FCPS Skyview Boundary Scenario 1/2/3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Didn't FCPS just create new attendance islands with the latest boundary changes?

The documents for Skyview shared with the public reiterate that a goal of the Skyview boundary study is to eliminate attendance islands and not create new ones.

Creating a new Marshall attendance island with the county-wide study was a bad decision that demonstrated just how awful Michelle Reid, Karl Frisch and Melanie Meren are at their jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't FCPS just create new attendance islands with the latest boundary changes?

The documents for Skyview shared with the public reiterate that a goal of the Skyview boundary study is to eliminate attendance islands and not create new ones.

Creating a new Marshall attendance island with the county-wide study was a bad decision that demonstrated just how awful Michelle Reid, Karl Frisch and Melanie Meren are at their jobs.

So...yes? They did create a new attendance island.

The issue is the lack of clear priorities. Not making hard choices on what is most important (balancing FARMs rates? reducing distances to schools? eliminating attendance "islands"?)made this process a huge mess.

I personally don't think attendance islands should be the most important issue---we have them all over the county-- and other priorities are more important.

[Anonymous]

I’ve spoken to 2 Oak Hill parents who are planning to opt out their kids from Skyview. They are both currently in boundary for Chantilly HS. Will opt outs only be for Skyview or can we opt out of any boundary changes for the first year? I will have a rising freshman during the 2021-2028 school year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve spoken to 2 Oak Hill parents who are planning to opt out their kids from Skyview. They are both currently in boundary for Chantilly HS. Will opt outs only be for Skyview or can we opt out of any boundary changes for the first year? I will have a rising freshman during the 2021-2028 school year.

Sorry this should be 2027-2028

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't FCPS just create new attendance islands with the latest boundary changes?

The documents for Skyview shared with the public reiterate that a goal of the Skyview boundary study is to eliminate attendance islands and not create new ones.

Creating a new Marshall attendance island with the county-wide study was a bad decision that demonstrated just how awful Michelle Reid, Karl Frisch and Melanie Meren are at their jobs.

So...yes? They did create a new attendance island.

The issue is the lack of clear priorities. Not making hard choices on what is most important (balancing FARMs rates? reducing distances to schools? eliminating attendance "islands"?)made this process a huge mess.

I personally don't think attendance islands should be the most important issue---we have them all over the county-- and other priorities are more important.

Agree that eliminating existing attendance islands probably shouldn’t be a priority but creating new ones is just inviting more trouble later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve spoken to 2 Oak Hill parents who are planning to opt out their kids from Skyview. They are both currently in boundary for Chantilly HS. Will opt outs only be for Skyview or can we opt out of any boundary changes for the first year? I will have a rising freshman during the 2021-2028 school year.

No, you will not be able to opt out for a rising freshman for 2027-2028 for any boundary change. Think for a second how absurd that would be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one minds being in an attendance "island" for a better school--look at all the Herndon people who cry to stay at Langley.

Attendance islands are only bad if they put your kid in what you think is a worse school.

Langley doesn’t have any attendance islands. It’s one contiguous boundary. You may think the boundaries are crazy but that’s a different issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve spoken to 2 Oak Hill parents who are planning to opt out their kids from Skyview. They are both currently in boundary for Chantilly HS. Will opt outs only be for Skyview or can we opt out of any boundary changes for the first year? I will have a rising freshman during the 2021-2028 school year.

No, you will not be able to opt out for a rising freshman for 2027-2028 for any boundary change. Think for a second how absurd that would be.

They have said their model for Skyview is to allow opt-in for 2026-27, opt out for 2027-28, and the standard practices thereafter.

The confusion is whether if you get moved into Westfield to backfill that school you’d have the same option to opt out in 2027-28 as someone assigned to Skyview.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve spoken to 2 Oak Hill parents who are planning to opt out their kids from Skyview. They are both currently in boundary for Chantilly HS. Will opt outs only be for Skyview or can we opt out of any boundary changes for the first year? I will have a rising freshman during the 2021-2028 school year.

The only reason they allowed opt ins and might allow opt outs is because of the lack of athletic opportunities at Skyview. They were not going to force kids to attend a school that did not have VHSL sports. I am not convinced that they will allow opt outs at Skyview for 2027-2028 if they have VHSL sports.

The original opt-in/opt-out structure seems to have been discarded. They allowed for opt ins from the 5 schools initially and now it is open to everyone. They thought it would be two years before they had VHSL sports but now they are talking about only one year.

I would not expect that they will allow students who are moved in the boundary study to opt out of moving. You can try and principal place for the Academy at Chantilly but that would require that your kid take those classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve spoken to 2 Oak Hill parents who are planning to opt out their kids from Skyview. They are both currently in boundary for Chantilly HS. Will opt outs only be for Skyview or can we opt out of any boundary changes for the first year? I will have a rising freshman during the 2021-2028 school year.

The only reason they allowed opt ins and might allow opt outs is because of the lack of athletic opportunities at Skyview. They were not going to force kids to attend a school that did not have VHSL sports. I am not convinced that they will allow opt outs at Skyview for 2027-2028 if they have VHSL sports.

The original opt-in/opt-out structure seems to have been discarded. They allowed for opt ins from the 5 schools initially and now it is open to everyone. They thought it would be two years before they had VHSL sports but now they are talking about only one year.

I would not expect that they will allow students who are moved in the boundary study to opt out of moving. You can try and principal place for the Academy at Chantilly but that would require that your kid take those classes.

Well if you principal place or find a loophole to opt out of, you’re not allowed to do any VHSL activities for a year.

[Anonymous]

Highly doubtful that they field a Varsity football team for the 2027-2028 school year, so they will be forced to allow some opt outs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one minds being in an attendance "island" for a better school--look at all the Herndon people who cry to stay at Langley.

Attendance islands are only bad if they put your kid in what you think is a worse school.

Langley doesn’t have any attendance islands. It’s one contiguous boundary. You may think the boundaries are crazy but that’s a different issue.

I don't see any practical difference between "attendance islands" and completely silly gerrymandered boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Funny, I’m a Chantilly parent and we just got an email saying Chantilly enrollment is going down next year so we are losing an administrator.

That's a good thing. Enrollment at Chantilly NEEDS to come down significantly. It would be nice if it came down enough to remove the modulars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funny, I’m a Chantilly parent and we just got an email saying Chantilly enrollment is going down next year so we are losing an administrator.

That's a good thing. Enrollment at Chantilly NEEDS to come down significantly. It would be nice if it came down enough to remove the modulars.

We have no problem with modulars. We are absolutely fine with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funny, I’m a Chantilly parent and we just got an email saying Chantilly enrollment is going down next year so we are losing an administrator.

That's a good thing. Enrollment at Chantilly NEEDS to come down significantly. It would be nice if it came down enough to remove the modulars.

We have no problem with modulars. We are absolutely fine with it.

Dp. They're prone to mold. Ideally, as a district, we should want to eliminate modular use to the extent possible.