Myth: low income students do better in schools with <25% FARMs rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, what's your point? We should pull out all the farms kids in the rich schools and bus them to the FARMS schools so they cannot be seen or bring down the test scores.

Stop using logic

[Anonymous]

Umm.... I think the point is that posters claiming that rezoning to balance out FARMS rate for the good of the children are misguided at best or maybe they honestly know that moving poor kids into rich schools or vice versa doesn't do anything and they have some other agenda.

The bottom line is that it doesn't work and it dilutes critical resources that poor kids do need and which have been proven to make a difference. If we care about poor kids doing better then we should adopt policies and programs that help poor kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Umm.... I think the point is that posters claiming that rezoning to balance out FARMS rate for the good of the children are misguided at best or maybe they honestly know that moving poor kids into rich schools or vice versa doesn't do anything and they have some other agenda.

The bottom line is that it doesn't work and it dilutes critical resources that poor kids do need and which have been proven to make a difference. If we care about poor kids doing better then we should adopt policies and programs that help poor kids.

Says who?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Umm.... I think the point is that posters claiming that rezoning to balance out FARMS rate for the good of the children are misguided at best or maybe they honestly know that moving poor kids into rich schools or vice versa doesn't do anything and they have some other agenda.

The bottom line is that it doesn't work and it dilutes critical resources that poor kids do need and which have been proven to make a difference. If we care about poor kids doing better then we should adopt policies and programs that help poor kids.

Says who?

A University of Denver master's student who wrote a non-peer reviewed, non-replicated paper for a class, a paper that violates most of the basic principles of research in the social sciences. Duh. If that's not evidence, I don't know what is!

[Anonymous]

Anything you do in the schools is just treating a symptom not the disease. If you don’t fix the challenges facing the families it is just like bailing out a boat with a hole in the bottom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anything you do in the schools is just treating a symptom not the disease. If you don’t fix the challenges facing the families it is just like bailing out a boat with a hole in the bottom.

So.... unless we can teach all the kids’ parents English, get them high-paying jobs so they can buy enriching activities for the kids, and make sure they stay married, read to the kids every night, and feed them all their vegetables, the school system might as well do nothing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anything you do in the schools is just treating a symptom not the disease. If you don’t fix the challenges facing the families it is just like bailing out a boat with a hole in the bottom.

I don't know about your experience, but in my experience, treating the symptoms is often very helpful. For example: my neighbor had shingles, it was very painful, she got gabapentin, she felt better. Should the doctor have said, "No, I'm not going to prescribe anything, because it's just treating a symptom not the disease"? Of course not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anything you do in the schools is just treating a symptom not the disease. If you don’t fix the challenges facing the families it is just like bailing out a boat with a hole in the bottom.

I don't know about your experience, but in my experience, treating the symptoms is often very helpful. For example: my neighbor had shingles, it was very painful, she got gabapentin, she felt better. Should the doctor have said, "No, I'm not going to prescribe anything, because it's just treating a symptom not the disease"? Of course not.

If your neighbor had gotten their varicella vaccine or their shingles vaccine there would be no need for the visit or the gabapentin. See how that works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anything you do in the schools is just treating a symptom not the disease. If you don’t fix the challenges facing the families it is just like bailing out a boat with a hole in the bottom.

I don't know about your experience, but in my experience, treating the symptoms is often very helpful. For example: my neighbor had shingles, it was very painful, she got gabapentin, she felt better. Should the doctor have said, "No, I'm not going to prescribe anything, because it's just treating a symptom not the disease"? Of course not.

MCPS has been treating the symptoms: smaller classes, free pre-K, free tutoring, free meals, free summer schools, free backpack, free school supplies, free, free, ..............

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anything you do in the schools is just treating a symptom not the disease. If you don’t fix the challenges facing the families it is just like bailing out a boat with a hole in the bottom.

I don't know about your experience, but in my experience, treating the symptoms is often very helpful. For example: my neighbor had shingles, it was very painful, she got gabapentin, she felt better. Should the doctor have said, "No, I'm not going to prescribe anything, because it's just treating a symptom not the disease"? Of course not.

MCPS has been treating the symptoms: smaller classes, free pre-K, free tutoring, free meals, free summer schools, free backpack, free school supplies, free, free, ..............

Are you arguing that the kids’ test scores would be better if, instead, they were hungry and had huge classes and no school supplies and no preschool? Where is your evidence that this is all for naught?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My link didn't come out clickable before. I really wish someone would read this.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/us/2018/09/26/list-studies-test-scores-poverty-school-income/

"The study examines a “set of welfare and antipoverty experiments conducted in the 1990s … Our estimates suggest that a $1,000 increase in annual income increases young children’s achievement by 5%–6% of a standard deviation.” Developmental Psychology (2011)
“An additional $4000 per year for the poorest households increases educational attainment by one year at age 21 and reduces having ever committed a minor crime by 22% at ages 16?17.” American Economic Journal (2010)"

If there are 60,000 FARMS kids in MCPS then giving each FARMS family 1K per kid per school year would only cost 60K a year yet yield a 5%-6% increase in performance. Giving each FAR<S family 4K a year would be 240K per year.

The investigation into MCPS Damascus assaults is costing 250K. 60K is fraction of the travel budget for conferences. The former Damascus principle is sitting in a made up job for 140K a year plus benefits while the DUI Damascus AP is sitting in another made up job. . Getting rid of these two positions would pay for it with left over money. >

I'm with you, PP. I do think it would be great to see some rigorous longitudinal studies on a system like this and see if it works, because it sure does sound like that would be a better way to allocate $$$.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anything you do in the schools is just treating a symptom not the disease. If you don’t fix the challenges facing the families it is just like bailing out a boat with a hole in the bottom.

I don't know about your experience, but in my experience, treating the symptoms is often very helpful. For example: my neighbor had shingles, it was very painful, she got gabapentin, she felt better. Should the doctor have said, "No, I'm not going to prescribe anything, because it's just treating a symptom not the disease"? Of course not.

MCPS has been treating the symptoms: smaller classes, free pre-K, free tutoring, free meals, free summer schools, free backpack, free school supplies, free, free, ..............

Are you arguing that the kids’ test scores would be better if, instead, they were hungry and had huge classes and no school supplies and no preschool? Where is your evidence that this is all for naught?

I am fine with what MCPS does. That’s how MCPS treat the symptoms. I don't have a magic pill to treat the root cause and I don't think anyone in the US knows how to meet the challenges. Rich people have thrown millions dollars to inner cities but not a single program is able to claim they made any difference.

[Anonymous]

Anything you do in the schools is just treating a symptom not the disease. If you don’t fix the challenges facing the families it is just like bailing out a boat with a hole in the bottom.

I disagree. Some cities and counties are working with the schools to address poverty and raising school scores. Programs that provide even modest relief from economic insecurity produce solid results.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/us/2018/09/26/list-studies-test-scores-poverty-school-income/

Here is another article on several high poverty schools outperforming wealthier areas.

https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2017-06-20/where-poor-students-are-top-of-the-class

I thought it was interesting how the principal made such a difference. One of the problems in MCPS is that principals are chosen because they are dedicated or passionate about their school. They are chosen because they support the central office. If the most critical position in the battle against the achievement gap is the one filled with dud and people that just kiss up to the central office then that is yet another problem that MCPS could fix if it wanted to fix it.

"“I have a very high level of expectations for all our principals,” she says. “In my opinion, principals are the most critical piece to academic outcomes in the schools. They are the ones who head, who direct, who organize, who oversee all aspects of operations in the school.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anything you do in the schools is just treating a symptom not the disease. If you don’t fix the challenges facing the families it is just like bailing out a boat with a hole in the bottom.

I don't know about your experience, but in my experience, treating the symptoms is often very helpful. For example: my neighbor had shingles, it was very painful, she got gabapentin, she felt better. Should the doctor have said, "No, I'm not going to prescribe anything, because it's just treating a symptom not the disease"? Of course not.

MCPS has been treating the symptoms: smaller classes, free pre-K, free tutoring, free meals, free summer schools, free backpack, free school supplies, free, free, ..............

Yes, and it's working! Hooray!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anything you do in the schools is just treating a symptom not the disease. If you don’t fix the challenges facing the families it is just like bailing out a boat with a hole in the bottom.

I don't know about your experience, but in my experience, treating the symptoms is often very helpful. For example: my neighbor had shingles, it was very painful, she got gabapentin, she felt better. Should the doctor have said, "No, I'm not going to prescribe anything, because it's just treating a symptom not the disease"? Of course not.

If your neighbor had gotten their varicella vaccine or their shingles vaccine there would be no need for the visit or the gabapentin. See how that works.

There was no varicella vaccine when my neighbor got chicken pix, and she did get the shingles vaccine. Also, do you think that the doctor should have said, "I'm not going to treat your symptoms because you should have gotten a vaccine"?