Reply to Sandy Anderson email

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "Sandy Anderson email "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Once again, FCPS is looking thru their equity lens; this a part of the great plan to boost achievement and of course lessen the FARMS numbers. I hope parents refuse to accept this arrangement.

[/quote]

These equity moves only reduce the % of FARMS within the school's population, the moves do not lessen the FARMS numbers or help the existing FARMS population.  One of two things will happen when high SES kids are cut over to Lewis as tribute:  1) They will immediately start taking opportunities that existing Lewis kids previously had like leadership/sports/club positions, to the detriment of the current Lewis population, or 2) Non-assimilation of the new 'rich kids', the face of which will be the white population. Lewis had 196 white students in 2023. The equity move will increase this number to 396, assuming an entire ES is moved over (4 HS grades, 100 students per grade, 50% white).  It will be no secret to the entire student body, and particularly a 63% FARMS population that 'rich kids' were imported to make the failing school better, and the face of the imported 'rich kids' will be the white population that doubles in size from 10% to 20%.  And yes, WSHS area is not Vienna/McLean/Tysons 'rich', but even small things like driving a car to school and having premium sports equipment makes one a target of resent.  If I was a non-white and/or FARMS student I would resent these new kids and treat them differently, and with good reason. The message that the SB is unintentionally sending to these Lewis students (88% non-white) is that they are not good enough, so bring in the rich kids to make things better.  And because of the existing Lewis population and the population that's projected to move over, the white kids will be seen as the 'rich kids'.

In any case, this is going to be a highly consequential social experiment within the school and a social and socioeconomic experience for whatever community is given as tribute to Lewis.  I believe it will achieve equity goals for making living in West Springfield more on par with Springfield.  Over the next 10 years you will see a yet-to-be-determined West Springfield neighborhood area decline at the community level in both property values and the quality of people living in the community.  Think some areas of Woodbridge circa 2008 housing crash and the decline of those areas as new populations flooded in.  This boundary transaction will be the example pointed to as families pay a premium for proximity to high schools that are not adjacent to urban population centers with section 8 housing and apartment dense areas.  [/quote]

Nonsense.

The power to overhaul boundaries every five years means the school board will prevent people from sorting themselves inequitably.

All schools will be maintained at an acceptable mix of socioeconomic and racial diversity.[/quote]

What party is for providing some additional support and resources when needed to disadvantaged kids but not using other people’s kids as resources?

That’s the party that I’d like to belong to.  Your vision is junk IMO and way worse than the conservative views on education, which I’m also not really into.  Unfortunately, I think that Sandy Anderson and crew are aligned with your view.

Wish this board could just be moderate rather than extreme.[/quote]
I’ve watched a handful of school board meetings and work sessions, and what you describe falls in line with the vision they’re presenting. The students they talk about moving are the ones in attendance islands that are bused to schools outside of their communities like Halley, Fort Hunt, and Groveton. They’ve mentioned academies for improving enrollment and shifting AP Center assignments. This isn’t to discredit parents concerns, as we have no idea what boundary changes are actually going to be presented, and they’ve done little to ease the rampant rumors. [/quote]

In the three named examples, don’t the attendance islands exist to “provide equity”? They’re all examples of bussing poor kids to a better school. Hagel Circle is literally carved from the Lorton Station boundary. The Fort Hunt island is wild, but doesn’t involve bussing wealthy kids to the school. Almost all of the elementary schools in the Ft. Hunt/South of Old Town area besides Waynewood have similar boundaries. Removing the attendance islands will improve the schools where they currently exist at, but drag down wherever those islands are moved. 
[/quote]

They can eliminate the islands or they can potentially redraw the boundaries to bridge the islands to the main attendance area, but in many cases the latter would also result in highly gerrymandered boundaries.

So they probably need to just eliminate the islands, consistent with the stated goal of reducing transportation times and accepting that this may mean higher concentrations of poverty at some schools.  They can't really have it both ways. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics