Reply to APS Duran School Performance Email - Is Long Branch a Failing School?

Forum Index » VA Public Schools other than FCPS

Reply to "APS Duran School Performance Email - Is Long Branch a Failing School?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This is classic MAGA tactics. They try to take credit for things the Dems did. Like the law that was sponsored by a DEM.

All on a thread that tries to bash Duran. [b]They now say they are happy about something Duran did while lying and saying it was forced by the state law. When it wasn't. Read the actual law. Don't believe their lies.[/b] [/quote]

The notes from the Jan 20, 2025 Math Advisory Committee explicitly say that Math 6 Advanced was recommended in response to the new law. It’s in the very first yellow highlighted section. APS was not going to offer this class without the new law.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/sites/57/2025/05/Math-Advisory-Committee-Recommendation-2024-25-Updated-April-2025.pdf
[/quote]

Read the law. The law does not require it. The math advisory committee is just a bunch of APE parents now. Hardly experts. [/quote]

Why are you such a troll? Here’s the discussion from the linked document. It very clearly lays out the requirements in the law and why a new course was created between math 6 and pre-algebra.

“ HB 2686 became state law this spring.1 It requires school districts to enroll all students
who score in the “top 25% in VA” on the 5th grade SOL into an advanced course in 6th grade.
MAC estimates, based on APS’s past SOL scores, that this will result in about 50% of APS’s 6th
graders being placed into an advanced course.
Currently APS offers two courses: Math 6 and 6th grade Prealgebra. Enrollment
recently has been split roughly 85% for Math 6 and 15% for Prealgebra. MAC does not believe
that the extra 35% of student that would be required by state law to be placed into an advanced
course would be successful in 6th grade Prealgebra. This provides APS with 3 options: (1)
Place the 35% of students into a course where they will struggle, (2) water down the course so
that the 35% can be successful but then the 15% are deprived of the course for their level and
neither set of students would be prepared to take Algebra 1 in 7th grade, or (3) create a third
course more suited to this 35% group of students. MAC strongly recommends this 3rd
option.”[/quote]

That’s the advisory committee’s report. That leaves out some important parts of the law. It’s a false narrative. Why are you pushing it instead of looking to the actual law? I guess you want to push this narrative too. It’s obvious who you are. [/quote]
You're accusing an APS committee of creating a false narrative that doesn't benefit APS?  That makes no sense.  If you were paying attention, you'd understand that the committee summary is entirely accurate.[/quote]

Read the law and compare it to the committee summary. Either the committee is incompetent or pushing a false narrative. You’re on the committee obviously. [/quote] The law and the committee summary aren't going to be the same. The committee summary is about implementing the law, whereas the law is the law. No one expects them to be identical. That's not how it works[/quote]

The report left out a crucial part for implementing. I think intentionally.[/quote]
The Virginia Department of Education has set implementation guidelines that aren't in the law.  That's how legislation and implementation works.

https://www.doe.virginia.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/62992/638943908317530000[/quote]

VDOE tracks the law but the math report doesn't track either one. YOu are a MAGA APE pushing your lies. Anyone who wants the real truth should look to the law or VDOE. [/quote]

Are you running a false flag operation? Your resistance to reality is making APE look better just because you hate them. [/quote]

you're so trumpian, you've been called out repeateldy and your lies exposed. why can't you admit APS did something right here? Oh yeah we know why. [/quote]

You haven’t exposed any lies. You’re just nuts. [/quote]

Your lies:
That the bill was Youngkin's
That the bill requires Math 6 advanced
that the math report is accurate

anyone can see you are lying. you are persistent Mr. Maga APE! [/quote]
Youngkin signed the bill and his administration rolled out the implementing guidance.  Before Youngkin, the prior dem administration was proposing to greatly curtail advanced math in Virginia public schools.

The law requires districts to offer advanced math to more students, which compelled APS to offer another advanced math class since not all advanced math students are ready for Pre-algebra in 6th.  If you are familiar with legislation, you'd know that it wouldn't require a specific class.  It has to be implemented.

You haven't identified anything in the Math Advisory Committee minutes that's incorrect.

You accuse me of lying, but I've posted to VDOE and the statute.  You just spew names and baseless accusations.[/quote]

The law was sponsored by a Dem. All Youngkin did was sign it. Of course his admin rolled out the guidance, they had to. That's how it works. Now the new admin will take that over, again because that's how it works. The governor implements the laws.

The law requires automatic opt ins to advanced courses subject to availabilty of the advanced courses. It does not require a district to offer advanced courese and it doesn't require them to offer additional advanced courses.

The math committee makes it sounds like there is a hard requirement to put a certain number of kids in advanced math and says that means there won't be enough spots in the pre algebra or pre algebra wouldn't be the right course, so APS should create a second lower advanced course. But that's not what the law or the VDOE guidance says. The law/VDOE only requires opt ins subject to availability. That's an important point. So if there are not available slots already, it's lot required. [/quote]
Youngkin campaigned on this issue, so it wasn't that he just signed the bill.  It was part of his platform.  I'm not a Youngkin fan and I don't think the bill was particularly well written, but I'm super glad it was passed because it is helping students.

The issue with Pre-algebra wasn't availability--there are teachers available to teach the course and it was being offered. The issue was that the additional students weren't prepared for it.  So yeah, MAC was correct that those students needed to be offered an advanced or accelerated math option per the law.  They looked at three options and chose to offer a new class.  I think they know APS parents would have rioted if they'd chosen the option to get rid of Pre-algebra (math 6-7-8) in 6th grade, so APS's feet were to the fire.[/quote]

I agree with MAC's recomendtion for the new class. But your claim that it was required by the new law is just bogus. This was an APS decision. That's it. It was a good one, but you can't give APS credit. Why not? It's weird unless your true agenda is to undermine public ed. And Dems.

IDC what Youngkin campaigned on. This was not "his law" as you claimed. It is a DEM law. He just didn't veto it, that's all. It's not a Youngkin law and it's not even a republican law. It's a DEM law. But you will never give credit to Dems. Look at the gymnastics you're trying to pull to try to give your guy credit where it's not due.

[/quote]You can't call it a Democrat law when it was signed by a Republican governor and had two Republican co-sponsors (Mike Cherry and Carrie Coyner).  I'm a dem, but am still super upset that the prior dem administration tried to gut advanced math in Virginia.

MAC thought that they were required to take action in view of the new law, and considered three options.  You are reading the statue in some bizarre way to say APS could have done nothing, but that's not the interpretation taken by APS, VDOE or MAC.  It's just made up by you.  Duran followed the law.  [/quote]

The Chief patron and the one who introduced it is a DEMOCRAT. There's a long list of co sponsors, Dems and Rs. It had bipartisan support.

YOU called it Youngkin's law before I called it anything. I pointed out that you can't call it Youngkin's law when it was sponsored by a Dem.

So. Many. Lies. [/quote]
Where did someone call it Youngkin's law?  No one said that.  But requiring more advanced math classes was 100% a central part of his platform.  Look how much it's discussed here:

The Surprising Strategy Behind Youngkin’s Stunner - POLITICO https://share.google/OJt2NAIoPz2PMgNWJ

During the election Dems were being crucified in the media for proposing to reduce math acceleration and rigor for "equity" purposes.  You may have not agreed that's what Dems were proposing, but that's how it was being portrayed and is absolutely one of the reasons Youngkin won.

Virginia Pushes Accelerated Math Enrollment | RealClearEducation https://share.google/b2VXGQxdboksA2gbH[/quote]

Yes, they did say it as Youngkin's law, scroll back yourself to find it. [/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