The Most Active Threads Since Friday

The most active thread over the weekend was the one about the Los Angeles fires that I've already discussed. Skipping that one, the next most active thread was titled, "Were Attendance Levels Status Quo Today?" and was posted in the "Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)" forum. The entire text of the first post was "Subnet says it all." The original poster should have done two things: 1) wrote a more explanatory post, and; 2) proofread before posting. She obviously meant "Subject says it all". Almost every day last week, a thread about the Fairfax County Public Schools system being closed due to snow was the most active thread of the day. I finally locked that thread on Friday when the schools reopened, albeit two hours late. That thread had reached 220 pages in length, and posters were clearly not done talking about snow. This thread was started almost immediately after I locked the previous one. On the face of it, this thread is supposed to be about the attendance levels at school on Friday. In reality, it just became a continuation of the thread that I had locked. The point of opening schools two hours late is to allow any morning freezing to begin melting. However, it throws off the schedules of many parents who have to be at their jobs on time, not two hours late. This is especially problematic when parents need to be involved in getting their kids to school, either by taking them there or walking them to the bus stop. Some of these parents believe that schools should have opened at the normal time. Others argue that schools should have closed for another day. As I have said in other posts about school snow days, school systems will be criticized regardless of what decision they make. There is simply no possible way for them to please everyone. Some posters reported that attendance was way down, though it was not clear how they were able to know that. Teachers that posted tended to report that attendance was essentially normal, though at least one said that about half of her students were out. In many ways, this thread simply highlights the reversal of fortunes of the two sides to the snow day debate. Those who favor closing schools had been getting their way throughout the week. Now they weren't. So now they were upset that the shoe was on the other foot. Their attitude towards those who wanted schools to open didn't change, however. Just as in the other thread, the pro-closing posters accused the pro-opening posters of not wanting to parent their kids and preferring to spend their time at the spa or Pilates classes rather than caring for their kids. One poster who was especially upset about the opening claimed that it was disruptive to her job. It is not clear to me how closing schools for the day would have been less disruptive if she, indeed, would have spent her time caring for her kids. There was an interesting discussion about whether sending kids to school when roads and sidewalks might be icy is risky or whether the challenge might actually be healthy for kids who are being too overly protected these days.

The next most active thread was the snow day thread that I mentioned above. Had I not locked it, I suspect that it easily could have been the most active of the weekend. After that thread was a thread posted in the "Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)" forum and titled, "New TJ principal announced". The original poster linked to an announcement that a new principal had been selected for the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, commonly referred to as "TJ". The new principal is Michael Mukai who, notably, had been a TJ student himself, graduating in 1989. As even casual readers of the AAP forum will know, it is dominated by TJ threads and TJ threads are dominated by debates concerning the current admissions policies. In the past, students were admitted to TJ based on an entrance examination. Proponents of this system argued that it was an objective means of identifying the most qualified students. Opponents of using the test argued that some students prepped extensively for the exam, taking specialized courses and gaining other unfair advantages. Regardless of whether it was due to merit or such advantages, the student body grew to be roughly 80% Asian. This elicited complaints that the school did not represent the demographics of FCPS and that some students were being unfairly excluded. A new admissions system was implemented that sought to admit a more diverse student body that drew from all schools in FCPS rather than a select few as had often been the case. The new system was extremely controversial and provoked legal battles that went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court with the rulings falling in favor of FCPS and the new system. But that hasn't ended the debates. Far from it. The argument tends to turn up in every TJ thread and this one is no different. Part of the issue here is that the outgoing principal was identified with the admissions changes and is strongly reviled by the opponents of the new system. Those opposed to the changes claim that students who are not academically prepared for the school are now being admitted, and the school is losing its academic edge. To strengthen their argument, they highlight TJ's drop in school rankings. Many of these posters hope that Mukai will restore the entrance exam and return the school to what they view as its glory days. Others contend that the principal doesn't have such authority, which, instead, belongs to the Board of Education. For the most part, this thread is simply a reiteration of the same arguments that have been posted in the countless TJ threads over the past few years. There is some discussion of the current admissions process that is, in parts, new to me but probably not to the usual readers of these threads. At some point, I guess posters will tire of arguing about TJ's admissions, but I don't think that time is in the near future. Good luck to Principal Mukai, who, hopefully, in addition to the rest of his qualifications, is a skilled diplomat. It will probably be necessary in his new role.

Going from one county's school system to another, the next most active thread was titled, "TPMS is killing the arts, the magnet program, and the autism program" and posted in the "Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)" forum. Whereas the two threads that I discussed above were characterized by their original posters not bothering to write very much, this thread starts with the original poster going to the opposite extreme. She drafted what might well be the longest run-on sentence in the history of DCUM. Despite the quantity of words, however, I was unable to understand what she was trying to say. Apparently, Takoma Park Middle School has proposed changing its bell schedule, the daily class schedule followed by students. Somehow, this is going to hinder the ability of certain groups of students to attend arts and music classes. This, in turn, will — according to the original poster — negatively impact a range of programs at the school. I could not determine from the post how or why this is the case. In a follow-up post, the original poster clarified that TPMS teachers had voted to go from teaching 6 classes to 5. This would reduce the electives that students can take from 2 to 1. Since magnet students generally take a language class for one elective, this would eliminate their ability to take an arts or music class. The poster says that students in the school's autism program would not be able to take any electives. This change is apparently not because the TPMS teachers are lazy, but because they have been teaching more classes than other Montgomery County Public School teachers for the same pay. This change will simply bring them into alignment with other teachers and their contract. If I understand things correctly, TPMS is not a magnet school in the sense that all of its students are magnet students. Rather, it is a neighborhood school with a magnet program. Nevertheless, students come from all over Montgomery County to participate in the magnet program. The incentive for this is said by some posters — including the original poster — to be stronger course offerings. By reducing the number of electives that magnet students can take, the program becomes less competitive vis-à-vis regular neighborhood schools and, therefore, may not justify the lengthy commutes required for some students. If parents decide that the program no longer justifies the extra effort to attend, they may remove their kids. This will weaken, if not destroy, the program according to some posters. The counterargument is that the attraction of the TPMS magnet program is strong STEM classes. Some posters would rather have small core classes and address art and music interests outside of school. As several posters point out, serious music students will take classes privately anyway. Therefore, not being able to take such classes at school is not that big of a loss. Moreover, other magnet programs in MCPS have the same bell schedule. Some posters agreed that the new schedule is justified, but expressed frustration with the process of informing parents. Many considered that process to be dishonest and the cause of considerable distrust.

The final thread that I will discuss today was posted in the "Political Discussion" forum and titled, "Oh California". When this thread was initially posted, I made the mistake of just reading the first few sentences, which argue that the fires in Los Angeles will result in a significant loss of property tax and that drop in revenue will affect other programs. This seems like an obviously true argument, though the extent of the revenue loss and its significance might be debatable. The rest of the post, however, which I didn't read until now, is a litany of right-wing falsehoods and misinformation. This has been one of the hallmarks of the fires: right-wing misinformation has dominated the discourse and, as a result, Los Angeles officials are forced to fight both the fires and the right-wing lies. The right-wing misinformation is not simply coming from anonymous posters on DCUM, but from the very top of the Republican Party, including from President-elect, cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump. Like all DCUM posters, I have rapidly gone from being an expert on the Middle East to being an expert on working-class politics and then to an expert on the causes of inflation. I am now an expert on fighting fires. Not really. In fact, I am pretty clueless about fires. But from reading people who are experts, it appears that Republicans are correct that important changes need to be made with regard to how the U.S. — not just Los Angeles or California — fights fires. However, the things that need to change are not the things about which Republicans are complaining. To the contrary, most of the things that Republicans argue should be done are being done. In addition, some of the claims they make simply aren't true. The bottom line from my perspective is that Republicans appear to be more interested in scoring political points than actually solving the problem of fires. I was so frustrated from reading just the first page of this thread that I gave up. It is a worthless thread that is a waste of anyone's time. Just a slew of misinformation and right-wing talking points. Rather than read or write about the blathering in this thread, I would rather discuss the thoughts of Tim Sheehy, a newly elected Republican Senator who owns a fire-fighting company. Sheehy is a conservative Republican, but — at least from my uneducated perspective — seems to know his stuff when it comes to fires. According to Sheehy, there is no longer a fire season. Rather, fires are a year-long threat. While most Republicans go to lengths to deny the impact of climate change, Sheehy seems to acknowledge that with this argument. As such, Sheehy believes that we need year-round preparation for firefighting and that we should create a national infrastructure. Instead of treating firefighters as seasonal employees, they should be hired year-round. Sheehy is currently working with Adam Schiff and Andy Kim, two liberal Democrats, to draft bipartisan legislation for addressing firefighting. Hopefully, more DCUM Republicans will begin taking their cues from him rather than Trump, but I doubt it.