Disadvantaged children can hurt achievement of others in their classrooms

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why on earth is it parents responsibility to come up with solutions to educating the poor and disadvantaged in DC. Let our well-informed, public officials with access to experts and consultants and law firms come up with some ideas and we can support

Because so much of that expertise has been directed at upper NW for so long that the number of disadvantaged in DC only grows larger?

Because the concentration of quality is so small that the only idea floated by the "experts" is redistribution?

Because public officials can only hear the demands of the wealthy?

Because the DINKs who can afford to stay in the city won't be asking for quality education?

Because your tax dollars can pay for better education now or bloated welfare rolls and overcrowded prisons later?

I'm not sure I'd agree with the suggestion that expertise or quality is in NW - those schools have no special magic or extra DCPS resources - primarily the difference is that they have a lot of involved parents. As for listening to demands of the wealthy - I don't think they do, else we wouldn't have all the overcrowding in those schools, the unmet demands which push wealthier families to charters, privates or the suburbs, or these cockamamie boundary proposals being floated around. However I do agree with the remainder of your statements.

It's ironic, but I'm starting to see this "involved parents" motif as perhaps the weakest aspect of DCPS policy. I promise you that there are committed, involved, squeaky-wheel parents ALL OVER this city. If DCPS were more equitable in the attention and resources, maybe those parents wouldn't be overcrowding your school. I'd even say they need to invert the spending level for wards and send more EOTP and EOTR, where the population of school aged kids is higher, the needs are greater, and no one is threatening to move if they don't get exactly what they want.

If involved, wealthy parents are all that's needed, then you won't miss the funds.

You missed the PP's point. Ward 3 schools already get less money than the rest of the city.

Also I challenge your notion that parents all over the city equally involved. There are definitely many involved families in gentrifying neighborhoods, and I am sure many involved families in individual schools but just look at the focus group participation by ward. Generational poverty is a problem. Those are the kids that need the most help and whose parents do not have the knowledge re how to help. I do not doubt their love for their children, but if they were as involved as many other parents throughout the city then dcps would not be in the state it is in.

[Anonymous]

It's amazing to me that the myth of "more money is spent on ward 3" is so resilient, when it's never been even remotely true. Disadvantaged kids get more money allocated to them than any other student.

Part problem with high-disadvantaged schools is the WAY the money is being spent on education. But I don't blame DCPS for it, really -- those kids need even MORE money spent on them. Their curriculum needs to be different, too. It's a huge problem that must be addressed on the federal level, to increase spending on these kids throughout the country.

The myth that Ward 3 kids get more money must also be part of the problem -- there's some kind of mental block that is preventing some people from seeing the truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Actually it would probably be beneficial if parents had to show proof of citizenship or paid income taxes in order to enroll kids, but they don't. My friend teaches in a school that is almost a complete drain on the system because all the kids are non-citizens.

How do you and your teacher friend know that "all" of the kids are non-citizens?

exactly...is it because of their looks? their surnames?

Education is a public good, it is good for everyone that our population is educated regardless of citizenship. I see a value in ensuring that families are going to school in the correct district (where they live) but none In withholding educational services due to either citizenship or homelessness. None of that is the fault of the child and none of us will be better off if we miss an opportunity to educate a child.

We are definitely better off educating all children the best we can, regardless of their background or ability but one also has to recognize that not all children have the same barriers and hurdles to overcome.

The problem is that many schools switch to a mode of teaching to the level of the lowest common denominator based on language, culture or other barriers, and it ends up withholding many students an appropriate education through no fault of their own, but instead because of the limitations of the other students.

This is political - if this basic reality were acknowledged and students were actually separated out into more appropriate, targeted and effective tracks based on ability versus limitations like ESL there would be accusations of racism and everything else. People don't like dealing with hard reality and instead want to hang on to a more rosy-tinted (but deeply misguided) view of all kids being equal.

So instead schools will just continue to teach to the lowest common denominator and underserve all equally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's amazing to me that the myth of "more money is spent on ward 3" is so resilient, when it's never been even remotely true. Disadvantaged kids get more money allocated to them than any other student.

Part problem with high-disadvantaged schools is the WAY the money is being spent on education. But I don't blame DCPS for it, really -- those kids need even MORE money spent on them. Their curriculum needs to be different, too. It's a huge problem that must be addressed on the federal level, to increase spending on these kids throughout the country.

The myth that Ward 3 kids get more money must also be part of the problem -- there's some kind of mental block that is preventing some people from seeing the truth.

Just throwing money at the problem won't solve it. You touched on something - the WAY kids are taught. Different approaches are needed with disadvantaged kids - and that may include teaching them many of the basic life skills and social skills that the rest of us take for granted. There's a lot of bad parenting and absentee parenting going on. Many disadvantaged households don't have a concept of what "normal" is to the rest of us. It needs to be taught and learned - and, the earlier in the child's life, the better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Actually it would probably be beneficial if parents had to show proof of citizenship or paid income taxes in order to enroll kids, but they don't. My friend teaches in a school that is almost a complete drain on the system because all the kids are non-citizens.

How do you and your teacher friend know that "all" of the kids are non-citizens?

exactly...is it because of their looks? their surnames?

Education is a public good, it is good for everyone that our population is educated regardless of citizenship. I see a value in ensuring that families are going to school in the correct district (where they live) but none In withholding educational services due to either citizenship or homelessness. None of that is the fault of the child and none of us will be better off if we miss an opportunity to educate a child.

We are definitely better off educating all children the best we can, regardless of their background or ability but one also has to recognize that not all children have the same barriers and hurdles to overcome.

The problem is that many schools switch to a mode of teaching to the level of the lowest common denominator based on language, culture or other barriers, and it ends up withholding many students an appropriate education through no fault of their own, but instead because of the limitations of the other students.

This is political - if this basic reality were acknowledged and students were actually separated out into more appropriate, targeted and effective tracks based on ability versus limitations like ESL there would be accusations of racism and everything else. People don't like dealing with hard reality and instead want to hang on to a more rosy-tinted (but deeply misguided) view of all kids being equal.

So instead schools will just continue to teach to the lowest common denominator and underserve all equally.

That is all good, but I was responding to a PP that said a group of kids were nothing but a drain on the system because they are illegal immigrants (or the children of). That statement was so offensive it was stunning.

[Anonymous]

The fact that people come here illegally and have children is also offensive. Yes, they come here to work and make a better life for themselves (and generally are productive and do contribute to the economy).

But that said, the process has so many flaws in it that many illegal aliens are not paying taxes and instead are only making their employers rich without contributing to the rest of society, since many work off of the books or are otherwise being cheated by their employers. Many do not have proper benefits, such as health care and without means to pay, become a drain on the healthcare system and so on. Many illegal immigrants send much of their earnings back to their home country rather than spending it in the local economy. One can't just generalize across the board as the previous poster did, but likewise, to suggest there aren't issues or to overstate contribution of illegal immigrants is likewise intellectually dishonest.

I would much prefer that we have a reasonable, expedited work visa program. Many illegal immigrants are not even interested in staying in the US - they would prefer to be back home. But, when it's a matter of such difficulty and adversity in coming here in the first place, many decide to bring their family here rather than try to go back and forth.

(Also, let's not forget about the elephant on the table - of low-income urban youth who aren't working and the suggestion that there aren't any jobs - when the huge numbers of illegal immigrants working various jobs around the area clearly shows otherwise)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact that people come here illegally and have children is also offensive. Yes, they come here to work and make a better life for themselves (and generally are productive and do contribute to the economy).

But that said, the process has so many flaws in it that many illegal aliens are not paying taxes and instead are only making their employers rich without contributing to the rest of society, since many work off of the books or are otherwise being cheated by their employers. Many do not have proper benefits, such as health care and without means to pay, become a drain on the healthcare system and so on. Many illegal immigrants send much of their earnings back to their home country rather than spending it in the local economy. One can't just generalize across the board as the previous poster did, but likewise, to suggest there aren't issues or to overstate contribution of illegal immigrants is likewise intellectually dishonest.

I would much prefer that we have a reasonable, expedited work visa program. Many illegal immigrants are not even interested in staying in the US - they would prefer to be back home. But, when it's a matter of such difficulty and adversity in coming here in the first place, many decide to bring their family here rather than try to go back and forth.

(Also, let's not forget about the elephant on the table - of low-income urban youth who aren't working and the suggestion that there aren't any jobs - when the huge numbers of illegal immigrants working various jobs around the area clearly shows otherwise)

Nothing you have said justifies the idea that educating children of any immigration status is worthless. Every American except native Americans are immigrants from somewhere. You have the luck of your birth and you treat it like you earned that somehow. There are lots of complicated issues surrounding immigration but the idea we should leave any children without educational opportunities is nonsensical and mean spirited.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Children of "non citizens" are almost always citizens due to their birth in the United States. Maybe not your kind of citizen is what you mean.

If immigrants were dragging down this country we'd have been a third-world basket case for our entire existence.

If you think educating poor immigrants' children is a waste, just imagine what you get by not educating them.

Also, Plyler v. Doe means compulsory-age education regardless of background or citizenship.

+1

[Anonymous]

Also I challenge your notion that parents all over the city equally involved. There are definitely many involved families in gentrifying neighborhoods, and I am sure many involved families in individual schools but just look at the focus group participation by ward. Generational poverty is a problem. Those are the kids that need the most help and whose parents do not have the knowledge re how to help. I do not doubt their love for their children, but if they were as involved as many other parents throughout the city then dcps would not be in the state it is in.

Why do you challenge that? How are you so certain that ONLY wealthy or gentrifying parents are involved?

When I taught at a failing ES on Capitol Hill years ago (way before charters), I had parents showing up in my classroom, calling me on my lunch break, following me to my car, showing up early and staying late for parent teacher conferences, grilling me about poor grades, insisting on more homework--so freaking involved I wanted to set up boundaries to keep them at bay.

But they could do nothing about broken and boarded up windows, rooms with no heat or air condtioning, inoperable toilet facilities for an entire floor, no music, art or PE classes; anything you needed was rusty, broken or missing. Who could possibly learn there? The place looked like a prison or asylum inside and out. It was the most dilapidated and depressing environment I've ever been in, but I didn't have to stay there.

I'm sure it's not that bad anymore, but when I talk about resources, it's not just funds/pupil. It's getting whatever is needed to ensure education and enrichment, which may mean an entirely different set of priorites--specialized staff or training, before and after school programs, enrichment and community development, specialized curricula, the chance to organize around interests (science club, etc)--but these extras are also essential to the success of a school.

You say failing parents are the reason DCPS is failing, but I say it's the other way around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's why my BF in MoCo is pulling her kid out of MCPS. 90%+ of the school is FARMS and her son cannot take anything advanced thanks to 2.0. He now takes all courses with mostly english as a second language students and learns nothing.

But hey, we cannot hurt any parents' feelings - we must all live in our utopian fantasy in MoCo, all join hands in the classroom and sing kumbayaa, and if nobody learns anything, who cares. At least everyone gets equal instruction. Learning isnt important.

Tell her to move across the county if she doesn't want her child in classes with poor Hispanic children

Actually it would probably be beneficial if parents had to show proof of citizenship or paid income taxes in order to enroll kids, but they don't. My friend teaches in a school that is almost a complete drain on the system because all the kids are non-citizens.

How do you and your teacher friend know that "all" of the kids are non-citizens?

The kids will tell you and have to take days of school to see attorneys, sometimes will ask teachers to write letters.

[Anonymous]

Non-title one parents can complain their kids have less money, but keep in mind that the money they raise is for extras, enrichment. Whereas all the "extra" money that goes to title one schools is focusing on making up for the the things you have already provided your kids. It deals with the crisis of poverty, the fact that parents have never been able to provide high quality nutrition or child care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that people come here illegally and have children is also offensive. Yes, they come here to work and make a better life for themselves (and generally are productive and do contribute to the economy).

But that said, the process has so many flaws in it that many illegal aliens are not paying taxes and instead are only making their employers rich without contributing to the rest of society, since many work off of the books or are otherwise being cheated by their employers. Many do not have proper benefits, such as health care and without means to pay, become a drain on the healthcare system and so on. Many illegal immigrants send much of their earnings back to their home country rather than spending it in the local economy. One can't just generalize across the board as the previous poster did, but likewise, to suggest there aren't issues or to overstate contribution of illegal immigrants is likewise intellectually dishonest.

I would much prefer that we have a reasonable, expedited work visa program. Many illegal immigrants are not even interested in staying in the US - they would prefer to be back home. But, when it's a matter of such difficulty and adversity in coming here in the first place, many decide to bring their family here rather than try to go back and forth.

(Also, let's not forget about the elephant on the table - of low-income urban youth who aren't working and the suggestion that there aren't any jobs - when the huge numbers of illegal immigrants working various jobs around the area clearly shows otherwise)

Nothing you have said justifies the idea that educating children of any immigration status is worthless. Every American except native Americans are immigrants from somewhere. You have the luck of your birth and you treat it like you earned that somehow. There are lots of complicated issues surrounding immigration but the idea we should leave any children without educational opportunities is nonsensical and mean spirited.

Don't confuse my comments with those of the other PP who said "drain on the system". My first sentence makes it 100% clear that I don't think it's worthless or that we should leave any children without educational opportunities. But by the same token, the remainder of my comments are justifiable and shouldn't be dismissed just because you didn't like what the other poster had to say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Also I challenge your notion that parents all over the city equally involved. There are definitely many involved families in gentrifying neighborhoods, and I am sure many involved families in individual schools but just look at the focus group participation by ward. Generational poverty is a problem. Those are the kids that need the most help and whose parents do not have the knowledge re how to help. I do not doubt their love for their children, but if they were as involved as many other parents throughout the city then dcps would not be in the state it is in.

Why do you challenge that? How are you so certain that ONLY wealthy or gentrifying parents are involved?

When I taught at a failing ES on Capitol Hill years ago (way before charters), I had parents showing up in my classroom, calling me on my lunch break, following me to my car, showing up early and staying late for parent teacher conferences, grilling me about poor grades, insisting on more homework--so freaking involved I wanted to set up boundaries to keep them at bay.

But they could do nothing about broken and boarded up windows, rooms with no heat or air condtioning, inoperable toilet facilities for an entire floor, no music, art or PE classes; anything you needed was rusty, broken or missing. Who could possibly learn there? The place looked like a prison or asylum inside and out. It was the most dilapidated and depressing environment I've ever been in, but I didn't have to stay there.

I'm sure it's not that bad anymore, but when I talk about resources, it's not just funds/pupil. It's getting whatever is needed to ensure education and enrichment, which may mean an entirely different set of priorites--specialized staff or training, before and after school programs, enrichment and community development, specialized curricula, the chance to organize around interests (science club, etc)--but these extras are also essential to the success of a school.

You say failing parents are the reason DCPS is failing, but I say it's the other way around.

I did not say only gentrifying parents, I recognized that other involved families also are there but they are not the majority. I think there are many low income families that care a lot about education, both of my parents were raised in working class families that cared about education. My grandfather was a coal miner that became a railroad safety inspector, my other grandfather was a farmer (3 out of 4 kids graduated from college and my dad has a PhD). The boarded up windows have been fixed, they have highly qualified teachers, there are 3 empty 100 million dollar high schools in this city no one wants to send their kids to because the students are failing. DCPS has a problem it is trying to solve and a big piece of that arises out of children showing up for school not ready to learn because of serious familial instability. So no, I do not believe the majority of the families in DCPS are involved. I believe all the families that care about education are involved to the best of their abilities and that includes many parents without college degrees. But it is not the majority. If the majority of families in this city sent their kids to school ready to learn and with high expectations we would have a lot higher proficiency rates and a lot better conduct at many schools. I expect things have gotten worse since you taught in DCPS because those families with high educational expectations with poor neighborhood schools have largely taken advantage of charter options.

[Anonymous]

Parents who've come to DC from elsewhere are far more likely to be squeaky wheels and get involved, because they bring with them a set of expectations based on their own background and experiences of the educational system outside of DC, whereas parents who've grown up in DC don't know much other than the status quo and don't have an independent set of experiences to gauge the system or to drive expectations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Also I challenge your notion that parents all over the city equally involved. There are definitely many involved families in gentrifying neighborhoods, and I am sure many involved families in individual schools but just look at the focus group participation by ward. Generational poverty is a problem. Those are the kids that need the most help and whose parents do not have the knowledge re how to help. I do not doubt their love for their children, but if they were as involved as many other parents throughout the city then dcps would not be in the state it is in.

Why do you challenge that? How are you so certain that ONLY wealthy or gentrifying parents are involved?

When I taught at a failing ES on Capitol Hill years ago (way before charters), I had parents showing up in my classroom, calling me on my lunch break, following me to my car, showing up early and staying late for parent teacher conferences, grilling me about poor grades, insisting on more homework--so freaking involved I wanted to set up boundaries to keep them at bay.

But they could do nothing about broken and boarded up windows, rooms with no heat or air condtioning, inoperable toilet facilities for an entire floor, no music, art or PE classes; anything you needed was rusty, broken or missing. Who could possibly learn there? The place looked like a prison or asylum inside and out. It was the most dilapidated and depressing environment I've ever been in, but I didn't have to stay there.

I'm sure it's not that bad anymore, but when I talk about resources, it's not just funds/pupil. It's getting whatever is needed to ensure education and enrichment, which may mean an entirely different set of priorites--specialized staff or training, before and after school programs, enrichment and community development, specialized curricula, the chance to organize around interests (science club, etc)--but these extras are also essential to the success of a school.

You say failing parents are the reason DCPS is failing, but I say it's the other way around.

I did not say only gentrifying parents, I recognized that other involved families also are there but they are not the majority. I think there are many low income families that care a lot about education, both of my parents were raised in working class families that cared about education. My grandfather was a coal miner that became a railroad safety inspector, my other grandfather was a farmer (3 out of 4 kids graduated from college and my dad has a PhD). The boarded up windows have been fixed, they have highly qualified teachers, there are 3 empty 100 million dollar high schools in this city no one wants to send their kids to because the students are failing. DCPS has a problem it is trying to solve and a big piece of that arises out of children showing up for school not ready to learn because of serious familial instability. So no, I do not believe the majority of the families in DCPS are involved. I believe all the families that care about education are involved to the best of their abilities and that includes many parents without college degrees. But it is not the majority. If the majority of families in this city sent their kids to school ready to learn and with high expectations we would have a lot higher proficiency rates and a lot better conduct at many schools. I expect things have gotten worse since you taught in DCPS because those families with high educational expectations with poor neighborhood schools have largely taken advantage of charter options.

I just want to put an end to the assumption--the haughty presumption--that if parents are involved, then the school will succeed. It's not true. And the corollary thrown out by so many here as empirical evidence--that failing schools are only thus because of UNinvolved parents, lets DCPS off the hook in a way that should be wholly unacceptable to anyone who pays taxes. Because DCPS bought the "involved parents" line, too, and now they're re-selling it as The Only Thing That Will Make Schools Work.

So hey. Since we can't make these other schools work, we're just going to allow "equitatable access" (whatever that means) to the schools that do. Mmmmkay? How's that working out for everyone?

If you KNOW that parents are not pulling up the slack, then there should be MORE resources thrown at those students. Why isn't that the corollary?

I get it that people don't want to pay for something and then watch others get it for free. But I want the public that I pay into to be creating self reliant individuals who eventually pay into it as well. I don't think it's a lot to ask. If wealthier parents have to pay more to get something above par, that seems fair. But bring up the par.