FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder why Gen Z kids are notoriously entitled and selfish. They're raised by parents like the ones commenting on this thread.

Agree. It is beyond entitled and selfish to demand you know what's best for other people's kids.

+1. She loves telling us what’s best for our kids.

It's insane to argue that there shouldn't even be a review because your kid may be negatively affected by it. Guess what, some kids will be better off, others will be worse off, but on balance the changes should benefit most. That's called public policy. If you have doubts or worries about the process being fair or balanced, then you should get off your couch and volunteer to be on the review committee or advocate some other way. Lazy armchair advocacy won't get you anywhere. But it's just so much easier to be a victim, isn't it? The immediate gratification of shouting at someone on an anonymous board is so so sweet.

Please give specifics on how some kids currently failing will be better off? Because it sounds like the school board really just wants the averages to go up without actually helping kids in need.
-dp

DP. Some students may be better off if their school can offer more advanced classes or more instances of those classes.

If kids are failing general ed classes how would they do better with the school offering more advanced classes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder why Gen Z kids are notoriously entitled and selfish. They're raised by parents like the ones commenting on this thread.

Agree. It is beyond entitled and selfish to demand you know what's best for other people's kids.

+1. She loves telling us what’s best for our kids.

It's insane to argue that there shouldn't even be a review because your kid may be negatively affected by it. Guess what, some kids will be better off, others will be worse off, but on balance the changes should benefit most. That's called public policy. If you have doubts or worries about the process being fair or balanced, then you should get off your couch and volunteer to be on the review committee or advocate some other way. Lazy armchair advocacy won't get you anywhere. But it's just so much easier to be a victim, isn't it? The immediate gratification of shouting at someone on an anonymous board is so so sweet.

She shouts from her couch. 🙄

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder why Gen Z kids are notoriously entitled and selfish. They're raised by parents like the ones commenting on this thread.

Agree. It is beyond entitled and selfish to demand you know what's best for other people's kids.

+1. She loves telling us what’s best for our kids.

It's insane to argue that there shouldn't even be a review because your kid may be negatively affected by it. Guess what, some kids will be better off, others will be worse off, but on balance the changes should benefit most. That's called public policy. If you have doubts or worries about the process being fair or balanced, then you should get off your couch and volunteer to be on the review committee or advocate some other way. Lazy armchair advocacy won't get you anywhere. But it's just so much easier to be a victim, isn't it? The immediate gratification of shouting at someone on an anonymous board is so so sweet.

Please give specifics on how some kids currently failing will be better off? Because it sounds like the school board really just wants the averages to go up without actually helping kids in need.
-dp

DP. Some students may be better off if their school can offer more advanced classes or more instances of those classes.

And other students may be worse off if their schools can offer fewer advanced classes or fewer sessions of those classes. It’s not clear there’s a net benefit here. You could just end up with fewer students in the aggregate taking advanced classes.

Often, it seems to be the very people who constantly say “diversity is our strength” then turning around and deciding they actually want less of it and someone else needs more of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder why Gen Z kids are notoriously entitled and selfish. They're raised by parents like the ones commenting on this thread.

Agree. It is beyond entitled and selfish to demand you know what's best for other people's kids.

+1. She loves telling us what’s best for our kids.

It's insane to argue that there shouldn't even be a review because your kid may be negatively affected by it. Guess what, some kids will be better off, others will be worse off, but on balance the changes should benefit most. That's called public policy. If you have doubts or worries about the process being fair or balanced, then you should get off your couch and volunteer to be on the review committee or advocate some other way. Lazy armchair advocacy won't get you anywhere. But it's just so much easier to be a victim, isn't it? The immediate gratification of shouting at someone on an anonymous board is so so sweet.

Please give specifics on how some kids currently failing will be better off? Because it sounds like the school board really just wants the averages to go up without actually helping kids in need.
-dp

DP. Some students may be better off if their school can offer more advanced classes or more instances of those classes.

Insane to make boundary changes that’ll significantly upend kids’ lives on a hunch that you have that things might magically get better for some students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder why Gen Z kids are notoriously entitled and selfish. They're raised by parents like the ones commenting on this thread.

Agree. It is beyond entitled and selfish to demand you know what's best for other people's kids.

+1. She loves telling us what’s best for our kids.

It's insane to argue that there shouldn't even be a review because your kid may be negatively affected by it. Guess what, some kids will be better off, others will be worse off, but on balance the changes should benefit most. That's called public policy. If you have doubts or worries about the process being fair or balanced, then you should get off your couch and volunteer to be on the review committee or advocate some other way. Lazy armchair advocacy won't get you anywhere. But it's just so much easier to be a victim, isn't it? The immediate gratification of shouting at someone on an anonymous board is so so sweet.

Please give specifics on how some kids currently failing will be better off? Because it sounds like the school board really just wants the averages to go up without actually helping kids in need.
-dp

DP. Some students may be better off if their school can offer more advanced classes or more instances of those classes.

If kids are failing general ed classes how would they do better with the school offering more advanced classes?

Sorry, read that as failing schools. But that point still stands.

As for failing students. Some you will never get through to and they could be at any school. They just don't care and aren't going to try.

It is really the borderline cases where there could be a difference where more positive role model students could make a difference. And where perhaps not having all the more difficult students concentrated in the same schools would ease the burden on staff and free up time to help those kids who might do better.

Certainly having a very poor and small Lewis next to considerably wealthier and larger West Springfield is going to work out much better for one group of students than the other.

But fine, let's just keep everything as it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder why Gen Z kids are notoriously entitled and selfish. They're raised by parents like the ones commenting on this thread.

Agree. It is beyond entitled and selfish to demand you know what's best for other people's kids.

+1. She loves telling us what’s best for our kids.

It's insane to argue that there shouldn't even be a review because your kid may be negatively affected by it. Guess what, some kids will be better off, others will be worse off, but on balance the changes should benefit most. That's called public policy. If you have doubts or worries about the process being fair or balanced, then you should get off your couch and volunteer to be on the review committee or advocate some other way. Lazy armchair advocacy won't get you anywhere. But it's just so much easier to be a victim, isn't it? The immediate gratification of shouting at someone on an anonymous board is so so sweet.

Please give specifics on how some kids currently failing will be better off? Because it sounds like the school board really just wants the averages to go up without actually helping kids in need.
-dp

DP. Some students may be better off if their school can offer more advanced classes or more instances of those classes.

If kids are failing general ed classes how would they do better with the school offering more advanced classes?

Sorry, read that as failing schools. But that point still stands.

As for failing students. Some you will never get through to and they could be at any school. They just don't care and aren't going to try.

It is really the borderline cases where there could be a difference where more positive role model students could make a difference. And where perhaps not having all the more difficult students concentrated in the same schools would ease the burden on staff and free up time to help those kids who might do better.

Certainly having a very poor and small Lewis next to considerably wealthier and larger West Springfield is going to work out much better for one group of students than the other.

But fine, let's just keep everything as it is.

So, you want to use other people’s kids as resources to fix the problem. How many parents do you honestly think would be okay with that?

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]No wonder why Gen Z kids are notoriously entitled and selfish. They're raised by parents like the ones commenting on this thread.[/quote]

Agree. It is beyond entitled and selfish to demand you know what's best for other people's kids.[/quote]

+1. She loves telling us what’s best for our kids.[/quote]

It's insane to argue that there shouldn't even be a review because your kid may be negatively affected by it. Guess what, [b]some kids will be better off[/b], others will be worse off, but on balance the changes should benefit most. That's called public policy. If you have doubts or worries about the process being fair or balanced, then you should get off your couch and volunteer to be on the review committee or advocate some other way. Lazy armchair advocacy won't get you anywhere. But it's just so much easier to be a victim, isn't it? The immediate gratification of shouting at someone on an anonymous board is so so sweet.[/quote]

Please give specifics on how some kids currently failing will be better off? Because it sounds like the school board really just wants the averages to go up without actually helping kids in need.
-dp[/quote]

DP. Some students may be better off if their school can offer more advanced classes or more instances of those classes. [/quote]

If kids are failing general ed classes how would they do better with the school offering more advanced classes?[/quote]

Sorry, read that as failing schools. But that point still stands.

As for failing students. Some you will never get through to and they could be at any school. They just don't care and aren't going to try.

It is really the borderline cases where there could be a difference where more positive role model students could make a difference. And where perhaps not having all the more difficult students concentrated in the same schools would ease the burden on staff and free up time to help those kids who might do better.

Certainly having a very poor and small Lewis next to considerably wealthier and larger West Springfield is going to work out much better for one group of students than the other.

But fine, let's just keep everything as it is.[/quote]

So, you want to use other people’s kids as resources to fix the problem. How many parents do you honestly think would be okay with that? [/quote] I think some balance needs to be brought between two adjacent schools, one with 1635 students and a FR lunch rate exceeding 60 percent and the other with 2791 students and a FR lunch rate in the teens. Wealthier students were removed from Lewis and sent to West Springfield.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder why Gen Z kids are notoriously entitled and selfish. They're raised by parents like the ones commenting on this thread.

Agree. It is beyond entitled and selfish to demand you know what's best for other people's kids.

+1. She loves telling us what’s best for our kids.

It's insane to argue that there shouldn't even be a review because your kid may be negatively affected by it. Guess what, some kids will be better off, others will be worse off, but on balance the changes should benefit most. That's called public policy. If you have doubts or worries about the process being fair or balanced, then you should get off your couch and volunteer to be on the review committee or advocate some other way. Lazy armchair advocacy won't get you anywhere. But it's just so much easier to be a victim, isn't it? The immediate gratification of shouting at someone on an anonymous board is so so sweet.

Please give specifics on how some kids currently failing will be better off? Because it sounds like the school board really just wants the averages to go up without actually helping kids in need.
-dp

DP. Some students may be better off if their school can offer more advanced classes or more instances of those classes.

If kids are failing general ed classes how would they do better with the school offering more advanced classes?

Sorry, read that as failing schools. But that point still stands.

As for failing students. Some you will never get through to and they could be at any school. They just don't care and aren't going to try.

It is really the borderline cases where there could be a difference where more positive role model students could make a difference. And where perhaps not having all the more difficult students concentrated in the same schools would ease the burden on staff and free up time to help those kids who might do better.

Certainly having a very poor and small Lewis next to considerably wealthier and larger West Springfield is going to work out much better for one group of students than the other.

But fine, let's just keep everything as it is.

That situation is an outlier. They don’t need a county-wide boundary study to adjust the West Springfield/Lewis boundaries. They didn’t need one to adjust the South Lakes boundaries in 2008.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder why Gen Z kids are notoriously entitled and selfish. They're raised by parents like the ones commenting on this thread.

Agree. It is beyond entitled and selfish to demand you know what's best for other people's kids.

+1. She loves telling us what’s best for our kids.

It's insane to argue that there shouldn't even be a review because your kid may be negatively affected by it. Guess what, some kids will be better off, others will be worse off, but on balance the changes should benefit most. That's called public policy. If you have doubts or worries about the process being fair or balanced, then you should get off your couch and volunteer to be on the review committee or advocate some other way. Lazy armchair advocacy won't get you anywhere. But it's just so much easier to be a victim, isn't it? The immediate gratification of shouting at someone on an anonymous board is so so sweet.

Please give specifics on how some kids currently failing will be better off? Because it sounds like the school board really just wants the averages to go up without actually helping kids in need.
-dp

DP. Some students may be better off if their school can offer more advanced classes or more instances of those classes.

And other students may be worse off if their schools can offer fewer advanced classes or fewer sessions of those classes. It’s not clear there’s a net benefit here. You could just end up with fewer students in the aggregate taking advanced classes.

Often, it seems to be the very people who constantly say “diversity is our strength” then turning around and deciding they actually want less of it and someone else needs more of it.

BINGO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High performing high schools will not guarantee your kid will be a high performer. There will always be outliers. Kids that focus on academics, find their crowd even in low performing schools. It is up to us, as parents to instill the good work ethics, and to make sure our kids are spending time with a good crowd.

My kid went to a low performing school. She found a crowd focused on athletics and academics and did just fine. I volunteered regurlarly, met parents and made sure my kid was on the right track. Now she is at a top 25 university, along with a few of her high school friends.

I wish home values were not tied so closely to school districts. Those websites that give schools grades, do not fully reflect the gains that are happening in these schools. Schools with high ELL numbers, will obviously have lower scores, but that does not mean your native English speaker cannot excel.

100% agree with this. Every child we know that is from a high SES family but at a school that gets low Great Schools or Niche ratings is doing GREAT in school. The high schoolers are excelling in Honors and AP classes (even the ones who didn't go AAP), the few that are in college got into great universities and are doing well there.

If you're upset about your child's cohort that says more about you (and your racism and classism) than it does the school and how well it is teaching students that are willing to work hard.

You gotta love the people who try to argue that all kids will be fine based on one or two cherry-picked examples.

Also gotta love the people who claim racism whenever they can. You want what’s best for your kids? You’re a racist, classist bigot. 🙄

I mean, you kind of are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We bought this exact house for the programs/electives that our high school offers. The next school over does not have those programs and is not nearly as high performing as the school we are slated for.

You should sue your realtor. You bought into a large school district not a school pyramid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder why Gen Z kids are notoriously entitled and selfish. They're raised by parents like the ones commenting on this thread.

Agree. It is beyond entitled and selfish to demand you know what's best for other people's kids.

+1. She loves telling us what’s best for our kids.

It's insane to argue that there shouldn't even be a review because your kid may be negatively affected by it. Guess what, some kids will be better off, others will be worse off, but on balance the changes should benefit most. That's called public policy. If you have doubts or worries about the process being fair or balanced, then you should get off your couch and volunteer to be on the review committee or advocate some other way. Lazy armchair advocacy won't get you anywhere. But it's just so much easier to be a victim, isn't it? The immediate gratification of shouting at someone on an anonymous board is so so sweet.

Please give specifics on how some kids currently failing will be better off? Because it sounds like the school board really just wants the averages to go up without actually helping kids in need.
-dp

DP. Some students may be better off if their school can offer more advanced classes or more instances of those classes.

If kids are failing general ed classes how would they do better with the school offering more advanced classes?

Sorry, read that as failing schools. But that point still stands.

As for failing students. Some you will never get through to and they could be at any school. They just don't care and aren't going to try.

It is really the borderline cases where there could be a difference where more positive role model students could make a difference. And where perhaps not having all the more difficult students concentrated in the same schools would ease the burden on staff and free up time to help those kids who might do better.

Certainly having a very poor and small Lewis next to considerably wealthier and larger West Springfield is going to work out much better for one group of students than the other.

But fine, let's just keep everything as it is.

No, the point does not still stand. Putting hundreds of UMC kids into Lewis from WSHS will not help the poor ELL students currently at Lewis. It doesn't even help the UMC kids currently at Lewis. The only thing it helps is FCPS and the school board to not look as bad on paper because having more UMC kids will bring up the average test scores and metrics. UMC kids are being used as cover because adults are bad at their jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder why Gen Z kids are notoriously entitled and selfish. They're raised by parents like the ones commenting on this thread.

Agree. It is beyond entitled and selfish to demand you know what's best for other people's kids.

+1. She loves telling us what’s best for our kids.

It's insane to argue that there shouldn't even be a review because your kid may be negatively affected by it. Guess what, some kids will be better off, others will be worse off, but on balance the changes should benefit most. That's called public policy. If you have doubts or worries about the process being fair or balanced, then you should get off your couch and volunteer to be on the review committee or advocate some other way. Lazy armchair advocacy won't get you anywhere. But it's just so much easier to be a victim, isn't it? The immediate gratification of shouting at someone on an anonymous board is so so sweet.

I’ve already wrote letters to board members.
Again you are failing to address my point, so I will repeat it. The school board is not a business. They represent their individual constituencies. They are a part of the community. They have stated repeatedly that they put student mental health and building strong relationships as the key to a solid education.
There is no way to reconcile those points with the lack of grandfathering. They put in the policy. It is hypocracy at its finest. I do not trust people who have show that they
1 lie and say the boundary revision policy was only a new policy- not that they are going to use it, just they they rewrote it. Clearly they are using it immediately.
2- hired a company to redo the boundaries with little transparency into the process
3- didn’t even THINK about the grandfathering clause until the day of the votes.
4 think 6 grade can magically be placed into over crowded middle schools
5- think they have enough money for public Prek when they can’t pay for buses


So if you want to naively carry on about “necessary adjustments” while trusting this board to do it- feel free. They have told me all I need to know about themselves and how they go about making decisions. If their public policy is to take care of student mental health and they then stomp on the first foundations of that (providing stability) for those same students they clearly don’t want to be taken at their word.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High performing high schools will not guarantee your kid will be a high performer. There will always be outliers. Kids that focus on academics, find their crowd even in low performing schools. It is up to us, as parents to instill the good work ethics, and to make sure our kids are spending time with a good crowd.

My kid went to a low performing school. She found a crowd focused on athletics and academics and did just fine. I volunteered regurlarly, met parents and made sure my kid was on the right track. Now she is at a top 25 university, along with a few of her high school friends.

I wish home values were not tied so closely to school districts. Those websites that give schools grades, do not fully reflect the gains that are happening in these schools. Schools with high ELL numbers, will obviously have lower scores, but that does not mean your native English speaker cannot excel.

100% agree with this. Every child we know that is from a high SES family but at a school that gets low Great Schools or Niche ratings is doing GREAT in school. The high schoolers are excelling in Honors and AP classes (even the ones who didn't go AAP), the few that are in college got into great universities and are doing well there.

If you're upset about your child's cohort that says more about you (and your racism and classism) than it does the school and how well it is teaching students that are willing to work hard.

You gotta love the people who try to argue that all kids will be fine based on one or two cherry-picked examples.

Also gotta love the people who claim racism whenever they can. You want what’s best for your kids? You’re a racist, classist bigot. 🙄

I mean, you kind of are.

And this need for strict adherence to an extremist view on race relations is a big reason why the number of people who identify as democrats has plummeted in the past four years. (Myself included).

It’s no longer a big tent party.

[Anonymous]

Are the boundary consultants going to suggest a site for the new High Scholol?