Second round options for Woodward boundary study

[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:

Anonymous wrote:So option D? Positives and negatives?

It also sucks for broader Garrett Park community. Garrett Park pool crew (Garrett Park, Garrett Park estates, white flint park) will not be happy.

No worries, they will fix that with the upcoming elementary boundary study

They are fine at elementary and middle school actually. It's the high school they are not fine with. That community will rally. I have friends there who are up in arms

Wow. That's pretty disgusting. I hope for their children's sakes they do Option D because being this fragile is not good for them.

DP
Karen enters the room with disgust. Option D sucks for other reasons. Nobody wants to turn a good school to another crappy DCC ghetto school

Let's be real, you all know a 30% FARMS rate is fine, but you also know it means it will reduce the real estate differential for your neighborhood compared with the 40-50% FARMS school and you can't tolerate losing 5% of your $5 million in wealth

30% is worse than my current situation and my current situation is barely acceptable. So no, I'm not ok with it. Sure it sucks to lose home equity, but having a cruddy school on top of it? No thanks

I can't imagine what on earth about being, what, 20% or 25% FARMS makes a school "barely acceptable." That's not a high FARMS rate or anything like that, not enough to put any meaningful strain on a school's resources. A 30-40% FARMS rate is just a plain vanilla normal school, not a poor one-- if you're down below 30% you're definitely on the richer side of normal. If you don't like your school, fine, but probably the issue is that it's badly run or something like that. What kind of problems could possibly be caused by that low a FARMS rate?

Numerous peer reviewed academic studies state the tipping point is 20%. So you, random Internet person, not being able to "imagine" it mattering is not credible with your esteemed credentials.

Let's see these studies, then, if you're so sure they exist. I couldn't find any. (And no, ones that say that higher-poverty schools are worse for the poor kids doesn't count. Clearly you are only concerned about the effects on your precious UMC or upper-class kids, so please point me in the direction of the studies that say that privileged kids suffer if even a quarter of the kids around them are poor and instead must be largely insulated from them.)

In the meantime, our elementary school is about 40% FARMS and doesn't feel like a "poor school" in any way and I don't see any major problems or challenges caused by it. So I indeed cannot imagine how having a FARMS rate of half that would make someone's school "barely acceptable.". But if I'm missing something, please enlighten me.

DP
Want a handout. Want someone else to do research for you. Typical.

DP

The other PP made a claim and this PP is asking them to defend that claim. It is far easier to make false claims than it is to refute them. The person making the claim has the burden of defending it. When people claim "research says" but don't mention any specific studies I am always skeptical.

DP

I actually agree with the jerk on here. Poverty doesn't help a school. It's obvious.

This was posted during the first round on DCUM. P 7 https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/9DG4KP71B0DB/$file/fcps_tipping-point.pdf

That PDF cited many studies that illustrate 20% FARMS is tipping point. Guess I want my school to have less poverty too

It's absolutely true that concentrated poverty is bad for academic achievement, but this is a terrible study. They did not control for anything and act like all poor kids are the same and all non poor kids are the same. They didn't even look at race (proxy for experience of racism) which is a separate predictor of academic achievement that is independent of income. To take this and then claim to establish some kind of causal tipping point, based on one school system no less, is absolutely preposterous, and I'm surprised to hear the wealthy parents in MoCo have bought into this.

[Anonymous]

Feel bad for anyone hoping to actually discuss the Woodward boundary as this thread is completely off track.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Feel bad for anyone hoping to actually discuss the Woodward boundary as this thread is completely off track.

I don't think it's completely off track. Apparently, families living in expensive neighborhoods are upset about being potentially placed in a boundary for a school with a 30% FARMS rate. For those of us whose kids are zoned for schools with higher FARMS rates it seems a little ridiculous since 30% not very high at all. But they've gotten riled up by bad research that any person with any understanding of social science will recognize this research is not remotely conclusive. I can understand being upset if you made home buying decisions based on GreatSchools scores. It sucks that we have an education system that has failed so horrifically at educating Black, EML and low income kids that basically most schools that serves large percentages of these kids is going to have awful test scores. I would just offer that if you have paid a massive premium for a house zoned school with 74% proficiency rates in math for White students in order to avoid a school with 60% math proficiency rates for White students, maybe it's time you admit you made a mistake instead of fighting to ingrain economic and racial segregation even more for the next few decades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feel bad for anyone hoping to actually discuss the Woodward boundary as this thread is completely off track.

I don't think it's completely off track. Apparently, families living in expensive neighborhoods are upset about being potentially placed in a boundary for a school with a 30% FARMS rate. For those of us whose kids are zoned for schools with higher FARMS rates it seems a little ridiculous since 30% not very high at all. But they've gotten riled up by bad research that any person with any understanding of social science will recognize this research is not remotely conclusive. I can understand being upset if you made home buying decisions based on GreatSchools scores. It sucks that we have an education system that has failed so horrifically at educating Black, EML and low income kids that basically most schools that serves large percentages of these kids is going to have awful test scores. I would just offer that if you have paid a massive premium for a house zoned school with 74% proficiency rates in math for White students in order to avoid a school with 60% math proficiency rates for White students, maybe it's time you admit you made a mistake instead of fighting to ingrain economic and racial segregation even more for the next few decades.

Just go to private schools. MCPS sucks. Kids can't read or write. Parents are dumb too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feel bad for anyone hoping to actually discuss the Woodward boundary as this thread is completely off track.

I don't think it's completely off track. Apparently, families living in expensive neighborhoods are upset about being potentially placed in a boundary for a school with a 30% FARMS rate. For those of us whose kids are zoned for schools with higher FARMS rates it seems a little ridiculous since 30% not very high at all. But they've gotten riled up by bad research that any person with any understanding of social science will recognize this research is not remotely conclusive. I can understand being upset if you made home buying decisions based on GreatSchools scores. It sucks that we have an education system that has failed so horrifically at educating Black, EML and low income kids that basically most schools that serves large percentages of these kids is going to have awful test scores. I would just offer that if you have paid a massive premium for a house zoned school with 74% proficiency rates in math for White students in order to avoid a school with 60% math proficiency rates for White students, maybe it's time you admit you made a mistake instead of fighting to ingrain economic and racial segregation even more for the next few decades.

Your goal for your kid is mere proficiency? You don't want excellence?

Seems like the "rich" families want more than avg for their kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feel bad for anyone hoping to actually discuss the Woodward boundary as this thread is completely off track.

I don't think it's completely off track. Apparently, families living in expensive neighborhoods are upset about being potentially placed in a boundary for a school with a 30% FARMS rate. For those of us whose kids are zoned for schools with higher FARMS rates it seems a little ridiculous since 30% not very high at all. But they've gotten riled up by bad research that any person with any understanding of social science will recognize this research is not remotely conclusive. I can understand being upset if you made home buying decisions based on GreatSchools scores. It sucks that we have an education system that has failed so horrifically at educating Black, EML and low income kids that basically most schools that serves large percentages of these kids is going to have awful test scores. I would just offer that if you have paid a massive premium for a house zoned school with 74% proficiency rates in math for White students in order to avoid a school with 60% math proficiency rates for White students, maybe it's time you admit you made a mistake instead of fighting to ingrain economic and racial segregation even more for the next few decades.

Your goal for your kid is mere proficiency? You don't want excellence?

Seems like the "rich" families want more than avg for their kids

Agree. It seems like DCC is ok with mediocre. Doesn't want to push kids to the top. Absurd

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feel bad for anyone hoping to actually discuss the Woodward boundary as this thread is completely off track.

I don't think it's completely off track. Apparently, families living in expensive neighborhoods are upset about being potentially placed in a boundary for a school with a 30% FARMS rate. For those of us whose kids are zoned for schools with higher FARMS rates it seems a little ridiculous since 30% not very high at all. But they've gotten riled up by bad research that any person with any understanding of social science will recognize this research is not remotely conclusive. I can understand being upset if you made home buying decisions based on GreatSchools scores. It sucks that we have an education system that has failed so horrifically at educating Black, EML and low income kids that basically most schools that serves large percentages of these kids is going to have awful test scores. I would just offer that if you have paid a massive premium for a house zoned school with 74% proficiency rates in math for White students in order to avoid a school with 60% math proficiency rates for White students, maybe it's time you admit you made a mistake instead of fighting to ingrain economic and racial segregation even more for the next few decades.

So #1 at the poor school is also at least 14% worse than #1 at the low FARMS school by this dudes logic. I'm sure they're not as good

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feel bad for anyone hoping to actually discuss the Woodward boundary as this thread is completely off track.

I don't think it's completely off track. Apparently, families living in expensive neighborhoods are upset about being potentially placed in a boundary for a school with a 30% FARMS rate. For those of us whose kids are zoned for schools with higher FARMS rates it seems a little ridiculous since 30% not very high at all. But they've gotten riled up by bad research that any person with any understanding of social science will recognize this research is not remotely conclusive. I can understand being upset if you made home buying decisions based on GreatSchools scores. It sucks that we have an education system that has failed so horrifically at educating Black, EML and low income kids that basically most schools that serves large percentages of these kids is going to have awful test scores. I would just offer that if you have paid a massive premium for a house zoned school with 74% proficiency rates in math for White students in order to avoid a school with 60% math proficiency rates for White students, maybe it's time you admit you made a mistake instead of fighting to ingrain economic and racial segregation even more for the next few decades.

Your goal for your kid is mere proficiency? You don't want excellence?

Seems like the "rich" families want more than avg for their kids

Where is the evidence that W schools provide more than proficiency? 1 out of 5 White kids at Whitman and 2 out of 5 Black kids don't even get "mere proficiency". The "more than avg" kids would be more than avg anywhere either by themselves or with supplementation they can get from any school boundary. Whitman instruction isn't as magical as some MCPS bureaucrats want you to believe. It's just a regular public school with large class sizes that serves a wealthy neighborhood. Your kid can be very successful in any MCPS school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Feel bad for anyone hoping to actually discuss the Woodward boundary as this thread is completely off track.

You know what would help? Multi-variable calculus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feel bad for anyone hoping to actually discuss the Woodward boundary as this thread is completely off track.

I don't think it's completely off track. Apparently, families living in expensive neighborhoods are upset about being potentially placed in a boundary for a school with a 30% FARMS rate. For those of us whose kids are zoned for schools with higher FARMS rates it seems a little ridiculous since 30% not very high at all. But they've gotten riled up by bad research that any person with any understanding of social science will recognize this research is not remotely conclusive. I can understand being upset if you made home buying decisions based on GreatSchools scores. It sucks that we have an education system that has failed so horrifically at educating Black, EML and low income kids that basically most schools that serves large percentages of these kids is going to have awful test scores. I would just offer that if you have paid a massive premium for a house zoned school with 74% proficiency rates in math for White students in order to avoid a school with 60% math proficiency rates for White students, maybe it's time you admit you made a mistake instead of fighting to ingrain economic and racial segregation even more for the next few decades.

So #1 at the poor school is also at least 14% worse than #1 at the low FARMS school by this dudes logic. I'm sure they're not as good

I love how you think I'm a dude.

Also, where did you get the 14% number? You know these are different kids right? While there are many UMC families zoned for Einstein, the White kids there are not as wealthy as those zoned for Whitman. You take the same kid out of Whitman and put them in Einstein and they will do exactly the same (but may not be able to take MVC and then repeat it in college, horrible).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So option D? Positives and negatives?

Positives: VME wins the real estate lotto.

Negatives: worst option for FARMS rates at Woodward and WJ. Worst option for current WJ zone.

I don't think you realize how bad it looks for you that you are afraid of those FARMS rates. Are you really that scared of low income families?

I'm anonymous. I don't care how it looks.

Scared no. But high FARMS schools are NOT good schools. I want my kid to have a good school. This is consistent with academic literature that when FARMS crosses about 20%, it's a genuine decline in education outcomes for the broader school community. I want poor served along with middle class and the rich. I don't want to favor poor for sake of being poor or rich for sake of being rich. Need to educate everyone. Push up the elite of them all regardless of what family they come from. We need doctors, engineers, etc etc etc
Sorry not everyone is capable or even resources. We also need good plumbers

If we need good plumbers, tell your kids to become plumbers.

Or, learn to DIY.

DIY won't pass a WSSC inspection! Need a license to plumb in a new gas water heater

Then I guess your kids better learn. Or, you be willing to pay. Its a good thing you are rich. You can DIY a gas water heater.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP

What value is it to be in school with poor kids? Honestly. What's the value to a non-poor kid's education to being with poor kids?

Unrelated, but on top of, is the economics of property values. It's why Whitman and Churchill are "good". Less poor kids.

All kids are poor. Most aren't making enough to support themselves independently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Y'all can compare MCAP math and ELA proficiency rates for White kids between Einstein and Walter Johnson, Churchill etc. on the MD school report card spoiler alert: it's not worth paying a premium for the "good" high schools. You are better off supplementing at home.

Or pay for Russian School of Mathematics on the weekend.

True. Einstein doesn't do awesome in math - 61% of White kids proficient. For comparison at BCC 74% of White kids are proficient in math. But everyone should supplement. 74% isn't exactly amazing either. At Whitman it's 79%.

In ELA, Einstein has 85% of White kids proficient compared with BCC which only has a 78% proficiency rate for White kids.

They all do poorly on math with Black, EML and FARMS kids. There are much larger differences between schools for these groups than the differences between White kids at different schools.

Hence, Einstein and its feeder schools need to put more effort into MATH and STEM...hence why we need more classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Y'all can compare MCAP math and ELA proficiency rates for White kids between Einstein and Walter Johnson, Churchill etc. on the MD school report card spoiler alert: it's not worth paying a premium for the "good" high schools. You are better off supplementing at home.

Or pay for Russian School of Mathematics on the weekend.

True. Einstein doesn't do awesome in math - 61% of White kids proficient. For comparison at BCC 74% of White kids are proficient in math. But everyone should supplement. 74% isn't exactly amazing either. At Whitman it's 79%.

In ELA, Einstein has 85% of White kids proficient compared with BCC which only has a 78% proficiency rate for White kids.

They all do poorly on math with Black, EML and FARMS kids. There are much larger differences between schools for these groups than the differences between White kids at different schools.

This public school won't exactly produce the next Archimedes. Gotta pay to play

I’d love to see how many adults would be considered proficient in math. Let’s get a cohort of parents taking that test and find out if anyone retained the math skills that schools claim are critical for success in life.

The math obsession is unhinged.

STEM professional jobs need math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Y'all can compare MCAP math and ELA proficiency rates for White kids between Einstein and Walter Johnson, Churchill etc. on the MD school report card spoiler alert: it's not worth paying a premium for the "good" high schools. You are better off supplementing at home.

Or pay for Russian School of Mathematics on the weekend.

True. Einstein doesn't do awesome in math - 61% of White kids proficient. For comparison at BCC 74% of White kids are proficient in math. But everyone should supplement. 74% isn't exactly amazing either. At Whitman it's 79%.

In ELA, Einstein has 85% of White kids proficient compared with BCC which only has a 78% proficiency rate for White kids.

They all do poorly on math with Black, EML and FARMS kids. There are much larger differences between schools for these groups than the differences between White kids at different schools.

This public school won't exactly produce the next Archimedes. Gotta pay to play

I’d love to see how many adults would be considered proficient in math. Let’s get a cohort of parents taking that test and find out if anyone retained the math skills that schools claim are critical for success in life.

The math obsession is unhinged.

I mean we are told Whitman is producing the next generation of geniuses so if 20% are not even proficient in math I am guessing Whitman kids that are successful, aren't getting there because of the amazing math instruction at Whitman.

You also need to include the fact that many have had enrichment and tutoring.