What Does FCPS Do with Excess Capacity at Herndon HS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No offense but it’s not the schools that are good, it’s the kids. If you redistrict Langley kids to another school, the other school will increase by that amount. Schools are such a tiny part of academic achievement (meaning they all teach roughly the same). It’s mostly parents.

Bingo. Thats exactly why considering how to efficiently use available space and minimize transportation costs where possible likely makes sense.

Nah, I don’t but your zero-sum game utopia, and I’m not interested in theory-testing with my kids being your lab rats. Also, it’s a little racist/classist for you to claim that Forestville students would make Herndon High better.

First, it’s not a zero-sum game if we spend scarce capital resources expanding schools but don’t use that space because it might offend some entitled Langley mom. It’s a net negative.

Second, if Forestville kids moved back to Langley, it would increase the demand for advanced courses that Herndon is otherwise fully capable of offering. There’s nothing racist in acknowledging this. But I guess you’re fine with a situation where scheduling conflicts are more likely to be an issue at Herndon than at other schools.

DS at HMS, and even I think your Forestville efforts are pretty racist.

+100
The PP exemplifies paternalistic social engineering. What a joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't they take it out of the CIP?

Of course. It should have come out when they sold the Carson site and it became apparent to everyone who had waited for a decade for the new HS to materialize that it was never going to happen. Instead, they doubled down and put it in a bond a couple years ago and said they had chosen the Hutchinson site (under the prior, COVID era SB, most of whose members no one could accuse of being smart, competent, or honest with the community about challenging realities). But no one who understands Western County zoning (which I grant you isn’t a lot of people— the boundaries are a disaster) or who has watched the expansions at all the western county HSs actually believes it will happen.

But, pulling it out of the CIP without a solution for some HSs sitting at 110% capacity— or more (Chantilly)— while expanding HSs that are not over capacity (or not nearly as over capacity) is not a good look. And once they admit it’s not going to be built, they will be locked into readjusting boundaries— now— rather than following the time honored FCPS tradition of pushing messes like a western county Hs with no viable site and western county rezoning down the road for the SB to deal with. Langley and Chantilly parents and the parents of any kids moved to HHs or possibly SLHS (we don’t want IB!) are going to end up furious about any rezoning. Easier to overpromise and never deliver. Eventually, there will be a new SB and it’s no longer the current SB’s problem. Plus, the new SB can ask for “grace” (my least favorite word when spoken by anyone associated with FCPS) and time because they inherited a mess. Then they drag their feet a couple years and the cycle repeats. I’ve even watching this happen for well over a decade.



They need to hire an outside consultant and make a commitment to following their recommendations unless there is a very good, non-SES, non-DEI, non-parently pressure to avoid ELL and FARMS reason not to. Because yes, they need to aim to spread out FARMS and ELL more fairly among the schools— as long as they can do so without creating ridiculous commutes and moving kids who are a mile or two from one HS to another Hs 10 miles away in the make of equity.

That already happened. Here are their recommendations:

1. Prioritize factors determining boundary policy.
2. Define school and program capacity to ensure consistency across the division.
3. Establish boundary adjustments based on balancing the number of schools and students
for efficient use of buildings.
4. Centralize, regionalize, or duplicate programs with great demand in schools across the
district to ensure equitable access for all families.
5. Limit time students are on busses and create efficient transportation networks.
6. Create an established and well-articulated exemption process.
7. Formally evaluate school boundary policies every five years.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/C9L3KG073D39/%24file/MGT%2520Boundary%2520Policy%2520Best%2520Practices%2520Review%2520Report.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwj8lP2o5p6EAxXLGlkFHUIvBsAQFnoECBMQAQ&usg=AOvVaw31CVtV1-GCn7fLz7PDaGJC

I hope we didn't pay the consultants too much to come up with this.

#1 is the key, but it's what hasn't been done, yet would drive the process.

#2 is largely moot, as FCPS already has a way to define and quantify "design capacity" and "program capacity" consistently across schools.

#3 is unclear - if the recommendation is to now prioritize the utilization of existing capacity, it will be unpopular and also entirely inconsistent with FCPS's past behavior.

## 4 and 6 - FCPS will say it already does or has this.

#5 - What's the recommended outer limit and the implications thereof (if, say, no one should be on a bus to a neighborhood school for over 30 minutes)?

#7 sounds good, but it assumes a degree of efficiency on the part of FCPS and the School Board that is belied by the debacles of the last 15 years when it comes to boundaries and facilities planning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No offense but it’s not the schools that are good, it’s the kids. If you redistrict Langley kids to another school, the other school will increase by that amount. Schools are such a tiny part of academic achievement (meaning they all teach roughly the same). It’s mostly parents.

Bingo. Thats exactly why considering how to efficiently use available space and minimize transportation costs where possible likely makes sense.

Nah, I don’t but your zero-sum game utopia, and I’m not interested in theory-testing with my kids being your lab rats. Also, it’s a little racist/classist for you to claim that Forestville students would make Herndon High better.

First, it’s not a zero-sum game if we spend scarce capital resources expanding schools but don’t use that space because it might offend some entitled Langley mom. It’s a net negative.

Second, if Forestville kids moved back to Langley, it would increase the demand for advanced courses that Herndon is otherwise fully capable of offering. There’s nothing racist in acknowledging this. But I guess you’re fine with a situation where scheduling conflicts are more likely to be an issue at Herndon than at other schools.

DS at HMS, and even I think your Forestville efforts are pretty racist.

This is hilarious. No one on either side wants the equity crusader meddling in their schools. Go back to worrying about your own kids’ education, rather than social engineering.

DP. I am. I could give 2 flying f—k about where Langley kids end up. But something got to give. My kids education is being compromised by being at Chantilly with dozens of trailers and sitting at 125% of capacity. Dealing with that level of overcrowding is not social engineering or DEI or whatever it’s competent management.

DP. Sure, and you have a good point. But Chantilly overcrowding has nothing to do with Langley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No offense but it’s not the schools that are good, it’s the kids. If you redistrict Langley kids to another school, the other school will increase by that amount. Schools are such a tiny part of academic achievement (meaning they all teach roughly the same). It’s mostly parents.

Bingo. Thats exactly why considering how to efficiently use available space and minimize transportation costs where possible likely makes sense.

Nah, I don’t but your zero-sum game utopia, and I’m not interested in theory-testing with my kids being your lab rats. Also, it’s a little racist/classist for you to claim that Forestville students would make Herndon High better.

First, it’s not a zero-sum game if we spend scarce capital resources expanding schools but don’t use that space because it might offend some entitled Langley mom. It’s a net negative.

Second, if Forestville kids moved back to Langley, it would increase the demand for advanced courses that Herndon is otherwise fully capable of offering. There’s nothing racist in acknowledging this. But I guess you’re fine with a situation where scheduling conflicts are more likely to be an issue at Herndon than at other schools.

DS at HMS, and even I think your Forestville efforts are pretty racist.

This is hilarious. No one on either side wants the equity crusader meddling in their schools. Go back to worrying about your own kids’ education, rather than social engineering.

Efficient use of facilities and reducing transportation costs is not social engineering.

As long as the trains run on time, right? Where have I heard that before?

Yes, moving some kids who live closer to Herndon to that school now that there's space would be just like putting them on a train to Auschwitz, right?

+1 Equating decent management of resources like HS seats so you don’t have a school at 120% capacity three miles from a school at 80% capacity with the Holocaust is just gross. Especially given current world events. No, moving your kid to HHS is not the same as your kid being help hostage in underground tunnels for months. Get over yourself.

I don’t really care if most of the kids they more out of Chantilly are UMC rather than FARMs and Chantilly’s ELL FARMS percentages rises some. My kids don’t melt is Poor sits at their lunchroom table. I do care that my kid, who is athlete at practice at 5pm has to have lunch at 10:30 am. And I do care that half their classes are in trailers. Especially in the age of school shootings.

Oh no, your athlete has to eat at 10:30? I’m so sorry, how does he ever survive? Out of all the nonsense I’ve heard on this thread, that one is the most absurd.

Upsetting entire school communities is worth it so your ds can eat his Turkey sandwich closer to game time? Gtfoh. 🤣

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No offense but it’s not the schools that are good, it’s the kids. If you redistrict Langley kids to another school, the other school will increase by that amount. Schools are such a tiny part of academic achievement (meaning they all teach roughly the same). It’s mostly parents.

Bingo. Thats exactly why considering how to efficiently use available space and minimize transportation costs where possible likely makes sense.

Nah, I don’t but your zero-sum game utopia, and I’m not interested in theory-testing with my kids being your lab rats. Also, it’s a little racist/classist for you to claim that Forestville students would make Herndon High better.

GTFOH. There’s no one more racist than the Langley parents always itching to scream “You wouldn’t send your kids to Herndon so why should we?”

DP. What about that is not true? Would you send your kids to Herndon? Nope. So don’t expect others to do so just because you “feel” they should. Also - what school do your kids attend?

Hilarious. A decent discussion is taking place with some Chantilly and other parents, and now the hideous Langley poster is back. Does her insecurity know no bounds?

They tried to get an exit closed on 495 so their kids could come home for a snack before practice. An exit to a major highway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you listened to the CIP discussion last night, it's clear where this board wants to go:

* Update the policy on boundary changes

* Have staff come up with county-wide boundary change recommendations, rather than one-off changes proposed by individual Board members.

So no one will get moved from Forestville to Langley on a one-off basis at the behest of any single Board member. But when staff comes up with the county-wide recommendations in a few years, all bets are off.

+1. Sounds like this is truly the time that boundaries are going to be scrutinized, unless every member yesterday was spewing lies and wasting each other's time.

Good. Lots of people don’t want it— including me. My kids are out, but my house is more valuable zoned for Chantilly than Herndon. But, it needs to happen. And FFS, please let them clean up the Carson 4 way split and get all the Franklin based AAP kids back to Franklin. Its AAP center was new and tiny 10 years ago. Now, Franklin is more than capable of being a good Center. But, not until it gets capacity relief.

Of course you want things changed now. Your kids are out of school.

I’m quite certain that you advocated for disruptive change while your kids were in school, right? Right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't they take it out of the CIP?

Of course. It should have come out when they sold the Carson site and it became apparent to everyone who had waited for a decade for the new HS to materialize that it was never going to happen. Instead, they doubled down and put it in a bond a couple years ago and said they had chosen the Hutchinson site (under the prior, COVID era SB, most of whose members no one could accuse of being smart, competent, or honest with the community about challenging realities). But no one who understands Western County zoning (which I grant you isn’t a lot of people— the boundaries are a disaster) or who has watched the expansions at all the western county HSs actually believes it will happen.

But, pulling it out of the CIP without a solution for some HSs sitting at 110% capacity— or more (Chantilly)— while expanding HSs that are not over capacity (or not nearly as over capacity) is not a good look. And once they admit it’s not going to be built, they will be locked into readjusting boundaries— now— rather than following the time honored FCPS tradition of pushing messes like a western county Hs with no viable site and western county rezoning down the road for the SB to deal with. Langley and Chantilly parents and the parents of any kids moved to HHs or possibly SLHS (we don’t want IB!) are going to end up furious about any rezoning. Easier to overpromise and never deliver. Eventually, there will be a new SB and it’s no longer the current SB’s problem. Plus, the new SB can ask for “grace” (my least favorite word when spoken by anyone associated with FCPS) and time because they inherited a mess. Then they drag their feet a couple years and the cycle repeats. I’ve even watching this happen for well over a decade.

They need to hire an outside consultant and make a commitment to following their recommendations unless there is a very good, non-SES, non-DEI, non-parently pressure to avoid ELL and FARMS reason not to. Because yes, they need to aim to spread out FARMS and ELL more fairly among the schools— as long as they can do so without creating ridiculous commutes and moving kids who are a mile or two from one HS to another Hs 10 miles away in the make of equity.

This is really informative.

The money in the bond was for site acquisition for the western HS. It would only cover a very, very small amount of the total cost of a new school. If they could take the money that had been earmarked for a new ES in Fairfax/Oakton and spend it on a new ES miles away in Dunn Loring instead, seems like they could come up with some use for that earmarked money.

Occasionally, the question comes up as to whether Carson could be converted into a secondary school. The acreage is certain larger than a number of existing high schools though a good bit smaller than the existing secondary schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No offense but it’s not the schools that are good, it’s the kids. If you redistrict Langley kids to another school, the other school will increase by that amount. Schools are such a tiny part of academic achievement (meaning they all teach roughly the same). It’s mostly parents.

Bingo. Thats exactly why considering how to efficiently use available space and minimize transportation costs where possible likely makes sense.

Nah, I don’t but your zero-sum game utopia, and I’m not interested in theory-testing with my kids being your lab rats. Also, it’s a little racist/classist for you to claim that Forestville students would make Herndon High better.

GTFOH. There’s no one more racist than the Langley parents always itching to scream “You wouldn’t send your kids to Herndon so why should we?”

DP. What about that is not true? Would you send your kids to Herndon? Nope. So don’t expect others to do so just because you “feel” they should. Also - what school do your kids attend?

Hilarious. A decent discussion is taking place with some Chantilly and other parents, and now the hideous Langley poster is back. Does her insecurity know no bounds?

Echo chamber circle j = decent discussion. As long as everyone agrees with you, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No offense but it’s not the schools that are good, it’s the kids. If you redistrict Langley kids to another school, the other school will increase by that amount. Schools are such a tiny part of academic achievement (meaning they all teach roughly the same). It’s mostly parents.

Bingo. Thats exactly why considering how to efficiently use available space and minimize transportation costs where possible likely makes sense.

Nah, I don’t but your zero-sum game utopia, and I’m not interested in theory-testing with my kids being your lab rats. Also, it’s a little racist/classist for you to claim that Forestville students would make Herndon High better.

GTFOH. There’s no one more racist than the Langley parents always itching to scream “You wouldn’t send your kids to Herndon so why should we?”

DP. What about that is not true? Would you send your kids to Herndon? Nope. So don’t expect others to do so just because you “feel” they should. Also - what school do your kids attend?

Hilarious. A decent discussion is taking place with some Chantilly and other parents, and now the hideous Langley poster is back. Does her insecurity know no bounds?

They tried to get an exit closed on 495 so their kids could come home for a snack before practice. An exit to a major highway.

I'm hoping FCPS uses the argument to close off the highway as a bonus to helping these parents by sending them to Herndon. What a freaking waste of everyone's time opposing that. I want payback for that and for shifting the flights away from their neighborhoods too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No offense but it’s not the schools that are good, it’s the kids. If you redistrict Langley kids to another school, the other school will increase by that amount. Schools are such a tiny part of academic achievement (meaning they all teach roughly the same). It’s mostly parents.

Bingo. Thats exactly why considering how to efficiently use available space and minimize transportation costs where possible likely makes sense.

Nah, I don’t but your zero-sum game utopia, and I’m not interested in theory-testing with my kids being your lab rats. Also, it’s a little racist/classist for you to claim that Forestville students would make Herndon High better.

First, it’s not a zero-sum game if we spend scarce capital resources expanding schools but don’t use that space because it might offend some entitled Langley mom. It’s a net negative.

Second, if Forestville kids moved back to Langley, it would increase the demand for advanced courses that Herndon is otherwise fully capable of offering. There’s nothing racist in acknowledging this. But I guess you’re fine with a situation where scheduling conflicts are more likely to be an issue at Herndon than at other schools.

DP. What are you even talking about? Doesn’t Herndon offer all the same advanced classes of any other FCPS school? What “scheduling conflicts” are Herndon students experiencing?

Scheduling conflicts are more likely to occur when one school offers one session of an advanced class and another offers multiple sessions at different times of the day. Are you really that dense?

Speaking of dense - you didn’t even answer the question. What are the SPECIFIC “scheduling conflicts” at HHS? Do tell!

The problem is that a class can't even be scheduled in the first place because too few kids are available to enroll. That is the conflict. My kid would like to take a Robotics elective that is offered at other schools but Herndon lacks enough interested kids to support the class.
What FCPS should do is hire a teacher and offer this class even if one kid wants it. That's real fairness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No offense but it’s not the schools that are good, it’s the kids. If you redistrict Langley kids to another school, the other school will increase by that amount. Schools are such a tiny part of academic achievement (meaning they all teach roughly the same). It’s mostly parents.

Bingo. Thats exactly why considering how to efficiently use available space and minimize transportation costs where possible likely makes sense.

Nah, I don’t but your zero-sum game utopia, and I’m not interested in theory-testing with my kids being your lab rats. Also, it’s a little racist/classist for you to claim that Forestville students would make Herndon High better.

GTFOH. There’s no one more racist than the Langley parents always itching to scream “You wouldn’t send your kids to Herndon so why should we?”

DP. What about that is not true? Would you send your kids to Herndon? Nope. So don’t expect others to do so just because you “feel” they should. Also - what school do your kids attend?

DP. Would I want to send my kids to HHS as is? Nope. Would I be okay sending them there if boundary changes moved some ELL/FARMS areas out and UMC neighborhoods in? Quite possibly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't they take it out of the CIP?

Of course. It should have come out when they sold the Carson site and it became apparent to everyone who had waited for a decade for the new HS to materialize that it was never going to happen. Instead, they doubled down and put it in a bond a couple years ago and said they had chosen the Hutchinson site (under the prior, COVID era SB, most of whose members no one could accuse of being smart, competent, or honest with the community about challenging realities). But no one who understands Western County zoning (which I grant you isn’t a lot of people— the boundaries are a disaster) or who has watched the expansions at all the western county HSs actually believes it will happen.

But, pulling it out of the CIP without a solution for some HSs sitting at 110% capacity— or more (Chantilly)— while expanding HSs that are not over capacity (or not nearly as over capacity) is not a good look. And once they admit it’s not going to be built, they will be locked into readjusting boundaries— now— rather than following the time honored FCPS tradition of pushing messes like a western county Hs with no viable site and western county rezoning down the road for the SB to deal with. Langley and Chantilly parents and the parents of any kids moved to HHs or possibly SLHS (we don’t want IB!) are going to end up furious about any rezoning. Easier to overpromise and never deliver. Eventually, there will be a new SB and it’s no longer the current SB’s problem. Plus, the new SB can ask for “grace” (my least favorite word when spoken by anyone associated with FCPS) and time because they inherited a mess. Then they drag their feet a couple years and the cycle repeats. I’ve even watching this happen for well over a decade.



They need to hire an outside consultant and make a commitment to following their recommendations unless there is a very good, non-SES, non-DEI, non-parently pressure to avoid ELL and FARMS reason not to. Because yes, they need to aim to spread out FARMS and ELL more fairly among the schools— as long as they can do so without creating ridiculous commutes and moving kids who are a mile or two from one HS to another Hs 10 miles away in the make of equity.

That already happened. Here are their recommendations:

1. Prioritize factors determining boundary policy.
2. Define school and program capacity to ensure consistency across the division.
3. Establish boundary adjustments based on balancing the number of schools and students
for efficient use of buildings.
4. Centralize, regionalize, or duplicate programs with great demand in schools across the
district to ensure equitable access for all families.
5. Limit time students are on busses and create efficient transportation networks.
6. Create an established and well-articulated exemption process.
7. Formally evaluate school boundary policies every five years.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/C9L3KG073D39/%24file/MGT%2520Boundary%2520Policy%2520Best%2520Practices%2520Review%2520Report.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwj8lP2o5p6EAxXLGlkFHUIvBsAQFnoECBMQAQ&usg=AOvVaw31CVtV1-GCn7fLz7PDaGJC

Making recommendations is easy. We’ve seen lists like this before. Get back to me when they move past “studying” and actually implement boundary changes— or even release a proposal for comprehensive boundary changes (spoiler alert: never gonna happen).

Those of us who have older kids have been watching them release lists and promise boundary studies for more than a decade. This Charlie Brown is done running to kick the football and landing on her back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't they take it out of the CIP?

Of course. It should have come out when they sold the Carson site and it became apparent to everyone who had waited for a decade for the new HS to materialize that it was never going to happen. Instead, they doubled down and put it in a bond a couple years ago and said they had chosen the Hutchinson site (under the prior, COVID era SB, most of whose members no one could accuse of being smart, competent, or honest with the community about challenging realities). But no one who understands Western County zoning (which I grant you isn’t a lot of people— the boundaries are a disaster) or who has watched the expansions at all the western county HSs actually believes it will happen.

But, pulling it out of the CIP without a solution for some HSs sitting at 110% capacity— or more (Chantilly)— while expanding HSs that are not over capacity (or not nearly as over capacity) is not a good look. And once they admit it’s not going to be built, they will be locked into readjusting boundaries— now— rather than following the time honored FCPS tradition of pushing messes like a western county Hs with no viable site and western county rezoning down the road for the SB to deal with. Langley and Chantilly parents and the parents of any kids moved to HHs or possibly SLHS (we don’t want IB!) are going to end up furious about any rezoning. Easier to overpromise and never deliver. Eventually, there will be a new SB and it’s no longer the current SB’s problem. Plus, the new SB can ask for “grace” (my least favorite word when spoken by anyone associated with FCPS) and time because they inherited a mess. Then they drag their feet a couple years and the cycle repeats. I’ve even watching this happen for well over a decade.



They need to hire an outside consultant and make a commitment to following their recommendations unless there is a very good, non-SES, non-DEI, non-parently pressure to avoid ELL and FARMS reason not to. Because yes, they need to aim to spread out FARMS and ELL more fairly among the schools— as long as they can do so without creating ridiculous commutes and moving kids who are a mile or two from one HS to another Hs 10 miles away in the make of equity.

That already happened. Here are their recommendations:

1. Prioritize factors determining boundary policy.
2. Define school and program capacity to ensure consistency across the division.
3. Establish boundary adjustments based on balancing the number of schools and students
for efficient use of buildings.
4. Centralize, regionalize, or duplicate programs with great demand in schools across the
district to ensure equitable access for all families.
5. Limit time students are on busses and create efficient transportation networks.
6. Create an established and well-articulated exemption process.
7. Formally evaluate school boundary policies every five years.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/C9L3KG073D39/%24file/MGT%2520Boundary%2520Policy%2520Best%2520Practices%2520Review%2520Report.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwj8lP2o5p6EAxXLGlkFHUIvBsAQFnoECBMQAQ&usg=AOvVaw31CVtV1-GCn7fLz7PDaGJC

Okay. So they are recommending that they come up with priorities as step one. What a brave thing to say. /s. #1 means that this has been an issue for a decade and there are no priorities. And guess what, there never will be. Because that would force them to publicly state whether trying to evenly distribute the percentage of ELL and FARMs between the schools. And either way they go on that, they get a cadre of furious parents. I guarantee that this time next year, we still don’t have a list of priorities. And without a list of priorities, the can’t even start a boundary study.

This is a list of things almost everyone agrees with. That you need to define priorities before you can make any proposals. That kids at every high school should have access to the same APs and popular electives. That kids should sit on buses for an hour. That kids should move from schools that are over capacity to schools that are under capacity. None of this is controversial, so developing and releasing this list was easy.

The lard part comes when they explain how they will decide who gets screwed over by a boundary adjustment. Because some families will. That list will never happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you listened to the CIP discussion last night, it's clear where this board wants to go:

* Update the policy on boundary changes

* Have staff come up with county-wide boundary change recommendations, rather than one-off changes proposed by individual Board members.

So no one will get moved from Forestville to Langley on a one-off basis at the behest of any single Board member. But when staff comes up with the county-wide recommendations in a few years, all bets are off.

+1. Sounds like this is truly the time that boundaries are going to be scrutinized, unless every member yesterday was spewing lies and wasting each other's time.

Good. Lots of people don’t want it— including me. My kids are out, but my house is more valuable zoned for Chantilly than Herndon. But, it needs to happen. And FFS, please let them clean up the Carson 4 way split and get all the Franklin based AAP kids back to Franklin. Its AAP center was new and tiny 10 years ago. Now, Franklin is more than capable of being a good Center. But, not until it gets capacity relief.

Of course you want things changed now. Your kids are out of school.

I’m quite certain that you advocated for disruptive change while your kids were in school, right? Right?

You'd have no problem with disruptive change for others as long as it keeps your snowflakes at Langley.

Now you’re getting it! I care about my children, not some theoretical equity argument. I’m quite certain that you also wouldn’t want to sacrifice your kids’ education, but your kids are probably just not affected by this. That’s called blatant hypocrisy.

You have no clue, honey.

DP. Then where do your kids go to school? Because if you’re not going to bother sharing that, then your opinions are absolutely meaningless.

I mean, her opinions are vapid anyway, but she’s a clear hypocrite to boot.

Yep. Trainwreck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No offense but it’s not the schools that are good, it’s the kids. If you redistrict Langley kids to another school, the other school will increase by that amount. Schools are such a tiny part of academic achievement (meaning they all teach roughly the same). It’s mostly parents.

Bingo. Thats exactly why considering how to efficiently use available space and minimize transportation costs where possible likely makes sense.

Nah, I don’t but your zero-sum game utopia, and I’m not interested in theory-testing with my kids being your lab rats. Also, it’s a little racist/classist for you to claim that Forestville students would make Herndon High better.

First, it’s not a zero-sum game if we spend scarce capital resources expanding schools but don’t use that space because it might offend some entitled Langley mom. It’s a net negative.

Second, if Forestville kids moved back to Langley, it would increase the demand for advanced courses that Herndon is otherwise fully capable of offering. There’s nothing racist in acknowledging this. But I guess you’re fine with a situation where scheduling conflicts are more likely to be an issue at Herndon than at other schools.

DS at HMS, and even I think your Forestville efforts are pretty racist.

This is hilarious. No one on either side wants the equity crusader meddling in their schools. Go back to worrying about your own kids’ education, rather than social engineering.

DP. I am. I could give 2 flying f—k about where Langley kids end up. But something got to give. My kids education is being compromised by being at Chantilly with dozens of trailers and sitting at 125% of capacity. Dealing with that level of overcrowding is not social engineering or DEI or whatever it’s competent management.

DP. Sure, and you have a good point. But Chantilly overcrowding has nothing to do with Langley.

Wow. Talk about being myopic. In any comprehensive boundary adjustment, of course Chantilly overcrowding could affect Langley. I know you think that the other 24 HSs in FCPS revolve around Langley, but they don’t. You sound like Jan on the Brady Bunch. “Langley, Langley, Langley”. Western county boundaries are an intertwined mess— and not just at the HS level. PP is right, as an example, that Carson boundaries are a mess. Any substantive discussion and compressive solution of underenrollment at HHS ends up and boundary adjustments involving ESs and MSs as well Centerville, Chantilly, Westfield, SLHS, HHS, Langley, probably McLean and Oakton. Maybe even Madison. And I’m probably missing a school or two.

I know that in your mind only Langley counts. And sure shuffling some kids between HHS and Langley helps solve one part of one problem. But that’s a band aid over the bullet hole solution. If there is going to be an actual, substantive solution, it won’t just involve HHS and Langley. 6 or 8 or 10 other HSs will come along for the ride. Including Chantilly, because their overenrollment has to go somewhere, and some Chantilly kids do have Herndon addresses (like the many of the Oak Hill kids). For Chantilly kids closer to Carson, HHS might be one option. Or, the might go to Westfield, and some Westfield kids might go to HHS. Western County boundary cannot be solved by moving one neighborhood from one school to another. In the end, about 1/3 of FCPS HSs are involved.

I hate these threads where people are trying to have a substantive conversation and the Langley parents jump in, insult everyone, and insist that only the impact on Langley matters. It may be all that matters to you, but Langley and HHS would not be the only two schools involved in a meaningful boundary change that addresses even half of the issues with Weatern County boundaries.

We know where Langley parents stand. Their kids deserve a school that is 1-2% FARMs and ELL. Basically, a private school in a public school system. Message received, loud and clear. So Please. Go away. Lots of other parents and kids from lots of other schools are affected. And I know you can’t fathom this, but they have opinions worth considering and concerns that need to be addressed too.

SMDH.