Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are no studies that would show what would happen to your specific child under specific different scenarios. We only have general studies and averages. Your child could end up with the "wrong crowd" at Wilson, could end up a "star pupil" at Coolidge, or "hate school" at McKinley. We cannot see the future, or any number of given circumstances that could impact the way your child turns out.

Generally speaking, your child will be "fine." Fine means a happy, healthy, fully functioning adult with a college education, capable of supporting themselves/their family and contributing to society. For most people, this scenario is all you could want for a child.

If you want "more" than that, then yes, you probably need to figure out some different ways to give your kids more of an advantage. Maybe that is private tutoring, sports coaching, art lessons, music school, etc. Maybe that is a different High School, Private School, Homeschool, etc. Maybe it is Harvard or bust. Maybe it is the Olympics or failure. But those types of goals are not what most people expect for their kids. And therefore, most studies will not tell you whether your future Harvard/Olympian/Presidential candidate/Supreme Court Justice/etc will be "fine" at any high school in DC.

I would venture to say that for the majority of WOTP families, "more" is what they expect. They aren't just looking for a happy, healthy, fully functioning adult with a college education, capable of supporting themselves/their family and contributing to society. They are looking for an education that can open up the pathways to a career and income level of the kid's choosing. They are looking for access to the same level of education for their child as they had themselves -- which is generally from very competitive colleges and grad schools. They are looking at the chances of their kid doing that at all types of schools. Looking at a high poverty school, I know my kid would need to fight to get the education I want them to have. That risk is too high for me.

In that case, you have to recognize that you are an outlier. While there might be a bunch in your surrounding area, you are not representative of the people these studies are made for. Additionally, you have to recognize that public schools are generally made for the average person. Government funded schools cannot cater to such a small subset of the population. What works for most everyone else, will not work for you.

For people in this category, I would recommend pursuing a private school that meets all your desires. This isn't snark. It is just accepting that the DC public school system is perhaps not going to meet your needs. And that is ok. Please remember, however, that for most people the DC school system will meet the needs of their child- and that too is ok.

Anonymous wrote:

(And all this said, I am sure my white kid would be "fine" if he went to HS at Ballou, in that I have the time and money to advocate for him at school to make sure he gets into the appropriate classes, has activities out of school, gets SAT test prep, goes to a 4-year college, have any mental health/developmental needs addressed right away, good food, good sleep, etc etc etc.)

Thank you to the PP and the others for helping me to understand how to better articulate my personal reservations (I'm not in DC). I've been soul searching on this issue and now realize that my fear has less to do with the student body at a higher poverty school, and more to do with 1) confidence in the particular school leadership; and 2) my own capacity to address potential problems that could come up in a more challenging environment in light of my individual circumstances and my particular child. I'm not too good to take a chance; more likely, I'm not good enough. Ten years ago, I would have been.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did you take the time to read the research linked in that thread or do you just want to start another racist/classist thread? There is a political forum for your type.

I am asking a very specific question. There are two separate points that are often conflated. One, that SES mixed schools (30-50 % disadvantaged) Provide academic benefits to low SES kids and high SES kids do fine (or maybe better). The second, what I am asking about, is that the education of the mother is the factor most correlated with a child’s academic success. The second is often used to support the argument that the success of a school doesn’t matter at all because your child will do well no matter what solely because of who the parents are. What I am asking whether and, if so, how those studies establish causation or otherwise account for the choices an educated mother will make on where she sends her children to school or it is pure correlation?

None of the linked research (to the extent it opens because some links are bad) address my question. Sending my child to a poorly performing school is a different question than sending my kids to an SES mixed school. I have zero problem with the second.

OP, I know people like you in real life. There is no study or analysis that could convince you that "High SES students will perform well no matter their peer group" because you have already made up your mind that you don't want to send your kid to a school where they might have a different peer group. You will find fault or ignore or nitpick any study or analysis that shows otherwise.

And I know people like you, you do not have the facts so you choose to name call. The unwillingness to engage on the facts and call names speaks volumes about you but it does not further the discussion.

What would further the discussion would be if you were to listen to parents like me who sent their kids to low-SES schools with good outcomes. But like I said, I know from first-hand experience that you won't listen.

(And all this said, I am sure my white kid would be "fine" if he went to HS at Ballou, in that I have the time and money to advocate for him at school to make sure he gets into the appropriate classes, has activities out of school, gets SAT test prep, goes to a 4-year college, have any mental health/developmental needs addressed right away, good food, good sleep, etc etc etc.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did you take the time to read the research linked in that thread or do you just want to start another racist/classist thread? There is a political forum for your type.

I am asking a very specific question. There are two separate points that are often conflated. One, that SES mixed schools (30-50 % disadvantaged) Provide academic benefits to low SES kids and high SES kids do fine (or maybe better). The second, what I am asking about, is that the education of the mother is the factor most correlated with a child’s academic success. The second is often used to support the argument that the success of a school doesn’t matter at all because your child will do well no matter what solely because of who the parents are. What I am asking whether and, if so, how those studies establish causation or otherwise account for the choices an educated mother will make on where she sends her children to school or it is pure correlation?

None of the linked research (to the extent it opens because some links are bad) address my question. Sending my child to a poorly performing school is a different question than sending my kids to an SES mixed school. I have zero problem with the second.

OP, I know people like you in real life. There is no study or analysis that could convince you that "High SES students will perform well no matter their peer group" because you have already made up your mind that you don't want to send your kid to a school where they might have a different peer group. You will find fault or ignore or nitpick any study or analysis that shows otherwise.

And I know people like you, you do not have the facts so you choose to name call. The unwillingness to engage on the facts and call names speaks volumes about you but it does not further the discussion.

Anonymous wrote:PP here. I'm also highly educated enough to know I didn't need a hyphen between highly and educated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are no studies that would show what would happen to your specific child under specific different scenarios. We only have general studies and averages. Your child could end up with the "wrong crowd" at Wilson, could end up a "star pupil" at Coolidge, or "hate school" at McKinley. We cannot see the future, or any number of given circumstances that could impact the way your child turns out.

Generally speaking, your child will be "fine." Fine means a happy, healthy, fully functioning adult with a college education, capable of supporting themselves/their family and contributing to society. For most people, this scenario is all you could want for a child.

If you want "more" than that, then yes, you probably need to figure out some different ways to give your kids more of an advantage. Maybe that is private tutoring, sports coaching, art lessons, music school, etc. Maybe that is a different High School, Private School, Homeschool, etc. Maybe it is Harvard or bust. Maybe it is the Olympics or failure. But those types of goals are not what most people expect for their kids. And therefore, most studies will not tell you whether your future Harvard/Olympian/Presidential candidate/Supreme Court Justice/etc will be "fine" at any high school in DC.

I would venture to say that for the majority of WOTP families, "more" is what they expect. They aren't just looking for a happy, healthy, fully functioning adult with a college education, capable of supporting themselves/their family and contributing to society. They are looking for an education that can open up the pathways to a career and income level of the kid's choosing. They are looking for access to the same level of education for their child as they had themselves -- which is generally from very competitive colleges and grad schools. They are looking at the chances of their kid doing that at all types of schools. Looking at a high poverty school, I know my kid would need to fight to get the education I want them to have. That risk is too high for me.

In that case, you have to recognize that you are an outlier. While there might be a bunch in your surrounding area, you are not representative of the people these studies are made for. Additionally, you have to recognize that public schools are generally made for the average person. Government funded schools cannot cater to such a small subset of the population. What works for most everyone else, will not work for you.

For people in this category, I would recommend pursuing a private school that meets all your desires. This isn't snark. It is just accepting that the DC public school system is perhaps not going to meet your needs. And that is ok. Please remember, however, that for most people the DC school system will meet the needs of their child- and that too is ok.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did you take the time to read the research linked in that thread or do you just want to start another racist/classist thread? There is a political forum for your type.

I am asking a very specific question. There are two separate points that are often conflated. One, that SES mixed schools (30-50 % disadvantaged) Provide academic benefits to low SES kids and high SES kids do fine (or maybe better). The second, what I am asking about, is that the education of the mother is the factor most correlated with a child’s academic success. The second is often used to support the argument that the success of a school doesn’t matter at all because your child will do well no matter what solely because of who the parents are. What I am asking whether and, if so, how those studies establish causation or otherwise account for the choices an educated mother will make on where she sends her children to school or it is pure correlation?

None of the linked research (to the extent it opens because some links are bad) address my question. Sending my child to a poorly performing school is a different question than sending my kids to an SES mixed school. I have zero problem with the second.

OP, I know people like you in real life. There is no study or analysis that could convince you that "High SES students will perform well no matter their peer group" because you have already made up your mind that you don't want to send your kid to a school where they might have a different peer group. You will find fault or ignore or nitpick any study or analysis that shows otherwise.

+1. See McKinley, Banneker

There's a world of difference between sending your white kid to Banneker, and sending them to say Ballou with 65% 1s on the PARCC ELA. I get why we're having this conversation, and I agree that white parents are often racist, but I don't think it helps to deny the truth that most parents, period, would wish for a better school than Ballou. I also think it can be counter-productive to deny the problems in these schools, because upper SES parents freak out and over-react when they start to see some of the difficulties and develop even more entrenched prejudices (saw this in action with our zoned middle school.) Better to acknowledge that, to a degree, high-poverty/all-black schools can be very difficult and poorly resources places because they are, of course, the product of our existing inequalities.

(And all this said, I am sure my white kid would be "fine" if he went to HS at Ballou, in that I have the time and money to advocate for him at school to make sure he gets into the appropriate classes, has activities out of school, gets SAT test prep, goes to a 4-year college, have any mental health/developmental needs addressed right away, good food, good sleep, etc etc etc.)

Anonymous wrote:I would agree that the subject of this threat is "classist," but that doesn't mean the topic isn't based in reality. I'll volunteer that in my personal experience, participation in advanced classes (whether you call such "G&T" or "tracking," it doesn't matter) results in higher levels of knowledge and competence in the given subject matter. The difference in results when comparing "tracked" classes and "average student" classes continues through higher education, meaning: there is a direct correlation between the competence of the peer group and the competence of the student who participates in the group. This is real-world stuff, full-stop.

I don't question the multitude of studies saying that academic competence of high-income students will not decrease when those high-income and/or "gifted" students are placed in mainstreamed classes, but these studies do not account for the opportunity to improve that is lost when those students have no opportunity to be surrounded by a measurably superior peer group.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are no studies that would show what would happen to your specific child under specific different scenarios. We only have general studies and averages. Your child could end up with the "wrong crowd" at Wilson, could end up a "star pupil" at Coolidge, or "hate school" at McKinley. We cannot see the future, or any number of given circumstances that could impact the way your child turns out.

Generally speaking, your child will be "fine." Fine means a happy, healthy, fully functioning adult with a college education, capable of supporting themselves/their family and contributing to society. For most people, this scenario is all you could want for a child.

If you want "more" than that, then yes, you probably need to figure out some different ways to give your kids more of an advantage. Maybe that is private tutoring, sports coaching, art lessons, music school, etc. Maybe that is a different High School, Private School, Homeschool, etc. Maybe it is Harvard or bust. Maybe it is the Olympics or failure. But those types of goals are not what most people expect for their kids. And therefore, most studies will not tell you whether your future Harvard/Olympian/Presidential candidate/Supreme Court Justice/etc will be "fine" at any high school in DC.

I would venture to say that for the majority of WOTP families, "more" is what they expect. They aren't just looking for a happy, healthy, fully functioning adult with a college education, capable of supporting themselves/their family and contributing to society. They are looking for an education that can open up the pathways to a career and income level of the kid's choosing. They are looking for access to the same level of education for their child as they had themselves -- which is generally from very competitive colleges and grad schools. They are looking at the chances of their kid doing that at all types of schools. Looking at a high poverty school, I know my kid would need to fight to get the education I want them to have. That risk is too high for me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are no studies that would show what would happen to your specific child under specific different scenarios. We only have general studies and averages. Your child could end up with the "wrong crowd" at Wilson, could end up a "star pupil" at Coolidge, or "hate school" at McKinley. We cannot see the future, or any number of given circumstances that could impact the way your child turns out.

Generally speaking, your child will be "fine." Fine means a happy, healthy, fully functioning adult with a college education, capable of supporting themselves/their family and contributing to society. For most people, this scenario is all you could want for a child.

If you want "more" than that, then yes, you probably need to figure out some different ways to give your kids more of an advantage. Maybe that is private tutoring, sports coaching, art lessons, music school, etc. Maybe that is a different High School, Private School, Homeschool, etc. Maybe it is Harvard or bust. Maybe it is the Olympics or failure. But those types of goals are not what most people expect for their kids. And therefore, most studies will not tell you whether your future Harvard/Olympian/Presidential candidate/Supreme Court Justice/etc will be "fine" at any high school in DC.

I would venture to say that for the majority of WOTP families, "more" is what they expect. They aren't just looking for a happy, healthy, fully functioning adult with a college education, capable of supporting themselves/their family and contributing to society. They are looking for an education that can open up the pathways to a career and income level of the kid's choosing. They are looking for access to the same level of education for their child as they had themselves -- which is generally from very competitive colleges and grad schools. They are looking at the chances of their kid doing that at all types of schools. Looking at a high poverty school, I know my kid would need to fight to get the education I want them to have. That risk is too high for me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did you take the time to read the research linked in that thread or do you just want to start another racist/classist thread? There is a political forum for your type.

I am asking a very specific question. There are two separate points that are often conflated. One, that SES mixed schools (30-50 % disadvantaged) Provide academic benefits to low SES kids and high SES kids do fine (or maybe better). The second, what I am asking about, is that the education of the mother is the factor most correlated with a child’s academic success. The second is often used to support the argument that the success of a school doesn’t matter at all because your child will do well no matter what solely because of who the parents are. What I am asking whether and, if so, how those studies establish causation or otherwise account for the choices an educated mother will make on where she sends her children to school or it is pure correlation?

None of the linked research (to the extent it opens because some links are bad) address my question. Sending my child to a poorly performing school is a different question than sending my kids to an SES mixed school. I have zero problem with the second.

OP, I know people like you in real life. There is no study or analysis that could convince you that "High SES students will perform well no matter their peer group" because you have already made up your mind that you don't want to send your kid to a school where they might have a different peer group. You will find fault or ignore or nitpick any study or analysis that shows otherwise.

+1. See McKinley, Banneker

There's a world of difference between sending your white kid to Banneker, and sending them to say Ballou with 65% 1s on the PARCC ELA. I get why we're having this conversation, and I agree that white parents are often racist, but I don't think it helps to deny the truth that most parents, period, would wish for a better school than Ballou. I also think it can be counter-productive to deny the problems in these schools, because upper SES parents freak out and over-react when they start to see some of the difficulties and develop even more entrenched prejudices (saw this in action with our zoned middle school.) Better to acknowledge that, to a degree, high-poverty/all-black schools can be very difficult and poorly resources places because they are, of course, the product of our existing inequalities.

Anonymous wrote:There are no studies that would show what would happen to your specific child under specific different scenarios. We only have general studies and averages. Your child could end up with the "wrong crowd" at Wilson, could end up a "star pupil" at Coolidge, or "hate school" at McKinley. We cannot see the future, or any number of given circumstances that could impact the way your child turns out.

Generally speaking, your child will be "fine." Fine means a happy, healthy, fully functioning adult with a college education, capable of supporting themselves/their family and contributing to society. For most people, this scenario is all you could want for a child.

If you want "more" than that, then yes, you probably need to figure out some different ways to give your kids more of an advantage. Maybe that is private tutoring, sports coaching, art lessons, music school, etc. Maybe that is a different High School, Private School, Homeschool, etc. Maybe it is Harvard or bust. Maybe it is the Olympics or failure. But those types of goals are not what most people expect for their kids. And therefore, most studies will not tell you whether your future Harvard/Olympian/Presidential candidate/Supreme Court Justice/etc will be "fine" at any high school in DC.