Fairfax County: McLean Citizens Association demands smaller class sizes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The random and huge disparities in all aspects are what's maddening about FCPS schools. One elementary school has an expansive property, three playgrounds and a climbing wall. Another has 18 students per class. Another has 36 students per class. Some kids get PE three times a week. Some have to eat lunch at 10 am. And on and on. I think it breeds resentment.

Who has a climbing wall!? (starts to feel resentful...)

All the schools I've been to have them. It's not that big a deal actually. Probably was an in vogue thing for the PTA to raise money for several years back. It runs along one of the short sides of the gym and has mats covering it. It's probably about 6' tall. The kids can climb from one side of the gym to the other on it.

None in my area have this. I can't even conceive of our PTA having the money for it. How much would that cost?

[Anonymous]

Why don't they just make all class sizes equal and base teacher assignments on student ratios?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Title one classes are capped around 21 students so she doesn't have to worry.

They are only capped (and I'm not sure what the cap is) until 3rd grade. And then there is no cap.

I don't think it's right to have classes over 30 kids. I think a cap of 25 is asking too much. I think suggesting that non-Title 1 classes be capped at only 4 more kids than Title 1 classes is preposterous because the needs at impoverished schools are so great. I think 28-30 per class is reasonable and that there should be no more than 30, regardless of the FRL percentage. Assuming the classrooms can accommodate 30 desks, of course. Fire Marshals, anyone?

I would support a measure that would cap class sizes at 30, but would not support taking away needs-based staffing.

I could be wrong, but i wonder if those classes that have a low number of kids is driven by the caps. Hypothetically, if there are 45 kids in a school area in a Title 1 school and the cap is indeed 21 per class, then it's not legal to have only 2 classes of 23 and 22 kids. There would have to be 3 classes of 15 each. Either that, or you have to combine grade levels in one class, which is not ideal, and would probably be difficult in a high FRL, possibly high ESL setting.

Taxes may have to go up, which I would support. That being said, I think developer proffers have to go way up as well (which is something the School Board is looking at), particularly if they want to develop in areas without sufficient school capacity.

The only other option is redrawing the boundary lines. This might mean taking some kids out of the 35-kid McLean classrooms and putting them in other schools, which I bet would meet resistance (just read any thread in which someone suggests moving kids to Falls Church HS). Parents rightfully complain about too-large class size, but don't want to pay more taxes and don't want to be the ones who have to move to schools with available capacity because the schools are perceived as lesser. So what's the solution? Are there empty classrooms in McLean just waiting for FCPS to allow them to hire another teacher? If not, then where are those extra kids going? A trailer?

I think most parents would accept a cap of 27 in grades 1-3 and 30 in grades 4-6 both including level 2 children, but after a new child comes in above the cap anytime during the year they want a new teacher and classroom that includes under 30 kids for specials too.

[Anonymous]

In some schools there are empty classrooms that are used as auxiliary rooms or storage in McLean, Vienna, and Great Falls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In some schools there are empty classrooms that are used as auxiliary rooms or storage in McLean, Vienna, and Great Falls.

what schools?

[Anonymous]

Really? Because my son's first grade class has amost 30 students and I haven't seen an empty classroom. The classes need to be smaller and I would happily pay higher taxes if they went directly to reducing class size at our school. Having an active PTA means everyone is involved. There are lots of fundraisers and events, which means you spend lots of money all year. Yes, the school benefits from the PTA. It's one of the reasons we moved here. I'm not sure if the PTA purchased our climbing wall but if they did, it's small. Why not if they can afford it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In some schools there are empty classrooms that are used as auxiliary rooms or storage in McLean, Vienna, and Great Falls.

Not at Colvin Run in Vienna... which schools are you referring to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are 1st-3rd grade classes with 10 students in them and others with over 30. It's gotten completely out of whack and I don't blame parents for being upset. There should not be that much discrepancy. I haven't read the demand, but most parents just think things need to be shifted a bit so that all class sizes are a bit more manageable and the difference between the largest and smallest class size in FCPS for the same grade is a little smaller than 20 plus students.

Maybe those overly burdened Mc lean kids should be bused to the Title 1 schools with 10 kids per class.

That sounds wonderful. I'd like to nominate you for school board.

Second.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In some schools there are empty classrooms that are used as auxiliary rooms or storage in McLean, Vienna, and Great Falls.

Not at Colvin Run in Vienna... which schools are you referring to?

Nor Chesterbrook or Haycock.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need to reopen Clifton ES. Those other ES schools in the area are really over crowded.

+1

Rebuild and reopen it. Solve one problem.

Thank you. Dr Garza are you listening?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need to reopen Clifton ES. Those other ES schools in the area are really over crowded.

+1

Rebuild and reopen it. Solve one problem.

Thank you. Dr Garza are you listening?

I think her listening tour is tonight at Falls Church HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Title one classes are capped around 21 students so she doesn't have to worry.

They are only capped (and I'm not sure what the cap is) until 3rd grade. And then there is no cap.

I don't think it's right to have classes over 30 kids. I think a cap of 25 is asking too much. I think suggesting that non-Title 1 classes be capped at only 4 more kids than Title 1 classes is preposterous because the needs at impoverished schools are so great. I think 28-30 per class is reasonable and that there should be no more than 30, regardless of the FRL percentage. Assuming the classrooms can accommodate 30 desks, of course. Fire Marshals, anyone?

I would support a measure that would cap class sizes at 30, but would not support taking away needs-based staffing.

I could be wrong, but i wonder if those classes that have a low number of kids is driven by the caps. Hypothetically, if there are 45 kids in a school area in a Title 1 school and the cap is indeed 21 per class, then it's not legal to have only 2 classes of 23 and 22 kids. There would have to be 3 classes of 15 each. Either that, or you have to combine grade levels in one class, which is not ideal, and would probably be difficult in a high FRL, possibly high ESL setting.

Taxes may have to go up, which I would support. That being said, I think developer proffers have to go way up as well (which is something the School Board is looking at), particularly if they want to develop in areas without sufficient school capacity.

The only other option is redrawing the boundary lines. This might mean taking some kids out of the 35-kid McLean classrooms and putting them in other schools, which I bet would meet resistance (just read any thread in which someone suggests moving kids to Falls Church HS). Parents rightfully complain about too-large class size, but don't want to pay more taxes and don't want to be the ones who have to move to schools with available capacity because the schools are perceived as lesser. So what's the solution? Are there empty classrooms in McLean just waiting for FCPS to allow them to hire another teacher? If not, then where are those extra kids going? A trailer?

I'm sure that next, after they ram this through, the MCAs next letter to the school board will include a request for another school improvement bond, even though we just had one in 2013, or higher taxes for all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Really? Because my son's first grade class has amost 30 students and I haven't seen an empty classroom. The classes need to be smaller and I would happily pay higher taxes if they went directly to reducing class size at our school. Having an active PTA means everyone is involved. There are lots of fundraisers and events, which means you spend lots of money all year. Yes, the school benefits from the PTA. It's one of the reasons we moved here. I'm not sure if the PTA purchased our climbing wall but if they did, it's small. Why not if they can afford it.

Doubtful that the PTA was involved in the climbing wall installation. If it was, it is now singing a different tune because from what I've read, PTAs discourage their chapters from spending $ on playgrounds due to the liability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The title of your thread is kind of misleading. The MCA didn't "demand" smaller class sizes. It adopted a resolution urging FCPS to narrow - but not eliminate - the current differences in class sizes.

The issue has been percolating for years, but the School Board has continued to let classes in McLean, Vienna and Great Falls get larger. Test scores remain very high, of course, but the parents see how much smaller the classes are elsewhere in FCPS, as well as in APS and FCCPS, and they feel short-changed and taken for granted.

I would love to know what the average McLean household pays in property taxes - I bet it isn't much more than my husband and I pay, and we are zoned for a title 1 school. Believe it or not, there are pockets of nice properties in other parts of the of the county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The title of your thread is kind of misleading. The MCA didn't "demand" smaller class sizes. It adopted a resolution urging FCPS to narrow - but not eliminate - the current differences in class sizes.

The issue has been percolating for years, but the School Board has continued to let classes in McLean, Vienna and Great Falls get larger. Test scores remain very high, of course, but the parents see how much smaller the classes are elsewhere in FCPS, as well as in APS and FCCPS, and they feel short-changed and taken for granted.

I would love to know what the average McLean household pays in property taxes - I bet it isn't much more than my husband and I pay, and we are zoned for a title 1 school. Believe it or not, there are pockets of nice properties in other parts of the of the county.

What is your point? Your children do not have the larger class sizes and benefit from the additional resources from the county and elsewhere.