FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to be upset if they don't address transfers for MS AAP. Our base school is Rocky Run and also my kid is in AAP. Looking at the transfer data, it looks like a significant portion of those in AAP at Rocky Run transfer there from out of pyramid, then go off to Westfield or Centreville HS. Sounds brutal as far as friendships go for everyone, especially once they reach HS.

Every middle school should have AAP and Carson and Rocky Run should stop serving so many kids who live outside their base boundaries.

But if you pull the AAP placements out of Rocky Run, you're left with a very small school unless they also expand the base boundaries.

I”m confused what the AAP middle school thing solves. Let’s say the board says: Great idea! Let’s try again! No AAP centers in middle schools.

Won’t that just draw out the process and make it even MORE impactful for MORE kids and pyramids?

This idea doesn’t seem viable.

It is absolutely viable, and certainly more disruptive in some areas than what they've proposed so far.

But it's inconsistent to pretend that attendance islands and split feeders are so terrible because they don't create enough of a sense of community or send kids to multiple schools, and then maintain MS AAP centers where the kids can go on to 3 or more high schools.

So you are arguing the board should dismantle and disrupt even MORE kids lives to win a point?

“Be careful what you wish for”

It would actually be less disruptive. All ES kids would stay together instead of sending a small percentage to the AAP Center. I know their mommies want them to end up at TJ, but I always feel bad for Navy kids who get pulled away from their ES friends and then make new friends in MS, but don't go to high school with ANY of them.

No, I’m saying it would be more disruptive to the current boundary process, the current students attending middle schools and upper elementary. It would move around a lot more families than were presented in the last boundary maps because it would create capacity issues at some middle schools which would make them have to redraw even more boundaries.

I’m not anti the principle and opted for AAP at our local middle school, BUT at this point, would mean more changes for more people.

Sure feel bad for the Navy kids, but also know the parents chose that. I don’t know where they go to middle school, but the AAP center school would have a population hole if you took the center away and that would need to be filled by redrawing boundaries. It is the domino effect.

It would be the least disruptive way to rezone.

Elementary and high school students would not be touched, with a few exceptionsat a couple of elementary schools. The changes would all occur over 2 years at the middle school level, as each new 7th grade class enters.

It would be about as seamless as a rezoning could be.

The rezoning should only happen at the middle school level, with every current student grandfathered at their existing school, switching only when they ove between school levels.

Add a residency check in 7th and 9th, and you have the best possible outcome for county wide rezoning.

Prove it.

How many kids and families affected under the current plan moving attendance islands?

How many kids would be affected under this “least disruptive plan” that reroutes all AAP center middle school kids back to base schools and then accounts for redistricting from there.

You don’t know the numbers unless you are a school board member or Thru AND they have already run this scenario.

Harkening back to a PP- I am guessing your kid may be affected under the current plan and you don’t want that, so you take zero issue disrupting even more families to get what your family wants.

I’m happy to be proven wrong with numbers.

Well, it appears that middle school AAP centers encourage pupil placement in high schools. I find it difficult to believe that there are not enough AAP kids to justify classes at every middle school. Quit separating them out.
DD's high school friends who went to AAP (she did not) were very disappointed to not get into TJ--almost depressed. And, she surpassed them at many levels in high school--to include National Merit scores, department awards, AP Scholar, NCTE award, etc.

Ok, but the consequence of not allowing these transfers (both at middle and high school level) will lead to MORE boundary changes.
TBH I am not a fan of AAP centers in middle, BUT I can also see that getting rid of them at this point will just lead to MORE boundary changes which this far into the process will lead to MORE uncertainty for MORE families.

Are you all not able to separate those things out?

I’m sorry, why do you think it would lead to more boundary changes to get rid of AAP centers?

It would really just impact Franklin which sends 300 AAP kids between Rocky Run and Carson. They’d have to sort out new boundaries between Rocky Run and Franklin, which isn’t hugely disruptive because they’re already Chantilly feeders.

Carson is a larger MS, so they wouldn’t be taking full advantage of its capacity, but if it’s primarily feeding KAA that may not be a bad thing.

Thoreau and Kilmer would have to undo some of its boundary recommendations. They had plans of sending a lot of Kilmer to Thoreau, but Thoreau’s excess capacity would shrink if their AAP kids returned from Kilmer and Jackson.

Regardless, I think it’s too late in the process to pivot. Doesn’t AAP need specific staffing?

All of these changes you describe are far less disruptive and impact far fewer families than the changes already proposed by Thru.

As a bonus, the changes could be implemented with each rising 7th grade class as they move from elementary to middle school, leaving current high school students untouched from their current school path, with the only affect being a new feeder pattern which would begin in 7th grade when they are already transitioning to new schools. Current 7th grade - 11th grade could stay on their current path. Current K-5th graders could stay at their neighborhood elementary, switching pyramids in 7th grade, unless they get a capacity rezoning like Coates needs.

This would be the least disruptive and most seamless way to institute a district wide rezoning.

Again. Show me some numbers to back up your claim.
You seem to think moving hundreds of kids out of an AAP center school will be fine and if the school has empyt classrooms, that is fine.

You also seem to think all AAP kids can be moved back to their base schools with out any overcrowding.

Show me the numbers that a majority of middle schools will not have to redo boundaries.

I think we found the mom here who doesn't want her middle schooler at their base middle school. There's no other reason she would be arguing so much. Name the schools, momma.

Ew. I”m not a ‘momma” my kids are in high school. They are protected by grandfathering at this point.

I sent my AAP kid to the local middle rather than a center because centers in middle school are dumb.

I do NOT understand why involving more families in redoing all the AAP boundaries and then redoing many middle school AND high school boundaries would be helpful at this stage of the process. It doesn’t make sense to me at all.

No one seems to be able to explain this idea that except to say “it gets something I can see done that I can understand” or “I must be personally affected to fight this”. It doesn’t affect me, it is just a silly idea that will complicate the boundary process even more at this point.

[Anonymous]

Oof. I knew things were running afoul when Reid made a comment saying something along the lines that the acquisition wouldn't affect the boundary study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FCPS can barely afford to pay their regular teachers. There is no way they could come up with the expertise to teach the things in that document as an academy. Maybe over many years of iteration and accumulation of talent. It would destroy the operating budget to try to create an academy like this.
They'll have to open as a regular high school on that basis alone. And they'll have to bring in a significant number of students from the base are of the western end of the county, or else there will be no money saved on a Centerville expansion

It suggests a partnership with George Mason and also mentions a pathway to work at Amazon HQ2 (can Amazon give money to fund it?).

In any event, I think it's way too niche/specialized for a high school program.

[Anonymous]

So, they go with a magnet. How does that help overcrowding in Chantlly and Westfield? How does that prevent long bus rides proposed for current Chantilly students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone from Great Falls certainly did put a lot of time into that Designing a Future-Ready High School.8.15.2025.docx document copying and pasting a bunch of sentences from various sources to try to justify stealing this high school from an area of the county that desperately needs one.

+1
They have been against this since the day it was announced. Ask yourself why? That is the elephant in the room.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone from Great Falls certainly did put a lot of time into that Designing a Future-Ready High School.8.15.2025.docx document copying and pasting a bunch of sentences from various sources to try to justify stealing this high school from an area of the county that desperately needs one.

100% this is the influence of the Fairfact people who for some inexplicable reason have UNDUE INFLUENCE on the school board. WTF GREAT FALLS LOBBYISTS????

I’m assuming you are making this mental leap based on the push on Nextdoor from some people in Great Falls who wanted the school board to explain more details about the purchase.

I am pretty confident that this is driven by the school board members themselves (eg, Kyle McDaniels).

Your normal boogey man isn’t boogeying here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone from Great Falls certainly did put a lot of time into that Designing a Future-Ready High School.8.15.2025.docx document copying and pasting a bunch of sentences from various sources to try to justify stealing this high school from an area of the county that desperately needs one.

100% this is the influence of the Fairfact people who for some inexplicable reason have UNDUE INFLUENCE on the school board. WTF GREAT FALLS LOBBYISTS????

I’m assuming you are making this mental leap based on the push on Nextdoor from some people in Great Falls who wanted the school board to explain more details about the purchase.

I am pretty confident that this is driven by the school board members themselves (eg, Kyle McDaniels).

Your normal boogey man isn’t boogeying here.

+1 I don’t think the GFCA has much to do with this. The SB does what they want and basically never listens to constituents, unless they happen to agree with them (which I guess is the case here). But it is the board pushing this idea and not random, if somewhat more influential, citizen groups. This has crooked Kyle McDaniel’s fingerprints all over it and maybe a large corporation? Imagine The (insert large defense contractor of your choice with a large NoVa presence) Aviation Careers Academy, where your 14-18 year olds can train to work for us and thus we don’t have to spend any of our own money training mechanics or engineers!

[Anonymous]

The board docs in the boundary section say they’re planning a transportation study of South County and Hayfield. To presumably see how it could impact kids if they move them around? I guess they’re making space at SC for all those WSHS kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The board docs in the boundary section say they’re planning a transportation study of South County and Hayfield. To presumably see how it could impact kids if they move them around? I guess they’re making space at SC for all those WSHS kids?

Ironically, SC was opened to take capacity from Hayfield and reduce bus commute times. I wonder if they’re going to try to shuffle the few neighborhoods east of 95 to Hayfield to make room for the Hunt Valley south of the Parkway neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

I KNEW IT. We are a Crossfield family that lives in Franklin Farm and I KNEW that this was never going to happen. I get that Crossfield was a maybe in the whole formula anyway, but now it absolutely isn't going to happen. NOBODY WANTS AN AVIATION AND AEROSPACE ACADEMY. Who on earth do they think they are going to hire to each here????? So much for relieving overcrowding and making a shorter bud ride for Westfield and Oakton kids. It was never going to happen. Just another magnet for Asian families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I KNEW IT. We are a Crossfield family that lives in Franklin Farm and I KNEW that this was never going to happen. I get that Crossfield was a maybe in the whole formula anyway, but now it absolutely isn't going to happen. NOBODY WANTS AN AVIATION AND AEROSPACE ACADEMY. Who on earth do they think they are going to hire to each here????? So much for relieving overcrowding and making a shorter bud ride for Westfield and Oakton kids. It was never going to happen. Just another magnet for Asian families.

You are such babies claiming this aviation program would be geared to “rich” and now “Asian” families. From the second the KAA deal was announced the people in western Fairfax have acted so self-centered and entitled. I am thrilled that some of you may NOT get what you want. Maybe it will teach you a bit more compassion for people elsewhere in the county. You can start by stop blaming Great Falls residents for something that clearly is the brainchild of Kyle McDaniel and others (maybe Robyn Lady, maybe a local corporation), not people in Great Falls.

[Anonymous]

That's shocking. They do a smart thing buying the school and then turn it into an academy for baggage handlers? IDIOTIC. That guy is a sleazeball.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That's shocking. They do a smart thing buying the school and then turn it into an academy for baggage handlers? IDIOTIC. That guy is a sleazeball.

Maybe it was never a smart thing to buy that school and you’re just figuring that out now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to be upset if they don't address transfers for MS AAP. Our base school is Rocky Run and also my kid is in AAP. Looking at the transfer data, it looks like a significant portion of those in AAP at Rocky Run transfer there from out of pyramid, then go off to Westfield or Centreville HS. Sounds brutal as far as friendships go for everyone, especially once they reach HS.

Every middle school should have AAP and Carson and Rocky Run should stop serving so many kids who live outside their base boundaries.

But if you pull the AAP placements out of Rocky Run, you're left with a very small school unless they also expand the base boundaries.

I”m confused what the AAP middle school thing solves. Let’s say the board says: Great idea! Let’s try again! No AAP centers in middle schools.

Won’t that just draw out the process and make it even MORE impactful for MORE kids and pyramids?

This idea doesn’t seem viable.

It is absolutely viable, and certainly more disruptive in some areas than what they've proposed so far.

But it's inconsistent to pretend that attendance islands and split feeders are so terrible because they don't create enough of a sense of community or send kids to multiple schools, and then maintain MS AAP centers where the kids can go on to 3 or more high schools.

So you are arguing the board should dismantle and disrupt even MORE kids lives to win a point?

“Be careful what you wish for”

It would actually be less disruptive. All ES kids would stay together instead of sending a small percentage to the AAP Center. I know their mommies want them to end up at TJ, but I always feel bad for Navy kids who get pulled away from their ES friends and then make new friends in MS, but don't go to high school with ANY of them.

No, I’m saying it would be more disruptive to the current boundary process, the current students attending middle schools and upper elementary. It would move around a lot more families than were presented in the last boundary maps because it would create capacity issues at some middle schools which would make them have to redraw even more boundaries.

I’m not anti the principle and opted for AAP at our local middle school, BUT at this point, would mean more changes for more people.

Sure feel bad for the Navy kids, but also know the parents chose that. I don’t know where they go to middle school, but the AAP center school would have a population hole if you took the center away and that would need to be filled by redrawing boundaries. It is the domino effect.

It would be the least disruptive way to rezone.

Elementary and high school students would not be touched, with a few exceptionsat a couple of elementary schools. The changes would all occur over 2 years at the middle school level, as each new 7th grade class enters.

It would be about as seamless as a rezoning could be.

The rezoning should only happen at the middle school level, with every current student grandfathered at their existing school, switching only when they ove between school levels.

Add a residency check in 7th and 9th, and you have the best possible outcome for county wide rezoning.

Prove it.

How many kids and families affected under the current plan moving attendance islands?

How many kids would be affected under this “least disruptive plan” that reroutes all AAP center middle school kids back to base schools and then accounts for redistricting from there.

You don’t know the numbers unless you are a school board member or Thru AND they have already run this scenario.

Harkening back to a PP- I am guessing your kid may be affected under the current plan and you don’t want that, so you take zero issue disrupting even more families to get what your family wants.

I’m happy to be proven wrong with numbers.

Well, it appears that middle school AAP centers encourage pupil placement in high schools. I find it difficult to believe that there are not enough AAP kids to justify classes at every middle school. Quit separating them out.
DD's high school friends who went to AAP (she did not) were very disappointed to not get into TJ--almost depressed. And, she surpassed them at many levels in high school--to include National Merit scores, department awards, AP Scholar, NCTE award, etc.

Ok, but the consequence of not allowing these transfers (both at middle and high school level) will lead to MORE boundary changes.
TBH I am not a fan of AAP centers in middle, BUT I can also see that getting rid of them at this point will just lead to MORE boundary changes which this far into the process will lead to MORE uncertainty for MORE families.

Are you all not able to separate those things out?

I’m sorry, why do you think it would lead to more boundary changes to get rid of AAP centers?

It would really just impact Franklin which sends 300 AAP kids between Rocky Run and Carson. They’d have to sort out new boundaries between Rocky Run and Franklin, which isn’t hugely disruptive because they’re already Chantilly feeders.

Carson is a larger MS, so they wouldn’t be taking full advantage of its capacity, but if it’s primarily feeding KAA that may not be a bad thing.

Thoreau and Kilmer would have to undo some of its boundary recommendations. They had plans of sending a lot of Kilmer to Thoreau, but Thoreau’s excess capacity would shrink if their AAP kids returned from Kilmer and Jackson.

Regardless, I think it’s too late in the process to pivot. Doesn’t AAP need specific staffing?

All of these changes you describe are far less disruptive and impact far fewer families than the changes already proposed by Thru.

As a bonus, the changes could be implemented with each rising 7th grade class as they move from elementary to middle school, leaving current high school students untouched from their current school path, with the only affect being a new feeder pattern which would begin in 7th grade when they are already transitioning to new schools. Current 7th grade - 11th grade could stay on their current path. Current K-5th graders could stay at their neighborhood elementary, switching pyramids in 7th grade, unless they get a capacity rezoning like Coates needs.

This would be the least disruptive and most seamless way to institute a district wide rezoning.

Again. Show me some numbers to back up your claim.
You seem to think moving hundreds of kids out of an AAP center school will be fine and if the school has empyt classrooms, that is fine.

You also seem to think all AAP kids can be moved back to their base schools with out any overcrowding.

Show me the numbers that a majority of middle schools will not have to redo boundaries.

I think we found the mom here who doesn't want her middle schooler at their base middle school. There's no other reason she would be arguing so much. Name the schools, momma.

Ew. I”m not a ‘momma” my kids are in high school. They are protected by grandfathering at this point.

I sent my AAP kid to the local middle rather than a center because centers in middle school are dumb.

I do NOT understand why involving more families in redoing all the AAP boundaries and then redoing many middle school AND high school boundaries would be helpful at this stage of the process. It doesn’t make sense to me at all.

No one seems to be able to explain this idea that except to say “it gets something I can see done that I can understand” or “I must be personally affected to fight this”. It doesn’t affect me, it is just a silly idea that will complicate the boundary process even more at this point.

Multiple people have explained the advantages of focusing on something that might actually provide some benefits to you. You simply choose not to listen, even though it’s not a “silly idea” at all. There’s nothing admirable about plowing ahead with the current boundary process when it seems destined to accomplish very little and hurt many families if it stays on its current track.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That's shocking. They do a smart thing buying the school and then turn it into an academy for baggage handlers? IDIOTIC. That guy is a sleazeball.

Based on the curriculum, it looks more like an AI/ML and data science focus that’s loosely branded as an aerospace academy.

It does feel like they’re putting the cart before the horse when we don’t know the schools capacity or how it will alleviate neighboring schools’ capacity. For example, as they work out transportation logistics, it might become evident that KAA makes more sense as a neighborhood school. While Westfield, which is isolated from much of its community, is a better home for an academy.