School board results?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about whether they are R or D but hate that the trajectory seems to be dumbing down education for "equity," and forcing teachers to deal with untenable classroom situations. We'll do the best we can to support our kids's education by providing them with as much supplemental education as we can. Sadly, we can't afford "private" as we're trying to save for four college educations, nor can we move as our jobs are based in Fairfax Mk. We'll survive, but it would be nice to see the schools start focus on educating again instead of spending money on wasteful renaming projects, consultants, etc.

^!My thoughts exactly. Im liberal BUT I just don’t like the trajectory our schools are going. HOW can we change that?

Lol You should have voted differently yesterday. That was your chance.

DP. Do you seriously think Republicans would have focused on education? I didn’t get the impression that they would care about getting all kids the education they need. They made me feel that they would spend all of their time focusing on how to not support LGBTQ+ kids, take away support for immigrant kids, and make sure no one learns about history that isn’t white American.

Because you want to think that. Deep down its about you feeling "moral" about your vote rather than actually thinking about what would happen. Any intelligent person would understand that one or two people would have no influence on these items in the same way a couple of democrats on a republican board might not be able to have much influence on these same topics. Zero Republicans got elected. Zero. The vote was to try to stop all the changes which Fairfax I guess decided they were just fine with.

If you want an alternate voice on the SB then scrape up someone normal next time.

Maybe FCPS doesn’t need as much change as you think it does.

I agree with the majority of Fairfax voters that people who align with the contemporary Republican party are not who the SB (or government overall) needs. There is enough diversity within the Democratic party that we can put forward candidates who represent a wider spectrum of perspectives and experiences of people who believe in democracy and governance--and this is what happened. The at-large candidates illustrate this: McDaniel was a Republican who realized his party was nuts and became Democrat--I'm sure the positions he holds/insights he brings will differ from someone who was a lifelong Progressive Democrat. Moon is a very centrist candidate, Democrat support for him was due to the long experience he holds/commitment he has on the School Board--many voted for him despite him also being "right" of their political views. McElveen is the only at-large member now that would be considered a progressive. I think this reflects the Fairfax voter population who mainly thinks we have good schools (which by all objective measures we do) and recognizes that education overall is experiencing challenges and pressures that need to be solved--due to changes in demographics, disruptions from the pandemic (not just the shift to virtual, but the actual pandemic upended lives), growing population of students eligible for special education services, the impact of social media on students social and emotional lives, the fast pace of technological disruptions and their impact on how we should be educating children (how does AI change the way we think about what people need to know/learn, how do we engage students in 'school learning' when many are used to immersive, emotional-charged learning in video games etc.). Then you throw in the usual massive challenge of managing buildings, staffing and enrollment in a big district. What we really need are people willing to work on these things, and the Republican party as it currently stands is a deeply, deeply unserious party. I don't know how anyone with sense and concern about governance can look at national politics and think differently. So until the Republican party is not held hostage by its chaotic, destructive, undemocratic wing--there are not likely to have any good candidates who want to align with them or seek their endorsement.

I don't know why you think this when there hasn't been diversity of thought in the four past years.

1) I think there was this past for years--not as much as I wanted. It was an extraordinarily challenging time for schools globally. 2) The crop of Democratic endorsed candidates who won are more ideologically mixed and have a variety of prior experiences in the educational system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about whether they are R or D but hate that the trajectory seems to be dumbing down education for "equity," and forcing teachers to deal with untenable classroom situations. We'll do the best we can to support our kids's education by providing them with as much supplemental education as we can. Sadly, we can't afford "private" as we're trying to save for four college educations, nor can we move as our jobs are based in Fairfax Mk. We'll survive, but it would be nice to see the schools start focus on educating again instead of spending money on wasteful renaming projects, consultants, etc.

^!My thoughts exactly. Im liberal BUT I just don’t like the trajectory our schools are going. HOW can we change that?

Lol You should have voted differently yesterday. That was your chance.

DP. Do you seriously think Republicans would have focused on education? I didn’t get the impression that they would care about getting all kids the education they need. They made me feel that they would spend all of their time focusing on how to not support LGBTQ+ kids, take away support for immigrant kids, and make sure no one learns about history that isn’t white American.

Because you want to think that. Deep down its about you feeling "moral" about your vote rather than actually thinking about what would happen. Any intelligent person would understand that one or two people would have no influence on these items in the same way a couple of democrats on a republican board might not be able to have much influence on these same topics. Zero Republicans got elected. Zero. The vote was to try to stop all the changes which Fairfax I guess decided they were just fine with.

If you want an alternate voice on the SB then scrape up someone normal next time.

Maybe FCPS doesn’t need as much change as you think it does.

I agree with the majority of Fairfax voters that people who align with the contemporary Republican party are not who the SB (or government overall) needs. There is enough diversity within the Democratic party that we can put forward candidates who represent a wider spectrum of perspectives and experiences of people who believe in democracy and governance--and this is what happened. The at-large candidates illustrate this: McDaniel was a Republican who realized his party was nuts and became Democrat--I'm sure the positions he holds/insights he brings will differ from someone who was a lifelong Progressive Democrat. Moon is a very centrist candidate, Democrat support for him was due to the long experience he holds/commitment he has on the School Board--many voted for him despite him also being "right" of their political views. McElveen is the only at-large member now that would be considered a progressive. I think this reflects the Fairfax voter population who mainly thinks we have good schools (which by all objective measures we do) and recognizes that education overall is experiencing challenges and pressures that need to be solved--due to changes in demographics, disruptions from the pandemic (not just the shift to virtual, but the actual pandemic upended lives), growing population of students eligible for special education services, the impact of social media on students social and emotional lives, the fast pace of technological disruptions and their impact on how we should be educating children (how does AI change the way we think about what people need to know/learn, how do we engage students in 'school learning' when many are used to immersive, emotional-charged learning in video games etc.). Then you throw in the usual massive challenge of managing buildings, staffing and enrollment in a big district. What we really need are people willing to work on these things, and the Republican party as it currently stands is a deeply, deeply unserious party. I don't know how anyone with sense and concern about governance can look at national politics and think differently. So until the Republican party is not held hostage by its chaotic, destructive, undemocratic wing--there are not likely to have any good candidates who want to align with them or seek their endorsement.

I don't know why you think this when there hasn't been diversity of thought in the four past years.

1) I think there was this past for years--not as much as I wanted. It was an extraordinarily challenging time for schools globally. 2) The crop of Democratic endorsed candidates who won are more ideologically mixed and have a variety of prior experiences in the educational system.

One can hope. It will still be an echo chamber.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about whether they are R or D but hate that the trajectory seems to be dumbing down education for "equity," and forcing teachers to deal with untenable classroom situations. We'll do the best we can to support our kids's education by providing them with as much supplemental education as we can. Sadly, we can't afford "private" as we're trying to save for four college educations, nor can we move as our jobs are based in Fairfax. We'll survive, but it would be nice to see the schools start focus on educating again instead of spending money on wasteful renaming projects, consultants, etc.

Oh come on, the schools focus on education--this is the vast majority of what they do. How exactly are they "dumbing down" education? I haven't seen it. I think they are focusing on equity and excellence. I've had 1 kid go through FCPS and 2 still in it and they all have received/are receiving solid educations. The eldest is succeeding at UVA now--well-prepared. And we didn't do any supplementing except for private music lessons and outdoorsy summer camps. There are nationwide teacher shortages and FCPS is handling staffing better than most districts. I honestly don't understand all the griping.

SPED kids are in desperate need of more Teachers, better trained Teachers, and county run programs for the kids with higher ED and learning needs.

ESL kids needs ESL classes that start in ES and not to be sent into a Gen Ed class room that they are not prepared for. You cannot expect success for a 9 year old who has barely been to school in their life and doesn’t speak the language when you put them in a Gen Ed 3rd grade classroom. But that is what we do. And then the Teachers need to get that child up to grade level so their focus os on that child and not the rst of the class. ESL classes are needed to meet the kids where they are. Help them learn English and build their skills and when they are ready they can move into Gen Ed classes.

We needed classes with fewer levels in them. Asking a Teacher to teach to 25 kids when some kids are 2 grade levels behind, some are a bit behind, some are on grade level, and some are a year ahead is ridiculous. Not one of those groups of kids is getting the attention they need. we need smaller classes for kids who are behind, a class for kids who are close to grade level, on grade level, and a bit ahead. The rest belong in LIV type classes. We don’t like the optics of it so we throw all of the kids in one class and wonder why parents are clamoring to get into LIV.

We have defined equity as everyone scoring well on the SOL and iReady and have lost the idea that equity should mean classes that meet the child's needs and help the child learn and get to a place where they can pass the SOL. We are so afraid of people visually seeing what we all know exists that we try and hide it behind Gen Ed classes. We all know that the education gap exists. We all know that it is mainly poor Black and Hispanic kids whoa re lagging behind and Asian and White kids who are on grade level or ahead. But we fear putting kids in classes based on ability and showing that gap.

This. These are thing things that should be the focus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm just sad that academic progress is ceasing to be an important goal for the schools along with the anything goes mentality of kids getting involved in bad behavior with no consequence. The most discriminatory people I know are the ones that say they are liberal but then only actually associate with a small group of people on a day to day basis.

I think this crop of at large members- despite being associated with Democrats- are more focused on academics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted R to keep AAP intact and to stop E3 math. I also voted R to restore normal discipline in schools. I voted R to stop SBG. I voted R to bring back homework. I don’t know many average liberal parents who actually support these efforts when they actually know what they entail. Sadly, most just don’t know about these things in any detail.

Don’t care about any of the culture war issues and voted D elsewhere.

The Republicans I saw campaigning were focused on Parents right to make sure their child was called by their birth name, banning books, anti-LGBTQ+, keeping boys out of girls locker rooms, and other issues. I looked at all the candidates web pages and none of the R candidates discussed substantive issues without tossing in some comment about sex identity in schools and parents rights. They are not worried about a parents right to make sure that their kid is placed in the right class but a parents right to know that their kid wants to use different pronouns.

Maybe if there had been a Republican candidate who actually discussed school issues that impacted education and not the social issues talking points proclaimed by MAGA I would have listened.

My kid does have homework, but he has not had homework every year in ES. I would say most year there has been some type of homework. The SPED at our school is better then most and that is not saying much. We need pay increases for Teachers, fewer Admin at Gatehouse, and an even higher pay rate for SPED Teachers. We need more self contained classrooms for ED kids that are run by the County and a faster process to get kids the help that they need.

Exactly, they were mainly focused on wedge issues and fear-mongering and the voting public let them know how they felt about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about whether they are R or D but hate that the trajectory seems to be dumbing down education for "equity," and forcing teachers to deal with untenable classroom situations. We'll do the best we can to support our kids's education by providing them with as much supplemental education as we can. Sadly, we can't afford "private" as we're trying to save for four college educations, nor can we move as our jobs are based in Fairfax. We'll survive, but it would be nice to see the schools start focus on educating again instead of spending money on wasteful renaming projects, consultants, etc.

Oh come on, the schools focus on education--this is the vast majority of what they do. How exactly are they "dumbing down" education? I haven't seen it. I think they are focusing on equity and excellence. I've had 1 kid go through FCPS and 2 still in it and they all have received/are receiving solid educations. The eldest is succeeding at UVA now--well-prepared. And we didn't do any supplementing except for private music lessons and outdoorsy summer camps. There are nationwide teacher shortages and FCPS is handling staffing better than most districts. I honestly don't understand all the griping.

SPED kids are in desperate need of more Teachers, better trained Teachers, and county run programs for the kids with higher ED and learning needs.

ESL kids needs ESL classes that start in ES and not to be sent into a Gen Ed class room that they are not prepared for. You cannot expect success for a 9 year old who has barely been to school in their life and doesn’t speak the language when you put them in a Gen Ed 3rd grade classroom. But that is what we do. And then the Teachers need to get that child up to grade level so their focus os on that child and not the rst of the class. ESL classes are needed to meet the kids where they are. Help them learn English and build their skills and when they are ready they can move into Gen Ed classes.

We needed classes with fewer levels in them. Asking a Teacher to teach to 25 kids when some kids are 2 grade levels behind, some are a bit behind, some are on grade level, and some are a year ahead is ridiculous. Not one of those groups of kids is getting the attention they need. we need smaller classes for kids who are behind, a class for kids who are close to grade level, on grade level, and a bit ahead. The rest belong in LIV type classes. We don’t like the optics of it so we throw all of the kids in one class and wonder why parents are clamoring to get into LIV.

We have defined equity as everyone scoring well on the SOL and iReady and have lost the idea that equity should mean classes that meet the child's needs and help the child learn and get to a place where they can pass the SOL. We are so afraid of people visually seeing what we all know exists that we try and hide it behind Gen Ed classes. We all know that the education gap exists. We all know that it is mainly poor Black and Hispanic kids whoa re lagging behind and Asian and White kids who are on grade level or ahead. But we fear putting kids in classes based on ability and showing that gap.

And these issues are widespread and not just FCPS problems. The whole thing needs an overhaul.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm just sad that academic progress is ceasing to be an important goal for the schools along with the anything goes mentality of kids getting involved in bad behavior with no consequence. The most discriminatory people I know are the ones that say they are liberal but then only actually associate with a small group of people on a day to day basis.

I think this crop of at large members- despite being associated with Democrats- are more focused on academics.

I like the thought but some of these half baked equity initiatives are already full steam ahead. I don’t see this SB reversing course on these efforts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm just sad that academic progress is ceasing to be an important goal for the schools along with the anything goes mentality of kids getting involved in bad behavior with no consequence. The most discriminatory people I know are the ones that say they are liberal but then only actually associate with a small group of people on a day to day basis.

I think this crop of at large members- despite being associated with Democrats- are more focused on academics.

I think Moon is but the other two seemed very political, not academic, focused.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about whether they are R or D but hate that the trajectory seems to be dumbing down education for "equity," and forcing teachers to deal with untenable classroom situations. We'll do the best we can to support our kids's education by providing them with as much supplemental education as we can. Sadly, we can't afford "private" as we're trying to save for four college educations, nor can we move as our jobs are based in Fairfax Mk. We'll survive, but it would be nice to see the schools start focus on educating again instead of spending money on wasteful renaming projects, consultants, etc.

^!My thoughts exactly. Im liberal BUT I just don’t like the trajectory our schools are going. HOW can we change that?

Lol You should have voted differently yesterday. That was your chance.

DP. Do you seriously think Republicans would have focused on education? I didn’t get the impression that they would care about getting all kids the education they need. They made me feel that they would spend all of their time focusing on how to not support LGBTQ+ kids, take away support for immigrant kids, and make sure no one learns about history that isn’t white American.

Because you want to think that. Deep down its about you feeling "moral" about your vote rather than actually thinking about what would happen. Any intelligent person would understand that one or two people would have no influence on these items in the same way a couple of democrats on a republican board might not be able to have much influence on these same topics. Zero Republicans got elected. Zero. The vote was to try to stop all the changes which Fairfax I guess decided they were just fine with.

If you want an alternate voice on the SB then scrape up someone normal next time.

Maybe FCPS doesn’t need as much change as you think it does.

I agree with the majority of Fairfax voters that people who align with the contemporary Republican party are not who the SB (or government overall) needs. There is enough diversity within the Democratic party that we can put forward candidates who represent a wider spectrum of perspectives and experiences of people who believe in democracy and governance--and this is what happened. The at-large candidates illustrate this: McDaniel was a Republican who realized his party was nuts and became Democrat--I'm sure the positions he holds/insights he brings will differ from someone who was a lifelong Progressive Democrat. Moon is a very centrist candidate, Democrat support for him was due to the long experience he holds/commitment he has on the School Board--many voted for him despite him also being "right" of their political views. McElveen is the only at-large member now that would be considered a progressive. I think this reflects the Fairfax voter population who mainly thinks we have good schools (which by all objective measures we do) and recognizes that education overall is experiencing challenges and pressures that need to be solved--due to changes in demographics, disruptions from the pandemic (not just the shift to virtual, but the actual pandemic upended lives), growing population of students eligible for special education services, the impact of social media on students social and emotional lives, the fast pace of technological disruptions and their impact on how we should be educating children (how does AI change the way we think about what people need to know/learn, how do we engage students in 'school learning' when many are used to immersive, emotional-charged learning in video games etc.). Then you throw in the usual massive challenge of managing buildings, staffing and enrollment in a big district. What we really need are people willing to work on these things, and the Republican party as it currently stands is a deeply, deeply unserious party. I don't know how anyone with sense and concern about governance can look at national politics and think differently. So until the Republican party is not held hostage by its chaotic, destructive, undemocratic wing--there are not likely to have any good candidates who want to align with them or seek their endorsement.

100%

[Anonymous]

What's frustrating is that APS is the progressive school district while FCPS is more traditional, more conservative with jumping on edu fads. But recently, the school board has forgotten this.

I don't want progressive schools, I chose not to send my kids to APS. I chose FCPS for a reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was assured that republicans were going to win because of school closures during covid, and TJ and boundaries. Where the trolls wrong?

Schools or not, people hate Rs now because of Roe. Especially women who are the mothers of the school aged children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All dem
https://www.vpap.org/electionresults/20231107/local/fairfax-county-va/

The constant fear mongering on this forum and elsewhere scared people away from the Rs vs helping them out. Having said that—I do think all the at large members seem much more reasonable than the status quo.

pfft fear mongering. Snort

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So depressing. I don't understand how FCPS will continue their reputation with thus trajectory.

Tell your party to change their ways so more of us can vote for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about whether they are R or D but hate that the trajectory seems to be dumbing down education for "equity," and forcing teachers to deal with untenable classroom situations. We'll do the best we can to support our kids's education by providing them with as much supplemental education as we can. Sadly, we can't afford "private" as we're trying to save for four college educations, nor can we move as our jobs are based in Fairfax. We'll survive, but it would be nice to see the schools start focus on educating again instead of spending money on wasteful renaming projects, consultants, etc.

Oh come on, the schools focus on education--this is the vast majority of what they do. How exactly are they "dumbing down" education? I haven't seen it. I think they are focusing on equity and excellence. I've had 1 kid go through FCPS and 2 still in it and they all have received/are receiving solid educations. The eldest is succeeding at UVA now--well-prepared. And we didn't do any supplementing except for private music lessons and outdoorsy summer camps. There are nationwide teacher shortages and FCPS is handling staffing better than most districts. I honestly don't understand all the griping.

SPED kids are in desperate need of more Teachers, better trained Teachers, and county run programs for the kids with higher ED and learning needs.

ESL kids needs ESL classes that start in ES and not to be sent into a Gen Ed class room that they are not prepared for. You cannot expect success for a 9 year old who has barely been to school in their life and doesn’t speak the language when you put them in a Gen Ed 3rd grade classroom. But that is what we do. And then the Teachers need to get that child up to grade level so their focus os on that child and not the rst of the class. ESL classes are needed to meet the kids where they are. Help them learn English and build their skills and when they are ready they can move into Gen Ed classes.

We needed classes with fewer levels in them. Asking a Teacher to teach to 25 kids when some kids are 2 grade levels behind, some are a bit behind, some are on grade level, and some are a year ahead is ridiculous. Not one of those groups of kids is getting the attention they need. we need smaller classes for kids who are behind, a class for kids who are close to grade level, on grade level, and a bit ahead. The rest belong in LIV type classes. We don’t like the optics of it so we throw all of the kids in one class and wonder why parents are clamoring to get into LIV.

We have defined equity as everyone scoring well on the SOL and iReady and have lost the idea that equity should mean classes that meet the child's needs and help the child learn and get to a place where they can pass the SOL. We are so afraid of people visually seeing what we all know exists that we try and hide it behind Gen Ed classes. We all know that the education gap exists. We all know that it is mainly poor Black and Hispanic kids whoa re lagging behind and Asian and White kids who are on grade level or ahead. But we fear putting kids in classes based on ability and showing that gap.

And these issues are widespread and not just FCPS problems. The whole thing needs an overhaul.

Agreed. And not one of the Republicans that I saw running said anything about trying to fix these issues. They talked about indoctrination and parental rights and locker rooms and kids reading books about sex in ES. I am not a fan of the Democrats who are also not addressing these issues, which is why I voted mainly Independent.

We are not going to address the real issues because we know that we cannot. We can’t fix the lack of parental involvement, the generational issues that cause a lack of interest in education among the poor, and the larger issues of ESL easily. We are trying to make it look like everyone is equal by putting everyone in the same room but we are not teaching any of those kids properly. But tracking would lead to people yelling about segregation and no one wants that. Never mind that we are already economically segregated and that is only going to get worse as parents who can afford it pull their kids out of public schools for private school because their kids needs are not being met in the Gen Ed classroom.

[Anonymous]

We should start a pool on who’ll be the most controversial member of the next board. We can call it the Abrar Omeish Award.

Mateo Dunne (f/k/a Matthew Dunne III) from Mount Vernon is a strong early contender. He won despite some other Democrats trying very hard to discredit him before he won the “primary.” Sounds like he doesn’t get along too well with his neighbors, either.