Are option schools in Arlington reducing or exacerbating FARMS distribution

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a really good study, with accurate numbers, on how options programs affect distribution of kids, with demographics, would be useful. But, until we have good data, can't be done.

I am a parent who pulled her kid out of a neighborhood school (in 3rd grade) with over 55% lower income kids in the school. I fully admit it. While I have nothing personally against the families and their kids from low income housing, but I am well aware of the conclusions reached by decades of research into how all kids in poorer schools miss out, both in the classroom and in extra curriculars (both parents in education/research). My observations here in Arlington validated my concerns.

This whole issue is based on game theory. If enough UMC parents like myself banded together to send our kids to the neighborhood school, the numbers may shift enough to meet our comfort level. But everyone has to do it. In fact, parents in my neighborhood school started to do that a while ago, and scores and parental satisfaction with the school started to increase. But, other forces changed things at the school and everything went down again. Reading this, you may be able to figure out which school I am talking about.

I think it is important to remember that even within these so called "diverse" schools (as APS likes to call it), there is a lot of segregation within the classrooms. Many schools group the gifted kids into one classroom (and guess who is more likely to test into the gifted program). The ELL students tend to be in one classroom. This is done to make it easier on the school, but the result is very segregated classrooms. I have seen it over and over and my average non-gifted kid was often the only UMC kid in his class. He had no ranges of capabilities in his classroom and expectations were very low. I guess the lesson there, to all you UMC families who are going to send your kid to a low performing neighborhood school - get your kid into the gifted program and while they will have fewer after school activities and less PTA support, they will not have the teacher always teaching to the bottom. That is the advice I have heard many parents say in my neighborhood. I didn't follow it. He is now in a classroom with kids at varying levels and thriving.

So how can a school like Campbell be explained? They have the demographics of Barcroft/Barrett, but much higher test scores for every demographic group. What's the difference?

It’s a self-selecting group. Parents who send their kids to option schools pretty much by definition are engaged with their kids’ education and have lower barriers to access.

DP- that should have been obvious. How are posters this ignorant?

I think a lot of people are willfully ignorant when it comes to things that don't support their personal agenda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a really good study, with accurate numbers, on how options programs affect distribution of kids, with demographics, would be useful. But, until we have good data, can't be done.

I am a parent who pulled her kid out of a neighborhood school (in 3rd grade) with over 55% lower income kids in the school. I fully admit it. While I have nothing personally against the families and their kids from low income housing, but I am well aware of the conclusions reached by decades of research into how all kids in poorer schools miss out, both in the classroom and in extra curriculars (both parents in education/research). My observations here in Arlington validated my concerns.

This whole issue is based on game theory. If enough UMC parents like myself banded together to send our kids to the neighborhood school, the numbers may shift enough to meet our comfort level. But everyone has to do it. In fact, parents in my neighborhood school started to do that a while ago, and scores and parental satisfaction with the school started to increase. But, other forces changed things at the school and everything went down again. Reading this, you may be able to figure out which school I am talking about.

I think it is important to remember that even within these so called "diverse" schools (as APS likes to call it), there is a lot of segregation within the classrooms. Many schools group the gifted kids into one classroom (and guess who is more likely to test into the gifted program). The ELL students tend to be in one classroom. This is done to make it easier on the school, but the result is very segregated classrooms. I have seen it over and over and my average non-gifted kid was often the only UMC kid in his class. He had no ranges of capabilities in his classroom and expectations were very low. I guess the lesson there, to all you UMC families who are going to send your kid to a low performing neighborhood school - get your kid into the gifted program and while they will have fewer after school activities and less PTA support, they will not have the teacher always teaching to the bottom. That is the advice I have heard many parents say in my neighborhood. I didn't follow it. He is now in a classroom with kids at varying levels and thriving.

So how can a school like Campbell be explained? They have the demographics of Barcroft/Barrett, but much higher test scores for every demographic group. What's the difference?

It’s a self-selecting group. Parents who send their kids to option schools pretty much by definition are engaged with their kids’ education and have lower barriers to access.

DP- that should have been obvious. How are posters this ignorant?

I think a lot of people are willfully ignorant when it comes to things that don't support their personal agenda.

You mean like claiming it's only motivated parents who wind up at Campbell and that's why the school is succeeding where others are not? No. You're saying that the kids who are disadvantaged can't possibly be doing better than they are because of something happening at the school, which is essentially saying that the kids at high poverty neighborhood schools all have limited potential because their parents aren't motivated enough to get them out, and that school doesn't matter, only home life does. If that's what you believe, why would it matter whether all the poor kids were corralled into Randolph and Drew?

I think you don't actaually know anything about kids who are living in poverty, kids who are ELL, or their families of origin.

ATS, you could maybe make the claim that it's self-selecting motivated families since it's far from disadvantaged neighborhoods and the families who apply have to be willing to accept the inconvenience of a less proximate school. You can't say the same for Campbell. It's the closer school for the lower income kids in that neighborhood. If anything, parents select it for VPI because it's closer to their home or because they know a friend or cousin who is there or who went there, so it's a known quantity. It's not because they think or believe it has more opportunities to offer than Carlin Springs and they are making some sort of informed decision. The MC families are doing that, but the disadvantaged kids get to Campbell through a lottery which only requires ticking one additional box on the VPI form. That's not a large hurdle to overcome. The difference in outcomes can't be explained away so easily. If it's a matter of self-selecting families, then let's abolish neighborhood schools in high poverty areas and make all MC families self-select to schools that also have set-asides for a large cohort of local disadvantaged kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a really good study, with accurate numbers, on how options programs affect distribution of kids, with demographics, would be useful. But, until we have good data, can't be done.

I am a parent who pulled her kid out of a neighborhood school (in 3rd grade) with over 55% lower income kids in the school. I fully admit it. While I have nothing personally against the families and their kids from low income housing, but I am well aware of the conclusions reached by decades of research into how all kids in poorer schools miss out, both in the classroom and in extra curriculars (both parents in education/research). My observations here in Arlington validated my concerns.

This whole issue is based on game theory. If enough UMC parents like myself banded together to send our kids to the neighborhood school, the numbers may shift enough to meet our comfort level. But everyone has to do it. In fact, parents in my neighborhood school started to do that a while ago, and scores and parental satisfaction with the school started to increase. But, other forces changed things at the school and everything went down again. Reading this, you may be able to figure out which school I am talking about.

I think it is important to remember that even within these so called "diverse" schools (as APS likes to call it), there is a lot of segregation within the classrooms. Many schools group the gifted kids into one classroom (and guess who is more likely to test into the gifted program). The ELL students tend to be in one classroom. This is done to make it easier on the school, but the result is very segregated classrooms. I have seen it over and over and my average non-gifted kid was often the only UMC kid in his class. He had no ranges of capabilities in his classroom and expectations were very low. I guess the lesson there, to all you UMC families who are going to send your kid to a low performing neighborhood school - get your kid into the gifted program and while they will have fewer after school activities and less PTA support, they will not have the teacher always teaching to the bottom. That is the advice I have heard many parents say in my neighborhood. I didn't follow it. He is now in a classroom with kids at varying levels and thriving.

So how can a school like Campbell be explained? They have the demographics of Barcroft/Barrett, but much higher test scores for every demographic group. What's the difference?

It’s a self-selecting group. Parents who send their kids to option schools pretty much by definition are engaged with their kids’ education and have lower barriers to access.

DP- that should have been obvious. How are posters this ignorant?

I think a lot of people are willfully ignorant when it comes to things that don't support their personal agenda.

You mean like claiming it's only motivated parents who wind up at Campbell and that's why the school is succeeding where others are not? No. You're saying that the kids who are disadvantaged can't possibly be doing better than they are because of something happening at the school, which is essentially saying that the kids at high poverty neighborhood schools all have limited potential because their parents aren't motivated enough to get them out, and that school doesn't matter, only home life does. If that's what you believe, why would it matter whether all the poor kids were corralled into Randolph and Drew?

I think you don't actaually know anything about kids who are living in poverty, kids who are ELL, or their families of origin.

ATS, you could maybe make the claim that it's self-selecting motivated families since it's far from disadvantaged neighborhoods and the families who apply have to be willing to accept the inconvenience of a less proximate school. You can't say the same for Campbell. It's the closer school for the lower income kids in that neighborhood. If anything, parents select it for VPI because it's closer to their home or because they know a friend or cousin who is there or who went there, so it's a known quantity. It's not because they think or believe it has more opportunities to offer than Carlin Springs and they are making some sort of informed decision. The MC families are doing that, but the disadvantaged kids get to Campbell through a lottery which only requires ticking one additional box on the VPI form. That's not a large hurdle to overcome. The difference in outcomes can't be explained away so easily. If it's a matter of self-selecting families, then let's abolish neighborhood schools in high poverty areas and make all MC families self-select to schools that also have set-asides for a large cohort of local disadvantaged kids.

So much word salad. So much drivel. Of course it’s about a self selecting cohort. Please join the rest of us back down here on earth.
I don’t disagree with your last idea. Dissolving neighborhood schools and dispersing poverty would have the greatest benefit for test scores. It’s just not a very feesible or kind thing to do to our least advantaged communities.
Also Campbell is hovering around 50’% low income. It’s not over 70.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a really good study, with accurate numbers, on how options programs affect distribution of kids, with demographics, would be useful. But, until we have good data, can't be done.

I am a parent who pulled her kid out of a neighborhood school (in 3rd grade) with over 55% lower income kids in the school. I fully admit it. While I have nothing personally against the families and their kids from low income housing, but I am well aware of the conclusions reached by decades of research into how all kids in poorer schools miss out, both in the classroom and in extra curriculars (both parents in education/research). My observations here in Arlington validated my concerns.

This whole issue is based on game theory. If enough UMC parents like myself banded together to send our kids to the neighborhood school, the numbers may shift enough to meet our comfort level. But everyone has to do it. In fact, parents in my neighborhood school started to do that a while ago, and scores and parental satisfaction with the school started to increase. But, other forces changed things at the school and everything went down again. Reading this, you may be able to figure out which school I am talking about.

I think it is important to remember that even within these so called "diverse" schools (as APS likes to call it), there is a lot of segregation within the classrooms. Many schools group the gifted kids into one classroom (and guess who is more likely to test into the gifted program). The ELL students tend to be in one classroom. This is done to make it easier on the school, but the result is very segregated classrooms. I have seen it over and over and my average non-gifted kid was often the only UMC kid in his class. He had no ranges of capabilities in his classroom and expectations were very low. I guess the lesson there, to all you UMC families who are going to send your kid to a low performing neighborhood school - get your kid into the gifted program and while they will have fewer after school activities and less PTA support, they will not have the teacher always teaching to the bottom. That is the advice I have heard many parents say in my neighborhood. I didn't follow it. He is now in a classroom with kids at varying levels and thriving.

So how can a school like Campbell be explained? They have the demographics of Barcroft/Barrett, but much higher test scores for every demographic group. What's the difference?

It’s a self-selecting group. Parents who send their kids to option schools pretty much by definition are engaged with their kids’ education and have lower barriers to access.

DP- that should have been obvious. How are posters this ignorant?

I think a lot of people are willfully ignorant when it comes to things that don't support their personal agenda.

You mean like claiming it's only motivated parents who wind up at Campbell and that's why the school is succeeding where others are not? No. You're saying that the kids who are disadvantaged can't possibly be doing better than they are because of something happening at the school, which is essentially saying that the kids at high poverty neighborhood schools all have limited potential because their parents aren't motivated enough to get them out, and that school doesn't matter, only home life does. If that's what you believe, why would it matter whether all the poor kids were corralled into Randolph and Drew?

I think you don't actaually know anything about kids who are living in poverty, kids who are ELL, or their families of origin.

ATS, you could maybe make the claim that it's self-selecting motivated families since it's far from disadvantaged neighborhoods and the families who apply have to be willing to accept the inconvenience of a less proximate school. You can't say the same for Campbell. It's the closer school for the lower income kids in that neighborhood. If anything, parents select it for VPI because it's closer to their home or because they know a friend or cousin who is there or who went there, so it's a known quantity. It's not because they think or believe it has more opportunities to offer than Carlin Springs and they are making some sort of informed decision. The MC families are doing that, but the disadvantaged kids get to Campbell through a lottery which only requires ticking one additional box on the VPI form. That's not a large hurdle to overcome. The difference in outcomes can't be explained away so easily. If it's a matter of self-selecting families, then let's abolish neighborhood schools in high poverty areas and make all MC families self-select to schools that also have set-asides for a large cohort of local disadvantaged kids.

So much word salad. So much drivel. Of course it’s about a self selecting cohort. Please join the rest of us back down here on earth.
I don’t disagree with your last idea. Dissolving neighborhood schools and dispersing poverty would have the greatest benefit for test scores. It’s just not a very feesible or kind thing to do to our least advantaged communities.
Also Campbell is hovering around 50’% low income. It’s not over 70.

It would put individual ED students into schools with higher average test scores, but that’s not the same thing as actually increasing their achievement. Tuckahoe has one of, if not the, lowest ED rates in APS, and there was a 30-point differential in SOL reading performance between ED students and the student body as a whole last year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a really good study, with accurate numbers, on how options programs affect distribution of kids, with demographics, would be useful. But, until we have good data, can't be done.

I am a parent who pulled her kid out of a neighborhood school (in 3rd grade) with over 55% lower income kids in the school. I fully admit it. While I have nothing personally against the families and their kids from low income housing, but I am well aware of the conclusions reached by decades of research into how all kids in poorer schools miss out, both in the classroom and in extra curriculars (both parents in education/research). My observations here in Arlington validated my concerns.

This whole issue is based on game theory. If enough UMC parents like myself banded together to send our kids to the neighborhood school, the numbers may shift enough to meet our comfort level. But everyone has to do it. In fact, parents in my neighborhood school started to do that a while ago, and scores and parental satisfaction with the school started to increase. But, other forces changed things at the school and everything went down again. Reading this, you may be able to figure out which school I am talking about.

I think it is important to remember that even within these so called "diverse" schools (as APS likes to call it), there is a lot of segregation within the classrooms. Many schools group the gifted kids into one classroom (and guess who is more likely to test into the gifted program). The ELL students tend to be in one classroom. This is done to make it easier on the school, but the result is very segregated classrooms. I have seen it over and over and my average non-gifted kid was often the only UMC kid in his class. He had no ranges of capabilities in his classroom and expectations were very low. I guess the lesson there, to all you UMC families who are going to send your kid to a low performing neighborhood school - get your kid into the gifted program and while they will have fewer after school activities and less PTA support, they will not have the teacher always teaching to the bottom. That is the advice I have heard many parents say in my neighborhood. I didn't follow it. He is now in a classroom with kids at varying levels and thriving.

So how can a school like Campbell be explained? They have the demographics of Barcroft/Barrett, but much higher test scores for every demographic group. What's the difference?

It’s a self-selecting group. Parents who send their kids to option schools pretty much by definition are engaged with their kids’ education and have lower barriers to access.

DP- that should have been obvious. How are posters this ignorant?

I think a lot of people are willfully ignorant when it comes to things that don't support their personal agenda.

You mean like claiming it's only motivated parents who wind up at Campbell and that's why the school is succeeding where others are not? No. You're saying that the kids who are disadvantaged can't possibly be doing better than they are because of something happening at the school, which is essentially saying that the kids at high poverty neighborhood schools all have limited potential because their parents aren't motivated enough to get them out, and that school doesn't matter, only home life does. If that's what you believe, why would it matter whether all the poor kids were corralled into Randolph and Drew?

I think you don't actaually know anything about kids who are living in poverty, kids who are ELL, or their families of origin.

ATS, you could maybe make the claim that it's self-selecting motivated families since it's far from disadvantaged neighborhoods and the families who apply have to be willing to accept the inconvenience of a less proximate school. You can't say the same for Campbell. It's the closer school for the lower income kids in that neighborhood. If anything, parents select it for VPI because it's closer to their home or because they know a friend or cousin who is there or who went there, so it's a known quantity. It's not because they think or believe it has more opportunities to offer than Carlin Springs and they are making some sort of informed decision. The MC families are doing that, but the disadvantaged kids get to Campbell through a lottery which only requires ticking one additional box on the VPI form. That's not a large hurdle to overcome. The difference in outcomes can't be explained away so easily. If it's a matter of self-selecting families, then let's abolish neighborhood schools in high poverty areas and make all MC families self-select to schools that also have set-asides for a large cohort of local disadvantaged kids.

So much word salad. So much drivel. Of course it’s about a self selecting cohort. Please join the rest of us back down here on earth.
I don’t disagree with your last idea. Dissolving neighborhood schools and dispersing poverty would have the greatest benefit for test scores. It’s just not a very feesible or kind thing to do to our least advantaged communities.
Also Campbell is hovering around 50’% low income. It’s not over 70.

It would put individual ED students into schools with higher average test scores, but that’s not the same thing as actually increasing their achievement. Tuckahoe has one of, if not the, lowest ED rates in APS, and there was a 30-point differential in SOL reading performance between ED students and the student body as a whole last year.

We're not talking about Tuckahoe. We're talking about an actually diverse school in Arlington that is posting test scores for "gap groups" that exceed statewide averages. We're comparing apples to apples. No school has yet erased the gap, but Campbell appears to be closing it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a really good study, with accurate numbers, on how options programs affect distribution of kids, with demographics, would be useful. But, until we have good data, can't be done.

I am a parent who pulled her kid out of a neighborhood school (in 3rd grade) with over 55% lower income kids in the school. I fully admit it. While I have nothing personally against the families and their kids from low income housing, but I am well aware of the conclusions reached by decades of research into how all kids in poorer schools miss out, both in the classroom and in extra curriculars (both parents in education/research). My observations here in Arlington validated my concerns.

This whole issue is based on game theory. If enough UMC parents like myself banded together to send our kids to the neighborhood school, the numbers may shift enough to meet our comfort level. But everyone has to do it. In fact, parents in my neighborhood school started to do that a while ago, and scores and parental satisfaction with the school started to increase. But, other forces changed things at the school and everything went down again. Reading this, you may be able to figure out which school I am talking about.

I think it is important to remember that even within these so called "diverse" schools (as APS likes to call it), there is a lot of segregation within the classrooms. Many schools group the gifted kids into one classroom (and guess who is more likely to test into the gifted program). The ELL students tend to be in one classroom. This is done to make it easier on the school, but the result is very segregated classrooms. I have seen it over and over and my average non-gifted kid was often the only UMC kid in his class. He had no ranges of capabilities in his classroom and expectations were very low. I guess the lesson there, to all you UMC families who are going to send your kid to a low performing neighborhood school - get your kid into the gifted program and while they will have fewer after school activities and less PTA support, they will not have the teacher always teaching to the bottom. That is the advice I have heard many parents say in my neighborhood. I didn't follow it. He is now in a classroom with kids at varying levels and thriving.

So how can a school like Campbell be explained? They have the demographics of Barcroft/Barrett, but much higher test scores for every demographic group. What's the difference?

It’s a self-selecting group. Parents who send their kids to option schools pretty much by definition are engaged with their kids’ education and have lower barriers to access.

DP- that should have been obvious. How are posters this ignorant?

I think a lot of people are willfully ignorant when it comes to things that don't support their personal agenda.

You mean like claiming it's only motivated parents who wind up at Campbell and that's why the school is succeeding where others are not? No. You're saying that the kids who are disadvantaged can't possibly be doing better than they are because of something happening at the school, which is essentially saying that the kids at high poverty neighborhood schools all have limited potential because their parents aren't motivated enough to get them out, and that school doesn't matter, only home life does. If that's what you believe, why would it matter whether all the poor kids were corralled into Randolph and Drew?

I think you don't actaually know anything about kids who are living in poverty, kids who are ELL, or their families of origin.

ATS, you could maybe make the claim that it's self-selecting motivated families since it's far from disadvantaged neighborhoods and the families who apply have to be willing to accept the inconvenience of a less proximate school. You can't say the same for Campbell. It's the closer school for the lower income kids in that neighborhood. If anything, parents select it for VPI because it's closer to their home or because they know a friend or cousin who is there or who went there, so it's a known quantity. It's not because they think or believe it has more opportunities to offer than Carlin Springs and they are making some sort of informed decision. The MC families are doing that, but the disadvantaged kids get to Campbell through a lottery which only requires ticking one additional box on the VPI form. That's not a large hurdle to overcome. The difference in outcomes can't be explained away so easily. If it's a matter of self-selecting families, then let's abolish neighborhood schools in high poverty areas and make all MC families self-select to schools that also have set-asides for a large cohort of local disadvantaged kids.

So much word salad. So much drivel. Of course it’s about a self selecting cohort. Please join the rest of us back down here on earth.
I don’t disagree with your last idea. Dissolving neighborhood schools and dispersing poverty would have the greatest benefit for test scores. It’s just not a very feesible or kind thing to do to our least advantaged communities.
Also Campbell is hovering around 50’% low income. It’s not over 70.

It would put individual ED students into schools with higher average test scores, but that’s not the same thing as actually increasing their achievement. Tuckahoe has one of, if not the, lowest ED rates in APS, and there was a 30-point differential in SOL reading performance between ED students and the student body as a whole last year.

We're not talking about Tuckahoe. We're talking about an actually diverse school in Arlington that is posting test scores for "gap groups" that exceed statewide averages. We're comparing apples to apples. No school has yet erased the gap, but Campbell appears to be closing it.

Actually, I was responding to a comment that "dissolving neighborhood schools and dispersing poverty would have the greatest benefit for test scores." Simply mixing in some ED students with a bunch of affluent students on its own is not a magic cure for the achievement gap because there are other factors in play that need to be addressed as well. If you want to look at Campbell specifically, though, there was still a 14-point gap in reading pass rates between the student body as a whole (73%) and ED students (59%, lower than the state average of 66%). Moreover, from the available data you can calculate the pass rate for non-ED students at Campbell, which was 90% as compared to 59% for ED students, a 41-point difference. That doesn't sound to me like a school that's figured out how to close the achievement gap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a really good study, with accurate numbers, on how options programs affect distribution of kids, with demographics, would be useful. But, until we have good data, can't be done.

I am a parent who pulled her kid out of a neighborhood school (in 3rd grade) with over 55% lower income kids in the school. I fully admit it. While I have nothing personally against the families and their kids from low income housing, but I am well aware of the conclusions reached by decades of research into how all kids in poorer schools miss out, both in the classroom and in extra curriculars (both parents in education/research). My observations here in Arlington validated my concerns.

This whole issue is based on game theory. If enough UMC parents like myself banded together to send our kids to the neighborhood school, the numbers may shift enough to meet our comfort level. But everyone has to do it. In fact, parents in my neighborhood school started to do that a while ago, and scores and parental satisfaction with the school started to increase. But, other forces changed things at the school and everything went down again. Reading this, you may be able to figure out which school I am talking about.

I think it is important to remember that even within these so called "diverse" schools (as APS likes to call it), there is a lot of segregation within the classrooms. Many schools group the gifted kids into one classroom (and guess who is more likely to test into the gifted program). The ELL students tend to be in one classroom. This is done to make it easier on the school, but the result is very segregated classrooms. I have seen it over and over and my average non-gifted kid was often the only UMC kid in his class. He had no ranges of capabilities in his classroom and expectations were very low. I guess the lesson there, to all you UMC families who are going to send your kid to a low performing neighborhood school - get your kid into the gifted program and while they will have fewer after school activities and less PTA support, they will not have the teacher always teaching to the bottom. That is the advice I have heard many parents say in my neighborhood. I didn't follow it. He is now in a classroom with kids at varying levels and thriving.

So how can a school like Campbell be explained? They have the demographics of Barcroft/Barrett, but much higher test scores for every demographic group. What's the difference?

It’s a self-selecting group. Parents who send their kids to option schools pretty much by definition are engaged with their kids’ education and have lower barriers to access.

DP- that should have been obvious. How are posters this ignorant?

I think a lot of people are willfully ignorant when it comes to things that don't support their personal agenda.

You mean like claiming it's only motivated parents who wind up at Campbell and that's why the school is succeeding where others are not? No. You're saying that the kids who are disadvantaged can't possibly be doing better than they are because of something happening at the school, which is essentially saying that the kids at high poverty neighborhood schools all have limited potential because their parents aren't motivated enough to get them out, and that school doesn't matter, only home life does. If that's what you believe, why would it matter whether all the poor kids were corralled into Randolph and Drew?

I think you don't actaually know anything about kids who are living in poverty, kids who are ELL, or their families of origin.

ATS, you could maybe make the claim that it's self-selecting motivated families since it's far from disadvantaged neighborhoods and the families who apply have to be willing to accept the inconvenience of a less proximate school. You can't say the same for Campbell. It's the closer school for the lower income kids in that neighborhood. If anything, parents select it for VPI because it's closer to their home or because they know a friend or cousin who is there or who went there, so it's a known quantity. It's not because they think or believe it has more opportunities to offer than Carlin Springs and they are making some sort of informed decision. The MC families are doing that, but the disadvantaged kids get to Campbell through a lottery which only requires ticking one additional box on the VPI form. That's not a large hurdle to overcome. The difference in outcomes can't be explained away so easily. If it's a matter of self-selecting families, then let's abolish neighborhood schools in high poverty areas and make all MC families self-select to schools that also have set-asides for a large cohort of local disadvantaged kids.

So much word salad. So much drivel. Of course it’s about a self selecting cohort. Please join the rest of us back down here on earth.
I don’t disagree with your last idea. Dissolving neighborhood schools and dispersing poverty would have the greatest benefit for test scores. It’s just not a very feesible or kind thing to do to our least advantaged communities.
Also Campbell is hovering around 50’% low income. It’s not over 70.

I'd rather dissolve neighborhood schools and disperse wealth rather than poverty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do they intentionally increase their numbers with a blind lottery?

ATS' increased FRL% is due to increasing the # of VPI classes at the school. Those students now have the the option to stay through 5th grade. I don't know how many do - you need to find the student demographics by grade chart for that. But I doubt they all stay; and I suspect the FRL population is "bottom heavy" as in mostly they are in the preK classes. The option to stay after preschool is new, though; so maybe the #s per grade level are starting to work their way up?

They all stay. It's an exact match by grade level for the [b]Buber who were admitted as K students. I've explained it on here multiple times. Someone doesn't want to hear the truth.

For the number. Last year was the first year they had two VPI classes. They have had just one for many years, and VPI students always had preferred admission to K at all option schools that had VPI classrooms. The latest policy update just made it explicit that all option schools will have VPI classes.

Nope. They had 2 VPI classes in 2011-2012, and 2 VPI in 2012-2013. My daughter started K in 2011 at ATS. That year, they also added a 4th K class (as they did in 2012 as well.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dang! Barcroft has almost as many transfers as it does K-5 students. They need to move the option there.

ding ding!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a really good study, with accurate numbers, on how options programs affect distribution of kids, with demographics, would be useful. But, until we have good data, can't be done.

I am a parent who pulled her kid out of a neighborhood school (in 3rd grade) with over 55% lower income kids in the school. I fully admit it. While I have nothing personally against the families and their kids from low income housing, but I am well aware of the conclusions reached by decades of research into how all kids in poorer schools miss out, both in the classroom and in extra curriculars (both parents in education/research). My observations here in Arlington validated my concerns.

This whole issue is based on game theory. If enough UMC parents like myself banded together to send our kids to the neighborhood school, the numbers may shift enough to meet our comfort level. But everyone has to do it. In fact, parents in my neighborhood school started to do that a while ago, and scores and parental satisfaction with the school started to increase. But, other forces changed things at the school and everything went down again. Reading this, you may be able to figure out which school I am talking about.

I think it is important to remember that even within these so called "diverse" schools (as APS likes to call it), there is a lot of segregation within the classrooms. Many schools group the gifted kids into one classroom (and guess who is more likely to test into the gifted program). The ELL students tend to be in one classroom. This is done to make it easier on the school, but the result is very segregated classrooms. I have seen it over and over and my average non-gifted kid was often the only UMC kid in his class. He had no ranges of capabilities in his classroom and expectations were very low. I guess the lesson there, to all you UMC families who are going to send your kid to a low performing neighborhood school - get your kid into the gifted program and while they will have fewer after school activities and less PTA support, they will not have the teacher always teaching to the bottom. That is the advice I have heard many parents say in my neighborhood. I didn't follow it. He is now in a classroom with kids at varying levels and thriving.

So how can a school like Campbell be explained? They have the demographics of Barcroft/Barrett, but much higher test scores for every demographic group. What's the difference?

It’s a self-selecting group. Parents who send their kids to option schools pretty much by definition are engaged with their kids’ education and have lower barriers to access.

DP- that should have been obvious. How are posters this ignorant?

I think a lot of people are willfully ignorant when it comes to things that don't support their personal agenda.

You mean like claiming it's only motivated parents who wind up at Campbell and that's why the school is succeeding where others are not? No. You're saying that the kids who are disadvantaged can't possibly be doing better than they are because of something happening at the school, which is essentially saying that the kids at high poverty neighborhood schools all have limited potential because their parents aren't motivated enough to get them out, and that school doesn't matter, only home life does. If that's what you believe, why would it matter whether all the poor kids were corralled into Randolph and Drew?

I think you don't actaually know anything about kids who are living in poverty, kids who are ELL, or their families of origin.

ATS, you could maybe make the claim that it's self-selecting motivated families since it's far from disadvantaged neighborhoods and the families who apply have to be willing to accept the inconvenience of a less proximate school. You can't say the same for Campbell. It's the closer school for the lower income kids in that neighborhood. If anything, parents select it for VPI because it's closer to their home or because they know a friend or cousin who is there or who went there, so it's a known quantity. It's not because they think or believe it has more opportunities to offer than Carlin Springs and they are making some sort of informed decision. The MC families are doing that, but the disadvantaged kids get to Campbell through a lottery which only requires ticking one additional box on the VPI form. That's not a large hurdle to overcome. The difference in outcomes can't be explained away so easily. If it's a matter of self-selecting families, then let's abolish neighborhood schools in high poverty areas and make all MC families self-select to schools that also have set-asides for a large cohort of local disadvantaged kids.

So much word salad. So much drivel. Of course it’s about a self selecting cohort. Please join the rest of us back down here on earth.
I don’t disagree with your last idea. Dissolving neighborhood schools and dispersing poverty would have the greatest benefit for test scores. It’s just not a very feesible or kind thing to do to our least advantaged communities.
Also Campbell is hovering around 50’% low income. It’s not over 70.

I'd rather dissolve neighborhood schools and disperse wealth rather than poverty.

And that is how you become Alexandria, with all the wealthy kids going to private schools, and much less PTA money for the public schools.

[Anonymous]

I'd rather dissolve neighborhood schools and disperse wealth rather than poverty.

And that is how you become Alexandria, with all the wealthy kids going to private schools, and much less PTA money for the public schools.

True story! It's already happening at my kids' school. UMC families (that are able to) are working on private school apps because they are tired of watching APS continue to fail at basic planning and analysis. While part of me thinks, oh good that will help capacity, on the whole this is not a positive trend because these are the same families that contribute a lot to the school in both time and finances. It's the making of Alexandria as you point out. Just give it time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'd rather dissolve neighborhood schools and disperse wealth rather than poverty.

And that is how you become Alexandria, with all the wealthy kids going to private schools, and much less PTA money for the public schools.

True story! It's already happening at my kids' school. UMC families (that are able to) are working on private school apps because they are tired of watching APS continue to fail at basic planning and analysis. While part of me thinks, oh good that will help capacity, on the whole this is not a positive trend because these are the same families that contribute a lot to the school in both time and finances. It's the making of Alexandria as you point out. Just give it time.

Yup. North Arlington is undergoing Bethesda-ization. South Arlington, Alexandria-zation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'd rather dissolve neighborhood schools and disperse wealth rather than poverty.

And that is how you become Alexandria, with all the wealthy kids going to private schools, and much less PTA money for the public schools.

True story! It's already happening at my kids' school. UMC families (that are able to) are working on private school apps because they are tired of watching APS continue to fail at basic planning and analysis. While part of me thinks, oh good that will help capacity, on the whole this is not a positive trend because these are the same families that contribute a lot to the school in both time and finances. It's the making of Alexandria as you point out. Just give it time.

Which school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, this has been well-known for a while. When people argue for expanding option programs, most of the time what they’re really arguing for is giving more ways for UMC whites in SA to get away from their less-affluent brown/black peers.

Nice try white hater,. Affluent people of all colors leave high farms because the farms drag down the entire school

It doesn't work that way. By transferring out, all of the benefits of parent involvement for all kids, declines.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a really good study, with accurate numbers, on how options programs affect distribution of kids, with demographics, would be useful. But, until we have good data, can't be done.

I am a parent who pulled her kid out of a neighborhood school (in 3rd grade) with over 55% lower income kids in the school. I fully admit it. While I have nothing personally against the families and their kids from low income housing, but I am well aware of the conclusions reached by decades of research into how all kids in poorer schools miss out, both in the classroom and in extra curriculars (both parents in education/research). My observations here in Arlington validated my concerns.

This whole issue is based on game theory. If enough UMC parents like myself banded together to send our kids to the neighborhood school, the numbers may shift enough to meet our comfort level. But everyone has to do it. In fact, parents in my neighborhood school started to do that a while ago, and scores and parental satisfaction with the school started to increase. But, other forces changed things at the school and everything went down again. Reading this, you may be able to figure out which school I am talking about.

I think it is important to remember that even within these so called "diverse" schools (as APS likes to call it), there is a lot of segregation within the classrooms. Many schools group the gifted kids into one classroom (and guess who is more likely to test into the gifted program). The ELL students tend to be in one classroom. This is done to make it easier on the school, but the result is very segregated classrooms. I have seen it over and over and my average non-gifted kid was often the only UMC kid in his class. He had no ranges of capabilities in his classroom and expectations were very low. I guess the lesson there, to all you UMC families who are going to send your kid to a low performing neighborhood school - get your kid into the gifted program and while they will have fewer after school activities and less PTA support, they will not have the teacher always teaching to the bottom. That is the advice I have heard many parents say in my neighborhood. I didn't follow it. He is now in a classroom with kids at varying levels and thriving.

So how can a school like Campbell be explained? They have the demographics of Barcroft/Barrett, but much higher test scores for every demographic group. What's the difference?

It’s a self-selecting group. Parents who send their kids to option schools pretty much by definition are engaged with their kids’ education and have lower barriers to access.

DP- that should have been obvious. How are posters this ignorant?

I think a lot of people are willfully ignorant when it comes to things that don't support their personal agenda.

You mean like claiming it's only motivated parents who wind up at Campbell and that's why the school is succeeding where others are not? No. You're saying that the kids who are disadvantaged can't possibly be doing better than they are because of something happening at the school, which is essentially saying that the kids at high poverty neighborhood schools all have limited potential because their parents aren't motivated enough to get them out, and that school doesn't matter, only home life does. If that's what you believe, why would it matter whether all the poor kids were corralled into Randolph and Drew?

I think you don't actaually know anything about kids who are living in poverty, kids who are ELL, or their families of origin.

ATS, you could maybe make the claim that it's self-selecting motivated families since it's far from disadvantaged neighborhoods and the families who apply have to be willing to accept the inconvenience of a less proximate school. You can't say the same for Campbell. It's the closer school for the lower income kids in that neighborhood. If anything, parents select it for VPI because it's closer to their home or because they know a friend or cousin who is there or who went there, so it's a known quantity. It's not because they think or believe it has more opportunities to offer than Carlin Springs and they are making some sort of informed decision. The MC families are doing that, but the disadvantaged kids get to Campbell through a lottery which only requires ticking one additional box on the VPI form. That's not a large hurdle to overcome. The difference in outcomes can't be explained away so easily. If it's a matter of self-selecting families, then let's abolish neighborhood schools in high poverty areas and make all MC families self-select to schools that also have set-asides for a large cohort of local disadvantaged kids.

So much word salad. So much drivel. Of course it’s about a self selecting cohort. Please join the rest of us back down here on earth.
I don’t disagree with your last idea. Dissolving neighborhood schools and dispersing poverty would have the greatest benefit for test scores. It’s just not a very feesible or kind thing to do to our least advantaged communities.
Also Campbell is hovering around 50’% low income. It’s not over 70.

It would put individual ED students into schools with higher average test scores, but that’s not the same thing as actually increasing their achievement. Tuckahoe has one of, if not the, lowest ED rates in APS, and there was a 30-point differential in SOL reading performance between ED students and the student body as a whole last year.

We're not talking about Tuckahoe. We're talking about an actually diverse school in Arlington that is posting test scores for "gap groups" that exceed statewide averages. We're comparing apples to apples. No school has yet erased the gap, but Campbell appears to be closing it.

Include ATS in closing the gap too.