FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

Maybe we can pair this with other needs-based measures such as eliminating after-school programming at Cooper, but not other middle schools. After all, the assumption seems to be that some families can arrange for transportation and other extras, and the wealthy seem willing to make these trade-offs as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.

You always repeat that last phrase about poor kids without anyone ever in the history of this discussion giving that as a justification for wanting to stay in their current pyramid. It says a lot about you that you are trying to foment class warfare with your neighbors.

Nice effort to flip the script but we all know you’d be outraged by the suggestion that FCPS cease providing transportation to your neighborhoods unless you saw it as a possible way to avoid rezoning to a less wealthy school.

What script did I flip. Those were literally your words that I was responding to.

You literally, verbatim said this: “as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.” No one has ever claimed that, like literally not once in this thread or related threads.

Should we not read your words literally? You got some alternative facts that your operating off of, Kellyanne?

Read the FairFACTS Matters comments when this came up. Example: "It was implied that a solution for the Langley pyramid would be that the boundaries wouldn't change, but FCPS would only provide bussing within a certain radius of Langley."

Y'all are so transparent, even when you are grasping at straws.

What is going on? Your quote appears to indicate that FCPS may propose to address a transportation cost concern with a transportation based solution. You read that as a means for one group to avoid grouping with another group based on relative wealth?

Yikes. I hope that you are not involved in this process. You appear to believe that things such as proximity, capacity, and transportation are all just mechanisms for other goals.

Sometimes a bussing issue is just about busses.

Everyone sees through this. You’d be yelling about it except for the fact that it’s a very slender reed (or in this case Reid) you’re hanging onto in hopes they’ll let rich neighborhoods avoid a much closer, yet poorer, school.

DP. Sometimes when you’re in a hole you should stop digging.

DP. This would be an obvious concession to Great Falls snobs trying to keep their kids out of Herndon. Don’t get your hopes up.

Or, just maybe, to stay in the school the neighborhood has attended for decades.

How long was Wakefield Forest at Annandale before it got moved to Woodson? How long was Fox Mill at Oakton before it got moved to South Lakes? Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes, but no one put up as big a fuss as you Langley snobs. You think Herndon is beneath you.

No wonder Reid tosses you a bone to shut you up occasionally.

DP. How soon you forgot! There was, indeed, a big fuss (hugely contentious, actually) when all those neighborhoods were rezoned to South Lakes in 2008. And then when the mythical "western high school" was proposed, families were up in arms that their kids would have to move schools yet again. Maybe get your facts straight?

https://patch.com/virginia/chantilly/guest-column-new-high-school-proposal-will-reverse-cob2f441f3ca

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are people finding out specifically what schools are up for grabs? Is if conjecture or is there info somewhere?

Conjecture. An educated guess based on the School Boards comments. I can fully see some of the border shifts that are being discussed, they fit with what the school board has laid out as their reasoning for redistricting.

But there is a lot of fear mongering with the hope that if the groups raise the alarm and FOIAing documents and pointing out how awful the school board is people will place pressure on the school board. This is coming from the same schools with the same posters. I would love to see an analysis of what percent of posters are responsible for the conversation in this topic. I suspect that a relativly small number of posters are responsible for the lions share of the posts.

Anyone who sees pros, to go along with the cons, is shouted down by the people who are violently opposed to any changes that moves their kids. There have been some good suggestions made in the topics, but they are hard to find.

I fully expect there to be large shifts in the Herndon, Centerville, Chantilly, South Lakes, Oakton, Westfield area because of the issues with over crowding and space available in some of the schools. The ES situation is problematic, and those shifts will affect MS and HS. That has been touched on a bit but for the most part the loudest voices have been the Great Falls and WSHS families.

FCPS is too big and really should be broken into smaller districts, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think the opposition is fanning this flame - they keep bringing up Langley and Herndon all the time. It just creates a response. No where was that discussed in any meeting. But - there they are saying it will happen because of equity. The county, in their view, will pay extra, drive longer distances, just to bus people from GF Village all the way to HHS. Going after trans was the last election, CRT the one before, now it's equity driven boundary change.

From Forestville, 2 minutes longer to cooper than HMS. From Forestville, 9 minutes longer to Langley than HHS. Don’t take my word for it. Check on maps at relevant times of the day.

The narrative about transportation savings is a chimera.

That 9 minutes is significant if they are trying to save costs via bus. It’s not just traveling TO Langley, but also the time it takes to get to those neighborhoods potentially out of route.

DP. You know what's a lot more significant? The wasted almost empty buses that traverse the county to take AAP kids to centers - when they already have AAP in their base school. THAT'S not only grossly wasteful and redundant, but also the very definition of INequity. I certainly hope the SB gets rid of centers and their associated busing before moving a single child to a new school.

Agreed! AAP centers should be the first thing to cut when there is a budget shortfall. That includes the elementary school specialists who work with 3 kids a day and give a lesson once a month.

The AART at our ES was part time. She provided classes for all the kids, plus the LIII pull out, plus a LIV pull out because our school uses the cluster method. DS brought home projects in K-2 that were completed with the AART and enjoyed the LIII pull outs. She was busy, her time was not wasted.

DP. I’m sorry, but this Level 1-3 nonsense is BS. Pull out here, pull out there - it all adds up to a big waste of time. There simply needs to be an AAP grouping for all four core classes that ALL kids have an opportunity to do. Those who need to fall back a level could easily do so if there were flexible groupings. Whoever came up with the current convoluted system was an idiot.

That isn’t what happens with flexible groupings thought. The reality (as parent and a teacher) is that admin then tells you never to meet with the AAP kids because they don’t need it and to focus on the regular kids who need regular instruction and the “bubble’ kids who can pass assessments with lots of extra help.

The AAP kids get sidelined (which I suppose makes you happy) and never get to have small group time with the teacher.

In AAP, those kids aleast can move a little faster.

Baloney. As another teacher and a parent. They already have 2E kids in AAP. Do you think those kids move as fast as the other AAP?

Disgusting statement from a teacher.

Just pointing out that a child with learning disabilities frequently needs more time to learn something and more attention. If you do not understand that, you are delusional. If a child has a learning disability --such as dyslexia--you don't think they need more time and help to read a book? There are many 2e kids who cannot keep up with the rest of the class.
And, for the ones with emotional problems, that also slows things down.

I believe we should get rid of AAP. I am all for mainstreaming, but it is misleading to think that a teacher does not need to spend more time with a 2E child than the rest. I was responding to the person who claims that AAP kids move faster than the rest.

Dear Fellow teacher,
Please explain how a child in advanced math receiving grade 4/5 instruction in grade 4 or grade 6 instruction in grade 5 is moving at the same pace as kids who are not in advanced/AAP math.

They are moving faster. They pass SOLS for a grade higher than their grade level. This is moving faster.

My experience as a teacher and a parent is that the high kids in gen ed NEVER GET SMALL GROUP TIME WITH THE TEACHER. They watch the other kids go to the reading table or math workshop group, but they don’t go. Or if they do go it is like once a month. This is because admin tells us not to.

If your experience is different and you are allowed to meet with high groups as frequently as lower groups- great! Name the school so I can move there.

There are many many many different types of 2E. Not all require “more time” from the AAP or Gen ed teacher.

DP. Which - again - is why FCPS needs to go back to having kids switch rooms for each core class, depending on their level. That way, each teacher is teaching only students on that particular level. It's a very simple and proven concept and makes far more sense than whatever they're doing right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

Maybe we can pair this with other needs-based measures such as eliminating after-school programming at Cooper, but not other middle schools. After all, the assumption seems to be that some families can arrange for transportation and other extras, and the wealthy seem willing to make these trade-offs as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.

You always repeat that last phrase about poor kids without anyone ever in the history of this discussion giving that as a justification for wanting to stay in their current pyramid. It says a lot about you that you are trying to foment class warfare with your neighbors.

Nice effort to flip the script but we all know you’d be outraged by the suggestion that FCPS cease providing transportation to your neighborhoods unless you saw it as a possible way to avoid rezoning to a less wealthy school.

What script did I flip. Those were literally your words that I was responding to.

You literally, verbatim said this: “as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.” No one has ever claimed that, like literally not once in this thread or related threads.

Should we not read your words literally? You got some alternative facts that your operating off of, Kellyanne?

Read the FairFACTS Matters comments when this came up. Example: "It was implied that a solution for the Langley pyramid would be that the boundaries wouldn't change, but FCPS would only provide bussing within a certain radius of Langley."

Y'all are so transparent, even when you are grasping at straws.

What is going on? Your quote appears to indicate that FCPS may propose to address a transportation cost concern with a transportation based solution. You read that as a means for one group to avoid grouping with another group based on relative wealth?

Yikes. I hope that you are not involved in this process. You appear to believe that things such as proximity, capacity, and transportation are all just mechanisms for other goals.

Sometimes a bussing issue is just about busses.

Everyone sees through this. You’d be yelling about it except for the fact that it’s a very slender reed (or in this case Reid) you’re hanging onto in hopes they’ll let rich neighborhoods avoid a much closer, yet poorer, school.

DP. Sometimes when you’re in a hole you should stop digging.

DP. This would be an obvious concession to Great Falls snobs trying to keep their kids out of Herndon. Don’t get your hopes up.

Or, just maybe, to stay in the school the neighborhood has attended for decades.

How long was Wakefield Forest at Annandale before it got moved to Woodson? How long was Fox Mill at Oakton before it got moved to South Lakes? Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes, but no one put up as big a fuss as you Langley snobs. You think Herndon is beneath you.

No wonder Reid tosses you a bone to shut you up occasionally.

DP. How soon you forgot! There was, indeed, a big fuss (hugely contentious, actually) when all those neighborhoods were rezoned to South Lakes in 2008. And then when the mythical "western high school" was proposed, families were up in arms that their kids would have to move schools yet again. Maybe get your facts straight?

https://patch.com/virginia/chantilly/guest-column-new-high-school-proposal-will-reverse-cob2f441f3ca

Perhaps you should have read the post before responding ("Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes").

Still, one Patch article isn't the same as months on end of whiny Great Falls parents, and we're still in the early stages of the boundary process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And, you think the AAP kids get small group time with the teacher?

Your AAP kids are all on the same level? Gee, that's really great.

The AAP kids are at least getting more work on their level, rather than being left on their own all day with “anchor activities” and busy work. The tier 1/whole group and follow up instruction from the teacher in AAP is somewhat better leveled for them than Tier 1 in a general education setting.

Again, please name the school where you meet with low, middle and high learners in small groups for the same amount of time each week. It doesn’t happen. Everything revolves around test scores and if kids are easily passing the tests, they aren’t getting more or even any small group instruction in gen ed.

DP. So, it's ok to just expect the high Gen Ed kids to entertain themselves with busy work while the teacher meets with those who need more help? No. If it's not ok for the AAP students, then it's not ok for ANY students. Each teacher needs to be leading a class of kids with similar/same abilities - for each core class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are people finding out specifically what schools are up for grabs? Is if conjecture or is there info somewhere?

Conjecture. An educated guess based on the School Boards comments. I can fully see some of the border shifts that are being discussed, they fit with what the school board has laid out as their reasoning for redistricting.

But there is a lot of fear mongering with the hope that if the groups raise the alarm and FOIAing documents and pointing out how awful the school board is people will place pressure on the school board. This is coming from the same schools with the same posters. I would love to see an analysis of what percent of posters are responsible for the conversation in this topic. I suspect that a relativly small number of posters are responsible for the lions share of the posts.

Anyone who sees pros, to go along with the cons, is shouted down by the people who are violently opposed to any changes that moves their kids. There have been some good suggestions made in the topics, but they are hard to find.

I fully expect there to be large shifts in the Herndon, Centerville, Chantilly, South Lakes, Oakton, Westfield area because of the issues with over crowding and space available in some of the schools. The ES situation is problematic, and those shifts will affect MS and HS. That has been touched on a bit but for the most part the loudest voices have been the Great Falls and WSHS families.

FCPS is too big and really should be broken into smaller districts, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think the opposition is fanning this flame - they keep bringing up Langley and Herndon all the time. It just creates a response. No where was that discussed in any meeting. But - there they are saying it will happen because of equity. The county, in their view, will pay extra, drive longer distances, just to bus people from GF Village all the way to HHS. Going after trans was the last election, CRT the one before, now it's equity driven boundary change.

From Forestville, 2 minutes longer to cooper than HMS. From Forestville, 9 minutes longer to Langley than HHS. Don’t take my word for it. Check on maps at relevant times of the day.

The narrative about transportation savings is a chimera.

That 9 minutes is significant if they are trying to save costs via bus. It’s not just traveling TO Langley, but also the time it takes to get to those neighborhoods potentially out of route.

DP. You know what's a lot more significant? The wasted almost empty buses that traverse the county to take AAP kids to centers - when they already have AAP in their base school. THAT'S not only grossly wasteful and redundant, but also the very definition of INequity. I certainly hope the SB gets rid of centers and their associated busing before moving a single child to a new school.

Agreed! AAP centers should be the first thing to cut when there is a budget shortfall. That includes the elementary school specialists who work with 3 kids a day and give a lesson once a month.

The AART at our ES was part time. She provided classes for all the kids, plus the LIII pull out, plus a LIV pull out because our school uses the cluster method. DS brought home projects in K-2 that were completed with the AART and enjoyed the LIII pull outs. She was busy, her time was not wasted.

DP. I’m sorry, but this Level 1-3 nonsense is BS. Pull out here, pull out there - it all adds up to a big waste of time. There simply needs to be an AAP grouping for all four core classes that ALL kids have an opportunity to do. Those who need to fall back a level could easily do so if there were flexible groupings. Whoever came up with the current convoluted system was an idiot.

That isn’t what happens with flexible groupings thought. The reality (as parent and a teacher) is that admin then tells you never to meet with the AAP kids because they don’t need it and to focus on the regular kids who need regular instruction and the “bubble’ kids who can pass assessments with lots of extra help.

The AAP kids get sidelined (which I suppose makes you happy) and never get to have small group time with the teacher.

In AAP, those kids aleast can move a little faster.

Baloney. As another teacher and a parent. They already have 2E kids in AAP. Do you think those kids move as fast as the other AAP?

+1
Not to mention, the SPED kids with all kinds of learning disabilities are grouped in the Gen Ed classes, making those kids unable to move as fast as they could otherwise. But somehow, I bet that's ok with the PP. As long as AAP kids get to be separate.

Do NOT dump your ignorance and nastiness on disabled kids. Disabled kids are not a monolith, and many compete with and exceed AAP kids.
Disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

Maybe we can pair this with other needs-based measures such as eliminating after-school programming at Cooper, but not other middle schools. After all, the assumption seems to be that some families can arrange for transportation and other extras, and the wealthy seem willing to make these trade-offs as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.

You always repeat that last phrase about poor kids without anyone ever in the history of this discussion giving that as a justification for wanting to stay in their current pyramid. It says a lot about you that you are trying to foment class warfare with your neighbors.

Nice effort to flip the script but we all know you’d be outraged by the suggestion that FCPS cease providing transportation to your neighborhoods unless you saw it as a possible way to avoid rezoning to a less wealthy school.

What script did I flip. Those were literally your words that I was responding to.

You literally, verbatim said this: “as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.” No one has ever claimed that, like literally not once in this thread or related threads.

Should we not read your words literally? You got some alternative facts that your operating off of, Kellyanne?

Read the FairFACTS Matters comments when this came up. Example: "It was implied that a solution for the Langley pyramid would be that the boundaries wouldn't change, but FCPS would only provide bussing within a certain radius of Langley."

Y'all are so transparent, even when you are grasping at straws.

What is going on? Your quote appears to indicate that FCPS may propose to address a transportation cost concern with a transportation based solution. You read that as a means for one group to avoid grouping with another group based on relative wealth?

Yikes. I hope that you are not involved in this process. You appear to believe that things such as proximity, capacity, and transportation are all just mechanisms for other goals.

Sometimes a bussing issue is just about busses.

Everyone sees through this. You’d be yelling about it except for the fact that it’s a very slender reed (or in this case Reid) you’re hanging onto in hopes they’ll let rich neighborhoods avoid a much closer, yet poorer, school.

DP. Sometimes when you’re in a hole you should stop digging.

DP. This would be an obvious concession to Great Falls snobs trying to keep their kids out of Herndon. Don’t get your hopes up.

Or, just maybe, to stay in the school the neighborhood has attended for decades.

How long was Wakefield Forest at Annandale before it got moved to Woodson? How long was Fox Mill at Oakton before it got moved to South Lakes? Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes, but no one put up as big a fuss as you Langley snobs. You think Herndon is beneath you.

No wonder Reid tosses you a bone to shut you up occasionally.

DP. How soon you forgot! There was, indeed, a big fuss (hugely contentious, actually) when all those neighborhoods were rezoned to South Lakes in 2008. And then when the mythical "western high school" was proposed, families were up in arms that their kids would have to move schools yet again. Maybe get your facts straight?

https://patch.com/virginia/chantilly/guest-column-new-high-school-proposal-will-reverse-cob2f441f3ca

Perhaps you should have read the post before responding ("Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes").

Still, one Patch article isn't the same as months on end of whiny Great Falls parents, and we're still in the early stages of the boundary process.

The bolded is a laughable understatement and if you were being honest, you'd admit that. Families in the Oakton area were FURIOUS at having to switch their kids from an excellent high school to one that... was not. Same situation we're seeing today.

Btw, what school are your kids currently zoned for?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

Maybe we can pair this with other needs-based measures such as eliminating after-school programming at Cooper, but not other middle schools. After all, the assumption seems to be that some families can arrange for transportation and other extras, and the wealthy seem willing to make these trade-offs as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.

You always repeat that last phrase about poor kids without anyone ever in the history of this discussion giving that as a justification for wanting to stay in their current pyramid. It says a lot about you that you are trying to foment class warfare with your neighbors.

Nice effort to flip the script but we all know you’d be outraged by the suggestion that FCPS cease providing transportation to your neighborhoods unless you saw it as a possible way to avoid rezoning to a less wealthy school.

What script did I flip. Those were literally your words that I was responding to.

You literally, verbatim said this: “as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.” No one has ever claimed that, like literally not once in this thread or related threads.

Should we not read your words literally? You got some alternative facts that your operating off of, Kellyanne?

Read the FairFACTS Matters comments when this came up. Example: "It was implied that a solution for the Langley pyramid would be that the boundaries wouldn't change, but FCPS would only provide bussing within a certain radius of Langley."

Y'all are so transparent, even when you are grasping at straws.

What is going on? Your quote appears to indicate that FCPS may propose to address a transportation cost concern with a transportation based solution. You read that as a means for one group to avoid grouping with another group based on relative wealth?

Yikes. I hope that you are not involved in this process. You appear to believe that things such as proximity, capacity, and transportation are all just mechanisms for other goals.

Sometimes a bussing issue is just about busses.

Everyone sees through this. You’d be yelling about it except for the fact that it’s a very slender reed (or in this case Reid) you’re hanging onto in hopes they’ll let rich neighborhoods avoid a much closer, yet poorer, school.

DP. Sometimes when you’re in a hole you should stop digging.

DP. This would be an obvious concession to Great Falls snobs trying to keep their kids out of Herndon. Don’t get your hopes up.

Or, just maybe, to stay in the school the neighborhood has attended for decades.

How long was Wakefield Forest at Annandale before it got moved to Woodson? How long was Fox Mill at Oakton before it got moved to South Lakes? Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes, but no one put up as big a fuss as you Langley snobs. You think Herndon is beneath you.

No wonder Reid tosses you a bone to shut you up occasionally.

DP. How soon you forgot! There was, indeed, a big fuss (hugely contentious, actually) when all those neighborhoods were rezoned to South Lakes in 2008. And then when the mythical "western high school" was proposed, families were up in arms that their kids would have to move schools yet again. Maybe get your facts straight?

https://patch.com/virginia/chantilly/guest-column-new-high-school-proposal-will-reverse-cob2f441f3ca

Perhaps you should have read the post before responding ("Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes").

Still, one Patch article isn't the same as months on end of whiny Great Falls parents, and we're still in the early stages of the boundary process.

Another DP. I haven't yet read the article, but I can tell you that there were months of upset parents. I would not call them "whiny" because I was one who wanted my kids to stay put where they were. Fortunately, we were on the periphery and did not get moved But, I still remember how emotional and difficult it was --with neighborhood being pitted against other neighborhoods--many of which were friends from youth sports.

Go watch the videos of the citizen participation at the SB meetings in 2008 if they are still available. Parents literally BEGGING for South Lakes to switch to AP--this was especially parents from the Floris group, I think whose kids were at Westfield at that time. And the SB would not even look at them. They just wanted what was best for their kids. And, Fox Mill, too. I remember one parent from Fox Mill Woods begging to let her pupil place her child at Oakton with the rest of her friends from Crossfield. Her DD was at Carson at the time.

And, let's not forget the woman from Navy boundary who attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor. She was still upset and bitter from being changed from Chantilly to Oakton. (and Oakton is considered "more desirable.")

If you think parents were not upset, you are greatly mistaken. And, no, they weren't "whiny," they were just standing up for their kids. I'm guessing that is what the Great Falls parents are doing now. And, if you think it is just Great Falls parents who are upset about this, you are VERY mistaken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are people finding out specifically what schools are up for grabs? Is if conjecture or is there info somewhere?

Conjecture. An educated guess based on the School Boards comments. I can fully see some of the border shifts that are being discussed, they fit with what the school board has laid out as their reasoning for redistricting.

But there is a lot of fear mongering with the hope that if the groups raise the alarm and FOIAing documents and pointing out how awful the school board is people will place pressure on the school board. This is coming from the same schools with the same posters. I would love to see an analysis of what percent of posters are responsible for the conversation in this topic. I suspect that a relativly small number of posters are responsible for the lions share of the posts.

Anyone who sees pros, to go along with the cons, is shouted down by the people who are violently opposed to any changes that moves their kids. There have been some good suggestions made in the topics, but they are hard to find.

I fully expect there to be large shifts in the Herndon, Centerville, Chantilly, South Lakes, Oakton, Westfield area because of the issues with over crowding and space available in some of the schools. The ES situation is problematic, and those shifts will affect MS and HS. That has been touched on a bit but for the most part the loudest voices have been the Great Falls and WSHS families.

FCPS is too big and really should be broken into smaller districts, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think the opposition is fanning this flame - they keep bringing up Langley and Herndon all the time. It just creates a response. No where was that discussed in any meeting. But - there they are saying it will happen because of equity. The county, in their view, will pay extra, drive longer distances, just to bus people from GF Village all the way to HHS. Going after trans was the last election, CRT the one before, now it's equity driven boundary change.

From Forestville, 2 minutes longer to cooper than HMS. From Forestville, 9 minutes longer to Langley than HHS. Don’t take my word for it. Check on maps at relevant times of the day.

The narrative about transportation savings is a chimera.

That 9 minutes is significant if they are trying to save costs via bus. It’s not just traveling TO Langley, but also the time it takes to get to those neighborhoods potentially out of route.

DP. You know what's a lot more significant? The wasted almost empty buses that traverse the county to take AAP kids to centers - when they already have AAP in their base school. THAT'S not only grossly wasteful and redundant, but also the very definition of INequity. I certainly hope the SB gets rid of centers and their associated busing before moving a single child to a new school.

Agreed! AAP centers should be the first thing to cut when there is a budget shortfall. That includes the elementary school specialists who work with 3 kids a day and give a lesson once a month.

The AART at our ES was part time. She provided classes for all the kids, plus the LIII pull out, plus a LIV pull out because our school uses the cluster method. DS brought home projects in K-2 that were completed with the AART and enjoyed the LIII pull outs. She was busy, her time was not wasted.

DP. I’m sorry, but this Level 1-3 nonsense is BS. Pull out here, pull out there - it all adds up to a big waste of time. There simply needs to be an AAP grouping for all four core classes that ALL kids have an opportunity to do. Those who need to fall back a level could easily do so if there were flexible groupings. Whoever came up with the current convoluted system was an idiot.

That isn’t what happens with flexible groupings thought. The reality (as parent and a teacher) is that admin then tells you never to meet with the AAP kids because they don’t need it and to focus on the regular kids who need regular instruction and the “bubble’ kids who can pass assessments with lots of extra help.

The AAP kids get sidelined (which I suppose makes you happy) and never get to have small group time with the teacher.

In AAP, those kids aleast can move a little faster.

Baloney. As another teacher and a parent. They already have 2E kids in AAP. Do you think those kids move as fast as the other AAP?

+1
Not to mention, the SPED kids with all kinds of learning disabilities are grouped in the Gen Ed classes, making those kids unable to move as fast as they could otherwise. But somehow, I bet that's ok with the PP. As long as AAP kids get to be separate.

Do NOT dump your ignorance and nastiness on disabled kids. Disabled kids are not a monolith, and many compete with and exceed AAP kids.
Disgusting.

Look - you've posted several times about this. This has nothing to do with "disabled kids," and everything to do with the fact the people like YOU seem to think AAP kids should be insulated from any of the distractions that Gen Ed kids have to put up with on a daily basis. As long as your AAP kid gets to learn in peace, who cares what kind of experience Gen Ed kids have?

I bet you have no problem claiming, "some Gen Ed kids couldn't possibly keep up with AAP kids!" (there are very few who couldn't, btw). So just be honest and admit that many students with disabilities ALSO aren't able to keep up with the Gen Ed students. It works both ways, whether you find it "disgusting" to speak the truth or not.

Gen Ed kids deserve a learning environment where they are free from distractions too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

Maybe we can pair this with other needs-based measures such as eliminating after-school programming at Cooper, but not other middle schools. After all, the assumption seems to be that some families can arrange for transportation and other extras, and the wealthy seem willing to make these trade-offs as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.

You always repeat that last phrase about poor kids without anyone ever in the history of this discussion giving that as a justification for wanting to stay in their current pyramid. It says a lot about you that you are trying to foment class warfare with your neighbors.

Nice effort to flip the script but we all know you’d be outraged by the suggestion that FCPS cease providing transportation to your neighborhoods unless you saw it as a possible way to avoid rezoning to a less wealthy school.

What script did I flip. Those were literally your words that I was responding to.

You literally, verbatim said this: “as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.” No one has ever claimed that, like literally not once in this thread or related threads.

Should we not read your words literally? You got some alternative facts that your operating off of, Kellyanne?

Read the FairFACTS Matters comments when this came up. Example: "It was implied that a solution for the Langley pyramid would be that the boundaries wouldn't change, but FCPS would only provide bussing within a certain radius of Langley."

Y'all are so transparent, even when you are grasping at straws.

What is going on? Your quote appears to indicate that FCPS may propose to address a transportation cost concern with a transportation based solution. You read that as a means for one group to avoid grouping with another group based on relative wealth?

Yikes. I hope that you are not involved in this process. You appear to believe that things such as proximity, capacity, and transportation are all just mechanisms for other goals.

Sometimes a bussing issue is just about busses.

Everyone sees through this. You’d be yelling about it except for the fact that it’s a very slender reed (or in this case Reid) you’re hanging onto in hopes they’ll let rich neighborhoods avoid a much closer, yet poorer, school.

DP. Sometimes when you’re in a hole you should stop digging.

DP. This would be an obvious concession to Great Falls snobs trying to keep their kids out of Herndon. Don’t get your hopes up.

Or, just maybe, to stay in the school the neighborhood has attended for decades.

How long was Wakefield Forest at Annandale before it got moved to Woodson? How long was Fox Mill at Oakton before it got moved to South Lakes? Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes, but no one put up as big a fuss as you Langley snobs. You think Herndon is beneath you.

No wonder Reid tosses you a bone to shut you up occasionally.

DP. How soon you forgot! There was, indeed, a big fuss (hugely contentious, actually) when all those neighborhoods were rezoned to South Lakes in 2008. And then when the mythical "western high school" was proposed, families were up in arms that their kids would have to move schools yet again. Maybe get your facts straight?

https://patch.com/virginia/chantilly/guest-column-new-high-school-proposal-will-reverse-cob2f441f3ca

Perhaps you should have read the post before responding ("Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes").

Still, one Patch article isn't the same as months on end of whiny Great Falls parents, and we're still in the early stages of the boundary process.

The bolded is a laughable understatement and if you were being honest, you'd admit that. Families in the Oakton area were FURIOUS at having to switch their kids from an excellent high school to one that... was not. Same situation we're seeing today.

Btw, what school are your kids currently zoned for?

Hmm. The neighborhoods moved up the school you disparage (South Lakes) got over it, with a few exceptions.

This too shall pass, despite your constant kvetching.

[Anonymous]

The kids will be fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are people finding out specifically what schools are up for grabs? Is if conjecture or is there info somewhere?

Conjecture. An educated guess based on the School Boards comments. I can fully see some of the border shifts that are being discussed, they fit with what the school board has laid out as their reasoning for redistricting.

But there is a lot of fear mongering with the hope that if the groups raise the alarm and FOIAing documents and pointing out how awful the school board is people will place pressure on the school board. This is coming from the same schools with the same posters. I would love to see an analysis of what percent of posters are responsible for the conversation in this topic. I suspect that a relativly small number of posters are responsible for the lions share of the posts.

Anyone who sees pros, to go along with the cons, is shouted down by the people who are violently opposed to any changes that moves their kids. There have been some good suggestions made in the topics, but they are hard to find.

I fully expect there to be large shifts in the Herndon, Centerville, Chantilly, South Lakes, Oakton, Westfield area because of the issues with over crowding and space available in some of the schools. The ES situation is problematic, and those shifts will affect MS and HS. That has been touched on a bit but for the most part the loudest voices have been the Great Falls and WSHS families.

FCPS is too big and really should be broken into smaller districts, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think the opposition is fanning this flame - they keep bringing up Langley and Herndon all the time. It just creates a response. No where was that discussed in any meeting. But - there they are saying it will happen because of equity. The county, in their view, will pay extra, drive longer distances, just to bus people from GF Village all the way to HHS. Going after trans was the last election, CRT the one before, now it's equity driven boundary change.

From Forestville, 2 minutes longer to cooper than HMS. From Forestville, 9 minutes longer to Langley than HHS. Don’t take my word for it. Check on maps at relevant times of the day.

The narrative about transportation savings is a chimera.

That 9 minutes is significant if they are trying to save costs via bus. It’s not just traveling TO Langley, but also the time it takes to get to those neighborhoods potentially out of route.

DP. You know what's a lot more significant? The wasted almost empty buses that traverse the county to take AAP kids to centers - when they already have AAP in their base school. THAT'S not only grossly wasteful and redundant, but also the very definition of INequity. I certainly hope the SB gets rid of centers and their associated busing before moving a single child to a new school.

Agreed! AAP centers should be the first thing to cut when there is a budget shortfall. That includes the elementary school specialists who work with 3 kids a day and give a lesson once a month.

The AART at our ES was part time. She provided classes for all the kids, plus the LIII pull out, plus a LIV pull out because our school uses the cluster method. DS brought home projects in K-2 that were completed with the AART and enjoyed the LIII pull outs. She was busy, her time was not wasted.

DP. I’m sorry, but this Level 1-3 nonsense is BS. Pull out here, pull out there - it all adds up to a big waste of time. There simply needs to be an AAP grouping for all four core classes that ALL kids have an opportunity to do. Those who need to fall back a level could easily do so if there were flexible groupings. Whoever came up with the current convoluted system was an idiot.

That isn’t what happens with flexible groupings thought. The reality (as parent and a teacher) is that admin then tells you never to meet with the AAP kids because they don’t need it and to focus on the regular kids who need regular instruction and the “bubble’ kids who can pass assessments with lots of extra help.

The AAP kids get sidelined (which I suppose makes you happy) and never get to have small group time with the teacher.

In AAP, those kids aleast can move a little faster.

Baloney. As another teacher and a parent. They already have 2E kids in AAP. Do you think those kids move as fast as the other AAP?

+1
Not to mention, the SPED kids with all kinds of learning disabilities are grouped in the Gen Ed classes, making those kids unable to move as fast as they could otherwise. But somehow, I bet that's ok with the PP. As long as AAP kids get to be separate.

Do NOT dump your ignorance and nastiness on disabled kids. Disabled kids are not a monolith, and many compete with and exceed AAP kids.
Disgusting.

Look - you've posted several times about this. This has nothing to do with "disabled kids," and everything to do with the fact the people like YOU seem to think AAP kids should be insulated from any of the distractions that Gen Ed kids have to put up with on a daily basis. As long as your AAP kid gets to learn in peace, who cares what kind of experience Gen Ed kids have?

I bet you have no problem claiming, "some Gen Ed kids couldn't possibly keep up with AAP kids!" (there are very few who couldn't, btw). So just be honest and admit that many students with disabilities ALSO aren't able to keep up with the Gen Ed students. It works both ways, whether you find it "disgusting" to speak the truth or not.

Gen Ed kids deserve a learning environment where they are free from distractions too.

Sounds like you are seeking equity for the gen ed students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

Maybe we can pair this with other needs-based measures such as eliminating after-school programming at Cooper, but not other middle schools. After all, the assumption seems to be that some families can arrange for transportation and other extras, and the wealthy seem willing to make these trade-offs as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.

You always repeat that last phrase about poor kids without anyone ever in the history of this discussion giving that as a justification for wanting to stay in their current pyramid. It says a lot about you that you are trying to foment class warfare with your neighbors.

Nice effort to flip the script but we all know you’d be outraged by the suggestion that FCPS cease providing transportation to your neighborhoods unless you saw it as a possible way to avoid rezoning to a less wealthy school.

What script did I flip. Those were literally your words that I was responding to.

You literally, verbatim said this: “as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.” No one has ever claimed that, like literally not once in this thread or related threads.

Should we not read your words literally? You got some alternative facts that your operating off of, Kellyanne?

Read the FairFACTS Matters comments when this came up. Example: "It was implied that a solution for the Langley pyramid would be that the boundaries wouldn't change, but FCPS would only provide bussing within a certain radius of Langley."

Y'all are so transparent, even when you are grasping at straws.

What is going on? Your quote appears to indicate that FCPS may propose to address a transportation cost concern with a transportation based solution. You read that as a means for one group to avoid grouping with another group based on relative wealth?

Yikes. I hope that you are not involved in this process. You appear to believe that things such as proximity, capacity, and transportation are all just mechanisms for other goals.

Sometimes a bussing issue is just about busses.

Everyone sees through this. You’d be yelling about it except for the fact that it’s a very slender reed (or in this case Reid) you’re hanging onto in hopes they’ll let rich neighborhoods avoid a much closer, yet poorer, school.

DP. Sometimes when you’re in a hole you should stop digging.

DP. This would be an obvious concession to Great Falls snobs trying to keep their kids out of Herndon. Don’t get your hopes up.

Or, just maybe, to stay in the school the neighborhood has attended for decades.

How long was Wakefield Forest at Annandale before it got moved to Woodson? How long was Fox Mill at Oakton before it got moved to South Lakes? Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes, but no one put up as big a fuss as you Langley snobs. You think Herndon is beneath you.

No wonder Reid tosses you a bone to shut you up occasionally.

DP. How soon you forgot! There was, indeed, a big fuss (hugely contentious, actually) when all those neighborhoods were rezoned to South Lakes in 2008. And then when the mythical "western high school" was proposed, families were up in arms that their kids would have to move schools yet again. Maybe get your facts straight?

https://patch.com/virginia/chantilly/guest-column-new-high-school-proposal-will-reverse-cob2f441f3ca

Perhaps you should have read the post before responding ("Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes").

Still, one Patch article isn't the same as months on end of whiny Great Falls parents, and we're still in the early stages of the boundary process.

Another DP. I haven't yet read the article, but I can tell you that there were months of upset parents. I would not call them "whiny" because I was one who wanted my kids to stay put where they were. Fortunately, we were on the periphery and did not get moved But, I still remember how emotional and difficult it was --with neighborhood being pitted against other neighborhoods--many of which were friends from youth sports.

Go watch the videos of the citizen participation at the SB meetings in 2008 if they are still available. Parents literally BEGGING for South Lakes to switch to AP--this was especially parents from the Floris group, I think whose kids were at Westfield at that time. And the SB would not even look at them. They just wanted what was best for their kids. And, Fox Mill, too. I remember one parent from Fox Mill Woods begging to let her pupil place her child at Oakton with the rest of her friends from Crossfield. Her DD was at Carson at the time.

And, let's not forget the woman from Navy boundary who attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor. She was still upset and bitter from being changed from Chantilly to Oakton. (and Oakton is considered "more desirable.")

If you think parents were not upset, you are greatly mistaken. And, no, they weren't "whiny," they were just standing up for their kids. I'm guessing that is what the Great Falls parents are doing now. And, if you think it is just Great Falls parents who are upset about this, you are VERY mistaken.

+100
It's difficult to find anything from 2008, but here's an archived article about how upset Madison/Oakton parents were at the prospect of being rezoned to South Lakes. Funny, their comments and concerns sound EXACTLY like today's conversations and objections over rezoning.
https://m.connectionnewspapers.com/news/2007/dec/04/boundary-bungle/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

Maybe we can pair this with other needs-based measures such as eliminating after-school programming at Cooper, but not other middle schools. After all, the assumption seems to be that some families can arrange for transportation and other extras, and the wealthy seem willing to make these trade-offs as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.

You always repeat that last phrase about poor kids without anyone ever in the history of this discussion giving that as a justification for wanting to stay in their current pyramid. It says a lot about you that you are trying to foment class warfare with your neighbors.

Nice effort to flip the script but we all know you’d be outraged by the suggestion that FCPS cease providing transportation to your neighborhoods unless you saw it as a possible way to avoid rezoning to a less wealthy school.

What script did I flip. Those were literally your words that I was responding to.

You literally, verbatim said this: “as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.” No one has ever claimed that, like literally not once in this thread or related threads.

Should we not read your words literally? You got some alternative facts that your operating off of, Kellyanne?

Read the FairFACTS Matters comments when this came up. Example: "It was implied that a solution for the Langley pyramid would be that the boundaries wouldn't change, but FCPS would only provide bussing within a certain radius of Langley."

Y'all are so transparent, even when you are grasping at straws.

What is going on? Your quote appears to indicate that FCPS may propose to address a transportation cost concern with a transportation based solution. You read that as a means for one group to avoid grouping with another group based on relative wealth?

Yikes. I hope that you are not involved in this process. You appear to believe that things such as proximity, capacity, and transportation are all just mechanisms for other goals.

Sometimes a bussing issue is just about busses.

Everyone sees through this. You’d be yelling about it except for the fact that it’s a very slender reed (or in this case Reid) you’re hanging onto in hopes they’ll let rich neighborhoods avoid a much closer, yet poorer, school.

DP. Sometimes when you’re in a hole you should stop digging.

DP. This would be an obvious concession to Great Falls snobs trying to keep their kids out of Herndon. Don’t get your hopes up.

Or, just maybe, to stay in the school the neighborhood has attended for decades.

How long was Wakefield Forest at Annandale before it got moved to Woodson? How long was Fox Mill at Oakton before it got moved to South Lakes? Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes, but no one put up as big a fuss as you Langley snobs. You think Herndon is beneath you.

No wonder Reid tosses you a bone to shut you up occasionally.

DP. How soon you forgot! There was, indeed, a big fuss (hugely contentious, actually) when all those neighborhoods were rezoned to South Lakes in 2008. And then when the mythical "western high school" was proposed, families were up in arms that their kids would have to move schools yet again. Maybe get your facts straight?

https://patch.com/virginia/chantilly/guest-column-new-high-school-proposal-will-reverse-cob2f441f3ca

Perhaps you should have read the post before responding ("Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes").

Still, one Patch article isn't the same as months on end of whiny Great Falls parents, and we're still in the early stages of the boundary process.

The bolded is a laughable understatement and if you were being honest, you'd admit that. Families in the Oakton area were FURIOUS at having to switch their kids from an excellent high school to one that... was not. Same situation we're seeing today.

Btw, what school are your kids currently zoned for?

Hmm. The neighborhoods moved up the school you disparage (South Lakes) got over it, with a few exceptions.

This too shall pass, despite your constant kvetching.

But you didn't tell us - which school are YOUR kids zoned for?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

Maybe we can pair this with other needs-based measures such as eliminating after-school programming at Cooper, but not other middle schools. After all, the assumption seems to be that some families can arrange for transportation and other extras, and the wealthy seem willing to make these trade-offs as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.

You always repeat that last phrase about poor kids without anyone ever in the history of this discussion giving that as a justification for wanting to stay in their current pyramid. It says a lot about you that you are trying to foment class warfare with your neighbors.

Nice effort to flip the script but we all know you’d be outraged by the suggestion that FCPS cease providing transportation to your neighborhoods unless you saw it as a possible way to avoid rezoning to a less wealthy school.

What script did I flip. Those were literally your words that I was responding to.

You literally, verbatim said this: “as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.” No one has ever claimed that, like literally not once in this thread or related threads.

Should we not read your words literally? You got some alternative facts that your operating off of, Kellyanne?

Read the FairFACTS Matters comments when this came up. Example: "It was implied that a solution for the Langley pyramid would be that the boundaries wouldn't change, but FCPS would only provide bussing within a certain radius of Langley."

Y'all are so transparent, even when you are grasping at straws.

What is going on? Your quote appears to indicate that FCPS may propose to address a transportation cost concern with a transportation based solution. You read that as a means for one group to avoid grouping with another group based on relative wealth?

Yikes. I hope that you are not involved in this process. You appear to believe that things such as proximity, capacity, and transportation are all just mechanisms for other goals.

Sometimes a bussing issue is just about busses.

Everyone sees through this. You’d be yelling about it except for the fact that it’s a very slender reed (or in this case Reid) you’re hanging onto in hopes they’ll let rich neighborhoods avoid a much closer, yet poorer, school.

DP. Sometimes when you’re in a hole you should stop digging.

DP. This would be an obvious concession to Great Falls snobs trying to keep their kids out of Herndon. Don’t get your hopes up.

Or, just maybe, to stay in the school the neighborhood has attended for decades.

How long was Wakefield Forest at Annandale before it got moved to Woodson? How long was Fox Mill at Oakton before it got moved to South Lakes? Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes, but no one put up as big a fuss as you Langley snobs. You think Herndon is beneath you.

No wonder Reid tosses you a bone to shut you up occasionally.

DP. How soon you forgot! There was, indeed, a big fuss (hugely contentious, actually) when all those neighborhoods were rezoned to South Lakes in 2008. And then when the mythical "western high school" was proposed, families were up in arms that their kids would have to move schools yet again. Maybe get your facts straight?

https://patch.com/virginia/chantilly/guest-column-new-high-school-proposal-will-reverse-cob2f441f3ca

Perhaps you should have read the post before responding ("Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes").

Still, one Patch article isn't the same as months on end of whiny Great Falls parents, and we're still in the early stages of the boundary process.

Another DP. I haven't yet read the article, but I can tell you that there were months of upset parents. I would not call them "whiny" because I was one who wanted my kids to stay put where they were. Fortunately, we were on the periphery and did not get moved But, I still remember how emotional and difficult it was --with neighborhood being pitted against other neighborhoods--many of which were friends from youth sports.

Go watch the videos of the citizen participation at the SB meetings in 2008 if they are still available. Parents literally BEGGING for South Lakes to switch to AP--this was especially parents from the Floris group, I think whose kids were at Westfield at that time. And the SB would not even look at them. They just wanted what was best for their kids. And, Fox Mill, too. I remember one parent from Fox Mill Woods begging to let her pupil place her child at Oakton with the rest of her friends from Crossfield. Her DD was at Carson at the time.

And, let's not forget the woman from Navy boundary who attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor. She was still upset and bitter from being changed from Chantilly to Oakton. (and Oakton is considered "more desirable.")

If you think parents were not upset, you are greatly mistaken. And, no, they weren't "whiny," they were just standing up for their kids. I'm guessing that is what the Great Falls parents are doing now. And, if you think it is just Great Falls parents who are upset about this, you are VERY mistaken.

+100
It's difficult to find anything from 2008, but here's an archived article about how upset Madison/Oakton parents were at the prospect of being rezoned to South Lakes. Funny, their comments and concerns sound EXACTLY like today's conversations and objections over rezoning.
https://m.connectionnewspapers.com/news/2007/dec/04/boundary-bungle/

Oh, my goodness. I had forgotten about the SB not facing the audience. I was at that meeting. I think I was at Chantilly, but it might have been at another school. There were several meetings.

That study had nothing to do with overcrowding and everything to do with Stu Gibson and the South Lakes PTA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are people finding out specifically what schools are up for grabs? Is if conjecture or is there info somewhere?

Conjecture. An educated guess based on the School Boards comments. I can fully see some of the border shifts that are being discussed, they fit with what the school board has laid out as their reasoning for redistricting.

But there is a lot of fear mongering with the hope that if the groups raise the alarm and FOIAing documents and pointing out how awful the school board is people will place pressure on the school board. This is coming from the same schools with the same posters. I would love to see an analysis of what percent of posters are responsible for the conversation in this topic. I suspect that a relativly small number of posters are responsible for the lions share of the posts.

Anyone who sees pros, to go along with the cons, is shouted down by the people who are violently opposed to any changes that moves their kids. There have been some good suggestions made in the topics, but they are hard to find.

I fully expect there to be large shifts in the Herndon, Centerville, Chantilly, South Lakes, Oakton, Westfield area because of the issues with over crowding and space available in some of the schools. The ES situation is problematic, and those shifts will affect MS and HS. That has been touched on a bit but for the most part the loudest voices have been the Great Falls and WSHS families.

FCPS is too big and really should be broken into smaller districts, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think the opposition is fanning this flame - they keep bringing up Langley and Herndon all the time. It just creates a response. No where was that discussed in any meeting. But - there they are saying it will happen because of equity. The county, in their view, will pay extra, drive longer distances, just to bus people from GF Village all the way to HHS. Going after trans was the last election, CRT the one before, now it's equity driven boundary change.

From Forestville, 2 minutes longer to cooper than HMS. From Forestville, 9 minutes longer to Langley than HHS. Don’t take my word for it. Check on maps at relevant times of the day.

The narrative about transportation savings is a chimera.

That 9 minutes is significant if they are trying to save costs via bus. It’s not just traveling TO Langley, but also the time it takes to get to those neighborhoods potentially out of route.

DP. You know what's a lot more significant? The wasted almost empty buses that traverse the county to take AAP kids to centers - when they already have AAP in their base school. THAT'S not only grossly wasteful and redundant, but also the very definition of INequity. I certainly hope the SB gets rid of centers and their associated busing before moving a single child to a new school.

Agreed! AAP centers should be the first thing to cut when there is a budget shortfall. That includes the elementary school specialists who work with 3 kids a day and give a lesson once a month.

The AART at our ES was part time. She provided classes for all the kids, plus the LIII pull out, plus a LIV pull out because our school uses the cluster method. DS brought home projects in K-2 that were completed with the AART and enjoyed the LIII pull outs. She was busy, her time was not wasted.

DP. I’m sorry, but this Level 1-3 nonsense is BS. Pull out here, pull out there - it all adds up to a big waste of time. There simply needs to be an AAP grouping for all four core classes that ALL kids have an opportunity to do. Those who need to fall back a level could easily do so if there were flexible groupings. Whoever came up with the current convoluted system was an idiot.

That isn’t what happens with flexible groupings thought. The reality (as parent and a teacher) is that admin then tells you never to meet with the AAP kids because they don’t need it and to focus on the regular kids who need regular instruction and the “bubble’ kids who can pass assessments with lots of extra help.

The AAP kids get sidelined (which I suppose makes you happy) and never get to have small group time with the teacher.

In AAP, those kids aleast can move a little faster.

Baloney. As another teacher and a parent. They already have 2E kids in AAP. Do you think those kids move as fast as the other AAP?

+1
Not to mention, the SPED kids with all kinds of learning disabilities are grouped in the Gen Ed classes, making those kids unable to move as fast as they could otherwise. But somehow, I bet that's ok with the PP. As long as AAP kids get to be separate.

Do NOT dump your ignorance and nastiness on disabled kids. Disabled kids are not a monolith, and many compete with and exceed AAP kids.
Disgusting.

Look - you've posted several times about this. This has nothing to do with "disabled kids," and everything to do with the fact the people like YOU seem to think AAP kids should be insulated from any of the distractions that Gen Ed kids have to put up with on a daily basis. As long as your AAP kid gets to learn in peace, who cares what kind of experience Gen Ed kids have?

I bet you have no problem claiming, "some Gen Ed kids couldn't possibly keep up with AAP kids!" (there are very few who couldn't, btw). So just be honest and admit that many students with disabilities ALSO aren't able to keep up with the Gen Ed students. It works both ways, whether you find it "disgusting" to speak the truth or not.

Gen Ed kids deserve a learning environment where they are free from distractions too.

Sounds like you are seeking equity for the gen ed students.

If you want to put it in those terms, then sure! You bet I am. FCPS blathers about "equity" all the time yet sees fit to offer AAP kids free busing to go to "special" center schools where they can learn without distraction from those pesky Gen Ed kids who, you know, would only slow them down! Meanwhile, Gen Ed kids are expected to simply deal with the SPED kids who have been mainstreamed into their classes. And if parents complain that *those* kids are slowing down the class, they're called all kinds of names.

The hypocrisy here is so blatant - and truly disgusting, to use your term.