Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we've had huge low income immigrant population shifts here. Our school systems are struggling to handle it.

This.

We have a large generational poverty black class and are building a large generational poverty Hispanic class. Both reproduce at 3-4 children per woman and are net takers in society not net producers. And remitting $3-6 billion a year to Central America from black market cash jobs each year doesn’t help.

Anonymous wrote:I think we've had huge low income immigrant population shifts here. Our school systems are struggling to handle it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've never taught in a school with only a 10% turnover. Looking back over the past 20 years or so, every school has had between about 20-50% turnover. 10% would be great though. I suspect the schools that are better resourced, with easier kids, and better administration might balance out the numbers. Less turnover there versus more turnover in other schools equals out to be about 20-25% turnover per year. That is my understanding of normal turnover in schools.

16% is the national turnover rate and includes averaging in high turnover areas like high poverty, urban districts 19%). 20-25% is not normal turnover. DC has a 25% rate and is considered to be in a turnover crisis. If you are at a MCPS with a 20% rate, start planning your exit or spearheading reform.

Anonymous wrote:I've never taught in a school with only a 10% turnover. Looking back over the past 20 years or so, every school has had between about 20-50% turnover. 10% would be great though. I suspect the schools that are better resourced, with easier kids, and better administration might balance out the numbers. Less turnover there versus more turnover in other schools equals out to be about 20-25% turnover per year. That is my understanding of normal turnover in schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many threads right now about how bad MCPS, FCPS, and APS are. Lots of admins and teachers leaving each school system. Is the DCUM noise justified, or is this much ado about nothing?

Democrats have allowed millions of illegal aliens. Kids are flooding Herndon and sterling. Single parents, unstable families. But nothing the gated liberals in Mclean need to worry about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many threads right now about how bad MCPS, FCPS, and APS are. Lots of admins and teachers leaving each school system. Is the DCUM noise justified, or is this much ado about nothing?

Some of this is just normal staff movement in a large organization. A person leaving a particular school doesn't mean they left the system. It seems like parents think teachers are permanent fixtures in a building, and forget that teachers are regular people who have different needs and interests over time. I know many teachers try to change positions/schools every 5-7 years to keep things fresh (not unlike in the general workforce.) I know teachers who really loved a particular school and position, but after getting married, moving to a different place, and starting a family, discovered that they needed to be much closer to their new home. I know teachers who have been super enthusiastic about moving up and shifted into a new position of responsibility every 4-5 years, often at different schools. There are changing family dynamics, interests in going back to school for a new degree, and the ever moving target of exactly when to retire - all the usual stuff. 10% turnover rate means people stay at a school an average of 10 years - that's pretty long. Sure there are triggers in a building that can cause a higher than 10% turnover, but typically many of those people were already considering their next move.

No. That is not what it means.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many threads right now about how bad MCPS, FCPS, and APS are. Lots of admins and teachers leaving each school system. Is the DCUM noise justified, or is this much ado about nothing?

Some of this is just normal staff movement in a large organization. A person leaving a particular school doesn't mean they left the system. It seems like parents think teachers are permanent fixtures in a building, and forget that teachers are regular people who have different needs and interests over time. I know many teachers try to change positions/schools every 5-7 years to keep things fresh (not unlike in the general workforce.) I know teachers who really loved a particular school and position, but after getting married, moving to a different place, and starting a family, discovered that they needed to be much closer to their new home. I know teachers who have been super enthusiastic about moving up and shifted into a new position of responsibility every 4-5 years, often at different schools. There are changing family dynamics, interests in going back to school for a new degree, and the ever moving target of exactly when to retire - all the usual stuff. [/b]10% turnover rate means people stay at a school an average of 10 years[b] - that's pretty long. Sure there are triggers in a building that can cause a higher than 10% turnover, but typically many of those people were already considering their next move.

Anonymous wrote:So many threads right now about how bad MCPS, FCPS, and APS are. Lots of admins and teachers leaving each school system. Is the DCUM noise justified, or is this much ado about nothing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many threads right now about how bad MCPS, FCPS, and APS are. Lots of admins and teachers leaving each school system. Is the DCUM noise justified, or is this much ado about nothing?

Democrats have allowed millions of illegal aliens. Kids are flooding Herndon and sterling. Single parents, unstable families. But nothing the gated liberals in Mclean need to worry about.

Anonymous wrote:So many threads right now about how bad MCPS, FCPS, and APS are. Lots of admins and teachers leaving each school system. Is the DCUM noise justified, or is this much ado about nothing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm the pp. I also want to mention that in my current school, in a classroom of 15 kids, 80% EL's, 65% below the poverty level, 25% refugees, that 80% of my students left reading on grade level. Only 40% came in with the skills they should have had at the start of they year and my other two grade level colleagues had 25% of their students (same demographics) on grade level by end of year.

great job

wouldn't more pay increase the caliber of teachers choosing the profession so they would get results like yours instead of your coworkers?

I don't think there's a causation between higher results and more pay. I could be wrong of course. I think a lot of people believe that most teachers are of average or slightly below average intelligence who only chose teaching because they had no other options. (I have never found this to be the case in any of the schools I've taught in and think this is just a caricature stereotype.) I also think a lot of people believe if we could pay teachers more they'd a) work longer and harder and or b) we'd attract folks with higher intelligence. Perhaps, perhaps not. I'd be so interested to read some studies comparing the results of students from similar demographics with teachers who had higher ACT scores, higher GPAs and who took harder coursework. I do believe in letting go of teachers who are underperformers, but not without significant support first and it is how you define under performers that can be problematic. I do think my suggestions about smaller class sizes, more RTI help, more psychs and social workers, etc, and more reading specialists would go a long way towards success in high poverty schools.
I'm not totally clear on why I regularly get higher scores than my colleagues. I do know that I look at test scores frequently, target my instruction in really specific ways and double up on reading group time for my lower performers. Unfortunately, my lower performers need for more time with me in small groups means that my high performers get the bare minimum on small group help. I have yet to find a way to ensure my kids who have the potential to perform well above grade level to do so while ensuring everyone else gets to grade level. High poverty schools, in my experience, are like triage.

Exactly.


-a Baltimore City schools teacher

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think more and more people are waking up to the fact that all the schools around here are being overrun by underperformers which takes away time and resources from everyone else

The above average performers are either clustering in the remaining "decent school pyramids" aka the wealthier ones supplementing and desperately holding on or going private

The average performers are really hurting and I think people are waking up and saying enough is enough you need to focus on my children

As a liberal, I hate agreeing with your post.

+1

A Canadian immigration system fixes the issue

Then why are Canadian school systems struggling with the same issues with non-native speakers? There are actually quite a lot of English Language Learners in FCPS whose families are professionals and get in on H1-B visas and the like. A child who is a non-native speaker adjusting to a new country is still going to need more educational resources initially. And many of the identified children with special education needs come from upper middle class US citizens and yet they still need a lot of resources. Public schools are just expected to do far more than they every were before--and they are absorbing costs that were used elsewhere. For instance, pre-special education, there was greater need for public support life long institutional care for people with disabilities that are now better managed.