Which school pyramids are considered "desirable" in Fairfax County? (McLean: upper-class, house)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Have you ever attended a school with a substantial number of low-achieving students? Are you aware of how much energy and resources such students suck away from the principal, teachers, and other staff? Are you aware of how the presence of so many indifferent students can poison the atmosphere for their classmates?
It is impossible for most families to spend weeks researching the public school options as you suggest -- sitting in on classes, taking tours, scheduling meetings with principals and athletic coaches, and the like. It is far more efficient to rely on objective indicators, such as test scores, college admission statistics, and AP class participation rates. I don't fault parents for taking the more efficient approach,
But "the more efficient approach" of relying on rumors and innuendo, or taking the ultimate short cut of relying on racial and/or socioeconomic demographics, is just wrong-headed. We should care that ALL children be educated and enabled to lead productive lives. You can't just "throwaway" other people's problems, and those free/reduced-lunch kids still deserve a shot at a decent education, and even troubled kids deserve the energy and resources from the teachers/principals to correct their behavior before it's too late.
I have traveled to near 30 countries, and it scares me to see America becoming a nation of haves and have-nots, and we'd better be careful before we end up in a society like Brazil or South Africa, where the rich sequester themselves behind barricades and have bodyguards since the crime is so high due to poverty and polarization.
It is not snobbery to observe that students with high SATs tend to come from families with high levels of education (and income), and that students with low SATs tend to come from families with lower levels of education (and income).
This wouldn't surprise me since families with more income are more likely to pay for SAT prep courses for their children.
Quote:
Originally Posted by claremarie
It is not snobbery to prefer to send one's children to a school with many high-achieving students rather than a school with many low-achieving students.
It is not snobbery to prefer a high-achieving environment for your children, but it can be perceived as snobbery if someone assumes that a lower income/less educated family equals low-achieving students. For example, I think that a student with a B or C average who works part-time during the school year and full-time during the summer to support him/herself and pay for college can be as likely, or even more likely, to succeed than one with an A average who spends the summer in some "camp" or "summer abroad program" paid by mommy and daddy. The first student in the example is developing a work ethic, self-motivation and discipline that will prove extremely helpful in college and later in life. All I see around me are teens who do no chores at home, don't work at all (so they can supposedly focus on their studies), and have mommy/daddy hand them everything (e.g., car, cell phone, money for entertainment, etc.). I rather see my children get involved with diverse, lower-income families anyday if that means learning the value of work ethics and self-discipline. But to understand my perspective, you have to accept that lower socioeconomics don't necessarily equal violence or substance abuse at home or parents who don't care about their children. You can be uneducated and lower-income and be a good, productive citizen.
Thank you for posting the actual data! However, I am heartbroken, because after spending 2 months on these forums, where everyone told me that West Springfield HS was one of the top pyramids, my husband & I placed an offer on a home that is in the heart of that pyramid. Now, I learn that the school didn't even place for a SILVER MEDAL in U.S. News & World Report but it is too late for me to rescind the offer.
WHY DID PEOPLE LIE ABOUT THE QUALITY OF WEST SPRINGFIELD HS??!!
In that southern region, I would only consider WT Woodson even if the other schools are just as good. Robinson and others may be good, but they are just too large and traditionally speaking, aren't proven over time to be better than the schools closer north.
In the northern region, I would only consider Langley, McLean, Madison, and Oakton.
But "the more efficient approach" of relying on rumors and innuendo, or taking the ultimate short cut of relying on racial and/or socioeconomic demographics, is just wrong-headed. We should care that ALL children be educated and enabled to lead productive lives. You can't just "throwaway" other people's problems, and those free/reduced-lunch kids still deserve a shot at a decent education, and even troubled kids deserve the energy and resources from the teachers/principals to correct their behavior before it's too late.
I have traveled to near 30 countries, and it scares me to see America becoming a nation of haves and have-nots, and we'd better be careful before we end up in a society like Brazil or South Africa, where the rich sequester themselves behind barricades and have bodyguards since the crime is so high due to poverty and polarization.
Unfortunately, parents are really only responsible for their own kids.
You don't see Obama putting his kids into DC Public Schools to make any statement. He's paying big money ($50-60k cash money total each year not including summer) to put them through an exclusive, elite school.
I rather see my children get involved with diverse, lower-income families anyday if that means learning the value of work ethics and self-discipline. But to understand my perspective, you have to accept that lower socioeconomics don't necessarily equal violence or substance abuse at home or parents who don't care about their children. You can be uneducated and lower-income and be a good, productive citizen.
Of course you can. You can also be educated and high income and be a crook, like Bernie Madoff. But, statistically speaking, children from higher socioeconomic groups are MORE likely than those from lower groups to be high-achieving students, and LESS likely to be drop out of school, become a teenage parent, or be arrested.
In an ideal world, you would have access to information on the attitude towards education, work ethics, moral standards, and self-discipline of the families of your children's potential classmates, and choose a school accordingly. In the absence of such useful but inaccessible information, you rely on proxies.
You can't just "throwaway" other people's problems, and those free/reduced-lunch kids still deserve a shot at a decent education, and even troubled kids deserve the energy and resources from the teachers/principals to correct their behavior before it's too late.
But aren't you moving away from Upper Marlboro, and a community that you love, precisely because of the PG County schools, which are filled with these kinds of students?
Unfortunately, parents are really only responsible for their own kids.
You don't see Obama putting his kids into DC Public Schools to make any statement. He's paying big money ($50-60k cash money total each year not including summer) to put them through an exclusive, elite school.
Tell him about haves and have nots.
I know, and I was disappointed that Obama put the girls in Sidwell Friends where it costs $30,000/yr. tuition, because he should have set an example and show that we haven't given up on inner-city youth. Personally I feel ambivalent to move to Fairfax County because I want to help make things better in PG County, but people said "don't gamble with your kids future", and so I have to go ahead and "sell out" and move to the better school district. I feel that both Obama and Adrian Fenty have "sold out" and put their kids in elite private schools, but at least Michelle Rhee is giving the public schools a try with her own 2 children.
But, statistically speaking, children from higher socioeconomic groups are MORE likely than those from lower groups to be high-achieving students, and LESS likely to be drop out of school, become a teenage parent, or be arrested.
But what about Bristol Palin? Her parents earned $180,000/yr. and mom's a Governor, yet she also ended up a single teen-mom and high school drop-out! In addition, I read in Washington Post that there was a drug-ring at a high school in Chantilly, and 5 teenagers died of herion overdoses the past couple of years. Now, isn't Chantilly also "high income" with high SAT scores? Of course, I'm sure those kids have mommy-daddy to get them a high-powered attorney so they'll get off on the felony drug charges, and should those girls get preggers they've got mommy-daddy to pay for the abortion.
Just stop bashing low-income folks already, some people just get unlucky in life.
In that southern region, I would only consider WT Woodson even if the other schools are just as good. Robinson and others may be good, but they are just too large and traditionally speaking, aren't proven over time to be better than the schools closer north.
In the northern region, I would only consider Langley, McLean, Madison, and Oakton.
Gee - the five schools with the lowest percentage of lower-income students in the county! I'm in total shock.
One of the interesting things about the US News rankings is that they recognized schools with somewhat higher percentages of lower-income students (Marshall and Stuart) that are achieving success across the board. Of course, in Marshall's case, the SAT scores there now exceed those at neighboring Madison. It may be, however, that you don't like the IB program and just haven't explained why you picked the most affluent schools in the county.
In any event, these sorts of assessments by parents typically focus as much on the neighborhood elementary schools as the high schools into which they ultimately feed.
Gee - the five schools with the lowest percentage of lower-income students in the county! I'm in total shock.
One of the interesting things about the US News rankings is that they recognized schools with somewhat higher percentages of lower-income students (Marshall and Stuart) that are achieving success across the board. Of course, in Marshall's case, the SAT scores there now exceed those at neighboring Madison. It may be, however, that you don't like the IB program and just haven't explained why you picked the most affluent schools in the county.
In any event, these sorts of assessments by parents typically focus as much on the neighborhood elementary schools as the high schools into which they ultimately feed.
I grew up in DC and know first hand the pitfalls that kids have to maneuver around in order to be successful. Needless to say, not many kids were successful.
You want to put your kids in an environment conducive to learning and away from the multitude of negative influences around them. If you look at the ethnic ratios at the schools I listed, regardless of income, they generally parallel the general population of the US with the exception of Langley.
I really don't see the benefit of choosing a pyramid that has a predominant low income population or mediocre test scores, whether for academic or real estate investment purposes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
