Where to send kids to school for best public school football program? (Houston: sales, mortgage)

[TurtleCreek80]

Originally Posted by usc619

Apparently I'm not as old as you, because you seem to be a little out of touch with today's kids, you took a lot of what I said out of context(whatever). If you have issues with the new burbs up north then just say so, but don't get your panties in a bunch because I don't share the same sentiments about city living as you lol

Sorry I'm out of touch with you, kid. Why don't you explain how a 90% affluent district is going to "prepare your kids to deal with all walks of life" in the "real world"?!

[usc619]

Originally Posted by TurtleCreek80

Plano does have 9-10 and 11-12 campuses. But each of them still have 1,000-1,400 students per grade.

What's so bad about that? Once again I think the more life exposure you have in today's society the more successful you'll be in the long run(due to making better decisions), why not start in high school?

[OpenBook777]

Originally Posted by TurtleCreek80

After growing up here and being away for so long, I'll be interested to see what you really think of Allen once your there. Most of my LH (late 90's) friends only moved to the burbs once they realized they'd never afford to live in town. With your budget, you could, and yet choose not to. Interesting. Most of the LH'ers I know have settled back into LH or are either in Lakewood or the Park Cities. Most of their LH friends who are still in Dallas seem to chose the same neighborhoods, too.

Most of my LH friends with kids, single and married alike, who didn't move away from Dallas ended up in Frisco. Many of our parents still reside in the same LH homes in which we were raised.

I'll be happy to provide my .02 cents on our Allen experience after we are there for a year.

One other really cool thing we learned about Allen is that they're building the first wakeboarding facility that doesn't require a boat to learn the sport. Love it!

[usc619]

Originally Posted by TurtleCreek80

Sorry I'm out of touch with you, kid. Why don't you explain how a 90% affluent district is going to "prepare your kids to deal with all walks of life" in the "real world"?!

The fact that Allen doesn't separate their HS kids based on "Attendance zones" allows for a better mix. As far as Allen being 90% affluent, I guess we have a different definition on what affluent is. My neighborhood/zip 77494 has about the same demo as Allen and I dam sure don't consider myself affluent

[usc619]

Look I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, no big deal. I gave my .02 on the OP, I'm cool with that.

btw; I do enjoy reading yours, momof2 and loves2read comments, you guys seem very knowledgeable on many issues re: DFW, just not Football

[The Gribbler]

Originally Posted by tofurkey

Well shoot... try this one...

Are Wisconsin Schools Better than Those in Texas? : Education Next

Program on Education Policy and Governance
Harvard Kennedy School
79 JFK Street, Cambridge, MA 02138
Phone (877) 476-5354 Fax (617) 496-1507

Still the same. Cherry picking certain stats to build an argument based on a political motive.

Here's my exact retort and another poster's (retired teacher) response as well.

BigSoccer - View Single Post - End of collective bargaining/other anti-union measures plus reactions ...

I read the article and the link to the NEAP, and I still can't figure out what he's talking about. What specific test is he referring to that Texas students score higher on? I never took a NAEP test in my schooling, and neither has my oldest child yet. Is the Iowa Skills Assessment test? I know that is a very widely accepted test and I didn't take it, but my daughter did?

Is he simply referring to the test that individual states give their students, like the TAKS?

If that's the case then he's argument is complete hogwash. 65% of a school year is committed to learning that test. Its shoved down the throats of every elementary, intermediate, and junior high schools in the state. It basically can make and break towns and cause parents to avoid entire school districts based on TAKS results. Its a joke. Its not an assessment of how well a child learns or at what level they're capable of learning, only teaching them how to pass a test. They had to come in make this test harder in Texas because they had too many average students like myself completely rape that test because it was too damn easy.

And what basis can you compare two tests that are completely at the discretion of the states and not administered nationally? The ACT and SAT scores seem one of the most uniform ways of comparing education nationally, unless of course an infinitely small sample of students are taking those tests.

BigSoccer - View Single Post - End of collective bargaining/other anti-union measures plus reactions ...

He's blatantly wrong when he says of the NAEP: "Participation is fairly universal; if you've had a 4th or 8th grader in the last few years, you're probably familiar with it."

The NAEP website states: "The NAEP assessments are administered to samples of students rather than the entire national, state, or district populations. Each assessment, based on its design, samples different numbers of students. For instance, approximately 156,500 fourth-graders from 9,330 schools, 151,100 eighth-graders from 6,920 schools, and 11,100 twelfth-graders from 1,410 schools participated in the 2009 science assessment."

So I can't comment on the statistical value of their sampling procedures or their sample size or whatever. But it's fair to say that blogger is way off in stating that the assessment is "fairly universal."

[TurtleCreek80]

Originally Posted by usc619

The fact that Allen doesn't separate their HS kids based on "Attendance zones" allows for a better mix. As far as Allen being 90% affluent, I guess we have a different definition on what affluent is. My neighborhood/zip 77494 has about the same demo as Allen and I dam sure don't consider myself affluent

You have to remember the three high schools OP had narrowed down to were Allen (10% economically disadvantaged with $100k median income), Lake Highlands (50% economically disadvantaged with $59k median income), and Woodrow Wilson (75% economically disadvantaged with zip codes ranging from $30k-$85k income). Allen is by far the most affluent ($100k is solidly middle to upper middle class) and least diverse of that bunch. That was my point.

[Macbeth2003]

Originally Posted by usc619

The fact that Allen doesn't separate their HS kids based on "Attendance zones" allows for a better mix. As far as Allen being 90% affluent, I guess we have a different definition on what affluent is. My neighborhood/zip 77494 has about the same demo as Allen and I dam sure don't consider myself affluent

Ok, I have to jump in (wearing my asbestos suit) on the issue of defining "affluent." If Allen has a median household income of $100,000 dollars that is twice the national average. I think any reasonable measure has to be that twice the average is affluent. Just as if the average shoe size for a man is a 9 and mine was an 18 if someone said I had big feet I couldn't say "Well I have a different definition of big"

For some reason no one in the USA wants to be considered affluent or wealthy anymore, or lower middle class. The truly rich are ok with being rich, the truly poor accept their lot, but everyone else wants to be solidly middle class. Those making $100k a year - generally speaking - worked hard to get there. They either have more education than the average, worked harder than the average, longer hours than the average, etc. They made an economic decision to swap something (free time, a few years of life staying in school instead of out in the world, etc) for a higher income. Good for them. Those of us who consciously made another decision, deciding to live below the average mark but work less, work in an underpaying field, spend more freetime with families etc... good for us too.

What a long way of saying twice the average income is affluent.

[TurtleCreek80]

Originally Posted by Macbeth2003

Ok, I have to jump in (wearing my asbestos suit) on the issue of defining "affluent." If Allen has a median household income of $100,000 dollars that is twice the national average. I think any reasonable measure has to be that twice the average is affluent. Just as if the average shoe size for a man is a 9 and mine was an 18 if someone said I had big feet I couldn't say "Well I have a different definition of big"

For some reason no one in the USA wants to be considered affluent or wealthy anymore, or lower middle class. The truly rich are ok with being rich, the truly poor accept their lot, but everyone else wants to be solidly middle class. Those making $100k a year - generally speaking - worked hard to get there. They either have more education than the average, worked harder than the average, longer hours than the average, etc. They made an economic decision to swap something (free time, a few years of life staying in school instead of out in the world, etc) for a higher income. Good for them. Those of us who consciously made another decision, deciding to live below the average mark but work less, work in an underpaying field, spend more freetime with families etc... good for us too.

What a long way of saying twice the average income is affluent.

Great post. I read an interesting stat yesterday: 6% of Americans own an iPhone. Only 6%. I thought about my life, friends, coworkers, family members, etc. I don't know anyone who DOESN'T own an iPhone except those who could afford one but choose to stick with Blackberry or something else. But 94% of Americans don't have one- and the vast majority of that 94% probably can't afford one. It hit me- I'm doing a heck of a lot better financially than probably 90% of Americans....even though in my Dallas life, fiancé and I joke that we're "poor" because we still can't swing the HPISD housing costs yet.

$100k is absolutely affluent, upper middle class, etc. If you have money in your 401k/IRA for the future, own a home in a safe/ clean neighborhood with better than average schools, don't worry about putting food on the table, take a family vacation once a year, and can find a way to pay for a child's competitive athletics program ($$$$), then YES- by all means- you are affluent and are living better than 90% of your fellow Americans.

[BigDGeek]

Originally Posted by TurtleCreek80

Great post. I read an interesting stat yesterday: 6% of Americans own an iPhone. Only 6%. I thought about my life, friends, coworkers, family members, etc. I don't know anyone who DOESN'T own an iPhone except those who could afford one but choose to stick with Blackberry or something else. But 94% of Americans don't have one- and the vast majority of that 94% probably can't afford one. It hit me- I'm doing a heck of a lot better financially than probably 90% of Americans....even though in my Dallas life, fiancé and I joke that we're "poor" because we still can't swing the HPISD housing costs yet.

$100k is absolutely affluent, upper middle class, etc. If you have money in your 401k/IRA for the future, own a home in a safe/ clean neighborhood with better than average schools, don't worry about putting food on the table, take a family vacation once a year, and can find a way to pay for a child's competitive athletics program ($$$$), then YES- by all means- you are affluent and are living better than 90% of your fellow Americans.

Count me in there too, I guess. (I just joined the smartphone revolution but I didn't go with an iPhone. I went with a Samsung phone that uses the Android operating system. I still see iPhones and iPads as neat but unnecessarily expensive toys.)