How would you change the FCPS boundary maps?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“ people with kids in school don't want them separated from their current school communities. ”

+1 make what changes you want but schedule them to phase in so kids can stay with their friends and the HS they thought they would go to

but...but...but.....Equity!

[Anonymous]

Could we do a school choice pilot? Offer for kids in 1 school, in 1 grade only, the option to go to different predetermined schools? Presumably ones not too far away. And see how it goes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I also feel like Woodson High School was placed in the wrong area of Fairfax County. Woodson High School should have been located halfway between Fairfax High School and Centreville High School, a little before the exclave of Fairfax High School's boundary begins. That way Fairfax High School would have students from the City of Fairfax and the eastern portion of Woodson's current boundary while Woodson would have students from the exclave of Fairfax High School's current boundary plus the western portion of Woodson's current boundary. Woodson High School as it is is too close to Fairfax High School while there is a significant distance between FHS and Chantilly High School or Centreville High School. If Woodson High School were in this new hypothetical location I think the boundaries would be better.

You're going to need a big trailer to relocate Woodson!

But, yes, Madison, Oakton, Woodson, and Fairfax HS are too close to one another. This skews the boundaries in central/western Fairfax.

Langley also is in an inconvenient location. It would be better if it were near Great Falls Village, and not so close to the Potomac River and Arlington County.

It would also help if Robinson were further southwest of its current location.

What’s interesting is that the western part of the Woodson boundary could go to Robinson. They literally pass it driving down Braddock road to get to Woodson.

.

When south county opened and relieved both lake braddock and robinson (both underenrolled now), they should have been assigned to robinson and just left there. It makes no sense, really.

Those neighborhoods used to go to Robinson, but were re-zoned to Fairfax and then re-zoned to Woodson. A lot of “ping ponging” that those neighborhoods have endured.

[Anonymous]

The boundaries should be redrawn so that kids are attending their neighborhood school, to reduce over crowding, and to limit the number of split feeder schools.

Kids shouldn't be bused to specialized programs, like AAP. If parents want their child to attend a magnet program or AAP then the parent should be responsible for transportation, just like they are for language immersion. But that means that every ES and MS should have an active AAP program.

Some neighborhoods will be upset because the school that is closest to them is going to be different then the school they are currently attending but that is life. Some parents will be upset because they don't like the school they are zoned for but that is life.

The priority should be schools that are not over crowded and limiting the split feeder mess.

[Anonymous]

If split feeders are such a mess, I suggest that FCPS begin by reassigning the kids who are in the minority at the split feeder, but only if they are being reassigned to a lower ranked school that the majority of students at the split feeder currently attend.

Then we will see how terrible split feeders are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:no more AAP and AAP busing

Agreed. This has done more to ruin the quality of education than anything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:no more AAP and AAP busing

AAP is the pride and joy of FCPS. That won’t be eliminated.

Pray tell, what make you say that? It begins by TJ reform. It continues with an outside firm hired to examine AAP
through an equity lens. It then follows with eliminating centers and expensive busing. Finishes with AAP for all.

FCPS needs to serve all students.

So I agree with no more centers and busing. I disagree with AAP for all. You hit a middle ground where you have a mix of some pull out separate AAP work and a mix of AAP students with the regular folks. It helps to raise the struggling kids but continues to give the challenge an AAP kids needs. But to work, you need smaller classrooms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I also feel like Woodson High School was placed in the wrong area of Fairfax County. Woodson High School should have been located halfway between Fairfax High School and Centreville High School, a little before the exclave of Fairfax High School's boundary begins. That way Fairfax High School would have students from the City of Fairfax and the eastern portion of Woodson's current boundary while Woodson would have students from the exclave of Fairfax High School's current boundary plus the western portion of Woodson's current boundary. Woodson High School as it is is too close to Fairfax High School while there is a significant distance between FHS and Chantilly High School or Centreville High School. If Woodson High School were in this new hypothetical location I think the boundaries would be better.

You do realize that is because Chantilly and Centreville were super country/rural areas. Woodson, Fairfax and Oakton were considered country for a while. Population densities have changed dramatically in the past 40 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I take from this thread is that DCUM thinks that diversity is not at all important and we should be carving up school districts on property values alone.

diversity is great until your kid is zoned for a school with a 50%+ FARMS rate.

This. Some schools shouldn’t bear the brunt of certain populations.

But it is compounded by everyone thinking their child is "gifted" and needs to be a center. FCPS has lowed the gifted standard to basically allow slightly above average kids into the program. They bus them out of these schools and the schools performs dreadfully because the only kids not "gifted" are the ones that don't speak English. It is segregation at every level.

The gifted program originally pulled kids with high IQs out to give them immensely challenging projects and a lot more work to do. That is not the case. Parents game the system, there are practice tests, and honestly most of these kids are not gifted. And when you have all children from a family gifted that shows you that the program is BS. We have entire families going to these programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ people with kids in school don't want them separated from their current school communities. ”

+1 make what changes you want but schedule them to phase in so kids can stay with their friends and the HS they thought they would go to

but...but...but.....Equity!

What is it about what's actually proposed -not what you are thinking may be proposed- that is being done in the name of equity, and that you object to?

I don't hear them proposing busing? Or dividing up boundaries like they have in the past (Woodson Island, anyone?) But, rather, a division of boundaries that are open to reasonable differing opinions as to what is appropriate? You may not like that there are equity considerations as a factor or decisions made to that division line.

Or do you think that equity shouldn't be a concern at all? And if so, how do you propose to ensure different schools that use our tax dollars -and are PUBLICLY funded- can provide an equivalent in terms of educational experience for their children?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The boundaries should be redrawn so that kids are attending their neighborhood school, to reduce over crowding, and to limit the number of split feeder schools.

Kids shouldn't be bused to specialized programs, like AAP. If parents want their child to attend a magnet program or AAP then the parent should be responsible for transportation, just like they are for language immersion. But that means that every ES and MS should have an active AAP program.

Some neighborhoods will be upset because the school that is closest to them is going to be different then the school they are currently attending but that is life. Some parents will be upset because they don't like the school they are zoned for but that is life.

The priority should be schools that are not over crowded and limiting the split feeder mess.

100% agree that parental whining should not be a factor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:no more AAP and AAP busing

AAP is the pride and joy of FCPS. That won’t be eliminated.

Pray tell, what make you say that? It begins by TJ reform. It continues with an outside firm hired to examine AAP
through an equity lens. It then follows with eliminating centers and expensive busing. Finishes with AAP for all.

FCPS needs to serve all students.

So I agree with no more centers and busing. I disagree with AAP for all. You hit a middle ground where you have a mix of some pull out separate AAP work and a mix of AAP students with the regular folks. It helps to raise the struggling kids but continues to give the challenge an AAP kids needs. But to work, you need smaller classrooms.

You need AAP. In class differentiation doesn't work for the kids who are really struggling and the kids who are advanced. We have programs in place to try and help the kids who are really struggling, IEPs/504 and associated services. They are not always the best and god knows that they could use additional help in the form of teachers aides and resources but they are there. AAP serves the kids who are advanced. Teachers are not going to split their time evenly so kids who are ahead are given challenging work. The kids who are ahead will be sent to work in their groups solo and might see the Teacher every few weeks for group work. We already see this with LA. Kids in the higher reading groups do not get that much time working with the Teacher because the Teacher is spending time with the kids who are struggling. And that makes sense, the Teachers priority is helping the kids who are not able to or barely able to complete the assigned work.

AAP gives kids who are ahead or advanced a more challenging curriculum that helps those kids stay engaged.

I agree with getting rid of busing for AAP and the Centers but every school needs to have an AAP option for kids who are ahead. I don't care if the kids are gifted, tested well, are ahead or whatever the label is, they should have a chance to be challenged in school. But it can be done at the neighborhood school. There is no reason to be busing kids to different schools. Or if the parents are so desperate to leave their base school, their parents can handle transportation the way the parents in the language immersion programs do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ people with kids in school don't want them separated from their current school communities. ”

+1 make what changes you want but schedule them to phase in so kids can stay with their friends and the HS they thought they would go to

but...but...but.....Equity!

What is it about what's actually proposed -not what you are thinking may be proposed- that is being done in the name of equity, and that you object to?

I don't hear them proposing busing? Or dividing up boundaries like they have in the past (Woodson Island, anyone?) But, rather, a division of boundaries that are open to reasonable differing opinions as to what is appropriate? You may not like that there are equity considerations as a factor or decisions made to that division line.

Or do you think that equity shouldn't be a concern at all? And if so, how do you propose to ensure different schools that use our tax dollars -and are PUBLICLY funded- can provide an equivalent in terms of educational experience for their children?

Our tax dollars shouldn't be used to "ensure" the same educational outcomes for all public school students. The only way that will ever happen is that if all the outcomes are equally poor.

Equal opportunities, yes. But we already spend more tax dollars on the schools with more lower-income kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ people with kids in school don't want them separated from their current school communities. ”

+1 make what changes you want but schedule them to phase in so kids can stay with their friends and the HS they thought they would go to

but...but...but.....Equity!

What is it about what's actually proposed -not what you are thinking may be proposed- that is being done in the name of equity, and that you object to?

I don't hear them proposing busing? Or dividing up boundaries like they have in the past (Woodson Island, anyone?) But, rather, a division of boundaries that are open to reasonable differing opinions as to what is appropriate? You may not like that there are equity considerations as a factor or decisions made to that division line.

Or do you think that equity shouldn't be a concern at all? And if so, how do you propose to ensure different schools that use our tax dollars -and are PUBLICLY funded- can provide an equivalent in terms of educational experience for their children?

The reality is that equity is not going to be achieved by changing most of the boundaries. Langley and McLean might get a small increase in the number of FARMs kids attending but how many lower SES families would live in the new boundaries? Some people from higher SES schools would be shifted to higher FARMs schools but they will survive. The families that moved to South Lakes seem to have done just fine. There might be some shifts in the FARMs rate but I would doubt that the change would be that drastic.

[Anonymous]

I don't hear them proposing busing? Or dividing up boundaries like they have in the past (Woodson Island, anyone?) But, rather, a division of boundaries that are open to reasonable differing opinions as to what is appropriate? You may not like that there are equity considerations as a factor or decisions made to that division line.

Then you have not been listening.