Search Results

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.

Cut Scores, a Great Way to Skew Test Results Assessment policy makers want us to believe that standardized testing is a fair, rational and effective way to determine how well students are learning. In spite of our almost exclusive reliance on standardized tests for today’s students, Fairtests.org points out the tests are neither fair nor reliable , at least in part because the policy makers themselves are so highly politicized.  There are a myriad of ways pass rates and the relative difficulty of assessments can be manipulated. Some ways include: Instructional alignment . The match between what is taught and what is tested, can be made less predictable - Each time standards are realigned, teachers need time and information to shift their instruction to match the changes in the tests and standards.  Test question difficulty can be modified.  For example when Common Core was introduced, the standard expectations for entering kindergartners was substantially altered.  Subjectivity. The subjective approach of the test creator can require that loaded terms be used or removed. The current drive to eliminate racial or gender relevant details is an example of how test subjectivity can be manipulated. Also the change to asking phonics-related rather than comprehension-related questions can influence results. Length of test can be altered.  The increase or decrease of a few number of questions can drastically alter the pass rates for any given test.  Testing Accommodations. Accommodations such as audio, or visual enhancement, whether the test is timed or untimed, and native language delivery affects outcomes. Testing conditions can vary with the resources of the school.  Basic conditions such as lighting, heating, cooling, space between students, and noise or movement interruptions are relevant and frequently flawed in less affluent communities. Technology access can be enhanced or impaired.  A slow or spotty internet and new technology enhancements introduced but not previewed can change the testing results. Altering cut scores.  And finally, the easiest, most direct and predictable way of lowering or raising test scores is to alter cut scores. (How many correct questions constitutes a pass)  In other words, you can design assessments for a specific outcome.   What’s about to Happen to Virginia Students? The Youngkin-Guidera Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) has used most of these techniques at various points across their tenure to alter the potential state test scores, but none of the prior changes and manipulations will come near this final accumulated blow they plan to deliver to Virginia’s children in the form of the new Accountability Support Framework  and their proposed changes to cut scores. When the Virginia Board of Education (VBOE) unveiled its plan for school accountability and accreditation in  July of 2024 , parents and educators  alike were stunned to hear they projected as much as 70% of our schools would be “off track” or failing. At the time it seemed unbelievable that would ever be the case. We did not realize a 70% failure rate was indeed what they planned  to build into the design.  In order to quell the outcry, the VDOE ratcheted down the percentages  projected across the summer of 2024, but the support documents just revealed at the Feb 26-27, 2025 Board of Education meetings restores the 70% failure rate as a goal.  The Department will be setting new cut scores between now and July 2025.  This is particularly political because Aimee Guidera has campaigned for the duration of her term that Virginia schools and students were failing and that the state and local governments were lying to parents about it. She and the governor have resurrected those  accusations yet again.  Every policy choice of Secretary Guidera’s and the governor's administration has been conceived to prove that failure. Every policy from changing standards without appropriate input to implementing without appropriate  guidance documents  has been geared to and guided by an attempt to prove failure which would pave the way for full voucher-charter-privatization reform.  Since Socrates was tried and executed for teaching in 399 BCE, school assessment practices have been political, but never more so than now. At what point should using tests as political weapons and the politicization of school policy be considered corruption bordering on the criminal? How much damage should be allowed before the people of Virginia stop this deliberate sabotage?  Please let the VBOE hear from you about their plans  here . See Part I VDOE's Dishonesty about Virginia's Math Scores to understand how changing cut scores will return to the department’s projected massive failure rates.

Don’t let them Cancel Extracurriculars for our Teens! This week, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors (BoS) is crafting their plan to eliminate funding for the Middle School After-School Program next year. Despite a surplus last year this program, that serves tens of thousands of Fairfax families and employs 26 amazing program specialists, will likely end up on the chopping block, unless you act now. Nearly twenty-five years ago, the after school program was funded through public and private partnerships to combat crime and increased gang recruitment of middle school students by providing 5-day programming afterschool from 2:30-4:30 pm. Now this program serves 23,000 students (and their families) across the 26 middle schools in Fairfax County. These programs contribute to health, wellbeing, academic success, and a sense of community among middle schoolers by: Providing quality programming in the areas of recreation, academic enrichment, social skills, youth development, physical health, wellness, and for students to create connections to their peers, their school, and their community. The after school program specialist at each middle school oversees the program, ensures diverse offerings that meet the needs and interests of students, and provides a healthy snack. If these programs are axed, 23,000 students per year will miss these opportunities to grow, learn, and make connections where they can form lifelong friendships, as well as develop skills, interests, and hobbies that will serve them a lifetime. Additionally, Fairfax County will see a likely see a marked rise in mental health issues, screentime, and crime among middle schoolers, AND a decrease in students ready to participate and succeed in high school activities including athletic and academic competitions. I f you live or work in Fairfax County and want our middle schoolers to succeed, please contact the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors and Chairman to urge them NOT to eliminate middle school afterschool and summer programs by Friday, March 14, 2025 and sign this petition . Find contact information for your Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Find contact information for your Fairfax County School Board If you are unsure who are your elected officials, click here  to find them.   To learn more about how this will impact middle schoolers, our families and our schools, please read last week's blog on the subject .

Contact your Fairfax County Supervisor and the Chairman now! Did you know that the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors (BoS) has proposed to eliminate funding for the Middle School After-School Program (ASP) and summer programs next year? This program costs barely $4 million from the BoS but serves 23,000 students (and their families) across the 26 middle schools in Fairfax County. If you live or work in Fairfax County, contact them now  to urge against this.  If this plan goes ahead it would eliminate all afterschool activities from basketball, drama club, chess club, Math Counts, and Model UN, leaving only cross country and track and field at any middle school. These are activities where students make new friends and learn new skills, preparing them for high school. For some students, these after school activities are lifelines that keep them engaged during the school year as well as during the summer. My own kids took advantage of these programs at their middle school, participating in Dungeons and Dragons, Retro-Computing, Science Olympiad, drama, and cooking classes. My son earned regional and state medals in Science Olympiad, which set him up to be part of the team in his high school, and enabled him to hone his engineering skills that he is now using in college.  For my daughter, she developed friendships and skills in all of her after school activities. In particular, Frost Minds Matter helped develop resilience to change while encouraging her to support others in her school. Not only that, but she was the sole middle-schooler at the Minds Matter gala presenting their work to adults. This means she gained impressive presentation skills, as well. For other children in the county, these after school programs offer connections to trustworthy adults, and also provide opportunities for students to get help with homework or develop networks that help them to succeed. These advantages were outlined in the Fairfax County Youth Survey . The survey identifies that having trusted adults to talk to and participating in after school activities offer “protective factors” to better manage stress, make better choices, and develop healthy habits. Also, participation of Middle school students in extracurricular programming gives those students a leg up in high school where the list of afterschool activities grows nearly exponentially. Without such programs, students may be unsupervised for hours at a time. When left to their own devices students are more likely to engage in negative behaviors and activities, according to studies  conducted shortly after these programs began. It is ironic that the BoS is considering cutting these programs to increase safety, which begs the question: safety for whom? Will middle school students and their families be safer with these cuts? Nearly all of these afterschool programs are free of cost to all students. If these programs are cancelled, 23,000 students per year will miss these opportunities to grow, learn, and make connections . They can form lifelong friendships, as well as develop skills, interests, and hobbies that will serve them a lifetime. If you live or work in Fairfax County, please take a few minutes to contact the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, and urge them NOT to eliminate middle school afterschool and summer programs and sign this petition . Find contact information for your Fairfax County Board of Supervisor and the Chairman of the Board Find contact information for your Fairfax County School Board member and the three At-Large members. If you are unsure who you need to contact, click here to find your local elected officials.

Be an Observer at the March 19, 2025 FLE Curriculum Meeting March 19th 7-9 pm Invitation to the FLE Meeting You may be unaware but sex education is under attack  in Fairfax County. Since January 1st of this year, far right blogs and extremist groups have attacked the reputations, intentions, and actions of the students, parents, educators, and professionals on the Family Life Education Curriculum Advisory Committee (FLECAC). They have even gone so far as enlisting hate groups and the Fairfax GOP to spread lies about 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. You can read more about these attacks in Why is FLE under attack?   This year, the FLE committee was tasked with making the FLE curriculum in Elementary School more inclusive, meaning that it would include new topics or approaches to ensure that the diverse student population in Fairfax County could be seen in the curriculum. One component of this is to ensure that gender identity is included in the curriculum, as students and parents have expressed that the current curriculum ignores transgender and nonbinary students to such an extent that the curriculum can feel somewhat hostile and exclusionary. To learn more, please consider joining others to witness the important work of the FLECAC  on March 19, 2025 from 7-9pm. Of course, in these days of book banning and “culture wars,” a small, but loud, minority of people are trying to hijack these efforts. Right before the last scheduled FLECAC meeting on February 12, 2025, which was cancelled due to snow, Cathy Ruse and Deborah Maddrell sent a letter (see below) across the nation misrepresenting the actions of Fairfax volunteers, requesting that their followers attend the FLECAC meeting to be a “first-hand witness of the evil of planned child abuse” by the “Sex Ed drafters,” as they referred to the adult and student volunteers of FLECAC. The entire letter used inflammatory language including the subject line of the email referring to a “ Vote on Trans Cult Lessons for Littlest Students .” The situation was so “dire” that Ruse and Maddrell advised attendees to bring “holy water.” I’m not sure how “holy water” will be useful at a curriculum discussion meeting, but I hope that they keep it in their purses and pockets, because throwing it at people could be considered assault . Absurdly, Ruse and Maddrell’s letter seems to indicate that FLECAC volunteers intend to vote to indoctrinate students and that participation is forced in these classes, despite the fact that: 1) FLE classes are age and scientifically appropriate and 2) it is easy to opt-out of the classes. In fact, it is so easy to opt out of FLE lessons that I opted my own child out of several FLE lessons one year because I felt they were incompatible with my family’s values. It was simple to opt out, and my child was given alternative material during the lessons. Not only are Ruse and Maddrell leaders of the 11th Congressional District Virginia Republican Committee , but they are part of the same groups who organized the aggressive, disruptive protest at the West Potomac High School (HS) drama presentation of Kinky Boots  last Spring. At the Kinky Boots musical at West Potomac HS, members of their group sprinkled unknown substances near the brunch for the drag show attendees, and harassed and filmed people as they arrived at West Potomac. Sadly few people outside of the volunteers on the committee come to the FLECAC meetings. At this time, I’d like to cordially invite you to join us to witness the work of the FLECAC  on Wednesday, March 19, 2025 from 7-9pm at Gatehouse in the first floor cafe of Gatehouse at 8115 Gatehouse Rd, Falls Church, VA (please park in the parking garage). You will need to be a silent observer, but we need you to attend to support the committees’ work because typically the only attendees are those who wish to misrepresent our work to inflame culture wars in our county in order to pit Fairfax residents against each other. Help support the student and adult volunteers who are trying to bring sex education into the 21st century. Come bear silent witness to their work and to support them in the face of aggressive outsiders. Wear spirit or rainbow gear to show your support.

Yes, as are LGBTQIA Students and Fairfax Volunteers! Content Warning:  The blog below includes some hateful terms, phrases, and imagery. These were deemed necessary for context and to explain extremist beliefs that may be unknown or unclear to the reader.  Of course, 2025 began with fiery rhetoric and inaccurate blogs from hate groups about Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS). I’m sure no one is surprised after the fabricated National Merit Certificate crisis of 2023  which cost over $1.6 million in outside legal fees, and annual election “October surprises” from the Daily Wire and Fairfax Times. However, this current campaign hits me personally, because hate groups and others are questioning the very existence of LGBTQIA kids, families, and staff while also targeting the safety of student, staff, and parent volunteers on Family Life Education Curriculum Advisory Committee (FLECAC).  As a member of FLECAC, I don’t appreciate the threatening language used against my fellow committee members, much less name-calling and reputational harm of any of us. Similarly, as the co-leader of FCPS Pride (and an American!), I fundamentally believe in the importance of protecting civil rights, including those of LGBTQIA kids, families, and staff to have access to a respectful and safe educational experience.  I am dismayed by the angry rhetoric surrounding Mark Spooner’s 12/31/24 Fairfax County School Monitor (Monitor) blog , which was amplified by the Fairfax GOP and a SPLC-defined hate group , Parents Defending Education  ( PDE ). This amplification and assoc iated disinformation has inflamed the community, possibly endangering volun teers, while advocating to infringe on the civil rights of the LGBTQIA community in our public schools.  The related blogs and responsive comments misrepresent the work and efforts of FCPS while they also malign and endanger the volunteers of the FLE committee, including parents, students, educators, staff, and public health professionals. Responses to PDE’s links to Spooner’s blog likened the FLE committee to child abusers, groomers, molesters, and the “mentally ill” doing the devil’s work. Response to amplification of Mark Spooner's recent blog I will attempt to correct the record below while explaining some of the inaccuracies, anti-LGBTQIA dog whistles, and civil rights impact of Spooner’s blog. Summary of the Monitor Blog Unfortunately, this current disinformation campaign was triggered by the Monitor blog which focuses yet again on sex education, known as Family Life Education (FLE) in Fairfax County. The Monitor is a blog written by Spooner, a retired octogenarian lawyer, who has sued FCPS multiple times and actively works with the Fairfax GOP and local political and dark money groups . His blog is influenced by his conservative viewpoint, but also seems to display a lack of understanding of public schools and 21st century students and families. The Monitor has been reprinted by the Fairfax GOP over a dozen times, thus can be considered a political blog, particularly when it advocates against equity, LGBTQIA rights, FLE, inclusive education, teacher’s rights, etc. At first glance, Spooner’s blog , which was accompanied by a more detailed letter to the FLECAC, sounds somewhat reasonable: it uses calm, lawyerly language to describe policy differences and significant confusion about the FLE curriculum and FLECAC. Unfortunately, the blog assumed malevolent intent on behalf of the FLECAC, and Spooner did not verify such suppositions with unbiased parties, much less anyone on the FLECAC; therefore, his blog is fundamentally inaccurate and flawed.  Although Spooner avoids easily identifiable hate speech, the blog and associated letter are far from benign. They are filled with anti-LGBTQIA dog whistles, and the pejorative descriptive words applied to LGBTQIA children and our friends and family are appalling. His blog and letter also contradict the FLE goals to work toward a more inclusive FLE curriculum.  Fundamentally, his blog advocated for anyone who is NOT cisgender and heterosexual to just stay in the closet , as if LGBTQIA students lose their rights when they walk in the schoolhouse door. Thus, if one follows the logic and subtext of the Monitor blog and letter, trans, non-binary, gay, intersex, and queer people are too “controversial”, “non-conforming”, or “contradict basic science” and therefore should be excluded from the FLE curriculum and public school conversations. That would mean that the nearly 20% of high students who identify as LGBTQIA+ would have their civil rights trampled, and other students would remain in the dark about anyone other than cisgender, heterosexual people in FLE. Spooner touted “parental rights” as the reason for his suggested changes to the FLE curriculum, but he seemed to forget that: 1) parents of LGBTQIA students have rights, 2) all parents have rights, and 3) he is not a parent in our schools. Additionally, “parent’s rights” are currently observed and respected by the FCPS FLE program, since parents can opt their children out of any portion of the curriculum. Accuracy Matters It is true that Spooner has attended the meetings since October of this year; however, beyond that, there is little accuracy about the FLECAC and FLE curriculum in his blog. Specifically, Spooner hypothesizes the intent of FLECAC members individually and as a whole; however, it is unlikely that he can know the intent of any individual, much less over 20 adults and students who are active members of FLECAC. I have witnessed and been part of heated, but respectful, discussions in FLECAC, so I can tell you firsthand that the committee is not a monolith, and even I cannot divine the intent of individuals on the committee, outside of the common interest in supporting student health, safety, and education.  At an October FLECAC meeting, I was dismayed to see Spooner trying to photograph the sign-in sheet of the FLECAC members, despite our names being publicly available online . His actions made me feel intimidated, particularly since he would withdraw from this task each time I walked toward the table. Additionally, his behavior toward another spectator who witnessed him photographing the signature list was both defensive and aggressive. It was reported that he also used…shall we say…”caustic” language with this spectator. In his blog, Spooner spent significant time describing the December FLECAC draft document; however, he ignored or misunderstood critical facts: The second and third columns of the chart were not draft language, but current language that has been used for years (e.g., the existence of different types of families, including families that have same gender parents, single parents or guardians.) The information in the right two columns were strawman language, not proposed language; therefore, to call them “draft” language is quite a stretch. It was agreed that the FCPS team was going to revise the draft document for discussion at the January meeting. Thus, the December draft would be overwritten by a January draft, and likely a February draft. Spooner questioned the FLECAC’s vote to add “gender” to a different identities of students, which included “race, cultures and traditions, religion, and dis/ability.” Although there was a sound rationale for this addition by FLECAC, he did not seem to capture it, and he had great concerns about the additional language, although it seemed uncontroversial to me, since a person’s identity is reflected by their gender in addition to their racial, religious, or other identities. Whether one is a boy or a girl, one’s identity is driven by gender. This is evidenced by gendered clothing, gender roles, social expectations, work load, pay, and more. Whether a child identifies as cisgender (where gender assigned at birth matches their gender identity) or is transgender (where gender identity may not match their gender assigned at birth).  Throughout his blog and letter, Spooner asserted that FLE should teach students non-scientific terms and ideology which do not comply with the law, or FCPS regulations. In many cases, his suggestions for the FLE curriculum would fall under the purview of parents' rights, not public school curriculum. For example, Spooner objected to the inclusion of intersex in the curriculum. He defined intersex as a “non-hetero-practice” and a “nonconforming sexual relationship” when intersex is actually a status of being, not a practice. Being intersex means that a person has chromosomes, genitals, or reproductive organs that don’t “fit into a male/female binary.”  As the Cleveland Clinic notes, intersex traits  may be apparent at birth or later in life (e.g., puberty), and that being intersex should not be considered a “disorder, disease, or condition.”  As many as 2% of children born are intersex, which is approximately the same percentage as children who are redheads. If this percentage holds true for FCPS students, then as many as 3,600 students in FCPS may be intersex, which is not an insignificant number.  In truth, I know very little about intersex individuals (learn more here ), but as a mother of two redheads, I wouldn’t want my children to be excluded or maligned in a curriculum because they are “gingers.” Intersex children exist and they and their peers need scientifically accurate and inclusive FLE. Anti-LGBTQIA Dog-Whistles  It is impossible in this space to capture and explain all of the dog whistles in Spooner’s blog and letter, so I will focus on two terms he uses: “transgenderism” and “gender ideology.” First, Spooner falsely reported that the FLE committee “favor[ed] lessons on transgenderism in elementary grades.” What are “transgenderism” lessons? I have no idea, thus Spooner’s use of the term made little sense, until I did some research– GLAAD  says that this word “arises from anti-trans extremists who seek to delegitimize and dehumanize trans people by implying that being trans is an ideology rather than an identity.” Furthermore, even Christian groups have identified that "transgenderism" is " the word of choice in the culture wars today ," thus they recommend less combative and negative words if one wants to open up conversation. It was explained to me that using the word “transgenderism” (a.k.a., “trans ideology”) is an effort to deny the very existence of transgender people. Anti-trans extremists have repeated this hateful revisionist term, thus in conservative circles, it has become an accepted term and viewpoint despite the fact that it is both dehumanizing and inaccurate to deny the existence of a person due to their gender identity. Denying the existence of a person is a violation of their human and civil rights. This is not to say that Spooner is anti-trans; however, his usage of the word “transgenderism” seems to have been influenced by anti-trans extremist ideology and media. Second, Spooner uses the term “gender ideology” in the blog’s title, “FCPS Moves Closer to Gender Ideology Instruction in Elementary Schools.” Although he never defines what this means, the term “gender ideology” seems to have a clear meaning to the audience of the Monitor, Fairfax GOP, and PDE. His blog inflamed readers who likened “gender ideology” to a cult and advocated that parents should “rise up In large numbers and confront this radical gender ideology.” Because of their shared fear and anger about “gender ideology,” commenters described FLECAC members as groomers who are sexualizing and experimenting on children. None of these inflammatory comments made sense to me, but that was because I was unaware that the term “gender ideology” has been redefined  to be rooted in anti-LGBTQIA extremist conspiracy theories which the American Defamation League (ADL) says, "characterize attempts to achieve LGBTQ+ rights or representation as an extreme ideology or even part of a nefarious left-wing plot to dominate public institutions…." Furthermore, the ADL says that proponents of such rhetoric "often use it to oppose school curricula that feature and/or celebrate LGBTQ+ history or experiences, falsely claiming that such materials promote the sexualization of minors and/or coerce children into identifying as members of the LGBTQ+ community." See ADL's report tracking anti-Transgender rhetoric here . I do not know whether Spooner has fallen into the trap of misusing these definitions as outlined above; however, commenters on his and the associated blogs have clearly accepted such inaccurate, extremist, and dehumanizing use of the word “gender ideology.” Finally, Spooner calls the phrase “sex assigned at birth” radical, despite it being approved in 2018 for FCPS FLE . “Sex assigned at birth” is the accepted term by major medical groups like the American Association of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association, thus it is scientifically accurate. Nevertheless, the Monitor blog claims that “gender assigned at birth” is “highly controversial but scientifically wrong,” which is sadly incorrect. Human and Civil Rights Merely because there is controversy does not mean that schools or the state can ignore basic civil rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as detailed in the Declaration of Independence that inspired our representative democracy. Spooner’s assertion that “transgenderism is one of the most controversial issues in today’s society” sounds eerily similar to rhetoric used to over history to prevent certain demographic groups from having rights in American society including women in the workplace, Black students in public schools, and all having rights to interracial or gay marriage.  Civil rights should always trump controversy, and in fact many of our most esteemed civil rights have been born of controversy. For example, in the 1960s integration and voting rights were some of the “most controversial issues;” however, the Supreme Court and civil rights laws supported the rights of Black citizens to vote, be educated, have access to housing, and exist without Jim Crow.  Similarly, Virginia has laws that govern the rights of transgender individuals, as does the United States, all of which confirm the rights of transgender individuals to exist, including to be employed , attend school , and have equal access to medical treatment . Thus FCPS Regulation 3280.4  applies to differences of opinion and seems more applicable to civics lessons than lessons on biology, despite Spooner’s assertions.  Final Thoughts I respect Spooner’s interest in attending the meetings and sharing information. I wish more community members attended in good faith to understand the role and actions of FLECAC. However, I do not appreciate fear-mongering and disinformation associated with a campaign against the FLE committee and FCPS students, staff, and families. No volunteer deserves to be targeted or to feel unsafe. Additionally, it was out of line for Spooner to directly contact anyone other than the FCPS liaison for the committee–sending letters to volunteers’ work or home addresses is unconscionable and intimidating.  Spooner’s blog and letter display confusion about FLECAC’s role in the FLE curriculum. FLECAC’s role is to “ provide advice and recommendations  to the curriculum coordinator as objectives and descriptive statements are developed and basal materials are considered for use in instruction ( FCPS Regulation 1708 ).” Thus Spooner’s argument that descriptors should be “more specific” and less “vanilla” countered the goals of FLECAC. Curriculum development is conducted by trained educators and health professionals, not FLECAC–see the curriculum development process to learn more–therefore, it is nonsensical that he would expect specificity from the descriptive statements produced by FLECAC.  I am confused why Mr. Spooner is so involved in this subject and has spent significant time and energy writing blogs about the FLECAC, FCPS Pride, and “transgender issues” (his term) despite having no children in FCPS, little knowledge of 21st Century sex education curricula, and no training in this arena.  Spooner has sued FCPS five times, and one of his lawsuits cost $266,270 in outside legal fees , which means that significant time and money was spent by our school system to address his seemingly politically motivated lawsuits. Are his blogs another burden on FCPS to pursue a political agenda? Of course, he has the right to free speech and action, even if it comes at a financial burden to our school system, but his motivation in this arena of sex education is concerning since his blogs involve anti-science, anti-safety, and anti-LGBTQIA themes and suggestions. Also, how much time do his inquiries, blogs, advocacy, and lawsuits take away from the education of our school children?  What is truly concerning is that a political party and an extremist group amplified his Monitor blog, despite it containing a wealth of flaws. I’ve been watching the interplay of extremist political forces for the last four years, and I can tell you that an inaccurate, biased blog about a minor school system committee changing one word (i.e., adding “gender”) doesn’t “accidently” get amplified by multiple venues outside of a person’s personal vanity project. That doesn't “just happen.” However, repetition is key to any successful disinformation campaign . Even the timing is suspect: Mr. Spooner published his blog on 12/31/24, Fairfax GOP published his blog on 1/1/25, Erika Sanzi of PDE published a version on 1/2/25 , and the Federalist published a blog on the “radical trans activism” of FLECAC on 1/2/25. I don’t know about you, but I was celebrating the holidays with friends and family during that same time period. It is obvious that there is interplay among the parties involved and intent beyond the words of the blog. Spooner has frequently partnered with Stephanie Lundquist-Arora , whose 1/2/25 Federalist editorial described the FLECAC volunteers as “extremists” with seemingly the “sole intent of indoctrinating our young children in transgender ideology.” Lundquist-Arora has also referred to these tireless FCPS volunteers as “leftists” who are trying to groom students, and she has called those who rally for LGBTQIA civil rights a “ trans cult  made up of mostly bored white women.” Lundquist-Arora is also the Chapter Chair of Independent Women’s (IWN) Network, and has written numerous anti-trans editorials and also sued FCPS multiple times , including a current suit against transgender student rights. Her group and its sister group, Independent Women’s Forum  (IWF, an anti-feminist group that partners with hate groups ), have long pursued anti-LGBTQIA legislation and advocacy, using dangerous stereotypes and tropes to categorize transgender children. IWF and Lundquist-Arora frequently partner with Fairfax GOP and PDE . Efforts have been made by Mr. Spooner, Fairfax GOP, PDE, and Lundquist-Arora to inflame people to “make their voices heard;” even though the public is not permitted to speak during FLECAC meetings, just observe. Based on the responses to his blog and letter, one might be concerned that their invitees will have trouble maintaining control during the meeting. Unfortunately, students, parents, staff, and health professionals are caught in the crossfire as the FLE curriculum and the existence of LGBTQIA kids are used for political gain . No one in our community should be forced to go back in the closet, or excluded from public schools. Whether intentionally or not, Spooner’s blog has fanned the flames of hate and disinformation in Fairfax County. As a result, I and others are being threatened online by extremists, and possibly neighbors, some of whom have said that the FLECAC volunteers belong in prison. Those of us who volunteer to do unpaid labor for our school system deserve to feel safe. There can be differences of opinion, but it is unnecessary to demonize those of us who give up our time with our friends and family to try to make our schools inclusive, supportive, and respectful spa ces for all to work and learn. If you would like to learn more, please consider attending a FLECAC meeting, which occur on the second Wednesday of the month from 7-9pm in the Gatehouse Administration Center Cafeteria. The next meetings are on 2/12/25, 3/12/25, 4/9/25. Please see the FCPS FLE Program  if you have questions about its content. Note: There is a rebuttal by the Monitor to this blog. Unfortunately, there are claims and accusations in the Monitor blog that are incorrect and/or continue to use anti-LGBTQIA dog whistles. I will not take the time to address them at this time; however, I strongly suggest that a closer reading of this 4PE blog may clear up some confusion. For example: Describing language as transphobic is not the same as calling a person transphobic. Similarly, an ad hominem attack is an argument or reaction directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining. By addressing words and behavior, this blog is not an ad hominem attack. No one accused Spooner of using "angry rhetoric;" however, there is clearly angry rhetoric "surrounding his blog" which includes responses to his blog and responses to amplification of his blog. Accuracy matters.