Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I have learned from this thread: if you start with the premise that whatever MCPS does, it's bad, then you can use any data to show that whatever MCPS does, it's bad.

And I will add to this, what I have gathered from this thread is that we made a good decision to put our kids in private, where testing is supported by all teachers and students, and there is cohesiveness and no bureaucracy. Grateful.

And yet you're posting on this thread, in the Maryland Public Schools forum?

She is gloating. Some of us would love to send our kids to private school but can’t afford it.

Is that what people who are truly happy and satisfied with their decision do?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I have learned from this thread: if you start with the premise that whatever MCPS does, it's bad, then you can use any data to show that whatever MCPS does, it's bad.

And I will add to this, what I have gathered from this thread is that we made a good decision to put our kids in private, where testing is supported by all teachers and students, and there is cohesiveness and no bureaucracy. Grateful.

And yet you're posting on this thread, in the Maryland Public Schools forum?

She is gloating. Some of us would love to send our kids to private school but can’t afford it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I have learned from this thread: if you start with the premise that whatever MCPS does, it's bad, then you can use any data to show that whatever MCPS does, it's bad.

And I will add to this, what I have gathered from this thread is that we made a good decision to put our kids in private, where testing is supported by all teachers and students, and there is cohesiveness and no bureaucracy. Grateful.

And yet you're posting on this thread, in the Maryland Public Schools forum?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I have learned from this thread: if you start with the premise that whatever MCPS does, it's bad, then you can use any data to show that whatever MCPS does, it's bad.

And I will add to this, what I have gathered from this thread is that we made a good decision to put our kids in private, where testing is supported by all teachers and students, and there is cohesiveness and no bureaucracy. Grateful.

And more and more teachers are doing the same for themselves. They want to teach whole children, not check boxes.

Anonymous wrote:What I have learned from this thread: if you start with the premise that whatever MCPS does, it's bad, then you can use any data to show that whatever MCPS does, it's bad.

And I will add to this, what I have gathered from this thread is that we made a good decision to put our kids in private, where testing is supported by all teachers and students, and there is cohesiveness and no bureaucracy. Grateful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is hilarious is that all schools suck but we will try and convince ourselves that our school is better than the next. What matters in the end is that somehow you are enriching your kid far more than what is measured here and that they are becoming globally competitive.

This kind of enrichment, acceleration is happening with only a fraction of kids and their families. This is happening in spite of MCPS. Of course, MCPS also measures these children with PARCC etc. so they can claim that these kids are striving because of the school. Who are these kids? The usual people who are making names for themselves.

It really comes down to politics and meeting the liberal agenda.

It is not liberal or conservative agenda. Its racial politics. Lets play a matching game, shall we? Take the race and match to the motivation/expectation of the parents/students of in the school system. No one race wholly has stood up as a champion for students and education.
Race
a) Asian-American,
b) Hispanic,
c) African-American
d) White

Motivation
1) Historically privilege without effort
2) Crippled due to dependence on handouts
3) Silent and subservient. Enrich at home if school is poor.
4) School as daycare.

What I have learned from this thread: if you start with the premise that whatever MCPS does, it's bad, then you can use any data to show that whatever MCPS does, it's bad.

It is very difficult to measure the strength of each school because students aren't a blank slate. They enter with skills and knowledge, some more than others. My son started kindergarten reading on a third grade level. His teacher got the credit for him making the EOY benchmark even though he had nothing to do with it. Students in my school enter without knowing much of anything expected of them at the BOY. Their parents are surprised when they get notice that they didn't meet the BOY benchmark. They had no idea they were behind the minute they walked in the door. They think the school should teach the kids everything. Schools really need to have EOY course exams so that it can be apparent exactly what students learned or didn't learn in that course that school year. My DS goes to a Catholic school and has had midterms and finals since 3rd grade. The content of the course is measured twice a year during exams. PARCC gives students a random set of passages that don't reflect any content that has been taught. So if a student has to read a passage about crustaceans but they have no idea what they are, they are screwed. Chances are, students who come to school with a lot of background knowledge (this tends to be UMC students) will do better on the PARCC test. It doesn't have much to do with the content they were taught though. They need to bring in midterms and finals and make sure the content of the course is what is being measured on these tests.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Actually Whitman's GS rating was 4 for a while. Because when rich white kids do badly on standardized tests it's because they're too smart to care about the test.

They boycotted the test. Everyone knows this. The drooling with jealously non-Whitman parents living in discount houses keep trying to spin it to their benefit.

Did it ever occur to you that other kids from other schools might not care about PARCC so they tanked it on purpose, too? Just randomly chose answers like I'm sure those Whitman students did?

Well thank you for letting us all know. Now we will assume the best. In all seriousness, I have never believed that PARCC exams give an accurate assessment of the kids’ knowledge or abilities. I really don’t know why anyone ever took those tests seriously. The fact that this report card bases anything on that test speaks to the inaccuracies of these reports. I would put no stock in the results of these reports. They simply are worthless.

DP here. At my kid's elementary school (not a W), the teachers and admin make it very clear that they think the PARCC is a ridiculous test. THey don't take it seriously. MAP? Absolutely. They care a lot about MAP scores, but PARCC- they don't. So as a result, the kids don't take it seriously and the parents don't take it seriously. What's crazy is that we are new to this school but was in another MCPS ES prior (again, not a W); and the teachers there didn't take the PARCC seriously either. They too were vocal about it so it's not like this big secret. By the way, I totally agree with them. I had a chance to take a practice test along with other parents at a PTA meeting, and we all pretty much agreed that it was bonkers.

Anonymous wrote:What is hilarious is that all schools suck but we will try and convince ourselves that our school is better than the next. What matters in the end is that somehow you are enriching your kid far more than what is measured here and that they are becoming globally competitive.

This kind of enrichment, acceleration is happening with only a fraction of kids and their families. This is happening in spite of MCPS. Of course, MCPS also measures these children with PARCC etc. so they can claim that these kids are striving because of the school. Who are these kids? The usual people who are making names for themselves.

It really comes down to politics and meeting the liberal agenda.

What is hilarious is that all schools suck but we will try and convince ourselves that our school is better than the next. What matters in the end is that somehow you are enriching your kid far more than what is measured here and that they are becoming globally competitive.

This kind of enrichment, acceleration is happening with only a fraction of kids and their families. This is happening in spite of MCPS. Of course, MCPS also measures these children with PARCC etc. so they can claim that these kids are striving because of the school. Who are these kids? The usual people who are making names for themselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Actually Whitman's GS rating was 4 for a while. Because when rich white kids do badly on standardized tests it's because they're too smart to care about the test.

They boycotted the test. Everyone knows this. The drooling with jealously non-Whitman parents living in discount houses keep trying to spin it to their benefit.

Did it ever occur to you that other kids from other schools might not care about PARCC so they tanked it on purpose, too? Just randomly chose answers like I'm sure those Whitman students did?

Well thank you for letting us all know. Now we will assume the best. In all seriousness, I have never believed that PARCC exams give an accurate assessment of the kids’ knowledge or abilities. I really don’t know why anyone ever took those tests seriously. The fact that this report card bases anything on that test speaks to the inaccuracies of these reports. I would put no stock in the results of these reports. They simply are worthless.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Actually Whitman's GS rating was 4 for a while. Because when rich white kids do badly on standardized tests it's because they're too smart to care about the test.

They boycotted the test. Everyone knows this. The drooling with jealously non-Whitman parents living in discount houses keep trying to spin it to their benefit.

Did it ever occur to you that other kids from other schools might not care about PARCC so they tanked it on purpose, too? Just randomly chose answers like I'm sure those Whitman students did?

Oh that's IMPOSSIBLE because it doesn't fit with the narrative Whitman parents have spun up. And when we point it out, we're apparently just jealous!

It has nothing to do with fitting a narrative. It is fact that a large portion of Whitman kids did not care about PARCC and purposely did poorly. It isn’t speculation. It happened. You are free to believe what you want. It is obvious that you are jealous of Whitman. You want the school to have a bad reputation for no other reason than jealousy. Whitman parents really don’t care if you don’t believe the facts. But denying you are jealous is laughable.

DP... it is also widely known that some other students from other schools also don't care about PARCC and purposely tanked it, ie, they didn't try.

Speaking for myself, I am not jealous of Whitman. Not one bit. We looked at houses out that way and decided against it. We moved from an area whiter and richer than Whitman.

My kids go to schools rated 4. I'm fine with that because I know that even if they went to schools rated a 5, they'd probably get similar scores and grades that they are getting in their 4 rated schools. Similarly, I'm pretty sure a student at Whitman who does well will do equally well at a 4 rated school. Whitman doesn't have a different curriculum nor does it have the best teachers in the county. It has money and not a lot of poor kids. That's about it.

Exactly, the Whitman excuse is the norm in many schools. Lots of URM just don't care about these tests at all. Same result....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Actually Whitman's GS rating was 4 for a while. Because when rich white kids do badly on standardized tests it's because they're too smart to care about the test.

They boycotted the test. Everyone knows this. The drooling with jealously non-Whitman parents living in discount houses keep trying to spin it to their benefit.

Did it ever occur to you that other kids from other schools might not care about PARCC so they tanked it on purpose, too? Just randomly chose answers like I'm sure those Whitman students did?

Oh that's IMPOSSIBLE because it doesn't fit with the narrative Whitman parents have spun up. And when we point it out, we're apparently just jealous!

It has nothing to do with fitting a narrative. It is fact that a large portion of Whitman kids did not care about PARCC and purposely did poorly. It isn’t speculation. It happened. You are free to believe what you want. It is obvious that you are jealous of Whitman. You want the school to have a bad reputation for no other reason than jealousy. Whitman parents really don’t care if you don’t believe the facts. But denying you are jealous is laughable.

DP... it is also widely known that some other students from other schools also don't care about PARCC and purposely tanked it, ie, they didn't try.

Speaking for myself, I am not jealous of Whitman. Not one bit. We looked at houses out that way and decided against it. We moved from an area whiter and richer than Whitman.

My kids go to schools rated 4. I'm fine with that because I know that even if they went to schools rated a 5, they'd probably get similar scores and grades that they are getting in their 4 rated schools. Similarly, I'm pretty sure a student at Whitman who does well will do equally well at a 4 rated school. Whitman doesn't have a different curriculum nor does it have the best teachers in the county. It has money and not a lot of poor kids. That's about it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Actually Whitman's GS rating was 4 for a while. Because when rich white kids do badly on standardized tests it's because they're too smart to care about the test.

They boycotted the test. Everyone knows this. The drooling with jealously non-Whitman parents living in discount houses keep trying to spin it to their benefit.

Did it ever occur to you that other kids from other schools might not care about PARCC so they tanked it on purpose, too? Just randomly chose answers like I'm sure those Whitman students did?

Oh that's IMPOSSIBLE because it doesn't fit with the narrative Whitman parents have spun up. And when we point it out, we're apparently just jealous!

It has nothing to do with fitting a narrative. It is fact that a large portion of Whitman kids did not care about PARCC and purposely did poorly. It isn’t speculation. It happened. You are free to believe what you want. It is obvious that you are jealous of Whitman. You want the school to have a bad reputation for no other reason than jealousy. Whitman parents really don’t care if you don’t believe the facts. But denying you are jealous is laughable.