Anonymous wrote:

The School board should make the best choices for the students--not just the wealthy students whose parents have the time and resources.

100% this

Repeal 8130 and get back to only necessary boundary changes.

The School board should make the best choices for the students--not just the wealthy students whose parents have the time and resources.

100% this

Since this entire process was supposed to focus on the transparency - can we see the final recommendations or written notes they gave last week?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pupil placing is a brain drain on certain schools. Often, it feels like the people most anxious to move other students into these Schools are the families who take advantage of pupil placing and don’t want that pupil placing practice to be scrutinized.

Pupil placement is the first thing that should be looked at. It will solve all the “problems” that the school board complains about.

Any time a solution is offered you have to look at what new problems it might cause.

That was one of the biggest flaws with what Thru proposed. They were lazy consultants just looking to collect a fee, so their approach was to identify a problem, come up with the most half-assed solution possible to solve it, and ignore the fact that they created as many problems as they solved.

We should address the reasons why kids are pupil placing, and not just limit them.

We are pretty confident that AP vs IB is one of the reasons given. And, yes, focus needs to be given to good, direct instruction in struggling schools.

I would give an additional stipend to good teachers who volunteer to teach in high FARMS schools.

Just following the logic the solution should be eliminating IB in the first instance before halting pupil placements. One approach is responsive; the other is punitive.,

Or offer AP at all schools. Maybe offer IB at schools that express an interest and have at least 10% of the student body complete the diploma. That should lead to 3 maybe 4 schools with IB and AP so students who want IB have a place to go.

There would only be 1, possibly 2 APs schools if 10% of students completing the diploma was the floor for IB.

Robnson would have IB.

Marshall would meet the treshhold some years but not others.

That is it.

And, doesn't Robinson offer quite a bit of AP?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pupil placing is a brain drain on certain schools. Often, it feels like the people most anxious to move other students into these Schools are the families who take advantage of pupil placing and don’t want that pupil placing practice to be scrutinized.

Pupil placement is the first thing that should be looked at. It will solve all the “problems” that the school board complains about.

Any time a solution is offered you have to look at what new problems it might cause.

That was one of the biggest flaws with what Thru proposed. They were lazy consultants just looking to collect a fee, so their approach was to identify a problem, come up with the most half-assed solution possible to solve it, and ignore the fact that they created as many problems as they solved.

We should address the reasons why kids are pupil placing, and not just limit them.

We are pretty confident that AP vs IB is one of the reasons given. And, yes, focus needs to be given to good, direct instruction in struggling schools.

I would give an additional stipend to good teachers who volunteer to teach in high FARMS schools.

Just following the logic the solution should be eliminating IB in the first instance before halting pupil placements. One approach is responsive; the other is punitive.,

Or offer AP at all schools. Maybe offer IB at schools that express an interest and have at least 10% of the student body complete the diploma. That should lead to 3 maybe 4 schools with IB and AP so students who want IB have a place to go.

There would only be 1, possibly 2 APs schools if 10% of students completing the diploma was the floor for IB.

Robnson would have IB.

Marshall would meet the treshhold some years but not others.

That is it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pupil placing is a brain drain on certain schools. Often, it feels like the people most anxious to move other students into these Schools are the families who take advantage of pupil placing and don’t want that pupil placing practice to be scrutinized.

Pupil placement is the first thing that should be looked at. It will solve all the “problems” that the school board complains about.

Any time a solution is offered you have to look at what new problems it might cause.

That was one of the biggest flaws with what Thru proposed. They were lazy consultants just looking to collect a fee, so their approach was to identify a problem, come up with the most half-assed solution possible to solve it, and ignore the fact that they created as many problems as they solved.

We should address the reasons why kids are pupil placing, and not just limit them.

We are pretty confident that AP vs IB is one of the reasons given. And, yes, focus needs to be given to good, direct instruction in struggling schools.

I would give an additional stipend to good teachers who volunteer to teach in high FARMS schools.

Just following the logic the solution should be eliminating IB in the first instance before halting pupil placements. One approach is responsive; the other is punitive.,

Or offer AP at all schools. Maybe offer IB at schools that express an interest and have at least 10% of the student body complete the diploma. That should lead to 3 maybe 4 schools with IB and AP so students who want IB have a place to go.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pupil placing is a brain drain on certain schools. Often, it feels like the people most anxious to move other students into these Schools are the families who take advantage of pupil placing and don’t want that pupil placing practice to be scrutinized.

Pupil placement is the first thing that should be looked at. It will solve all the “problems” that the school board complains about.

Any time a solution is offered you have to look at what new problems it might cause.

That was one of the biggest flaws with what Thru proposed. They were lazy consultants just looking to collect a fee, so their approach was to identify a problem, come up with the most half-assed solution possible to solve it, and ignore the fact that they created as many problems as they solved.

We should address the reasons why kids are pupil placing, and not just limit them.

We are pretty confident that AP vs IB is one of the reasons given. And, yes, focus needs to be given to good, direct instruction in struggling schools.

I would give an additional stipend to good teachers who volunteer to teach in high FARMS schools.

Just following the logic the solution should be eliminating IB in the first instance before halting pupil placements. One approach is responsive; the other is punitive.,

I suggested the stipend, but I definitely agree about getting rid of IB. It is clear.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pupil placing is a brain drain on certain schools. Often, it feels like the people most anxious to move other students into these Schools are the families who take advantage of pupil placing and don’t want that pupil placing practice to be scrutinized.

Pupil placement is the first thing that should be looked at. It will solve all the “problems” that the school board complains about.

Any time a solution is offered you have to look at what new problems it might cause.

That was one of the biggest flaws with what Thru proposed. They were lazy consultants just looking to collect a fee, so their approach was to identify a problem, come up with the most half-assed solution possible to solve it, and ignore the fact that they created as many problems as they solved.

We should address the reasons why kids are pupil placing, and not just limit them.

We are pretty confident that AP vs IB is one of the reasons given. And, yes, focus needs to be given to good, direct instruction in struggling schools.

I would give an additional stipend to good teachers who volunteer to teach in high FARMS schools.

Just following the logic the solution should be eliminating IB in the first instance before halting pupil placements. One approach is responsive; the other is punitive.,

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pupil placing is a brain drain on certain schools. Often, it feels like the people most anxious to move other students into these Schools are the families who take advantage of pupil placing and don’t want that pupil placing practice to be scrutinized.

Pupil placement is the first thing that should be looked at. It will solve all the “problems” that the school board complains about.

Any time a solution is offered you have to look at what new problems it might cause.

That was one of the biggest flaws with what Thru proposed. They were lazy consultants just looking to collect a fee, so their approach was to identify a problem, come up with the most half-assed solution possible to solve it, and ignore the fact that they created as many problems as they solved.

We should address the reasons why kids are pupil placing, and not just limit them.

The problem has been wholly misidentified. The reason these schools are under capacity is because of structural offerings that have allowed students to flee the schools (e.g., languages and IB).

I don’t have any objection to that normally, but it is offensive to the core that the school board then pretends that we have to have a comprehensive review to plug the holes from these students fleeing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pupil placing is a brain drain on certain schools. Often, it feels like the people most anxious to move other students into these Schools are the families who take advantage of pupil placing and don’t want that pupil placing practice to be scrutinized.

Pupil placement is the first thing that should be looked at. It will solve all the “problems” that the school board complains about.

Any time a solution is offered you have to look at what new problems it might cause.

That was one of the biggest flaws with what Thru proposed. They were lazy consultants just looking to collect a fee, so their approach was to identify a problem, come up with the most half-assed solution possible to solve it, and ignore the fact that they created as many problems as they solved.

We should address the reasons why kids are pupil placing, and not just limit them.

We are pretty confident that AP vs IB is one of the reasons given. And, yes, focus needs to be given to good, direct instruction in struggling schools.

I would give an additional stipend to good teachers who volunteer to teach in high FARMS schools.

Anonymous wrote:Pupil placing is a brain drain on certain schools. Often, it feels like the people most anxious to move other students into these Schools are the families who take advantage of pupil placing and don’t want that pupil placing practice to be scrutinized.

Pupil placement is the first thing that should be looked at. It will solve all the “problems” that the school board complains about.

Any time a solution is offered you have to look at what new problems it might cause.

That was one of the biggest flaws with what Thru proposed. They were lazy consultants just looking to collect a fee, so their approach was to identify a problem, come up with the most half-assed solution possible to solve it, and ignore the fact that they created as many problems as they solved.

We should address the reasons why kids are pupil placing, and not just limit them.

Anonymous wrote:Pupil placing is a brain drain on certain schools. Often, it feels like the people most anxious to move other students into these Schools are the families who take advantage of pupil placing and don’t want that pupil placing practice to be scrutinized.

Pupil placement is the first thing that should be looked at. It will solve all the “problems” that the school board complains about.

Not sure it will solve ALL the problems, but it certainly could have a high impact. When you have more than 100 students placing out for other than TJ, there is a serious issue with it.

Pupil placing is a brain drain on certain schools. Often, it feels like the people most anxious to move other students into these Schools are the families who take advantage of pupil placing and don’t want that pupil placing practice to be scrutinized.

Pupil placement is the first thing that should be looked at. It will solve all the “problems” that the school board complains about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need to get rid of IB and bring in-boundary students back to the base school. After that, we can start talking over or under capacity schools, but only after that.

They should also standardize foreign language options so that we don't have some high schools offering multiple languages typically not offered at other schools.

I don't think that is possible. But, they could limit placement based on that or offer virtual classes if they insist.

There would not be enough qualified teachers interested in teaching some of those languages.

Fine, then just offer certain languages online. This is a glaring inequity within FCPS and you want to prevent kids from pupil placing into the favored schools while other schools get inferior options.

Agree. And, I know for a fact that it has been used as a way to transfer for sports by claiming extreme interest in a particular foreign language.

Anonymous wrote:I hate that they are bringing public into this. You are there to make the best decisions for the county schools; not listen to a bunch of self interest serving parents. Make the best choices and we will live with it.

In our neighborhood's case the scenario four (which was different than the prior ones) put us in a worse situation. We reached out to the BRAC and they were like whoa, we don't want that and did not recommend it. It was an error apparently and has been adjusted.

What if other errors have occurred as well and are not caught... It could be your neighborhood.

I don't agree with the people who are like don't send me to Lewis, Lewis is a crappy school. But, I also think that the county needs to look at transfers, residency, etc. I had assumed that this would be part of the data presented in the process.