Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is the OP here. People are welcome to say good riddance to us, PP - but if I don't have the school I want for our kids, and can afford to move, why on earth would I stay? Childfree people will then move to our house and be happy enough there and everything will balance itself out. I like walking everywhere and being close to work, but not enough to send any of my children to a school I don't care for.
To the PP who mentioned geographical component - I saw that but the problem is we live on the Hill where our inbound school is good (Brent) but any of the other neighboring ones, not so much, so any school choice that has a decent chance of landing my DD at e.g. Tyler Traditional (or sending half of Tyler Traditional students to Brent) is not really great.
If this comes about, they will try and lure you to stay with promises of great programs and shiny new stuff. The inequality at this point is so great in our school system ( for example between the education one receives at Brent, and the one at Tyler Traditional ) that those is charge are willing to gamble that you really want to stay and will give up some certainty to do so.
In what way is the inequity so great between Tyler and Brent?
Just look at the test scores. But I don't see how destroying Brent's achievements can help Tyler. Either expand Brent or help Tyler directly. No grad school social engineering.
That's it? Test scores? You don't have anything but test scores to prove an inequity? Not facilities, curriculum, teaching quality, learning environment, special programs? Test scores are correlated with SES, so where's the inequity? Are you saying that a school is only good if it has high SES students?
I think low-ses students should have higher test scores, absolutely.
But test scores do not indicate an inequality in the opportunities offered by the two schools.
Anonymous wrote:All of the families saying that they will leave shows their selfishness and desire to only help their own children, instead of working to support and improve the entire DCPS community. I'd be glad to see you all leave and make room for families who want educational equity for all students.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is the OP here. People are welcome to say good riddance to us, PP - but if I don't have the school I want for our kids, and can afford to move, why on earth would I stay? Childfree people will then move to our house and be happy enough there and everything will balance itself out. I like walking everywhere and being close to work, but not enough to send any of my children to a school I don't care for.
To the PP who mentioned geographical component - I saw that but the problem is we live on the Hill where our inbound school is good (Brent) but any of the other neighboring ones, not so much, so any school choice that has a decent chance of landing my DD at e.g. Tyler Traditional (or sending half of Tyler Traditional students to Brent) is not really great.
If this comes about, they will try and lure you to stay with promises of great programs and shiny new stuff. The inequality at this point is so great in our school system ( for example between the education one receives at Brent, and the one at Tyler Traditional ) that those is charge are willing to gamble that you really want to stay and will give up some certainty to do so.
In what way is the inequity so great between Tyler and Brent?
Just look at the test scores. But I don't see how destroying Brent's achievements can help Tyler. Either expand Brent or help Tyler directly. No grad school social engineering.
That's it? Test scores? You don't have anything but test scores to prove an inequity? Not facilities, curriculum, teaching quality, learning environment, special programs? Test scores are correlated with SES, so where's the inequity? Are you saying that a school is only good if it has high SES students?
I think low-ses students should have higher test scores, absolutely.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is the OP here. People are welcome to say good riddance to us, PP - but if I don't have the school I want for our kids, and can afford to move, why on earth would I stay? Childfree people will then move to our house and be happy enough there and everything will balance itself out. I like walking everywhere and being close to work, but not enough to send any of my children to a school I don't care for.
To the PP who mentioned geographical component - I saw that but the problem is we live on the Hill where our inbound school is good (Brent) but any of the other neighboring ones, not so much, so any school choice that has a decent chance of landing my DD at e.g. Tyler Traditional (or sending half of Tyler Traditional students to Brent) is not really great.
If this comes about, they will try and lure you to stay with promises of great programs and shiny new stuff. The inequality at this point is so great in our school system ( for example between the education one receives at Brent, and the one at Tyler Traditional ) that those is charge are willing to gamble that you really want to stay and will give up some certainty to do so.
In what way is the inequity so great between Tyler and Brent?
Just look at the test scores. But I don't see how destroying Brent's achievements can help Tyler. Either expand Brent or help Tyler directly. No grad school social engineering.
That's it? Test scores? You don't have anything but test scores to prove an inequity? Not facilities, curriculum, teaching quality, learning environment, special programs? Test scores are correlated with SES, so where's the inequity? Are you saying that a school is only good if it has high SES students?
I think low-ses students should have higher test scores, absolutely.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:All of the families saying that they will leave shows their selfishness and desire to only help their own children, instead of working to support and improve the entire DCPS community. I'd be glad to see you all leave and make room for families who want educational equity for all students.
This is bullshit. You can create equity without destroying existing value. And it is the height of arrogance to assume that equity can be centrally planned anyway. I guarantee you that the majority of high ses parents (who are not just white btw) would be more than happy to pay in more taxes to help everyone improve. We just don't see the point of destroying achievements in the name of unproven social engineering.
Attributing whiteness to a previous post when that person made no mention of race? Truly the height of arrogance and ignorance.
Anonymous wrote:This is a mess, but a good lesson to the spoiled, privileged whites in DC that they are not quite the masters of the universe that they have come to believe they are. Shit happens and you do not always come out ahead.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:All of the families saying that they will leave shows their selfishness and desire to only help their own children, instead of working to support and improve the entire DCPS community. I'd be glad to see you all leave and make room for families who want educational equity for all students.
This is bullshit. You can create equity without destroying existing value. And it is the height of arrogance to assume that equity can be centrally planned anyway. I guarantee you that the majority of high ses parents (who are not just white btw) would be more than happy to pay in more taxes to help everyone improve. We just don't see the point of destroying achievements in the name of unproven social engineering.
Anonymous wrote:All of the families saying that they will leave shows their selfishness and desire to only help their own children, instead of working to support and improve the entire DCPS community. I'd be glad to see you all leave and make room for families who want educational equity for all students.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is the OP here. People are welcome to say good riddance to us, PP - but if I don't have the school I want for our kids, and can afford to move, why on earth would I stay? Childfree people will then move to our house and be happy enough there and everything will balance itself out. I like walking everywhere and being close to work, but not enough to send any of my children to a school I don't care for.
To the PP who mentioned geographical component - I saw that but the problem is we live on the Hill where our inbound school is good (Brent) but any of the other neighboring ones, not so much, so any school choice that has a decent chance of landing my DD at e.g. Tyler Traditional (or sending half of Tyler Traditional students to Brent) is not really great.
If this comes about, they will try and lure you to stay with promises of great programs and shiny new stuff. The inequality at this point is so great in our school system ( for example between the education one receives at Brent, and the one at Tyler Traditional ) that those is charge are willing to gamble that you really want to stay and will give up some certainty to do so.
In what way is the inequity so great between Tyler and Brent?
Just look at the test scores. But I don't see how destroying Brent's achievements can help Tyler. Either expand Brent or help Tyler directly. No grad school social engineering.
That's it? Test scores? You don't have anything but test scores to prove an inequity? Not facilities, curriculum, teaching quality, learning environment, special programs? Test scores are correlated with SES, so where's the inequity? Are you saying that a school is only good if it has high SES students?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is the OP here. People are welcome to say good riddance to us, PP - but if I don't have the school I want for our kids, and can afford to move, why on earth would I stay? Childfree people will then move to our house and be happy enough there and everything will balance itself out. I like walking everywhere and being close to work, but not enough to send any of my children to a school I don't care for.
To the PP who mentioned geographical component - I saw that but the problem is we live on the Hill where our inbound school is good (Brent) but any of the other neighboring ones, not so much, so any school choice that has a decent chance of landing my DD at e.g. Tyler Traditional (or sending half of Tyler Traditional students to Brent) is not really great.
If this comes about, they will try and lure you to stay with promises of great programs and shiny new stuff. The inequality at this point is so great in our school system ( for example between the education one receives at Brent, and the one at Tyler Traditional ) that those is charge are willing to gamble that you really want to stay and will give up some certainty to do so.
In what way is the inequity so great between Tyler and Brent?
Just look at the test scores. But I don't see how destroying Brent's achievements can help Tyler. Either expand Brent or help Tyler directly. No grad school social engineering.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is the OP here. People are welcome to say good riddance to us, PP - but if I don't have the school I want for our kids, and can afford to move, why on earth would I stay? Childfree people will then move to our house and be happy enough there and everything will balance itself out. I like walking everywhere and being close to work, but not enough to send any of my children to a school I don't care for.
To the PP who mentioned geographical component - I saw that but the problem is we live on the Hill where our inbound school is good (Brent) but any of the other neighboring ones, not so much, so any school choice that has a decent chance of landing my DD at e.g. Tyler Traditional (or sending half of Tyler Traditional students to Brent) is not really great.
If this comes about, they will try and lure you to stay with promises of great programs and shiny new stuff. The inequality at this point is so great in our school system ( for example between the education one receives at Brent, and the one at Tyler Traditional ) that those is charge are willing to gamble that you really want to stay and will give up some certainty to do so.
In what way is the inequity so great between Tyler and Brent?