Immersion programs in MoCo

[Anonymous]

the "random" unfairness has a ripple effect on entire neighborhoods. It is really destructive to the Eastern county (downcounty) schools and neighborhoods. How would you feel if your neighbor randomly got into a neighborhood public school that was safe, had decent test scores, virtually no violence or poverty, while you didn't?

The kids who go to these programs are the kids who, if they just went to their local public, would be creating diversity (by being white), raising test scores (by coming from educated homes), lowering ESOL rates, and making life easier on principles and teachers for all the neighborhood.

To those who say they'd just move or go private otherwise I say- so why the f*ck am I paying for their kid to get a special program my kid can't have?

[Anonymous]

PP here- should add that what we have is a bait and switch, where families move to the neighborhood assuming/hoping they'll get in, and often get stuck there forced to go to underperforming schools when they don't get in on lottery. They assume they get in because all the older (middle class, white) kids in the neighborhood got in. But it's a chicken and egg thing, because the older kids who didn't get in moved out of dodge!

[Anonymous]

I'd argue that your problem isn't with the lottery per se, but the general low quality of down-county schools in general. And there, I couldn't agree with you more. We've done private, immersion and magnets to escape them.

So in that sense, I agree that the lure of immersion, and magnets at the MS and HS levels, are a bait and switch for the majority of families with talented kids who just don't luck out.

But how else would you allocate the immersion slots? About 15 years ago it used to be that a MoCo bureaucrat decided who got to go. Some dummy in the MoCo bureaucracy actually told our friends that their half-Asian kid couldn't do immersion because their diversity was needed at home. Our friends sued, MoCo lost, and now we have the lottery. At least the lottery ensures that a randomly diverse group of kids goes to the immersion programs, and a similar diverse group of kids stays in the local public (you're not correct that it's just white kids who leave).

So while I'm with you on the bad quality of downcounty schools, I'd root for you more if you lobbied hard on improving school quality. The lottery is just a side issue.

[Anonymous]

I agree with the last poster. The problem is the quality of the Downcounty schools. Immersion should be eliminated to spread resources around those schools- not just a way for a select few to escape the lower quality schools.

[Anonymous]

Does immersion actually cost more than the non-immersion classes in the school? Are the teachers paid more? Class sizes smaller? I'm not clear what resources you think should be spread around, particularly since the schools in the "red zone" are much more heavily funded per pupil than the schools in the "green zone".

[Anonymous]

Basically if you want a guaranteed good education you have to pay for it, either by going private or by moving to an expensive Bethesda house. It sucks, but it's a fact of life. There are a few "good deals" to be had downcounty, if you get into an immersion or magnet program, but there's no guarantee as you've found out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does immersion actually cost more than the non-immersion classes in the school? Are the teachers paid more? Class sizes smaller? I'm not clear what resources you think should be spread around, particularly since the schools in the "red zone" are much more heavily funded per pupil than the schools in the "green zone".

Would you mind defining red zone and green zone? I'm not familiar with those terms.

[Anonymous]

Human beings from stable homes who have english as a first language are a resource here.

To the PP who said the immersion families are not all white-- the public statistics beg to differ on that a bit. No, it is not 100% white, but the school that hosts the french program has 30% white kids in the non-immersion side and more than 70% white on the immersion side. It is a stark contrast.

[Anonymous]

Nevermind I found the definition of Red zone: schools whose populations are impacted by poverty, mobility and limited English proficiency. There is a map online showing red/green territory in MoCo if you google MCPS red zone.

[Anonymous]

PP again. Also, I found an interesting article from Education Week. According to the article, approximately $2,000 more per pupil is spent by MCPS on the red zone vs. the green zone.

http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/02/20/24zones.h27.html

[Anonymous]

The $2K differential per child is an interesting factoid, but it fails to make a parent feel better about the red zone schools, especially in light of not getting into an immersion program. "Oh, I hate my child's school but hey, at least they're spending an extra $2K per pupil there. Of course, we still can't escape..." Plus, now that the iniquities have been "addressed" it's time to move on and fix the middle schools! Well, what if I don't feel like the problem has been "solved" for my family, yet?

[Anonymous]

Is the quality of the elementary education actually inferior in the Downcounty schools? My child is about to start at Oakland Terrace. I am impressed by how small the K classes are (which I know is a result of the larged number of FARMS) even though the school is huge. And, of course, I know that people perceive the high schools to be less desirable for a variety of reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The $2K differential per child is an interesting factoid, but it fails to make a parent feel better about the red zone schools, especially in light of not getting into an immersion program. "Oh, I hate my child's school but hey, at least they're spending an extra $2K per pupil there. Of course, we still can't escape..." Plus, now that the iniquities have been "addressed" it's time to move on and fix the middle schools! Well, what if I don't feel like the problem has been "solved" for my family, yet?

I'm the PP with the edweek link. I'm also one of the posters whose child didn't get into immersion. I wasn't actually meaning to imply that $2K is a big deal, particularly since the article does not reveal how that money is spent. Also, it's an AVERAGE per pupil-meaning the slightly better off parents may well get $0 extra for their children. For all we know it's spent more on FARMS than instruction or curriculum development (although the article implies otherwise). I was only trying to research a claim by another poster that more money is spent per pupil in the "red" zone vs. the "green" zone. I am familiar with these "green" zone schools, having grown up in the "green zone", and the huge difference between the two zones is more about parent involvement and their very high expectations for curriculum and instruction. Sure, smaller K sizes are nice but when half the class doesn't speak English it's not enough to make me feel so great about losing out on immersion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The $2K differential per child is an interesting factoid, but it fails to make a parent feel better about the red zone schools, especially in light of not getting into an immersion program. "Oh, I hate my child's school but hey, at least they're spending an extra $2K per pupil there. Of course, we still can't escape..." Plus, now that the iniquities have been "addressed" it's time to move on and fix the middle schools! Well, what if I don't feel like the problem has been "solved" for my family, yet?

I'm the PP with the edweek link. I'm also one of the posters whose child didn't get into immersion. I wasn't actually meaning to imply that $2K is a big deal, particularly since the article does not reveal how that money is spent. Also, it's an AVERAGE per pupil-meaning the slightly better off parents may well get $0 extra for their children. For all we know it's spent more on FARMS than instruction or curriculum development (although the article implies otherwise). I was only trying to research a claim by another poster that more money is spent per pupil in the "red" zone vs. the "green" zone. I am familiar with these "green" zone schools, having grown up in the "green zone", and the huge difference between the two zones is more about parent involvement and their very high expectations for curriculum and instruction. Sure, smaller K sizes are nice but when half the class doesn't speak English it's not enough to make me feel so great about losing out on immersion.

I get what you're saying now, PP. I'm the PP who isn't exactly over-the-moon about the $2K average (thank you for making that distinction) differential. I could not agree more that the real difference(s) being parental involvement and high expectations. It's hard to put a price on that, but it's a h*ll of a lot more than $2K that's for sure!

[Anonymous]

Sorry, that should have read "I could not agree more ABOUT the real difference(s) being parental involvement and high expectations.