Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Ridgeview parents are just angry because their elementary schools have forced diversity. Have you ever been in the Jones Lane or Thurgood Marshall neighborhood? You will see they aren't very diverse or have any lower-class housing. The schools are diverse because the county brings kids from outside the boundary into the school to bring up the FARMS rate. I know this since my kids are in high school and college now and I went to the meetings long ago when they started bringing in Gaithersburg kids to make the FARMS rate higher. The same happens at Thurgood Marshall.

Yeah - I don't think so....

Not PP but parent at RCES, I have heard this from parents. You can look at both schools service maps and see that the county busses kids some almost 20 min away to make there more FARMs at the schools. Otherwise, FARMs rates would be negligible.

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/ServiceAreaMaps/JonesLaneES.pdf

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/ServiceAreaMaps/ThurgoodMarshallES.pdf

You posted maps of the school boundaries. How does this demonstrate that MCPS brings kids in from outside the boundaries?

This is a troll poster. I have a hard time believing that someone could mail out letters via USPS. USPS is both costly for a high school size and how would this parent have gotten this information. OP, email is move believable, next time stick to thinking your lies through.

ALL children should be highlighted not just black students---no matter the size of their student population. If this story is indeed true it is sad on both the part of the school and the part of the alleged racist parent.

I'd be upset too, if my child worked just as hard as another black student and was not recognized.

I'm leaning toward troll as well.

There is a an argument to be made that highlighting the accomplishments of the black students may help lower performing black students more than it would hurt higher performing white students. I have no idea what the demographic breakdown is at Ridgeview. I do know that in several of the Silver Spring schools the racial/SES/performance breakdown is very stark. The majority of AA and Latino students are lower SES/lower performing while the white kids are UMC/higher performing. The inside of the school is very segregated - AA/Latino kids not winning academic awards, filling the lower tier classes, higher drop out rate etc. In those schools, highlighting and focusing on AA or Latino kids who are succeeding can send a powerful message to other kids that they can do it too. If the majority of kids up there are all white and the everyday experience is segregated within the school, the AA students don't see themselves as someone who can succeed.

This is a troll poster. I have a hard time believing that someone could mail out letters via USPS. USPS is both costly for a high school size and how would this parent have gotten this information. OP, email is move believable, next time stick to thinking your lies through.

ALL children should be highlighted not just black students---no matter the size of their student population. If this story is indeed true it is sad on both the part of the school and the part of the alleged racist parent.

I'd be upset too, if my child worked just as hard as another black student and was not recognized.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a school want to increase its FARMs rate?

Because it is better for society.

Can you explain in concrete ways? I’m a fifteen-year veteran teacher in MCPS and, while I’ve taught in schools with high to low rates of poverty, I have never heard of this initiative. By the way, I’m a double minority and grew up poor so I support FARMs and other supports for low income students. Do you mean trying to get already attending students whose families meet the criteria enrolled in FARMs?

I'm not PP, but I believe PP was trying to point out that economically and racially integrated schools benefit society in a variety of ways. First - concentrated poverty is bad for students, and bad for communities. Second - integrated classrooms have been shown to improve outcomes for low income kids, but to have no impact on higher income kids.

So, for a variety of reasons, it makes sense for schools to be economically integrated - it means poverty is not concentrated, it improves outcomes for low-income kids, and it has zero impact on higher income kids.

Hence, it is good for society because you help kids who would otherwise be in highly concentrated poverty, who are members of our society.

Yes but this makes Wootton moms believe their school is better than QO and RM and NW because they have less FARMs

Yup! It’s a powerful fantasy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a school want to increase its FARMs rate?

Because it is better for society.

Can you explain in concrete ways? I’m a fifteen-year veteran teacher in MCPS and, while I’ve taught in schools with high to low rates of poverty, I have never heard of this initiative. By the way, I’m a double minority and grew up poor so I support FARMs and other supports for low income students. Do you mean trying to get already attending students whose families meet the criteria enrolled in FARMs?

I'm not PP, but I believe PP was trying to point out that economically and racially integrated schools benefit society in a variety of ways. First - concentrated poverty is bad for students, and bad for communities. Second - integrated classrooms have been shown to improve outcomes for low income kids, but to have no impact on higher income kids.

So, for a variety of reasons, it makes sense for schools to be economically integrated - it means poverty is not concentrated, it improves outcomes for low-income kids, and it has zero impact on higher income kids.

Hence, it is good for society because you help kids who would otherwise be in highly concentrated poverty, who are members of our society.

Yes but this makes Wootton moms believe their school is better than QO and RM and NW because they have less FARMs

Why would a school want to increase its FARMs rate?

Because it is better for society.

Can you explain in concrete ways? I’m a fifteen-year veteran teacher in MCPS and, while I’ve taught in schools with high to low rates of poverty, I have never heard of this initiative. By the way, I’m a double minority and grew up poor so I support FARMs and other supports for low income students. Do you mean trying to get already attending students whose families meet the criteria enrolled in FARMs?

I'm not the PP either but I'll try to answer. There have been studies that in schools with something like 10% or less FARMS/URMs the FARMS/URM kids do better than they would in a school with more FARMS kids. In this ratio, there is no measurable impact on the performance of non-FARMS. This benefit disappears when the ratio of FARMS kids increases and performance for non FARMS kids starts to decline.

In the W schools, including schools like Churchill, minorities and FARMS kids do perform better than their SES counterparts at other schools. These schools could absorb another 5% FARMS. As a Wootton parent and former teacher, I can completely see this working. My kids had FARMS friends, UMC friends and uber rich friends going all the way back to ES. I never knew some of the families were FARMS until after being friends with some of the moms for years. The kids all mix and make friends in school, sports teams etc. It isn't racially divided either. One of my son's African friends lives in a house that is twice the size of ours. He has a very close AA friend and another white friend who are FARMS and are in small THs. There are lots of kids in the smaller THs some FARMS, some not.

With a lower percentage of FARMS the school can put forward lots of resources to make sure the kids perform well. These kids are mixed in with other higher SES kids that have learning disabilities or are ESOL so it isn't as if all the poor kids have to go to homework club or are the only ones getting extra help. The PTA gives the guidance counselor money so all the FARMS kids get money for the book fair, school t-shirts that all the kids wear, and can attend the after school programs without anyone knowing they didn't have the money to sign up.

What MCPS wants to do which is wrong is to move boundaries around to disperse FARMS kids far from their neighborhoods and into schools where the ratio would increase to negate the benefit to the FARMS kids and start to diminish the performance of the non-FARMS kids. Studies show that FARMS kids do not do any better when the number increases. This only diverts resources toward busing FARMS kids rather than providing teachers which do make a difference. This helps no one except MCPS by creating an appearance that schools are more even in performance.

It may slightly help the property values of schools that are losing large portions FARMS students but only if the school is losing enough to substantially raise the scores. It does hurt the property values of the receiving schools if the numbers are substantial enough to drop the scores. MCPS leverages this to create divisions between home owners hoping for a windfall and home owners fearing a loss.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a school want to increase its FARMs rate?

The school and the community doesn't. The county screws them over so they can say how "diverse" all their schools are.

Suck a rock you racist elitist troll

Anonymous wrote:This is not a troll, I received a letter too. Many of the other moms did as well but I don't know if it is only white parents because our neighborhood is all white. The letter wasn't even racist OP is being overly sensitive. The letter just said it is unfair that blacks can be proud that they beat white people in a competition and that if whites say it then it would be racist. Yes it is true but that is just where our society is now. Anyway, the letter is completely real, but I don't know if minority parents got it as well. QO has had a few racial incidents in the past but it is still a great school.

Well, we found the letter writer

Both of those explanations make sense to me. Thank you. I still don’t believe increasing the FARMS rate is an actual goal of schools. I’ve sat on 2 instructional leadership teams at low poverty schools and the concern was how to serve the few FARMs students we had, not get more.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a school want to increase its FARMs rate?

Because it is better for society.

Can you explain in concrete ways? I’m a fifteen-year veteran teacher in MCPS and, while I’ve taught in schools with high to low rates of poverty, I have never heard of this initiative. By the way, I’m a double minority and grew up poor so I support FARMs and other supports for low income students. Do you mean trying to get already attending students whose families meet the criteria enrolled in FARMs?

It is most important for society for everybody to be educated. I don't have kids in MCPS anymore but I still pay taxes for education, why (besides I have to) .. because I am paying to live in an educated world/society/neighborhood.

Of course we would need a course in the law of deminishing returns but there is s value to having done FARM in each school instead of segregating but I think there is a saturation point on both ends of the scale.

That's not concrete. But I think 0 FARM is not good,100% not good.

Some want more FARM because class sizes are smaller. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about not having schools that are all or nothing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a school want to increase its FARMs rate?

Because it is better for society.

Can you explain in concrete ways? I’m a fifteen-year veteran teacher in MCPS and, while I’ve taught in schools with high to low rates of poverty, I have never heard of this initiative. By the way, I’m a double minority and grew up poor so I support FARMs and other supports for low income students. Do you mean trying to get already attending students whose families meet the criteria enrolled in FARMs?

I'm not PP, but I believe PP was trying to point out that economically and racially integrated schools benefit society in a variety of ways. First - concentrated poverty is bad for students, and bad for communities. Second - integrated classrooms have been shown to improve outcomes for low income kids, but to have no impact on higher income kids.

So, for a variety of reasons, it makes sense for schools to be economically integrated - it means poverty is not concentrated, it improves outcomes for low-income kids, and it has zero impact on higher income kids.

Hence, it is good for society because you help kids who would otherwise be in highly concentrated poverty, who are members of our society.

OP- can you share the letter here?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a school want to increase its FARMs rate?

Because it is better for society.

Can you explain in concrete ways? I’m a fifteen-year veteran teacher in MCPS and, while I’ve taught in schools with high to low rates of poverty, I have never heard of this initiative. By the way, I’m a double minority and grew up poor so I support FARMs and other supports for low income students. Do you mean trying to get already attending students whose families meet the criteria enrolled in FARMs?

Anonymous wrote:Why would a school want to increase its FARMs rate?

Because it is better for society.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a school want to increase its FARMs rate?

The school and the community doesn't. The county screws them over so they can say how "diverse" all their schools are.

You're a terrible person.