Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can afford Langley HS, Churchill Road or Spring Hill, those two have great test scores and almost no FARMS.

Avoid Forestville as it will likely be redistributed to Herndon High School.

I think you would be doing your children a great disservice if you send them to a no FARMS elementary school. There is something to be said for diversity. And diversity means more than "oh but we have a large asian population".

Did you really choose your kids' elementary school by looking up the FARMS rates to make sure there was enough poverty there for you to give your kids the "diversity" they need to thrive? Do you realize how obnoxious and offensive this is to everyone, especially poor folks?

If I was poor, the last thing I'd be doing is saying to myself I need to find a school for my kid where there's enough poor people to make me feel good about the "diverse" environment.

But let's be honest, people choose higher FARMS schools when they do not have to, not because of a love of diversity, but because they want a nicer house for a better price or otherwise do not care all that much about the educational and social experiences their kids will endure.

That's an overly simplistic view. Sure we chose a location where we could have a nice house and walk to things. We very much care about the educational experiences of our kids. We could without any sacrifice afford private school. Instead we value what are children learn from being around others that may not be as fortunate as they are. Our very high rate FARMS school has very caring and dedicated teachers. There seems to be lots of extra support with the number of ESL teachers that are added to class rooms. I think it's extremely disingenuous to just assume because a school doesn't have the highest test scores with lots of esl students that the school is bad. If your scared of sending your child there you are racist or afraid that your child isn't as gifted and special as you think they are and need to be coddled.

So you could offer your kids many educational/environmental advantages that high income provides but instead you chose a school with a very high FARMS rate so that your kids learn from others' poverty? What exactly are you wanting your kids to learn from this and how is this not offensive to those who are being used by you in this way?

Also you are arguing that people who make different decisions are racist, yet the property values around schools with different FARMS rates tells a different story. Is everyone but you racist, or are you living in a fantasy land?

Why are you questioning this families decsions? To each their own. Let them choose higher FARMS if they want.

They may not be choosing higher FARMS so much as choosing to avoid certain areas with stuck-up parents and ostentatious wealth.

I could see that, but in that case, choosing "very high FARMS" does not align. We are in a pyramid with a relatively high median SES but nothing like Langley and McLean and a fair amount of variation. This was the best we could afford so I am not going to pretend that the 'diversity' was our choice. There are stuck up parents but there are others who are educated/intelligent but not showy, which we like because it fits our experience. My guess would be that the poster has a cohort of families that are like her family and she has a house that she likes very much and doesn't want to move.

Hayfield. South County. Robinson. GREAT "middle of the road" schools.

Are you joking?

Umm....no? They are all relatively solid, good test scores, seemingly involved communities.
Am I missing something?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can afford Langley HS, Churchill Road or Spring Hill, those two have great test scores and almost no FARMS.

Avoid Forestville as it will likely be redistributed to Herndon High School.

I think you would be doing your children a great disservice if you send them to a no FARMS elementary school. There is something to be said for diversity. And diversity means more than "oh but we have a large asian population".

Did you really choose your kids' elementary school by looking up the FARMS rates to make sure there was enough poverty there for you to give your kids the "diversity" they need to thrive? Do you realize how obnoxious and offensive this is to everyone, especially poor folks?

If I was poor, the last thing I'd be doing is saying to myself I need to find a school for my kid where there's enough poor people to make me feel good about the "diverse" environment.

But let's be honest, people choose higher FARMS schools when they do not have to, not because of a love of diversity, but because they want a nicer house for a better price or otherwise do not care all that much about the educational and social experiences their kids will endure.

That's an overly simplistic view. Sure we chose a location where we could have a nice house and walk to things. We very much care about the educational experiences of our kids. We could without any sacrifice afford private school. Instead we value what are children learn from being around others that may not be as fortunate as they are. Our very high rate FARMS school has very caring and dedicated teachers. There seems to be lots of extra support with the number of ESL teachers that are added to class rooms. I think it's extremely disingenuous to just assume because a school doesn't have the highest test scores with lots of esl students that the school is bad. If your scared of sending your child there you are racist or afraid that your child isn't as gifted and special as you think they are and need to be coddled.

So you could offer your kids many educational/environmental advantages that high income provides but instead you chose a school with a very high FARMS rate so that your kids learn from others' poverty? What exactly are you wanting your kids to learn from this and how is this not offensive to those who are being used by you in this way?

Also you are arguing that people who make different decisions are racist, yet the property values around schools with different FARMS rates tells a different story. Is everyone but you racist, or are you living in a fantasy land?

Why are you questioning this families decsions? To each their own. Let them choose higher FARMS if they want.

Um, because it is an anonymous forum that thrives on debate, argument, opinion and gossip? They are making an argument that they chose high farms for the sake of their children. They are being asked to reveal more about their logic.

Also the poster said not doing what she did would make a person racist...so, she is questioning others decisions rather bluntly, and others should not question hers the same?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can afford Langley HS, Churchill Road or Spring Hill, those two have great test scores and almost no FARMS.

Avoid Forestville as it will likely be redistributed to Herndon High School.

I think you would be doing your children a great disservice if you send them to a no FARMS elementary school. There is something to be said for diversity. And diversity means more than "oh but we have a large asian population".

Did you really choose your kids' elementary school by looking up the FARMS rates to make sure there was enough poverty there for you to give your kids the "diversity" they need to thrive? Do you realize how obnoxious and offensive this is to everyone, especially poor folks?

If I was poor, the last thing I'd be doing is saying to myself I need to find a school for my kid where there's enough poor people to make me feel good about the "diverse" environment.

But let's be honest, people choose higher FARMS schools when they do not have to, not because of a love of diversity, but because they want a nicer house for a better price or otherwise do not care all that much about the educational and social experiences their kids will endure.

That's an overly simplistic view. Sure we chose a location where we could have a nice house and walk to things. We very much care about the educational experiences of our kids. We could without any sacrifice afford private school. Instead we value what are children learn from being around others that may not be as fortunate as they are. Our very high rate FARMS school has very caring and dedicated teachers. There seems to be lots of extra support with the number of ESL teachers that are added to class rooms. I think it's extremely disingenuous to just assume because a school doesn't have the highest test scores with lots of esl students that the school is bad. If your scared of sending your child there you are racist or afraid that your child isn't as gifted and special as you think they are and need to be coddled.

So you could offer your kids many educational/environmental advantages that high income provides but instead you chose a school with a very high FARMS rate so that your kids learn from others' poverty? What exactly are you wanting your kids to learn from this and how is this not offensive to those who are being used by you in this way?

Also you are arguing that people who make different decisions are racist, yet the property values around schools with different FARMS rates tells a different story. Is everyone but you racist, or are you living in a fantasy land?

Why are you questioning this families decsions? To each their own. Let them choose higher FARMS if they want.

They may not be choosing higher FARMS so much as choosing to avoid certain areas with stuck-up parents and ostentatious wealth.

I could see that, but in that case, choosing "very high FARMS" does not align. We are in a pyramid with a relatively high median SES but nothing like Langley and McLean and a fair amount of variation. This was the best we could afford so I am not going to pretend that the 'diversity' was our choice. There are stuck up parents but there are others who are educated/intelligent but not showy, which we like because it fits our experience. My guess would be that the poster has a cohort of families that are like her family and she has a house that she likes very much and doesn't want to move.

Hayfield. South County. Robinson. GREAT "middle of the road" schools.

Are you joking?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can afford Langley HS, Churchill Road or Spring Hill, those two have great test scores and almost no FARMS.

Avoid Forestville as it will likely be redistributed to Herndon High School.

I think you would be doing your children a great disservice if you send them to a no FARMS elementary school. There is something to be said for diversity. And diversity means more than "oh but we have a large asian population".

Did you really choose your kids' elementary school by looking up the FARMS rates to make sure there was enough poverty there for you to give your kids the "diversity" they need to thrive? Do you realize how obnoxious and offensive this is to everyone, especially poor folks?

If I was poor, the last thing I'd be doing is saying to myself I need to find a school for my kid where there's enough poor people to make me feel good about the "diverse" environment.

But let's be honest, people choose higher FARMS schools when they do not have to, not because of a love of diversity, but because they want a nicer house for a better price or otherwise do not care all that much about the educational and social experiences their kids will endure.

That's an overly simplistic view. Sure we chose a location where we could have a nice house and walk to things. We very much care about the educational experiences of our kids. We could without any sacrifice afford private school. Instead we value what are children learn from being around others that may not be as fortunate as they are. Our very high rate FARMS school has very caring and dedicated teachers. There seems to be lots of extra support with the number of ESL teachers that are added to class rooms. I think it's extremely disingenuous to just assume because a school doesn't have the highest test scores with lots of esl students that the school is bad. If your scared of sending your child there you are racist or afraid that your child isn't as gifted and special as you think they are and need to be coddled.

So you could offer your kids many educational/environmental advantages that high income provides but instead you chose a school with a very high FARMS rate so that your kids learn from others' poverty? What exactly are you wanting your kids to learn from this and how is this not offensive to those who are being used by you in this way?

Also you are arguing that people who make different decisions are racist, yet the property values around schools with different FARMS rates tells a different story. Is everyone but you racist, or are you living in a fantasy land?

Why are you questioning this families decsions? To each their own. Let them choose higher FARMS if they want.

They may not be choosing higher FARMS so much as choosing to avoid certain areas with stuck-up parents and ostentatious wealth.

I could see that, but in that case, choosing "very high FARMS" does not align. We are in a pyramid with a relatively high median SES but nothing like Langley and McLean and a fair amount of variation. This was the best we could afford so I am not going to pretend that the 'diversity' was our choice. There are stuck up parents but there are others who are educated/intelligent but not showy, which we like because it fits our experience. My guess would be that the poster has a cohort of families that are like her family and she has a house that she likes very much and doesn't want to move.

Hayfield. South County. Robinson. GREAT "middle of the road" schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can afford Langley HS, Churchill Road or Spring Hill, those two have great test scores and almost no FARMS.

Avoid Forestville as it will likely be redistributed to Herndon High School.

I think you would be doing your children a great disservice if you send them to a no FARMS elementary school. There is something to be said for diversity. And diversity means more than "oh but we have a large asian population".

Did you really choose your kids' elementary school by looking up the FARMS rates to make sure there was enough poverty there for you to give your kids the "diversity" they need to thrive? Do you realize how obnoxious and offensive this is to everyone, especially poor folks?

If I was poor, the last thing I'd be doing is saying to myself I need to find a school for my kid where there's enough poor people to make me feel good about the "diverse" environment.

But let's be honest, people choose higher FARMS schools when they do not have to, not because of a love of diversity, but because they want a nicer house for a better price or otherwise do not care all that much about the educational and social experiences their kids will endure.

That's an overly simplistic view. Sure we chose a location where we could have a nice house and walk to things. We very much care about the educational experiences of our kids. We could without any sacrifice afford private school. Instead we value what are children learn from being around others that may not be as fortunate as they are. Our very high rate FARMS school has very caring and dedicated teachers. There seems to be lots of extra support with the number of ESL teachers that are added to class rooms. I think it's extremely disingenuous to just assume because a school doesn't have the highest test scores with lots of esl students that the school is bad. If your scared of sending your child there you are racist or afraid that your child isn't as gifted and special as you think they are and need to be coddled.

So you could offer your kids many educational/environmental advantages that high income provides but instead you chose a school with a very high FARMS rate so that your kids learn from others' poverty? What exactly are you wanting your kids to learn from this and how is this not offensive to those who are being used by you in this way?

Also you are arguing that people who make different decisions are racist, yet the property values around schools with different FARMS rates tells a different story. Is everyone but you racist, or are you living in a fantasy land?

Why are you questioning this families decsions? To each their own. Let them choose higher FARMS if they want.

They may not be choosing higher FARMS so much as choosing to avoid certain areas with stuck-up parents and ostentatious wealth.

I could see that, but in that case, choosing "very high FARMS" does not align. We are in a pyramid with a relatively high median SES but nothing like Langley and McLean and a fair amount of variation. This was the best we could afford so I am not going to pretend that the 'diversity' was our choice. There are stuck up parents but there are others who are educated/intelligent but not showy, which we like because it fits our experience. My guess would be that the poster has a cohort of families that are like her family and she has a house that she likes very much and doesn't want to move.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The outcome is still going to be different because of the level of teaching and the students being taught to. Teachers have to teach to the lowest denominator and the lowest denominator is a lot higher at a low FARMS rate school. So this only works at your school if your child is in the AAP class, but if you compare Gen Ed to Gen Ed, there is a markable difference, even for the white and asian kids. That said, an average white or asian kid is probably more likely to get into AAP at your school than at a high SES school, so maybe that makes up the difference.

This is not true. It is true that the common denominator may be lower, but that does not mean that is where the teacher "teaches."

Do you really think that elementary teachers teach to the "whole class" all day? That they do not provide leveled instruction at all?

I was a first grade teacher in a school with a very wide span of abilities. Except for the morning discussion and some other activities, there was plenty of leveled teaching. I had at least three reading groups (and as many as five), as an example. With math, everyone was taught together, but then additional work was given to kids.
Social studies and science were generally group taught.

And, FWIW, while it is true that the FARMS is an indicator, there are always exceptions. I also taught in a Title I school for several years where almost all the kids were very poor. Even there, I taught some kids who were highly gifted--yes, even poor people can have gifted children.

Of course they don't teach to the whole class. They teach to the middle and then work with the kids behind in small groups. The kids ahead either get busy work or ignored

When my kids started ES at a high FARMS rate school, I was very surprised by the methodologies of differentiated learning that was going on in the classroom. My advanced kids were never left behind because there were others in the classroom who were at a different learning level from them including several in each class with no English language experience. In fact, they absolutely bloomed. There are some very excellent teachers out there who are making sure that every child in their classroom is getting exactly what they need. All three of my kids are in MS/HS now, but in all of my kids' ES years, we only had 1 "dud" who wasn't great at meeting my kids' needs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can afford Langley HS, Churchill Road or Spring Hill, those two have great test scores and almost no FARMS.

Avoid Forestville as it will likely be redistributed to Herndon High School.

I think you would be doing your children a great disservice if you send them to a no FARMS elementary school. There is something to be said for diversity. And diversity means more than "oh but we have a large asian population".

Did you really choose your kids' elementary school by looking up the FARMS rates to make sure there was enough poverty there for you to give your kids the "diversity" they need to thrive? Do you realize how obnoxious and offensive this is to everyone, especially poor folks?

If I was poor, the last thing I'd be doing is saying to myself I need to find a school for my kid where there's enough poor people to make me feel good about the "diverse" environment.

But let's be honest, people choose higher FARMS schools when they do not have to, not because of a love of diversity, but because they want a nicer house for a better price or otherwise do not care all that much about the educational and social experiences their kids will endure.

That's an overly simplistic view. Sure we chose a location where we could have a nice house and walk to things. We very much care about the educational experiences of our kids. We could without any sacrifice afford private school. Instead we value what are children learn from being around others that may not be as fortunate as they are. Our very high rate FARMS school has very caring and dedicated teachers. There seems to be lots of extra support with the number of ESL teachers that are added to class rooms. I think it's extremely disingenuous to just assume because a school doesn't have the highest test scores with lots of esl students that the school is bad. If your scared of sending your child there you are racist or afraid that your child isn't as gifted and special as you think they are and need to be coddled.

So you could offer your kids many educational/environmental advantages that high income provides but instead you chose a school with a very high FARMS rate so that your kids learn from others' poverty? What exactly are you wanting your kids to learn from this and how is this not offensive to those who are being used by you in this way?

Also you are arguing that people who make different decisions are racist, yet the property values around schools with different FARMS rates tells a different story. Is everyone but you racist, or are you living in a fantasy land?

Why are you questioning this families decsions? To each their own. Let them choose higher FARMS if they want.

Um, because it is an anonymous forum that thrives on debate, argument, opinion and gossip? They are making an argument that they chose high farms for the sake of their children. They are being asked to reveal more about their logic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can afford Langley HS, Churchill Road or Spring Hill, those two have great test scores and almost no FARMS.

Avoid Forestville as it will likely be redistributed to Herndon High School.

I think you would be doing your children a great disservice if you send them to a no FARMS elementary school. There is something to be said for diversity. And diversity means more than "oh but we have a large asian population".

Did you really choose your kids' elementary school by looking up the FARMS rates to make sure there was enough poverty there for you to give your kids the "diversity" they need to thrive? Do you realize how obnoxious and offensive this is to everyone, especially poor folks?

If I was poor, the last thing I'd be doing is saying to myself I need to find a school for my kid where there's enough poor people to make me feel good about the "diverse" environment.

But let's be honest, people choose higher FARMS schools when they do not have to, not because of a love of diversity, but because they want a nicer house for a better price or otherwise do not care all that much about the educational and social experiences their kids will endure.

That's an overly simplistic view. Sure we chose a location where we could have a nice house and walk to things. We very much care about the educational experiences of our kids. We could without any sacrifice afford private school. Instead we value what are children learn from being around others that may not be as fortunate as they are. Our very high rate FARMS school has very caring and dedicated teachers. There seems to be lots of extra support with the number of ESL teachers that are added to class rooms. I think it's extremely disingenuous to just assume because a school doesn't have the highest test scores with lots of esl students that the school is bad. If your scared of sending your child there you are racist or afraid that your child isn't as gifted and special as you think they are and need to be coddled.

So you could offer your kids many educational/environmental advantages that high income provides but instead you chose a school with a very high FARMS rate so that your kids learn from others' poverty? What exactly are you wanting your kids to learn from this and how is this not offensive to those who are being used by you in this way?

Also you are arguing that people who make different decisions are racist, yet the property values around schools with different FARMS rates tells a different story. Is everyone but you racist, or are you living in a fantasy land?

Why are you questioning this families decsions? To each their own. Let them choose higher FARMS if they want.

They may not be choosing higher FARMS so much as choosing to avoid certain areas with stuck-up parents and ostentatious wealth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d buy a house you can afford, in a neighborhood you like, with a commute you can manage and send your kid to Catholic school. Stay away from the FCPS nonsense.

We were lucky to be in a great FCPS elementary, but if I had to do it all over again, this is absolutely what I would do. And we are not Catholic. But Catholic schools are excellent, time tested, and not affected by the kind of crap coming out of Gatehouse.

There is a misconception that Catholic schools are "excellent" especially by comparison to FCPS schools, but it depends on what your definition of "excellent" is. Are they "excellent" at weeding out kids with special needs? Sure - often times, they do not provide the depth and breadth of special needs services to students so those parents send their special needs kids to public schools to get those services. Are they "excellent" at assigning lots of busy work to give parents the impression that their students are always busy, churn out a ton of work product and are buried under homework which must mean that they are learning more than the kids in public school. Yep, sure do. Are they "excellent" because their student bodies are predominantly made up of a homogeneous pool of MC-UMC families with active parents who work together as a community to prioritize compliance instead of free-thinking? Yes again. Catholic schools are excellent at keeping MC-UMC predominantly white, similarly thinking families together to learn without the "distraction" of poor students, special needs students, LGBTQ students, and students whose families have different (read: more leftist) world views. Is that "excellent?" Apparently large swaths of families think so.

But the actual level of instruction provided at each grade level is often times not as high as what one would receive in the public school system. In our FCPS pyramid, there is a very large and active K-8
Catholic school. The parents are extremely vocal about the exceptional quality of education they are paying for. Then they send their kids to the local public high school after they graduate from the Catholic school and realize that their kids have not been offered the advanced math options that FCPS offers in 5th-8th, or foreign language options in 7th/8th, and many of those kids are competent in Honors classes but fail to excel in AP classes where critical thinking is emphasized over rote memorization and regurgitation. Then the public school kids start running circles around them in the classroom.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can afford Langley HS, Churchill Road or Spring Hill, those two have great test scores and almost no FARMS.

Avoid Forestville as it will likely be redistributed to Herndon High School.

I think you would be doing your children a great disservice if you send them to a no FARMS elementary school. There is something to be said for diversity. And diversity means more than "oh but we have a large asian population".

Did you really choose your kids' elementary school by looking up the FARMS rates to make sure there was enough poverty there for you to give your kids the "diversity" they need to thrive? Do you realize how obnoxious and offensive this is to everyone, especially poor folks?

If I was poor, the last thing I'd be doing is saying to myself I need to find a school for my kid where there's enough poor people to make me feel good about the "diverse" environment.

But let's be honest, people choose higher FARMS schools when they do not have to, not because of a love of diversity, but because they want a nicer house for a better price or otherwise do not care all that much about the educational and social experiences their kids will endure.

That's an overly simplistic view. Sure we chose a location where we could have a nice house and walk to things. We very much care about the educational experiences of our kids. We could without any sacrifice afford private school. Instead we value what are children learn from being around others that may not be as fortunate as they are. Our very high rate FARMS school has very caring and dedicated teachers. There seems to be lots of extra support with the number of ESL teachers that are added to class rooms. I think it's extremely disingenuous to just assume because a school doesn't have the highest test scores with lots of esl students that the school is bad. If your scared of sending your child there you are racist or afraid that your child isn't as gifted and special as you think they are and need to be coddled.

So you could offer your kids many educational/environmental advantages that high income provides but instead you chose a school with a very high FARMS rate so that your kids learn from others' poverty? What exactly are you wanting your kids to learn from this and how is this not offensive to those who are being used by you in this way?

Also you are arguing that people who make different decisions are racist, yet the property values around schools with different FARMS rates tells a different story. Is everyone but you racist, or are you living in a fantasy land?

Why are you questioning this families decsions? To each their own. Let them choose higher FARMS if they want.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can afford Langley HS, Churchill Road or Spring Hill, those two have great test scores and almost no FARMS.

Avoid Forestville as it will likely be redistributed to Herndon High School.

I think you would be doing your children a great disservice if you send them to a no FARMS elementary school. There is something to be said for diversity. And diversity means more than "oh but we have a large asian population".

Did you really choose your kids' elementary school by looking up the FARMS rates to make sure there was enough poverty there for you to give your kids the "diversity" they need to thrive? Do you realize how obnoxious and offensive this is to everyone, especially poor folks?

If I was poor, the last thing I'd be doing is saying to myself I need to find a school for my kid where there's enough poor people to make me feel good about the "diverse" environment.

But let's be honest, people choose higher FARMS schools when they do not have to, not because of a love of diversity, but because they want a nicer house for a better price or otherwise do not care all that much about the educational and social experiences their kids will endure.

NP. I don’t know what makes you think you can speak for others. We deliberately avoided the Langley pyramid because we didn’t want that type of environment for our kids. We are more comfortable with greater diversity and believe it helps kids develop better social skills and empathy.

Stop using the word "diversity" as a euphemistic stand in for something more specific that you, for whatever reason, do not want to speak.

It is understandable to avoid a wealthy pyramid if your values do not align well with those of the wealthy, but no need to act like you are superior for it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can afford Langley HS, Churchill Road or Spring Hill, those two have great test scores and almost no FARMS.

Avoid Forestville as it will likely be redistributed to Herndon High School.

I think you would be doing your children a great disservice if you send them to a no FARMS elementary school. There is something to be said for diversity. And diversity means more than "oh but we have a large asian population".

Did you really choose your kids' elementary school by looking up the FARMS rates to make sure there was enough poverty there for you to give your kids the "diversity" they need to thrive? Do you realize how obnoxious and offensive this is to everyone, especially poor folks?

If I was poor, the last thing I'd be doing is saying to myself I need to find a school for my kid where there's enough poor people to make me feel good about the "diverse" environment.

But let's be honest, people choose higher FARMS schools when they do not have to, not because of a love of diversity, but because they want a nicer house for a better price or otherwise do not care all that much about the educational and social experiences their kids will endure.

That's an overly simplistic view. Sure we chose a location where we could have a nice house and walk to things. We very much care about the educational experiences of our kids. We could without any sacrifice afford private school. Instead we value what are children learn from being around others that may not be as fortunate as they are. Our very high rate FARMS school has very caring and dedicated teachers. There seems to be lots of extra support with the number of ESL teachers that are added to class rooms. I think it's extremely disingenuous to just assume because a school doesn't have the highest test scores with lots of esl students that the school is bad. If your scared of sending your child there you are racist or afraid that your child isn't as gifted and special as you think they are and need to be coddled.

So you could offer your kids many educational/environmental advantages that high income provides but instead you chose a school with a very high FARMS rate so that your kids learn from others' poverty? What exactly are you wanting your kids to learn from this and how is this not offensive to those who are being used by you in this way?

Also you are arguing that people who make different decisions are racist, yet the property values around schools with different FARMS rates tells a different story. Is everyone but you racist, or are you living in a fantasy land?

Anonymous wrote:I’d buy a house you can afford, in a neighborhood you like, with a commute you can manage and send your kid to Catholic school. Stay away from the FCPS nonsense.

We were lucky to be in a great FCPS elementary, but if I had to do it all over again, this is absolutely what I would do. And we are not Catholic. But Catholic schools are excellent, time tested, and not affected by the kind of crap coming out of Gatehouse.

Anonymous wrote:

The outcome is still going to be different because of the level of teaching and the students being taught to. Teachers have to teach to the lowest denominator and the lowest denominator is a lot higher at a low FARMS rate school. So this only works at your school if your child is in the AAP class, but if you compare Gen Ed to Gen Ed, there is a markable difference, even for the white and asian kids. That said, an average white or asian kid is probably more likely to get into AAP at your school than at a high SES school, so maybe that makes up the difference.

This is not true. It is true that the common denominator may be lower, but that does not mean that is where the teacher "teaches."

Do you really think that elementary teachers teach to the "whole class" all day? That they do not provide leveled instruction at all?

I was a first grade teacher in a school with a very wide span of abilities. Except for the morning discussion and some other activities, there was plenty of leveled teaching. I had at least three reading groups (and as many as five), as an example. With math, everyone was taught together, but then additional work was given to kids.
Social studies and science were generally group taught.

And, FWIW, while it is true that the FARMS is an indicator, there are always exceptions. I also taught in a Title I school for several years where almost all the kids were very poor. Even there, I taught some kids who were highly gifted--yes, even poor people can have gifted children.

Of course they don't teach to the whole class. They teach to the middle and then work with the kids behind in small groups. The kids ahead either get busy work or ignored

First off, a school that is high farms 50 percent or more is not diverse. Diversity is when you have a balance of races, income, religion, etc. If one group is a majority then that is not diversity. If you want true diversity, go to Freedom Hill. A true international school where everyone is welcome and appreciated.