Anonymous wrote:Nice sockpuppeting. OP asked, “For those of you who have sent their kids to Thoreau instead of LJMS, how do you feel? Are your children challenged enough? Are you liking the level of instruction and feel it is adequate?” And you claim that someone answering who had no kids at either school is better, bc then there is no bias...
This is why we can’t argue with you. You make no sense, contribute little other than your repeated histrionic arguments and you prattle on and on (and on and on).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You throw up a lot of numbers, without even recognizing the sharp changes in one year. The trends are clear.
A reduction in Asian students from 25% of the population (before rezoning) to 23.8% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."
A reduction in White students from 26% of the population(before the rezoing) to 24.4% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."
The actual number of Asian and white students (as well as every other group of students -- hispanic, black, multi-race, etc.) decreased BECAUSE THERE WAS A REZONING. That was the whole point of the rezoning --- TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF (Asian, white, black, hispanic, and all other) STUDENTS AT LJ.
It is a pity that you are having a hard time understanding this.
This. a million times this. It is like arguing with an idiot. And...she doesn't even have kids at either school...she throws this crap out in the hopes that the decision will change and her property value will increase. The truth is that LJ was doing fine before and is fine now and Thoreau is doing fine now and was fine before.
Keep telling yourself that. It's in the CIP that Thoreau is now projected to me the most overcrowded middle school in FCPS in a few years. And you don't appear to understand (1) how the white/Asian demographics at Jackson are changing more rapidly than the Hispanic demographics and (2) how these trends invariably play out over longer periods.
FCPS has played this game before, and we have multiple "basket case" schools to show for it. Jackson will be another one.
How is any of this answering the questions asked about academics at Thoreau?!
She always chimes in with this gibberish. And I’m sure she’ll think it’s a single person asking her to refrain from providing non responsive answers, esp when she has NO KIDS at these schools!!!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You throw up a lot of numbers, without even recognizing the sharp changes in one year. The trends are clear.
A reduction in Asian students from 25% of the population (before rezoning) to 23.8% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."
A reduction in White students from 26% of the population(before the rezoing) to 24.4% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."
The actual number of Asian and white students (as well as every other group of students -- hispanic, black, multi-race, etc.) decreased BECAUSE THERE WAS A REZONING. That was the whole point of the rezoning --- TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF (Asian, white, black, hispanic, and all other) STUDENTS AT LJ.
It is a pity that you are having a hard time understanding this.
This. a million times this. It is like arguing with an idiot. And...she doesn't even have kids at either school...she throws this crap out in the hopes that the decision will change and her property value will increase. The truth is that LJ was doing fine before and is fine now and Thoreau is doing fine now and was fine before.
Keep telling yourself that. It's in the CIP that Thoreau is now projected to me the most overcrowded middle school in FCPS in a few years. And you don't appear to understand (1) how the white/Asian demographics at Jackson are changing more rapidly than the Hispanic demographics and (2) how these trends invariably play out over longer periods.
FCPS has played this game before, and we have multiple "basket case" schools to show for it. Jackson will be another one.
How is any of this answering the questions asked about academics at Thoreau?!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You throw up a lot of numbers, without even recognizing the sharp changes in one year. The trends are clear.
A reduction in Asian students from 25% of the population (before rezoning) to 23.8% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."
A reduction in White students from 26% of the population(before the rezoing) to 24.4% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."
The actual number of Asian and white students (as well as every other group of students -- hispanic, black, multi-race, etc.) decreased BECAUSE THERE WAS A REZONING. That was the whole point of the rezoning --- TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF (Asian, white, black, hispanic, and all other) STUDENTS AT LJ.
It is a pity that you are having a hard time understanding this.
This. a million times this. It is like arguing with an idiot. And...she doesn't even have kids at either school...she throws this crap out in the hopes that the decision will change and her property value will increase. The truth is that LJ was doing fine before and is fine now and Thoreau is doing fine now and was fine before.
Keep telling yourself that. It's in the CIP that Thoreau is now projected to me the most overcrowded middle school in FCPS in a few years. And you don't appear to understand (1) how the white/Asian demographics at Jackson are changing more rapidly than the Hispanic demographics and (2) how these trends invariably play out over longer periods.
FCPS has played this game before, and we have multiple "basket case" schools to show for it. Jackson will be another one.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You throw up a lot of numbers, without even recognizing the sharp changes in one year. The trends are clear.
A reduction in Asian students from 25% of the population (before rezoning) to 23.8% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."
A reduction in White students from 26% of the population(before the rezoing) to 24.4% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."
The actual number of Asian and white students (as well as every other group of students -- hispanic, black, multi-race, etc.) decreased BECAUSE THERE WAS A REZONING. That was the whole point of the rezoning --- TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF (Asian, white, black, hispanic, and all other) STUDENTS AT LJ.
It is a pity that you are having a hard time understanding this.
This. a million times this. It is like arguing with an idiot. And...she doesn't even have kids at either school...she throws this crap out in the hopes that the decision will change and her property value will increase. The truth is that LJ was doing fine before and is fine now and Thoreau is doing fine now and was fine before.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You throw up a lot of numbers, without even recognizing the sharp changes in one year. The trends are clear.
A reduction in Asian students from 25% of the population (before rezoning) to 23.8% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."
A reduction in White students from 26% of the population(before the rezoing) to 24.4% (after rezoining) is NOT a "sharp change."
The actual number of Asian and white students (as well as every other group of students -- hispanic, black, multi-race, etc.) decreased BECAUSE THERE WAS A REZONING. That was the whole point of the rezoning --- TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF (Asian, white, black, hispanic, and all other) STUDENTS AT LJ.
It is a pity that you are having a hard time understanding this.
Anonymous wrote:You throw up a lot of numbers, without even recognizing the sharp changes in one year. The trends are clear.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m saying no one cares about her home’s value. Indeed, if possible, I care less about it with each post.
Try to stay on topic.
Someone above asked, “Are you saying Palchik didn't look out for LJ and Falls Church?” ThAts what I answered. You make a good point however and for the love of everything AAP related, don’t keep posting about your stupid home value in The aap forum. Please.
Who are you talking to? It sounds like you’ve lost your marbles. Several posters have observed that Palchik hasn’t been looking out for the schools in her district. LJ is in her district and has a declining AAP program.
That’s all on topic, unlike your repeated references to real estate, which you should take somewhere else.
How do you know the LJ Aap is "declining?" Do you have actual numbets or other criteria that says it is losing quality or numbers?
One telling statistic is that the enrollment at Jackson went down this year by considerably more than the enrollment at Thoreau increased (339 decline at Jackson vs. 265 increase at Thoreau). Another is that, in percentage terms, the number of white and Asian kids at Jackson declined considerably more than the number of Hispanic kids, who tend to be less advantaged. More details on LJ and its AAP program will emerge over time, but the data so far is not favorable. FCPS did a hatchet job on the school.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m saying no one cares about her home’s value. Indeed, if possible, I care less about it with each post.
Try to stay on topic.
Someone above asked, “Are you saying Palchik didn't look out for LJ and Falls Church?” ThAts what I answered. You make a good point however and for the love of everything AAP related, don’t keep posting about your stupid home value in The aap forum. Please.
Who are you talking to? It sounds like you’ve lost your marbles. Several posters have observed that Palchik hasn’t been looking out for the schools in her district. LJ is in her district and has a declining AAP program.
That’s all on topic, unlike your repeated references to real estate, which you should take somewhere else.
How do you know the LJ Aap is "declining?" Do you have actual numbets or other criteria that says it is losing quality or numbers?