Facts Get in the Way of Gloomy Gaslighting about Fairfax County Public Schools
- Marianne Burke, PhD
- 2 hours ago
- 3 min read
Stephanie Lundquist-Arora’s recent gloomy commentary about Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) in Heritage Foundation’s Daily Signal is large on hysterical arm-waving, but is short on facts, as has been the case with over 100 of her previous anti-FCPS commentaries. It is yet another attempt by those trying to privatize public schools to gaslight or misinform the public with claims that public schools are failing. As is often the case with gaslighting, the claims are easy to refute.
Without providing a source, Lundquist-Arora erroneously described FCPS as being on a ‘downward trajectory’. In fact, “FCPS made gains in all three federally reported subject areas in the Standards of Learning (SOL) tests in 2025 compared to 2024, with improvements for most students across subjects. These consistent improvements were in spite of the fact that both reading and mathematics saw new, more rigorous SOL tests [in 2025].” Also, FCPS test scores continue to surpass state average scores.
One can only assume that Lundquist-Arora is recycling erroneous information from 2023 when the Youngkin administration tried to gaslight the public about the supposed failure of Virginia's public schools. Those claims were debunked by 4 Public Education based on factual interpretations of results for Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT), SOL and National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) tests.
Lundquist-Arora claimed that 20% of the schools in the FCPS district are underperforming, without providing any source so it is hard to know where she found support for that claim. In fact, according to the VDOE, only 5.50% of FCPS schools are “off track” and 10% need “intensive support” based on the revised school accreditation data. Many if not all of these schools have a high number of low income students. Since Lundquist-Arora likes to compare Fairfax and Loudoun School districts, the latter district has a larger proportion of schools that are “off track” (13%) but a slightly lower percentage of schools that need “intensive support” (3%) than FCPS. Of course, both of these school districts contrast with the statewide ratings where 27.7% of the schools are rated off track and 17.2% need intensive support.
In similarly erroneous analyses, Lundquist-Arora claimed high SOL test failure rates for FCPS students. But failure rates in that school system are well below those for the Commonwealth of Virginia, and Lundquist-Arora doesn’t account for the high number of economically disadvantaged students in the FCPS district, a population that tends to score substantially lower on SOL tests than the general student population.
Regarding Lundquist-Arora’s concern that enrollment in public schools will continue to ‘fail’ without a course correction, we wonder what her proposed course correction is? Does she want FCPS to veer from its commitment to deliver excellence, equity, and opportunity in education and ensure that each and every student reaches their greatest potential? Or is this her way of expressing her dissatisfaction that FCPS is not bowing to political pressure by groups such as hers to discriminate against members of its student body and censor the truth?
Paid spokespeople, who are parents like Lundquist-Arora with children in FCPS, should be transparent that some of their claims may be attempts to undermine public education by the school privatization lobby. Learn more here in Vanessa Hall's analysis.
Families that are successfully convinced to leave their public schools may find the less regulation and accountability and variable performance in their new school unacceptable. Private schools are free to reject or expel any student because they are free to discriminate without accountability. Private schools do not have to follow civil rights and other laws that are requirements for public schools. Parents may find that it is the private schools and not the parents who have the “school choice”.
Parents are encouraged to evaluate for themselves the advantages and disadvantages of each school setting and they should not just believe the politically motivated and often erroneous claims made by those who have a school privatization agenda.
Please find companion pieces here by Marianne Burke and Vanessa Hall.
Comments