Anonymous wrote:Textbooks would be a great start. I cannot believe my kid doesn't have a math textbook and has NEVER had a math textbook.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When the entirety of a school district’s mission has NOTHING to do with educating children expectations should be very low, and the results, unsurprisingly, reveal children are not being educated. Equitably failing is equity for all.

My bigger problem is ACPS’s narrow focus on what remediates the equity issue. You are correct that ACPS’s first mission should be educating its student population. Equity fits right with that because of the barriers to some groups to the same educational opportunity. Thus, if ACPS was really focused on equity, it would start with instituting the best instructional approach possible to give all its students the best opportunity. Instead, ACPS seems to love to downplay its poor test scores and spend little time looking at its instructional approaches (or not even focus on where it might be moving in the right direction like the adoption of a evidence based reading instruction program for lower elementary (Really Great Reading).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, not interested in moving. Our jobs are both DC based. We are not interested in private schools and I am not sure why that is always the "solution".

Bless your heart.

It's the solution because there is no alternative. Alexandrians would rather pretend the schools are good, than demand that the schools actually be good. Then it doesn't make their cocktail parties and scholarship fundraisers awkward.

I banged my head against the ACPS wall for years. Nothing changes. Save yourself the frustration and the trouble of your neighbors vilifying you and insulting responses from School Board members (if you get any response).

Stay but know that you'll have to teach the fundamentals at home or leave and get a proper education for your kid(s).

I have two recent TC grads. One went to UVA and one went to UNC Chapel Hill. All my frinds who went to private schools went to way lesser schools and spent 160k per kid gettng them there. Yikes. Some people just aren't good at making decisions.

Huh. We send our children to private schools because we have the money to do it. You don't. Oh well. Spending the tuition money doesn't mean that we aren't making a good decision. In fact, your post validates our choice. Yikes right back atcha, sweetie.

DP

P.S. Your math is incorrect. It is +$50,000 per year per child for 13 years.

Tell your kid to have fun at Elon!

Further validation of why we did not send our children to ACPS.

PP, you have problems. The sad thing is that you think you're being cute and that you've posted a zinger. You don't realize that it doesn't matter where our children go to school because they already are so far ahead of you that you'll never catch up.

If only you knew. I'm decimals ahead of you, fool. I got that way by being good with money, not by blowing it on pathetic 'privates' like SSSAS.

SSSAS is Applebees.

Most privates are similar. Those who graduate from the Big privates aren’t getting ahead because they got some grand education, they’re getting ahead because they’re of a socioeconomic class that allowed them to afford the Big privates and thus were already on 3rd base.

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Back to class sizes. It seems like in March of last year, the school board voted to increase class sizes. It might be enrollment projections, but our school historically gets more kids: military, foreign service, SIVs, kids in community housing.

On the ACPS school board website, I found a 2020 teacher to student ratio. I saw our school and saw that at that time, we had a low teacher to student ratio. I assume that is ACPS' rationale for moving to less classrooms with more students. And then I see the vacancies no longer list what school they are for on the ACPS HR website. Instead they are generic, school wide positions so they are interchangable.

I am sorry that this conversation diverged into public vs. private and ACPS and Alexandria politics. I believe politics have no place in education and we need to do what is best for our students and teachers.

The SOLs were published for the state and ACPS has some serious issues. But I think the issues are because of the diversity of population: immigrants and refugess, very low income kids, kids who are learning English, kids with many challenges due to homelessness, etc.

Anonymous wrote:When the entirety of a school district’s mission has NOTHING to do with educating children expectations should be very low, and the results, unsurprisingly, reveal children are not being educated. Equitably failing is equity for all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Back to class sizes. It seems like in March of last year, the school board voted to increase class sizes. It might be enrollment projections, but our school historically gets more kids: military, foreign service, SIVs, kids in community housing.

On the ACPS school board website, I found a 2020 teacher to student ratio. I saw our school and saw that at that time, we had a low teacher to student ratio. I assume that is ACPS' rationale for moving to less classrooms with more students. And then I see the vacancies no longer list what school they are for on the ACPS HR website. Instead they are generic, school wide positions so they are interchangable.

I am sorry that this conversation diverged into public vs. private and ACPS and Alexandria politics. I believe politics have no place in education and we need to do what is best for our students and teachers.

The SOLs were published for the state and ACPS has some serious issues. But I think the issues are because of the diversity of population: immigrants and refugess, very low income kids, kids who are learning English, kids with many challenges due to homelessness, etc.

Why would the school board do that. Not sure if they didnt have any other choices with hiring being difficult, but sucks because low class size used to be a great thing about ACPS.

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Back to class sizes. It seems like in March of last year, the school board voted to increase class sizes. It might be enrollment projections, but our school historically gets more kids: military, foreign service, SIVs, kids in community housing.

On the ACPS school board website, I found a 2020 teacher to student ratio. I saw our school and saw that at that time, we had a low teacher to student ratio. I assume that is ACPS' rationale for moving to less classrooms with more students. And then I see the vacancies no longer list what school they are for on the ACPS HR website. Instead they are generic, school wide positions so they are interchangable.

I am sorry that this conversation diverged into public vs. private and ACPS and Alexandria politics. I believe politics have no place in education and we need to do what is best for our students and teachers.

The SOLs were published for the state and ACPS has some serious issues. But I think the issues are because of the diversity of population: immigrants and refugess, very low income kids, kids who are learning English, kids with many challenges due to homelessness, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By diversity I am strictly talking about wealth. Less than 20% off Lyles Crouch students qualify for free or reduced lunch. That's almost less than half as many students as the next two wealthy schools Brooks and George Mason which are closer to 30% free and reduced lunch. Compare that to the 70% of low income students at schools like Patrick Henry of Ferdinand T. Day.

Rich students = good test scores. That's the answer, there's no other secret curriculum that is making the students perform better.

According your logic, with L-C at 20% free or reduced lunch and GM at 30%, GM should proficiency numbers should only be around 10% below L-C. That's not the case. The proficiency numbers aren't even close.

So what is the solution to increasing ACPS' dismal proficiency numbers if curriculum isn't (even partially) a factor?

Overall, social scientists and education scholars have found that there are two things that correlate with higher reading and math proficiency:

(1) the mother's education level (not SES);
(2) more guided reading time/more small group math intervention from K-3 - what this looks like is more small-group tutoring and more summer school - (Lyles-Crouch is very good about identifying students before they fall below grade level and staff or community volunteers step in to provide extra tutoring). All the others ES schools provide additional tutoring for students who are falling behind but Lyles-Crouch is very proactive about it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By diversity I am strictly talking about wealth. Less than 20% off Lyles Crouch students qualify for free or reduced lunch. That's almost less than half as many students as the next two wealthy schools Brooks and George Mason which are closer to 30% free and reduced lunch. Compare that to the 70% of low income students at schools like Patrick Henry of Ferdinand T. Day.

Rich students = good test scores. That's the answer, there's no other secret curriculum that is making the students perform better.

According your logic, with L-C at 20% free or reduced lunch and GM at 30%, GM should proficiency numbers should only be around 10% below L-C. That's not the case. The proficiency numbers aren't even close.

So what is the solution to increasing ACPS' dismal proficiency numbers if curriculum isn't (even partially) a factor?

Overall, social scientists and education scholars have found that there are two things that correlate with higher reading and math proficiency:

(1) the mother's education level (not SES);
(2) more guided reading time/more small group math intervention from K-3 - what this looks like is more small-group tutoring and more summer school - (Lyles-Crouch is very good about identifying students before they fall below grade level and staff or community volunteers step in to provide extra tutoring). All the others ES schools provide additional tutoring for students who are falling behind but Lyles-Crouch is very proactive about it.

Anonymous wrote:By diversity I am strictly talking about wealth. Less than 20% off Lyles Crouch students qualify for free or reduced lunch. That's almost less than half as many students as the next two wealthy schools Brooks and George Mason which are closer to 30% free and reduced lunch. Compare that to the 70% of low income students at schools like Patrick Henry of Ferdinand T. Day.

Rich students = good test scores. That's the answer, there's no other secret curriculum that is making the students perform better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's up with this garbage about lyles crouchs traditional model that someone writes in every discussion. The reason that the school preforms so high is because there in NO diversity. It is a neighborhood school filled with children who live in million dollar homes in Old Town. That's the secret to the school's success. Rich children with involved families = good scores. It has nothing to do with thier traditional model or curriculum.

By your logic and definition of diversity, George Mason and Brooks should be "high performing" schools. Their diversity numbers are about the same as L-C and they have involved parents. But their proficiency numbers don't come close to L-C and are abysmal.

You may want to ask yourself why you find it so hard to accept that a different curriculum might be better than what is in place at the other schools.

Co-signed. It’s the superior school curriculum and the leadership.