ACPS overcrowding and teachers

[Anonymous]

Why is ACPS not addressing overcrowding and contradicting information on class sizes and teacher ratio?

[Anonymous]

Because ACPS is so buried with a million other issues they haven't had a chance to get to this one.

[Anonymous]

But also because the district has a history of ignoring parent concerns.

[Anonymous]

I mean, ACPS isn't even acknowledging there is over crowding. They maintain their class sizes are the lowest in the DMV. Hard to fix a problem that doesn't exist. If you tell them your first grader has 30+ kids in your class, I guess it's easier for them to assume you're lying? At the city/schools work session on 3/8 Amy Jackson asked specifically about overcrowding, and the superintendent said there wasn't any. Sad that there wasn't any pushback on this, but not surprising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean, ACPS isn't even acknowledging there is over crowding. They maintain their class sizes are the lowest in the DMV. Hard to fix a problem that doesn't exist. If you tell them your first grader has 30+ kids in your class, I guess it's easier for them to assume you're lying? At the city/schools work session on 3/8 Amy Jackson asked specifically about overcrowding, and the superintendent said there wasn't any. Sad that there wasn't any pushback on this, but not surprising.

There is one HS with 4800 students in it. It's literally impossible that there isn't overcrowding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean, ACPS isn't even acknowledging there is over crowding. They maintain their class sizes are the lowest in the DMV. Hard to fix a problem that doesn't exist. If you tell them your first grader has 30+ kids in your class, I guess it's easier for them to assume you're lying? At the city/schools work session on 3/8 Amy Jackson asked specifically about overcrowding, and the superintendent said there wasn't any. Sad that there wasn't any pushback on this, but not surprising.

Amy Jackson isn't the brightest bulb but glad she asked. Was she prepared with ACPS' own numbers that are on the website to refute Hutchings 2.0?

[Anonymous]

Nearly every year, a High School rep to the school board discusses how the students don't feel safe with the overcrowding at the high school. They want the kids to protest and speak out until they go against the establishment. Then they ignore them.

A natural follow up question to the superintendent would be if there is no overcrowding, why are we building bigger schools? Why are we buying office buildings to turn into schools?

[Anonymous]

Because they have internalized this twisted idea that addressing overcrowding would make the system racist. Instead, stuffing every City student into one high school apparently somehow constitutes “equity.” It’s completely convoluted but that is really what this comes down to

[Anonymous]

I am shocked anyone would deny that it is overcrowded. My son is in 8th at GW and cannot even get to his locker at the end of the day because the halls are so full. His class size has generally been ok, but the building itself seems packed.

[Anonymous]

Look through some of the CIP documents on the ACPS website. ACPS publishes charts with overcrowding percentages (GW, ACHS, Hammond, and some of the west side elementary schools) and what schools are dramatically under crowded (George Mason).

The soon to be new super really is taking after her mentor Hutchings with the gaslighting. And ACPS parents will continue to roll over.

[Anonymous]

City Councilwoman Jackson is the only one with my vote. She is a parent of an ACPS student and it you follow can tell that she is the only one looking out for the students.

[Anonymous]

Jackson is dim but she is right on these issues from time to time. Which means...she'll be out at the next election. It's well known in city dem circles exactly what Wilson thinks of her for opposing him on issues. Ever hear the story of what Wilson told her husband leading up to the last election? His full misogyny was on full display.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Jackson is dim but she is right on these issues from time to time. Which means...she'll be out at the next election. It's well known in city dem circles exactly what Wilson thinks of her for opposing him on issues. Ever hear the story of what Wilson told her husband leading up to the last election? His full misogyny was on full display.

Please elaborate on Wilson.

I think Jackson is in no danger if she runs again (I don’t dispute she may be “dim”). It seems to me that she has general democratic support and peels off some support from the anti-Wilson/density faction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jackson is dim but she is right on these issues from time to time. Which means...she'll be out at the next election. It's well known in city dem circles exactly what Wilson thinks of her for opposing him on issues. Ever hear the story of what Wilson told her husband leading up to the last election? His full misogyny was on full display.

Please elaborate on Wilson.

I think Jackson is in no danger if she runs again (I don’t dispute she may be “dim”). It seems to me that she has general democratic support and peels off some support from the anti-Wilson/density faction.

If she runs again the anti-Wilson/density faction won't support her like last time. Someone told her that the faction was a liability to her so she abandoned them quickly and completely after the election. But those votes got her the vice mayor spot. IF she gets re-elected...she certainly won't have the votes to be vice mayor.

[Anonymous]

Look at the midget running interference for Justin. You're a great fluffer!