Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am all in favor of a redistricting across the entire county. Lets shift all the boundaries so that over enrolled schools see relief and under enrolled schools see their seats being used. Families who are unhappy with their new schools are welcome to move to Private but the boundaries, as they stand right now, are bullshit.

Mass chaos. I suspect you have never been through a redistricting. Bad idea.

For who? The parents of kids that are in the higher income families maybe but better for the rest of the county. We have schools with declining population and schools that are bursting at the seems. We can alleviate a good amount of that by shifting the boundaries. We won't because the wealthy families will scream bloody murder and will contribute to whatever campaign they have to so that their kids don't have to attend school with kids who are under privileged.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am all in favor of a redistricting across the entire county. Lets shift all the boundaries so that over enrolled schools see relief and under enrolled schools see their seats being used. Families who are unhappy with their new schools are welcome to move to Private but the boundaries, as they stand right now, are bullshit.

Mass chaos. I suspect you have never been through a redistricting. Bad idea.

It won't happen. Local politicians aren't dumb enough to stir up that hornets nest. If you think the Loudon parents that helped Youngkin get elected was bad, bring Lewis, Mt Vernon, and Annandale up to capacity and see what happens in the next election.

I have been wildly curious if all the signs I saw about 8 years ago by parents in the Wakefield Chapel area begging to stay at Annandale would still be there if FCPS decided to move them back.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am all in favor of a redistricting across the entire county. Lets shift all the boundaries so that over enrolled schools see relief and under enrolled schools see their seats being used. Families who are unhappy with their new schools are welcome to move to Private but the boundaries, as they stand right now, are bullshit.

Mass chaos. I suspect you have never been through a redistricting. Bad idea.

It won't happen. Local politicians aren't dumb enough to stir up that hornets nest. If you think the Loudon parents that helped Youngkin get elected was bad, bring Lewis, Mt Vernon, and Annandale up to capacity and see what happens in the next election.

Anonymous wrote:

I am all in favor of a redistricting across the entire county. Lets shift all the boundaries so that over enrolled schools see relief and under enrolled schools see their seats being used. Families who are unhappy with their new schools are welcome to move to Private but the boundaries, as they stand right now, are bullshit.

Mass chaos. I suspect you have never been through a redistricting. Bad idea.

Anonymous wrote:

I am all in favor of a redistricting across the entire county. Lets shift all the boundaries so that over enrolled schools see relief and under enrolled schools see their seats being used. Families who are unhappy with their new schools are welcome to move to Private but the boundaries, as they stand right now, are bullshit.

Mass chaos. I suspect you have never been through a redistricting. Bad idea.

I am all in favor of a redistricting across the entire county. Lets shift all the boundaries so that over enrolled schools see relief and under enrolled schools see their seats being used. Families who are unhappy with their new schools are welcome to move to Private but the boundaries, as they stand right now, are bullshit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:...

I am all in favor of a redistricting across the entire county. Lets shift all the boundaries so that over enrolled schools see relief and under enrolled schools see their seats being used. Families who are unhappy with their new schools are welcome to move to Private but the boundaries, as they stand right now, are bullshit.

I see you truly do want to create a school board reckoning, and get the superintendent fired to boot.

"Families who are unhappy with their new schools are welcome to move to Private" ... as if there are enough privates to absorb all the kids whose families would like to switch and as if everyone could afford it. Funding doesn't follow kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:...

I am all in favor of a redistricting across the entire county. Lets shift all the boundaries so that over enrolled schools see relief and under enrolled schools see their seats being used. Families who are unhappy with their new schools are welcome to move to Private but the boundaries, as they stand right now, are bullshit.

I see you truly do want to create a school board reckoning, and get the superintendent fired to boot.

"Families who are unhappy with their new schools are welcome to move to Private" ... as if there are enough privates to absorb all the kids whose families would like to switch and as if everyone could afford it. Funding doesn't follow kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:...

I am all in favor of a redistricting across the entire county. Lets shift all the boundaries so that over enrolled schools see relief and under enrolled schools see their seats being used. Families who are unhappy with their new schools are welcome to move to Private but the boundaries, as they stand right now, are bullshit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes f the lower income kids, why should they get the same good quality education as us especially at Langley.

No more bussing and no more equity, why should I have to work myself half to death to get them up to grade level. It’s just too much, it’s insane, I’m not god, I cannot create miracles okrrr

There is no busing. The only kids who are bused are kids going to the AAP Centers. And most of those kids are not the lower income kids that you are worried about. The kids moving from the Title I school to the AAP Center are the Middle Class kids whose parents bought into a Title I school boundary so they could afford a bigger house in FCPS. They wanted the 4-5 bedroom house with big kitchen but couldn't pay McLean/Great Falls/Vienna prices so they bought into Dogwood and now they want to leave Dogwood ES. The lower income kids at Dogwood tend to stay at Dogwood because the parents don't understand AAP or don't/can't deal with kids at different schedules.

No one is saying that the kids in Title I schools shouldn't receive a quality education. What people are saying is that you should not lower the standards at other schools so that the gap between the Title I schools and the other schools looks to be less. Lowering the standards for MC and UMC class kids does not solve the problem at Title I schools. It does a crappy job of hiding the problem but it doesn't solve the problem.

The reality is that people with lower levels of education tend to value education less then people with higher levels of education. People with lower levels of education tend to read less to their kids when they are babies/toddlers/in preschool ages. They tend to play fewer games with their kids that would teach reading, math, and problem solving. There is a ton of research out there showing the correlation between income level and a child's preparedness for school and a child's performance in school.

Kids from MC and UMC families start school with a huge advantage in learning because they had parents who engaged with them in academic subjects in non-academic ways. The kids of MC and UMC families tend to have been read to, they know their sounds and letters and numbers. They know their colors and shapes. They have been exposed to math and science through trips to museums and watching TV shows that are meant to stimulate those interests.

PreK programs like Head Start are meant to help bridge that gap but they can only do so much. And parents have to be willing to enroll their kids in Head Start, or similar programs, which means learning about the program, working through the process to enroll the child, and get the child to the program. Those are hurdles that many lower income families struggle with.

Title I schools receive additional funds and have smaller classes and provide more supports for kids because we want to address this educational gap but the gap continues to grow.

Screwing over the kids of MC and UMC families in public schools does nothing to help the kids of lower income families. It is not helping those kids catch up it is simply stunting kids whose parents are better off.

I would not oppose a program to bus kids from Title I schools MC and UMC schools. If the parents could volunteer their kids to participate and the parents wanted their kids to attend those schools. And if there were supports in place in K-2 to help those kids address the gaps that exist. I suspect that the families who would take that option would be the same families desperate to send their kids to the AAP Center because they want to escpae the school. Kind of like the families who say they want their kid to go to an AP program in high school isn't IB. The parents really don't care about the IB, they just don't want their kid at Justice or Lewis or Mt. Vernon and AP is the excuse for leaving for a different high school.

I would not oppose a program to bus kids from MC and UMC kids to Title I schools if there are parents who want to do that. But I seriously doubt that would happen. I can't see a parent at Great Falls or any of the Langley or McLean pyramids being willing to send their kids to Hutchinson or Dogwood.

The equity agenda that the School Board has been pushing does nothing to fix the systemic causes of the education gap and only hinders the education of kids whose parents are are middle and upper middle class.

FCPS talks a lot about equity and then creates the conditions that makes solutions that might mitigate disparities all but impossible.

To take one example, Langley HS is in a very high-income corner of the county just a few miles away from another HS, McLean. Moreover, the parents in the Langley catchment area are the most likely of any parents in the county to send their kids to privates. FCPS can't change the school's location, which is a sunk cost, but logically it should be one of the smallest 2-3 high schools in the county.

So what did FCPS do Langley came up for its scheduled renovation? Rather than renovate the school with a modest addition, they added hundreds of additional seats to the school that weren't needed and weren't part of the original plan. So now Langley has a capacity of almost 2400, and FCPS is not only continuing to send kids who live closer to other schools like Herndon and Marshall to Langley, but also now moving more kids who live closer to McLean to Langley, when they should have been adding more permanent capacity to Herndon, Marshall, and McLean instead.

Of course, once those neighborhoods are at Langley, they'll fight like hell to stay there and point to the fact that the school remains under-enrolled, which would no longer be the case but for the additional seats that were needed elsewhere. And the School Board members will nod their heads and agree with them, at the same time as they sign up a Kendi or Angelo for their next big staff event in the summer of 2022.

It's actually almost comical that they spend so much time on their virtue-signaling exercises when their operating decisions undercut "equity" at every point. The whole IB/AP pupil placement dynamic (where families can arbitrage academic programs to get out of a poorer IB school by enrolling their kids in a few AP classes at another school) is another example.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes f the lower income kids, why should they get the same good quality education as us especially at Langley.

No more bussing and no more equity, why should I have to work myself half to death to get them up to grade level. It’s just too much, it’s insane, I’m not god, I cannot create miracles okrrr

There is no busing. The only kids who are bused are kids going to the AAP Centers. And most of those kids are not the lower income kids that you are worried about. The kids moving from the Title I school to the AAP Center are the Middle Class kids whose parents bought into a Title I school boundary so they could afford a bigger house in FCPS. They wanted the 4-5 bedroom house with big kitchen but couldn't pay McLean/Great Falls/Vienna prices so they bought into Dogwood and now they want to leave Dogwood ES. The lower income kids at Dogwood tend to stay at Dogwood because the parents don't understand AAP or don't/can't deal with kids at different schedules.

No one is saying that the kids in Title I schools shouldn't receive a quality education. What people are saying is that you should not lower the standards at other schools so that the gap between the Title I schools and the other schools looks to be less. Lowering the standards for MC and UMC class kids does not solve the problem at Title I schools. It does a crappy job of hiding the problem but it doesn't solve the problem.

The reality is that people with lower levels of education tend to value education less then people with higher levels of education. People with lower levels of education tend to read less to their kids when they are babies/toddlers/in preschool ages. They tend to play fewer games with their kids that would teach reading, math, and problem solving. There is a ton of research out there showing the correlation between income level and a child's preparedness for school and a child's performance in school.

Kids from MC and UMC families start school with a huge advantage in learning because they had parents who engaged with them in academic subjects in non-academic ways. The kids of MC and UMC families tend to have been read to, they know their sounds and letters and numbers. They know their colors and shapes. They have been exposed to math and science through trips to museums and watching TV shows that are meant to stimulate those interests.

PreK programs like Head Start are meant to help bridge that gap but they can only do so much. And parents have to be willing to enroll their kids in Head Start, or similar programs, which means learning about the program, working through the process to enroll the child, and get the child to the program. Those are hurdles that many lower income families struggle with.

Title I schools receive additional funds and have smaller classes and provide more supports for kids because we want to address this educational gap but the gap continues to grow.

Screwing over the kids of MC and UMC families in public schools does nothing to help the kids of lower income families. It is not helping those kids catch up it is simply stunting kids whose parents are better off.

I would not oppose a program to bus kids from Title I schools MC and UMC schools. If the parents could volunteer their kids to participate and the parents wanted their kids to attend those schools. And if there were supports in place in K-2 to help those kids address the gaps that exist. I suspect that the families who would take that option would be the same families desperate to send their kids to the AAP Center because they want to escpae the school. Kind of like the families who say they want their kid to go to an AP program in high school isn't IB. The parents really don't care about the IB, they just don't want their kid at Justice or Lewis or Mt. Vernon and AP is the excuse for leaving for a different high school.

I would not oppose a program to bus kids from MC and UMC kids to Title I schools if there are parents who want to do that. But I seriously doubt that would happen. I can't see a parent at Great Falls or any of the Langley or McLean pyramids being willing to send their kids to Hutchinson or Dogwood.

The equity agenda that the School Board has been pushing does nothing to fix the systemic causes of the education gap and only hinders the education of kids whose parents are are middle and upper middle class.

FCPS talks a lot about equity and then creates the conditions that makes solutions that might mitigate disparities all but impossible.

To take one example, Langley HS is in a very high-income corner of the county just a few miles away from another HS, McLean. Moreover, the parents in the Langley catchment area are the most likely of any parents in the county to send their kids to privates. FCPS can't change the school's location, which is a sunk cost, but logically it should be one of the smallest 2-3 high schools in the county.

So what did FCPS do Langley came up for its scheduled renovation? Rather than renovate the school with a modest addition, they added hundreds of additional seats to the school that weren't needed and weren't part of the original plan. So now Langley has a capacity of almost 2400, and FCPS is not only continuing to send kids who live closer to other schools like Herndon and Marshall to Langley, but also now moving more kids who live closer to McLean to Langley, when they should have been adding more permanent capacity to Herndon, Marshall, and McLean instead.

Of course, once those neighborhoods are at Langley, they'll fight like hell to stay there and point to the fact that the school remains under-enrolled, which would no longer be the case but for the additional seats that were needed elsewhere. And the School Board members will nod their heads and agree with them, at the same time as they sign up a Kendi or Angelo for their next big staff event in the summer of 2022.

It's actually almost comical that they spend so much time on their virtue-signaling exercises when their operating decisions undercut "equity" at every point. The whole IB/AP pupil placement dynamic (where families can arbitrage academic programs to get out of a poorer IB school by enrolling their kids in a few AP classes at another school) is another example.

I think this is a good thing. Tysons can go to Langley.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes f the lower income kids, why should they get the same good quality education as us especially at Langley.

No more bussing and no more equity, why should I have to work myself half to death to get them up to grade level. It’s just too much, it’s insane, I’m not god, I cannot create miracles okrrr

There is no busing. The only kids who are bused are kids going to the AAP Centers. And most of those kids are not the lower income kids that you are worried about. The kids moving from the Title I school to the AAP Center are the Middle Class kids whose parents bought into a Title I school boundary so they could afford a bigger house in FCPS. They wanted the 4-5 bedroom house with big kitchen but couldn't pay McLean/Great Falls/Vienna prices so they bought into Dogwood and now they want to leave Dogwood ES. The lower income kids at Dogwood tend to stay at Dogwood because the parents don't understand AAP or don't/can't deal with kids at different schedules.

No one is saying that the kids in Title I schools shouldn't receive a quality education. What people are saying is that you should not lower the standards at other schools so that the gap between the Title I schools and the other schools looks to be less. Lowering the standards for MC and UMC class kids does not solve the problem at Title I schools. It does a crappy job of hiding the problem but it doesn't solve the problem.

The reality is that people with lower levels of education tend to value education less then people with higher levels of education. People with lower levels of education tend to read less to their kids when they are babies/toddlers/in preschool ages. They tend to play fewer games with their kids that would teach reading, math, and problem solving. There is a ton of research out there showing the correlation between income level and a child's preparedness for school and a child's performance in school.

Kids from MC and UMC families start school with a huge advantage in learning because they had parents who engaged with them in academic subjects in non-academic ways. The kids of MC and UMC families tend to have been read to, they know their sounds and letters and numbers. They know their colors and shapes. They have been exposed to math and science through trips to museums and watching TV shows that are meant to stimulate those interests.

PreK programs like Head Start are meant to help bridge that gap but they can only do so much. And parents have to be willing to enroll their kids in Head Start, or similar programs, which means learning about the program, working through the process to enroll the child, and get the child to the program. Those are hurdles that many lower income families struggle with.

Title I schools receive additional funds and have smaller classes and provide more supports for kids because we want to address this educational gap but the gap continues to grow.

Screwing over the kids of MC and UMC families in public schools does nothing to help the kids of lower income families. It is not helping those kids catch up it is simply stunting kids whose parents are better off.

I would not oppose a program to bus kids from Title I schools MC and UMC schools. If the parents could volunteer their kids to participate and the parents wanted their kids to attend those schools. And if there were supports in place in K-2 to help those kids address the gaps that exist. I suspect that the families who would take that option would be the same families desperate to send their kids to the AAP Center because they want to escpae the school. Kind of like the families who say they want their kid to go to an AP program in high school isn't IB. The parents really don't care about the IB, they just don't want their kid at Justice or Lewis or Mt. Vernon and AP is the excuse for leaving for a different high school.

I would not oppose a program to bus kids from MC and UMC kids to Title I schools if there are parents who want to do that. But I seriously doubt that would happen. I can't see a parent at Great Falls or any of the Langley or McLean pyramids being willing to send their kids to Hutchinson or Dogwood.

The equity agenda that the School Board has been pushing does nothing to fix the systemic causes of the education gap and only hinders the education of kids whose parents are are middle and upper middle class.

FCPS talks a lot about equity and then creates the conditions that makes solutions that might mitigate disparities all but impossible.

To take one example, Langley HS is in a very high-income corner of the county just a few miles away from another HS, McLean. Moreover, the parents in the Langley catchment area are the most likely of any parents in the county to send their kids to privates. FCPS can't change the school's location, which is a sunk cost, but logically it should be one of the smallest 2-3 high schools in the county.

So what did FCPS do Langley came up for its scheduled renovation? Rather than renovate the school with a modest addition, they added hundreds of additional seats to the school that weren't needed and weren't part of the original plan. So now Langley has a capacity of almost 2400, and FCPS is not only continuing to send kids who live closer to other schools like Herndon and Marshall to Langley, but also now moving more kids who live closer to McLean to Langley, when they should have been adding more permanent capacity to Herndon, Marshall, and McLean instead.

Of course, once those neighborhoods are at Langley, they'll fight like hell to stay there and point to the fact that the school remains under-enrolled, which would no longer be the case but for the additional seats that were needed elsewhere. And the School Board members will nod their heads and agree with them, at the same time as they sign up a Kendi or Angelo for their next big staff event in the summer of 2022.

It's actually almost comical that they spend so much time on their virtue-signaling exercises when their operating decisions undercut "equity" at every point. The whole IB/AP pupil placement dynamic (where families can arbitrage academic programs to get out of a poorer IB school by enrolling their kids in a few AP classes at another school) is another example.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not PP but having different opinions doesn’t mean someone is out of touch, it means they do not agree with you. I’m not happy with the SB either but I think right wingers completely astroturfed social media-including this forum-and convinced parents Democrats alone are responsible for the fall of education. Ignoring the changing demographics that contribute to local systems being overwhelmed. Ignoring that Republican led states often completely undermine public education and do not have good outcomes. Ignoring that CRT is not a thing. And that outsiders were brought in to stir crap up. That charter schools and vouchers have failed miserably in most cases bc they are not held to any standards.
You can call me names, be patronizing, etc, I still do not agree with you PPs. And yes, I am paying attention. I will vote for SB who are focused on academics in 2023. But this? Sticking it to the Dems when there is so much more at stake? Nah.

Democrats alone run the fcps school board, the lcps school board, the aps school board, the fcc school board, the arps school hoard and the Virginia Departmemt of Ed and have for many years.

So yes, without exception, the democratic party owns all of the school issues in northern Virginia.

And none of that changed by electing Youngkin.

Congrats on accomplishing nothing.

Virginia Department of Ed will change almost immediately after his inauguration.

He is going to be firing the current appointees and replacing them with professionals who value education, rigor and excellence over indoctrination, low standards and racism.

Just think, once Youngkin gets his policies in place, our teachers can return to using their planning days on things like literacy and math skills, instead of spending all their training hours on Ibrahim X and white privilege.

I really hope so. I’m worried it will be all about charter schools and cutting spending.

About a decade ago there was a liberal social studies teacher who wanted to start a charter school in the Justice HS/Falls Church HS area because he felt a segment of the at-risk students at those schools weren't being well-served. He had lined up a bunch of private businesses prepared to assist with funding. The biggest opposition was from Falls Church HS parents worried a charter school might delay FCPS's funding of the renovation of Falls Church, or end up attracting some of the higher-performing kids away from FCHS.

The FCPS School Board, controlled then as now by Democrats, was not receptive to the idea. So either state law in Virginia would have to change, so that the power to approve charter schools rested with the VDOE rather than local school boards, or there would need School Board members in Fairfax less hostile to charter schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes f the lower income kids, why should they get the same good quality education as us especially at Langley.

No more bussing and no more equity, why should I have to work myself half to death to get them up to grade level. It’s just too much, it’s insane, I’m not god, I cannot create miracles okrrr

There is no busing. The only kids who are bused are kids going to the AAP Centers. And most of those kids are not the lower income kids that you are worried about. The kids moving from the Title I school to the AAP Center are the Middle Class kids whose parents bought into a Title I school boundary so they could afford a bigger house in FCPS. They wanted the 4-5 bedroom house with big kitchen but couldn't pay McLean/Great Falls/Vienna prices so they bought into Dogwood and now they want to leave Dogwood ES. The lower income kids at Dogwood tend to stay at Dogwood because the parents don't understand AAP or don't/can't deal with kids at different schedules.

No one is saying that the kids in Title I schools shouldn't receive a quality education. What people are saying is that you should not lower the standards at other schools so that the gap between the Title I schools and the other schools looks to be less. Lowering the standards for MC and UMC class kids does not solve the problem at Title I schools. It does a crappy job of hiding the problem but it doesn't solve the problem.

The reality is that people with lower levels of education tend to value education less then people with higher levels of education. People with lower levels of education tend to read less to their kids when they are babies/toddlers/in preschool ages. They tend to play fewer games with their kids that would teach reading, math, and problem solving. There is a ton of research out there showing the correlation between income level and a child's preparedness for school and a child's performance in school.

Kids from MC and UMC families start school with a huge advantage in learning because they had parents who engaged with them in academic subjects in non-academic ways. The kids of MC and UMC families tend to have been read to, they know their sounds and letters and numbers. They know their colors and shapes. They have been exposed to math and science through trips to museums and watching TV shows that are meant to stimulate those interests.

PreK programs like Head Start are meant to help bridge that gap but they can only do so much. And parents have to be willing to enroll their kids in Head Start, or similar programs, which means learning about the program, working through the process to enroll the child, and get the child to the program. Those are hurdles that many lower income families struggle with.

Title I schools receive additional funds and have smaller classes and provide more supports for kids because we want to address this educational gap but the gap continues to grow.

Screwing over the kids of MC and UMC families in public schools does nothing to help the kids of lower income families. It is not helping those kids catch up it is simply stunting kids whose parents are better off.

I would not oppose a program to bus kids from Title I schools MC and UMC schools. If the parents could volunteer their kids to participate and the parents wanted their kids to attend those schools. And if there were supports in place in K-2 to help those kids address the gaps that exist. I suspect that the families who would take that option would be the same families desperate to send their kids to the AAP Center because they want to escpae the school. Kind of like the families who say they want their kid to go to an AP program in high school isn't IB. The parents really don't care about the IB, they just don't want their kid at Justice or Lewis or Mt. Vernon and AP is the excuse for leaving for a different high school.

I would not oppose a program to bus kids from MC and UMC kids to Title I schools if there are parents who want to do that. But I seriously doubt that would happen. I can't see a parent at Great Falls or any of the Langley or McLean pyramids being willing to send their kids to Hutchinson or Dogwood.

The equity agenda that the School Board has been pushing does nothing to fix the systemic causes of the education gap and only hinders the education of kids whose parents are are middle and upper middle class.