FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fareed Zakaria has a piece in the Washington post about gore the Dems should post attention to its base - the professional class, rather than move further to the left.

Will the school board listen, or are they going to charge full bore into the boundary changes. Hard to think of an issue that can turn off the professional class quicker than depriving their kids of an education.

That's a false characterization of what's going on.

Changing boundaries is not the same as turning children away or locking the doors.

You're not going to get anywhere being so ridiculous.

School board is depriving these families of the pyramid that they selected when they bought their house. Clamor all you want about how we are one county and it is not guaranteed, but those families will see this as a big betrayal. The Dems will bleed a lot of support over this. Maybe they can afford to be dense about it on the local level, but nationwide and statewide, certainly not.

Then let them bleed the support

Yes, “let them eat cake.”

Lots of board members look like they enjoy cake fairly frequently.

[Anonymous]

Well that settles it then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well that settles it then.

are we in the eye of the storm?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well that settles it then.

are we in the eye of the storm?

Yeah, but it’s only going to get worse for the school board in the other side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well that settles it then.

are we in the eye of the storm?

Yeah, but it’s only going to get worse for the school board in the other side.

Good thing the boundary review is just a distraction while the rest of the equity measures are implemented.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well that settles it then.

are we in the eye of the storm?

Yeah, but it’s only going to get worse for the school board in the other side.

Good thing the boundary review is just a distraction while the rest of the equity measures are implemented.

What does that even mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well that settles it then.

are we in the eye of the storm?

Yeah, but it’s only going to get worse for the school board in the other side.

Good thing the boundary review is just a distraction while the rest of the equity measures are implemented.

What does that even mean?

It means the administration is great at playing shell games. Get everyone worked up and fighting over an unneeded boundary change while we sneak in something like a poorly implemented SBG program county wide that creates an incomprehensible grading structure that closes the achievement gap while making it harder for smart kids to get As and get into top colleges.

It is all about getting to the lowest common denominator from an educational standpoint.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well that settles it then.

are we in the eye of the storm?

Yeah, but it’s only going to get worse for the school board in the other side.

Good thing the boundary review is just a distraction while the rest of the equity measures are implemented.

What does that even mean?

It means the administration is great at playing shell games. Get everyone worked up and fighting over an unneeded boundary change while we sneak in something like a poorly implemented SBG program county wide that creates an incomprehensible grading structure that closes the achievement gap while making it harder for smart kids to get As and get into top colleges.

It is all about getting to the lowest common denominator from an educational standpoint.

DP. This is so true and I can't for the life of me understand why people continue to elect idiots who clearly want to run this school system into the ground rather than seek excellence.

[Anonymous]

They posted what appear to be select posters and feedback sheets from the community meetings. Shocker, i can’t find my table’s feedback, which basically stated that nobody wants boundary changes and that Thru is wholly unqualified to lead this study.

This is why there should be transparency for the BRAC. This is all such gross sham “community engagement”. Shame on FCPS.

[Anonymous]

I just looked at a good chunk of the feedback for the in-person boundary meetings, and whoa boy the school board is walking into a buzz saw if they try to do anything more than fix split feeders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just looked at a good chunk of the feedback for the in-person boundary meetings, and whoa boy the school board is walking into a buzz saw if they try to do anything more than fix split feeders.

It sounds like Thru is going to give the SB (and possibly the whole 100+ member BRAC?) a few maps with different options. It will be interesting to see what direction they go in. Just clean up the ES split feeders and attendance islands as much as possible, and call it a day to try to protect their future political ambitions? Or will SB members/BRAC members egos get in the way and they’ll try to push for more changes, or try to protect their own areas from getting moved, even if they are in a split feeder or attendance island?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just looked at a good chunk of the feedback for the in-person boundary meetings, and whoa boy the school board is walking into a buzz saw if they try to do anything more than fix split feeders.

It sounds like Thru is going to give the SB (and possibly the whole 100+ member BRAC?) a few maps with different options. It will be interesting to see what direction they go in. Just clean up the ES split feeders and attendance islands as much as possible, and call it a day to try to protect their future political ambitions? Or will SB members/BRAC members egos get in the way and they’ll try to push for more changes, or try to protect their own areas from getting moved, even if they are in a split feeder or attendance island?

Feels a bit like some people are happy to throw others in these attendance islands or split feeders under a bus as long as they are left alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just looked at a good chunk of the feedback for the in-person boundary meetings, and whoa boy the school board is walking into a buzz saw if they try to do anything more than fix split feeders.

It sounds like Thru is going to give the SB (and possibly the whole 100+ member BRAC?) a few maps with different options. It will be interesting to see what direction they go in. Just clean up the ES split feeders and attendance islands as much as possible, and call it a day to try to protect their future political ambitions? Or will SB members/BRAC members egos get in the way and they’ll try to push for more changes, or try to protect their own areas from getting moved, even if they are in a split feeder or attendance island?

Feels a bit like some people are happy to throw others in these attendance islands or split feeders under a bus as long as they are left alone.

I’m agnostic as to whether they change split feeders or attendance islands. It does seem like split feeders are more likely to have people okay with boundary changes, but if the majority in those schools don’t want it changed, I’m wholly supportive of us all telling the school board to F off and don’t make any changes at all.

Seems pretty clear from the boundary meetings that that’s the overwhelming message.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just looked at a good chunk of the feedback for the in-person boundary meetings, and whoa boy the school board is walking into a buzz saw if they try to do anything more than fix split feeders.

It sounds like Thru is going to give the SB (and possibly the whole 100+ member BRAC?) a few maps with different options. It will be interesting to see what direction they go in. Just clean up the ES split feeders and attendance islands as much as possible, and call it a day to try to protect their future political ambitions? Or will SB members/BRAC members egos get in the way and they’ll try to push for more changes, or try to protect their own areas from getting moved, even if they are in a split feeder or attendance island?

Feels a bit like some people are happy to throw others in these attendance islands or split feeders under a bus as long as they are left alone.

I’m agnostic as to whether they change split feeders or attendance islands. It does seem like split feeders are more likely to have people okay with boundary changes, but if the majority in those schools don’t want it changed, I’m wholly supportive of us all telling the school board to F off and don’t make any changes at all.

Seems pretty clear from the boundary meetings that that’s the overwhelming message.

Some of the board members seem to be really pushing for eliminating the split feeders and attendance islands. The islands usually have a much longer bus commute, and in lower income neighborhoods the long bus rides contribute to absenteeism. Families might not have a car, so if a kid misses the bus to a school 3 miles away, they are a lot more likely to miss school entirely vs. if they went to a closer school where they could walk or bike. And we all know how much FCPS is back to pushing attendance because it’s linked to school funding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just looked at a good chunk of the feedback for the in-person boundary meetings, and whoa boy the school board is walking into a buzz saw if they try to do anything more than fix split feeders.

It sounds like Thru is going to give the SB (and possibly the whole 100+ member BRAC?) a few maps with different options. It will be interesting to see what direction they go in. Just clean up the ES split feeders and attendance islands as much as possible, and call it a day to try to protect their future political ambitions? Or will SB members/BRAC members egos get in the way and they’ll try to push for more changes, or try to protect their own areas from getting moved, even if they are in a split feeder or attendance island?

Feels a bit like some people are happy to throw others in these attendance islands or split feeders under a bus as long as they are left alone.

I’m agnostic as to whether they change split feeders or attendance islands. It does seem like split feeders are more likely to have people okay with boundary changes, but if the majority in those schools don’t want it changed, I’m wholly supportive of us all telling the school board to F off and don’t make any changes at all.

Seems pretty clear from the boundary meetings that that’s the overwhelming message.

Some of the board members seem to be really pushing for eliminating the split feeders and attendance islands. The islands usually have a much longer bus commute, and in lower income neighborhoods the long bus rides contribute to absenteeism. Families might not have a car, so if a kid misses the bus to a school 3 miles away, they are a lot more likely to miss school entirely vs. if they went to a closer school where they could walk or bike. And we all know how much FCPS is back to pushing attendance because it’s linked to school funding.

Of course, they don’t need a comprehensive boundary review to fix a few split feeders or attendance islands.