Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A school is made by teachers, students, admins, supporting staffs, and facility. Since MCPS uses the same curriculum for all its schools, the curriculum shouldn't vary among different schools. Special programs or choice programs are not discussed here.
Let’s discuss why some svhools are strong but others are weak by looking into each component and then ask how to improve it. Remember, the goal of MCPS is not to produce schools with equal out come. MCPS should provide tools for EACH student to reach his/her potential

wow - that's exactly the argument many used in favor of segregation!

One of the main arguments in favor of an emphasis on racial mix is that white kids get the best teachers and instruction, therefore you must have black kids in the classroom with them, otherwise black children will get the crap teachers and crap instruction (and the crap facilities).

Redistricting is a fact of public school management but if the lesser teachers and instruction are being concentrated in schools with a higher minority population that's a problem.

There's a lot of research around this, but it can be hard to extrapolate to a place like MoCo. In general, the higher the number of Black and Latinx kids in a school district, the worse the resources for schools. That is particularly true in places with city-based and town-based school districts.

Some of those inequities are smoothed in a large diverse county-wide district like MCPS, but there are other challenges. I've had kids in both high-needs and low-needs MCPS schools, and the low-needs schools are funding a tremendous number of additional activities and opportunities out of PTA (parental) funds. They are also able to be very generous with teachers, which reduces the amount that a teacher needs to spend out of pocket. This can be appealing to some teachers, who move from high-needs to low-needs schools as they progress in their careers.

At the same time, there are plenty of high quality teachers who chose teaching because they wanted to work with high-needs student populations, or who stay in a specific school because it works for their commute or they like the administration.

So, it's a mixed bag. I've seen very weak teachers move from a high-needs to a low-needs school, and I wonder how they fare there, with a demanding parent community and zero classroom management skills. I've also seen teachers move from a low-needs to a high-needs school and struggle because their mode of instruction rests on every kid having access to a computer at home and plenty of time and space to do their work.

The final factor is parent advocacy. I've not done a comprehensive survey, but it does seem that the squeaky wheel gets the grease in MCPS. If you have a critical mass of well-connected parents, you get your facilities revamped ahead of schedule (BCC) or hang on to benefits the rest of the county doesn't have (Piney Branch).

It's complicated, in short.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A school is made by teachers, students, admins, supporting staffs, and facility. Since MCPS uses the same curriculum for all its schools, the curriculum shouldn't vary among different schools. Special programs or choice programs are not discussed here.
Let’s discuss why some svhools are strong but others are weak by looking into each component and then ask how to improve it. Remember, the goal of MCPS is not to produce schools with equal out come. MCPS should provide tools for EACH student to reach his/her potential

wow - that's exactly the argument many used in favor of segregation!

One of the main arguments in favor of an emphasis on racial mix is that white kids get the best teachers and instruction, therefore you must have black kids in the classroom with them, otherwise black children will get the crap teachers and crap instruction (and the crap facilities).

Redistricting is a fact of public school management but if the lesser teachers and instruction are being concentrated in schools with a higher minority population that's a problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain why schools with more colored or poor students are labeled low quality? Is the quality measured by test score? Does MCPS assign less qualified teachers the these schools? Does MCPS assign ineffective principles and admins to magnge the schools? Do the low quality schools have worse facilities?

A lot of factors are taken into consideration. Graduation rate, test scores, experience of teachers, etc. The problem is that experienced and good teachers are all at the "good" schools...mainly because they would never take a job at the other schools.

I think the biggest problem is absenteeism. The rate at those schools are ridiculously high...hence the low graduation rate and high dropout rate.

On DCUM? Nah. "Bad school" = "school with lots of poor/black/Hispanic kids"

Sadly, it is true that the "bad schools" have mostly poor people of color. Many of these same kids come from families that do not support them at the same level as families in other school districts. This is the biggest problem...it starts in the home. Absenteeism is ridiculously high at these schools...why aren't the parents making these kids go to school?

Yes, of course it's true - because it's tautological. That's the definition for DCUM. For DCUM, "school quality" doesn't refer to the facilities or the course offerings or the administration or the teachers or anything that actually makes up the school. It refers to the race/ethnicity/household income of the students who attend the school.

You didn't answer the question..."Why aren't the parents making these kids go to school?

You're telling me that the reason DCUM thinks those schools are "bad schools", is that lots of kids enrolled in those schools skip class?

I don't think so.

high absenteeism means reduced instruction time which has a negative influence on grades and test scores. Many people look at test scores as a major factor when rating a school.

Anonymous wrote:A school is made by teachers, students, admins, supporting staffs, and facility. Since MCPS uses the same curriculum for all its schools, the curriculum shouldn't vary among different schools. Special programs or choice programs are not discussed here.
Let’s discuss why some svhools are strong but others are weak by looking into each component and then ask how to improve it. Remember, the goal of MCPS is not to produce schools with equal out come. MCPS should provide tools for EACH student to reach his/her potential

wow - that's exactly the argument many used in favor of segregation!

A school is made by teachers, students, admins, supporting staffs, and facility. Since MCPS uses the same curriculum for all its schools, the curriculum shouldn't vary among different schools. Special programs or choice programs are not discussed here.
Let’s discuss why some svhools are strong but others are weak by looking into each component and then ask how to improve it. Remember, the goal of MCPS is not to produce schools with equal out come. MCPS should provide tools for EACH student to reach his/her potential

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain why schools with more colored or poor students are labeled low quality? Is the quality measured by test score? Does MCPS assign less qualified teachers the these schools? Does MCPS assign ineffective principles and admins to magnge the schools? Do the low quality schools have worse facilities?

A lot of factors are taken into consideration. Graduation rate, test scores, experience of teachers, etc. The problem is that experienced and good teachers are all at the "good" schools...mainly because they would never take a job at the other schools.

I think the biggest problem is absenteeism. The rate at those schools are ridiculously high...hence the low graduation rate and high dropout rate.

On DCUM? Nah. "Bad school" = "school with lots of poor/black/Hispanic kids"

Sadly, it is true that the "bad schools" have mostly poor people of color. Many of these same kids come from families that do not support them at the same level as families in other school districts. This is the biggest problem...it starts in the home. Absenteeism is ridiculously high at these schools...why aren't the parents making these kids go to school?

Yes, of course it's true - because it's tautological. That's the definition for DCUM. For DCUM, "school quality" doesn't refer to the facilities or the course offerings or the administration or the teachers or anything that actually makes up the school. It refers to the race/ethnicity/household income of the students who attend the school.

You didn't answer the question..."Why aren't the parents making these kids go to school?

You're telling me that the reason DCUM thinks those schools are "bad schools", is that lots of kids enrolled in those schools skip class?

I don't think so.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain why schools with more colored or poor students are labeled low quality? Is the quality measured by test score? Does MCPS assign less qualified teachers the these schools? Does MCPS assign ineffective principles and admins to magnge the schools? Do the low quality schools have worse facilities?

A lot of factors are taken into consideration. Graduation rate, test scores, experience of teachers, etc. The problem is that experienced and good teachers are all at the "good" schools...mainly because they would never take a job at the other schools.

I think the biggest problem is absenteeism. The rate at those schools are ridiculously high...hence the low graduation rate and high dropout rate.

On DCUM? Nah. "Bad school" = "school with lots of poor/black/Hispanic kids"

Sadly, it is true that the "bad schools" have mostly poor people of color. Many of these same kids come from families that do not support them at the same level as families in other school districts. This is the biggest problem...it starts in the home. Absenteeism is ridiculously high at these schools...why aren't the parents making these kids go to school?

Yes, of course it's true - because it's tautological. That's the definition for DCUM. For DCUM, "school quality" doesn't refer to the facilities or the course offerings or the administration or the teachers or anything that actually makes up the school. It refers to the race/ethnicity/household income of the students who attend the school.

You didn't answer the question..."Why aren't the parents making these kids go to school?

We know the answers. Some families are dysfunctional - and that's across the board. I've worked with kids on IIS who have spent the BULK of their school career in that program. You are not marked absent on IIS b/c you're still being serviced through the school system. You're simply not present at your local school. These are kids with means! So sometimes it's hard to make a blanket statement about attendance.

IIS aside, kids living in poverty are often looking after younger siblings, as their parents are working. So there are no adults around for much of the day. Many work to support the HH, too. Some miss days to accompany parents to appointments, as they need conversations to be translated.

Flipping around boundaries WILL NOT solve these issues - issues that - sadly - often become the teachers' problems, as the question asked is this: "What have YOU done to ensure Student X passes?" passing the buck, shifting the blame - doing whatever is possible to cover the "system's" a**

This is why teachers leave. So you can shift boundaries around all you like, but this movement will NOT address the root causes. It's simply another band aid approach that will fail.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain why schools with more colored or poor students are labeled low quality? Is the quality measured by test score? Does MCPS assign less qualified teachers the these schools? Does MCPS assign ineffective principles and admins to magnge the schools? Do the low quality schools have worse facilities?

A lot of factors are taken into consideration. Graduation rate, test scores, experience of teachers, etc. The problem is that experienced and good teachers are all at the "good" schools...mainly because they would never take a job at the other schools.

I think the biggest problem is absenteeism. The rate at those schools are ridiculously high...hence the low graduation rate and high dropout rate.

On DCUM? Nah. "Bad school" = "school with lots of poor/black/Hispanic kids"

Sadly, it is true that the "bad schools" have mostly poor people of color. Many of these same kids come from families that do not support them at the same level as families in other school districts. This is the biggest problem...it starts in the home. Absenteeism is ridiculously high at these schools...why aren't the parents making these kids go to school?

Yes, of course it's true - because it's tautological. That's the definition for DCUM. For DCUM, "school quality" doesn't refer to the facilities or the course offerings or the administration or the teachers or anything that actually makes up the school. It refers to the race/ethnicity/household income of the students who attend the school.

You didn't answer the question..."Why aren't the parents making these kids go to school?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain why schools with more colored or poor students are labeled low quality? Is the quality measured by test score? Does MCPS assign less qualified teachers the these schools? Does MCPS assign ineffective principles and admins to magnge the schools? Do the low quality schools have worse facilities?

A lot of factors are taken into consideration. Graduation rate, test scores, experience of teachers, etc. The problem is that experienced and good teachers are all at the "good" schools...mainly because they would never take a job at the other schools.

I think the biggest problem is absenteeism. The rate at those schools are ridiculously high...hence the low graduation rate and high dropout rate.

On DCUM? Nah. "Bad school" = "school with lots of poor/black/Hispanic kids"

Sadly, it is true that the "bad schools" have mostly poor people of color. Many of these same kids come from families that do not support them at the same level as families in other school districts. This is the biggest problem...it starts in the home. Absenteeism is ridiculously high at these schools...why aren't the parents making these kids go to school?

Yes, of course it's true - because it's tautological. That's the definition for DCUM. For DCUM, "school quality" doesn't refer to the facilities or the course offerings or the administration or the teachers or anything that actually makes up the school. It refers to the race/ethnicity/household income of the students who attend the school.

And this is what the BOE is looking to change through redistricting, yes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain why schools with more colored or poor students are labeled low quality? Is the quality measured by test score? Does MCPS assign less qualified teachers the these schools? Does MCPS assign ineffective principles and admins to magnge the schools? Do the low quality schools have worse facilities?

A lot of factors are taken into consideration. Graduation rate, test scores, experience of teachers, etc. The problem is that experienced and good teachers are all at the "good" schools...mainly because they would never take a job at the other schools.

I think the biggest problem is absenteeism. The rate at those schools are ridiculously high...hence the low graduation rate and high dropout rate.

On DCUM? Nah. "Bad school" = "school with lots of poor/black/Hispanic kids"

Sadly, it is true that the "bad schools" have mostly poor people of color. Many of these same kids come from families that do not support them at the same level as families in other school districts. This is the biggest problem...it starts in the home. Absenteeism is ridiculously high at these schools...why aren't the parents making these kids go to school?

Yes, of course it's true - because it's tautological. That's the definition for DCUM. For DCUM, "school quality" doesn't refer to the facilities or the course offerings or the administration or the teachers or anything that actually makes up the school. It refers to the race/ethnicity/household income of the students who attend the school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is you have more of a buy in when you have kids traveling further distances for “good” schools. When you make kids travel farther distances for “bad” schools that’s a problem as the trade off is just one failed social experiment.

Lets put Langley Park in the Whitman boundary. MCPS loves islands and it would help the Blair overcrowding issues.

The Woodward reopening will provide some opportunities to tweak the HS boundaries and it will provide more capacity overall in each of these clusters. However, the downsides for lower SES kids travelling long distances are at least as big as the reverse. It hurts attendance, it cuts down on opportunities for afterschool tutoring or extracurricular participation, worst of all it's hard for families to be present at discussions around the curriculum or college admissions process etc etc. I have a kid at BCC and I'm amazed at how many parent info nights there are, all optional of course; but a lot easier to get to if you have a car and a flexible schedule and live very close by.

I'm not advocating for any solution here, I'm just pointing out that this is super complicated, with a lot of tradeoffs to every proposition. (And that the long term policy really should focus on developing more affordable housing in the areas near where the "good" schools are located.)

Woodward reopening will impact the HS within a couple of miles of it namely WJ, Einstein, BCC and possibly other W's. It could indirectly affect other schools in that moving more kids out of schools like Einstein that are currently overcapacity might create room there to its east.,

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain why schools with more colored or poor students are labeled low quality? Is the quality measured by test score? Does MCPS assign less qualified teachers the these schools? Does MCPS assign ineffective principles and admins to magnge the schools? Do the low quality schools have worse facilities?

A lot of factors are taken into consideration. Graduation rate, test scores, experience of teachers, etc. The problem is that experienced and good teachers are all at the "good" schools...mainly because they would never take a job at the other schools.

I think the biggest problem is absenteeism. The rate at those schools are ridiculously high...hence the low graduation rate and high dropout rate.

This is a lie.

I've spent the bulk of my career in challenging schools. This is the first year I've experienced a so-called "good" school. I am not impressed by my colleagues at all. The BEST teachers can handle all kids - from those in gangs to kids earning impressive scores on AP and IB exams. Those teachers don't coast. They work, and they know how to plan.

Please don't ASSume that all the best are at the "good" schools. I can out plan all of my colleagues, but they REFUSE to listen to any advice I share, thinking their way is the best way.

the REAL problem? Moving kids from A to B takes time - much more time and emotional/mental effort in challenging schools. But a move from A to B means little to the county, as the county wants a move from A to G. This is why good teachers burn out. I've seen some of the best leave before year five. But even more painful is watching a year 15 move out. Each year, I watch experienced, talented teachers - those who make wonderful mentors - just walk out.

I'm so tired of people like you who talk out of their a**es. Please don't post lies.

Thank you for your dedication and service.

Thank you for your kind words.

Then add school choice programs in the “bad areas” then. UMC families are willing to travel far distances for signature programs that appeal to them.

Anonymous wrote:The problem is you have more of a buy in when you have kids traveling further distances for “good” schools. When you make kids travel farther distances for “bad” schools that’s a problem as the trade off is just one failed social experiment.

Problem is many of the clusters on the western side are over crowded (look at the heat map), so some of the students will have to move, and that might mean going to a "bad" school.

The problem is you have more of a buy in when you have kids traveling further distances for “good” schools. When you make kids travel farther distances for “bad” schools that’s a problem as the trade off is just one failed social experiment.