School board reckoning?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the Rs focused on micro-local issues instead of actual state-level issues.

Because they were voting out of anger, not out of reason.

Reason is subjective. Not your reason - but their reason. That's what politics is about - finding out what matters to the voters. I am a D but Youngkin found it for the majority this time.

If you want changes at the local level, you don’t accomplish that at the state level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the Rs focused on micro-local issues instead of actual state-level issues.

Because they were voting out of anger, not out of reason.

Reason is subjective. Not your reason - but their reason. That's what politics is about - finding out what matters to the voters. I am a D but Youngkin found it for the majority this time.

If you want changes at the local level, you don’t accomplish that at the state level.

Stop with the lies. The state set the tone with the D-appointed Secretary of Education, Atif Qarni. He will be gone soon, which is fantastic.

It’s not that changes don’t also need to occur at the local level, but this is a big step in the right direction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Voting against the party that ruined out kids by prioritizing unions, and who are working overtime to indoctrinate school chiodren into compliant little leftists is a very productive and positive way for rational citizens to handle their emotions.

Someone sounds like an extremist and it’s not the leftists lady…

Not either PP. But, the SB did bow to Teachers' Unions. And, they were pushing "equity" and "anti-racism."

Wait. Is anti-racism a bad thing now?

You want to *keep* racist policies?

When math is considered racist, they’ve entirely lost the plot.

Numbers are objective. No one is saying otherwise. (unless you want to get into different numeral systems ).

However, there is a lot that can happen around those numbers - instruction, policies, etc. - that affect outcomes.

The goal is to reduce the disparities in math outcomes. Shouldn't we do that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the Rs focused on micro-local issues instead of actual state-level issues.

Because they were voting out of anger, not out of reason.

Reason is subjective. Not your reason - but their reason. That's what politics is about - finding out what matters to the voters. I am a D but Youngkin found it for the majority this time.

If you want changes at the local level, you don’t accomplish that at the state level.

Stop with the lies. The state set the tone with the D-appointed Secretary of Education, Atif Qarni. He will be gone soon, which is fantastic.

It’s not that changes don’t also need to occur at the local level, but this is a big step in the right direction.

VA/VDOE said schools were open.

Local school districts made the choice to go virtual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Voting against the party that ruined out kids by prioritizing unions, and who are working overtime to indoctrinate school chiodren into compliant little leftists is a very productive and positive way for rational citizens to handle their emotions.

Someone sounds like an extremist and it’s not the leftists lady…

Not either PP. But, the SB did bow to Teachers' Unions. And, they were pushing "equity" and "anti-racism."

Wait. Is anti-racism a bad thing now?

You want to *keep* racist policies?

When math is considered racist, they’ve entirely lost the plot.

Numbers are objective. No one is saying otherwise. (unless you want to get into different numeral systems ).

However, there is a lot that can happen around those numbers - instruction, policies, etc. - that affect outcomes.

The goal is to reduce the disparities in math outcomes. Shouldn't we do that?

That depends what you mean by "reduce disparities". There are 2 ways to do that. Bring the top scores down or bring the lowest scores up.
Sadly, it seems that in the name of equity the educational and political establishment has chosen the easier path of bringing the top scores down.

[Anonymous]

The goal is to reduce the disparities in math outcomes. Shouldn't we do that?


That depends what you mean by "reduce disparities". There are 2 ways to do that. Bring the top scores down or bring the lowest scores up.
Sadly, it seems that in the name of equity the educational and political establishment has chosen the easier path of bringing the top scores down.

And, I thought diversity was a good thing. Equality was a good thing. Now, we must have equity. Everyone the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the Rs focused on micro-local issues instead of actual state-level issues.

Because they were voting out of anger, not out of reason.

Reason is subjective. Not your reason - but their reason. That's what politics is about - finding out what matters to the voters. I am a D but Youngkin found it for the majority this time.

If you want changes at the local level, you don’t accomplish that at the state level.

Stop with the lies. The state set the tone with the D-appointed Secretary of Education, Atif Qarni. He will be gone soon, which is fantastic.

It’s not that changes don’t also need to occur at the local level, but this is a big step in the right direction.

VA/VDOE said schools were open.

Local school districts made the choice to go virtual.

I would like to know if they could have mandated schools open at the state level. Northam did mandate that they close from mid-March to the end of the year. I actually thought Northam did well with his handling of the pandemic for VA. My only complaint about him is that he should have mandated school opening in August 2020 rather than just allow it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Voting against the party that ruined out kids by prioritizing unions, and who are working overtime to indoctrinate school chiodren into compliant little leftists is a very productive and positive way for rational citizens to handle their emotions.

Someone sounds like an extremist and it’s not the leftists lady…

Not either PP. But, the SB did bow to Teachers' Unions. And, they were pushing "equity" and "anti-racism."

Wait. Is anti-racism a bad thing now?

You want to *keep* racist policies?

When math is considered racist, they’ve entirely lost the plot.

Numbers are objective. No one is saying otherwise. (unless you want to get into different numeral systems ).

However, there is a lot that can happen around those numbers - instruction, policies, etc. - that affect outcomes.

The goal is to reduce the disparities in math outcomes. Shouldn't we do that?

That depends what you mean by "reduce disparities". There are 2 ways to do that. Bring the top scores down or bring the lowest scores up.
Sadly, it seems that in the name of equity the educational and political establishment has chosen the easier path of bringing the top scores down.

+1. And this debate is far from over.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/04/us/california-math-curriculum-guidelines.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The goal is to reduce the disparities in math outcomes. Shouldn't we do that?


That depends what you mean by "reduce disparities". There are 2 ways to do that. Bring the top scores down or bring the lowest scores up.
Sadly, it seems that in the name of equity the educational and political establishment has chosen the easier path of bringing the top scores down.

And, I thought diversity was a good thing. Equality was a good thing. Now, we must have equity. Everyone the same.

Equity . . . except for their kids in AAP and their birthday parties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Voting against the party that ruined out kids by prioritizing unions, and who are working overtime to indoctrinate school chiodren into compliant little leftists is a very productive and positive way for rational citizens to handle their emotions.

Someone sounds like an extremist and it’s not the leftists lady…

Not either PP. But, the SB did bow to Teachers' Unions. And, they were pushing "equity" and "anti-racism."

Wait. Is anti-racism a bad thing now?

You want to *keep* racist policies?

When math is considered racist, they’ve entirely lost the plot.

Numbers are objective. No one is saying otherwise. (unless you want to get into different numeral systems ).

However, there is a lot that can happen around those numbers - instruction, policies, etc. - that affect outcomes.

The goal is to reduce the disparities in math outcomes. Shouldn't we do that?

Not if it is accomplished by suppressing the potential and achievements of those with more aptitude for math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Voting against the party that ruined out kids by prioritizing unions, and who are working overtime to indoctrinate school chiodren into compliant little leftists is a very productive and positive way for rational citizens to handle their emotions.

Someone sounds like an extremist and it’s not the leftists lady…

Not either PP. But, the SB did bow to Teachers' Unions. And, they were pushing "equity" and "anti-racism."

Wait. Is anti-racism a bad thing now?

You want to *keep* racist policies?

When math is considered racist, they’ve entirely lost the plot.

Numbers are objective. No one is saying otherwise. (unless you want to get into different numeral systems ).

However, there is a lot that can happen around those numbers - instruction, policies, etc. - that affect outcomes.

The goal is to reduce the disparities in math outcomes. Shouldn't we do that?

That depends what you mean by "reduce disparities". There are 2 ways to do that. Bring the top scores down or bring the lowest scores up.
Sadly, it seems that in the name of equity the educational and political establishment has chosen the easier path of bringing the top scores down.

They thought that was what would get the most support and votes. They are finding out now they may have been wrong about that.

[Anonymous]

When have Republicans ever advocated for education? You elected a guy running on lowering taxes and school vouchers-both which are not good things for public schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When have Republicans ever advocated for education? You elected a guy running on lowering taxes and school vouchers-both which are not good things for public schools.

Turns out in this election they just had to be the less likely party to close school for a year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read an interesting interview with two of the top campaign people for Youngkin where they were asked about the respective campaigns of McAuliffe and Youngkin.

Their response was that McAuliffe offered very few affirmative reasons to vote for him, and ran against Youngkin as if Youngkin was running for national office (i.e., to be elected to the Senate), whereas Youngkin ran a disciplined campaign that remained focused on the types of local issues like education, crime, and attracting business that people expect a governor (but not necessarily a House or Senate member in Congress) to address.

That seemed to make sense, and I think we see the same thing with the FCPS School Board. These folks were elected to focus on the most local of issues - the administration of a county's public school system - and yet from day one they've acted as if they hold or aspire to hold national political office. Cohen and Frisch weren't in office for more than a few weeks before they were holding fundraisers for Democratic candidates, and the "all equity, all the time" rhetoric of most of them sounded as if they thought they were personally responsible for some type of great national reckoning. And then even the ones whose rhetoric wasn't as overblown demonstrated that they had a tin ear and next to no sensitivity to local concerns.

So while the Ds still got most of the votes in NoVa, the Ds on the current school boards in NoVa have all the flaws of a Terry McAuliffe, and would be very stupid if they don't think they are going to be extremely vulnerable in an election that focuses primarily on their own performance (or lack thereof). They have two years left to clean up their act, but it seems unlikely that they have the smarts to do so. McLaughlin has been the only one who has demonstrated any sensitivity to what her constituents want from a School Board member; the rest seem too ideological, too dense, or too lazy to right the ship.

I don't know if anyone else is interested in this - but I would really like to get back to the school board being non partisan. No endorsement of any candidates on the sample ballots.

Did it used to be like that? Jesus, why did they change it? Please, please, get rid of the political part of all this

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When have Republicans ever advocated for education? You elected a guy running on lowering taxes and school vouchers-both which are not good things for public schools.

I know. We are screwed. The Democrats current lip service to equity and “ issues” is a huge problem and I hate it and all the educrats they empower, too, but charter schools are like a sign for end of times.