No clue, but I have a high schooler and honestly don't know a single parent who wanted the change, or a single parent who claims their high schooler is unable to fall asleep at a decent time.

I don't have a high schooler, but ditto to the rest.

My high school grad learned that he had to leave earlier on late start days because of the traffic. They've messed up the schedules for all the kids. Sure my kids would have liked to sleep in--but they also had busy after school activities.
The change is costing money to the county --for what? thirty or forty minutes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you're so against IB start a group, petition the school board and get rid of it. Good grief, it only took a handful of parents to ruin the start times for the rest of us. It can't be that difficult.

Off topic, but how many parents were really for SLEEP? I don't have a high schooler, but it seemed like a large group.

No clue, but I have a high schooler and honestly don't know a single parent who wanted the change, or a single parent who claims their high schooler is unable to fall asleep at a decent time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

15:36 I agree with you. We should keep IB, but just lesson the number of high schools offering it. And then help make it a more desirable program in those smaller number of schools.

Why should we keep it?

High SES kids don't need IB b/c their parents can "buy" their way to college (i.e., test looPprep, tutors,..etc.). Their future is theirs to lose. Lower SES kids who do not and can't afford same luxury have to work extra hard to create the same opportunity as the high SES kids. It is uneven playing field. For those kids, IB gives that extra push, that extra help they need. It may not reach every single kid but if it helps even small fraction of these kids, I'd say it's well worth it. Yes, I know you pay tax. I pay tax too. But if we stop educating our kids because they don't meet your definition of "acceptable", what would our future be?

You are completely off base on this. In schools with a large number of low SES kids, it's the high SES kids who benefit from IB because it creates "a school within a school" so they can avoid mixing with the low SES kids. My neighborhood feeds into one of those IB schools and I've heard this many times over.

This.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

15:36 I agree with you. We should keep IB, but just lesson the number of high schools offering it. And then help make it a more desirable program in those smaller number of schools.

Why should we keep it?

High SES kids don't need IB b/c their parents can "buy" their way to college (i.e., test looPprep, tutors,..etc.). Their future is theirs to lose. Lower SES kids who do not and can't afford same luxury have to work extra hard to create the same opportunity as the high SES kids. It is uneven playing field. For those kids, IB gives that extra push, that extra help they need. It may not reach every single kid but if it helps even small fraction of these kids, I'd say it's well worth it. Yes, I know you pay tax. I pay tax too. But if we stop educating our kids because they don't meet your definition of "acceptable", what would our future be?

You are completely off base on this. In schools with a large number of low SES kids, it's the high SES kids who benefit from IB because it creates "a school within a school" so they can avoid mixing with the low SES kids. My neighborhood feeds into one of those IB schools and I've heard this many times over.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

15:36 I agree with you. We should keep IB, but just lesson the number of high schools offering it. And then help make it a more desirable program in those smaller number of schools.

Why should we keep it?

High SES kids don't need IB b/c their parents can "buy" their way to college (i.e., test prep, tutors,..etc.). Their future is theirs to lose. Lower SES kids who do not and can't afford same luxury have to work extra hard to create the same opportunity as the high SES kids. It is uneven playing field. For those kids, IB gives that extra push, that extra help they need. It may not reach every single kid but if it helps even small fraction of these kids, I'd say it's well worth it. Yes, I know you pay tax. I pay tax too. But if we stop educating our kids because they don't meet your definition of "acceptable", what would our future be?

What you've said might be on point if we were talking about an IB charter that required lower SES kids to pursue an IB diploma and then gave them the tools and support to achieve that goal.

But that hasn't been the IB model in FCPS. FCPS put IB in mostly lower SES schools in lieu of AP to try and stem white flight and attract students from neighboring schools. It hasn't really worked, as there aren't many IB diploma candidates at most of the schools, but most of them are higher SES. It's not clear what the lower SES kids get out of it, other than the privilege of attending the same school as the IB students. You'd tend to think they'd get more out of AP, since it's more flexible, there are lesser writing requirements for some AP classes, and AP credits are more widely accepted by colleges and universities.

Anonymous wrote:If you're so against IB start a group, petition the school board and get rid of it. Good grief, it only took a handful of parents to ruin the start times for the rest of us. It can't be that difficult.

Off topic, but how many parents were really for SLEEP? I don't have a high schooler, but it seemed like a large group.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

High SES kids don't need IB b/c their parents can "buy" their way to college (i.e., test prep, tutors,..etc.). Their future is theirs to lose. Lower SES kids who do not and can't afford same luxury have to work extra hard to create the same opportunity as the high SES kids. It is uneven playing field. For those kids, IB gives that extra push, that extra help they need. It may not reach every single kid but if it helps even small fraction of these kids, I'd say it's well worth it. Yes, I know you pay tax. I pay tax too. But if we stop educating our kids because they don't meet your definition of "acceptable", what would our future be?

Who said anything about not educating these kids? Do you even hear yourself? AP offers much more flexibility for any student --including low income kids. What makes you think that IB is better for them? How does IB give them that "extra push"?

As for your statement about high SES kids buying their way into college--that has nothing to do with this argument. It does, however, indicate that you created a straw man.

Dude, you sound like an angry white man. Get over it.

Not the PP, but that's random. And nothing betrays an angry white man as a sentence that begins "Dude..."

Anonymous wrote:

High SES kids don't need IB b/c their parents can "buy" their way to college (i.e., test prep, tutors,..etc.). Their future is theirs to lose. Lower SES kids who do not and can't afford same luxury have to work extra hard to create the same opportunity as the high SES kids. It is uneven playing field. For those kids, IB gives that extra push, that extra help they need. It may not reach every single kid but if it helps even small fraction of these kids, I'd say it's well worth it. Yes, I know you pay tax. I pay tax too. But if we stop educating our kids because they don't meet your definition of "acceptable", what would our future be?

Who said anything about not educating these kids? Do you even hear yourself? AP offers much more flexibility for any student --including low income kids. What makes you think that IB is better for them? How does IB give them that "extra push"?

As for your statement about high SES kids buying their way into college--that has nothing to do with this argument. It does, however, indicate that you created a straw man.

Dude, you sound like an angry white man. Get over it.

If you're so against IB start a group, petition the school board and get rid of it. Good grief, it only took a handful of parents to ruin the start times for the rest of us. It can't be that difficult.

High SES kids don't need IB b/c their parents can "buy" their way to college (i.e., test prep, tutors,..etc.). Their future is theirs to lose. Lower SES kids who do not and can't afford same luxury have to work extra hard to create the same opportunity as the high SES kids. It is uneven playing field. For those kids, IB gives that extra push, that extra help they need. It may not reach every single kid but if it helps even small fraction of these kids, I'd say it's well worth it. Yes, I know you pay tax. I pay tax too. But if we stop educating our kids because they don't meet your definition of "acceptable", what would our future be?

Who said anything about not educating these kids? Do you even hear yourself? AP offers much more flexibility for any student --including low income kids. What makes you think that IB is better for them? How does IB give them that "extra push"?

As for your statement about high SES kids buying their way into college--that has nothing to do with this argument. It does, however, indicate that you created a straw man.

Anonymous wrote:

15:36 I agree with you. We should keep IB, but just lesson the number of high schools offering it. And then help make it a more desirable program in those smaller number of schools.

Why should we keep it?

High SES kids don't need IB b/c their parents can "buy" their way to college (i.e., test prep, tutors,..etc.). Their future is theirs to lose. Lower SES kids who do not and can't afford same luxury have to work extra hard to create the same opportunity as the high SES kids. It is uneven playing field. For those kids, IB gives that extra push, that extra help they need. It may not reach every single kid but if it helps even small fraction of these kids, I'd say it's well worth it. Yes, I know you pay tax. I pay tax too. But if we stop educating our kids because they don't meet your definition of "acceptable", what would our future be?

Anonymous wrote:

15:36 I agree with you. We should keep IB, but just lesson the number of high schools offering it. And then help make it a more desirable program in those smaller number of schools.

Why should we keep it?

There are a lot of teachers who can teach IB, it's a respectable program, and there are children who desire to take it. It also probably attracts some more international business to Fairfax. Just not enough interest to fill all the schools that it's currently offered in.

15:36 I agree with you. We should keep IB, but just lesson the number of high schools offering it. And then help make it a more desirable program in those smaller number of schools.

Why should we keep it?

15:36 I agree with you. We should keep IB, but just lesson the number of high schools offering it. And then help make it a more desirable program in those smaller number of schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:.

Our time on this earth is limited. Be bold.

About what?

Recognizing when an expensive program is not worth the money spent on it.

Well, may be people believe it IS worth the money. It's not your call is it?

There should be a cost per student analysis at each of the IB schools and if it exceeds a certain amount for a certain number of years, IB should be cut from the school. There are some schools where the program is grossly underutilized. I don't have a problem with IB being offered, I have a problem with it being offered in many schools where the students aren't interested in large enough numbers to justify the costs. Some of those schools should be consolidated and kids currently at the schools where IB is cut should be provided bus transportation for free the consolidated IB school. Going forward, the bus can be eliminated after the grandfathered kids have completed the program. I'm not sure why there is so much resistance to cutting IB, schools where it's underutilized. I'd prefer to consolidate IB into fewer schools and spend the savings on smaller class sizes or something else that benefits a lot of kids instead of just a few. I think this would be a win win. We would still have IB but in a more cost efficient model. What's so offensive about that?