driving factor for them. Let’s admit, many of the racial issues of our entire country are due to “some” white men dealing with the fact that they are losing their power in numbers and are realizing they are no longer going to be a majority in this country.

I am not asking families to opt into a failing Eastern as some people keep taking about. I’m simply asking for a reason people don’t look at a top 100 school that’s centrally located with metro accessibility.

[Anonymous]

PS - I have to say when people say they don’t want to disrespect the sanctity of the HBCU atmosphere at Banneker, it’s quite insulting. Especially given the gentrification that already happens in this city in so many other parts of the city.

The only response I want to hear and would respect is that you don’t want your child to be an only. It’s a practical and respectable response. However, I would counter that response by asking why can’t some families rally together like that did with Hardy to make it so they’re not an only. I imagine if today Banneker published demographics showing 8% white, the number of applicants would go up 1000% in just one year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You fundamentally misunderstand the point of reports like these. It's descriptive; the goal is to describe a problem, not to offer solutions in the same report. I was patient in several earlier posts in trying to explain this, but you have doubled down on your complaints. You don't like that your site has been portrayed in this light (which is understandable) and so have characterized the report as shaming and name-calling, instead of perhaps considering some of the points made. White people do indeed make decisions influenced by racial dynamics as discussed in prior research; this is uncontroversial.

It is frustrating because you are completing rigid in your defensiveness and will cede nothing, over several days of posting. Perhaps it's possible that parents want to do what's best for their kids AND their decisions are impacted by unconscious or conscious biases and assumptions about what makes a good school? I'm a black parent who has visited this site for years, and the racism and classism is entirely clear to me and others, some of whom I know have stopped even visiting this site. I'm not sure what else to say at this point except good luck in complaining about what you see as unfair treatment instead of considering some of the issues raised.

This is what it boils down to:

Perhaps it's possible that parents want to do what's best for their kids AND their decisions are impacted by unconscious or conscious biases and assumptions about what makes a good school?

This statement clearly displays just how uninformed you are about the people with whom you are trying to engage. The vast majority of the posters in this forum do want to do what's best for their kids AND consider their assumptions and biases. You simply cannot dispute that most of the schools that are popular in this forum are objectively "good" by most definitions of good. There are a few blindspots and addressing those blindspots would be helpful. But, you show no interest in being helpful. Your only interest is to shame us.

I really don't now how you can expect people to change without being able to offer any ideas about how they should change. If you don't know the answer, why do you expect others to know it? This is plain common sense. Don't you think that it might be possible that people have struggled with the moral and ethnical issues, reflected about them, but still concluded that their choice was the best despite that it wasn't perfect?

I am happy to work with you to improve the disparities in DC public schools to the extend that I have any ability to do that at all (and I suspect my ability is very limited). But you are going to have to move beyond the name-calling and shaming.

I actually think that both views are right to some extent. No, a research paper need not identify solutions, but only problems - however, it's also true that the problems that are identified (poorly, because, shoddy research) are MUCH more complex than a simple racial analysis. As others have pointed out, a dearth of good schools leads everyone who can to try to hoard that resource - of every race. Lottery helps make it slightly more accessible to all.

But, for white parents, I think most of us do feel unfairly targeted by the "problem analysis" which seems to tell us that our only motivating choice factor is racial composition, we just don't realize it. Jeff's insistence that someone say what we should do instead is valid. What it shows is that the problem itself is not properly analyzed. The problem statement implies free choice and uncomplicated choice. No, this is not free choice - we are bound by lottery results, income, and more. It is also not uncomplicated - we consider MANY factors, we do not decide based on one.

The apparent OUTCOME may be segregation beyond what the authors want, but, they are trying to assign CAUSATION - they cannot. They can only assume causation in this study.

Normally I would agree that yes, white parents seem to cluster toward each other and create bubbles - that's UNW for you. But, this study is a totally facile swipe at all white parents district-wide, total clickbait. It's not that it needs to identify solutions, but if it had tried, some of the conclusions would begin to quickly unravel and - shocker! - the SYSTEMIC problems at play which the city government, not individual white parents, need to solve, will become much more apparent.

Ah. Well-said and insightful.