If you are wealthy would you send your kids to a W school over private?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

So then tell me how W schools are so diverse.

Even Whitman, which is the whitest high school in MCPS, is 40% non-white.

And top private schools are typically 40-50% non-white.

"Top private" schools are, by definition, highly selective. Even more selective than real estate prices and rents.

Love how you’re trying to act as though you didn’t buy into a segregated environment.

What are you talking about? I live in Ganglandia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

So then tell me how W schools are so diverse.

Even Whitman, which is the whitest high school in MCPS, is 40% non-white.

And top private schools are typically 40-50% non-white.

"Top private" schools are, by definition, highly selective. Even more selective than real estate prices and rents.

Love how you’re trying to act as though you didn’t buy into a segregated environment.

What are you talking about? I live in Ganglandia.

Then this isn’t a relevant thread to you. Read the OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

So then tell me how W schools are so diverse.

Even Whitman, which is the whitest high school in MCPS, is 40% non-white.

And top private schools are typically 40-50% non-white.

Hmm.... I'm skeptical. How is my white hispanic family classified? How about our family friend who is literally African-American- mom is white South African and dad is white American - is she white or African-American (she's both).

What exactly is "non-white"? Which shade exactly is the cut-off? I mean, I see very few albinos around town, so there must be a cut off...

If we are classifying Hispanics appropriately, it is an ethnicity. Jews are an ethnicity too - are jews appropriately boxed, like "non-white"? What about the white jews?

I'm so confused. I thought we were a just humans!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

So then tell me how W schools are so diverse.

Even Whitman, which is the whitest high school in MCPS, is 40% non-white.

And top private schools are typically 40-50% non-white.

Hmm.... I'm skeptical. How is my white hispanic family classified? How about our family friend who is literally African-American- mom is white South African and dad is white American - is she white or African-American (she's both).

What exactly is "non-white"? Which shade exactly is the cut-off? I mean, I see very few albinos around town, so there must be a cut off...

If we are classifying Hispanics appropriately, it is an ethnicity. Jews are an ethnicity too - are jews appropriately boxed, like "non-white"? What about the white jews?

I'm so confused. I thought we were a just humans!

Shade? You think they look at people and make a determination? No. It’s done through self-reporting, just like all demographic tracking is done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

Exactly. The quality of education sucks. But that doesn’t matter.

Well.... no really.

It's a different type of education. If you want them to learn multi-variable Calculus (or difficult math in public school), I have to question why. I am a scientist and the last time I used it was to pass the AP exam in HS. On the other hand, if you want them to learn soft skills (learned in private schools), the last time I used that was today dealing with some colleagues. So which skills are more relevant? What exactly is an "education" to you?

In Spanish the phrase "mala educación" or "bad education" literally means poor manners. This idea of soft skills/ private school advantage transcends cultural boundaries and time. You can find similar things the world over.

You’re making it seem that public schools graduate only cave dwellers that only communicate through grunting, while private schools are graduating only smooth talker, peace prize material. Of course there’s no basis for this assumption.

The post doesn't sound like that. Of course there is some overlap between the two.

But what’s the basis to assert that privates teach soft skills but publics don’t? In my view soft skills depend more on personality and the values taught at home.l, have less to do with the high school the kid goes to.

The basis is that colleges give higher scores for private school kids based in soft skills or other metrics aside from scores and grades. The fact that these skills might be learned or practiced elsewhere is irrelevant. If you read the posts it was mentioned that there are tons of studies on this. Here is a link to an article posted last week-ish on this forum, although there are so many.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/06/private-schools-competitive-college-advantage-problems.html

It's not what all the hard core public school parents want to hear, but it's the truth. The perception from college admissions is that private school kids are wealthier and pre-screened by the private school. So many studies on this!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

Exactly. The quality of education sucks. But that doesn’t matter.

Well.... no really.

It's a different type of education. If you want them to learn multi-variable Calculus (or difficult math in public school), I have to question why. I am a scientist and the last time I used it was to pass the AP exam in HS. On the other hand, if you want them to learn soft skills (learned in private schools), the last time I used that was today dealing with some colleagues. So which skills are more relevant? What exactly is an "education" to you?

In Spanish the phrase "mala educación" or "bad education" literally means poor manners. This idea of soft skills/ private school advantage transcends cultural boundaries and time. You can find similar things the world over.

You’re making it seem that public schools graduate only cave dwellers that only communicate through grunting, while private schools are graduating only smooth talker, peace prize material. Of course there’s no basis for this assumption.

The post doesn't sound like that. Of course there is some overlap between the two.

But what’s the basis to assert that privates teach soft skills but publics don’t? In my view soft skills depend more on personality and the values taught at home.l, have less to do with the high school the kid goes to.

I agree. I’ve got no issue with private schools but the “soft skills” argument is bizarre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

So then tell me how W schools are so diverse.

Even Whitman, which is the whitest high school in MCPS, is 40% non-white.

And top private schools are typically 40-50% non-white.

Hmm.... I'm skeptical. How is my white hispanic family classified? How about our family friend who is literally African-American- mom is white South African and dad is white American - is she white or African-American (she's both).

What exactly is "non-white"? Which shade exactly is the cut-off? I mean, I see very few albinos around town, so there must be a cut off...

If we are classifying Hispanics appropriately, it is an ethnicity. Jews are an ethnicity too - are jews appropriately boxed, like "non-white"? What about the white jews?

I'm so confused. I thought we were a just humans!

Shade? You think they look at people and make a determination? No. It’s done through self-reporting, just like all demographic tracking is done.

Oh?!

Then which shade is the most advantageous for me and my family? I'm that shade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread makes people want to avoid the entire area! Racist and classist. Bashing of Asians/Asian-Americans, bragging about country clubs, bragging about their 3.3 million house, how 200k each for a two-income household is not wealthy. Who are you people?

I’m not sure wanting to achieve great wealth is a bad thing. Nor is having high financial aspirations.

Just like it’s not bad to desire that your kids can go to an Ivy as opposed to a good local school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

Exactly. The quality of education sucks. But that doesn’t matter.

Well.... no really.

It's a different type of education. If you want them to learn multi-variable Calculus (or difficult math in public school), I have to question why. I am a scientist and the last time I used it was to pass the AP exam in HS. On the other hand, if you want them to learn soft skills (learned in private schools), the last time I used that was today dealing with some colleagues. So which skills are more relevant? What exactly is an "education" to you?

In Spanish the phrase "mala educación" or "bad education" literally means poor manners. This idea of soft skills/ private school advantage transcends cultural boundaries and time. You can find similar things the world over.

You’re making it seem that public schools graduate only cave dwellers that only communicate through grunting, while private schools are graduating only smooth talker, peace prize material. Of course there’s no basis for this assumption.

The post doesn't sound like that. Of course there is some overlap between the two.

But what’s the basis to assert that privates teach soft skills but publics don’t? In my view soft skills depend more on personality and the values taught at home.l, have less to do with the high school the kid goes to.

I agree. I’ve got no issue with private schools but the “soft skills” argument is bizarre.

I used "soft skills" to mean not test scores, grades, or anything that is concrete. The colleges will all call it something different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

So then tell me how W schools are so diverse.

Even Whitman, which is the whitest high school in MCPS, is 40% non-white.

And top private schools are typically 40-50% non-white.

Hmm.... I'm skeptical. How is my white hispanic family classified? How about our family friend who is literally African-American- mom is white South African and dad is white American - is she white or African-American (she's both).

What exactly is "non-white"? Which shade exactly is the cut-off? I mean, I see very few albinos around town, so there must be a cut off...

If we are classifying Hispanics appropriately, it is an ethnicity. Jews are an ethnicity too - are jews appropriately boxed, like "non-white"? What about the white jews?

I'm so confused. I thought we were a just humans!

Shade? You think they look at people and make a determination? No. It’s done through self-reporting, just like all demographic tracking is done.

Oh?!

Then which shade is the most advantageous for me and my family? I'm that shade.

WTH are you talking about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

Exactly. The quality of education sucks. But that doesn’t matter.

Well.... no really.

It's a different type of education. If you want them to learn multi-variable Calculus (or difficult math in public school), I have to question why. I am a scientist and the last time I used it was to pass the AP exam in HS. On the other hand, if you want them to learn soft skills (learned in private schools), the last time I used that was today dealing with some colleagues. So which skills are more relevant? What exactly is an "education" to you?

In Spanish the phrase "mala educación" or "bad education" literally means poor manners. This idea of soft skills/ private school advantage transcends cultural boundaries and time. You can find similar things the world over.

You’re making it seem that public schools graduate only cave dwellers that only communicate through grunting, while private schools are graduating only smooth talker, peace prize material. Of course there’s no basis for this assumption.

The post doesn't sound like that. Of course there is some overlap between the two.

But what’s the basis to assert that privates teach soft skills but publics don’t? In my view soft skills depend more on personality and the values taught at home.l, have less to do with the high school the kid goes to.

The basis is that colleges give higher scores for private school kids based in soft skills or other metrics aside from scores and grades. The fact that these skills might be learned or practiced elsewhere is irrelevant. If you read the posts it was mentioned that there are tons of studies on this. Here is a link to an article posted last week-ish on this forum, although there are so many.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/06/private-schools-competitive-college-advantage-problems.html

It's not what all the hard core public school parents want to hear, but it's the truth. The perception from college admissions is that private school kids are wealthier and pre-screened by the private school. So many studies on this!

I mean, yes? Also, water is wet? If your argument is that kids from wealthy families have advantages that kids from non-wealthy families don't have, I wouldn't think there are many people will disagree with you. Them that has, gets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

So then tell me how W schools are so diverse.

Even Whitman, which is the whitest high school in MCPS, is 40% non-white.

And top private schools are typically 40-50% non-white.

Hmm.... I'm skeptical. How is my white hispanic family classified? How about our family friend who is literally African-American- mom is white South African and dad is white American - is she white or African-American (she's both).

What exactly is "non-white"? Which shade exactly is the cut-off? I mean, I see very few albinos around town, so there must be a cut off...

If we are classifying Hispanics appropriately, it is an ethnicity. Jews are an ethnicity too - are jews appropriately boxed, like "non-white"? What about the white jews?

I'm so confused. I thought we were a just humans!

Shade? You think they look at people and make a determination? No. It’s done through self-reporting, just like all demographic tracking is done.

Oh?!

Then which shade is the most advantageous for me and my family? I'm that shade.

WTH are you talking about?

Well, if we "self-report" than I identify as whatever give us the biggest advantage.

Today does being blue, green, jagged, straight, white, rich, poor, etc give me an advantage? Then I'm that. Tomorrow, I could be something different if the tide changes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

Exactly. The quality of education sucks. But that doesn’t matter.

Well.... no really.

It's a different type of education. If you want them to learn multi-variable Calculus (or difficult math in public school), I have to question why. I am a scientist and the last time I used it was to pass the AP exam in HS. On the other hand, if you want them to learn soft skills (learned in private schools), the last time I used that was today dealing with some colleagues. So which skills are more relevant? What exactly is an "education" to you?

In Spanish the phrase "mala educación" or "bad education" literally means poor manners. This idea of soft skills/ private school advantage transcends cultural boundaries and time. You can find similar things the world over.

You’re making it seem that public schools graduate only cave dwellers that only communicate through grunting, while private schools are graduating only smooth talker, peace prize material. Of course there’s no basis for this assumption.

The post doesn't sound like that. Of course there is some overlap between the two.

But what’s the basis to assert that privates teach soft skills but publics don’t? In my view soft skills depend more on personality and the values taught at home.l, have less to do with the high school the kid goes to.

The basis is that colleges give higher scores for private school kids based in soft skills or other metrics aside from scores and grades. The fact that these skills might be learned or practiced elsewhere is irrelevant. If you read the posts it was mentioned that there are tons of studies on this. Here is a link to an article posted last week-ish on this forum, although there are so many.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/06/private-schools-competitive-college-advantage-problems.html

It's not what all the hard core public school parents want to hear, but it's the truth. The perception from college admissions is that private school kids are wealthier and pre-screened by the private school. So many studies on this!

OK but it’s not clear what you mean by soft skills; that article simply points out the difference in connections and wealth. Don’t think I’ve seen anyone argue that on here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

So then tell me how W schools are so diverse.

Even Whitman, which is the whitest high school in MCPS, is 40% non-white.

Non-White doesn’t mean diversity if the remaining 60% is Asian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And LOL at you all claiming these schools are diverse. They’re as diverse as a box of milk toast with a bag of rice next to it.

Which schools are "these schools"? My kid's MCPS high school, in Ganglandia, is diverse by any measure of diversity, except I guess maybe kids from super-rich families are underrepresented.

The post is literally about W schools. Keep up.

W schools have a lack of diversity. Hence why the Board of Education raises the issue of redrawing boundaries once in a while.

W schools do have students who have a sense of entitlement and break rules without a fear of consequences. There’s a large percentage of students with cash to spend on drugs.

Compared to many other schools in MCPS. Whitman, Wootton, Churchill, and WJ are less diverse than many other schools in MCPS. In the bigger picture, though, there is no school in MCPS that is not diverse. Certainly far more diverse than the public schools I went to, growing up.

Define “diverse.” <5% FARMS isn’t exactly diverse in my book.

There are many aspects of diversity. Household income (poor/not-poor) is one of them. It is not the only one.

So then tell me how W schools are so diverse.

Even Whitman, which is the whitest high school in MCPS, is 40% non-white.

Non-White doesn’t mean diversity if the remaining 60% is Asian.

Check your math, for starters.