Who benefits from watered down math and science in school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a few types of kids who benefit:

Those who perform at the newly lowered ceiling and not much higher or lower - although even this kids will suffer in college
Those whose parents can see past the Harrison Bergeron rhetoric and have the money and knowledge necessary to get their kids a proper education outside of school. The parents of the latter are mostly white, and at times the exact same as the ones pushing for these lowered ceilings. Many minorities are either too scared of the tiger mom stereotype, too poor to afford AoPS/RSM, or too ignorant of the possibilities to do anything.

To add: many minorities come from countries where the education system is heavily top-down, so they have 0 clue advocacy is even an option, much less skilled in things like getting their kids in classes with the teachers who do care, petitioning for enrichment, networking with admin to make advocacy easier, etc. etc.

What people cant seem to understand about the equity issue is that some parents will continue to advocate for their child education no matter how many road blocks are put up. And some parents will continue to not care about their childs education no matter how many steps up you give those kids.

Only parents interested in raising their child's performance can effectively close the gap. Unfortunately, those kids and parents have been told its not their fault.

Truth. The achievement gap is really a parenting gap. Not to say that kids who aren’t high achievers have bad parents, but their parents do not place a high priority on academics.

Why is the assumption always that those parents don't prioritize academics? Have you ever considered that parents can care about academics but at the same time be entirely incapable of providing any help due to their own very limited education or inability to afford enrichment?

BU's Bempechat has an interesting article, with a section titled "Homework and Social Class". (Pages 40-41 below.) She highlights ways low-income parents do help their students despite limited education or funds.
https://www.educationnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ednext_xix_1_bempechat.pdf

Bempechat argues that:
"research shows that low-income parents who are unable to assist with homework are far from passive in their children’s learning, and they do help foster scholastic performance." ... "In another recent study, researchers examined mathematics achievement in low-income 8th-grade Asian and Latino students. Help with homework was an advantage their mothers could not provide. They could, however, furnish structure (for example, by setting aside quiet time for homework completion), and it was this structure that most predicted high achievement. As the authors note, 'It is . . . important to help [low-income] parents realize that they can still help their children get good grades in mathematics and succeed in school even if they do not know how to provide direct assistance with their child’s mathematics homework.' ”

So, just like I said in the post above yours

Yes, supports exactly what you said. Thanks for your post; particularly useful since you have firsthand experience.

I'll tell you what else I knew starting in summer 2020 - that these kids were going to be particularly F-ed with all virtual for a year. Frustrates me that the school board knows less than me. But I hate people so I can't run.

Sorry, no. It’s 2023. You’re really going to have to stop with this line and get a new excuse.

The effects of virtual learning are very apparent and damaging in 2023. The share of kids failing standardized tests is much higher now than pre-covid. Remediating learning loss should be the number one priority.

Actually most analyses show that while initially schools that were in person more had fewer gaps, now there is no difference-- everyone is experiencing similar gaps regardless of the approach their school took to covid. This is more due to unpredictability of increased absences, disruptions caused by the pandemic and teacher shortages due to the stress. So the pandemic still has a huge impact but the effects of virtual learning have been basically washed out by now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a few types of kids who benefit:

Those who perform at the newly lowered ceiling and not much higher or lower - although even this kids will suffer in college
Those whose parents can see past the Harrison Bergeron rhetoric and have the money and knowledge necessary to get their kids a proper education outside of school. The parents of the latter are mostly white, and at times the exact same as the ones pushing for these lowered ceilings. Many minorities are either too scared of the tiger mom stereotype, too poor to afford AoPS/RSM, or too ignorant of the possibilities to do anything.

To add: many minorities come from countries where the education system is heavily top-down, so they have 0 clue advocacy is even an option, much less skilled in things like getting their kids in classes with the teachers who do care, petitioning for enrichment, networking with admin to make advocacy easier, etc. etc.

What people cant seem to understand about the equity issue is that some parents will continue to advocate for their child education no matter how many road blocks are put up. And some parents will continue to not care about their childs education no matter how many steps up you give those kids.

Only parents interested in raising their child's performance can effectively close the gap. Unfortunately, those kids and parents have been told its not their fault.

Truth. The achievement gap is really a parenting gap. Not to say that kids who aren’t high achievers have bad parents, but their parents do not place a high priority on academics.

Why is the assumption always that those parents don't prioritize academics? Have you ever considered that parents can care about academics but at the same time be entirely incapable of providing any help due to their own very limited education or inability to afford enrichment?

BU's Bempechat has an interesting article, with a section titled "Homework and Social Class". (Pages 40-41 below.) She highlights ways low-income parents do help their students despite limited education or funds.
https://www.educationnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ednext_xix_1_bempechat.pdf

Bempechat argues that:
"research shows that low-income parents who are unable to assist with homework are far from passive in their children’s learning, and they do help foster scholastic performance." ... "In another recent study, researchers examined mathematics achievement in low-income 8th-grade Asian and Latino students. Help with homework was an advantage their mothers could not provide. They could, however, furnish structure (for example, by setting aside quiet time for homework completion), and it was this structure that most predicted high achievement. As the authors note, 'It is . . . important to help [low-income] parents realize that they can still help their children get good grades in mathematics and succeed in school even if they do not know how to provide direct assistance with their child’s mathematics homework.' ”

So, just like I said in the post above yours

Yes, supports exactly what you said. Thanks for your post; particularly useful since you have firsthand experience.

I'll tell you what else I knew starting in summer 2020 - that these kids were going to be particularly F-ed with all virtual for a year. Frustrates me that the school board knows less than me. But I hate people so I can't run.

Sorry, no. It’s 2023. You’re really going to have to stop with this line and get a new excuse.

No - I’m never going to forget. Dual working family with 3 kids in ES during all virtual - I will never forget.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a few types of kids who benefit:

Those who perform at the newly lowered ceiling and not much higher or lower - although even this kids will suffer in college
Those whose parents can see past the Harrison Bergeron rhetoric and have the money and knowledge necessary to get their kids a proper education outside of school. The parents of the latter are mostly white, and at times the exact same as the ones pushing for these lowered ceilings. Many minorities are either too scared of the tiger mom stereotype, too poor to afford AoPS/RSM, or too ignorant of the possibilities to do anything.

To add: many minorities come from countries where the education system is heavily top-down, so they have 0 clue advocacy is even an option, much less skilled in things like getting their kids in classes with the teachers who do care, petitioning for enrichment, networking with admin to make advocacy easier, etc. etc.

What people cant seem to understand about the equity issue is that some parents will continue to advocate for their child education no matter how many road blocks are put up. And some parents will continue to not care about their childs education no matter how many steps up you give those kids.

Only parents interested in raising their child's performance can effectively close the gap. Unfortunately, those kids and parents have been told its not their fault.

Truth. The achievement gap is really a parenting gap. Not to say that kids who aren’t high achievers have bad parents, but their parents do not place a high priority on academics.

Why is the assumption always that those parents don't prioritize academics? Have you ever considered that parents can care about academics but at the same time be entirely incapable of providing any help due to their own very limited education or inability to afford enrichment?

BU's Bempechat has an interesting article, with a section titled "Homework and Social Class". (Pages 40-41 below.) She highlights ways low-income parents do help their students despite limited education or funds.
https://www.educationnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ednext_xix_1_bempechat.pdf

Bempechat argues that:
"research shows that low-income parents who are unable to assist with homework are far from passive in their children’s learning, and they do help foster scholastic performance." ... "In another recent study, researchers examined mathematics achievement in low-income 8th-grade Asian and Latino students. Help with homework was an advantage their mothers could not provide. They could, however, furnish structure (for example, by setting aside quiet time for homework completion), and it was this structure that most predicted high achievement. As the authors note, 'It is . . . important to help [low-income] parents realize that they can still help their children get good grades in mathematics and succeed in school even if they do not know how to provide direct assistance with their child’s mathematics homework.' ”

So, just like I said in the post above yours

Yes, supports exactly what you said. Thanks for your post; particularly useful since you have firsthand experience.

I'll tell you what else I knew starting in summer 2020 - that these kids were going to be particularly F-ed with all virtual for a year. Frustrates me that the school board knows less than me. But I hate people so I can't run.

Sorry, no. It’s 2023. You’re really going to have to stop with this line and get a new excuse.

The effects of virtual learning are very apparent and damaging in 2023. The share of kids failing standardized tests is much higher now than pre-covid. Remediating learning loss should be the number one priority.

Actually most analyses show that while initially schools that were in person more had fewer gaps, now there is no difference-- everyone is experiencing similar gaps regardless of the approach their school took to covid. This is more due to unpredictability of increased absences, disruptions caused by the pandemic and teacher shortages due to the stress. So the pandemic still has a huge impact but the effects of virtual learning have been basically washed out by now.

Actually you are wrong. Here are my receipts.

“Preliminary test scores around the country confirm what Kargbo witnessed: The longer many students studied remotely, the less they learned.”

The article also hit the nail on the head with you too:
“ Many adults are pushing to move on, to stop talking about the impact of the pandemic — especially learning loss.

"As crazy as this sounds now, I'm afraid people are going to forget about the pandemic," said Jason Kamras, superintendent in Richmond, Virginia. "People will say, 'That was two years ago. Get over it.'"

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/nation/preliminary-testing-shows-online-learning-has-put-u-s-kids-behind-some-adults-have-regrets

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a few types of kids who benefit:

Those who perform at the newly lowered ceiling and not much higher or lower - although even this kids will suffer in college
Those whose parents can see past the Harrison Bergeron rhetoric and have the money and knowledge necessary to get their kids a proper education outside of school. The parents of the latter are mostly white, and at times the exact same as the ones pushing for these lowered ceilings. Many minorities are either too scared of the tiger mom stereotype, too poor to afford AoPS/RSM, or too ignorant of the possibilities to do anything.

To add: many minorities come from countries where the education system is heavily top-down, so they have 0 clue advocacy is even an option, much less skilled in things like getting their kids in classes with the teachers who do care, petitioning for enrichment, networking with admin to make advocacy easier, etc. etc.

What people cant seem to understand about the equity issue is that some parents will continue to advocate for their child education no matter how many road blocks are put up. And some parents will continue to not care about their childs education no matter how many steps up you give those kids.

Only parents interested in raising their child's performance can effectively close the gap. Unfortunately, those kids and parents have been told its not their fault.

Truth. The achievement gap is really a parenting gap. Not to say that kids who aren’t high achievers have bad parents, but their parents do not place a high priority on academics.

Why is the assumption always that those parents don't prioritize academics? Have you ever considered that parents can care about academics but at the same time be entirely incapable of providing any help due to their own very limited education or inability to afford enrichment?

BU's Bempechat has an interesting article, with a section titled "Homework and Social Class". (Pages 40-41 below.) She highlights ways low-income parents do help their students despite limited education or funds.
https://www.educationnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ednext_xix_1_bempechat.pdf

Bempechat argues that:
"research shows that low-income parents who are unable to assist with homework are far from passive in their children’s learning, and they do help foster scholastic performance." ... "In another recent study, researchers examined mathematics achievement in low-income 8th-grade Asian and Latino students. Help with homework was an advantage their mothers could not provide. They could, however, furnish structure (for example, by setting aside quiet time for homework completion), and it was this structure that most predicted high achievement. As the authors note, 'It is . . . important to help [low-income] parents realize that they can still help their children get good grades in mathematics and succeed in school even if they do not know how to provide direct assistance with their child’s mathematics homework.' ”

So, just like I said in the post above yours

Yes, supports exactly what you said. Thanks for your post; particularly useful since you have firsthand experience.

I'll tell you what else I knew starting in summer 2020 - that these kids were going to be particularly F-ed with all virtual for a year. Frustrates me that the school board knows less than me. But I hate people so I can't run.

Sorry, no. It’s 2023. You’re really going to have to stop with this line and get a new excuse.

The effects of virtual learning are very apparent and damaging in 2023. The share of kids failing standardized tests is much higher now than pre-covid. Remediating learning loss should be the number one priority.

Actually most analyses show that while initially schools that were in person more had fewer gaps, now there is no difference-- everyone is experiencing similar gaps regardless of the approach their school took to covid. This is more due to unpredictability of increased absences, disruptions caused by the pandemic and teacher shortages due to the stress. So the pandemic still has a huge impact but the effects of virtual learning have been basically washed out by now.

Please stop trying to use all those fancy facts to undermine my grievance narrative. I heard it on FOX so I know it's true!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a few types of kids who benefit:

Those who perform at the newly lowered ceiling and not much higher or lower - although even this kids will suffer in college
Those whose parents can see past the Harrison Bergeron rhetoric and have the money and knowledge necessary to get their kids a proper education outside of school. The parents of the latter are mostly white, and at times the exact same as the ones pushing for these lowered ceilings. Many minorities are either too scared of the tiger mom stereotype, too poor to afford AoPS/RSM, or too ignorant of the possibilities to do anything.

To add: many minorities come from countries where the education system is heavily top-down, so they have 0 clue advocacy is even an option, much less skilled in things like getting their kids in classes with the teachers who do care, petitioning for enrichment, networking with admin to make advocacy easier, etc. etc.

What people cant seem to understand about the equity issue is that some parents will continue to advocate for their child education no matter how many road blocks are put up. And some parents will continue to not care about their childs education no matter how many steps up you give those kids.

Only parents interested in raising their child's performance can effectively close the gap. Unfortunately, those kids and parents have been told its not their fault.

Truth. The achievement gap is really a parenting gap. Not to say that kids who aren’t high achievers have bad parents, but their parents do not place a high priority on academics.

Why is the assumption always that those parents don't prioritize academics? Have you ever considered that parents can care about academics but at the same time be entirely incapable of providing any help due to their own very limited education or inability to afford enrichment?

BU's Bempechat has an interesting article, with a section titled "Homework and Social Class". (Pages 40-41 below.) She highlights ways low-income parents do help their students despite limited education or funds.
https://www.educationnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ednext_xix_1_bempechat.pdf

Bempechat argues that:
"research shows that low-income parents who are unable to assist with homework are far from passive in their children’s learning, and they do help foster scholastic performance." ... "In another recent study, researchers examined mathematics achievement in low-income 8th-grade Asian and Latino students. Help with homework was an advantage their mothers could not provide. They could, however, furnish structure (for example, by setting aside quiet time for homework completion), and it was this structure that most predicted high achievement. As the authors note, 'It is . . . important to help [low-income] parents realize that they can still help their children get good grades in mathematics and succeed in school even if they do not know how to provide direct assistance with their child’s mathematics homework.' ”

So, just like I said in the post above yours

Yes, supports exactly what you said. Thanks for your post; particularly useful since you have firsthand experience.

I'll tell you what else I knew starting in summer 2020 - that these kids were going to be particularly F-ed with all virtual for a year. Frustrates me that the school board knows less than me. But I hate people so I can't run.

Sorry, no. It’s 2023. You’re really going to have to stop with this line and get a new excuse.

No - I’m never going to forget. Dual working family with 3 kids in ES during all virtual - I will never forget.

I know! So what if teachers had to put their lives at risk! We demand our free daycare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a few types of kids who benefit:

Those who perform at the newly lowered ceiling and not much higher or lower - although even this kids will suffer in college
Those whose parents can see past the Harrison Bergeron rhetoric and have the money and knowledge necessary to get their kids a proper education outside of school. The parents of the latter are mostly white, and at times the exact same as the ones pushing for these lowered ceilings. Many minorities are either too scared of the tiger mom stereotype, too poor to afford AoPS/RSM, or too ignorant of the possibilities to do anything.

To add: many minorities come from countries where the education system is heavily top-down, so they have 0 clue advocacy is even an option, much less skilled in things like getting their kids in classes with the teachers who do care, petitioning for enrichment, networking with admin to make advocacy easier, etc. etc.

What people cant seem to understand about the equity issue is that some parents will continue to advocate for their child education no matter how many road blocks are put up. And some parents will continue to not care about their childs education no matter how many steps up you give those kids.

Only parents interested in raising their child's performance can effectively close the gap. Unfortunately, those kids and parents have been told its not their fault.

Truth. The achievement gap is really a parenting gap. Not to say that kids who aren’t high achievers have bad parents, but their parents do not place a high priority on academics.

Why is the assumption always that those parents don't prioritize academics? Have you ever considered that parents can care about academics but at the same time be entirely incapable of providing any help due to their own very limited education or inability to afford enrichment?

BU's Bempechat has an interesting article, with a section titled "Homework and Social Class". (Pages 40-41 below.) She highlights ways low-income parents do help their students despite limited education or funds.
https://www.educationnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ednext_xix_1_bempechat.pdf

Bempechat argues that:
"research shows that low-income parents who are unable to assist with homework are far from passive in their children’s learning, and they do help foster scholastic performance." ... "In another recent study, researchers examined mathematics achievement in low-income 8th-grade Asian and Latino students. Help with homework was an advantage their mothers could not provide. They could, however, furnish structure (for example, by setting aside quiet time for homework completion), and it was this structure that most predicted high achievement. As the authors note, 'It is . . . important to help [low-income] parents realize that they can still help their children get good grades in mathematics and succeed in school even if they do not know how to provide direct assistance with their child’s mathematics homework.' ”

So, just like I said in the post above yours

Yes, supports exactly what you said. Thanks for your post; particularly useful since you have firsthand experience.

I'll tell you what else I knew starting in summer 2020 - that these kids were going to be particularly F-ed with all virtual for a year. Frustrates me that the school board knows less than me. But I hate people so I can't run.

Sorry, no. It’s 2023. You’re really going to have to stop with this line and get a new excuse.

The effects of virtual learning are very apparent and damaging in 2023. The share of kids failing standardized tests is much higher now than pre-covid. Remediating learning loss should be the number one priority.

Actually most analyses show that while initially schools that were in person more had fewer gaps, now there is no difference-- everyone is experiencing similar gaps regardless of the approach their school took to covid. This is more due to unpredictability of increased absences, disruptions caused by the pandemic and teacher shortages due to the stress. So the pandemic still has a huge impact but the effects of virtual learning have been basically washed out by now.

Please stop trying to use all those fancy facts to undermine my grievance narrative. I heard it on FOX so I know it's true!

Assertions were made that the effects of virtual learning are now gone. Facts need citations. The PBS story references Brown professor Emily's Oster study, which controlled for background factors and isolated the impact of virtual learning .
https://emilyoster.net/wp-content/uploads/MS_Updated_Revised.pdf
"Our results show that declines in student pass rates are larger in districts with less in-person schooling." (page 3)

[Anonymous]

That study just looked at the 2020-2021 school year. How does it argue against the premise that the effect of virtual learning has now gone, in 2023, two years after the end of that study?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That study just looked at the 2020-2021 school year. How does it argue against the premise that the effect of virtual learning has now gone, in 2023, two years after the end of that study?

Standardized test scores remain well below pre-covid levels. The question is what drove them there. The Oster study shows that virtual was a key factor. What studies are you or another PP citing to argue that virtual's effects are no more?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the people that think that advancing kids in math and science is abuse:

Who are you fighting for? Who benefits from this?

China

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a few types of kids who benefit:

Those who perform at the newly lowered ceiling and not much higher or lower - although even this kids will suffer in college
Those whose parents can see past the Harrison Bergeron rhetoric and have the money and knowledge necessary to get their kids a proper education outside of school. The parents of the latter are mostly white, and at times the exact same as the ones pushing for these lowered ceilings. Many minorities are either too scared of the tiger mom stereotype, too poor to afford AoPS/RSM, or too ignorant of the possibilities to do anything.

To add: many minorities come from countries where the education system is heavily top-down, so they have 0 clue advocacy is even an option, much less skilled in things like getting their kids in classes with the teachers who do care, petitioning for enrichment, networking with admin to make advocacy easier, etc. etc.

What people cant seem to understand about the equity issue is that some parents will continue to advocate for their child education no matter how many road blocks are put up. And some parents will continue to not care about their childs education no matter how many steps up you give those kids.

Only parents interested in raising their child's performance can effectively close the gap. Unfortunately, those kids and parents have been told its not their fault.

Truth. The achievement gap is really a parenting gap. Not to say that kids who aren’t high achievers have bad parents, but their parents do not place a high priority on academics.

Why is the assumption always that those parents don't prioritize academics? Have you ever considered that parents can care about academics but at the same time be entirely incapable of providing any help due to their own very limited education or inability to afford enrichment?

BU's Bempechat has an interesting article, with a section titled "Homework and Social Class". (Pages 40-41 below.) She highlights ways low-income parents do help their students despite limited education or funds.
https://www.educationnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ednext_xix_1_bempechat.pdf

Bempechat argues that:
"research shows that low-income parents who are unable to assist with homework are far from passive in their children’s learning, and they do help foster scholastic performance." ... "In another recent study, researchers examined mathematics achievement in low-income 8th-grade Asian and Latino students. Help with homework was an advantage their mothers could not provide. They could, however, furnish structure (for example, by setting aside quiet time for homework completion), and it was this structure that most predicted high achievement. As the authors note, 'It is . . . important to help [low-income] parents realize that they can still help their children get good grades in mathematics and succeed in school even if they do not know how to provide direct assistance with their child’s mathematics homework.' ”

So, just like I said in the post above yours

Yes, supports exactly what you said. Thanks for your post; particularly useful since you have firsthand experience.

I'll tell you what else I knew starting in summer 2020 - that these kids were going to be particularly F-ed with all virtual for a year. Frustrates me that the school board knows less than me. But I hate people so I can't run.

Sorry, no. It’s 2023. You’re really going to have to stop with this line and get a new excuse.

No - I’m never going to forget. Dual working family with 3 kids in ES during all virtual - I will never forget.

Same.

[Anonymous]

China India Iran

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a few types of kids who benefit:

Those who perform at the newly lowered ceiling and not much higher or lower - although even this kids will suffer in college
Those whose parents can see past the Harrison Bergeron rhetoric and have the money and knowledge necessary to get their kids a proper education outside of school. The parents of the latter are mostly white, and at times the exact same as the ones pushing for these lowered ceilings. Many minorities are either too scared of the tiger mom stereotype, too poor to afford AoPS/RSM, or too ignorant of the possibilities to do anything.

To add: many minorities come from countries where the education system is heavily top-down, so they have 0 clue advocacy is even an option, much less skilled in things like getting their kids in classes with the teachers who do care, petitioning for enrichment, networking with admin to make advocacy easier, etc. etc.

What people cant seem to understand about the equity issue is that some parents will continue to advocate for their child education no matter how many road blocks are put up. And some parents will continue to not care about their childs education no matter how many steps up you give those kids.

Only parents interested in raising their child's performance can effectively close the gap. Unfortunately, those kids and parents have been told its not their fault.

Truth. The achievement gap is really a parenting gap. Not to say that kids who aren’t high achievers have bad parents, but their parents do not place a high priority on academics.

Why is the assumption always that those parents don't prioritize academics? Have you ever considered that parents can care about academics but at the same time be entirely incapable of providing any help due to their own very limited education or inability to afford enrichment?

BU's Bempechat has an interesting article, with a section titled "Homework and Social Class". (Pages 40-41 below.) She highlights ways low-income parents do help their students despite limited education or funds.
https://www.educationnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ednext_xix_1_bempechat.pdf

Bempechat argues that:
"research shows that low-income parents who are unable to assist with homework are far from passive in their children’s learning, and they do help foster scholastic performance." ... "In another recent study, researchers examined mathematics achievement in low-income 8th-grade Asian and Latino students. Help with homework was an advantage their mothers could not provide. They could, however, furnish structure (for example, by setting aside quiet time for homework completion), and it was this structure that most predicted high achievement. As the authors note, 'It is . . . important to help [low-income] parents realize that they can still help their children get good grades in mathematics and succeed in school even if they do not know how to provide direct assistance with their child’s mathematics homework.' ”

So, just like I said in the post above yours

Yes, supports exactly what you said. Thanks for your post; particularly useful since you have firsthand experience.

I'll tell you what else I knew starting in summer 2020 - that these kids were going to be particularly F-ed with all virtual for a year. Frustrates me that the school board knows less than me. But I hate people so I can't run.

Sorry, no. It’s 2023. You’re really going to have to stop with this line and get a new excuse.

No - I’m never going to forget. Dual working family with 3 kids in ES during all virtual - I will never forget.

Dual working family of 2 here. Virtual learning was a mess, especially for one of my kids. But you know what I will never forget about that time period? Being a nurse and working during the height of Covid in the hospital. All while having to listen to mostly well off parents throw hissy fits about how
Covid wasn't a big deal for them/their families while hospitals were imploding. That's what I have a hard time letting go of but I am trying to let it go for my own sake. We can all acknowledge that virtual learning sucked while also acknowledging that Covid was unprecedented and most people were trying to make the best decisions at the time.

[Anonymous]

I think virtual learning is being over emphasized as a cause for watered down curriculum. I browse the teaching subreddit and it's both depressing and enlightening. Things that seem to have led to watered down academics:
-emphasis on closing the gap (but watering material down so that it seems like it's closing)
-pressure from higher ups to pass most kids
-kids are very rarely held back a grade even if they have not mastered content
-kids can now self-select to go into Honors and AP classes. Before you need recommendations from teachers. That means that Susie who barely passed Algebra I can still pick Honors Geometry, etc. So it's hard for teachers to maintain the rigor
-screens, screens, and more screens
-parents do not hold their kids accountable
-too much time spent on discipline not enough on academics
-teaching to standardized tests
Who benefits? Not any of the kids. Not teachers. Maybe whoever stands to benefit from a dumb populace?