Anonymous wrote:I see so much more anger, cynicism, and cruelty on this thread than I do at my child’s “bad” high school.

Anonymous wrote:It is so much about income, and not about race. Yet that's what everyone jumps to. With the boundary assessment coming, MCPS is about to undertake the largest social experiment in modern history. Good luck to them. I'm glad my youngest will be done with MCPS before the study comes out - or maybe at the same time, but already accepted to college!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


So I guess we are going to have to agree on what constitutes education? Right now all kids are getting educated but yet something isn’t right according to who? Maybe it is the college for all model doesn’t apply to poor kids who most don’t go to college? Maybe it is the test score/FARM rate ranking system that rubs people the wrong way that causes the glaring SES stratification. Maybe it because softies like you confuse equal access with equal opportunities let alone equal outcomes the last two are but pipe dreams in resource contrived meritocracies.

All things are not equal, poor does equal failure at a much higher proclivity and too many poor people can and do crash systems (not just educational) . Those are the facts based off of every historical measure. The county is getting in influx of people who fall below the regional middle class threshold. When you have more not middle class people logic states the ability to maintain an iconic middle class school system will be challenged. If you then turn around and compare the first changed schools to the legacy/richer schools it makes it look like the schools are slipping but is it really the schools?

Do you think it is realistic to replicate Whitman in Langley Park with all the school funds possible? Most educators don’t. If the county becomes bifurcated the schools will and have followed, mix all you want but rich people tend to stay one step ahead, always have always will. You’re chasing the systemic ghosts of social engineering with new and different social engineering. But nothing you do will fundamentally move the needle for poor kids in a society with not nearly as much social mobility as people pretend it has. And mixing the metrics to obscure the early schools in trouble won’t stop more poor kids from coming in and dropping test scores in predictable curves. I assure you they aren’t moving to Chevy Chase.

Also point out where I correlated failure to race? Your own stereotypes color your comprehension.

I partially agree with you - on the school part. If there are problems, they are not really problems of the schools. People here tend to use schools as a tool trying to solve social issues which are not supposed to be solved by schools.

I don't have enough information to comment on whether there are serious social issues and how they can be solved. I just do not believe schools should be used for that purpose. Maybe we should just do nothing and people will try to work things out. Or maybe we can do something to help, but not using our schools,

Agree and Agree.

I don't think you could replicate Whitman most places since it's basically a segregated school and without practices like red-lining that kind of thing doesn't happen these days.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


So I guess we are going to have to agree on what constitutes education? Right now all kids are getting educated but yet something isn’t right according to who? Maybe it is the college for all model doesn’t apply to poor kids who most don’t go to college? Maybe it is the test score/FARM rate ranking system that rubs people the wrong way that causes the glaring SES stratification. Maybe it because softies like you confuse equal access with equal opportunities let alone equal outcomes the last two are but pipe dreams in resource contrived meritocracies.

All things are not equal, poor does equal failure at a much higher proclivity and too many poor people can and do crash systems (not just educational) . Those are the facts based off of every historical measure. The county is getting in influx of people who fall below the regional middle class threshold. When you have more not middle class people logic states the ability to maintain an iconic middle class school system will be challenged. If you then turn around and compare the first changed schools to the legacy/richer schools it makes it look like the schools are slipping but is it really the schools?

Do you think it is realistic to replicate Whitman in Langley Park with all the school funds possible? Most educators don’t. If the county becomes bifurcated the schools will and have followed, mix all you want but rich people tend to stay one step ahead, always have always will. You’re chasing the systemic ghosts of social engineering with new and different social engineering. But nothing you do will fundamentally move the needle for poor kids in a society with not nearly as much social mobility as people pretend it has. And mixing the metrics to obscure the early schools in trouble won’t stop more poor kids from coming in and dropping test scores in predictable curves. I assure you they aren’t moving to Chevy Chase.

Also point out where I correlated failure to race? Your own stereotypes color your comprehension.

I partially agree with you - on the school part. If there are problems, they are not really problems of the schools. People here tend to use schools as a tool trying to solve social issues which are not supposed to be solved by schools.

I don't have enough information to comment on whether there are serious social issues and how they can be solved. I just do not believe schools should be used for that purpose. Maybe we should just do nothing and people will try to work things out. Or maybe we can do something to help, but not using our schools,

Agree and Agree.

I don't think you could replicate Whitman most places since it's basically a segregated school and without practices like red-lining that kind of thing doesn't happen these days.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


So I guess we are going to have to agree on what constitutes education? Right now all kids are getting educated but yet something isn’t right according to who? Maybe it is the college for all model doesn’t apply to poor kids who most don’t go to college? Maybe it is the test score/FARM rate ranking system that rubs people the wrong way that causes the glaring SES stratification. Maybe it because softies like you confuse equal access with equal opportunities let alone equal outcomes the last two are but pipe dreams in resource contrived meritocracies.

All things are not equal, poor does equal failure at a much higher proclivity and too many poor people can and do crash systems (not just educational) . Those are the facts based off of every historical measure. The county is getting in influx of people who fall below the regional middle class threshold. When you have more not middle class people logic states the ability to maintain an iconic middle class school system will be challenged. If you then turn around and compare the first changed schools to the legacy/richer schools it makes it look like the schools are slipping but is it really the schools?

Do you think it is realistic to replicate Whitman in Langley Park with all the school funds possible? Most educators don’t. If the county becomes bifurcated the schools will and have followed, mix all you want but rich people tend to stay one step ahead, always have always will. You’re chasing the systemic ghosts of social engineering with new and different social engineering. But nothing you do will fundamentally move the needle for poor kids in a society with not nearly as much social mobility as people pretend it has. And mixing the metrics to obscure the early schools in trouble won’t stop more poor kids from coming in and dropping test scores in predictable curves. I assure you they aren’t moving to Chevy Chase.

Also point out where I correlated failure to race? Your own stereotypes color your comprehension.

I partially agree with you - on the school part. If there are problems, they are not really problems of the schools. People here tend to use schools as a tool trying to solve social issues which are not supposed to be solved by schools.

I don't have enough information to comment on whether there are serious social issues and how they can be solved. I just do not believe schools should be used for that purpose. Maybe we should just do nothing and people will try to work things out. Or maybe we can do something to help, but not using our schools,

Agree and Agree.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


So I guess we are going to have to agree on what constitutes education? Right now all kids are getting educated but yet something isn’t right according to who? Maybe it is the college for all model doesn’t apply to poor kids who most don’t go to college? Maybe it is the test score/FARM rate ranking system that rubs people the wrong way that causes the glaring SES stratification. Maybe it because softies like you confuse equal access with equal opportunities let alone equal outcomes the last two are but pipe dreams in resource contrived meritocracies.

All things are not equal, poor does equal failure at a much higher proclivity and too many poor people can and do crash systems (not just educational) . Those are the facts based off of every historical measure. The county is getting in influx of people who fall below the regional middle class threshold. When you have more not middle class people logic states the ability to maintain an iconic middle class school system will be challenged. If you then turn around and compare the first changed schools to the legacy/richer schools it makes it look like the schools are slipping but is it really the schools?

Do you think it is realistic to replicate Whitman in Langley Park with all the school funds possible? Most educators don’t. If the county becomes bifurcated the schools will and have followed, mix all you want but rich people tend to stay one step ahead, always have always will. You’re chasing the systemic ghosts of social engineering with new and different social engineering. But nothing you do will fundamentally move the needle for poor kids in a society with not nearly as much social mobility as people pretend it has. And mixing the metrics to obscure the early schools in trouble won’t stop more poor kids from coming in and dropping test scores in predictable curves. I assure you they aren’t moving to Chevy Chase.

Also point out where I correlated failure to race? Your own stereotypes color your comprehension.

I partially agree with you - on the school part. If there are problems, they are not really problems of the schools. People here tend to use schools as a tool trying to solve social issues which are not supposed to be solved by schools.

I don't have enough information to comment on whether there are serious social issues and how they can be solved. I just do not believe schools should be used for that purpose. Maybe we should just do nothing and people will try to work things out. Or maybe we can do something to help, but not using our schools,

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

F off snowflake. People like you are part of the problem. Can’t fix a problem that can’t be spoken about or doesn’t exist

I’m not the person you’re arguing with but your use of “snowflake” outs you as a biased source as far as I’m concerned. Clearly, people understand that demographics are changing. The suburbanization of poverty is a real trend across the country. But you are the one stating minority = poor = bad = failure. How exactly does it work that schools that have physically remained in the same place in the suburbs are now “urban-ish” unless urban is the dog whistle for not white? We get it. Schools in MCPS are less white. Many of us — even white people — think that’s fine. Children aren’t “decay.” Let’s all get on board with solutions for how to best educate the children who actually live in the county.

So I guess we are going to have to agree on what constitutes education? Right now all kids are getting educated but yet something isn’t right according to who? Maybe it is the college for all model doesn’t apply to poor kids who most don’t go to college? Maybe it is the test score/FARM rate ranking system that rubs people the wrong way that causes the glaring SES stratification. Maybe it because softies like you confuse equal access with equal opportunities let alone equal outcomes the last two are but pipe dreams in resource contrived meritocracies.

All things are not equal, poor does equal failure at a much higher proclivity and too many poor people can and do crash systems (not just educational) . Those are the facts based off of every historical measure. The county is getting in influx of people who fall below the regional middle class threshold. When you have more not middle class people logic states the ability to maintain an iconic middle class school system will be challenged. If you then turn around and compare the first changed schools to the legacy/richer schools it makes it look like the schools are slipping but is it really the schools?

Do you think it is realistic to replicate Whitman in Langley Park with all the school funds possible? Most educators don’t. If the county becomes bifurcated the schools will and have followed, mix all you want but rich people tend to stay one step ahead, always have always will. You’re chasing the systemic ghosts of social engineering with new and different social engineering. But nothing you do will fundamentally move the needle for poor kids in a society with not nearly as much social mobility as people pretend it has. And mixing the metrics to obscure the early schools in trouble won’t stop more poor kids from coming in and dropping test scores in predictable curves. I assure you they aren’t moving to Chevy Chase.

Also point out where I correlated failure to race? Your own stereotypes color your comprehension.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s amazing that you think there are any west MoCo families in dCUm at all.

? of course there are.

For example, complaining that the middle-school magnet programs are too far plus their kids didn't get in, so unfair.

MS and HS magnets are so far from west Bethesda during rush hour I honestly don’t see why or how they’d be seriously considered by those families. I think they just get actively involved with their home schools and extra curricular/sports.
But whatever PP is right, we don’t live west if 270 nor inside the beltway.

I guess you didn't read the gazillions of threads on downcounty middle-school magnet admissions.

Anonymous wrote:


So I guess we are going to have to agree on what constitutes education? Right now all kids are getting educated but yet something isn’t right according to who? Maybe it is the college for all model doesn’t apply to poor kids who most don’t go to college? Maybe it is the test score/FARM rate ranking system that rubs people the wrong way that causes the glaring SES stratification. Maybe it because softies like you confuse equal access with equal opportunities let alone equal outcomes the last two are but pipe dreams in resource contrived meritocracies.

All things are not equal, poor does equal failure at a much higher proclivity and too many poor people can and do crash systems (not just educational) . Those are the facts based off of every historical measure. The county is getting in influx of people who fall below the regional middle class threshold. When you have more not middle class people logic states the ability to maintain an iconic middle class school system will be challenged. If you then turn around and compare the first changed schools to the legacy/richer schools it makes it look like the schools are slipping but is it really the schools?

Do you think it is realistic to replicate Whitman in Langley Park with all the school funds possible? Most educators don’t. If the county becomes bifurcated the schools will and have followed, mix all you want but rich people tend to stay one step ahead, always have always will. You’re chasing the systemic ghosts of social engineering with new and different social engineering. But nothing you do will fundamentally move the needle for poor kids in a society with not nearly as much social mobility as people pretend it has. And mixing the metrics to obscure the early schools in trouble won’t stop more poor kids from coming in and dropping test scores in predictable curves. I assure you they aren’t moving to Chevy Chase.

Also point out where I correlated failure to race? Your own stereotypes color your comprehension.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

F off snowflake. People like you are part of the problem. Can’t fix a problem that can’t be spoken about or doesn’t exist

I’m not the person you’re arguing with but your use of “snowflake” outs you as a biased source as far as I’m concerned. Clearly, people understand that demographics are changing. The suburbanization of poverty is a real trend across the country. But you are the one stating minority = poor = bad = failure. How exactly does it work that schools that have physically remained in the same place in the suburbs are now “urban-ish” unless urban is the dog whistle for not white? We get it. Schools in MCPS are less white. Many of us — even white people — think that’s fine. Children aren’t “decay.” Let’s all get on board with solutions for how to best educate the children who actually live in the county.

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.

F off snowflake. People like you are part of the problem. Can’t fix a problem that can’t be spoken about or doesn’t exist

Anonymous wrote:

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.