Are you happy with Thoreau?

[Anonymous]

Back to the OP question
For those of you who have sent their kids to Thoreau instead of LJMS, how do you feel? Are your children challenged enough? Are you liking the level of instruction and feel it is adequate?

I don't think any school is perfect - and MS is a social emotional mess. We opted for TMS and- yea some downs (child adjusting) but overall very positive. We have had fantastic teachers- I am in awe of one teacher who ran with a student who was sick (throwing up) held the trash can with DS and talked them about having this bug before- taking them to the clinic. As hand holding as ES can be, Thoreau teachers been offering so much help that it's proving to be a great transition from ES to MS.

[Anonymous]

I went to Thorough when I was in MS. At the time it seemed preferable to LJ, but was still a bastion of mediocrity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m saying no one cares about her home’s value. Indeed, if possible, I care less about it with each post.

Try to stay on topic.

Someone above asked, “Are you saying Palchik didn't look out for LJ and Falls Church?” ThAts what I answered. You make a good point however and for the love of everything AAP related, don’t keep posting about your stupid home value in The aap forum. Please.

Who are you talking to? It sounds like you’ve lost your marbles. Several posters have observed that Palchik hasn’t been looking out for the schools in her district. LJ is in her district and has a declining AAP program.

That’s all on topic, unlike your repeated references to real estate, which you should take somewhere else.

How do you know the LJ Aap is "declining?" Do you have actual numbets or other criteria that says it is losing quality or numbers?

One telling statistic is that the enrollment at Jackson went down this year by considerably more than the enrollment at Thoreau increased (339 decline at Jackson vs. 265 increase at Thoreau). Another is that, in percentage terms, the number of white and Asian kids at Jackson declined considerably more than the number of Hispanic kids, who tend to be less advantaged. More details on LJ and its AAP program will emerge over time, but the data so far is not favorable. FCPS did a hatchet job on the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m saying no one cares about her home’s value. Indeed, if possible, I care less about it with each post.

Try to stay on topic.

Someone above asked, “Are you saying Palchik didn't look out for LJ and Falls Church?” ThAts what I answered. You make a good point however and for the love of everything AAP related, don’t keep posting about your stupid home value in The aap forum. Please.

Who are you talking to? It sounds like you’ve lost your marbles. Several posters have observed that Palchik hasn’t been looking out for the schools in her district. LJ is in her district and has a declining AAP program.

That’s all on topic, unlike your repeated references to real estate, which you should take somewhere else.

How do you know the LJ Aap is "declining?" Do you have actual numbets or other criteria that says it is losing quality or numbers?

One telling statistic is that the enrollment at Jackson went down this year by considerably more than the enrollment at Thoreau increased (339 decline at Jackson vs. 265 increase at Thoreau). Another is that, in percentage terms, the number of white and Asian kids at Jackson declined considerably more than the number of Hispanic kids, who tend to be less advantaged. More details on LJ and its AAP program will emerge over time, but the data so far is not favorable. FCPS did a hatchet job on the school.

very very shaky reasoning. Does anyone know the enrollment in the Jackson AAP 7th grade class? It doesn't mean that the program is declining even if the numbers decreased some. The program doesn't have to be 225 students to be a good program. FWIW, my kids don't go to LJ, but I have no reason to believe it is "declining" just because the overcrowding of the base school was reduced.

Regarding the enrollment going down by more than the enrollment increased at TMS -- that could be caused by a variety of reasons that have nothing to do with people fleeing LJ. You seem to be suggesting that more kids left LJ -- but instead of going to TMS, they went to other schools (private or other middle schools). It is more likely that the outgoing 8th grade class was the super large class (remember a few years back that there was an AAP bump up in this grade). And so, as that grade moved into HS, the enrollment in the middle schools decreased. You are trying to compare the size of the last 8th grade class (now 9th graders) to the size of the incoming 7th grade (+ incoming 8th graders who transferred to TMS). This seems like a dubious comparison ... and even more dubious to make claims regarding the "decline of the AAP at LJ" off of it.

I think we went over some of these stats in the first couple of pages of this thread, but here we go again:

Current stats (2018-19 school year):
Asian population at LJ: 23.8 %
White population at LJ: 24.4%

Last year stats (2017-18 school year):
Asian population at LJ: 25%
White population at LJ: 26%

Please stop lying with statistics. I have no reason to believe that LJ is in decline. In fact, they are probably better able to serve all of their students now that it isn't so crowded and they can put more attention on the needier kids. TMS is probably better positioned to handle a larger student population because it is overall less "needy." That said, I am not boosting one or the other. We had the choice and went with TMS b/c we are in Madison pyramid and wanted to connect to those kids (as my student was previously at MWES, DC did not know any kids from Madision pyramid). It worked for us, although the vast majority of MWES AAP kids were going to LJ.

The whole "whoa is me, whoa is LJ" (striking hand to forehead and pretending to faint) act is getting a little old.

[Anonymous]

You throw up a lot of numbers, without even recognizing the sharp changes in one year. The trends are clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You throw up a lot of numbers, without even recognizing the sharp changes in one year. The trends are clear.

A reduction in Asian students from 25% of the population (before rezoning) to 23.8% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."

A reduction in White students from 26% of the population(before the rezoing) to 24.4% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."

The actual number of Asian and white students (as well as every other group of students -- hispanic, black, multi-race, etc.) decreased BECAUSE THERE WAS A REZONING. That was the whole point of the rezoning --- TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF (Asian, white, black, hispanic, and all other) STUDENTS AT LJ.

It is a pity that you are having a hard time understanding this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You throw up a lot of numbers, without even recognizing the sharp changes in one year. The trends are clear.

A reduction in Asian students from 25% of the population (before rezoning) to 23.8% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."

A reduction in White students from 26% of the population(before the rezoing) to 24.4% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."

The actual number of Asian and white students (as well as every other group of students -- hispanic, black, multi-race, etc.) decreased BECAUSE THERE WAS A REZONING. That was the whole point of the rezoning --- TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF (Asian, white, black, hispanic, and all other) STUDENTS AT LJ.

It is a pity that you are having a hard time understanding this.

This. a million times this. It is like arguing with an idiot. And...she doesn't even have kids at either school...she throws this crap out in the hopes that the decision will change and her property value will increase. The truth is that LJ was doing fine before and is fine now and Thoreau is doing fine now and was fine before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You throw up a lot of numbers, without even recognizing the sharp changes in one year. The trends are clear.

A reduction in Asian students from 25% of the population (before rezoning) to 23.8% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."

A reduction in White students from 26% of the population(before the rezoing) to 24.4% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."

The actual number of Asian and white students (as well as every other group of students -- hispanic, black, multi-race, etc.) decreased BECAUSE THERE WAS A REZONING. That was the whole point of the rezoning --- TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF (Asian, white, black, hispanic, and all other) STUDENTS AT LJ.

It is a pity that you are having a hard time understanding this.

This. a million times this. It is like arguing with an idiot. And...she doesn't even have kids at either school...she throws this crap out in the hopes that the decision will change and her property value will increase. The truth is that LJ was doing fine before and is fine now and Thoreau is doing fine now and was fine before.

Keep telling yourself that. It's in the CIP that Thoreau is now projected to me the most overcrowded middle school in FCPS in a few years. And you don't appear to understand (1) how the white/Asian demographics at Jackson are changing more rapidly than the Hispanic demographics and (2) how these trends invariably play out over longer periods.

FCPS has played this game before, and we have multiple "basket case" schools to show for it. Jackson will be another one.

[Anonymous]

Must.resist.arguing.with.idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You throw up a lot of numbers, without even recognizing the sharp changes in one year. The trends are clear.

A reduction in Asian students from 25% of the population (before rezoning) to 23.8% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."

A reduction in White students from 26% of the population(before the rezoing) to 24.4% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."

The actual number of Asian and white students (as well as every other group of students -- hispanic, black, multi-race, etc.) decreased BECAUSE THERE WAS A REZONING. That was the whole point of the rezoning --- TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF (Asian, white, black, hispanic, and all other) STUDENTS AT LJ.

It is a pity that you are having a hard time understanding this.

This. a million times this. It is like arguing with an idiot. And...she doesn't even have kids at either school...she throws this crap out in the hopes that the decision will change and her property value will increase. The truth is that LJ was doing fine before and is fine now and Thoreau is doing fine now and was fine before.

Keep telling yourself that. It's in the CIP that Thoreau is now projected to me the most overcrowded middle school in FCPS in a few years. And you don't appear to understand (1) how the white/Asian demographics at Jackson are changing more rapidly than the Hispanic demographics and (2) how these trends invariably play out over longer periods.

FCPS has played this game before, and we have multiple "basket case" schools to show for it. Jackson will be another one.

How is any of this answering the questions asked about academics at Thoreau?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You throw up a lot of numbers, without even recognizing the sharp changes in one year. The trends are clear.

A reduction in Asian students from 25% of the population (before rezoning) to 23.8% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."

A reduction in White students from 26% of the population(before the rezoing) to 24.4% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."

The actual number of Asian and white students (as well as every other group of students -- hispanic, black, multi-race, etc.) decreased BECAUSE THERE WAS A REZONING. That was the whole point of the rezoning --- TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF (Asian, white, black, hispanic, and all other) STUDENTS AT LJ.

It is a pity that you are having a hard time understanding this.

This. a million times this. It is like arguing with an idiot. And...she doesn't even have kids at either school...she throws this crap out in the hopes that the decision will change and her property value will increase. The truth is that LJ was doing fine before and is fine now and Thoreau is doing fine now and was fine before.

Keep telling yourself that. It's in the CIP that Thoreau is now projected to me the most overcrowded middle school in FCPS in a few years. And you don't appear to understand (1) how the white/Asian demographics at Jackson are changing more rapidly than the Hispanic demographics and (2) how these trends invariably play out over longer periods.

FCPS has played this game before, and we have multiple "basket case" schools to show for it. Jackson will be another one.

How is any of this answering the questions asked about academics at Thoreau?!

She always chimes in with this gibberish. And I’m sure she’ll think it’s a single person asking her to refrain from providing non responsive answers, esp when she has NO KIDS at these schools!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You throw up a lot of numbers, without even recognizing the sharp changes in one year. The trends are clear.

A reduction in Asian students from 25% of the population (before rezoning) to 23.8% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."

A reduction in White students from 26% of the population(before the rezoing) to 24.4% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."

The actual number of Asian and white students (as well as every other group of students -- hispanic, black, multi-race, etc.) decreased BECAUSE THERE WAS A REZONING. That was the whole point of the rezoning --- TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF (Asian, white, black, hispanic, and all other) STUDENTS AT LJ.

It is a pity that you are having a hard time understanding this.

This. a million times this. It is like arguing with an idiot. And...she doesn't even have kids at either school...she throws this crap out in the hopes that the decision will change and her property value will increase. The truth is that LJ was doing fine before and is fine now and Thoreau is doing fine now and was fine before.

Keep telling yourself that. It's in the CIP that Thoreau is now projected to me the most overcrowded middle school in FCPS in a few years. And you don't appear to understand (1) how the white/Asian demographics at Jackson are changing more rapidly than the Hispanic demographics and (2) how these trends invariably play out over longer periods.

FCPS has played this game before, and we have multiple "basket case" schools to show for it. Jackson will be another one.

How is any of this answering the questions asked about academics at Thoreau?!

She always chimes in with this gibberish. And I’m sure she’ll think it’s a single person asking her to refrain from providing non responsive answers, esp when she has NO KIDS at these schools!!!

I think it's better when someone chimes in without kids at either school. Means they are looking at things without bias.

[Anonymous]

NP here- Thoreau has been challenging enough and the teachers have been engaged that as a minimum for MS it has been very good. What makes it much above average is that the teachers are engaged/supportive. My kid had a hard time at first- teachers saw that - I am so appreciative of how far ad beyond the teachers have done that I can only say we have been very pleased with TMS. We don't even look back at the possibility of Luther- two different worlds.

[Anonymous]

Nice sockpuppeting. OP asked, “For those of you who have sent their kids to Thoreau instead of LJMS, how do you feel? Are your children challenged enough? Are you liking the level of instruction and feel it is adequate?” And you claim that someone answering who had no kids at either school is better, bc then there is no bias...

This is why we can’t argue with you. You make no sense, contribute little other than your repeated histrionic arguments and you prattle on and on (and on and on).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nice sockpuppeting. OP asked, “For those of you who have sent their kids to Thoreau instead of LJMS, how do you feel? Are your children challenged enough? Are you liking the level of instruction and feel it is adequate?” And you claim that someone answering who had no kids at either school is better, bc then there is no bias...

This is why we can’t argue with you. You make no sense, contribute little other than your repeated histrionic arguments and you prattle on and on (and on and on).

Feel free to ask Jeff whether 22:13 is the same poster as 12:27. Different posters.

Your extreme defensiveness suggests a reluctance to recognize the obvious.