Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all well and good to say you want to close the achievement gap, but he said nothing other than "oh we have this new metric to measure the gap." Great -- you've measured it. Now how are you going to close it while also providing high quality education to non-FARMS kids?

The education gap grew under 2.0 because it was a crappy non-vetted educational experiment. UMC parents with college degrees recognized gaps and the need to supplement. They also had the financial means to supplement.

Everybody on DCUM assumes that everybody in the DCUM demographic supplements (whatever that specifically means), but I don't know what they base this assumption on.

It's wishful thinking imo; a way to explain why outcomes are so different. I don't know anyone in my UMC circle that does what this board seems to think everyone does.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think they are making this too much about race, especially considering the county is majority-minority and whites are only the second largest group at MCPS (latinos are #1).

The five groups they identify for special focus seem to comprise more than half of all students. At that point, why not just focus on all students?

It's like the free lunch program -- at schools where more than a certain percentage of teh student body is entitled to it, they realized it's easier to just give everyone free lunch at that school than deal with the hassle of charging/running a payment program for the minority of kids who don't qualify for it.

I think they should just focus on students who are lower SES, regardless of race.

+1 in the other thread about Asian Americans and MS magnet, someone stated that people should stop making it about race, and I responded that I totally agree, but that it's MCPS that keeps bringing race into the picture.

If they want to be race blind in magnets, then why call out races for under achievers?

If they want to look at the individual rather than the group, then why make magnet admission about "peer cohort"?

If you truly understand the history of the United States, you know that race and SES are linked. Even if you did focus on SES and didn't mention race, you are still going to find Blacks and Hispanics overrepresented when it comes to poverty.

I find the desire to "take race out of it" to be....questionable.

Yes, I do *truly* understand US history, which includes discrimination against Asian Americans, as well. Do you *truly* understand that?

And I hope you *truly* understand that you can't say "let's look at race when it comes to instance x but not look at race when it comes to instance y". Either you look at it, or you don't. Stop picking and choosing when you want to look at race and when you don't.

I have no problem helping low income students. I grew up low income, with very little help from our poor school district when I was in school. I am now upper/middle income and have donated thousands of dollars to our public schools via the "buy nothing drive"; we participate in the backpack back to school drives. I have no problem with MCPS helping out low income students. I have a problem with MCPS (and others) picking and choosing when to look at race (when it helps some groups) and when not to (when it doesn't help said group).

I think it is perfectly fine to look at SES...but if you think that doing so will get you away from the race factor that you so clearly loathe, you are mistaken.

This country was built on brutality and the subjugation of some to the benefit of others. We see the remnants of this today in the form of massive inequalities with black and brown kids more likely to be in the losing in.

So sure, let's focus on SES in lieu of race. You will still be focused in the same group of kids , but you will probably "feel" better about it.

There are also kids who are black but are perfectly at a good advantage. Focusing on SES might overlap mostly with the black/Latino community, but it targets it better to the group that needs the most help while weeding out the few that were mistakenly caught in the net.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all well and good to say you want to close the achievement gap, but he said nothing other than "oh we have this new metric to measure the gap." Great -- you've measured it. Now how are you going to close it while also providing high quality education to non-FARMS kids?

The education gap grew under 2.0 because it was a crappy non-vetted educational experiment. UMC parents with college degrees recognized gaps and the need to supplement. They also had the financial means to supplement.

Everybody on DCUM assumes that everybody in the DCUM demographic supplements (whatever that specifically means), but I don't know what they base this assumption on.

How is there equity when students pass out N Word cards, say the N word, and think Instagram posts of themselves in blackface is funny? What about other forms of harassment that goes ignored by school administrators?

I think the problems with school climate are barriers in specific schools based on the minority groups within that school’s community. The Superintendent may say he wants to fix these types of biases but to do so he will have to change the issue that principals won't fix problems thatthey are afraid of acknowledging.

Anonymous wrote:It's all well and good to say you want to close the achievement gap, but he said nothing other than "oh we have this new metric to measure the gap." Great -- you've measured it. Now how are you going to close it while also providing high quality education to non-FARMS kids?

The education gap grew under 2.0 because it was a crappy non-vetted educational experiment. UMC parents with college degrees recognized gaps and the need to supplement. They also had the financial means to supplement.

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn’t want to be a teacher here.

Now you can be judged on how well your students are testing based on
Poor blacks
Poor Hispanics
Poor non black or non Hispanic
Black
Hispanic
Non poor, non hispanic, non black

Lovely. As if.

The whole Jack Smith OpEd seems to be setting the table for One Big Experiment. Never mind the other MCPS failed experiments (c2.0, test retakes, whole grading in HS, free meals, free Heathcare, free summer camp, free test prep, free counseling, free esol for years, no discipline or punish intent, etc. All of that didn’t help some kids test on grade level proficiency.

Can’t wait to see what’s next up Jack’s central office $2B budget sleeve.

This sounds racist. Trumpeting out how each of these class segments are doing in each school.
What is that supposed to accomplish? It already was in the annual write-ups: Scores per school by black, hispanic, white, asian, and then Farms, esol, neither.
They just regrouped it and renamed it? Prob cost a pretty penny to outsource that.

What does Smith mean when he says: "schools situated in communities across al SES levels have demonstrated success serving all students"

Is he talking about magnet schools placed in poorly performing schools? Or which specific schools? Some way up county have an easier way to mix students, cover more acreage?

He goes on to say "educators are the most important factor in determining student outcomes." What proves that? And we all know it certainly isn't curriculum 2.0...I thought decades of research shows that parental involvement is the most important factor.

He concludes by saying that "equity requires equal access and opportunity." So there is not access and opportunity of the effective "educators"?
The MoCo public schools already provide access to the same curriculum, trained teachers, and classes and opportunity (not at magnets, specialty schools access and opportunity whatsoever. there are more aides and esol aides in Title 1 as well).

well now we have some constructive unilateral DCUM passport commenting going on.

having a bad night PP?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Catholic schools aren't talking about it.

STEM schools aren't talking about it.

Independent schools aren't talking about it.

Boarding schools aren't talking about.

Fairfax and Arlington aren't harping on it 24/7/365 like MCPS has been the last 5 years.

LA and SF gave up decades ago.

Only MCPS is. And now with this hidden Wash Post OpEd, the whole region can see for themselves how $hitty sanctuary cities are.

OK. Send your children to those schools.

Hopefully someday we will be able to.

Unfortunately, in MCPS parents have ZERO choice in where to send their kids (unless you want to be shady and commit residency fraud).

There definitely needs to be more choices for families in MCPS.

What's stopping you from sending your children to Catholic schools/boarding schools/independent schools/schools in Fairfax, Arlington, LA, SF?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Catholic schools aren't talking about it.

STEM schools aren't talking about it.

Independent schools aren't talking about it.

Boarding schools aren't talking about.

Fairfax and Arlington aren't harping on it 24/7/365 like MCPS has been the last 5 years.

LA and SF gave up decades ago.

Only MCPS is. And now with this hidden Wash Post OpEd, the whole region can see for themselves how $hitty sanctuary cities are.

OK. Send your children to those schools.

So you agree, MCPS is choosing this track and marching away on it. You just don't ask WHY.

No, I agree that, if that's how you see it, then you have the choice of sending your children to schools that (in your opinion) do what you want and don't do what you don't want.

That's great! I'm glad to hear that you support School Choice. Historically, that hasn't been very popular in Montgomery County. Maybe the tide is slowly changing and parents will recognize the benefit of vouchers and school choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Catholic schools aren't talking about it.

STEM schools aren't talking about it.

Independent schools aren't talking about it.

Boarding schools aren't talking about.

Fairfax and Arlington aren't harping on it 24/7/365 like MCPS has been the last 5 years.

LA and SF gave up decades ago.

Only MCPS is. And now with this hidden Wash Post OpEd, the whole region can see for themselves how $hitty sanctuary cities are.

OK. Send your children to those schools.

So you agree, MCPS is choosing this track and marching away on it. You just don't ask WHY.

No, I agree that, if that's how you see it, then you have the choice of sending your children to schools that (in your opinion) do what you want and don't do what you don't want.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Catholic schools aren't talking about it.

STEM schools aren't talking about it.

Independent schools aren't talking about it.

Boarding schools aren't talking about.

Fairfax and Arlington aren't harping on it 24/7/365 like MCPS has been the last 5 years.

LA and SF gave up decades ago.

Only MCPS is. And now with this hidden Wash Post OpEd, the whole region can see for themselves how $hitty sanctuary cities are.

OK. Send your children to those schools.

So you agree, MCPS is choosing this track and marching away on it. You just don't ask WHY.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Catholic schools aren't talking about it.

STEM schools aren't talking about it.

Independent schools aren't talking about it.

Boarding schools aren't talking about.

Fairfax and Arlington aren't harping on it 24/7/365 like MCPS has been the last 5 years.

LA and SF gave up decades ago.

Only MCPS is. And now with this hidden Wash Post OpEd, the whole region can see for themselves how $hitty sanctuary cities are.

OK. Send your children to those schools.

Hopefully someday we will be able to.

Unfortunately, in MCPS parents have ZERO choice in where to send their kids (unless you want to be shady and commit residency fraud).

There definitely needs to be more choices for families in MCPS.

Anonymous wrote:

Catholic schools aren't talking about it.

STEM schools aren't talking about it.

Independent schools aren't talking about it.

Boarding schools aren't talking about.

Fairfax and Arlington aren't harping on it 24/7/365 like MCPS has been the last 5 years.

LA and SF gave up decades ago.

Only MCPS is. And now with this hidden Wash Post OpEd, the whole region can see for themselves how $hitty sanctuary cities are.

OK. Send your children to those schools.

Anonymous wrote:It's all well and good to say you want to close the achievement gap, but he said nothing other than "oh we have this new metric to measure the gap." Great -- you've measured it. Now how are you going to close it while also providing high quality education to non-FARMS kids?

Well, so glad you asked... Stay tuned for next month's Washington Post Opinion Piece by Jack Smith & Co. And buckle your seatbelts.

Anonymous wrote:Again the biggest thing in education today is closing the achievement gap

They want everyone to be average period

It's only good if you are below grade level

Above grade level we don't care so please shutup educating you just increases the achievement gap

At grade level we don't care about you either you are fine

All resources need to go to folks below grade level to get them to be average that's it average otherwise if they advance too far they start having a negative impact on the achievement gap again

Catholic schools aren't talking about it.

STEM schools aren't talking about it.

Independent schools aren't talking about it.

Boarding schools aren't talking about.

Fairfax and Arlington aren't harping on it 24/7/365 like MCPS has been the last 5 years.

LA and SF gave up decades ago.

Only MCPS is. And now with this hidden Wash Post OpEd, the whole region can see for themselves how $hitty sanctuary cities are.