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.

So you’re in favor of busing students miles from their homes in order to provide “economic diversity” at Langley? Try actually proposing that and see what kind of reaction you get from those families whose kids you want to sit on buses for hours each day in the name of “equity.” Good luck with that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the posts tossing out creative ideas about how the county could hold McLean hostage underscores the kidnapping has already occurred.

you can also say that the posts assuming McClean would continue to have access to county services after leaving show just how entitled people are

Are you really this dense or is it wishful thinking on your part? Fairfax Co. simply charges FCC a fee for the use of the landfill. Other services are handled in a similar way. It can - and has - been done. It’s beyond obvious how triggered the very idea of McLean splitting off makes you.
DP

There is no bitterness toward FCC, there would be bitterness towards McLean

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a great idea. And it will be even better if there can be a wall built around McLean to keep the low-lifes out. Residents could get a tag that would allow quicker access at the gate. Visitors would have to pay a fee and undergo a check.

Agreed. And anyone moving to McLean would have to pass a background check to make sure they are of the right demographic. As a PP mentioned up thread, we don’t our resources to help those living in Annandale or Springfield. So we must ensure that only a certain demographic can move to McLean.

When you have an incredibly diverse area like McLean/Great Falls in favor of a move like this, your idiotic accusations kind of fall flat.

Umm, the demographic isn't diverse at all. It's all very high income.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what the Langley parents think?

Langley parent here. This is the first I’m hearing about this and I think it’s a fantastic idea.

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: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.

The Langley renovation mismanagement by FCPS was absolutely classic of the problem. Langley was being renovated. Instead of doing a good job, they went over the top and added a whole addition to a school that didn't need it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

I am an immigrant as well and I live in McLean. Nobody here opposes other schools benefiting from a healthy tax base, what we have accepted is that “others” will be benefited at our expense while our kids sit in trailers. No, thanks!

Just move a couple streets over and your children can go to Langley in a lovely newly renovated building with no overcrowding.

What's the problem?

I love that FCPS is so progressive and focused on equity, but they'll spend $40 million to expand West Potomac so kids don't have to go to Mount Vernon, but next to nothing on McLean because maybe they'll get around eventually (just not in 2018, 2019, or 2020) to moving some kids to the richer school in town. Or people can just move or send their kids to privates, no big deal.

You have the same school board rep for both districts, she came through for Langley - maybe vote for someone who cares about your school (that's how West Potomac got its expansion)

Our current School Board rep just got elected last year. She tries, but gets steamrolled by other School Board members who want to invest capital dollars anywhere but McLean and staff members who just ignore her questions. Another reason why we want out.

What happened to the one that got the Langley reno?

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what the Langley parents think?

Anonymous wrote:I think McLean is tired of subsidizing the rest of the FCPS. Also, FCPS is horribly inefficient, due to its unmanageable size. Not saying I agree which way, but something had to be done.

Just like Fairfax County and Northern VA should be tired of subsidizing the rest of VA.

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.

You have no way of knowing this.

+1

Plus, would you want to deal with those parents? You could not pay me enough.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like the idea of Mclean City taking over Langley and McLean HS buildings. North McLean HS and South McLean HS. That way one McLean HS is not overcrowded.

And that way Langley HS families are responsible for paying for renovating McLean HS. That sounds like a great plan.

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?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is predictably what happens when "equity" becomes the primary focus of a school system or county government.

The equity advocates are very clear. "Equity" is about taking all steps possible to produce equal outcomes; "equality" is about similar levels of resource allocation and equal opportunities.

People thought "equity" sounded reasonable, so they supported candidates who endorsed One Fairfax and the "equity" agenda. Now they're seeing that officials will deliberately allocate fewer resources to places like McLean because that might elevate equality over equity, whereas spending more on low-income areas and less in higher-income areas is consistent with an "equity" focus.

This was readily accepted when it wasn't so explicitly stated. Folks in McLean (and Vienna, Burke, Fairfax Station, and similar areas) tacitly agreed that some schools would get more funding, have smaller classes, receive additional teacher's aides, etc. It seemed appropriately designed to give an extra boost to higher-needs students.

But now it's all spelled out explicitly, people are expected to accept it as a matter of faith or else, and the short-changing of higher-income areas isn't treated like a necessary evil, but something that's a moral imperative. As it turns out, people still care about their own kids, and they don't like what they are seeing. Whether McLean can pull off separating from FC remains to be seen, but it's another canary in the coal mine that people weren't quite as "all-in" on the equity bandwagon as some of their recent votes may have suggested.

This is half of it. The other half is that the other candidates were nutters.

Anonymous wrote:This is predictably what happens when "equity" becomes the primary focus of a school system or county government.

The equity advocates are very clear. "Equity" is about taking all steps possible to produce equal outcomes; "equality" is about similar levels of resource allocation and equal opportunities.

People thought "equity" sounded reasonable, so they supported candidates who endorsed One Fairfax and the "equity" agenda. Now they're seeing that officials will deliberately allocate fewer resources to places like McLean because that might elevate equality over equity, whereas spending more on low-income areas and less in higher-income areas is consistent with an "equity" focus.

This was readily accepted when it wasn't so explicitly stated. Folks in McLean (and Vienna, Burke, Fairfax Station, and similar areas) tacitly agreed that some schools would get more funding, have smaller classes, receive additional teacher's aides, etc. It seemed appropriately designed to give an extra boost to higher-needs students.

But now it's all spelled out explicitly, people are expected to accept it as a matter of faith or else, and the short-changing of higher-income areas isn't treated like a necessary evil, but something that's a moral imperative. As it turns out, people still care about their own kids, and they don't like what they are seeing. Whether McLean can pull off separating from FC remains to be seen, but it's another canary in the coal mine that people weren't quite as "all-in" on the equity bandwagon as some of their recent votes may have suggested.

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.

The top schools in Va (after TJ) are Langley and Mclean HS. Langley got a beautiful renovation done recently. Apart from the over-crowding issue at Mclean HS, how exactly are these schools being "short-changed"?