Does this mean "White" is a minority now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hers a crazy thought focus on providing a high quality education regardless of the race or income of the kids in the classroom

We do but not everyone is going to excel. We provide equal opportunities. It is up to families to decide what to do with what is being offered.

Except you don’t. Especially in K-8, you aim to pull down the high performers, so you can reduce the achievement gap that way, rather than by pulling up the lower performing kids.

[Anonymous]

+1 Lottery magnet? Is that "up to families to decide what to do with what is being offered?

Such a lie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hers a crazy thought focus on providing a high quality education regardless of the race or income of the kids in the classroom

We do but not everyone is going to excel. We provide equal opportunities. It is up to families to decide what to do with what is being offered.

Except you don’t. Especially in K-8, you aim to pull down the high performers, so you can reduce the achievement gap that way, rather than by pulling up the lower performing kids.

It's a standard curriculum. There are no gifted classes in top performing countries in the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hers a crazy thought focus on providing a high quality education regardless of the race or income of the kids in the classroom

We do but not everyone is going to excel. We provide equal opportunities. It is up to families to decide what to do with what is being offered.

Except you don’t. Especially in K-8, you aim to pull down the high performers, so you can reduce the achievement gap that way, rather than by pulling up the lower performing kids.

It's a standard curriculum. There are no gifted classes in top performing countries in the world.

Except that all over the world, systems identify the gift in every child and support every child to propel the growth based on strengths so that they reach their maximum potential. This is the first time, at least for us, we see that an education system is denying opportunities for highly abled students using a lottery instead of competitive selection like the one we have for sports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hers a crazy thought focus on providing a high quality education regardless of the race or income of the kids in the classroom

We do but not everyone is going to excel. We provide equal opportunities. It is up to families to decide what to do with what is being offered.

Except you don’t. Especially in K-8, you aim to pull down the high performers, so you can reduce the achievement gap that way, rather than by pulling up the lower performing kids.

It's a standard curriculum. There are no gifted classes in top performing countries in the world.

Except that all over the world, systems identify the gift in every child and support every child to propel the growth based on strengths so that they reach their maximum potential. This is the first time, at least for us, we see that an education system is denying opportunities for highly abled students using a lottery instead of competitive selection like the one we have for sports.

Equity is the new politics

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hers a crazy thought focus on providing a high quality education regardless of the race or income of the kids in the classroom

We do but not everyone is going to excel. We provide equal opportunities. It is up to families to decide what to do with what is being offered.

Except you don’t. Especially in K-8, you aim to pull down the high performers, so you can reduce the achievement gap that way, rather than by pulling up the lower performing kids.

It's a standard curriculum. There are no gifted classes in top performing countries in the world.

Except that all over the world, systems identify the gift in every child and support every child to propel the growth based on strengths so that they reach their maximum potential. This is the first time, at least for us, we see that an education system is denying opportunities for highly abled students using a lottery instead of competitive selection like the one we have for sports.

Equity is the new politics

How about some equity in sports?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hers a crazy thought focus on providing a high quality education regardless of the race or income of the kids in the classroom

We do but not everyone is going to excel. We provide equal opportunities. It is up to families to decide what to do with what is being offered.

Except you don’t. Especially in K-8, you aim to pull down the high performers, so you can reduce the achievement gap that way, rather than by pulling up the lower performing kids.

It's a standard curriculum. There are no gifted classes in top performing countries in the world.

Except that all over the world, systems identify the gift in every child and support every child to propel the growth based on strengths so that they reach their maximum potential. This is the first time, at least for us, we see that an education system is denying opportunities for highly abled students using a lottery instead of competitive selection like the one we have for sports.

Do you really believe this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This isn't really new. And it's not just MoCo thing.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/children-of-color-projected-to-be-majority-of-u-s-youth-this-year

But, currently, they are still the majority in terms of power and higher ed. Don't worry. All is well in the white bubble.

In 2018, the last year for which data are currently available, the proportion of people in the U.S. under 18 years of age was just barely more white than nonwhite.

However, children under 11 were more nonwhite than white.

In almost one-third of U.S. states, nonwhite children outnumber all white children under 18 in 14 states – including Nevada, Hawaii, Georgia and Maryland – plus the District of Columbia.

Nonwhite children currently outnumber white children ages 0 to 4 in these 15 states and in Louisiana. In the next few years, the same will be true in North Carolina, Illinois and Virginia, followed a little later by Connecticut and Oklahoma.

In the coming decades, the percentage of all white children will drop – from 49.8% in 2020 to 36.4% in 2060.

White people aren't having children at a high enough rate to cover the dying white population.

First, the declining number of white children reflects the significant aging of the white population.

Whites in the U.S. have a median age of 43.6, much higher than those of all other racial or ethnic groups. Latinos, in particular, are much younger, with a median age of 29.5.

this “white bubble” condescension is the opposite of what we need to do to help our white kids live up to our values and thrive in a majority-minority world. if you think lecturing them on their “white bubble” and “white privilege” is the way to teach history and values - you need to get out of your own bubble.

oh please, OP posted this as part of the "replacement theory". What exactly do we need to do to "help our white kids live up to our values and thrive"? If they are fearful of losing their "privilege" then clearly, they realize that they do have "white privilege".

I'm in a biracial relationship, and live in a very diverse cluster. Should I go live in an all white bubble so I understand how they feel? BTDT. That's why we moved to a more diverse area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hers a crazy thought focus on providing a high quality education regardless of the race or income of the kids in the classroom

We do but not everyone is going to excel. We provide equal opportunities. It is up to families to decide what to do with what is being offered.

Except you don’t. Especially in K-8, you aim to pull down the high performers, so you can reduce the achievement gap that way, rather than by pulling up the lower performing kids.

It's a standard curriculum. There are no gifted classes in top performing countries in the world.

Except that all over the world, systems identify the gift in every child and support every child to propel the growth based on strengths so that they reach their maximum potential. This is the first time, at least for us, we see that an education system is denying opportunities for highly abled students using a lottery instead of competitive selection like the one we have for sports.

Um, yeah. If you're top 1% or maybe 10%.

[Anonymous]

I think all sports programs should pick players by "lottery". Set the bar at the top 85% of the sports team, then randomly pick the starting lineups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hers a crazy thought focus on providing a high quality education regardless of the race or income of the kids in the classroom

We do but not everyone is going to excel. We provide equal opportunities. It is up to families to decide what to do with what is being offered.

Except you don’t. Especially in K-8, you aim to pull down the high performers, so you can reduce the achievement gap that way, rather than by pulling up the lower performing kids.

It's a standard curriculum. There are no gifted classes in top performing countries in the world.

Except that all over the world, systems identify the gift in every child and support every child to propel the growth based on strengths so that they reach their maximum potential. This is the first time, at least for us, we see that an education system is denying opportunities for highly abled students using a lottery instead of competitive selection like the one we have for sports.

Oh I know that deadly COVID pandemic was such an inconvenience! I can't believe the CogAT makers wouldn't allow them to admin their test virtually! Sure, there'd be rampant cheating but only by the best students!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hers a crazy thought focus on providing a high quality education regardless of the race or income of the kids in the classroom

We do but not everyone is going to excel. We provide equal opportunities. It is up to families to decide what to do with what is being offered.

Except you don’t. Especially in K-8, you aim to pull down the high performers, so you can reduce the achievement gap that way, rather than by pulling up the lower performing kids.

It's a standard curriculum. There are no gifted classes in top performing countries in the world.

Except that all over the world, systems identify the gift in every child and support every child to propel the growth based on strengths so that they reach their maximum potential. This is the first time, at least for us, we see that an education system is denying opportunities for highly abled students using a lottery instead of competitive selection like the one we have for sports.

BS. I had to sit through a very long PD about the school system in Scandinavia (I can't remember the country because it was so dull). There are no gifted programs and they were proud of that. I guess the only way of recognizing gifted students is that they took the academic track in HS instead of the vocational one. That's it. And we were shown a documentary about it since it was supposedly the best model in the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think all sports programs should pick players by "lottery". Set the bar at the top 85% of the sports team, then randomly pick the starting lineups.

Such a poor analogy. So many great players don't "make the team" every year because of so many reasons.

poor sportsmanship,
not gelling with the coach's program,
stalled development (the kid who was a big star in middle school who hasn't gotten any better)
chronic injury

Maybe use a "starting lineup" analogy instead?

Oh, but then you would have to acknowledge that the starting lineup is chosen based on who the opposing team has playing. And then you might have to acknowledge that team's are not built solely on individual player statistics.

Coaches work to build teams that are best able to meet a challenge - And public school systems work to build graduates that can meet the challenges of their communities.

[Anonymous]

Gifted programs actually have been proven to hurt vast majority of students.

It also diverts funds and attention to those who don’t need it away from those who need it.

My old school district in a different state only had magnet schools for students in need. We pull the kids struggling, give them smaller classes, better teachers and more one on one time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think all sports programs should pick players by "lottery". Set the bar at the top 85% of the sports team, then randomly pick the starting lineups.

Such a poor analogy. So many great players don't "make the team" every year because of so many reasons.

poor sportsmanship,
not gelling with the coach's program,
stalled development (the kid who was a big star in middle school who hasn't gotten any better)
chronic injury

Maybe use a "starting lineup" analogy instead?

Oh, but then you would have to acknowledge that the starting lineup is chosen based on who the opposing team has playing. And then you might have to acknowledge that team's are not built solely on individual player statistics.

Coaches work to build teams that are best able to meet a challenge - And public school systems work to build graduates that can meet the challenges of their communities.

A better sports analogy would be group projects, where the star has to carry all the weight, and the bench warmers are just along for the ride. But they all share the same grade.