Delays and Mistakes Plague Youngkin's History Standards About three weeks ago, on March 14th, Governor Youngkin’s second Virginia Superintendent of Instruction, Lisa Coons, resigned suddenly. Within a week, Governor Youngkin had appointed Coons’ deputy Emily Anne Gullickson as his third Superintendent in as many years. Gullickson is an Arizonan. Arizona is known for being 51st in education and having blanket vouchers which have blown a hole in the state budget. Gullickson is noted for having founded a pro-privatization non-profit named “A for Arizona.” For weeks, speculation had been circulating among education stakeholders as to when the instructional guidelines for Virginia’s latest History standards would be released–each week came with another promise of “soon” as history teachers anxiously waited for the materials. With past updates, guidelines and substantial resources were provided well in advance to give teachers a chance to prepare students for the different standards, new test questions, and changed formulas, thus insulating students from sudden and unnecessary failures. The 2023 History standard revisions date back to Governor Youngkin’s Executive Order One and his decree that he would “restore excellence” to Virginia schools “without the influence of inherently divisive concepts.” But the reality was very different. His first Superintendent (Jillian Balow) and Secretary of Education Aimee Guidera threw out a draft of the history standards which had been two years in preparation, included robust incorporation of parental and historian input, and which were ready to go. Instead of adopting the draft, in October 2022, the administration commissioned a secret rewrite. What they substituted was a haphazardly drafted and highly controversial Hillsdale-esque version that took out many Black, Asian, immigrant, and women’s contributions to Virginia’s history, and inserted both developmentally inappropriate and sequentially problematic topics. After a vocal uprising from parents, stakeholders, history teachers, and historians, the initial Youngkin drafts were withdrawn and a not-quite-so-terrible, compromised set of standards was approved by the Virginia Board of Education (VBOE) in April 2023. Now, almost two years later, on March 26, 2025, Emily Anne Gullickson, the 3rd Superintendent in as many years, delivered her first presentation to the VBOE. In it, she promised the guideline documents necessary to implement those standards will be rolled out week by week across April 2025. Each set of standards are mandated to be updated every 7 years. The Northam administration finished timely revisions of the History SOL in December 2021. Due to Youngkin’s unnecessary delay, we are now 10 years beyond when the 2015 History standards should have been revised. Rumors as to why they are still not out and are so late have included talk of the need to conform the standards to Trump’s most recent anti-DEI Executive Orders. At the March VBOE work session board member Anne Holton asked outright what happened, but Gullickson’s response, that they had been adding resources, left more questions than answers. Adding to the confusion, during the delay, the VDOE once again removed Indigenous People’s Day from the materials. It has since been added back in, but the change calls into question Gullickson’s assertions that they were only “adding resources.” In a letter co-signed by 12 organizations, the Virginia Social Studies Leadership Consortium asked VDOE to delay implementation of the standards for another year because Virginia’s teachers will not be able to prepare in time for the roll out in August of 2025. However, the department still plans to implement them in the coming year (2025-26) There are three signature initiatives that Governor Youngkin believed would cement his reputation as the “education governor” and substantially overhaul the whole K-12 system. They are: Changing the core subject Standards of Learning to more reflect business and socially conservative values. Establishing school choice through Lab Schools and Private school Vouchers called Education Savings Accounts, and Creating the new Support Framework for Accreditation and Accountability, which would be “honest” about student and school failures. The Framework includes changing the curriculum tracks and the scoring formulas for all K-12 subjects. Besides the rewriting of the History and Social Studies standards, in the first two years of the Governor’s tenure, the VBOE has changed the Math and English Language sets of standards. Though the Math standards were announced as implemented in Fall 2024, approved textbooks and materials were not approved by the VBOE until March of 2025, a short 5 weeks before actual SOL testing was to begin. Once again Youngkin left teachers and students without the necessary materials or time to perform well. The English Language Standards were similarly changed a year ago, March 28, 2024 to be implemented during the 2024-25 academic year, with video support being released on February 12, 2025, a week and a half into the second semester of the implementation year. When they reach implementation, the Accountability Framework initiatives promise to be the deepest and most disruptive changes in Virginia’s K-12 education system since the introduction of the Standards of Learning and their yearly state tests under Governor George Allen in 1997. Like the Standards changes, the School Performance and Support Framework was originally to be implemented the 2024-25 Academic year, then was postponed to begin data collection in January of 2025, but now is scheduled to roll out along with two new sets of standards, and an untitled change in score formulations in Fall of 2025. Aimee Guidera, the Secretary of Education who came to Virginia from Minnesota and her DC data collection business, has very much been involved in these last two Frameworks. The goal is to completely remake middle school and high school curricula and testing toward three tracks students will choose in 7th and 8th grades (Post HS schooling, Work, or Military) and raise the cut scores of the state tests to meet or exceed Proficient on the NAEP, the federal test given every three years to a relatively small sample of students. NAEP’s Proficient score has long been established as a performance score above grade level. The expectation is once again that close to 70% of students will not meet the new cut scores and increased difficulty of the new tests, created for the newly established standards requirements. Although the VDOE is currently staffed with approximately 25 people over the legal staffing limit, much of the Governor’s flagship initiatives have been developed by privatization consultant groups, some from outside Virginia, rather than by the VDOE or the numerous experts within Virginia’s highly regarded universities. However, several of the VBOE members appointed by Youngkin have a vested interest in the History Standards project, having long standing relationships with the Thomas B. Fordham Institute of Ohio and DC, which was involved in the development of the standards The Governor’s proposed budget amendments which would have funded much of his agenda. He called for $50 million to fund his Accountability Framework implementation, $15 million to fund his lab schools, and private school vouchers for an additional 5,000 students at $5,000 each or a total of $25 million. Fortunately, on April 2 in a one day session, the legislature rejected most of his budget changes. Many questions remain as the Governor, his VBOE, third Superintendent, and his data analysis Secretary approach their last nine months in office. Will the guidelines tailored to meet President Trump’s anti-DEI directives actually follow the compromise History standards approved in April 2023, or push them farther back toward the mostly-white, “patriotic” history Youngkin originally tried to get approved? Will the Accountability Frameworks set to fail a majority of Virginia’s students and communities reach implementation and be permanently established? How hard will it be for the new Governor in January of 2026 and senior staff to deal with the fall out of 70% failure rates created by Governor Youngkin and his appointees? There is little to be gained for Governor Youngkin and his appointees by implementing these last initiatives other than contriving a false proof of their earlier assertions that Virginia’s students and schools are not performing well. Yet, it is likely that neither the highly pro-privatization VBOE nor Governor Youngkin’s appointees will change course unless they are forced to. Time is closing in for both Youngkin’s agenda and for Virginia to avoid the threat those plans pose to Virginia school children and teachers.

At the Statehouse, March 31, 2025 On April 2nd the General Assembly will enter another session where legislators will decide on whether to accept, amend, or reject Governor Youngkin's recommended changes in legislative bills and amendments in the conference budget.  One would think that by his fourth and final year as Governor, Glenn Youngkin would recognize that the proven strategies and practices that improve academic achievement in public schools are not what he endorses for Virginia. Instead, the quality of public education in Virginia seems to be declining under his leadership , and his tendency to veto and amend changes to bills that have passed in the legislature, shows his lack of understanding on how to improve academic achievement. Or maybe he just doesn’t regard Virginia’ K-12 students. For example, the Governor heartlessly vetoed some essential bills including the bill  that would have provided mental health support and services in a culturally responsive and language-appropriate way to Virginia’s public school students. Also, the Governor amended the General Assembly's conference budget in ways that may be harmful to students, schools and communities if his amendments prevail, according to the Fund our Schools Coalition . He drastically reduced funding for school support staff, even after a bipartisan majority of state lawmakers passed a  bill that would lift the  cap  or limit on state funding for support staff. The arbitrary support cap that is still in effect was put in place in 2009  during the Great Recession and it is well past time that the limit is removed. The Governor’s amendment was for $84.8 million when legislators determined it would take $222.9 million to provide the state’s share of the needed additional 4,725 support staff to help students succeed in the classroom. Another part of this bill that has not been funded is better support for students with disabilities.  Instead of supporting those identified needs, the Governor proposed funding a   private school voucher program and an already ample rainy day fund . This was in spite of the fact that the legislature already rejected a number of school voucher bills in the 2025 session, a voucher proposal in 2023, and that there was negative press  on the subject.  The Governor’s insistence on this program was in conflict with what we know about vouchers. P olls show that private school vouchers  are highly unpopular among most Americans, do not tend to improve academic performance, can cause state budget overruns, tend to benefit the wealthy because low income families often can not pay the balance of the tuition (school vouchers would be $5,000 per student), and would use government money to support schools that discriminate against students. Yet Governor Youngkin insisted Virginia develop the program and amended the budget with $25m for that purpose in an apparent ongoing effort to privatize public schools.  Another disappointment was the Governor’s rejection of funds needed to update Virginia's school funding formula . He removed all funds budgeted by the legislature that would support a commission for revising the funding formula, again rejecting recommendations  by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) that Virginia needed to revise the K-12 funding formula. That commission reported that Virginia needs to change from the complicated staffing-based calculation to a simpler student-based calculation for funding schools. The Governor’s veto of that funding ($1 million) will set back the bipartisan effort to transform the calculation of public school funding with a formula that better reflects the needs of Virginia’s public school students and which also should improve academic performance.  Youngkin’s refusal to follow the recommendations made by JLARC flies in the face of the commission’s report that showed Virginia’s public schools are seriously underfunded. Instead the Governor ignores the evidence that academic achievement in K-12 is closely tied to funding of the schools. Yet rather than budgeting for what is known to raise academic performance, the Governor instead has initiated a new accountability system that is fraught with problems  and is unpopular with Virginians . This controversial accountability system  with a cost in 2026 of $25m would label schools as “off track” and “needs intensive support”, and would then provide support when he often makes unfounded claims that Virginia Schools are failing. Furthermore, the conference budget that was approved by the legislature budgeted no money for this purpose, although a bill to postpone implementation of the system beyond 2026 failed during the 2025 session.  Another of Youngkin’s pet projects that is  controversial  and that received no funding in the conference budget is for the Lab School program but that did not stop the Governor from proposing amendments to the conference budget with a $10m boost. Many object to Lab Schools because they divert funds from public schools and seem to have a bait and switch strategy. The original, approved plan for lab schools indicated only public colleges were eligible for the program  but it now appears to be open to private and even religious schools of higher education. As Ashley C. Kenneth , President and CEO of The Commonwealth Institute for Fiscal Analysis (TCI), notes “These are steps in the wrong direction” and seem to support the Governor’s agenda to privatize public schools .  “These are steps in the wrong direction.” - Ashley C. Kenneth, President and CEO of TCI On April 2nd, when the General Assembly returns, legislators will make decisions about Governor Youngkins recommended changes on legislative bills and amendments in the conference` budget. At that time, we hope that Legislators recognize that the Governor has proposed some unacceptable changes to their work. Public school advocates urge them to do what is best for Virginia’s public school students, and reject changes that undermine Virginia’s students, schools, and families.

Make Yourselves Heard on this Trans Day of Visibility Around the country, communities celebrated the Trans Day of Visibility (TDOV) in advance of March 31st. Nowhere was this more visible than in Fairfax County where proclamations involved celebrations of the trans community, in the shadow of attacks by the current administration and far right groups. Fairfax County Public Schools Proclamation March 27, 2025 Close to 200 people arrived to celebrate TDOV in a Unity Rally held by FCPS Pride and the Pride Liberation Project. People came from all over Fairfax County with homemade signs, rainbows, pink-white-and-blue trans flags, and love in their heart for transgender loved ones, neighbors, friends, and themselves. Following speeches by FCPS Pride and Transgender Education Association board members, and clergy like Reverend Emma Chattin and J.P. Hong, the crowd entered Luther Jackson to hear the proclamation by the Fairfax County School Board. Chairman Karl Frisch read a beautiful TDOV proclamation that reminded the crowd that transgender people have always been here and have made significant contributions beyond civil rights, such as those like neurobiologist Dr. Ben Barres, and Dr. Lynn Conway, an innovator in computer science. Despite all of these contributions, Chair Frisch reminded the crowd that in the first months of 2025, "nearly 700 anti-trans bills are under consideration in state legislatures, seeking to block access for transgender people to basic healthcare, housing, employment, education services, legal recognition, and more." "When he was ready to socially transition at school, we were terrified. But his friends, his school, and his theater community supported him in the best way they knew how. They respected his chosen name, his pronouns, and everything else about him. Overtime we watched him slowly bloom as he became his authentic self." - Christine McCormick, mother and co-leader of FCPS Pride After the proclamation and the obligatory chaotic photo opportunity (so many joyful people!), students and adults shared stories of transgender joy and success, despite the cloud of uncertainty for the future. Listen to their words to understand what it means to be transgender or the parent of a transgender child in this sometimes frightening world. Much appreciation to reporters from the Patch, FFX Now, and the Washington Blade for attending and providing beautiful coverage of this historic event. Media coverage of transgender joy and community support is an important part of being visible. Fairfax City Proclamation March 25, 2025 Reverend Emma Chattin shared this beautiful speech at the Fairfax City council proclamation in honor of the Trans Day of Visibility. Her words buoyed a community that is suffering right now, as transgender people and their families are denied basic civil rights to medical care, education, and their own names. As the Administration tries to prevent our transgender friends, family, and selves from legally existing, let us raise the rafters and be VISIBLE. I want to thank Mayor Catherine Read and every member of the Fairfax City council for this proclamation! These are some pretty words, and i have very little to add to them, except to say that these words mean something. They mean: we see you. You see us. The trans communities are a sliver of the population, less than 1%, somewhere between .4 and .6%. This means that in a room of 500, you may have only two or three trans people. And you would likely never know. Yet this community has been falsely singled out by misinformation and misunderstanding. Way too much time has been spent finger pointing at us. We are gentle, kind, and harmless people. Get to know one of us, and find out the challenges we face in life. And if you don’t know where to start, start with me. I like lunch. We are communities with well over 100 years of medical and scientific documentation. And we have always existed everywhere since the beginning of time. Among indigenous people, we are often regarded as healers, and people of wisdom who walk in many worlds. To paraphrase Shakespeare, we may be a small group small, but we are fierce. And we are not alone. We have friends, family, spouses, and allies here, strong fearless people who believe in the freedom of the human soul to find it’s place in community. Day of visibility? To paraphrase another writer: We are here. A person is a person, and people are people. Even if the group is small. Speak up for what is right, and make yourselves heard; speak up .. speak up… speak up … one and all! You can’t beat Dr. Seuss and in Horton hears a Who. You see us. You hear us. And this… this right here is visibility…. A moment where you see That we here…. we are people, friends and family.. We rise for equality… all groups, big and small And we give thanks for liberty, And a city that makes room… and is a safe place for all. Reverend Emma Chattin is the Pastor of the Metropolitan Community Church of Northern Virginia (MCC NoVA), a Church Home for all people, No Exceptions, No Kidding, Affirming and Celebrating LGBTIQQ Diversity: MCC Was Born That Way. She is also the Executive Director of the TransGender Education Association of Greater Washington, an education and community building organization Supporting Trans and Gender Expansive Individuals and the Communities in which They Live and Work. "Names are so important. They are a demonstration of love and support that we give to loved ones." - Reverend J.P. Hong

There are drastic changes ahead for public education in the United States and these changes can impact our K-12 students via radical, severe cuts to public education funding. The Trump administration and the 119th Congress are working to divest the US Department of Education (ED) of responsibility for K-12 public education and to give federal funding directly to the states, which means public education quality and funding will vary widely from state to state.  Likewise, the Educational Choice for Children Act bills ( S.292  and H.R. 833 ) are also detrimental. If they pass in Congress, these bills will provide  school vouchers  to families by way of a tax shelter that will provide a 100% reduction in tax liability up to $5,000 for parents who pay private school tuition or homeschool their children.   Although not yet federally mandated, 29 states and the District of Columbia currently have private school choice programs. Of those, programs that are available to all students  exist in 15 states. These programs include tax-credit scholarships, education savings accounts, vouchers, and tax-credit education savings accounts.   Virginia is one of the few states that has resisted school vouchers (for the most part), but in 2012, then-Governor McDonnell initiated a limited tax credit program  for charitable donations to scholarship funds. In 2025, five private school voucher bills were defeated in Virginia’s General Assembly, however, Governor Youngkin has not given up on getting $50 million for School Vouchers  in the 2026 budget, currently under consideration.  Of course, if S292 or HR833 passes, all states will have school voucher programs, and public education in the U.S. will be profoundly changed.   Why do we financially support public schools? We support public schools with our taxes because education is too important to our society to leave it to chance. Public education is a cornerstone of our democracy and a thriving democracy needs citizens to be educated. In addition to helping children become productive members of our society, public education provides the knowledge and skills to understand civic responsibilities and participate in the democratic process. A healthy democracy needs citizens who are engaged, can make well-informed decisions about their government, and have critical thinking skills so they can actively participate in the democratic process.   Public education is structured to serve everyone regardless of ethnic background, income status, physical or mental abilities, special education or accommodation needs, English language proficiency, or citizenship status. Also, public school buildings and employees tend to serve as anchors in communities.  In contrast, private schools can refuse to admit students and do not have the accountability, transparency, and oversight requirements that public schools have. If public education funds are redirected to private school vouchers, our government will be subsidizing  a system that is allowed to discriminate against students. Private schools are also not required to have licensed teachers, nor are they overseen by school boards with open meetings, unlike public schools. As a result, private school students are more vulnerable to discrimination, severe punishment, suspension, or even expulsion. Also, they are not required to provide special education support.  Funds from federal and state taxes have fueled mostly excellent public education  in our country. Nevertheless, there is a misconception that public schools are failing and this misinformation is being used to justify the need for private school vouchers. In one of the President’s  executive orders , he shared the disinformation that “too many children do not thrive in their assigned, government-run K-12 school” which precipitated his call for a federal private school voucher program. In fact, voucher programs have resulted in lower academic achievement  relative to public schools while vouchers can actually harm student achievement  and result in worse test scores .  Public education is freely available to every and all students. In contrast, vouchers seldom cover the total cost  of attending a private school and vouchers can be used by students already enrolled in private school.  For these reasons, vouchers are a greater financial  benefit to upper- income families  compared to those families that cannot afford to pay the tuition balance.   Rural communities depend heavily on public education and are less able to use school vouchers because those communities are so sparsely populated. Finally, private schools are not required to provide transportation, unlike public schools.   Why is there a push for school vouchers? The idea of  private school vouchers  was introduced by Milton Friedman in 1955 to allow children to attend for free the schools chosen by parents, rather than their designated neighborhood public school. Unsurprisingly, this concept coincided with the Brown v. Board of Education  decision that mandated the desegregation of public schools. What followed that court decision was  Massive Resistance , where many white families refused to send their children to integrated schools. Instead, numerous “ segregation academies ” were formed so families could send their children to all-white schools.   It was during Massive Resistance that Virginia  adopted a school voucher system  to help pay the tuition for non-sectarian segregated, private schools that accepted only white students. School vouchers enabled white families to use public funds for tuition at these segregated, private schools. At the same time, funding for public schools was reduced. It wasn’t until 1965 that it was determined to be against the law  to use vouchers from the state’s tuition grant program to fund schools that discriminated based on race.  Currently, some states already have school voucher programs , and some states (including Virginia) have fought against initiating voucher programs: 20 States have tax-credit scholarships, 16 States have education savings accounts, 10 States and the District of Columbia have vouchers, and two states have tax-credit education savings accounts.  If Congress passes S.292 and H.R. 833, all states will have school voucher programs funded with federal tax dollars that would have gone to public schools.  Reasons to Fight School Vouchers    Private school voucher programs could divert billions of dollars  away from already underfunded public schools and lead to the unacceptable privatization  of the public school system. Virginia is one of the few states that has fought hard to resist voucher programs and guards its public school funding. At the same time, Commonwealth funding has been documented as inadequate for the needs of Virginia’s children. Diversion of public school funds from federal contributions would further exacerbate the underfunding problem in Virginia and would be especially devastating to rural communities.  In practice, states may not realize the full cost of voucher programs until they are underway. For example, Arizona has what was considered a model voucher program , but a recent “budget meltdown ” occurred due to unanticipated expenses of the voucher program. Still, some states are modelling their voucher programs after Arizona’s, despite its fiscal failures. "As voucher systems expand, they cannibalize states’ ability to pay for their public education commitments. Arizona, which passed universal vouchers in 2022, is nearing a genuine budget crisis as a result of voucher over-spending. Six of the last seven states to pass vouchers have had to slow spending on public schools relative to investments made by non-voucher states.” - Josh Cowan , Professor of Education Policy at Michigan State University Often sold as a way to provide “school choice,” it is only the private school’s choice whether to accept or retain students. Private schools are not required to accept all students, and often will not accept students with learning or physical disabilities, English language learners, those living in poverty, those with challenging behaviors, or even those of particular ethnic backgrounds. Private school students have no guarantee that civil rights laws will be enforced, unlike public schools which must abide by civil rights laws.  Despite continued amplification that vouchers will improve education outcomes, there is no convincing evidence that this is true . Instead, it has been shown that redirecting tax dollars to private schools can lead to even worse academic outcomes  and can increase the gaps between the haves and have-nots. In other words, redirecting tax dollars to private schools has been shown to increase the achievement gap that some claim it will “fix.” The loss of essential funding to public schools may destabilize the schools that serve the vast majority of students, and it will be the most at-risk kids who are most vulnerable.  The National Coalition for Public Education  shares that studies of voucher programs show these programs are not only associated with steep declines in academic performance, but also can have an impact that is greater than natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana and the COVID-19 pandemic on academic performance. "Vouchers harm student achievement as much as natural disasters."  -   National Coalition for Public Education School vouchers remain  deeply unpopular  with the voting public. Polls conducted by  All4Ed, revealed that most voters, regardless of their age, race, gender, education level, political views, or geographic location in the United States, picked public schools over private schools. Also, more than two-thirds of voters chose to fund public schools over the availability of vouchers. Even the majority of Republicans preferred to spend federal funds on public schools over vouchers. Surprisingly, two-thirds of voters in states that voted overwhelmingly for President Trump picked public school funding over private school vouchers. “Public schools aren’t failing, they’re starving.” - First Focus on Children

Please stop inserting me randomly in your opinion pieces and articles. I am a local mother who is active in my community and does significant volunteer work as a school volunteer and scout leader, but I am also a private individual who has been subject to threats, insults, and reputational damage due to false, inflammatory pieces written about me in your publication and others. I am sorry to resort to this letter, but communications with your editor have proven futile. Most recently, I was inserted into a bizarre article about FairFACTS Matters accusations regarding the Boundary Review Advisory Committee (BRAC) selections on March 7, 2025. I call it bizarre because not only did it come on the heels of a lack of engagement on FairFACTS Matters’ multiple social media posts about their FOIA results, but the article also repeated nearly verbatim their accusations as if they were fact rather than mere supposition, and failed to interview anyone from FCPS. Also the Fairfax Times failed to include the fact that the BRAC representatives from each school are current parents of students who attend FCPS, which was a critical part of the decision-making process. That being said, it is strange that the Fairfax Times would choose to interview a vocal critic of FCPS (Joanne Sears) who was removed as a potential BRAC representative because she has no students in FCPS. Weird choice by Fairfax Times. Not only did the Fairfax Times irresponsibly add me to the article, but you also included my friend and fellow 4 Public Education board member, Robert Rigby. Neither of us were contacted, interviewed or alerted to the fact that the article was coming out and named us. The information about us is irrelevant to the article about complaints by FairFACTS Matters. There is no reason to print our names and add our volunteer work to the article, except as an attempt to intimidate and create the aura of villainy around both of us. At the same time, you misrepresent both Robert and me. I believe that Robert sent a correction to you already; however, I am requesting that you remove our names from the article. Because I was not contacted about the article, It seems particularly odd that the author, Samir Ali Nomani, expressed concern about the safety of “Parent #35” and withheld their name, yet did not hesitate to name me and Robert, opening both of us up to false accusations and slanderous comments: Why withhold from print the name of Parent #35 when FCPS already knows who she is because she is labeled as #35 on the FCPS list? Was there ever a parent #35 on the original list, which FairFACTS Matters has never produced? Since the videos are heavily edited, is it possible that there was more video to explain the issue with the original list, which would question the foundation of your entire article? Why repeat a false assertion that FCPS would retaliate against children? Why expose random private citizens (me and Robert) by sharing their names and volunteer activities in this article without contacting them in advance of publication and giving them a chance to respond? Why pretend that you care about protecting mothers and their children when you have repeatedly exposed me and my family to inflammatory articles with false accusations for three years about who I am and what I do? If one searches “Fairfax Times” and “Vanessa Hall,” one can see a number of media posts where your paper accuses me of being a “racist” while supposedly running the Fairfax NAACP (both are false). You have published multiple media posts falsely accusing me of interfering in an election, being under investigation by the Attorney General, trying to get a teacher fired, making a false report of a teacher who outed an autistic student on Twitter, and more. Never was I consulted regarding these posts, and the authors never bothered to evaluate the veracity of what they wrote. Simply terrible, slanderous journalism by the Fairfax Times. Nevertheless, I feel I should correct something you said about Robert and me. You “accuse” both of us of “frequently speak[ing] at school board meetings in support of FCPS policies, including the boundary changes;” however, that is false. Each of us speaks up to support the rights of students, teachers/staff, and families. Both of us advocate for the rights and education of the most vulnerable students, including those who are lower income, disabled, immigrant, and LGBTQIA. We care about people over policy and politics. I don’t think either of us have voiced support for “boundary changes.” Have we ever ranted and raved angrily at the School Board? We have not. That is because both of us believe in civil discourse. It may be your misguided opinion that we speak in support of all school board policies when in fact, we speak in favor of school board policies that support and protect the most vulnerable students. By neglecting nuance and context, you are misrepresenting factual information and attempting to harm our reputations. Please consider the ethical ramifications of failing to follow journalistic ethics, but also consider the harm you incur on Robert, me, and our families as you repeatedly use us as punching bags. Frankly there are so many false and rather grotesque comments on your pages that it saddens me to think of how you have fanned the flames of furor by printing repeated lies about me and others. You have harmed my reputation, my family, and my safety. In 2022, when I tried to ask your editor, Heather Zwicker, to retract a statement, she later mocked me, and cc’d those who have bullied me for years. Such abhorrent behavior is beneath a community newspaper relied upon for truth in journalism by Fairfax County residents. Of course, your false reporting and accusations have had consequences, as can be seen at the bottom of the article of concern where, once again, I am falsely accused of things I have not done. 4 Public Education was started in 2021 to support public education across Virginia. Since then, we have written hundreds of blogs about education, participated in pro-education rallies around the state, and spoken frequently in front of school boards and the Virginia Board of Education. We are not directed, amplified or funded by a political party or dark money organization (e.g., Independent Women’s Forum or Parents Defending Education), unlike many highlighted in your paper. At this point, I am wondering whether the Fairfax Times’ behavior is retaliatory against me and my organization, 4 Public Education. Recently we shared how your paper seems to be coordinating messaging with those attacking equity, including the Fairfax GOP and Parents Defending Education. We also reported on the $1.64 million in outside FCPS legal costs associated with your reporting on the manufactured “Commended Certificate Crisis” of 2023. Are you retaliating against board members of 4 Public Education because we exposed your biased, sloppy journalism with factual, sourced reporting? Or, is this just purely personal? Are these political actions intended to sow doubt and distrust of those who support public education and vulnerable students, or is it purely personal and a vendetta to sully my reputation”? Why would a local paper intimidate–through cherry-picked inaccurate reporting–a local stay-at-home mom who works hard for her community, is polite, bakes the best pound cake, and has been a scout leader and Sunday school teacher for more than a decade? It is a bizarre turn of events for a newspaper to intimidate and abridge the free speech and exercise of an American citizen, particularly a stay-at-home mom who is active in her community. Finally, I find it odd that you are importing relatives of Asra Nomani from West Virginia to do your journalism in Virginia. Why not hire locals from Fairfax County? Hiring from one family smacks of nepotism, despite your repeated articles about the importance of merit. Thank you for your time, Vanessa Hall Mother of 3, Scout Leader, and Volunteer Vice President of 4 Public Education This letter was sent to the Fairfax Times Editor, Heather Zwicker, on March 21, 2025. We have not heard from them at this time; however, we will share whatever outcome happens. If you have an interest to submit a letter to the editor at Fairfax Times, here is the link.

CANCELLED: March 19, 2025 FLE Curriculum Meeting in Fairfax, VA The March 19, 2025 meeting of the Family Life Education Curriculum Advisory Committee (FLECAC) has been cancelled because of a major change in how the FLE curriculum is managed within Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS). Last Thursday, the Fairfax County School Board voted to move FLECAC to be under the Superintendent's purview, similar to how Math and English curriculum committees are managed. The changes can be found here in the governance manual for community advisory committees . 4 Public Education has been covering attacks on the FLE committee during this school year. Why is FLE under attack? covers the far right blogs, hate groups, and political groups targeting the adult and student volunteers who have committed their time and talent to ensure inclusive, scientifically accurate, and age-appropriate FLE curriculum for K-12 in FCPS. Click to view They have (purposefully?) misinterpreted the intentions and words of the FLECAC volunteers to stir up fears in their base. So much so that one of the same groups that organized the aggressive, disruptive protest at the West Potomac High School (HS) drama presentation of Kinky Boots  a year ago, sent a letter across the nation to witness a "Vote on Trans Cult Lessons Littlest Students" (see right). What is described in this letter from Cathy Ruse and Deborah Maddrell bared little resemblance to what actually occurred during FLECAC meetings, and their characterization of the FLECAC volunteers was quite slanderous. Additionally, Ruse and Maddrell’s letter indicated that FLECAC volunteers intended to vote to indoctrinate students and that participation is forced in these classes--neither of which was true. Read more about their letter here . The Fairfax County School Board indicated that moving FLECAC under the Superintendent has been a long time coming. In truth, it never really made sense that a small curriculum like FLE was treated differently than other curricula committees. However, it is also very likely that the intimidation of aggressive, outside groups may have precipitated this change earlier than intended. Hopefully, when the dust settles, the FLECAC can be more robust and effective. Perhaps without constant criticism and interference by groups that want to eliminate sex education from public education, the FLE committee can get their work done with less intimidation and threats. Then, the student and adult volunteers can focus on what the students need from a family life curriculum to ensure that students can be both healthy and safe in and outside of school. As per usual, once FLECAC review and suggested changes are complete, then Fairfax County students, teachers, and families will be able to review and provide input on the curriculum before the School Board reviews and decide whether to approve them. Click for more information

Project 2025 Tries to Silence Fairfax Schools (Part I) March is Women’s History month, an opportunity to celebrate the successes and setbacks of women in our country. Schools, news media, and businesses have created displays and special events to acknowledge women’s contributions and their continued challenges. In a year when the President has declared women in the workplace to be unqualified “DEI hires,” it is nice to see women and the world celebrating women. Except at West Springfield High School (HS) where a self proclaimed “boy mom,” who dismisses concerns about toxic masculinity, found a Women’s History display to be “highly inappropriate,” “leftist” propaganda that she likened to kindergarten work. Because she is one of the ever-changing horde of paid ultra-right activists in Northern Virginia, Stephanie Lundquist-Arora’s anti-free speech opinions were published by national media sources like the Daily Signal and the Ingraham Angle. West Springfield HS students, particularly those associated with the Women’s History class, were frustrated and alarmed by Lundquist-Arora’s opinion piece. They were disturbed that Lundquist-Arora tried to link their thoughtful Women's History Month display with supposed “plummeting standardized test scores” and replacement conspiracy theory gibberish. More importantly, it was clear to students that Lundquist-Arora’s opinion piece was an adult effort to silence them. Likely, their parents are unhappy at another parent trying to control their childrens’ free speech and curriculum, as well. Lundquist-Arora is known for dozens of opinion pieces critical of FCPS, Superintendent Dr. Reid, Fairfax School Board members, schools her children attend, schools her children don’t attend, LGBTQIA+ rights, immigrants, etc. Typically, these opinion pieces are long on opinion and short on facts, yet they are published and amplified like clockwork by far right media, extremist groups, and the Fairfax GOP. Unsurprisingly, Lundquist-Arora is known for multiple complaints about teachers, multiple lawsuits against FCPS, dropping out of a School Board race after mocking an autistic student, campaigning for a school board candidate with a known history of spousal abuse, advocating against LGBTQIA+ and immigrant rights, etc. But few know about her association with Project 2025. The far right media outrage and coverage of Lundquist-Arora’s reactive views about the West Springfield student women's history display has been far from organic. In fact, it was entirely coordinated by Project 2025ers: The Daily Signal, run by the Heritage Foundation, a tax-free charity with over $100 million 2023 revenue, published the initial opinion piece. (March 16) Stephanie Lundquist-Arora, who works for Independent Women’s Forum (IWF) a tax-free anti-feminist charity with over $7 million 2023 revenue, wrote the Daily Signal opinion piece that targeted the Women’s History students’ hall display. Laura Ingraham, a former IWF spokesperson and Justice Clarence Thomas law clerk, interviewed Lundquist-Arora on her show, the Ingraham Angle. (March 17) Moms for Liberty and Parents Defending Education (regular attendees of IWF galas and known SPLC extremist groups) condemned the West Springfield HS student display in The Daily Signal, calling it “lunacy” and “regressive for women.” Neither spokesperson lives in the FCPS school district. (March 18) EdReformVA, a “school choice” group and likely extension of IWF, also amplified Lundquist-Arora’s opinion piece. It is run by Nathan Brinkman whose Brinkman Media made over $84 thousand from the Fairfax GOP in 2022, with IWF Senior Fellow Ginny Gentles as a trustee. (March 19) Chaya Raichek, IWF’s 2023 Resilience award winner, used her large and threatening Twitter/X platform via @LibsofTikTok to amplify Lundquist-Arora’s opinion piece. (March 19) Carrie Lukas (President of IWF), Julie Gunlock (Program Manager of IWF and co-host on WMAL’s Larry O’Connor show), and their employer (IWF) further amplified co-worker Lundquist-Arora’s opinion piece on twitter, while “helpfully” providing West Springfield HS’s phone number for complaints. (March 19) As of today, it just hit the Fairfax GOP social media to generate anger and disinformation to its base. The comments involve rants about "indoctrination of students" and the need to defund FCPS or homeschool. But before discussing the dark money operatives further, this blog must focus on the students, because education advocacy should always be student focused. Please see Part II (coming soon) to learn more about the Project 2025 operatives targeting FCPS students. Thoughtful Women's History Display by Students For the month of March, young women in the elective Women’s History class created a display “celebrating and bringing awareness to what it means to be a young woman today at West Springfield High School and in the world.” They created A-Z artwork to represent full range of the experience of girls and women, including that they: Are hopeful, independent, nurturing, qualified, triumphant, unique, and worthy. Are leaders like Carol Mosely Braun, Kamala Harris, and Rosa Parks. Can be athletes, dancers, educators, housewives, musicians, Olympians, queer, and scientists. Have to suffer and work to overcome body image, catcalling, injustice, mansplaining, objectification, persecution, and the wage gap. The display showed that students know their opportunities should be limitless and that they hope to be triumphant over challenges placed in their path. The full display avoided politics, but focused on the experience of women. In truth, their full display challenges Project 2025’s intent to subjugate women through rolling back civil rights protections. Project 2025 wants to remove women from the workplace and leadership, police women’s bodies, penalize unmarried women, legalize sex discrimination, keep women and their children in poverty, penalize women who are not white and/or not cisgender heterosexuals. As such, it is understandable that Women’s History class students would create a slightly provocative display to provoke discussion, deep thought, and action. Most caregivers would applaud this display, but not Lundquist-Arora and her Project 2025 buddies. Women’s History is often excluded from history books. A 2024 study of 1,255 English language textbooks revealed continuing under-representation and stereotypical language use in high school texts. Recently, the Trump Administration has taken to erase what he considers “DEI” from the Arlington National Cemetery website, thus erasing the history of Black and women veterans like Former United States Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Colin Powell and U.S. Marine Corps Staff Sergeant Bea Arthur. Thus, the celebration of Women's History Month feels very relevant even in 2025. A is for Attack The picture which apparently incited Lundquist-Arora and far right media was called “A is for Abortion.” In truth, abortion may be debated as a political issue concerning legal rights; however, abortion is a fact and a right for women–one in four American women have an abortion by the age of 45. Ironically, Lundquist-Arora’s employer has a long history of undermining contraception access despite campaigns during the last election cycles to convince young women voters otherwise. Additionally, as a member of Project 2025, IWF has signed on to support “abortion surveillance” and undermine contraception access. These are odd choices for a supposedly non-political, charitable organization with tax-free status. Over concern that the display would “alienate male students,” Lundquist-Arora appeared on the Laura Ingraham Angle to advocate for censorship of the women’s history display and applaud a male student who ripped down part of the display, even though that action was likely violation of the Students Rights and Responsibilities (SR&R) handbook. Not only that, but it is odd that a parent would support violence over discussion in school…against women. Lundquist-Arora made dismissive comments about the Women’s History students, questioning “how could students come up with it”? Does she not know how young women in FCPS came up with such a dynamic display? Young women are smart and capable. They are independent thinkers who follow current events and frequently think about how those events impact their lives. Perhaps, she doesn’t know many students outside of her own family? Most adults find that Fairfax County students are incredibly smart, capable, and creative. Likely, the parents of the young women who created the display have a very different view from Lundquist-Arora; however, their voices will not be heard because Project 2025 has the microphone. On the Ingraham Angle, both Lundquist-Arora and Ingraham were indignant that the young, female West Springfield students would dare to admire the leadership of Democrats, including the revered former first lady, groundbreaking former presidential candidate, and a dynamic U.S. representative. Neither mentioned Lundquist-Arora’s recent quote supporting toxic masculinity in a Fox opinion piece from February, which seems awfully pertinent to her interest in eradicating a Women’s History display. The fact that this Women’s History Month display was created by students in compliance with school guidelines and SR&R did not dissuade Lundquist-Arora from heaping disdain on their hard work, thoughtful presentation, and creativity. It’s as if she does not support the students’ efforts to bring “awareness to what it means to be a young woman today,” despite the fact that women’s voices are frequently silenced in the school and board room. Most agree that young women's hopes and dreams should be cultivated so that they can reach their full potential. Instead IWF, a so-called “women's organization,” has tried to silence young women's voices at West Springfield HS. Impact on Students’ Rights Of course, students know that they and their school are the intended targets of the Lundquist-Arora’s “anti-woke” Daily Signal and Ingraham Angle pieces. The two media pieces and further amplification by other far right outlets intend to silence the young women of West Springfield HS, misrepresent their school, and possibly encourage the school to capitulate to outside force demands and take down the display in order to “protect students.” When in truth, the display and students are fine, it is the outside paid agitators causing the problems. The intense disinformation campaign by Project 2025ers will bring unwarranted and unwanted attention to the West Springfield HS community. Multiple disinformation campaigns like this have played out over the last five years (e.g., the Commended Certificates “crisis” in 2023 by another IWF employee) so it is expected that there will be lots of angry messages (and possible threats) sent to West Springfield HS, some of which may reach students. The students perceive this media hype and interference by a grumpy mom to be an assault on student free speech. Students know that their free speech does not end at the schoolhouse door, and they will not take this silently. (Please take a moment to applaud their tenacity and bravery.) Since most high school students are knowledgeable of their rights and have mastered critical thinking skills at FCPS, it would be hard to “indoctrinate” them via colorful hallway displays. Thus, it is weird that Lundquist-Arora thinks that passing by a student display will upend years of her parenting, much less her publicized efforts to teach her children “how to be men.” Concerning to many is how often she is using her children to pursue a paycheck, as she shared that her West Springfield HS son took the photos of the Women’s History display. Did he do this of his own accord or at his mother’s urging for more material? On the other hand, since Lundquist-Arora does not have a child in the West Springfield HS Women’s History class, yet she is exerting the power of Project 2025 over the Women’s History curriculum and class expression. All students, teachers, and families should be concerned about her increasing reach via Project 2025’s network. How much can one parent interfere in the education of other people’s children before enough is enough? How much interference by Project 2025 operatives should Fairfax County Public Schools need to withstand, especially when each lawsuit, investigation, and complaint from them takes valuable time and money from the education of Fairfax County’s 180,000 other students? 4 Public Education has shown that political attacks on FCPS cost significant amounts of money. For example, there were $1.64 million in outside FCPS legal costs associated with IWF reporting on the manufactured “Commended Certificate Crisis” of 2023, which doesn’t even cover the disruption of education and threats against staff that resulted from the repeated accusations by an IWF employee and amplification by Project 2025’s network. Ironically, Project 2025’s plan has backfired! More students are walking down the hall to view the supposedly controversial, but definitely inspirational Women’s History display. Now, that is something to celebrate! If you would like to learn more about the forces behind this effort to target and censor Fairfax County students, please read Part II: Project 2025 Meets West Springfield High School coming soon.

Combatting Disinformation is Harder than Sharing It There is so much disinformation floating around these days that it is hard to do much but dismiss the primary sources of disinformation, and move on with your day. However, most people do not know that in the last 20 years much of local media has   been purchased  and repurposed  to spread disinformation  and division in our community .  Once venerable papers like the Fairfax Times, Washington Examiner, Washington Times, the Federalist, and others are no longer purveyors of “the truth” or even “truth” from a clear political perspective. Instead, they have been bought, and are run by editors who tow a political line and often repeat stories from other similar media companies regardless of the accuracy of the claims. Many are no longer independent news purveyors, and have moved on to being significant mouthpieces for disinformation. Last Summer, I ignored one particularly egregious published piece because it contained repetitive, false information, and inaccurate assumptions. Also, I knew that the author, Stephanie Lundquist-Arora, was directly connected to signatories of Project 2025 , specifically the radically right wing Independent Women's Forum  and America First Legal . These groups are typically described as “dark money” groups as 4 Public Education explains in an earlier blog about “Fake Grassroots, Real Dark Money.” Unfortunately, very few other people knew that the claims repeated by Lundquist-Arora were deliberate disinformation, so I now feel forced to evaluate her recent piece that I find factually corrupt and filled with bigotry. Understandably, ire may creep in as I evaluate errors in the August 22nd opinion piece in the Washington Examiner  that falsely links the 2021 FCPS Trust Policy, immigrants in Fairfax, crime, Biden’s “border policies,” and the FCPS boundary policy.  Facts about Fairfax County’s Immigrant Population When I first came to Fairfax County in the 1980s, many of my classmates, friends, and neighbors came from Korea, India, and China, and most spoke more than one language. Over a decade ago, when my family chose to move back to Fairfax County, we chose this county because of its diversity  so that our children would also know people from different cultures. This diversity makes our school community stronger and also makes school Heritage Night delicious!  Thus, I need to set the facts straight about Fairfax County’s immigrant population. Graphic by Fairfax County Government The graphic above from Fairfax County shows a breakdown of " Our Immigrant Neighbors " which establishes the top 15 countries of birth, only 4 of the 15 are from "south of the border," and none of which are from Mexico. It also demonstrates that 84.2% of immigrants aged 5 and older speak English well, and few local immigrants have been in this country for less than 5 years. It also shows a much higher incidence of poverty and lower income for immigrants who have yet to become citizens.  Pew Research findings  show that 77% of the immigrants in the United States are here legally. The other 23% are considered “unauthorized immigrants.”  Many may have entered the country without legal permission, but are living and working in the U.S. with temporary legal protections. This distinction is important, since there is a tendency to refer to unauthorized immigrants as “illegal immigrants,” but this term is pejorative and inaccurate because many have temporary legal protections. Many immigrants who came to Fairfax County and the U.S. in 2023 had been driven from their home countries by political unrest in Afghanistan, Ukraine, Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. The Trust Policy was implemented to both increase opportunities and decrease crime in immigrant communities by ensuring that they could send children to school and report crimes, such as domestic violence, without fear of deportation:  “One Fairfax recognizes that the County’s ethnic, racial, and linguistic diversity is a key source of its strength. The County is devoted to protecting the rights of all its residents, regardless of their immigration or citizenship status, and to ensuring they have an equal opportunity to participate in our economic vitality. The Public Trust and Confidentiality Policy (Trust Policy) is being issued to reaffirm current county policy and improve community health, welfare, safety, security, and trust by ensuring that immigrant residents can access county services without fear.” - Fairfax Trust Policy We all need to arm ourselves with accurate information before letting anyone , much less a paid political writer ,  denigrate our immigrant friends and family.  At Least Double-Check Your Math before You Print Disinformation The August 22, 2024 Washington Examiner piece by Lundquist-Arora entitled “ Sanctuary policy is largely the reason a quarter of Fairfax County’s high schools are almost failing ” is so ridiculously fallacious that it is painful to read.  Anyone who follows education policy and news in Fairfax, Virginia should be appalled by the title and the content of Lundquist-Aurora’s piece. The title uses words like “largely” and “almost” as if these qualifiers can provide cover for Lundquist-Aurora’s opinions; however, “word on the street” is that people are interpreting this ridiculous story concocted by Lundquist-Arora as news, not political opinion. This is particularly harmful in the communities that she targeted, like the Justice High School (HS) community. The story never demonstrates a causal relationship among “sanctuary cities,” English Learners, FCPS boundary policies, and political rantings about the “Southern Border.” Nevertheless, Lundquist-Arora claims that these disparate subjects are causally linked and part of a nefarious plot by our school superintendent, board, and system to harm our community. Never mind the question: how would they have time to concoct such a “plot” when they are involved in educating 180,000+ students, managing over 200 schools, and supporting 25,000 employees? Below, I will try to address statements published by the Independent Women's Network’s Chapter Lead, Lundquist-Arora, to show how they lack veracity. Unfortunately, this won’t rectify the damage done to students, schools, and communities by these falsehoods, but at least it will correct the record for the first eight paragraphs of her story. Click here to read the corrected data and facts. Virginia has no "sanctuary cities,"   because of the Dillon Rule which states that no locality can have a law that violates state law  and sanctuary cities are against the law in Virginia. Additionally, the Trust Policy enacted in 2021  by the Fairfax Board of Supervisors specifically states, "The County will comply with all federal or state law and regulations mandating cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other federal immigration officials, as well as valid judicial warrants and subpoena." In addition, even if Virginia had sanctuary cities (which it doesn't), such policies do not shield people who are committing crimes. Those committing crimes " still face the same charges, same sentences and punishments ." Without offering evidence or data, Lundquist-Arora associates our immigrant students with “illegal” activity , including crimes, and claims that English Learners have "significant costs to our education system." Not only that but she completely misrepresents the vast demography of our immigrant students who speak more than 200 languages . In truth, no schools are "on the verge of losing accreditation" under the current Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) system ; however, VDOE has created a controversial new accountability and accreditation system  that will push 55-70% of Virginia schools into a failing status, which could also affect accreditation. Those schools with high numbers of English Learners, low income, and disabled students will be the most affected by these disruptive VDOE measures. Oddly, Lundquist-Aurora had already acknowledged this impact in previous writings, including:  T he Washington Examiner on August 6, 2024  where she states, “Whether one agrees with the [VDOE] change or not, this undoubtedly creates an added burden for schools with high populations of ESOL students.” September 24, 2024 anti-immigrant screed in the Federalist , “[The VDOE changes will] mean more of Fairfax County’s English-language learners will be tak ing the state’s standardized reading test this year, likely decreasing already low-performing schools’ overall test scores and increasing their academic achievement gaps.” In fact, much of the variation in school opportunities and performance across the county is actually tied to income , not immigration status . 35% of FCPS students  are eligible for free and reduced meals (FARM), and are therefore considered low income Available demographic data does not remotely resemble Lundquist-Arora’s erroneous claims. Without access to Lundquist-Arora’s FOIAed data ( note:  demographic data is available for free for all schools from 2021 through 2023 school years via the School Profiles pages , so there was no need by Lundquist-Arora to FOIA this data ), I do not know why she came to such wildly incorrect conclusions and calculations regarding Justice HS, but she did. For example: Justice HS’s demographic profile shows that the percentage of English Learners barely  increased  from the 2021-22 to 2023-24 school year from 40.5% (916 students) to 41.5% (972 students). In contrast, Lundquist-Arora claimed that a whopping 79%  of students at Justice HS required ESOL services. However, in the 2023-24 school year, Justice HS demographic profile shows that 58.5% of students are english proficient . It is impossible to replicate Lundquist-Arora’s numbers without seeing her data; however, based on the data available, it sounds like she made errors in computation or understanding to estimate that 79% of Justice HS students were English Learners in 2023-24. Possibly, she did not understand that only   English Learners level 1-4 are eligible for ESOL services ? Did she include English Learners for levels 1-5?  Where did she find that there were 2,406 students at Justice HS over the 2023-24 school year? The FCPS profiles by month in the 23-24 school year  show a student population at Justice HS wavering between 2,340 and 2,371 over the 2023-24 school year, so did she miscalculate or misunderstand her FOIA'd data?  Justice HS has one of the highest percentages of students on Free and Reduced Meals (FARM) at 58.5% in Fairfax County, thus it receives Title 1 funding from the federal government. Again, it bears repeating that school performance, particularly on standardized tests, is related to income of the families that attend the school. Mount Vernon also has a large population of FARM students (62.5%), but only 24.2% of Mount Vernon students are English Learners  versus Lundquist-Arora’s claim that 39.1% of students require ESOL services. Again, she doesn’t show her data or her work, so goodness knows why her FOIAed calculations are so vastly different from the facts available online. It is well known that the FCPS budget increased from FY 2023 to FY2024 , so it is not surprising that ESOL budgeted expenditures ( on page 26 ) would rise along with the budgets of academic core costs at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. With the implementation of the FCPS Strategic Plan and (possibly) impending changes by VDOE, the Fairfax County School Board (FCSB) chose to increase ESOL teachers by 160 across the county to help decrease the opportunity and achievement gap for English Learners, address enrollment increases, and accommodate increased staffing costs. That is less than one teacher per school. Lundquist-Arora falsely tried to link students arriving from different countries to recent redistricting policies . However, her data and graphs are just nonsensical, and create more questions like: Why is data for 2022-23 missing in her graph?  Why does she create a strawman Central American immigrant student when children have arrived in Fairfax County schools from all over the world? Is she trying to lead the reader to her conclusions without the facts to do so? Why is she only evaluating six schools that had the highest FARM percentages while ignoring data at 19 other local high schools? Did she not have the data, or did they not fit her false narrative that English Learners are “bad” for our schools?  Does she not understand that performance on tests is directly tied to socio-economic issues? Wouldn’t demographic data for 2020-22 school years be lower for all  immigrants because of a worldwide pandemic and closed immigration routes? How is This Linked to Boundary Policy? (Hint: It is Not.) In the August 22nd piece, Lundquist-Arora somehow tries to causally link her assumptions and allegations regarding “Biden’s Southern border policy,” Fairfax’s Trust Policy, and English Learners to the updated FCPS Boundary Policy (8130) . She claimed that the FCSB was “rushing  redistricting” because of the high percentage of English Learners at six high schools that was, in her opinion, due to Biden’s border policies, despite clear evidence that:  These six high schools have had a high percentage of English Learners years before Biden took office. These six high schools have had the highest percentage of FARM students for years before Biden took office. English Learners come from all over the world. Over 200 languages are spoken at home in Fairfax County. The FCSB has been trying to update the Boundary Policy since (at least) 2019. The Boundary Policy does not change boundaries. In the past two decades, most boundary changes have affected schools with lower numbers of English Learners and FARM students, as shown in 4 Public Education’s blog about the Recent History of Boundary Changes . No one knows what school boundaries will change, or even if any will change. The Boundary Policy was just accepted. No studies have been performed yet. Community Engagement is just beginning. The Boundary Policy states that drivers for boundary changes are transportation (e.g., shorter bus rides for students and fewer buses needed in the county), programming access, enrollment/capacity, and proximity ( page 3 ), not country of origin. There are no causal links among these events and individuals, and to say otherwise is dishonest. The biggest change to the current Boundary Policy 8130 added 5-year boundary reviews for all of Fairfax County. This enables FCPS to get a better picture of all population projections and school resources every five years. In the past twenty years , boundary studies have been done on a piecemeal basis, often initiated by the outcry of communities in higher income neighborhoods like McLean and Langley High School. Merely doing a boundary review every five years does not mean that boundaries will be changed . FCPS leadership understands how disruptive changing attendance zones can be. However, boundary reviews enable the FCSB and FCPS to better allocate resources among the schools, including staff and capital funding, while permitting attendance zone changes as needed to ensure that schools are not severely under or over-capacity, particularly in light of long-term population projections. An Agenda of Exclusion If it isn’t obvious, there is an agenda in Lundquist-Arora’s August 22nd Washington Examiner piece and it is anti-immigrant and anti-FCPS. Is it hers or her employers’? In addition, the piece reflects ignorance of education policy and data.  Lundquist-Arora’s piece is not student-focused or even family-focused. In fact, it feels hostile to both students and families, particularly those who are lower income, Hispanic, immigrant, English Learners, or are in the Justice HS pyramid. Attacking students for immutable characteristics is not the Fairfax County way. As with many of Lundquist-Arora’s published stories and advocacy, there is an underlying theme that only some students deserve to be educated, respected, and included in our schools. Whether discussing LGBTQIA+ or immigrant students, she has consistently advocated to exclude (and sometimes bully) students in our public schools that are either unlike her own or do not fit within the agenda of Independent Women’s Forum , a Project 2025 supporter .  For example, in an August 23, 2023 story in The Federalist, she claimed that parents of transgender and non-binary children were “weaponizing kindness” when they advocated for rights and respect for their children in public schools. Her pieces in the Washington Examiner regularly refer to the LGBTQIA+ community, their families, and allies as "the rainbow mafia" and "alphabet people." This sort of language is beyond disrespectful. In  July 2022, she hosted a rally  for GOP candidates with special guest  Sebastian Gorka  (known America First provocateur,  podcaster ,  Trump advisor , and  anti-trans activist ) where she advocated for the right to bully trans students because she felt that the anti-bullying language in the Students Rights and Responsibilities (SR&R) was “compelled speech.”  Lundquist-Arora  is currently involved in the  America First legal lawsuit against FCPS  on that subject and the issue of excluding transgender and non-binary students from FCPS rest rooms.  In 2022, she, Harry Jackson, and others openly mocked a talented autistic musician  at a School Board meeting. She dropped out of the 2023 FCSB race, but proceeded to regularly campaign with/for Harry Jackson even after astonishing revelations about him in local media (e.g., history of spousal abuse , known association with Christian Nationalist Groypers , vicious attacks on local parents , sending controversial mailers to homes depicting sex acts , etc.). Who Decides which Students Deserve to be Educated? If it is her opinion that students who pose "significant costs to our education system" should not be a part of our public schools, then she wildly misunderstands the purpose and mission of public schools, which are to educate everyone --a point which is foundational to our nation and supported by numerous laws and regulations. That includes English Learners (21% of students), students who receive special education services (16%), military families (7% of students), and tens of thousands of students receiving advanced academic services across FCPS. Additionally, it is well-known that disabled students pose "significant costs to our education system" sometimes as much as twice the average student. Does Lundquist-Arora advocate for removing them from our schools, as well? What about advanced academic placement and Thomas Jefferson High School for Science for Technology students, who also pose “significant costs” above general education costs?  Which students are worthwhile to be educated in Lundquist-Arora’s opinion? Does she think that your student does not deserve educational opportunities? Does she believe that autistic students deserve respect and education  in public schools? Her opinion matters about as much as any parent’s opinion, which means that it does  matter, but only as much as one voice in an entire community of hundreds of thousands of voices. However, if someone is advocating to violate the education rights of other students and families, we should all be concerned, particularly when she has been handed a large platform by her employers.  Ultimately, Fairfax County elected a School Board to create policies and follow federal and state regulations ensuring that all  students have access to a public education. Quality  public education is enshrined in the Virginia Constitution. One Fairfax and related equity policies are intended to ensure that students who require additional support to succeed in school have access to those supports, whether those students require team taught classes, English language support, or access to advanced math.  Picking and choosing which students “deserve” to be educated or eliminating education opportunities due to expense or rigor remains in the purview of charter and private schools, because “Public schools are for everyone.” Author’s note: You may notice that I do not use the word “article” to describe the pieces written by Lundquist-Arora. That is because news articles should display journalistic ethics , including truth and accuracy, independence, efforts to minimize harm, and accountability and transparency. Her pieces lack these fundamental building blocks of journalistic ethics; therefore, I refer to her writings as “pieces” or “stories.”  Similarly, this written piece is a blog, not an article. Thus, it contains a collection of facts and personal comments. Nevertheless, it does comply with journalistic ethics, has been well-researched, and edited. 4 Public Education is dedicated to disseminating truthful reports about public education while correcting disinformation. Pardon the length of this blog, but... .

Pardon the pun, but Linda McMahon, Trump's Secretary of Education showed how little she knows about public education, as she fires 1,300 dedicated civil servants and sets about to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education (US ED). Last night on the Laura Ingraham Angle, McMahon revealed that she did not know what the acronym "IDEA" stood for. She seemed to surprise even Ingraham who told her IDEA stood for "Individuals with Disabilities Act." Of course, they both forgot the key word "Education" since IDEA exists to ensure that students with disabilities receive a free and appropriate education. Most parents of disabled children would know this was not by accident. McMahon laughed off her ignorance (see video). She had only been in the job for 5 days! Oddly, IDEA has been around for 50 years and has served millions of disabled students, so it is surprising that she would be utterly ignorant of one of the most important education regulations of the last century. It is obvious that the Trump US ED has once again erased disabled students from existence, just like they erased them from their website the day after his inauguration. Parents and guardians of children with disabilities know how hard it is to navigate the byzantine system of regulations, testing, and accommodations for their students. It is painfully clear that under the Trump administration, accessing accommodations and support for disabled students will no longer merely be a Sisyphean task of eternally pushing a rock up a hill, only to have to begin again the next day. Instead, parents and guardians will feel like Prometheus whose guts are ripped out every day as they persistently demand, yet are denied, support and funding for their children's constitutional right to education.

(photo credit: Kyle Scott) How will VDOE use their Shocking Narrative to Upend Public Education? On February 17, 2025 the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) made a shocking announcement: “Virginia ranks 51st in the U.S. — behind all other states and Washington, D.C. — in math recovery from 2019 to 2024 for its performance on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, an assessment known as “The Nation’s Report Card.” News outlets around the commonwealth picked up the story and shared the news. Legislators were quick to comment, but few asked how it was that Virginia that had long performed as well as or better than most states suddenly dropped to 51st? The simple, obvious answer is Virginia did not drop to 51st. In the actual profile report from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), it says, “In 2024, the average score in Virginia (275) was lower than those in 10 states/jurisdictions, higher than those in 24 states/jurisdictions, and not significantly different from those in 17 states/jurisdictions.“ Higher than those in 24 states is NOT 51st! “We know where we want our children to be—on track and ready for life. But we can’t help them get there without being honest about where they are today,” said Secretary of VDOE, Aimee Guidera. Secretary Guidera has accused Virginians of having an “honesty gap” with parents since the early days of her term in office, and insists her data methods are superior. Is she being honest? So What Happened to Virginia Math Scores? The report where the VDOE got the sound bite is titled “Pivoting from Pandemic Recovery to Long-Term Reform: A District Level Analysis,” which is authored by a group of educational economics professors, operating under Thomas Kane’s auspices at Harvard’s Center for Educational Policy Research (CEPR). Thomas Kane has long been a proponent of charter schools, particularly related to middle school math. As early as 2009, he was writing positive reports on the idea of “school choice” and has continued to use Harvard’s policy institute and education-economics program to push for reform ever since. The formulas for CEPR’s derived rankings are only partially based on the NAEP actual results, and are a change from NAEP’s long standing resistance to equating their basic and proficient scores with grade-level equivalencies. Yet, the authors created a new mathematical formula for standardizing the many types of state level tests with NAEP to create a “grade level formula.” As Dr. Marianne Burke pointed out in 2023, this Virginia administration and reform promoters has a pattern of Gaslighting Virginians about NAEP scores. Is it a valid formula, when it ranks a state that scored better than 20 other states on the NAEP as 51st? Is it a valid formula when Virginia’s average scores have been consistently higher than the national average? At the February 26-27, 2025 Board of Education meetings the Department laid out its most recent initiative to change the scoring bands for Standards of Learning tests. In it they renewed their attacks on the “honesty” of Virginia’s schools, and established that they will use NAEP “proficient” as the basis for SOL cut scores in spite of the fact “proficient” in NAEP terms is higher than “grade level” standards. See Part II VDOE's Dishonesty about Skewing Assessment Scores To understand how changing cut scores will return to the department’s projected massive failure rates.