incidents at W schools disproportionately represented in media/DCUM?

[Anonymous]

I don't think the W's are overly represented but I do think these things happen there more frequently because its a privileged and segregated environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think W issues/biases/info are over reported on DCUM because W schools are over represented here.

Exactly. And face it, most of MCPS is low-performing and not getting much better.

Those areas are desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools to see if they'll improve the academics and culture.

But to get what they want they have to blow every little incident at a W out of proportion to justify breaking up the clusters.

+100

Jack smiths editorial and the coverage of this in the media with zero research done (typical at WaPO) will just accelerate the decline of MoCo and MCPS, and property values.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/POL/Resources/Files/PDF/PDResources/MCPD_Annual%20Report%20Crime%20Safety_2018.pdf

MoCo crime in 2018:

Bethesda district:
Population: 189,266
Crimes against a person: 606

Silver Spring district:
Population: 160,640
Crimes against a person: 1,237

(page 24 in the report)

So either:

a) Silver Spring has more crime than Bethesda
or
b) More than half of crime victims in Bethesda fail to report the crime

Yet people will just refuse to acknowledge that this describes a general atmosphere in each district.
They will claim schools are separate from district crime numbers, as if schools operated in a vacuum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the W's are overly represented but I do think these things happen there more frequently because its a privileged and segregated environment.

This

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Show me school incident data -- would love to see that if MCPS reports it.

I'd wager that there are more incidents of a serious nature in schools that are in areas with a higher crime rate, compared to schools in an area with a lower crime rate. Is there reason to believe otherwise? I guess if we have MCPS incident data we could check to be certain.

Do you even live in Montgomery County?

Yes, and with kids at MCPS. Now, where's the incident data?

Found the incident data:
https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/regulatoryaccountability/SafetyGlance/currentyear/SafetyGlance2018.pdf

page 434 (PDF page 450) shows out of school suspension rates by gender and race. Again, we need more diversity in who gets suspended.

Then it's per high school on preceding pages.

Whitman in on page 405 (PDF page 422) and had 1 serious incident where police were called -- a physical or verbal threat.

Wheaton is on the page before that, with 9 serious incident calls: 4 drugs, 2 threats, 3 weapons.

You think the principal at W is calling police over drugs? Or you believe there are no drugs?

Everyone knows W’s got the most drugs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Media loves to highlight it because story will sell. I am in RM cluster and attended one boundary analysis meeting in QO HS. I was disgusted to see an article in Bethesda beat depicting parents in that meeting as bunch of racist by cherrypicking quotes.

I started thinking why they did it. I think , media want to report something controversial to get more eyeballs. I don't have much clue about what's going on in Churchill or Whitman to be honest, but it won't surprise me if media is playing a similar role.

So the people at that meeting didn't say that what they were quoted (refusing to give their names) as saying? Everything said in that piece has been repeatedly posted on DCUM, and it's presumably not all Russian trolls.

I went to the Walter Johnson boundary analysis meeting, and while I didn't hear any open bigotry, I heard plenty of things that were bigotry-adjacent.

+1 After reading folks rail here about their property values, "FARMS kids," and "illegals," I totally believe that people said exactly what was reported at the boundary meeting. If PP doesn't like how that looks when it is put down in hard print, and if those saying it are aware enough not to be willing to be quoted by name, then I think we can all agree it is bigoted, and likely also racist.

But to answer the question in the OP, I have a middle-school aged child and a lot of contact with high schoolers, mostly from Blair. I have never heard about a racist incident being swept under the rug there, and I do believe those incidents are less common in integrated environments. Integration brings humanization of "the other" and compassion, but it also brings repercussions for racist behaviors. If some of these kids on the west side had faced a minor consequence for racism in their early years - something as simple as being excluded from a group of kids playing - then they would have learned their lesson before the stakes got quite so dire in high school.

Kids use N word in Blair all the time. Sometime nonblack kids call their black friends using the N word, or something close to it. No one cares in school because they use the word in a friendly way. It is all based on intention. The black kids know their nonblack friend use the word as a friend.
Why would the Blair kids you know tell you any racist incident in Blair? There is no racist incident because using the N word in Blair is not a racial incident.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think W issues/biases/info are over reported on DCUM because W schools are over represented here.

Exactly. And face it, most of MCPS is low-performing and not getting much better.

Those areas are desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools to see if they'll improve the academics and culture.

But to get what they want they have to blow every little incident at a W out of proportion to justify breaking up the clusters.

If nothing it's clear W kids would not improve the culture at any place.

Why does anyone even expect them to?

Aren't those who do that be ashamed of themselves when they expect kids to do their job?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think W issues/biases/info are over reported on DCUM because W schools are over represented here.

Exactly. And face it, most of MCPS is low-performing and not getting much better.

Those areas are desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools to see if they'll improve the academics and culture.

But to get what they want they have to blow every little incident at a W out of proportion to justify breaking up the clusters.

It is only in the fevered dreams of Bethesda DCUMers that people are "desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools."

I'm sure this is difficult for you to understand, but I'll try: the motivation for desegregation initiatives is NOT because folks want "W kids" in their schools. Most of the folks involved in the desegregation initiatives in MCPS have kids beyond school age. The motivation for desegreation is.....desegregation. It is good public policy, and good for all the children involved. Not everything is about personal gain - there are people in the world who care about social and educational policy because it is the right thing to do, not because they see any personal benefit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It is only in the fevered dreams of Bethesda DCUMers that people are "desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools."

I'm sure this is difficult for you to understand, but I'll try: the motivation for desegregation initiatives is NOT because folks want "W kids" in their schools. Most of the folks involved in the desegregation initiatives in MCPS have kids beyond school age. The motivation for desegreation is.....desegregation. It is good public policy, and good for all the children involved. Not everything is about personal gain - there are people in the world who care about social and educational policy because it is the right thing to do, not because they see any personal benefit.

I don't understand why this is so difficult for some people to believe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think W issues/biases/info are over reported on DCUM because W schools are over represented here.

Exactly. And face it, most of MCPS is low-performing and not getting much better.

Those areas are desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools to see if they'll improve the academics and culture.

But to get what they want they have to blow every little incident at a W out of proportion to justify breaking up the clusters.

It is only in the fevered dreams of Bethesda DCUMers that people are "desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools."

I'm sure this is difficult for you to understand, but I'll try: the motivation for desegregation initiatives is NOT because folks want "W kids" in their schools. Most of the folks involved in the desegregation initiatives in MCPS have kids beyond school age. The motivation for desegreation is.....desegregation. It is good public policy, and good for all the children involved. Not everything is about personal gain - there are people in the world who care about social and educational policy because it is the right thing to do, not because they see any personal benefit.

It is not difficult to understand. Of course people understand there are those who believe what they do is good for society.

It is you who do not understand: you think you are doing the good thing for "all the children involved", yet you could hardly get enough parents involved, whose interest are really at stake.
Otherwise your statement on "Most ..." would not be valid.
Apparently, what you want to do is good in your imagination, yet not really in the minds of parents who are really going to be affected.

That is the problem of this this world. If everyone could think twice about what they want themselves, instead of the fancy "social need", the world would be much better off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think W issues/biases/info are over reported on DCUM because W schools are over represented here.

Exactly. And face it, most of MCPS is low-performing and not getting much better.

Those areas are desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools to see if they'll improve the academics and culture.

But to get what they want they have to blow every little incident at a W out of proportion to justify breaking up the clusters.

It is only in the fevered dreams of Bethesda DCUMers that people are "desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools."

I'm sure this is difficult for you to understand, but I'll try: the motivation for desegregation initiatives is NOT because folks want "W kids" in their schools. Most of the folks involved in the desegregation initiatives in MCPS have kids beyond school age. The motivation for desegreation is.....desegregation. It is good public policy, and good for all the children involved. Not everything is about personal gain - there are people in the world who care about social and educational policy because it is the right thing to do, not because they see any personal benefit.

You're right but try reasoning with a segregationist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think W issues/biases/info are over reported on DCUM because W schools are over represented here.

Exactly. And face it, most of MCPS is low-performing and not getting much better.

Those areas are desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools to see if they'll improve the academics and culture.

But to get what they want they have to blow every little incident at a W out of proportion to justify breaking up the clusters.

It is only in the fevered dreams of Bethesda DCUMers that people are "desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools."

I'm sure this is difficult for you to understand, but I'll try: the motivation for desegregation initiatives is NOT because folks want "W kids" in their schools. Most of the folks involved in the desegregation initiatives in MCPS have kids beyond school age. The motivation for desegreation is.....desegregation. It is good public policy, and good for all the children involved. Not everything is about personal gain - there are people in the world who care about social and educational policy because it is the right thing to do, not because they see any personal benefit.

You're right but try reasoning with a segregationist.

Calling others "segregationist" is not going make you more correct.

Schools reflect the demographics of the neighborhood they serve, nothing wrong with that. If you want a school to reflect the demographics of the county, that is your choice. I don't call it wrong - you can try for sure. Others don't have a responsibility to help you realize your social ideology. However calling others segregationist only tells people that you don't have enough reason to support what you do other than name calling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think W issues/biases/info are over reported on DCUM because W schools are over represented here.

Exactly. And face it, most of MCPS is low-performing and not getting much better.

Those areas are desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools to see if they'll improve the academics and culture.

But to get what they want they have to blow every little incident at a W out of proportion to justify breaking up the clusters.

It is only in the fevered dreams of Bethesda DCUMers that people are "desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools."

I'm sure this is difficult for you to understand, but I'll try: the motivation for desegregation initiatives is NOT because folks want "W kids" in their schools. Most of the folks involved in the desegregation initiatives in MCPS have kids beyond school age. The motivation for desegreation is.....desegregation. It is good public policy, and good for all the children involved. Not everything is about personal gain - there are people in the world who care about social and educational policy because it is the right thing to do, not because they see any personal benefit.

You're right but try reasoning with a segregationist.

Calling others "segregationist" is not going make you more correct.

Schools reflect the demographics of the neighborhood they serve, nothing wrong with that. If you want a school to reflect the demographics of the county, that is your choice. I don't call it wrong - you can try for sure. Others don't have a responsibility to help you realize your social ideology. However calling others segregationist only tells people that you don't have enough reason to support what you do other than name calling.

But it depends how you define the neighborhood. There are opportunities to change how the school boundary lines are drawn. They're still the same neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think W issues/biases/info are over reported on DCUM because W schools are over represented here.

Exactly. And face it, most of MCPS is low-performing and not getting much better.

Those areas are desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools to see if they'll improve the academics and culture.

But to get what they want they have to blow every little incident at a W out of proportion to justify breaking up the clusters.

It is only in the fevered dreams of Bethesda DCUMers that people are "desperate for W cluster kids to get sent to their schools."

I'm sure this is difficult for you to understand, but I'll try: the motivation for desegregation initiatives is NOT because folks want "W kids" in their schools. Most of the folks involved in the desegregation initiatives in MCPS have kids beyond school age. The motivation for desegreation is.....desegregation. It is good public policy, and good for all the children involved. Not everything is about personal gain - there are people in the world who care about social and educational policy because it is the right thing to do, not because they see any personal benefit.

You're right but try reasoning with a segregationist.

Calling others "segregationist" is not going make you more correct.

Schools reflect the demographics of the neighborhood they serve, nothing wrong with that. If you want a school to reflect the demographics of the county, that is your choice. I don't call it wrong - you can try for sure. Others don't have a responsibility to help you realize your social ideology. However calling others segregationist only tells people that you don't have enough reason to support what you do other than name calling.

But it depends how you define the neighborhood. There are opportunities to change how the school boundary lines are drawn. They're still the same neighborhoods.

You can try to redefine the neighborhood, I am not calling you "...ist" just because of that.

But clearly there are people calling others "segregationist" just because they do not agree with that neighborhood definition.

It shows that these people don't really have good arguments other than name calling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Calling others "segregationist" is not going make you more correct.

Schools reflect the demographics of the neighborhood they serve, nothing wrong with that. If you want a school to reflect the demographics of the county, that is your choice. I don't call it wrong - you can try for sure. Others don't have a responsibility to help you realize your social ideology. However calling others segregationist only tells people that you don't have enough reason to support what you do other than name calling.

Schools reflect the demographics of their school boundaries.