Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Come back and talk more
That's the number one issue I see too
Why is someone going to willingly send their kid or move to an area with schools that aren't as good. Everyone is trying to get the best for their child period. Just look at real estate prices almost entirely correlated to school boundary quality.

When you say "schools that aren't as good", are you talking about the buildings, the skills of the teachers and administrators, and so on? Or are you talking about the income and education of the parents of the students?

Anonymous wrote:Public school BUDGETS are most definitely a zero sum game, even after the partial federal FARM and ESOL subsidies.

Educational OPPORTUNITIES are (a) what you make of them, and (b) what you seek out (museums, sports, trips, conversations, books, clubs)

Public schools goal is for students to pass proficiency in reading and math. The rest is gravy. Unf the rest is now increasingly provided by the parents, tutors, camps, other schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Come back and talk more
That's the number one issue I see too
Why is someone going to willingly send their kid or move to an area with schools that aren't as good. Everyone is trying to get the best for their child period. Just look at real estate prices almost entirely correlated to school boundary quality.

When you say "schools that aren't as good", are you talking about the buildings, the skills of the teachers and administrators, and so on? Or are you talking about the income and education of the parents of the students?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread sounds like OP is crowdsourcing ideas/input for some sort of a school project. Are you, OP?

Really? I would have said that OP is part of a disinformation campaign to stir up rumors and uncertainty about MCPS. District-wide boundary studies! Cross-county busing! Moving magnet programs! Rezoning students to unidentified future schools! Abolishing neighborhood schools! I'm not sure to what end - is there a particular candidate whom this rumor-milling would favor? Maybe I can crowdsource an answer to this question.

Anonymous wrote:

Come back and talk more
That's the number one issue I see too
Why is someone going to willingly send their kid or move to an area with schools that aren't as good. Everyone is trying to get the best for their child period. Just look at real estate prices almost entirely correlated to school boundary quality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The conflict I see is that although I believe many in the county agree with the proposition that the school system should attempt to afford all access to a high quality education, not as many would be willing to have their children be part of an experiment where there is a high likelihood of negative disruption to their own children's education. The societal and economic issues that the school system would need to overcome are profound and not susceptible to easy solutions - otherwise, they (hopefully) would have been solved long ago. It would take a massive effort and a huge commitment of resources, not just busing. I think an effective solution is also well beyond this system's administration's ability to execute. Parents who have worked hard to get their children into a good district/cluster aren't going to sit around and watch that be undone without responding.

Agree. Then they will pour extra money and time into their private academic hours after school. Who is going to lose?

This is based on the assumption that educational opportunities are a zero-sum game. I.e., if it helps you, it hurts me. It doesn't have to be that way.

Anonymous wrote:

Where do you get your stats from?

I'm an Asian American immigrant. The ones who came here in the 70's/80's, maybe even 90's were not well off in their home countries, at least not the large circle of Asians I knew. Certainly, my family wasn't. That's why they came here.. to seek better opportunities, kind of like why most of the white people's ancestors came here way back when.

With the exception of refugees, and even many refugees (given the difficulty inherent in navigating the process), ANY documented immigrant is by definition going to possess some skills/education/wherewithal that the poorest of the poor in their home countries don't have. You may not have felt well off, but think about the resources inherent in the immigration process. Basic literacy to navigate the process. Money to pay for appointments at the Embassy. Money to pay for health checks and any other forms required. Airfare to the United States, likely a community when your parents arrived.

That's not nothing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Where do you get your stats from?

I'm an Asian American immigrant. The ones who came here in the 70's/80's, maybe even 90's were not well off in their home countries, at least not the large circle of Asians I knew. Certainly, my family wasn't. That's why they came here.. to seek better opportunities, kind of like why most of the white people's ancestors came here way back when.

DP. It depends on who, where, and when - as you say. Overall, Asian-Americans do better on measures of economic well-being and education than the American population as a whole, but that masks differences among subgroups.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/08/key-facts-about-asian-americans/

I think that's the point. People here live in a bubble. They see only the educated Asian immigrants. They don't see the many who aren't educated even in their home countries, yet when they come here, and struggle, they want their children to live a better life and they see education as the means to get there.

Certainly there are subgroups that aren't like this.. Hmong group is a perfect example. But, even that is slowly changing.

...Hmong-Americans don't want their children to live a better life?

They don't value education *as much* as other Asian subgroups. As someone stated up thread, it's cultural.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/these-groups-of-asian-americans-rarely-attend-college-but-california-is-trying-to-change-that

Among the 281,000 Hmong in the United States, 38 percent have less than a high school degree, about 25 percentage points lower than both the Asian-American and U.S. averages, according to the Center for American Progress. Just 14 percent have at least a bachelor’s degree, less than half the national average.

How did you get from "have fewer college degrees" to "value education less"?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
My parents had an ES education. At one point, we were on food stamps here, so no, we were not well off by any measure compared to the rest of the US. It was incredibly difficult for them. No community to speak of here back in the 70s. No school communication in their language. My parents had help from one family member here who was not well off himself.

The story of many Asian immigrants is the same story as most of white people immigrants 100 years ago. Many such immigrants struggle, and that is why many value education and want their children to get a good education to have a better life.

That goes for most immigrants, doesn't it?

I would think so. So, it's a mistake to think that most Asian immigrants are educated and therefore, it's no surprise their kids have a high IQ or do well in school. That is not the reason why so many Asian American students do well in school. That was my point.

Most are, these days. That's a matter of fact, not opinion. Obviously most is not all, and generalizing as if there were such a thing as a universal Asian-American experience is foolish.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Where do you get your stats from?

I'm an Asian American immigrant. The ones who came here in the 70's/80's, maybe even 90's were not well off in their home countries, at least not the large circle of Asians I knew. Certainly, my family wasn't. That's why they came here.. to seek better opportunities, kind of like why most of the white people's ancestors came here way back when.

DP. It depends on who, where, and when - as you say. Overall, Asian-Americans do better on measures of economic well-being and education than the American population as a whole, but that masks differences among subgroups.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/08/key-facts-about-asian-americans/

I think that's the point. People here live in a bubble. They see only the educated Asian immigrants. They don't see the many who aren't educated even in their home countries, yet when they come here, and struggle, they want their children to live a better life and they see education as the means to get there.

Certainly there are subgroups that aren't like this.. Hmong group is a perfect example. But, even that is slowly changing.

...Hmong-Americans don't want their children to live a better life?

They don't value education *as much* as other Asian subgroups. As someone stated up thread, it's cultural.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/these-groups-of-asian-americans-rarely-attend-college-but-california-is-trying-to-change-that

Among the 281,000 Hmong in the United States, 38 percent have less than a high school degree, about 25 percentage points lower than both the Asian-American and U.S. averages, according to the Center for American Progress. Just 14 percent have at least a bachelor’s degree, less than half the national average.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Where do you get your stats from?

I'm an Asian American immigrant. The ones who came here in the 70's/80's, maybe even 90's were not well off in their home countries, at least not the large circle of Asians I knew. Certainly, my family wasn't. That's why they came here.. to seek better opportunities, kind of like why most of the white people's ancestors came here way back when.

DP. It depends on who, where, and when - as you say. Overall, Asian-Americans do better on measures of economic well-being and education than the American population as a whole, but that masks differences among subgroups.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/08/key-facts-about-asian-americans/

I think that's the point. People here live in a bubble. They see only the educated Asian immigrants. They don't see the many who aren't educated even in their home countries, yet when they come here, and struggle, they want their children to live a better life and they see education as the means to get there.

Certainly there are subgroups that aren't like this.. Hmong group is a perfect example. But, even that is slowly changing.

...Hmong-Americans don't want their children to live a better life?

Among the 281,000 Hmong in the United States, 38 percent have less than a high school degree, about 25 percentage points lower than both the Asian-American and U.S. averages, according to the Center for American Progress. Just 14 percent have at least a bachelor’s degree, less than half the national average.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The conflict I see is that although I believe many in the county agree with the proposition that the school system should attempt to afford all access to a high quality education, not as many would be willing to have their children be part of an experiment where there is a high likelihood of negative disruption to their own children's education. The societal and economic issues that the school system would need to overcome are profound and not susceptible to easy solutions - otherwise, they (hopefully) would have been solved long ago. It would take a massive effort and a huge commitment of resources, not just busing. I think an effective solution is also well beyond this system's administration's ability to execute. Parents who have worked hard to get their children into a good district/cluster aren't going to sit around and watch that be undone without responding.

Agree. Then they will pour extra money and time into their private academic hours after school. Who is going to lose?

Anonymous wrote:The conflict I see is that although I believe many in the county agree with the proposition that the school system should attempt to afford all access to a high quality education, not as many would be willing to have their children be part of an experiment where there is a high likelihood of negative disruption to their own children's education. The societal and economic issues that the school system would need to overcome are profound and not susceptible to easy solutions - otherwise, they (hopefully) would have been solved long ago. It would take a massive effort and a huge commitment of resources, not just busing. I think an effective solution is also well beyond this system's administration's ability to execute. Parents who have worked hard to get their children into a good district/cluster aren't going to sit around and watch that be undone without responding.