Myth: low income students do better in schools with <25% FARMs rate.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
A Summary Overview of Moving to Opportunity: A Random Assignment Housing Mobility Study in Five U.S. Cities AbstractThe U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Moving to Opportunity (MTO) for Fair Housing program is a unique experimental research demonstration designed to answer the question of whether moving from a high-poverty neighborhood to a lower-poverty community improves the social and economic prospects of low-income families. Authorized by the U.S. Congress in 1992, MTO made use of rental assistance vouchers, in combination with intensive housing search and counseling services, to assist low-income families to move from some of America’s most distressed urban neighborhoods to lower-poverty communities. A total of 4,600 low-income families with children, the vast majority of them headed by African-American or Hispanic single mothers, were recruited from high-poverty public housing projects in five participating cities between 1994 and 1998. These families were assigned by lottery to one of three research groups: A Traditional Voucher group, a Low Poverty Voucher group and a control group. Because of the random assignment design, the MTO study generates comparable groups of adults and children living in different types of neighborhoods, so that a comparison of outcomes across research groups can uncover the potential effects of neighborhood characteristics across a range of family and children’s outcomes. Among the households assigned to the Low Poverty Voucher group, 47 percent used a MTO voucher to relocate to a low-poverty neighborhood, while 62 percent of those assigned to the Traditional Voucher group relocated through MTO. A follow-up study carried out 4 to 7 years after random assignment found that: ?MTO improved neighborhood outcomes. Assignment to either of the MTO mobility groups led participating adults to feel safer and more satisfied with their housing and neighborhoods. ?MTO had no effect on the labor market outcomes or social program participation of adults, but improved adults’ mental health as well as several important aspects of physical health.?MTO improved outcomes for female youth, particularly their mental health, but on balance had deleterious effects on male youth risky behavior. ?MTO had no detectable effects on the math and reading achievement of children. Seems like a good program, even if it didn't increase scores on standardized tests. https://www.nber.org/mtopublic/MTO%20Overview%20Summary.pdf |
Anonymous
You really aren’t very familiar with our social welfare system. Or about the fact that we import hundreds of thousands of poor people each year. This has something to do with the number of poor people in this country. |
Anonymous
+1 No one wants to discuss the big elephant in the room. It is not the school's responsibility that people choose to breed children into the world that they can not afford to raise period! If we are not going to discuss the larger societal problem of poverty, then injecting poor students into wealthy schools is pointless. We are not discussing family planning, birth control, parental courses, parental counseling, etc. before these kids are even born. The American society refuses to address poverty and now schools have to take on the impossible task of playing the role of a foster parent to kids who should not have been born in the first place from individuals who have no business breeding children. My prediction is that many wealthy and UMC families will run to private schools. Public schools will become flooded with FARMS, have limited resources, and have a ton of academic obstacles all because individuals refuse to utilize birth control. This is a birth control issue and not a school issue. Why are schools being blame for parent's lack of personal responsibility? Why didn't these folks have access to birth control, financial planning courses, or parental classes before they decided to bring a child into the world? We need to start teaching family planning, life skill courses, and financial planning starting in high school so that folks will learn from an early age that is not okay to breed children into poverty. Access to free birth control will decrease so many issues. |
Anonymous
Let focus on the students who are in MCPS or will attend MCPS. Most of the growth in MCPS are from poor Hispanic students, and many of them are the unaccompanied minors. In another word, the increased poverty is imported. As long as MC remains a sanctuary city, more and more illegal immegrants, adults and young men, will keep showing up in our classroom. When the resources are limited, imported poor will make the poor who are born here with less and less help. |
Anonymous
+1 mental health of parents and children have long term positive results. |
Anonymous
It's not. Also, most of the poor Hispanic students in Montgomery County were born here. |
Anonymous
| A lot of this could be fixed by county daycares. If you get these kids learning and speaking english earlier, it would be different. There are a LOT of toddlers plopped in front of TV with absent grandparents/aunts all day, every day. They've never been read to. They're not literate in Spanish, let alone english. |
Anonymous
Most toddlers aren't literate. |
Anonymous
PP means the caregivers aren't literate. |
Anonymous
No educational benefits, no effect on the labor market outcomes, and a deleterious effect on male risky behavior. The gains were all small as well. In reality, nothing much changed, even after great expense. This thread started talking about the achievement gap, and a large intervention plan showed "no detectable effects on the math and reading achievement of children." The just did a huge study on pre-kindergarten in Tennessee where they randomly assigned some kids to pre-k. The kids actually ended up doing worse in later grades after a small boost in K and 1st. https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/education/2015/09/28/study-some-pre-k-programs-effective-but-not-over-time/72965950/ Honestly, if these issues were as easy to fix as posters here seem to believe, we would have already fixed them. |
Anonymous
No. No increase in standardized test scores. That's not the same thing. Nobody said the issues are easy to fix. |
Anonymous
THey already offer low/no-cost preschool to kids who are low-income. Some students go, some don't. Also, there have been studies that show pretty definitively that any benefit seen from programs like Head Start, are pretty much gone by MS. |
Anonymous
Great, if test-score disparities don't signal educational disparities then we're done! Just claim that everyone is doing great, despite the differences in objective measures and call it a day. |
Anonymous
Disparities in test scores signal educational disparities. Test scores are not the only outcome measure for education. Both of these statements are true. |
Anonymous
No, they signal that one person knows the material better than another person. That can (and does) happen even when the education is similar between the two students. I do agree with the second statement. |