What does the term “good schools” mean to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about this for the truth, I want a school filled with kids that will be successful. Not just some who want or wish to be successful.

Show me a school filled with rich white kids and I’ll show you a school filled with way above average success rates. Show me a school not that and I’ll show you average to below average success rates almost without exception. Life is a numbers game and one would be wise to play the odds.

Spare me your anecdotal examples to the contrary. Most elite levels of society are filled by very few archetypes from pretty predictable pedigrees. It is true success doesn’t always bring happiness but failure almost always brings misery.

A good school, for me, is a school without parents like this.

There is nothing more toxic to learning than the attitude that it's all a race, and you cannot win unless others lose.

Practically, I like a school with a strong and caring principal.

But really, I ignore the term "good schools" because it's primarily used either by real estate agents or naive parents to mean "white and/or Asian schools where I can feel safe my child will be guaranteed to do well, away from the negative influences of people who make less than $100k."

There is a lot of data out there that shows more diverse companies and companies with more diverse boards do better: take on less risk, have higher profits, etc. I work for one of the top four consulting firms and they are hell bent on diversity, and it's not just a brand thing. They want more women and people of color taking on leadership roles, they think it is vital to the future. So it's interesting that some people think the key to successful schools are to have only rich white kids.

And you know that the diversity we are looking for are the upper middle class tokens who still attend the mostly rich white schools and over time have the exact same elitist attitude and work ethic. Model still applies. It's why affirmative action is a sham too. The Obama kids aren't adding diversity.

Right, but that same model means that UMC kids will do fine, whether they are in a lower rated DCC school or a higher rated school in the eastern part of the county. My UMC kid in SS in a lower rated school that I think is "good" but you probably think is "bad" will benefit from the system just as your kid a different school will - highly educated parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles etc., involved parents invested in their education, a peer group in the school (yes, many FARMS and ESOL kids, but a definite critical mass of college bound kids), extracurricular activities, tutors if necessary, fully funded college because we save and have incomes that will let us pay, paying for braces and dental care to give them straight white teeth, help with internships etc. When they do graduate they will not have crushing debt so they won't be forced to move into a low COLA and take any job. They'll know how to dress and act for the interview and how to polish a resume and what fork to use, etc. They can live in a city and develop their network further and go to grad school if they wish.

All of these things will perpetuate the system because lower income kids don't have a lot of this going for them. It's silly to think a high rated school with all wealthy white kids gives this cohort an advantage. Now if you are talking about Obama level connections they can make, then yes, get thee to the top privates and boarding schools in the country so they can make those friends. But that is not happening for your child in a GS 10 public in Montgomery County, sorry.