Forum Index
»
Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)
Predicted Enrollment Decline in FCPS Materializes
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
They won’t see the “drop in birth rate” effects for a few years. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/usa/united-states/birth-rate Look at the 20 year data … the decline has started but we’ll need to get the current HSers out of the schools first. The big drop off doesn’t start until the kids who were born in around 2010. Those kids will be graduating in 2028. They will be replaced by a much smaller cohort of 5-6 year olds who were born in 2022-2023. Even with the recent “bump” in birth rate in 2024-2025 according to the chart, it’s still half of peak from 2005-2008. |
Anonymous
All the people pulling out to homeschool for various reasons. Also kids who are victims of bullying in the schools. |
Anonymous
I don’t think that’s what she meant. I’m guessing it’s ice enforcement. |
Anonymous
I dont mean to be rude, but offering any sort of virtual school for those kids is largely going to be a waste of resources. Did we learn nothing from the pandemic? |
Anonymous
| I would love to see a chart showing the drop in enrollment from June to September over the last 10 years to see if this is typical or extreme. If I had to guess I would think that a lot of people move over the summer and forget to notify the school, so a big drop is expected. |
Anonymous
Every 2-3 years when I take attendance on the first day of school, there’s always a kid missing and everybody else in class was like “oh they moved away” |
Anonymous
Maybe, but the school still has to offer some type of education. Virtual schools have seen a rise since Covid, so I wouldn’t be surprised if a few other parents took advantage of it. |
Anonymous
That backs up the theory: FFX county parents are “un - enrolling” their kids. Two most likely explanations are: - parents are illegal and are either moving back home or moving to a state they consider safer from ICE. - parents were affected by DOGE/ or the ripple effect, and lost jobs, taking kids to other states. |
Anonymous
Third, some of us are just over FCPS |
Anonymous
It's a pronounced uptick in the decline in enrollment from June to September of a calendar year, even if enrollments may increase during a school year. June to September 2025: -4,146 (uncertified) June to September 2024 : -2,307 June to September 2023: -1,045 June to September 2022: -1,263 June to September 2021: -1,146 June to September 2020: -9,701 (Covid year) June to September 2019: +447 June to September 2018: -673 June to September 2017: +1,753 June to September 2016: +1,136 I don't purport to have the explanation for the decline, but it's not business as usual if the September 2025 numbers hold. |
Anonymous
Failing to invest capital resources where they are most needed and then threatening people with county-wide boundary changes can't help. |
Anonymous
FCPS is spending budget dollars to fight a lawsuit over their choice to violate Title IX of the Civil Rights Act. |
Anonymous
How many times do we have to go over this? The Trump Administration wants to ignore lower appellate court rulings and create conflicts for the Supreme Court to resolve, hoping that the Supreme Court will rule in its favor. It leaves FCPS and other school districts in a Catch-22 where they can either comply with Trump's DOE and violate the civil rights of some students, according to the Fourth Circuit, or follow the law and see federal funding denied or delayed. If it violated a court ruling, it could be subject to civil monetary sanctions as well. It would be one thing if FCPS was just striking out on its own and flouting both Trump's DOE and the Supreme Court, but that is not currently the case. |
Anonymous
Lol they’re so out of touch. Look at the attendance statistics of lower income and ESOL groups from COVID times. They might as well be saying, we know you’re not attending and you won’t be attending virtually either but please stay enrolled so we still have your student $$$ and don’t have to make cuts. |
Anonymous
They’re off bass with their interpretation of the Grimm case and they know it. Grimm’s case was very different than the FCPS policy. Grimm was under a doctor’s care and receiving therapy for gender dysphoria. Together with a doctor it was agreed that it was in his best interest to transition. The single occupancy stall near a nurse that he was offered was not adequate to take care of his basic biological needs and slow him to navigate the building as needed to attend classes on time. He could not easily make it to and from the far and inconvenient single stall which led to multiple UTI’s from having to hold his urine so often. He was approved for virtual summer PE so he never used or asked to use locker rooms. The school upgraded the privacy of each bathroom to have partitions at urinals and stalls were given longer doors with shorter gaps in between to enhance privacy. So when the court asked the School Board how Grimm’s presence in the bathroom would impact anyone’s privacy, they were unable to answer. This was a key part of the ruling. A locker room would have a very different legal outcome. It would lack the material harm (UTI) and there is actual privacy concern. Self identifying and immediately being able to go to the locker room of your choice is not at all what this ruling had in mind. There is a middle ground that will protect ALL students. It’s not what FCPS is doing by internally misconstruing the Grimm ruling. |