Equity model editorial

[Anonymous]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/local-opinions/the-growing-achievement-gap-in-montgomery-county-schools-must-be-addressed/2019/05/02/9cdf89ac-5bc5-11e9-842d-7d3ed7eb3957_story.html?utm_term=.9d60ade72868

Without disagreeing with the overall message that communities of color ib MCPS are in educational crisis, especially if poverty is added into the mix, can we talk about what this editorial and the vision outlined by Dr Smith means for students and communities not in crisis?

[Anonymous]

I am specifically interested in:

* Impact on Asian American and white communities
* Impact on school boundaries
* Impact on advanced class offerings, especially in the elementary school and middle school grades
* Impact on magnet programs
* Impact on other test-in programs
* Impact on funding for enrichment after-school activities
* Message sent to children about achieving above grade level

[Anonymous]

I love that Montgomery County is really looking into what works for struggling students. As the UMC parent of high-achieving kids, here are my (possibly selfish) thoughts:

1) I wish they didn't have so much testing. I get why they're doing it - data is the answer! it will tell us who we're failing and how - but it's too much. Two MAPs, three times a year. Two PARCCs, in multiple parts, yearly. Two district assessments, some of them in multiple parts, four times a year. Plus whatever classroom assessments they do just as part of regular teaching and learning. Plus CoGat some years. And science testing some years. When do they have time to actually teach anything? We came from far less diverse schools. One kid had two MAPs, twice a year, plus two PARCCs, once a year. The other had three MAPs (they also used the Language Usage piece, which MoCo does not use), twice a year, and nothing else. The testing is definitely disruptive, and when all you find out from it is that your kid is a high achiever, which you already knew, it hardly seems worth it. Surely there's a way to get baselines for all the kids and follow up more on the kids most at risk? Or would that just put them further behind because they'd spend more time testing and less time learning than the other kids?

2) "Equity does not require equal results and achievement. Equity requires equal access and opportunity so that success cannot be predicted by race or socioeconomic status." This will NEVER work unless the school is willing to offer underperforming students the types of extracurricular learning that UMC kids get. UMC kids are not increasing the achievement gap at school; they're increasing it through parentally provided enrichment. The schools can not solve this problem.

[Anonymous]

I think they are making this too much about race, especially considering the county is majority-minority and whites are only the second largest group at MCPS (latinos are #1).

The five groups they identify for special focus seem to comprise more than half of all students. At that point, why not just focus on all students?

It's like the free lunch program -- at schools where more than a certain percentage of teh student body is entitled to it, they realized it's easier to just give everyone free lunch at that school than deal with the hassle of charging/running a payment program for the minority of kids who don't qualify for it.

I think they should just focus on students who are lower SES, regardless of race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love that Montgomery County is really looking into what works for struggling students. As the UMC parent of high-achieving kids, here are my (possibly selfish) thoughts:

1) I wish they didn't have so much testing. I get why they're doing it - data is the answer! it will tell us who we're failing and how - but it's too much. Two MAPs, three times a year. Two PARCCs, in multiple parts, yearly. Two district assessments, some of them in multiple parts, four times a year. Plus whatever classroom assessments they do just as part of regular teaching and learning. Plus CoGat some years. And science testing some years. When do they have time to actually teach anything? We came from far less diverse schools. One kid had two MAPs, twice a year, plus two PARCCs, once a year. The other had three MAPs (they also used the Language Usage piece, which MoCo does not use), twice a year, and nothing else. The testing is definitely disruptive, and when all you find out from it is that your kid is a high achiever, which you already knew, it hardly seems worth it. Surely there's a way to get baselines for all the kids and follow up more on the kids most at risk? Or would that just put them further behind because they'd spend more time testing and less time learning than the other kids?

2) "Equity does not require equal results and achievement. Equity requires equal access and opportunity so that success cannot be predicted by race or socioeconomic status." This will NEVER work unless the school is willing to offer underperforming students the types of extracurricular learning that UMC kids get. UMC kids are not increasing the achievement gap at school; they're increasing it through parentally provided enrichment. The schools can not solve this problem.

Good point.
+ Cancel all tests, homework and classwork for all UMC students.
+ Expand free condom program to cover all UMC students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think they are making this too much about race, especially considering the county is majority-minority and whites are only the second largest group at MCPS (latinos are #1).

The five groups they identify for special focus seem to comprise more than half of all students. At that point, why not just focus on all students?

It's like the free lunch program -- at schools where more than a certain percentage of teh student body is entitled to it, they realized it's easier to just give everyone free lunch at that school than deal with the hassle of charging/running a payment program for the minority of kids who don't qualify for it.

I think they should just focus on students who are lower SES, regardless of race.

+1 in the other thread about Asian Americans and MS magnet, someone stated that people should stop making it about race, and I responded that I totally agree, but that it's MCPS that keeps bringing race into the picture.

If they want to be race blind in magnets, then why call out races for under achievers?

If they want to look at the individual rather than the group, then why make magnet admission about "peer cohort"?

[Anonymous]

All this is is a big paper on slicing and dicing who is proficient, above proficient and below proficient. Funny enough it holds “non farm, non-URM” as the control group. Why not hold the common core bar?

This just continues to show that mcps is putting zero time and resources - and decreasing amounts of resources, towards the top half of students.

This is going like Los Angeles. In 10 years all there will be is under performers, union protests, tax hikes, flight of white collar families and tax payers.

[Anonymous]

Why aren’t they putting N under each category? I can’t tell quantity or magnitude of the issue with their charts and categories.
It’s like they are purposely leaving them out. Makes me think this is a tiny pet project.

[Anonymous]

Simple solution is to redraw the boundary lines.

[Anonymous]

Wouldn’t want to be a teacher here.

Now you can be judged on how well your students are testing based on
Poor blacks
Poor Hispanics
Poor non black or non Hispanic
Black
Hispanic
Non poor, non hispanic, non black

Lovely. As if.

The whole Jack Smith OpEd seems to be setting the table for One Big Experiment. Never mind the other MCPS failed experiments (c2.0, test retakes, whole grading in HS, free meals, free Heathcare, free summer camp, free test prep, free counseling, free esol for years, no discipline or punish intent, etc. All of that didn’t help some kids test on grade level proficiency.

Can’t wait to see what’s next up Jack’s central office $2B budget sleeve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think they are making this too much about race, especially considering the county is majority-minority and whites are only the second largest group at MCPS (latinos are #1).

The five groups they identify for special focus seem to comprise more than half of all students. At that point, why not just focus on all students?

It's like the free lunch program -- at schools where more than a certain percentage of teh student body is entitled to it, they realized it's easier to just give everyone free lunch at that school than deal with the hassle of charging/running a payment program for the minority of kids who don't qualify for it.

I think they should just focus on students who are lower SES, regardless of race.

+1 in the other thread about Asian Americans and MS magnet, someone stated that people should stop making it about race, and I responded that I totally agree, but that it's MCPS that keeps bringing race into the picture.

If they want to be race blind in magnets, then why call out races for under achievers?

If they want to look at the individual rather than the group, then why make magnet admission about "peer cohort"?

If you truly understand the history of the United States, you know that race and SES are linked. Even if you did focus on SES and didn't mention race, you are still going to find Blacks and Hispanics overrepresented when it comes to poverty.

I find the desire to "take race out of it" to be....questionable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/local-opinions/the-growing-achievement-gap-in-montgomery-county-schools-must-be-addressed/2019/05/02/9cdf89ac-5bc5-11e9-842d-7d3ed7eb3957_story.html?utm_term=.9d60ade72868

Without disagreeing with the overall message that communities of color ib MCPS are in educational crisis, especially if poverty is added into the mix, can we talk about what this editorial and the vision outlined by Dr Smith means for students and communities not in crisis?

Why would I move here if I wasn’t poor or a “focus area” student?

There is nothing new in this tool, as Smith says. But what he intends to do is what will scare everyone away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn’t want to be a teacher here.

Now you can be judged on how well your students are testing based on
Poor blacks
Poor Hispanics
Poor non black or non Hispanic
Black
Hispanic
Non poor, non hispanic, non black

Lovely. As if.

The whole Jack Smith OpEd seems to be setting the table for One Big Experiment. Never mind the other MCPS failed experiments (c2.0, test retakes, whole grading in HS, free meals, free Heathcare, free summer camp, free test prep, free counseling, free esol for years, no discipline or punish intent, etc. All of that didn’t help some kids test on grade level proficiency.

Can’t wait to see what’s next up Jack’s central office $2B budget sleeve.

The man is a narcissistic maniac. He needs to get his pedophile friends out of MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:IThis will NEVER work unless the school is willing to offer underperforming students the types of extracurricular learning that UMC kids get. UMC kids are not increasing the achievement gap at school; they're increasing it through parentally provided enrichment. The schools can not solve this problem.

You make it sound it's such a bad thing that some kids are learning more outside of the school. Doesn't MCPS benefit from their high performance without providing the resource? There are clear grade level requirement, the "underperforming" is under-grade level. It has nothing to do with the high performers. MCPS would not talk about achievement gap if all students are at least on-grade and can graduate high-school. You don't need extracurricular learning for on-grade level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/local-opinions/the-growing-achievement-gap-in-montgomery-county-schools-must-be-addressed/2019/05/02/9cdf89ac-5bc5-11e9-842d-7d3ed7eb3957_story.html?utm_term=.9d60ade72868

Without disagreeing with the overall message that communities of color ib MCPS are in educational crisis, especially if poverty is added into the mix, can we talk about what this editorial and the vision outlined by Dr Smith means for students and communities not in crisis?

Why would I move here if I wasn’t poor or a “focus area” student?

There is nothing new in this tool, as Smith says. But what he intends to do is what will scare everyone away.

OP here - yes, I am asking myself that same question.

The county needs to start doing something to retain families that seek opportunities to give their children the education competitive on the world level, not on grade level.