Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ but I completely agree the 25% mark seems to be the magic number to which the county should strive for since it seems to benefit the kids

There aren’t enough rich kids for the east county’s slipping demographics

There are words for people who think that some demographic groups are better than other demographic groups, though.

Also, you're behind the times.

Realists? Demographics don’t always equal race

They can also represent poverty, non-Native speakers, education levels, intact house holds or criminality rates. Those are all increasing in wrong directions in the eastern and northern parts of MoCo. If you think of a particular race for any of those then you are the racist. But the plan the export those to the west’s schools won’t change your neighborhood or help those kids. It will just mask a few of them in superior sastistics. There will be plenty of poor kids to back fill them in the DCC.

That is really the problem here right? The rich suburban schools of yesteryear are now devolving to poor urban-ish schools as wealth migrates back into the cities. The middle class remaining wonder what is happening and look west and see what they thought they were buying into and wonder why those got to resist the change. Mean while no matter how you bus, rezone, balance or breakup, the county will have a title 1 middle school in the not to distant future and most likely a high school soon after. The county is gaining poor people quicker than rich people and they live in just a few areas because the metro is so pricy. But careful punishing the rich people, if an exodus occurs it will only speed the decay.

You're doing it again.

DP here. Just stupid. Not everyone who's rich prefers the city.

You’re the type of moron who confuses weather with climate. We are talking trends and not individuals. If you are poor you will most like not move to DC, the few spots are mostly taken up by existing poor people fighting over rapidly decreasing spots. If you are poor you move to the suburbs of job centers/cities like MoCo. Coupled to it being trendy to have a city address where people with money have options and many take the trendy option which is trendy for a reason and you get.... the national trend of suburban decay. Read up a little bit and come back
https://www.citylab.com/equity/2017/05/the-new-suburban-crisis/521709/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ but I completely agree the 25% mark seems to be the magic number to which the county should strive for since it seems to benefit the kids

There aren’t enough rich kids for the east county’s slipping demographics

There are words for people who think that some demographic groups are better than other demographic groups, though.

Also, you're behind the times.

Realists? Demographics don’t always equal race

They can also represent poverty, non-Native speakers, education levels, intact house holds or criminality rates. Those are all increasing in wrong directions in the eastern and northern parts of MoCo. If you think of a particular race for any of those then you are the racist. But the plan the export those to the west’s schools won’t change your neighborhood or help those kids. It will just mask a few of them in superior sastistics. There will be plenty of poor kids to back fill them in the DCC.

That is really the problem here right? The rich suburban schools of yesteryear are now devolving to poor urban-ish schools as wealth migrates back into the cities. The middle class remaining wonder what is happening and look west and see what they thought they were buying into and wonder why those got to resist the change. Mean while no matter how you bus, rezone, balance or breakup, the county will have a title 1 middle school in the not to distant future and most likely a high school soon after. The county is gaining poor people quicker than rich people and they live in just a few areas because the metro is so pricy. But careful punishing the rich people, if an exodus occurs it will only speed the decay.

You're doing it again.

DP here. Just stupid. Not everyone who's rich prefers the city.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ but I completely agree the 25% mark seems to be the magic number to which the county should strive for since it seems to benefit the kids

There aren’t enough rich kids for the east county’s slipping demographics

There are words for people who think that some demographic groups are better than other demographic groups, though.

Also, you're behind the times.

Realists? Demographics don’t always equal race

They can also represent poverty, non-Native speakers, education levels, intact house holds or criminality rates. Those are all increasing in wrong directions in the eastern and northern parts of MoCo. If you think of a particular race for any of those then you are the racist. But the plan the export those to the west’s schools won’t change your neighborhood or help those kids. It will just mask a few of them in superior sastistics. There will be plenty of poor kids to back fill them in the DCC.

That is really the problem here right? The rich suburban schools of yesteryear are now devolving to poor urban-ish schools as wealth migrates back into the cities. The middle class remaining wonder what is happening and look west and see what they thought they were buying into and wonder why those got to resist the change. Mean while no matter how you bus, rezone, balance or breakup, the county will have a title 1 middle school in the not to distant future and most likely a high school soon after. The county is gaining poor people quicker than rich people and they live in just a few areas because the metro is so pricy. But careful punishing the rich people, if an exodus occurs it will only speed the decay.

You're doing it again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ but I completely agree the 25% mark seems to be the magic number to which the county should strive for since it seems to benefit the kids

There aren’t enough rich kids for the east county’s slipping demographics

There are words for people who think that some demographic groups are better than other demographic groups, though.

Also, you're behind the times.

Realists? Demographics don’t always equal race

They can also represent poverty, non-Native speakers, education levels, intact house holds or criminality rates. Those are all increasing in wrong directions in the eastern and northern parts of MoCo. If you think of a particular race for any of those then you are the racist. But the plan the export those to the west’s schools won’t change your neighborhood or help those kids. It will just mask a few of them in superior sastistics. There will be plenty of poor kids to back fill them in the DCC.

That is really the problem here right? The rich suburban schools of yesteryear are now devolving to poor urban-ish schools as wealth migrates back into the cities. The middle class remaining wonder what is happening and look west and see what they thought they were buying into and wonder why those got to resist the change. Mean while no matter how you bus, rezone, balance or breakup, the county will have a title 1 middle school in the not to distant future and most likely a high school soon after. The county is gaining poor people quicker than rich people and they live in just a few areas because the metro is so pricy. But careful punishing the rich people, if an exodus occurs it will only speed the decay.

Community

I give them an OK in a scale of good-bad.

The course offerings and clubs are good.
Culture and expectations driven by some unity and student body.
Classroom sizes less than ideal.
Guidance counselors stretched.
The rounded whole grades creates a real mess- intense need to differentiate, very wide span within an A or B or C student, gaming the system w bare minimum effort (for some personalities)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ but I completely agree the 25% mark seems to be the magic number to which the county should strive for since it seems to benefit the kids

There aren’t enough rich kids for the east county’s slipping demographics

There are words for people who think that some demographic groups are better than other demographic groups, though.

Also, you're behind the times.

Anonymous wrote:^^ but I completely agree the 25% mark seems to be the magic number to which the county should strive for since it seems to benefit the kids

There aren’t enough rich kids for the east county’s slipping demographics

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'd be interested in seeing the composition of the FARMs kids. Is it predominantly poor Asian kids in Whitman vs poor black/Hispanic kids in RM, or do the populations look similar?

Some number between 0 and 104 students received free or reduced meals at Whitman HS last year, in the whole high school. Some number between 0 and 25 seniors. How would you generalize from numbers that small? It's like me saying that half of the kids in my house (n=2) are in high school.

It's interesting that other schools with Farm rates lower than Clarksburg and RM such as Sherwood and BCC aren't on this list.

BCC % of FARMs students taking SATs is pretty high though - 77%; so is WJ.
Wootton is 69%.

The other schools are around the 50% mark, except for QO - 35% and Watkins Mill 20%. That's probably why the scores looked wacky for Watkins Mill and BCC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'd be interested in seeing the composition of the FARMs kids. Is it predominantly poor Asian kids in Whitman vs poor black/Hispanic kids in RM, or do the populations look similar?

Some number between 0 and 104 students received free or reduced meals at Whitman HS last year, in the whole high school. Some number between 0 and 25 seniors. How would you generalize from numbers that small? It's like me saying that half of the kids in my house (n=2) are in high school.

It's interesting that other schools with Farm rates lower than Clarksburg and RM such as Sherwood and BCC aren't on this list.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That's why I said.. "for the most part". There are outliers, but the trend is that low income kids seem to do better (per SAT scores) when the FARMs rate is around the 25% mark. I'm not sure what other measure you could use. If low income kids are taking SATs, then that's a sign that they want to go to college, which is great.

I did notice Poolesville. Wow, there are some super smart kids there

Argh, the document doesn't show any pattern or trend that low income kids do better per SAT at schools with low FARMS. I only pulled 10 schools -which even if these were the only examples are far more than a fluke outlier. The FARMS kids scores are all over the map but the trend appears to show that they do better in schools with higher FARMS not lower.

Top 10 schools where FARMs had the highest scores:
Whitman 1715
Wootton 1659
Poolesville 1641
Damascus 1612
Watkins Mill 1534
QO 1512
Churchill 1518
WJ 1493
Clarksburg 1460
RM 1447

Of the top 10, only Watkins Mill has a FARMs rate about 50%, Clarksburg is at about 26.8%. The rest is below about 25%.

Here's what I stated... " the trend is that low income kids seem to do better (per SAT scores) when the FARMs rate is around the 25% mark. "... or lower I should add.

Here's what you stated... "the trend appears to show that they do better in schools with higher FARMS not lower". The data doesn't support your assertion at all.

Pg 17
https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/info/pdf/SATBOEMemo10614.pdf

The new SAT has a scale of 400-1600 so guessing the data to which you're referring is out of date.

The data is for the graduating class of 2014. I can't find any recent data. I'm sure it's somewhere, and it would be interesting to see if this trend continues.

Anonymous wrote:

I'd be interested in seeing the composition of the FARMs kids. Is it predominantly poor Asian kids in Whitman vs poor black/Hispanic kids in RM, or do the populations look similar?

Some number between 0 and 104 students received free or reduced meals at Whitman HS last year, in the whole high school. Some number between 0 and 25 seniors. How would you generalize from numbers that small? It's like me saying that half of the kids in my house (n=2) are in high school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That's why I said.. "for the most part". There are outliers, but the trend is that low income kids seem to do better (per SAT scores) when the FARMs rate is around the 25% mark. I'm not sure what other measure you could use. If low income kids are taking SATs, then that's a sign that they want to go to college, which is great.

I did notice Poolesville. Wow, there are some super smart kids there

Argh, the document doesn't show any pattern or trend that low income kids do better per SAT at schools with low FARMS. I only pulled 10 schools -which even if these were the only examples are far more than a fluke outlier. The FARMS kids scores are all over the map but the trend appears to show that they do better in schools with higher FARMS not lower.

Top 10 schools where FARMs had the highest scores:
Whitman 1715
Wootton 1659
Poolesville 1641
Damascus 1612
Watkins Mill 1534
QO 1512
Churchill 1518
WJ 1493
Clarksburg 1460
RM 1447

Of the top 10, only Watkins Mill has a FARMs rate about 50%, Clarksburg is at about 26.8%. The rest is below about 25%.

Here's what I stated... " the trend is that low income kids seem to do better (per SAT scores) when the FARMs rate is around the 25% mark. "... or lower I should add.

Here's what you stated... "the trend appears to show that they do better in schools with higher FARMS not lower". The data doesn't support your assertion at all.

Pg 17
https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/info/pdf/SATBOEMemo10614.pdf

I'd be interested in seeing the composition of the FARMs kids. Is it predominantly poor Asian kids in Whitman vs poor black/Hispanic kids in RM, or do the populations look similar?

^^ but I completely agree the 25% mark seems to be the magic number to which the county should strive for since it seems to benefit the kids

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That's why I said.. "for the most part". There are outliers, but the trend is that low income kids seem to do better (per SAT scores) when the FARMs rate is around the 25% mark. I'm not sure what other measure you could use. If low income kids are taking SATs, then that's a sign that they want to go to college, which is great.

I did notice Poolesville. Wow, there are some super smart kids there

Argh, the document doesn't show any pattern or trend that low income kids do better per SAT at schools with low FARMS. I only pulled 10 schools -which even if these were the only examples are far more than a fluke outlier. The FARMS kids scores are all over the map but the trend appears to show that they do better in schools with higher FARMS not lower.

Top 10 schools where FARMs had the highest scores:
Whitman 1715
Wootton 1659
Poolesville 1641
Damascus 1612
Watkins Mill 1534
QO 1512
Churchill 1518
WJ 1493
Clarksburg 1460
RM 1447

Of the top 10, only Watkins Mill has a FARMs rate about 50%, Clarksburg is at about 26.8%. The rest is below about 25%.

Here's what I stated... " the trend is that low income kids seem to do better (per SAT scores) when the FARMs rate is around the 25% mark. "... or lower I should add.

Here's what you stated... "the trend appears to show that they do better in schools with higher FARMS not lower". The data doesn't support your assertion at all.

Pg 17
https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/info/pdf/SATBOEMemo10614.pdf

The new SAT has a scale of 400-1600 so guessing the data to which you're referring is out of date.