S/O faking the address for the good cluster

[Anonymous]

Sometimes school choice is based on subject choice. We moved, but if my kid had studied French instead of Spanish at her old school, she could have gotten a school-change-assignment easily. It was no what we wanted

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So good quality PUBLIC school education is only for the affluent? Got it.

The difference in the school quality is NOT driven by the money and resources being allocated (assuming we're talking about school quality as being defined by test scores). In fact, if you go by money spent and teacher/student ratio the non-affluent areas are measurably better. The affluent areas are funding a better quality of education in the poorer areas than they would be able to by themselves. I doubt they would be that good w/o tax revenue from the richer areas.

Yet this thread isn't about people's anger that poor areas are getting the benefit of tax dollars from wealthier individuals, instead it is about someone who can't afford to live in a certain area having the nerve to care enough about their child's education that they try to find a way to get access to a quality public school. The key here is that it is public school. if people want to be exclusive about who attends the school then they should pay to send their child to private school. But people acting like they get to corner the market on PUBLIC schools is mind-blowing to me.

If those who cares about their child education finding a LEGAL way to get to better school (COSA, special program, you name it) - I have no problem with that
I guess OP of original topic wouldn't mind that too.
Fraud covered by child's best interest is still fraud no matter how you phrase it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Which is it, PP? Is school quality defined by test scores? Or is school quality defined by something else, which the affluent areas are funding in the poorer areas?

Honestly it's hard to really define school quality, especially in a place like MoCo where despite all of the parent bitching schools are all pretty good. IMO, test scores don't tell you how good the instruction is at a school. What they will tell you is how academically advanced the peer group is. Having an advanced peer group will probably lead to a better educational experience because the teacher will need to focus less on remedial work and there is probably peer pressure to do well in school. On the other hand, a smaller student to teacher ratio at a "worse" school (as defined by test scores) can certainly be good in some cases. For example, my daughter was in a K class with 29 kids. It was madness and the teacher was unable to keep control. This led to my daughter getting bullied and eventually led us to withdraw her from the school. My friend lived in an area zoned to a lower performing school system and there were 15 kids in his daughters K class. As she was a very smart child, the teacher was able to spend considerable amounts of time doing individual lesson plans to keep her engaged and motivated. She thrived. In this instance we probably would have done better in a "worse" school system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The person who thinks that the premium is for proximity to the city is wrong. Take the area in Kensington where some of it feeds to Oakland Terrace or Rock View Elementary (and eventually to Einstein). It is next to the area that feeds to Kensington Parkwood and eventually Walter Johnson. There is a street that is divided- the houses that go to WJ are 200,000 more. Obviously not a proximity issue.

I believe that no one is entitled to a better school because they paid more. [/

Your money goes farther outside the beltway, excluding Potomac. The area you are referring to is not inside the beltway.

This response makes no sense. The entire area is outside the beltway. This does not explain why one part of a block is 200,000 more. What explains that differential is the perceived difference in schools.

I agree, but the point I was making is that housing get more expensive inside the beltway in moco.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which is it, PP? Is school quality defined by test scores? Or is school quality defined by something else, which the affluent areas are funding in the poorer areas?

Honestly it's hard to really define school quality, especially in a place like MoCo where despite all of the parent bitching schools are all pretty good. IMO, test scores don't tell you how good the instruction is at a school. What they will tell you is how academically advanced the peer group is. Having an advanced peer group will probably lead to a better educational experience because the teacher will need to focus less on remedial work and there is probably peer pressure to do well in school. On the other hand, a smaller student to teacher ratio at a "worse" school (as defined by test scores) can certainly be good in some cases. For example, my daughter was in a K class with 29 kids. It was madness and the teacher was unable to keep control. This led to my daughter getting bullied and eventually led us to withdraw her from the school. My friend lived in an area zoned to a lower performing school system and there were 15 kids in his daughters K class. As she was a very smart child, the teacher was able to spend considerable amounts of time doing individual lesson plans to keep her engaged and motivated. She thrived. In this instance we probably would have done better in a "worse" school system.

Spot-on!! And the pressure these kids feel at the higher performing schools is heartbreaking. I've heard that some of these kids are so glad to get to college because they can finally take a break. All pretty much unnecessary, but I guess worth it to some to live in a shack. Einstein has an outstanding IB program. So does Springbrook. Kennedy has a wonderful leadership program. All with lower teacher/student ratios.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yet this thread isn't about people's anger that poor areas are getting the benefit of tax dollars from wealthier individuals, instead it is about someone who can't afford to live in a certain area having the nerve to care enough about their child's education that they try to find a way to get access to a quality public school. The key here is that it is public school. if people want to be exclusive about who attends the school then they should pay to send their child to private school. But people acting like they get to corner the market on PUBLIC schools is mind-blowing to me.

If those who cares about their child education finding a LEGAL way to get to better school (COSA, special program, you name it) - I have no problem with that
I guess OP of original topic wouldn't mind that too.
Fraud covered by child's best interest is still fraud no matter how you phrase it.

And if there is no legal way? Then the child should be stuck in a failing school? We as a society have failed when children don't have access to a decent public education, it is not the parent who cares enough to try to seek out other options when that happens.

I hope you are just as angry when people prep their kids to get into HGCs that they probably wouldn't otherwise get into, since we are strict about going by the book and all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The person who thinks that the premium is for proximity to the city is wrong. Take the area in Kensington where some of it feeds to Oakland Terrace or Rock View Elementary (and eventually to Einstein). It is next to the area that feeds to Kensington Parkwood and eventually Walter Johnson. There is a street that is divided- the houses that go to WJ are 200,000 more. Obviously not a proximity issue.

I believe that no one is entitled to a better school because they paid more. [/

Your money goes farther outside the beltway, excluding Potomac. The area you are referring to is not inside the beltway.

This response makes no sense. The entire area is outside the beltway. This does not explain why one part of a block is 200,000 more. What explains that differential is the perceived difference in schools.

I agree, but the point I was making is that housing get more expensive inside the beltway in moco.

But that has nothing to do with this thread...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which is it, PP? Is school quality defined by test scores? Or is school quality defined by something else, which the affluent areas are funding in the poorer areas?

Honestly it's hard to really define school quality, especially in a place like MoCo where despite all of the parent bitching schools are all pretty good. IMO, test scores don't tell you how good the instruction is at a school. What they will tell you is how academically advanced the peer group is. Having an advanced peer group will probably lead to a better educational experience because the teacher will need to focus less on remedial work and there is probably peer pressure to do well in school. On the other hand, a smaller student to teacher ratio at a "worse" school (as defined by test scores) can certainly be good in some cases. For example, my daughter was in a K class with 29 kids. It was madness and the teacher was unable to keep control. This led to my daughter getting bullied and eventually led us to withdraw her from the school. My friend lived in an area zoned to a lower performing school system and there were 15 kids in his daughters K class. As she was a very smart child, the teacher was able to spend considerable amounts of time doing individual lesson plans to keep her engaged and motivated. She thrived. In this instance we probably would have done better in a "worse" school system.

Spot-on!! And the pressure these kids feel at the higher performing schools is heartbreaking. I've heard that some of these kids are so glad to get to college because they can finally take a break. All pretty much unnecessary, but I guess worth it to some to live in a shack. Einstein has an outstanding IB program. So does Springbrook. Kennedy has a wonderful leadership program. All with lower teacher/student ratios.

This is why I'm glad that we are zoned for Einstein. I have a very bright kid who would be a wreck in the environment of the higher performing schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The person who thinks that the premium is for proximity to the city is wrong. Take the area in Kensington where some of it feeds to Oakland Terrace or Rock View Elementary (and eventually to Einstein). It is next to the area that feeds to Kensington Parkwood and eventually Walter Johnson. There is a street that is divided- the houses that go to WJ are 200,000 more. Obviously not a proximity issue.

I believe that no one is entitled to a better school because they paid more.

I could start a whole thread about the Kensington schools! I have friends who live in all three parts, a matter of a block or two from each other. It is a case study in parental school anxiety, the real estate bubble, demographic differences, etc., but right in the middle of it are a bunch of houses that pretty much look the same. Someone at the upper echelons of MCPS should look at it as an example of the continuing perceived inequality between schools.

'd be interested in such a thread. A long time ago there was a thread about Kensington Parkwood possibly being rezoned to go to Einstein (because of White Flint development). People freaked out. I don't think it was ever in the works though.

Interesting. I assume they would never do that, but it will get pretty interesting in the next few years when the huge demographic bulge hits Parkwood and WJ. Check this out: go to http://www.schooldigger.com/go/MD/schools/0048000892/school.aspx and click on the "students" tab. Look at that huge increase in the last few years at KP! I think the same thing is happening at other schools that feed to WJ. In a few years someone is bound to ask why those Kensington kids are going to an overcrowded school when there's a cluster right next to them with lots of room in it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yet this thread isn't about people's anger that poor areas are getting the benefit of tax dollars from wealthier individuals, instead it is about someone who can't afford to live in a certain area having the nerve to care enough about their child's education that they try to find a way to get access to a quality public school. The key here is that it is public school. if people want to be exclusive about who attends the school then they should pay to send their child to private school. But people acting like they get to corner the market on PUBLIC schools is mind-blowing to me.

If those who cares about their child education finding a LEGAL way to get to better school (COSA, special program, you name it) - I have no problem with that
I guess OP of original topic wouldn't mind that too.
Fraud covered by child's best interest is still fraud no matter how you phrase it.

And if there is no legal way? Then the child should be stuck in a failing school? We as a society have failed when children don't have access to a decent public education, it is not the parent who cares enough to try to seek out other options when that happens.

I hope you are just as angry when people prep their kids to get into HGCs that they probably wouldn't otherwise get into, since we are strict about going by the book and all.
I'm not angry at all
1. Several posters in this topic already mentioned that overall MoCo schools are good, so I don't think you can find really 'falling school'
2. There are always a legal way if you truly worried about your children education - just set your priorities straight: get a small townhouse in W cluster vs huge SFH, rent an apartment; if you brock - subsidized housing available too. One of the main thing you teach your children - is honesty, fraud is not an option, really.
3. Yes, I kind of don't like too much prep for HGC testing (and it some parents went wild after 2.0 rolled out), especially for 3rd graders - it kills the idea. But I don't want to start that discussion about intelligence vs knowledge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If those who cares about their child education finding a LEGAL way to get to better school (COSA, special program, you name it) - I have no problem with that
I guess OP of original topic wouldn't mind that too.
Fraud covered by child's best interest is still fraud no matter how you phrase it.

You definitely sound like a NIMBY. Are the kids in question not good enough for you?

Nobody is stealing anything from anyone. Public funds will be used to educate those kids regardless of where they choose to live

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The person who thinks that the premium is for proximity to the city is wrong. Take the area in Kensington where some of it feeds to Oakland Terrace or Rock View Elementary (and eventually to Einstein). It is next to the area that feeds to Kensington Parkwood and eventually Walter Johnson. There is a street that is divided- the houses that go to WJ are 200,000 more. Obviously not a proximity issue.

I believe that no one is entitled to a better school because they paid more.

I could start a whole thread about the Kensington schools! I have friends who live in all three parts, a matter of a block or two from each other. It is a case study in parental school anxiety, the real estate bubble, demographic differences, etc., but right in the middle of it are a bunch of houses that pretty much look the same. Someone at the upper echelons of MCPS should look at it as an example of the continuing perceived inequality between schools.

'd be interested in such a thread. A long time ago there was a thread about Kensington Parkwood possibly being rezoned to go to Einstein (because of White Flint development). People freaked out. I don't think it was ever in the works though.

Interesting. I assume they would never do that, but it will get pretty interesting in the next few years when the huge demographic bulge hits Parkwood and WJ. Check this out: go to http://www.schooldigger.com/go/MD/schools/0048000892/school.aspx and click on the "students" tab. Look at that huge increase in the last few years at KP! I think the same thing is happening at other schools that feed to WJ. In a few years someone is bound to ask why those Kensington kids are going to an overcrowded school when there's a cluster right next to them with lots of room in it.

Indeed!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The person who thinks that the premium is for proximity to the city is wrong. Take the area in Kensington where some of it feeds to Oakland Terrace or Rock View Elementary (and eventually to Einstein). It is next to the area that feeds to Kensington Parkwood and eventually Walter Johnson. There is a street that is divided- the houses that go to WJ are 200,000 more. Obviously not a proximity issue.

I believe that no one is entitled to a better school because they paid more. [/

Your money goes farther outside the beltway, excluding Potomac. The area you are referring to is not inside the beltway.

This response makes no sense. The entire area is outside the beltway. This does not explain why one part of a block is 200,000 more. What explains that differential is the perceived difference in schools.

I agree, but the point I was making is that housing get more expensive inside the beltway in moco.

But that has nothing to do with this thread...

Maybe if you read the entire thread you would understand the context of the comment. But thanks for making your point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which is it, PP? Is school quality defined by test scores? Or is school quality defined by something else, which the affluent areas are funding in the poorer areas?

Honestly it's hard to really define school quality, especially in a place like MoCo where despite all of the parent bitching schools are all pretty good. IMO, test scores don't tell you how good the instruction is at a school. What they will tell you is how academically advanced the peer group is. Having an advanced peer group will probably lead to a better educational experience because the teacher will need to focus less on remedial work and there is probably peer pressure to do well in school. On the other hand, a smaller student to teacher ratio at a "worse" school (as defined by test scores) can certainly be good in some cases. For example, my daughter was in a K class with 29 kids. It was madness and the teacher was unable to keep control. This led to my daughter getting bullied and eventually led us to withdraw her from the school. My friend lived in an area zoned to a lower performing school system and there were 15 kids in his daughters K class. As she was a very smart child, the teacher was able to spend considerable amounts of time doing individual lesson plans to keep her engaged and motivated. She thrived. In this instance we probably would have done better in a "worse" school system.

Spot-on!! And the pressure these kids feel at the higher performing schools is heartbreaking. I've heard that some of these kids are so glad to get to college because they can finally take a break. All pretty much unnecessary, but I guess worth it to some to live in a shack. Einstein has an outstanding IB program. So does Springbrook. Kennedy has a wonderful leadership program. All with lower teacher/student ratios.

I agree. I want some pressure to achieve, but it's crazy what some kids are doing in high school.