Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is legacy pocket of poverty in Churchill?

Scotland area. Google the history behind that area. Apparently, there was/is a gang from that area that goes to Churchill. Oh, and when there was some violence that broke out several years ago, the Principal told the white/asian parents not to worry because it was black on black violence - paraphrasing, but that was the gist of it.

Wow, having black on black violence doesn't make it better. When did this happen? Does Churchill has the same principle?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is legacy pocket of poverty in Churchill?

Scotland area. Google the history behind that area. Apparently, there was/is a gang from that area that goes to Churchill. Oh, and when there was some violence that broke out several years ago, the Principal told the white/asian parents not to worry because it was black on black violence - paraphrasing, but that was the gist of it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is legacy pocket of poverty in Churchill?

Scotland area. Google the history behind that area. Apparently, there was/is a gang from that area that goes to Churchill. Oh, and when there was some violence that broke out several years ago, the Principal told the white/asian parents not to worry because it was black on black violence - paraphrasing, but that was the gist of it.

Anonymous wrote:Where is legacy pocket of poverty in Churchill?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am simply going by scores published by MCPS.

Churchill - 1326 ( Special Education)

Just to put some comparison with other schools in region,

BCC - 1519
WJ - 1421
Whitman - 1623
Wootton - 1399
RM - 1615
Einstein - 1436
Watkins mill - 1550

There could be some magnet effect in some schools, but lots of schools have higher scores than Churchill. Churchill is a very well off area and parents have resource to help kids and yet scores are poor when compared to many other schools. Am I missing something here?

Not the main topic, but Chuchill does equally poor with FARMs students as well despite having advantage of having so few FARMs. Looks like one of the worst schools for disadvantage kids.


Ref - Page 19 - http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/info/pdf/160929%20SAT%20Exam%20Participation%20Perform.pdf

Churchill doesn’t do poorly with farms, there is only a very small population that would struggle anywhere. There simply aren’t any hard working motivated farm populations nearby to cover them up statistically. Goes to show you the whole BS narrative about putting poor kids in with successful kids being this magic fix all.

Whitman has a tiny % of FARMs, yet their scores are higher than those in Churchill.

They are not a legacy pocket of poverty, the Whitman farms are typically motivated foreigners who went there for the opportunity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Special Eduction can mean anything from really mild to very severe. I would assume it is more because parents in that area can afford the expensive SN privates that typically run $40-70K, that many of us would love to send our kids to but cannot afford.

I don't think Churchill has less number of special needs kids.

I would think that Churchill and Whitman is not too different here when it comes to parents being able to afford 40-70K. Whitman and Churchill, both have 9-11 % students as special education.

I don't live in either and don't know much about both schools, but I recon it may have to do with some special program in Churchill which accommodates kids with severe disability. Otherwise it makes very little sense to see such a huge difference between Whitman and Churchill.

Whitman and Churchill both have programs for children whose disabilities are severe enough that they can't attend their home school. So, both schools pull in a number of kids with disabilities.

However, the kids at Whitman are kids with Intellectual disabilities, often combined with other issues. They are taught on alternate standards and don't take the SAT. So their scores are not reflected in these numbers.

The kids at Churchill are kids with emotional and behavioral issues but average range IQ. Many of these kids have histories of school failure because of interfering behaviors, but they're still on track to get a diploma, and as such some of them do take the SAT. So their scores are reflected in the number.

Is that the whole story? Probably not. But it's one factor.

Anonymous wrote:Churchill and Whitman both have different special education programs. Each of these programs (Bridge, ARS, Autism, ED, LFI, etc.) focus on kids with different needs and abilities. These programs pull from multiple school clusters and reflect students from various parts of the county.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Special Eduction can mean anything from really mild to very severe. I would assume it is more because parents in that area can afford the expensive SN privates that typically run $40-70K, that many of us would love to send our kids to but cannot afford.

I don't think Churchill has less number of special needs kids.

I would think that Churchill and Whitman is not too different here when it comes to parents being able to afford 40-70K. Whitman and Churchill, both have 9-11 % students as special education.

I don't live in either and don't know much about both schools, but I recon it may have to do with some special program in Churchill which accommodates kids with severe disability. Otherwise it makes very little sense to see such a huge difference between Whitman and Churchill.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Special Eduction can mean anything from really mild to very severe. I would assume it is more because parents in that area can afford the expensive SN privates that typically run $40-70K, that many of us would love to send our kids to but cannot afford.

May be true, but then how come Whitman special education kids have a drastically higher score than Churchill?

Because the special programs that pull kids to Whitman (SCB and LFI) have kids who don't take the SAT, whereas the special programs that pull kids to Churchill (Bridge in particular) do have kids who take the SAT.

Anonymous wrote:Special Eduction can mean anything from really mild to very severe. I would assume it is more because parents in that area can afford the expensive SN privates that typically run $40-70K, that many of us would love to send our kids to but cannot afford.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Special Eduction can mean anything from really mild to very severe. I would assume it is more because parents in that area can afford the expensive SN privates that typically run $40-70K, that many of us would love to send our kids to but cannot afford.

May be true, but then how come Whitman special education kids have a drastically higher score than Churchill?

Anonymous wrote:Another thing to keep in mind is that when we're comparing the SAT scores, is that there are lots of factors about which kids take which tests.

For example, BCC sent in the application for SAT testing accommodations for my kid so late, and with so many errors, that he didn't get what he needed. On the other hand, since parents can fill out the ACT form, it was turned in early and accurately. Needless to say, my kid took the ACT and not the SAT, so he isn't reflected in those numbers. If he had been, he'd have pulled the average down.

There are also schools out there (I am not saying this is or isn't true about Churchill, I have no experience there) that steer kids with disabilities towards community college and discourage them from taking either test, as well as schools that encourage every kid to take both tests and don't do a good job of counseling kids to pick the one that aligns with their strengths or has the accommodations they need. Without knowing what a particular school does, and what subset of students at the school take the SAT, you can't tell much from average scores.