FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alexandria City Schools had a meeting this week about redistricting. The minutes show a presentation on current boundaries, changes based on school proximity, changes based on capacity, and more. It talks about all the factors they are pulling in with the strategic plan called “equity for all”. I would imagine these maps and GIS data is the same FCPS will be using. If our neighbor county is doing this, it is for sure happening to Fairfax.

Do they still just have one giant high school in Alexandria? Seems like they need two.

website lists two "campuses" for the high school.

Somehow, FCPS following the lead of Alexandria City Public Schools does not give me confidence in this boundary plan.

[Anonymous]

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/fcps-boundary-review-faces-concerns-despite-claims-of-transparency/article_5163cb5c-efab-11ef-b945-5b3343dc4582.html

quote from article:
According to the school board, FCPS will reap benefits from the review. Based on educational research reviewed by the FCPS Office of Research and Strategic Improvement, “Boundary adjustment decisions [b]may be linked to better student achievement through instructional quality, budget optimization, and enhanced student well-being; these outcomes will help to ensure that each and every student reaches their greatest potential.”[/b]

"may" be linked to better outcomes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alexandria City Schools had a meeting this week about redistricting. The minutes show a presentation on current boundaries, changes based on school proximity, changes based on capacity, and more. It talks about all the factors they are pulling in with the strategic plan called “equity for all”. I would imagine these maps and GIS data is the same FCPS will be using. If our neighbor county is doing this, it is for sure happening to Fairfax.

Right? Their boundary adjustment examples are using the elementary schools and are pretty extreme in my opinion.

There’s officially no way FCPS will let ACPS do theirs and then say “we didn’t go through with it because parents were upset with us”. Ugh!!!

Do they still just have one giant high school in Alexandria? Seems like they need two.

website lists two "campuses" for the high school.

Somehow, FCPS following the lead of Alexandria City Public Schools does not give me confidence in this boundary plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/fcps-boundary-review-faces-concerns-despite-claims-of-transparency/article_5163cb5c-efab-11ef-b945-5b3343dc4582.html

quote from article:
According to the school board, FCPS will reap benefits from the review. Based on educational research reviewed by the FCPS Office of Research and Strategic Improvement, “Boundary adjustment decisions [b]may be linked to better student achievement through instructional quality, budget optimization, and enhanced student well-being; these outcomes will help to ensure that each and every student reaches their greatest potential.”[/b]

"may" be linked to better outcomes?

Get the feds to withhold funds from FCPS until they clean up their act and stop treating kids as widgets to advance their equity agenda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alexandria City Schools had a meeting this week about redistricting. The minutes show a presentation on current boundaries, changes based on school proximity, changes based on capacity, and more. It talks about all the factors they are pulling in with the strategic plan called “equity for all”. I would imagine these maps and GIS data is the same FCPS will be using. If our neighbor county is doing this, it is for sure happening to Fairfax.

Their map draft examples use the elementary schools. The changes seem pretty extreme to me!

No way will FCPS let ACPS do this and backed down because of parent opposition. It’s happening.

Do they still just have one giant high school in Alexandria? Seems like they need two.

website lists two "campuses" for the high school.

Somehow, FCPS following the lead of Alexandria City Public Schools does not give me confidence in this boundary plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alexandria City Schools had a meeting this week about redistricting. The minutes show a presentation on current boundaries, changes based on school proximity, changes based on capacity, and more. It talks about all the factors they are pulling in with the strategic plan called “equity for all”. I would imagine these maps and GIS data is the same FCPS will be using. If our neighbor county is doing this, it is for sure happening to Fairfax.

Right? Their boundary adjustment examples are using the elementary schools and are pretty extreme in my opinion.

There’s officially no way FCPS will let ACPS do theirs and then say “we didn’t go through with it because parents were upset with us”. Ugh!!!

Do they still just have one giant high school in Alexandria? Seems like they need two.

website lists two "campuses" for the high school.

Somehow, FCPS following the lead of Alexandria City Public Schools does not give me confidence in this boundary plan.

Right? Their boundary adjustment examples are using the elementary schools and are pretty extreme in my opinion.

There’s officially no way FCPS will let ACPS do theirs and then say “we didn’t go through with it because parents were upset with us”. Ugh!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What a piece of garbage, wow. I shouldn’t have read the recommendations (p. 42) before bed, because they got my blood pressure up.

So, i went to the recommendations. "Garbage" is putting it mildly. Gibberish. And, lots more training. Now, let's guess--which consultant will get the contract for all this training? How much time will be spent training the principal and teachers. Lots of recommendations for more "experts" in the school who work with teachers--not kids.

Here's one of my favorites

Improve educator knowledge and skills regarding advanced learning and advanced learners
(Recommendation 4). The review team recommends a rethinking of who receives such training and
how that training is administered, with a priority being professional development for central
administrators and principals. The next priority would be continuing and strengthening professional
development of AART staff given the importance of AARTs to the success of advanced academic
programs in each school. Finally, all classroom teachers in FCPS should have an understanding of the
needs of diverse, advanced learners, including comprehensive knowledge of the Young Scholars
program and how best to support participating students. Providing access, including provision of
substitute teachers, should be a priority given the high quality professional development
programming that has already been developed.

Wonder how much FCPS paid for this study.

"Examination of the initial universal screening cutoff score. The current cut scores for NNAT or CogAT are extremely high – only the top ~2% of students in the country would be expected to be further considered for identification and placement in Level IV Centers, even fewer from traditionally underrepresented groups. If the referral pathway was restricted, the universal screening cut scores could be lowered without overburdening the Central Selection Committee process. Furthermore, if local (i.e., building-level) norms were used to make placements, the cut scores would (and should) vary considerably among building. "

How is it equal or fair to have "considerable" cut off thresholds for access to AAP based on equity goals, while actively trying to cut off access to the AAP program for specific demographics?

The school board and Reid are actively trying to discriminate against certain demographics during the rezoning process to create unequal access to the gifted program in the name of equity??

My understanding is the point of AAP is basically for a differentiated learning environment when a student's needs orpotential can't adequately be met in a GenEd classroom. Given that the overall level and pace of learning in GenEd classrooms can vary substantially by school site, it would seem obvious that the thresholds for differentiated learning in an AAP classroom should likewise vary substantially by school site.

Students in general education receive the same curriculum across the county regardless of the class has a cohort of students in the 98th/99th percentile that didn’t qualify for in pool cut off at their schools. The school doesn’t have to provide a differentiated learning environment or curriculum. This is 💯 not equitable with students having scores 10-20 points lower on cogat/NNAT qualifying at lower schools. These kids all get sent to the same AAP center schools. So you have kids at some schools that have to have 138 cogat scores and kids with 120 cogat scores at the centers and then leave the highly gifted kids at base schools with 98th/99th percentile IQs to be with a similar cohort of highly gifted kids who don’t qualify for the program?

"Receiving the same curriculum", sure, technically true; but the classroom experience and how they move through that material or how much depth they cover is clearly NOT the same from one class to the next. We have teachers, not robots. Even in the same school there's going to be classroom-to-classroom differences, but they'll be relatively minor, but this is part of why certain teachers are preferred or sought after in each school. It's not as simple as "the curriculum". But to think that this isn't true across schools and that there aren't DRAMATIC differences in GenEd classroom experiences across the county is a position that is rather hard to take seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The school profile shows I was incorrect. It is Level 3, not level 4 that most of the non ESL students are in.

Level 3 AAP is a joke. Once a week pull out to work on something different for like an hour, provided your kid doesn't have it on a Monday or Friday where it seems like you miss it altogether at least once a month. Those kids are all still stuck in classes with the ESL kids, learning at the ESL pace.

[Anonymous]

Graham Road, Pine Spring and Timber Lane ES (all title 1) go to Mantua AAP Center (umc neighborhood)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Graham Road, Pine Spring and Timber Lane ES (all title 1) go to Mantua AAP Center (umc neighborhood)

Those are all Falls Church feeders, right? Definitely can see why they might want to go ahead and move Mantua to Jackson/Falls Church.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Graham Road, Pine Spring and Timber Lane ES (all title 1) go to Mantua AAP Center (umc neighborhood)

Those are all Falls Church feeders, right? Definitely can see why they might want to go ahead and move Mantua to Jackson/Falls Church.

Your forgetting that the Mantua neighborhood is basically right across the street from Woodson HS. It makes zero sense to move to the Falls Church HS pyramid just because some of the AAP feeders are assigned to Mantua. It would make more sense to have an AAP feeder in the Falls Church pyramid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Graham Road, Pine Spring and Timber Lane ES (all title 1) go to Mantua AAP Center (umc neighborhood)

Those are all Falls Church feeders, right? Definitely can see why they might want to go ahead and move Mantua to Jackson/Falls Church.

Your forgetting that the Mantua neighborhood is basically right across the street from Woodson HS. It makes zero sense to move to the Falls Church HS pyramid just because some of the AAP feeders are assigned to Mantua. It would make more sense to have an AAP feeder in the Falls Church pyramid.

It's adjacent to Camelot, which is in the Falls Church pyramid. Looking at the enrollment projections, maybe they just move a 1/4 or 1/3 of Mantua to Camelot and leave the rest of Mantua at Woodson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Graham Road, Pine Spring and Timber Lane ES (all title 1) go to Mantua AAP Center (umc neighborhood)

Those are all Falls Church feeders, right? Definitely can see why they might want to go ahead and move Mantua to Jackson/Falls Church.

Your forgetting that the Mantua neighborhood is basically right across the street from Woodson HS. It makes zero sense to move to the Falls Church HS pyramid just because some of the AAP feeders are assigned to Mantua. It would make more sense to have an AAP feeder in the Falls Church pyramid.

It's adjacent to Camelot, which is in the Falls Church pyramid. Looking at the enrollment projections, maybe they just move a 1/4 or 1/3 of Mantua to Camelot and leave the rest of Mantua at Woodson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Could someone explain Reid's vision for UPK. Is it full day? Half day? Everyday?
Certified teachers?

Maybe Reid is talking about UPK because they can’t redistrict based upon DEI factors now. If she doesn’t have a ‘reason” DEI will become more obvious and leave FCPS more open for law suits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What a piece of garbage, wow. I shouldn’t have read the recommendations (p. 42) before bed, because they got my blood pressure up.

So, i went to the recommendations. "Garbage" is putting it mildly. Gibberish. And, lots more training. Now, let's guess--which consultant will get the contract for all this training? How much time will be spent training the principal and teachers. Lots of recommendations for more "experts" in the school who work with teachers--not kids.

Here's one of my favorites

Improve educator knowledge and skills regarding advanced learning and advanced learners
(Recommendation 4). The review team recommends a rethinking of who receives such training and
how that training is administered, with a priority being professional development for central
administrators and principals. The next priority would be continuing and strengthening professional
development of AART staff given the importance of AARTs to the success of advanced academic
programs in each school. Finally, all classroom teachers in FCPS should have an understanding of the
needs of diverse, advanced learners, including comprehensive knowledge of the Young Scholars
program and how best to support participating students. Providing access, including provision of
substitute teachers, should be a priority given the high quality professional development
programming that has already been developed.

Wonder how much FCPS paid for this study.

"Examination of the initial universal screening cutoff score. The current cut scores for NNAT or CogAT are extremely high – only the top ~2% of students in the country would be expected to be further considered for identification and placement in Level IV Centers, even fewer from traditionally underrepresented groups. If the referral pathway was restricted, the universal screening cut scores could be lowered without overburdening the Central Selection Committee process. Furthermore, if local (i.e., building-level) norms were used to make placements, the cut scores would (and should) vary considerably among building. "

How is it equal or fair to have "considerable" cut off thresholds for access to AAP based on equity goals, while actively trying to cut off access to the AAP program for specific demographics?

The school board and Reid are actively trying to discriminate against certain demographics during the rezoning process to create unequal access to the gifted program in the name of equity??

No. That reads that they have to lower the cut score to allow enough kids into local AAP to make a decent class size. Which is exactly why they need to keep the centers. Many of us have been saying that the cohorts in local level IV are not strong enough academically for this exact reason. Our center also requires all AAP teachers to be certified to teach gifted children.

AAP is NOT Gifted. And, this "study" proves it.

That doesn't matter. It satisfies the VA requirement to teach gifted students. Cry about it.