Not Happy With Public Schools (Fairfax: buy, square footage, incomes)

[novatert]

Have you thought about having an IQ test done on the child? In Fairfax I was tested in the 2nd grade, for entry to a GT class in the 3rd. I don't know how things are done in PW. Maybe you should have a private one done. IQ isn't everything, but it's a start if you think he's gifted. Is he reading ahead of his age group, or doing something else that's special?

I grew up in Fairfax County and I don't have any experience to compare it to other schools, but as someone who was "highly gifted" I found even many of the gifted classes boring. I failed classes because I aced tests but wouldn't do repetitive homework problems that I didn't need to do. I didn't really have these problems in early elementary school, though. It was later on.

[Denton56]

Originally Posted by housewatcher

Will you provide your source for this statement? Or is this just your opinion?

Think about it. How many of those Asian kids have single moms? And how many Black kids do? Asians don't have kids they can't support and can't educate. It's a cultural thing.

A child born to married parents has a less than 4% chance of growing up in poverty. A child born to a single mom has a nearly 40% chance. You may look that up at the BLS.

[Denton56]

Originally Posted by novatert

Have you thought about having an IQ test done on the child? In Fairfax I was tested in the 2nd grade, for entry to a GT class in the 3rd. I don't know how things are done in PW. Maybe you should have a private one done. IQ isn't everything, but it's a start if you think he's gifted. Is he reading ahead of his age group, or doing something else that's special?

I grew up in Fairfax County and I don't have any experience to compare it to other schools, but as someone who was "highly gifted" I found even many of the gifted classes boring. I failed classes because I aced tests but wouldn't do repetitive homework problems that I didn't need to do. I didn't really have these problems in early elementary school, though. It was later on.

That doesn't work so well anymore. FCPS educrats found too many high IQ kids were white and Asian so they don't like IQ tests anymore. According to them, giftedness can be an ''emerging'' characteristic, that cannot always be found in IQ tests. Only educrats can determine which children have intelligence that is not yet apparent but might still emerge at some point in the child's life. Or perhaps when he is an adult. Or perhaps never. It's impossible to say.

I find it hard to believe that you aced tests in high school yet failed your classes. That does not compute. Perhaps it was your superior attitude, or something else, that got you into trouble. I bet that you are not Asian. Asian kids do whatever is necessary to get good grades, even homework that is beneath them. It seems to serve them well in academic life and beyond. Much of life is repetitive stuff that we don't enjoy. But I guess you know that by now and surely your parents tried to convince you of such in high school. Don't you hate it when parents are right?! haha

[claremarie]

Surely everyone with an opinion on public school quality is also aware of the extensive research on the adverse effects of growing up without a father in the home (which is the same thing as growing up in a single-parent family).
Here's just one link: FATHERS.COM - The Consequences of Fatherlessness

If you can find out how many children in a given school are living without a father in the home, you can make an extremely accurate prediction of that school's test scores and behavioral issues. Given that Fairfax schools all use essentially the same curriculum, and have the same resources (indeed, poorer schools get MORE resources), variations in school performance can be attributed to the demographics of the student body.

Scran -- data is not the plural of anecdote....

[housewatcher]

Denton - it looked like ClaireMarie was saying that simply having 2 parents at home (vs. 1 parent at home and all other things being equal), is "better". It looks like she dismissed other factors and that is what concerned me.

I don't think having just the fact of having only 1 parent in the home is an automatic recipe for disaster. Thinking like that can prevent people from leaving abusive, etc. households because they may think it is worse if they leave. Or a single person who has the wherewithall to raise a child who is a good student and good citizen, etc. choosing not to because they've been told it will be a bad choice to have/keep the child. It may not be a bad choice!

It is similar to some of the response to that old Murphy Brown TV segment in which she was going to have a baby on her own. I just don't like it when people blindly think that, no matter what, having 2 parents at home is "better". It may be or it may not be - there can be lots of things in play for both situations.

[claremarie]

"it looked like ClaireMarie was saying that simply having 2 parents at home (vs. 1 parent at home and all other things being equal), is "better" "

It IS better, and social science research confirms that fact. It's not politically correct, because families come in all shapes and sizes, and all of that, but some family structures are simply better for children than others. Children need both of their parents.
There are always exceptions, and statistics cannot predict the outcome in individual cases, but ON AVERAGE, children raised in two-parent families will do better on every observable dimension than children raised by single parents.
Honestly, does this come as a surprise to anyone?

[ChristineVA]

[quote=claremarie;11951236Honestly, does this come as a surprise to anyone?[/quote]

Nope!

[leighland]

Originally Posted by Denton56

I find it hard to believe that you aced tests in high school yet failed your classes. That does not compute. Perhaps it was your superior attitude, or something else, that got you into trouble.

Actually extremely high IQs fit a pattern of testing excellent but not following thru on coursework. A most excellent example of this is Bill Gates.

[CAVA1990]

Originally Posted by claremarie

"it looked like ClaireMarie was saying that simply having 2 parents at home (vs. 1 parent at home and all other things being equal), is "better" "

It IS better, and social science research confirms that fact. It's not politically correct, because families come in all shapes and sizes, and all of that, but some family structures are simply better for children than others. Children need both of their parents.
There are always exceptions, and statistics cannot predict the outcome in individual cases, but ON AVERAGE, children raised in two-parent families will do better on every observable dimension than children raised by single parents.
Honestly, does this come as a surprise to anyone?

I think you may be confusing correlation with causation. This is a common problem with statistics. It's like discovering that kids who come from homes where there are lots of books are more likely to go to college and then concluding that if I go out and buy a bunch of books my kids will have a better chance of getting into college. A home with lots of books is indicative of people who value education, which is the real explanation of why kids from such homes are more likely to go to college. A home with two parents is indicative of other factors that are probably bigger drivers of a child's success in life. Enacting laws to limit divorce, discouraging single parenthood in responsible adults, or staying with an abusive spouse "for the sake of the kids" is about as productive as buying lots of books.

[JD984]

Originally Posted by CAVA1990

I think you may be confusing correlation with causation. This is a common problem with statistics. It's like discovering that kids who come from homes where there are lots of books are more likely to go to college and then concluding that if I go out and buy a bunch of books my kids will have a better chance of getting into college. A home with lots of books is indicative of people who value education, which is the real explanation of why kids from such homes are more likely to go to college. A home with two parents is indicative of other factors that are probably bigger drivers of a child's success in life. Enacting laws to limit divorce, discouraging single parenthood in responsible adults, or staying with an abusive spouse "for the sake of the kids" is about as productive as buying lots of books.

I think you may be confusing causation with casuistry. As far as I'm aware, having two parents and lots of books in the house BOTH generally tend to be positives if you want to create the best conditions for your children to succeed.