Patch article summarizing AAP Expansion vote
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Mostly accurate, although Schultz was only proposing to move the fourth and fifth grade AAP kids, not all students, to Pimmit. Dumb idea in either case. |
Anonymous
| The article failed to mention how often Dr. Jack Dale really looked foolish. I look forward to his retirement. |
Anonymous
| They need to up the AAP requirements to make less kids applicable for AAP. This would also help boost their home schools. |
Anonymous
I know this is very fashionable to say -- to blame Dr. Dale and ridicule him -- but as a parent new to FCPS I have to say I was really impressed with him. Sorry! SB members like Elizabeth Schultz & Patty Reed were shouting about how "the numbers" changed between different CIPs and while they stopped short of calling the staff a bunch of buffoons, that is clearly what they meant. Dr. Dale tried to explain: models change, we take into account the latest data and the projections change, etc. Anybody who's worked in the private or public sector -- by this I mean anybody who has worked -- knows that this is true. Models change; numbers change; projections change. As long as those changes can be explained, we shouldn't be surprised. Schultz & Reed didn't want to hear this, and wanted to paralyze the system in order to punish the staff. They wanted to NOT pass the CIP because the numbers were in flux. That's irresponsible. Dr. Dale called them out on it. He seemed to me like the grown-up in the room. |
Anonymous
Reed was in a very tough position. She knew the overcrowding at Haycock was untenable, but she represents people who would not be forced to change schools so often had planning been better and projections more accurate. Of course she had to summon up some righteous indignation and make clear it's not a situation anyone should be happy or sanguine about, least of all Jack Dale. Schultz is a total buffoon who sucks the oxygen out of the room any time she opens her mouth. |
Anonymous
Dr. Jack Dale said that the difference between honors classes and AAP at the middle school level is "semantics." Well, that is not what is detailed on the FCPS website -- "The following diagram highlights the major similarities and differences between the Advanced Academic Level IV Center and the Honors classes in the middle school.": http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/AAPforMSdiagram.pdf Does not appear to be "semantics" to me. |
Anonymous
| Springfield District always elects lunatics to the School Board. Schultz makes Liz Bradsher look good, and that's no easy feat. |
Anonymous
| I like Shultz. I met her at her swearing in last year. Note, I live in Redd's distict and like her, too. But, Shultz is great! Very focal and not afraid!! |
Anonymous
You're right - she's not afraid. Most people have an inner monitor that tells them to pause before they say or propose something really stupid. She's not constrained that way in the slightest. |
Anonymous
| I would put Schultz and Reed in the same boat on this particular issue, I'm afraid. Last night SB members praised the "bravery" of both Schultz & Reed for bringing up an "innovative" solution to the overcrowding at Haycock. But their solutions -- for a Haycock annex, whether at Lemon Road (Reed) or the Pimmit Center (Schultz) were both last-minute, hail-mary suggestions that should have been fully vetted and thought out. If they'd come forward with those ideas in October, perhaps they would have stood a chance. I doubt it (because Pimmit WAS discussed at Haycock as a solution at one point), but at least then we'd have full public engagement, time for reasonable discussions and trade-offs, etc. Instead, these last-minute suggestions just served to FREAK OUT Haycock parents who then felt the need to testify last night to make sure the Board didn't listen to these crazy ideas and put in place a still-painful-but-necessary compromise. I would rather have heard more last night from Cooper parents, Thoreau parents, etc. but Haycock dominated the discussion because of Reed & Shultz's need to score political points and seem "independent" rather than be helpful. |
Anonymous
| Sorry to point this out for the new poster at 9:45, but as recently as two years ago projections were HUNDREDS of students off in one school or another (it really was HUNDREDS in some elementary schools and several school STILL dispute their projections). So, we all have reason to distrust the projections - especially when we can't see HOW they are generated. Being a very numbers based system that is designed around ratios, we rely on the accuracy of those numbers as does the school board. When the school board can't get accurate information then it is nearly impossible to make good decisions. Reed and Schultz are standing up for what they believe is an inconsistency that is great enough that it makes them thing twice about expending dollars and moving children. I applaud Ms. Reed for stating what so many of us have thought for a long while now, and while it's hard to hear (and was probably hard to say), they are the bosses of the superintendent, and I'm glad someone said it. |
Anonymous
This debate about numbers is much ado about nothing. I'm a longtime FCPS parent and the numbers are NEVER accurate because they are PROJECTIONS. My word, the standard some of you guys hold these people to is ludicrous. It makes for great theater seeing people like Schultz and Reed grandstand about their need for precise numbers before they move forward with the CIP, but we as voters ought to be smart enough to see that for what it is: stonewalling on the part of people who have no intention of fighting for more dollars in education and therefore would rather direct your attention to stuff that will make you angry at government (the incompetence! the intentional misleading!) so you don't think you need to actually PAY for stuff like, um, PUBLIC education. |
Anonymous
|
Projections should be based in reality and show some kind of correlation to the real world. Some glaring examples would be the projections at South Lakes (anyone with common sense could see that enrollment would be rising with the Metro expansion--but FCPS said "No.") Now, South Lakes is looking at another redistricting. Another example would be South County. Just look at the enrollments in the high school and middle school. Did they really need a middle school?
FCPS says it needs a high school in the southwest part of the county to relieve overcrowding at Centreville, Chantilly, and South Lakes. Have they looked at a map? South Lakes and Chantilly are not in the southwest part of the county. Look at the schools that need improvement--this doesn't reflect projections, it reflects poor planning on the part of staff and the school board. |
Anonymous
Why do people on these boards talk PAST each other rather than listen? The PP just refuted your point, and I think she's right: as long as we remain stuck with a completely underfunded maintenance and/or CIP budget, we will continue to have a 30+ year backlog on renovations. This isn't about SB members or staff who are idiots... It's about not having enough $$ to go around. Those of you who focus on this project being rushed through or that project being delayed are just barking around the edges of the real problem. How ironic that the SB last night went through a painful exercise in emergency measures at Haycock while delaying action at the middle school level because... there wasn't an emergency. I know consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, but if you're going to scream and moan about how schools are IGNORED FOR YEARS, then maybe you ought to also support the SB making forward-thinking moves to deal with capacity problems it KNOWS are coming. |