Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an immigrant, I could never understand why there was such a disparity in education quality across the U.S. I couldn't understand why poor black areas had such worse schools compared to more affluent (and usually white) areas. But this thread has been an eye-opener. I understand this much better now. It seems the more affluent folks want their money to benefit only them and their families. They don't see the benefit to society of elevating everyone and giving a good education to all children, regardless of their socioeconomic status. Don't people want the US to succeed long-term? How does keeping poor people less educated benefit a country in the long-run?

you are describing communism, America is capitalism and freedom. You are free to move to any community you want.

Yes and no. There's enough wealth in this country that we do, in some areas, use our wealth to subsidize the less well-off. But there is a tension that the rich don't like it and there is the underlying knowledge that if you ask for too much, they'll get tired of it and stop altogether, as is being proposed. Capitalism is always regulated, never unfettered. But sometimes it is more unfettered than others.

The truly "rich" in McLean mostly gave up on FCPS years ago and opted for privates.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:moving forward with this would create a school that could rival TJ. Given the changes going on there, this would be welcomed

No it wouldn't. That's not what TJ is.

If you keep all the poors out, the scores will soar!!! Just look at Langley, PP.

It is not just about poors. Mclean has an extremely well educated. Lots of Harvard, MIT, UVA types. Well educated parents produce well educated children.

The poors in McLean are often the Asians who live in a modest home. The modest home is still $1m. Then you also have the rich Asian kids, rich Persian kids, rich white kids. If your parents are successful business owners, lawyers and doctors, you will have the proper support at home to succeed academically.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think maybe we disagree on what public schools mean in a fundamental way if you believe that the price of the house a child's family can afford should directly determine the quality of their public school education. Maybe you should get a cheaper house and pay for private school.

Or maybe you should acknowledge that FCPS short-changes the public schools in McLean and then takes credit for the high achievement of their students that is a result of the additional resources that the parents there have to fork over on their own.

+1

No one wants McLean schools to get more than other schools in FCPS. They want to be treated equally. I’m not sure you understand what goes on. FCPS regularly puts money into schools in poorer areas and then expects McLean schools to do without. For example, fields at poorer schools are regularly funded by FCPS. If McLean needs money for fields, they are required to fundraise for them. The county will not pay for them. That is just one example.

Citizens of mclean just want to be treated equally, not better than. But they are constantly being treated less than all others in the county because they assume the citizens will just fund it themselves.

But then FCPS is perfectly ready to take credit for the high test scores that come out of the underfunded schools. Even though it is the parents and students that actually are responsible for those phenomenal test scores.

Ummm... maybe the teachers helped also. But they don't live in McLean, I guess.

Sorry - I don't disagree that the teachers help. But McLean is not provided with better teachers than the rest of the county. You can't say that the teachers at McLean/Langley are so much better than the teachers at South Lakes can you? So much so that it makes the difference in all the test scores?

It is generally easier to recruit and retain teachers at McLean/Langley than at many other schools because the teachers don't have to work as hard or deal with as many disciplinary issues, but the flip-side is that the area is expensive and teachers may prefer positions closer to where they live.

If McLean City ran its own schools, it likely could pay higher salaries than FCPS or offer smaller class sizes, both advantages to teachers.

Is this what Fairfax City and McLean currently do?

Fairfax City owns all the school buildings in that jurisdiction, and they contract with FCPS to operate them. I don't believe teachers at Fairfax, Lanier, Providence or Daniels Run get paid more than other FCPS teachers.

Falls Church City owns and operates all the school buildings in that jurisdiction (and one school that is physically located in Fairfax County); on average, teachers get paid $3000 more than in FCPS and classes are smaller.

McLean would not try to self-incorporate unless it planned to follow the FCC model. A primary driver is the dissatisfaction with FCPS.

McLean City would probably have at least twice the population of Fairfax City and about four times the population of Falls Church City, by the way. And it wouldn't be a city within the county, like Fairfax City; rather its boundaries would be north of Fairfax County.

I can just imagine the shit that would hit the fan as they drew boundary lines and those left out by a block or a few feet or whatever started screaming unfair.

That would be a sad commentary on how people feel about the county and FCPS right now, wouldn't it?

Anonymous wrote:Yes but will an independent McLean School District have enough expertise in transgender elementary school bathrooms, racial grievance school renaming, and LGBTQ+@#!@$ studies?

Won't they be missing out on the coming FCPS racial bussing experience?

Will they have enough students of Special Hues who are permitted to get away with misbehavior and troublemaking to keep the "disparate discipline" rates pleasing to the liberal conscious?

So many questions!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think maybe we disagree on what public schools mean in a fundamental way if you believe that the price of the house a child's family can afford should directly determine the quality of their public school education. Maybe you should get a cheaper house and pay for private school.

Or maybe you should acknowledge that FCPS short-changes the public schools in McLean and then takes credit for the high achievement of their students that is a result of the additional resources that the parents there have to fork over on their own.

+1

No one wants McLean schools to get more than other schools in FCPS. They want to be treated equally. I’m not sure you understand what goes on. FCPS regularly puts money into schools in poorer areas and then expects McLean schools to do without. For example, fields at poorer schools are regularly funded by FCPS. If McLean needs money for fields, they are required to fundraise for them. The county will not pay for them. That is just one example.

Citizens of mclean just want to be treated equally, not better than. But they are constantly being treated less than all others in the county because they assume the citizens will just fund it themselves.

But then FCPS is perfectly ready to take credit for the high test scores that come out of the underfunded schools. Even though it is the parents and students that actually are responsible for those phenomenal test scores.

Ummm... maybe the teachers helped also. But they don't live in McLean, I guess.

Sorry - I don't disagree that the teachers help. But McLean is not provided with better teachers than the rest of the county. You can't say that the teachers at McLean/Langley are so much better than the teachers at South Lakes can you? So much so that it makes the difference in all the test scores?

It is generally easier to recruit and retain teachers at McLean/Langley than at many other schools because the teachers don't have to work as hard or deal with as many disciplinary issues, but the flip-side is that the area is expensive and teachers may prefer positions closer to where they live.

If McLean City ran its own schools, it likely could pay higher salaries than FCPS or offer smaller class sizes, both advantages to teachers.

Is this what Fairfax City and McLean currently do?

Fairfax City owns all the school buildings in that jurisdiction, and they contract with FCPS to operate them. I don't believe teachers at Fairfax, Lanier, Providence or Daniels Run get paid more than other FCPS teachers.

Falls Church City owns and operates all the school buildings in that jurisdiction (and one school that is physically located in Fairfax County); on average, teachers get paid $3000 more than in FCPS and classes are smaller.

McLean would not try to self-incorporate unless it planned to follow the FCC model. A primary driver is the dissatisfaction with FCPS.

McLean City would probably have at least twice the population of Fairfax City and about four times the population of Falls Church City, by the way. And it wouldn't be a city within the county, like Fairfax City; rather its boundaries would be north of Fairfax County.

I can just imagine the shit that would hit the fan as they drew boundary lines and those left out by a block or a few feet or whatever started screaming unfair.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think maybe we disagree on what public schools mean in a fundamental way if you believe that the price of the house a child's family can afford should directly determine the quality of their public school education. Maybe you should get a cheaper house and pay for private school.

Or maybe you should acknowledge that FCPS short-changes the public schools in McLean and then takes credit for the high achievement of their students that is a result of the additional resources that the parents there have to fork over on their own.

+1

No one wants McLean schools to get more than other schools in FCPS. They want to be treated equally. I’m not sure you understand what goes on. FCPS regularly puts money into schools in poorer areas and then expects McLean schools to do without. For example, fields at poorer schools are regularly funded by FCPS. If McLean needs money for fields, they are required to fundraise for them. The county will not pay for them. That is just one example.

Citizens of mclean just want to be treated equally, not better than. But they are constantly being treated less than all others in the county because they assume the citizens will just fund it themselves.

But then FCPS is perfectly ready to take credit for the high test scores that come out of the underfunded schools. Even though it is the parents and students that actually are responsible for those phenomenal test scores.

Ummm... maybe the teachers helped also. But they don't live in McLean, I guess.

Sorry - I don't disagree that the teachers help. But McLean is not provided with better teachers than the rest of the county. You can't say that the teachers at McLean/Langley are so much better than the teachers at South Lakes can you? So much so that it makes the difference in all the test scores?

It is generally easier to recruit and retain teachers at McLean/Langley than at many other schools because the teachers don't have to work as hard or deal with as many disciplinary issues, but the flip-side is that the area is expensive and teachers may prefer positions closer to where they live.

If McLean City ran its own schools, it likely could pay higher salaries than FCPS or offer smaller class sizes, both advantages to teachers.

Is this what Fairfax City and McLean currently do?

Fairfax City owns all the school buildings in that jurisdiction, and they contract with FCPS to operate them. I don't believe teachers at Fairfax, Lanier, Providence or Daniels Run get paid more than other FCPS teachers.

Falls Church City owns and operates all the school buildings in that jurisdiction (and one school that is physically located in Fairfax County); on average, teachers get paid $3000 more than in FCPS and classes are smaller.

McLean would not try to self-incorporate unless it planned to follow the FCC model. A primary driver is the dissatisfaction with FCPS.

McLean City would probably have at least twice the population of Fairfax City and about four times the population of Falls Church City, by the way. And it wouldn't be a city within the county, like Fairfax City; rather its boundaries would be north of Fairfax County.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm laughing so hard at everyone saying they pay more taxes in McLean so they deserve more. Pretty sure you knew what you were getting into when you bought a huge house in an expensive part of the county!! LOL.

Try to keep up. It's more like they've said they pay a lot of taxes, so it seems like they should certainly get the same as everyone else.

It has only become obvious relatively recently that the county and FCPS now believe there should be an inverse relationship: the more you pay, the less you get in return.

Poor McLean. The Langley renovation has driven you crazy. You can't even make logical arguments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm laughing so hard at everyone saying they pay more taxes in McLean so they deserve more. Pretty sure you knew what you were getting into when you bought a huge house in an expensive part of the county!! LOL.

Try to keep up. It's more like they've said they pay a lot of taxes, so it seems like they should certainly get the same as everyone else.

It has only become obvious relatively recently that the county and FCPS now believe there should be an inverse relationship: the more you pay, the less you get in return.

Poor McLean. The Langley renovation has driven you crazy. You can't even make logical arguments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an immigrant, I could never understand why there was such a disparity in education quality across the U.S. I couldn't understand why poor black areas had such worse schools compared to more affluent (and usually white) areas. But this thread has been an eye-opener. I understand this much better now. It seems the more affluent folks want their money to benefit only them and their families. They don't see the benefit to society of elevating everyone and giving a good education to all children, regardless of their socioeconomic status. Don't people want the US to succeed long-term? How does keeping poor people less educated benefit a country in the long-run?

you are describing communism, America is capitalism and freedom. You are free to move to any community you want.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm laughing so hard at everyone saying they pay more taxes in McLean so they deserve more. Pretty sure you knew what you were getting into when you bought a huge house in an expensive part of the county!! LOL.

Try to keep up. It's more like they've said they pay a lot of taxes, so it seems like they should certainly get the same as everyone else.

It has only become obvious relatively recently that the county and FCPS now believe there should be an inverse relationship: the more you pay, the less you get in return.

Anonymous wrote:I'm laughing so hard at everyone saying they pay more taxes in McLean so they deserve more. Pretty sure you knew what you were getting into when you bought a huge house in an expensive part of the county!! LOL.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an immigrant, I could never understand why there was such a disparity in education quality across the U.S. I couldn't understand why poor black areas had such worse schools compared to more affluent (and usually white) areas. But this thread has been an eye-opener. I understand this much better now. It seems the more affluent folks want their money to benefit only them and their families. They don't see the benefit to society of elevating everyone and giving a good education to all children, regardless of their socioeconomic status. Don't people want the US to succeed long-term? How does keeping poor people less educated benefit a country in the long-run?

you are describing communism, America is capitalism and freedom. You are free to move to any community you want.

Yes and no. There's enough wealth in this country that we do, in some areas, use our wealth to subsidize the less well-off. But there is a tension that the rich don't like it and there is the underlying knowledge that if you ask for too much, they'll get tired of it and stop altogether, as is being proposed. Capitalism is always regulated, never unfettered. But sometimes it is more unfettered than others.

SMH, you realize that teachers and facilities make little difference in the children's outcomes. It is the parent's availability and attitude towards education that create the differences, and the home life of the student is not something "equity" can address. I see a potential problem for McLean is that if they break away from FCPS, then all the Karen's will then push for high-density affordable housing in McLean, and that will destroy much of the character of McLean.

SMH, teachers definitely can and do make a difference in children's lives.

But if you think defunding poorer schools will make no difference in outcomes, then I'm not sure we're going to get anywhere in a discussion.

Anonymous wrote:Im confused. Does McLean want to become a city just like Fairfax City, City of Falls Church, or just break off their own schools? Because this seems to be to be all about schools vs any other municipal services.

I guess my first question would be why you expect Fairfax County to just give you its school buildings/properties/other municipal buildings if you are going to secede from the county? These properties(Ie the land they are built on) are worth millions!