Move toward local level IV

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thoreau will become a center and the kids from Madison and Oakton pyramids who are now attending Jackson will be zoned for AAP center at Thoreau... not an option.

(This came from someone inside TMS.) Expect it to happen next year or the following year. Jackson is way over crowded and TMS is going to have a lot of excess capacity staring this fall.

I do not think anything has been decided yet, especially since the new geocoding software tool has not been fully implemented, and Facilities has found enrollment pressures are not as large as was once thought. From the FPAC report to the School Board:

Based upon staff's new projections included in this year’s CIP (Fiscal Years 2017-21) and the
significant reduction in the rate of increase in enrollment, it appears that the necessity for
medium-term capacity solutions is not as pressing as it appeared to be a year ago.
Therefore, this portion of our charge may no longer be as relevant as previously thought. We
believe that FCPS should go through one more CIP cycle before making any capacityrelated,
medium-term recommendations. As the capacity projections based upon the prior
methodology are vastly different than the capacity projections based upon the new geocoding
methodology, FCPS needs to further validate this new methodology over at least
three projection cycles (Fall 2015, Spring 2016 and Fall 2016).

http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/ABMK654C6433/$file/FPAC%20Annual%20Report%20SY%202015-16%20for%207-18-16%20WS.pdf

No official decisions have been made, but the plans are in the works. They didn't increase the size of Thoreau to accommodate 1300 kids just so that they can keep enrollment at 900 (or less). They have the capacity and Jackson is currently about 250 kids or more OVER capacity. It also makes no sense for Oakton kids and Madison kids to be going out of their pyramids and geographic location. The JMS base kids deserve to have their school available for their use. The solution is obvious.... space at Thoreau .... no space at Jackson... kids leaving the pyramid with space and an existing level 4 program.... to go to the school with no space out of the pyramid.... it's not rocket science. The administrators already know the plan.

But the Oakton AAP kids now at Jackson already have Jackson as their base school. Moving them to Thoreau, which is in the Madison pyramid, would be taking them to another school "out of their pyramids." It seems to me the much better approach is to have the kids for whom Thoreau is their base school attend a new AAP center at Thoreau, and leave the Oakton kids - none of whom currently have Thoreau as their base school - alone until FCPS has a better handle on the numbers.

good point. I don't know. That's what I heard from someone at TMS. Maybe all the Oakton AAP kids would be taken out of Jackson and put at TMS which is closer, but out of pyramid. We'll see how this plays out. If someone has to move out of Jackson -- the easiest ones would be the AAP kids. Otherwise you have to rezone entire areas to move from LJMS/OHS to TMS/MHS. If they just move the AAP center kids, it only impacts the MS numbers, not the HS numbers.

I can't see a scenario where FCPS moves the Oakton AAP kids from Jackson to Thoreau, but leaves the Oakton GenEd kids currently zoned for Jackson there. And if all the Oakton kids now at Jackson were moved to Thoreau, it would leave Jackson as only a feeder to Falls Church, which also pulls from Poe, whereas Thoreau would start to feed to three high schools (Oakton, Madison and Marshall). It would be better to leave the Oakton kids now at Jackson there, and if Jackson were to still be overcrowded after the Thoreau AAP kids move to Thoreau, redistrict part of Jackson to under-enrolled Poe.

Just moving the Thoreau AAP kids from Jackson to Thoreau is not really enough kids to fill that school. They will have capacity for 1350 this fall. They have 850. I don't think your analysis addresses the capacity available at Thoreau. How many Oakton pyramid kids are attending Jackson in either the base or AAP?

Moving the AAP kids whose base school is Thoreau back there from Kilmer and Jackson would bring the school's enrollment up to about 990 students, and it's fair to assume that having an AAP center within Thoreau could attract additional families to live within Thoreau's boundaries. If FCPS still finds itself with hundreds of vacant seats at a renovated Thoreau, it seems like the more logical thing to do would be to move the areas currently zoned for Kilmer/Madison to Thoreau, rather than moving part of Jackson/Oakton to Thoreau (and thereby creating, as previously noted, a situation where Thoreau feeds into three different high schools). And if that still leaves Jackson overcrowded, I'd move part of it to Poe, which had about 875 students last year in a school designed for 1341.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thoreau will become a center and the kids from Madison and Oakton pyramids who are now attending Jackson will be zoned for AAP center at Thoreau... not an option.

(This came from someone inside TMS.) Expect it to happen next year or the following year. Jackson is way over crowded and TMS is going to have a lot of excess capacity staring this fall.

I do not think anything has been decided yet, especially since the new geocoding software tool has not been fully implemented, and Facilities has found enrollment pressures are not as large as was once thought. From the FPAC report to the School Board:

Based upon staff's new projections included in this year’s CIP (Fiscal Years 2017-21) and the
significant reduction in the rate of increase in enrollment, it appears that the necessity for
medium-term capacity solutions is not as pressing as it appeared to be a year ago.
Therefore, this portion of our charge may no longer be as relevant as previously thought. We
believe that FCPS should go through one more CIP cycle before making any capacityrelated,
medium-term recommendations. As the capacity projections based upon the prior
methodology are vastly different than the capacity projections based upon the new geocoding
methodology, FCPS needs to further validate this new methodology over at least
three projection cycles (Fall 2015, Spring 2016 and Fall 2016).

http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/ABMK654C6433/$file/FPAC%20Annual%20Report%20SY%202015-16%20for%207-18-16%20WS.pdf

No official decisions have been made, but the plans are in the works. They didn't increase the size of Thoreau to accommodate 1300 kids just so that they can keep enrollment at 900 (or less). They have the capacity and Jackson is currently about 250 kids or more OVER capacity. It also makes no sense for Oakton kids and Madison kids to be going out of their pyramids and geographic location. The JMS base kids deserve to have their school available for their use. The solution is obvious.... space at Thoreau .... no space at Jackson... kids leaving the pyramid with space and an existing level 4 program.... to go to the school with no space out of the pyramid.... it's not rocket science. The administrators already know the plan.

But the Oakton AAP kids now at Jackson already have Jackson as their base school. Moving them to Thoreau, which is in the Madison pyramid, would be taking them to another school "out of their pyramids." It seems to me the much better approach is to have the kids for whom Thoreau is their base school attend a new AAP center at Thoreau, and leave the Oakton kids - none of whom currently have Thoreau as their base school - alone until FCPS has a better handle on the numbers.

good point. I don't know. That's what I heard from someone at TMS. Maybe all the Oakton AAP kids would be taken out of Jackson and put at TMS which is closer, but out of pyramid. We'll see how this plays out. If someone has to move out of Jackson -- the easiest ones would be the AAP kids. Otherwise you have to rezone entire areas to move from LJMS/OHS to TMS/MHS. If they just move the AAP center kids, it only impacts the MS numbers, not the HS numbers.

I can't see a scenario where FCPS moves the Oakton AAP kids from Jackson to Thoreau, but leaves the Oakton GenEd kids currently zoned for Jackson there. And if all the Oakton kids now at Jackson were moved to Thoreau, it would leave Jackson as only a feeder to Falls Church, which also pulls from Poe, whereas Thoreau would start to feed to three high schools (Oakton, Madison and Marshall). It would be better to leave the Oakton kids now at Jackson there, and if Jackson were to still be overcrowded after the Thoreau AAP kids move to Thoreau, redistrict part of Jackson to under-enrolled Poe.

Just moving the Thoreau AAP kids from Jackson to Thoreau is not really enough kids to fill that school. They will have capacity for 1350 this fall. They have 850. I don't think your analysis addresses the capacity available at Thoreau. How many Oakton pyramid kids are attending Jackson in either the base or AAP?

Moving the AAP kids whose base school is Thoreau back there from Kilmer and Jackson would bring the school's enrollment up to about 990 students, and it's fair to assume that having an AAP center within Thoreau could attract additional families to live within Thoreau's boundaries. If FCPS still finds itself with hundreds of vacant seats at a renovated Thoreau, it seems like the more logical thing to do would be to move the areas currently zoned for Kilmer/Madison to Thoreau, rather than moving part of Jackson/Oakton to Thoreau (and thereby creating, as previously noted, a situation where Thoreau feeds into three different high schools). And if that still leaves Jackson overcrowded, I'd move part of it to Poe, which had about 875 students last year in a school designed for 1341.

[Anonymous]

It seems like LLIV should be implemented where it can verses a center model and then the rest of the AAP centers should be more integrated. The program should be more of a math/language arts program with integrated specials, science, and social studies, lunch, and recess.

[Anonymous]

9:41- Agree. Never heard that segregation was good for anyone. Very surprised FCPS hasn't been sued yet over this model, particularly in light of the high percentage of kids who are in the program from certain schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:9:41- Agree. Never heard that segregation was good for anyone. Very surprised FCPS hasn't been sued yet over this model, particularly in light of the high percentage of kids who are in the program from certain schools.

Never? Have you heard of boys schools and girls schools? You may disagree, but some people think they are valuable.

If you disapprove of separating students, look at MoCo. They have no differentiation in MS. No separate classes at all.

[Anonymous]

Remember that a sizable number of the Oakton HS zoned AAP students (the western half of the attendance zone) are attending Carson MS-- which is also overcrowded, and then turns around feeds to 5 different HSs (Oakton, awestfields, SLHS, Chantilly & TJ). The FCPS feeder system is a disaster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:9:41- Agree. Never heard that segregation was good for anyone. Very surprised FCPS hasn't been sued yet over this model, particularly in light of the high percentage of kids who are in the program from certain schools.

Those are really sweeping statements to make without having any backup. First you can't say the current model of "segregating" AAP students "never" works for "anyone." In fact, AAP works very well for lots of people in FCPS, including AAP kids & their families, for example. Secondly, what would be the basis of your lawsuit (besides "my kid should have gotten in, life is unfair, I'm mad, etc.?) FCPS may have a limited ability to "segregate" based on race, gender, disability, national origin, etc. But, "not gifted"/GE is not one of these protected classes. Finally, I am puzzled as to why you believe that you can sue FCPS for over-identifying AAP kids (as opposed to under-identifying them). Participation in AAP is voluntary. Why would giving kids "on the fence" the benefit of the doubt make FCPS vulnerable from a litigation standpoint?

I get the policy objections to AAP. But the "someone should sue their sorry a@@es" movement seems half baked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:9:41- Agree. Never heard that segregation was good for anyone. Very surprised FCPS hasn't been sued yet over this model, particularly in light of the high percentage of kids who are in the program from certain schools.

Those are really sweeping statements to make without having any backup. First you can't say the current model of "segregating" AAP students "never" works for "anyone." In fact, AAP works very well for lots of people in FCPS, including AAP kids & their families, for example. Secondly, what would be the basis of your lawsuit (besides "my kid should have gotten in, life is unfair, I'm mad, etc.?) FCPS may have a limited ability to "segregate" based on race, gender, disability, national origin, etc. But, "not gifted"/GE is not one of these protected classes. Finally, I am puzzled as to why you believe that you can sue FCPS for over-identifying AAP kids (as opposed to under-identifying them). Participation in AAP is voluntary. Why would giving kids "on the fence" the benefit of the doubt make FCPS vulnerable from a litigation standpoint?

I get the policy objections to AAP. But the "someone should sue their sorry a@@es" movement seems half baked.

NP here. Because not all kids are given the benefit of a doubt. I don't think it would be too difficult to find the data to show that kids the bulk of the students who barely make it in (the above average, but hardly gifted, super-prepped and enriched "bubble kids") are predominantly high SES, white and or Asian. People like you who benefit from this warped system will be calling the idea of a lawsuit "half-baked" until it's filed. And btw, there is already a discrimination lawsuit looking at the segregation that occurs in elementary and middle school pipelines that feed TJ, so I wouldn't assume FCPS's current cluster-f#ck of a "gifted" program is safe from litigation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:9:41- Agree. Never heard that segregation was good for anyone. Very surprised FCPS hasn't been sued yet over this model, particularly in light of the high percentage of kids who are in the program from certain schools.

Those are really sweeping statements to make without having any backup. First you can't say the current model of "segregating" AAP students "never" works for "anyone." In fact, AAP works very well for lots of people in FCPS, including AAP kids & their families, for example. Secondly, what would be the basis of your lawsuit (besides "my kid should have gotten in, life is unfair, I'm mad, etc.?) FCPS may have a limited ability to "segregate" based on race, gender, disability, national origin, etc. But, "not gifted"/GE is not one of these protected classes. Finally, I am puzzled as to why you believe that you can sue FCPS for over-identifying AAP kids (as opposed to under-identifying them). Participation in AAP is voluntary. Why would giving kids "on the fence" the benefit of the doubt make FCPS vulnerable from a litigation standpoint?

I get the policy objections to AAP. But the "someone should sue their sorry a@@es" movement seems half baked.

NP here. Because not all kids are given the benefit of a doubt. I don't think it would be too difficult to find the data to show that kids the bulk of the students who barely make it in (the above average, but hardly gifted, super-prepped and enriched "bubble kids") are predominantly high SES, white and or Asian. People like you who benefit from this warped system will be calling the idea of a lawsuit "half-baked" until it's filed. And btw, there is already a discrimination lawsuit looking at the segregation that occurs in elementary and middle school pipelines that feed TJ, so I wouldn't assume FCPS's current cluster-f#ck of a "gifted" program is safe from litigation.

Another NP here. No such "lawsuit" was been filed. A submission was made to the Department of Education back in 2012, and four years later DOE has not filed any complaint alleging civil rights violations. The law does not guarantee equal outcomes, as much as some might like that to be the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:9:41- Agree. Never heard that segregation was good for anyone. Very surprised FCPS hasn't been sued yet over this model, particularly in light of the high percentage of kids who are in the program from certain schools.

Those are really sweeping statements to make without having any backup. First you can't say the current model of "segregating" AAP students "never" works for "anyone." In fact, AAP works very well for lots of people in FCPS, including AAP kids & their families, for example. Secondly, what would be the basis of your lawsuit (besides "my kid should have gotten in, life is unfair, I'm mad, etc.?) FCPS may have a limited ability to "segregate" based on race, gender, disability, national origin, etc. But, "not gifted"/GE is not one of these protected classes. Finally, I am puzzled as to why you believe that you can sue FCPS for over-identifying AAP kids (as opposed to under-identifying them). Participation in AAP is voluntary. Why would giving kids "on the fence" the benefit of the doubt make FCPS vulnerable from a litigation standpoint?

I get the policy objections to AAP. But the "someone should sue their sorry a@@es" movement seems half baked.

NP here. Because not all kids are given the benefit of a doubt. I don't think it would be too difficult to find the data to show that kids the bulk of the students who barely make it in (the above average, but hardly gifted, super-prepped and enriched "bubble kids") are predominantly high SES, white and or Asian. People like you who benefit from this warped system will be calling the idea of a lawsuit "half-baked" until it's filed. And btw, there is already a discrimination lawsuit looking at the segregation that occurs in elementary and middle school pipelines that feed TJ, so I wouldn't assume FCPS's current cluster-f#ck of a "gifted" program is safe from litigation.

Another NP here. No such "lawsuit" was been filed. A submission was made to the Department of Education back in 2012, and four years later DOE has not filed any complaint alleging civil rights violations. The law does not guarantee equal outcomes, as much as some might like that to be the case.

My mistake. It was a "complaint" filed with the DOE not a lawsuit. But hardly a mere "submission" the DOE is found there were grounds to launch an investigation, which is still continuing, btw.

An while the law cannot guarantee equal outcomes, it does provide for equity and fairness in publicly-funded programs, and if a program is set up to capture and reward kids whose families have the means to game it to the detriment of equally or more qualified actual "gifted" kids, that is actionable.

[Anonymous]

Sorry for the typos ^^^ but am so sick of the "merit, only merit" smugness. When it comes to giftedness, it's an argument that fails.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
My mistake. It was a "complaint" filed with the DOE not a lawsuit. But hardly a mere "submission" the DOE is found there were grounds to launch an investigation, which is still continuing, btw.

An while the law cannot guarantee equal outcomes, it does provide for equity and fairness in publicly-funded programs, and if a program is set up to capture and reward kids whose families have the means to game it to the detriment of equally or more qualified actual "gifted" kids, that is actionable.

I'm sorry, but the logic here is flimsy. In the Obama Administration, getting a federal agency to open an investigation ("launch" exaggerates the significance) into potential discrimination takes very little effort. The real issue is whether the investigation results in enough evidence to justify the filing of a complaint by the federal government. That wouldn't mean that the feds could ultimately prove their case, but it would suggest that they felt there was a sufficient basis to file a lawsuit. It's been four years since some groups urged the DOE to challenge AAP admissions within FCPS, and nothing significant has occurred besides DOE agreeing to look into it. Big deal.

The problem, of course, is the difficult of showing that the program was structured, as you assert, for the purpose of segregating children who come from families of means (mostly white and Asian) from children who come from lower-income families (mostly Hispanic and black). It is easy to claim that was the goal, and next to impossible to prove.

[Anonymous]

Wasn't this "lawsuit" your threatening a 2012 DOE complaint about TJ admissions, and the under-representation of AAs and Hispanics at TJ? And it touched on AA/Hispanic AAP admissions, since AAP Centers are the TJ pipeline?

My understanding is that TJ agreed to move to "holistic" admissions and do more outreach & this complaint died a quiet death. Is it still active? And that Asian advocacy groups got upset with TJ holistic admissions, and claiming that they discriminate against Asians. Is something else going on?

Maybe I'm too cynical, but even if this complaint were active, I doubt it would apply. The complaint is about under representation of AAs and Hispanics (protected class). In most cases, parents railing against AAP are white and/or Asian. So not covered by this complaint or a protected class under the law.

FWIW- I agree that AAP/TJ need to get their act together on AAP, and by extension, TJ recruitment, identification & admissions. This year's TJ numbers were terrible.

But are the anti-AAP Pearl clutchers on here AA/ Hispanic? If so-- yep-- there is an issue. If not, no there isn't a potential class action out there that will right the perceived AAP wrongs.

[Anonymous]

WHat about a lawsuit based on LRE?
How is the program LRE if the kids don't even mix for specials/ lunch and homeroom?
Just trying to understand....

[Anonymous]

Can a lawsuit be filed because of classism verses racism?