Anonymous wrote:Why is it wrong for parents to prioritize their own children?

My question is, why do these schools have such low test scores? It's established fact that cities often spend more (often much more) per student than suburbs do. Why does that extra money do nothing to raise test scores?!

It’s not wrong for you to put your kids first.

Money will never fix test scores when education is not prioritized at home. The schools can’t fix that.

It’s a bit race (skin color), it’s class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the DC suburbs, the schools with more poors get smaller classrooms, extra resources, and more attention on a daily basis. Yet somehow the white parents get slandered and accused of opportunity hoarding when their kids (and Asian kids, who are now “white” whether their parents like it or not) perform better in school. Is it really so unreasonable to want your kids to attend schools near their homes rather than be parceled out across the county like they are some sort of precious resource which other schools cannot be denied?

Hilarious. As if every rich parent didn’t pick out their house according to the school.

Specific schools? Not necessarily. Not that much hangs in the balance when you can easily afford good private schools and tutors.

Anonymous wrote:Why is it wrong for parents to prioritize their own children?

My question is, why do these schools have such low test scores? It's established fact that cities often spend more (often much more) per student than suburbs do. Why does that extra money do nothing to raise test scores?!

Because money alone does not solve systemic inequity.

When rich white parents say they want diversity, they mean similarly situation as them that are not white

Having done the high FARMS school, we left and we didn't lie. The kids and families were just too different and in a much different place on the socioeconomic ladder which made their opinions on what good education was supposed to be. All parents paid lip service to this but the difference is are you as a parent sitting with your kid working on the homework. reading with them and paying for tutoring, doing workbooks in the summer and so.

We tried all that be involved with the PTA bs and make a difference but by 2nd grade we realized no, parents and PTA aren't going to matter.

Anonymous wrote:The whole podcast is a massive call out of the DCUM mentality and I love it.

I heard a parent explaining why they needed a fundraising org outside the pta in order to allow donors to fund pet projects and it was just -**cringe**

Why is it wrong for parents to prioritize their own children?

My question is, why do these schools have such low test scores? It's established fact that cities often spend more (often much more) per student than suburbs do. Why does that extra money do nothing to raise test scores?!

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea why the focus is on the behavior of white parents in the 60s when we can see Asian families today using every tool in the book to preserve their kids’ dominance at selective magnet schools like Stuyvesant and TJHSST. It obviously is not the case that white parents are the only ones trying to maximize their own kids’ advantages.

IMO the difference is that Asian parents don't coat their intentions with feel-good words like "diversity" and "wholesome experience" like UMC white parents tend to.

Anonymous wrote:In the DC suburbs, the schools with more poors get smaller classrooms, extra resources, and more attention on a daily basis. Yet somehow the white parents get slandered and accused of opportunity hoarding when their kids (and Asian kids, who are now “white” whether their parents like it or not) perform better in school. Is it really so unreasonable to want your kids to attend schools near their homes rather than be parceled out across the county like they are some sort of precious resource which other schools cannot be denied?

Hilarious. As if every rich parent didn’t pick out their house according to the school.

The whole podcast is a massive call out of the DCUM mentality and I love it.

In the DC suburbs, the schools with more poors get smaller classrooms, extra resources, and more attention on a daily basis. Yet somehow the white parents get slandered and accused of opportunity hoarding when their kids (and Asian kids, who are now “white” whether their parents like it or not) perform better in school. Is it really so unreasonable to want your kids to attend schools near their homes rather than be parceled out across the county like they are some sort of precious resource which other schools cannot be denied?

Not reading all the messages— did anyone reference the Shaw middle school group? They epitomize this for me.

Anonymous wrote:I love it love it love it. I love that it exposes the hypocrisy of rich white parents who say they are sending their kids to a "lower performing" elementary school because they love diversity, but then their kid ends up in the all-white "gifted" class. Or they say that "all you need to do" is stay on top of the teachers/administrators to make sure they are giving your child extra challenge, etc., which really means you are stealing resources from the underprivileged kids at the school who actually need them. It really is gentification.

The rich white parents sent their kids for the french immersion program and said so in the beginning.

It (SIS in Brooklyn) reminds me of Mcps strategy if language magnets program.

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea why the focus is on the behavior of white parents in the 60s when we can see Asian families today using every tool in the book to preserve their kids’ dominance at selective magnet schools like Stuyvesant and TJHSST. It obviously is not the case that white parents are the only ones trying to maximize their own kids’ advantages.

What do you propose? Quotas? The elimination of standardized tests? Hard pass.