FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[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:

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:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

Maybe we can pair this with other needs-based measures such as eliminating after-school programming at Cooper, but not other middle schools. After all, the assumption seems to be that some families can arrange for transportation and other extras, and the wealthy seem willing to make these trade-offs as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.

You always repeat that last phrase about poor kids without anyone ever in the history of this discussion giving that as a justification for wanting to stay in their current pyramid. It says a lot about you that you are trying to foment class warfare with your neighbors.

Nice effort to flip the script but we all know you’d be outraged by the suggestion that FCPS cease providing transportation to your neighborhoods unless you saw it as a possible way to avoid rezoning to a less wealthy school.

What script did I flip. Those were literally your words that I was responding to.

You literally, verbatim said this: “as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.” No one has ever claimed that, like literally not once in this thread or related threads.

Should we not read your words literally? You got some alternative facts that your operating off of, Kellyanne?

Read the FairFACTS Matters comments when this came up. Example: "It was implied that a solution for the Langley pyramid would be that the boundaries wouldn't change, but FCPS would only provide bussing within a certain radius of Langley."

Y'all are so transparent, even when you are grasping at straws.

What is going on? Your quote appears to indicate that FCPS may propose to address a transportation cost concern with a transportation based solution. You read that as a means for one group to avoid grouping with another group based on relative wealth?

Yikes. I hope that you are not involved in this process. You appear to believe that things such as proximity, capacity, and transportation are all just mechanisms for other goals.

Sometimes a bussing issue is just about busses.

Everyone sees through this. You’d be yelling about it except for the fact that it’s a very slender reed (or in this case Reid) you’re hanging onto in hopes they’ll let rich neighborhoods avoid a much closer, yet poorer, school.

DP. Sometimes when you’re in a hole you should stop digging.

DP. This would be an obvious concession to Great Falls snobs trying to keep their kids out of Herndon. Don’t get your hopes up.

Or, just maybe, to stay in the school the neighborhood has attended for decades.

How long was Wakefield Forest at Annandale before it got moved to Woodson? How long was Fox Mill at Oakton before it got moved to South Lakes? Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes, but no one put up as big a fuss as you Langley snobs. You think Herndon is beneath you.

No wonder Reid tosses you a bone to shut you up occasionally.

DP. How soon you forgot! There was, indeed, a big fuss (hugely contentious, actually) when all those neighborhoods were rezoned to South Lakes in 2008. And then when the mythical "western high school" was proposed, families were up in arms that their kids would have to move schools yet again. Maybe get your facts straight?

https://patch.com/virginia/chantilly/guest-column-new-high-school-proposal-will-reverse-cob2f441f3ca

Perhaps you should have read the post before responding ("Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes").

Still, one Patch article isn't the same as months on end of whiny Great Falls parents, and we're still in the early stages of the boundary process.

Another DP. I haven't yet read the article, but I can tell you that there were months of upset parents. I would not call them "whiny" because I was one who wanted my kids to stay put where they were. Fortunately, we were on the periphery and did not get moved But, I still remember how emotional and difficult it was --with neighborhood being pitted against other neighborhoods--many of which were friends from youth sports.

Go watch the videos of the citizen participation at the SB meetings in 2008 if they are still available. Parents literally BEGGING for South Lakes to switch to AP--this was especially parents from the Floris group, I think whose kids were at Westfield at that time. And the SB would not even look at them. They just wanted what was best for their kids. And, Fox Mill, too. I remember one parent from Fox Mill Woods begging to let her pupil place her child at Oakton with the rest of her friends from Crossfield. Her DD was at Carson at the time.

And, let's not forget the woman from Navy boundary who attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor. She was still upset and bitter from being changed from Chantilly to Oakton. (and Oakton is considered "more desirable.")

If you think parents were not upset, you are greatly mistaken. And, no, they weren't "whiny," they were just standing up for their kids. I'm guessing that is what the Great Falls parents are doing now. And, if you think it is just Great Falls parents who are upset about this, you are VERY mistaken.

+100
It's difficult to find anything from 2008, but here's an archived article about how upset Madison/Oakton parents were at the prospect of being rezoned to South Lakes. Funny, their comments and concerns sound EXACTLY like today's conversations and objections over rezoning.
https://m.connectionnewspapers.com/news/2007/dec/04/boundary-bungle/

Oh, my goodness. I had forgotten about the SB not facing the audience. I was at that meeting. I think I was at Chantilly, but it might have been at another school. There were several meetings.

That study had nothing to do with overcrowding and everything to do with Stu Gibson and the South Lakes PTA.

South Lakes was under enrolled. Now it isn’t. Clearly the redistricting worked. Just like it will if the whiny Langley families redistricted. Their kids are no different than other kids who’ve been rezoned.

[Anonymous]

The obvious fix to this whole mess is to require the school board members’ kids to be rezoned every time they do a comprehensive boundary review. There is literally no reason not to, We’re supposedly all one school district.

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, right Kyle McDaniel and Sandy Anderson and all the rest of the hypocritical lot?

[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:

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:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

Maybe we can pair this with other needs-based measures such as eliminating after-school programming at Cooper, but not other middle schools. After all, the assumption seems to be that some families can arrange for transportation and other extras, and the wealthy seem willing to make these trade-offs as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.

You always repeat that last phrase about poor kids without anyone ever in the history of this discussion giving that as a justification for wanting to stay in their current pyramid. It says a lot about you that you are trying to foment class warfare with your neighbors.

Nice effort to flip the script but we all know you’d be outraged by the suggestion that FCPS cease providing transportation to your neighborhoods unless you saw it as a possible way to avoid rezoning to a less wealthy school.

What script did I flip. Those were literally your words that I was responding to.

You literally, verbatim said this: “as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.” No one has ever claimed that, like literally not once in this thread or related threads.

Should we not read your words literally? You got some alternative facts that your operating off of, Kellyanne?

Read the FairFACTS Matters comments when this came up. Example: "It was implied that a solution for the Langley pyramid would be that the boundaries wouldn't change, but FCPS would only provide bussing within a certain radius of Langley."

Y'all are so transparent, even when you are grasping at straws.

What is going on? Your quote appears to indicate that FCPS may propose to address a transportation cost concern with a transportation based solution. You read that as a means for one group to avoid grouping with another group based on relative wealth?

Yikes. I hope that you are not involved in this process. You appear to believe that things such as proximity, capacity, and transportation are all just mechanisms for other goals.

Sometimes a bussing issue is just about busses.

Everyone sees through this. You’d be yelling about it except for the fact that it’s a very slender reed (or in this case Reid) you’re hanging onto in hopes they’ll let rich neighborhoods avoid a much closer, yet poorer, school.

DP. Sometimes when you’re in a hole you should stop digging.

DP. This would be an obvious concession to Great Falls snobs trying to keep their kids out of Herndon. Don’t get your hopes up.

Or, just maybe, to stay in the school the neighborhood has attended for decades.

How long was Wakefield Forest at Annandale before it got moved to Woodson? How long was Fox Mill at Oakton before it got moved to South Lakes? Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes, but no one put up as big a fuss as you Langley snobs. You think Herndon is beneath you.

No wonder Reid tosses you a bone to shut you up occasionally.

DP. How soon you forgot! There was, indeed, a big fuss (hugely contentious, actually) when all those neighborhoods were rezoned to South Lakes in 2008. And then when the mythical "western high school" was proposed, families were up in arms that their kids would have to move schools yet again. Maybe get your facts straight?

https://patch.com/virginia/chantilly/guest-column-new-high-school-proposal-will-reverse-cob2f441f3ca

Perhaps you should have read the post before responding ("Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes").

Still, one Patch article isn't the same as months on end of whiny Great Falls parents, and we're still in the early stages of the boundary process.

Another DP. I haven't yet read the article, but I can tell you that there were months of upset parents. I would not call them "whiny" because I was one who wanted my kids to stay put where they were. Fortunately, we were on the periphery and did not get moved But, I still remember how emotional and difficult it was --with neighborhood being pitted against other neighborhoods--many of which were friends from youth sports.

Go watch the videos of the citizen participation at the SB meetings in 2008 if they are still available. Parents literally BEGGING for South Lakes to switch to AP--this was especially parents from the Floris group, I think whose kids were at Westfield at that time. And the SB would not even look at them. They just wanted what was best for their kids. And, Fox Mill, too. I remember one parent from Fox Mill Woods begging to let her pupil place her child at Oakton with the rest of her friends from Crossfield. Her DD was at Carson at the time.

And, let's not forget the woman from Navy boundary who attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor. She was still upset and bitter from being changed from Chantilly to Oakton. (and Oakton is considered "more desirable.")

If you think parents were not upset, you are greatly mistaken. And, no, they weren't "whiny," they were just standing up for their kids. I'm guessing that is what the Great Falls parents are doing now. And, if you think it is just Great Falls parents who are upset about this, you are VERY mistaken.

+100
It's difficult to find anything from 2008, but here's an archived article about how upset Madison/Oakton parents were at the prospect of being rezoned to South Lakes. Funny, their comments and concerns sound EXACTLY like today's conversations and objections over rezoning.
https://m.connectionnewspapers.com/news/2007/dec/04/boundary-bungle/

Oh, my goodness. I had forgotten about the SB not facing the audience. I was at that meeting. I think I was at Chantilly, but it might have been at another school. There were several meetings.

That study had nothing to do with overcrowding and everything to do with Stu Gibson and the South Lakes PTA.

South Lakes was under enrolled. Now it isn’t. Clearly the redistricting worked. Just like it will if the whiny Langley families redistricted. Their kids are no different than other kids who’ve been rezoned.

We get you’ve got a Langley inferiority complex, lady. For your own sanity, you might want to touch some grass.

[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:How are people finding out specifically what schools are up for grabs? Is if conjecture or is there info somewhere?

Conjecture. An educated guess based on the School Boards comments. I can fully see some of the border shifts that are being discussed, they fit with what the school board has laid out as their reasoning for redistricting.

But there is a lot of fear mongering with the hope that if the groups raise the alarm and FOIAing documents and pointing out how awful the school board is people will place pressure on the school board. This is coming from the same schools with the same posters. I would love to see an analysis of what percent of posters are responsible for the conversation in this topic. I suspect that a relativly small number of posters are responsible for the lions share of the posts.

Anyone who sees pros, to go along with the cons, is shouted down by the people who are violently opposed to any changes that moves their kids. There have been some good suggestions made in the topics, but they are hard to find.

I fully expect there to be large shifts in the Herndon, Centerville, Chantilly, South Lakes, Oakton, Westfield area because of the issues with over crowding and space available in some of the schools. The ES situation is problematic, and those shifts will affect MS and HS. That has been touched on a bit but for the most part the loudest voices have been the Great Falls and WSHS families.

FCPS is too big and really should be broken into smaller districts, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think the opposition is fanning this flame - they keep bringing up Langley and Herndon all the time. It just creates a response. No where was that discussed in any meeting. But - there they are saying it will happen because of equity. The county, in their view, will pay extra, drive longer distances, just to bus people from GF Village all the way to HHS. Going after trans was the last election, CRT the one before, now it's equity driven boundary change.

From Forestville, 2 minutes longer to cooper than HMS. From Forestville, 9 minutes longer to Langley than HHS. Don’t take my word for it. Check on maps at relevant times of the day.

The narrative about transportation savings is a chimera.

That 9 minutes is significant if they are trying to save costs via bus. It’s not just traveling TO Langley, but also the time it takes to get to those neighborhoods potentially out of route.

DP. You know what's a lot more significant? The wasted almost empty buses that traverse the county to take AAP kids to centers - when they already have AAP in their base school. THAT'S not only grossly wasteful and redundant, but also the very definition of INequity. I certainly hope the SB gets rid of centers and their associated busing before moving a single child to a new school.

Agreed! AAP centers should be the first thing to cut when there is a budget shortfall. That includes the elementary school specialists who work with 3 kids a day and give a lesson once a month.

The AART at our ES was part time. She provided classes for all the kids, plus the LIII pull out, plus a LIV pull out because our school uses the cluster method. DS brought home projects in K-2 that were completed with the AART and enjoyed the LIII pull outs. She was busy, her time was not wasted.

DP. I’m sorry, but this Level 1-3 nonsense is BS. Pull out here, pull out there - it all adds up to a big waste of time. There simply needs to be an AAP grouping for all four core classes that ALL kids have an opportunity to do. Those who need to fall back a level could easily do so if there were flexible groupings. Whoever came up with the current convoluted system was an idiot.

That isn’t what happens with flexible groupings thought. The reality (as parent and a teacher) is that admin then tells you never to meet with the AAP kids because they don’t need it and to focus on the regular kids who need regular instruction and the “bubble’ kids who can pass assessments with lots of extra help.

The AAP kids get sidelined (which I suppose makes you happy) and never get to have small group time with the teacher.

In AAP, those kids aleast can move a little faster.

Baloney. As another teacher and a parent. They already have 2E kids in AAP. Do you think those kids move as fast as the other AAP?

+1
Not to mention, the SPED kids with all kinds of learning disabilities are grouped in the Gen Ed classes, making those kids unable to move as fast as they could otherwise. But somehow, I bet that's ok with the PP. As long as AAP kids get to be separate.

Special ed kids get least restrictive environment by state and federal law, which means being placed into the general ed classrooms whenver humanly possible, even if they are not at the same level as everyone else. AAP is special ed according to Virginia law. If you don't like that, call your state representative.

The special ed kids have aids, who watch over them very attentively.

Your issue is with low performing or poorly behaved gen ed kids, who would be in your kid's classes no matter what.

You might not know this, but there are far more poorly behaved special ed kids in the AAP classroom, due to a high percentage of kids who are twice exceptional or on the spectrum. You might not realize this, but highly and profoundly gifted kids are often terrible students, poorly behaved, or a combination of the two. The poorly behaved highly gifted kids are the reason why gifted programs exist, and why they fall under special ed. The purpose of gifted ed, in a nutshell, is to find a way to keep these highly gifted kids from crashing and burning in school and ending up living in moms basement after high school. Gifted programs were not created for the compliant well behaved smart kids. The program model of having these kids in a slightly larger contained class, like AAP, is better for them tham pull outs or a tiny "truly gifted" Malcom in the Middle style class.

[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:How are people finding out specifically what schools are up for grabs? Is if conjecture or is there info somewhere?

Conjecture. An educated guess based on the School Boards comments. I can fully see some of the border shifts that are being discussed, they fit with what the school board has laid out as their reasoning for redistricting.

But there is a lot of fear mongering with the hope that if the groups raise the alarm and FOIAing documents and pointing out how awful the school board is people will place pressure on the school board. This is coming from the same schools with the same posters. I would love to see an analysis of what percent of posters are responsible for the conversation in this topic. I suspect that a relativly small number of posters are responsible for the lions share of the posts.

Anyone who sees pros, to go along with the cons, is shouted down by the people who are violently opposed to any changes that moves their kids. There have been some good suggestions made in the topics, but they are hard to find.

I fully expect there to be large shifts in the Herndon, Centerville, Chantilly, South Lakes, Oakton, Westfield area because of the issues with over crowding and space available in some of the schools. The ES situation is problematic, and those shifts will affect MS and HS. That has been touched on a bit but for the most part the loudest voices have been the Great Falls and WSHS families.

FCPS is too big and really should be broken into smaller districts, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think the opposition is fanning this flame - they keep bringing up Langley and Herndon all the time. It just creates a response. No where was that discussed in any meeting. But - there they are saying it will happen because of equity. The county, in their view, will pay extra, drive longer distances, just to bus people from GF Village all the way to HHS. Going after trans was the last election, CRT the one before, now it's equity driven boundary change.

From Forestville, 2 minutes longer to cooper than HMS. From Forestville, 9 minutes longer to Langley than HHS. Don’t take my word for it. Check on maps at relevant times of the day.

The narrative about transportation savings is a chimera.

That 9 minutes is significant if they are trying to save costs via bus. It’s not just traveling TO Langley, but also the time it takes to get to those neighborhoods potentially out of route.

DP. You know what's a lot more significant? The wasted almost empty buses that traverse the county to take AAP kids to centers - when they already have AAP in their base school. THAT'S not only grossly wasteful and redundant, but also the very definition of INequity. I certainly hope the SB gets rid of centers and their associated busing before moving a single child to a new school.

Agreed! AAP centers should be the first thing to cut when there is a budget shortfall. That includes the elementary school specialists who work with 3 kids a day and give a lesson once a month.

The AART at our ES was part time. She provided classes for all the kids, plus the LIII pull out, plus a LIV pull out because our school uses the cluster method. DS brought home projects in K-2 that were completed with the AART and enjoyed the LIII pull outs. She was busy, her time was not wasted.

DP. I’m sorry, but this Level 1-3 nonsense is BS. Pull out here, pull out there - it all adds up to a big waste of time. There simply needs to be an AAP grouping for all four core classes that ALL kids have an opportunity to do. Those who need to fall back a level could easily do so if there were flexible groupings. Whoever came up with the current convoluted system was an idiot.

That isn’t what happens with flexible groupings thought. The reality (as parent and a teacher) is that admin then tells you never to meet with the AAP kids because they don’t need it and to focus on the regular kids who need regular instruction and the “bubble’ kids who can pass assessments with lots of extra help.

The AAP kids get sidelined (which I suppose makes you happy) and never get to have small group time with the teacher.

In AAP, those kids aleast can move a little faster.

Baloney. As another teacher and a parent. They already have 2E kids in AAP. Do you think those kids move as fast as the other AAP?

+1
Not to mention, the SPED kids with all kinds of learning disabilities are grouped in the Gen Ed classes, making those kids unable to move as fast as they could otherwise. But somehow, I bet that's ok with the PP. As long as AAP kids get to be separate.

Do NOT dump your ignorance and nastiness on disabled kids. Disabled kids are not a monolith, and many compete with and exceed AAP kids.
Disgusting.

Look - you've posted several times about this. This has nothing to do with "disabled kids," and everything to do with the fact the people like YOU seem to think AAP kids should be insulated from any of the distractions that Gen Ed kids have to put up with on a daily basis. As long as your AAP kid gets to learn in peace, who cares what kind of experience Gen Ed kids have?

I bet you have no problem claiming, "some Gen Ed kids couldn't possibly keep up with AAP kids!" (there are very few who couldn't, btw). So just be honest and admit that many students with disabilities ALSO aren't able to keep up with the Gen Ed students. It works both ways, whether you find it "disgusting" to speak the truth or not.

Gen Ed kids deserve a learning environment where they are free from distractions too.

It is hilarious that you think AAp classes are some sort of well behaved utopia.

It is not.

AAP has a disproportionate amount of kids who act up in class compared to the regular gen ed classes.

Ask any teacher of elementary AAP.

[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:How are people finding out specifically what schools are up for grabs? Is if conjecture or is there info somewhere?

Conjecture. An educated guess based on the School Boards comments. I can fully see some of the border shifts that are being discussed, they fit with what the school board has laid out as their reasoning for redistricting.

But there is a lot of fear mongering with the hope that if the groups raise the alarm and FOIAing documents and pointing out how awful the school board is people will place pressure on the school board. This is coming from the same schools with the same posters. I would love to see an analysis of what percent of posters are responsible for the conversation in this topic. I suspect that a relativly small number of posters are responsible for the lions share of the posts.

Anyone who sees pros, to go along with the cons, is shouted down by the people who are violently opposed to any changes that moves their kids. There have been some good suggestions made in the topics, but they are hard to find.

I fully expect there to be large shifts in the Herndon, Centerville, Chantilly, South Lakes, Oakton, Westfield area because of the issues with over crowding and space available in some of the schools. The ES situation is problematic, and those shifts will affect MS and HS. That has been touched on a bit but for the most part the loudest voices have been the Great Falls and WSHS families.

FCPS is too big and really should be broken into smaller districts, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think the opposition is fanning this flame - they keep bringing up Langley and Herndon all the time. It just creates a response. No where was that discussed in any meeting. But - there they are saying it will happen because of equity. The county, in their view, will pay extra, drive longer distances, just to bus people from GF Village all the way to HHS. Going after trans was the last election, CRT the one before, now it's equity driven boundary change.

From Forestville, 2 minutes longer to cooper than HMS. From Forestville, 9 minutes longer to Langley than HHS. Don’t take my word for it. Check on maps at relevant times of the day.

The narrative about transportation savings is a chimera.

That 9 minutes is significant if they are trying to save costs via bus. It’s not just traveling TO Langley, but also the time it takes to get to those neighborhoods potentially out of route.

DP. You know what's a lot more significant? The wasted almost empty buses that traverse the county to take AAP kids to centers - when they already have AAP in their base school. THAT'S not only grossly wasteful and redundant, but also the very definition of INequity. I certainly hope the SB gets rid of centers and their associated busing before moving a single child to a new school.

Agreed! AAP centers should be the first thing to cut when there is a budget shortfall. That includes the elementary school specialists who work with 3 kids a day and give a lesson once a month.

The AART at our ES was part time. She provided classes for all the kids, plus the LIII pull out, plus a LIV pull out because our school uses the cluster method. DS brought home projects in K-2 that were completed with the AART and enjoyed the LIII pull outs. She was busy, her time was not wasted.

DP. I’m sorry, but this Level 1-3 nonsense is BS. Pull out here, pull out there - it all adds up to a big waste of time. There simply needs to be an AAP grouping for all four core classes that ALL kids have an opportunity to do. Those who need to fall back a level could easily do so if there were flexible groupings. Whoever came up with the current convoluted system was an idiot.

That isn’t what happens with flexible groupings thought. The reality (as parent and a teacher) is that admin then tells you never to meet with the AAP kids because they don’t need it and to focus on the regular kids who need regular instruction and the “bubble’ kids who can pass assessments with lots of extra help.

The AAP kids get sidelined (which I suppose makes you happy) and never get to have small group time with the teacher.

In AAP, those kids aleast can move a little faster.

Baloney. As another teacher and a parent. They already have 2E kids in AAP. Do you think those kids move as fast as the other AAP?

+1
Not to mention, the SPED kids with all kinds of learning disabilities are grouped in the Gen Ed classes, making those kids unable to move as fast as they could otherwise. But somehow, I bet that's ok with the PP. As long as AAP kids get to be separate.

Do NOT dump your ignorance and nastiness on disabled kids. Disabled kids are not a monolith, and many compete with and exceed AAP kids.
Disgusting.

Look - you've posted several times about this. This has nothing to do with "disabled kids," and everything to do with the fact the people like YOU seem to think AAP kids should be insulated from any of the distractions that Gen Ed kids have to put up with on a daily basis. As long as your AAP kid gets to learn in peace, who cares what kind of experience Gen Ed kids have?

I bet you have no problem claiming, "some Gen Ed kids couldn't possibly keep up with AAP kids!" (there are very few who couldn't, btw). So just be honest and admit that many students with disabilities ALSO aren't able to keep up with the Gen Ed students. It works both ways, whether you find it "disgusting" to speak the truth or not.

Gen Ed kids deserve a learning environment where they are free from distractions too.

Sounds like you are seeking equity for the gen ed students.

If you want to put it in those terms, then sure! You bet I am. FCPS blathers about "equity" all the time yet sees fit to offer AAP kids free busing to go to "special" center schools where they can learn without distraction from those pesky Gen Ed kids who, you know, would only slow them down! Meanwhile, Gen Ed kids are expected to simply deal with the SPED kids who have been mainstreamed into their classes. And if parents complain that *those* kids are slowing down the class, they're called all kinds of names.

The hypocrisy here is so blatant - and truly disgusting, to use your term.

Different poster.

I am calling utter BS on your "special ed kids are overrunning the gen ed classrooms and ruining school for everyone else" mantra.

#1 AAP is full of special ed kids. Half the kids in the class are usually some sort of 2E, on the spectrum, ADHD on hyperspeed, difficult to work with, temperamental genius combination. One of mine was one of these kids and the AAP classes were overflowing with them.

#2 Special Ed kids mainstreamed into the gen ed classroom have dedicated aides with anywhere from a 1:1 to 1:3 ratio. They basically have their very own adult to sit with them and supervise them. They do not disrupt the class and if they struffle with the work, their aide is right there to help them do a modified lesson.

#3 The elementary schools in particular carefully craft the inclusion classes. They pick mainstream kids who are helpful and kids who make the special ed kids feel like they are a welcome part of the class. 2 of my kids have repeatedly been put into the inclusion classes over multiple years. They are great classes and the special ed kids are never the trouble makers and do not slow down the classes, because 1) they are nice kids and 2) they are very well supervised. If your kid was actually in one of these classes, you would know this to be true.

#4 All of the parents of mainstream kids in inclusion classes are either very nice and helpful, don't complain about anything, or are not really involved in the daily life at school. They don't pick kids with pain in the a$$ parents, even if their kids are great. If you had a kid in an inclusion classroom, you would also know this.

It is disgusting to see repeated posts denigrating the special ed kids, especially since the posts are clearly trying to use these kids to enact some sort of twisted revenge on the kids who qualified for AAP.

[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:How are people finding out specifically what schools are up for grabs? Is if conjecture or is there info somewhere?

Conjecture. An educated guess based on the School Boards comments. I can fully see some of the border shifts that are being discussed, they fit with what the school board has laid out as their reasoning for redistricting.

But there is a lot of fear mongering with the hope that if the groups raise the alarm and FOIAing documents and pointing out how awful the school board is people will place pressure on the school board. This is coming from the same schools with the same posters. I would love to see an analysis of what percent of posters are responsible for the conversation in this topic. I suspect that a relativly small number of posters are responsible for the lions share of the posts.

Anyone who sees pros, to go along with the cons, is shouted down by the people who are violently opposed to any changes that moves their kids. There have been some good suggestions made in the topics, but they are hard to find.

I fully expect there to be large shifts in the Herndon, Centerville, Chantilly, South Lakes, Oakton, Westfield area because of the issues with over crowding and space available in some of the schools. The ES situation is problematic, and those shifts will affect MS and HS. That has been touched on a bit but for the most part the loudest voices have been the Great Falls and WSHS families.

FCPS is too big and really should be broken into smaller districts, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think the opposition is fanning this flame - they keep bringing up Langley and Herndon all the time. It just creates a response. No where was that discussed in any meeting. But - there they are saying it will happen because of equity. The county, in their view, will pay extra, drive longer distances, just to bus people from GF Village all the way to HHS. Going after trans was the last election, CRT the one before, now it's equity driven boundary change.

From Forestville, 2 minutes longer to cooper than HMS. From Forestville, 9 minutes longer to Langley than HHS. Don’t take my word for it. Check on maps at relevant times of the day.

The narrative about transportation savings is a chimera.

That 9 minutes is significant if they are trying to save costs via bus. It’s not just traveling TO Langley, but also the time it takes to get to those neighborhoods potentially out of route.

DP. You know what's a lot more significant? The wasted almost empty buses that traverse the county to take AAP kids to centers - when they already have AAP in their base school. THAT'S not only grossly wasteful and redundant, but also the very definition of INequity. I certainly hope the SB gets rid of centers and their associated busing before moving a single child to a new school.

Agreed! AAP centers should be the first thing to cut when there is a budget shortfall. That includes the elementary school specialists who work with 3 kids a day and give a lesson once a month.

The AART at our ES was part time. She provided classes for all the kids, plus the LIII pull out, plus a LIV pull out because our school uses the cluster method. DS brought home projects in K-2 that were completed with the AART and enjoyed the LIII pull outs. She was busy, her time was not wasted.

DP. I’m sorry, but this Level 1-3 nonsense is BS. Pull out here, pull out there - it all adds up to a big waste of time. There simply needs to be an AAP grouping for all four core classes that ALL kids have an opportunity to do. Those who need to fall back a level could easily do so if there were flexible groupings. Whoever came up with the current convoluted system was an idiot.

That isn’t what happens with flexible groupings thought. The reality (as parent and a teacher) is that admin then tells you never to meet with the AAP kids because they don’t need it and to focus on the regular kids who need regular instruction and the “bubble’ kids who can pass assessments with lots of extra help.

The AAP kids get sidelined (which I suppose makes you happy) and never get to have small group time with the teacher.

In AAP, those kids aleast can move a little faster.

Baloney. As another teacher and a parent. They already have 2E kids in AAP. Do you think those kids move as fast as the other AAP?

+1
Not to mention, the SPED kids with all kinds of learning disabilities are grouped in the Gen Ed classes, making those kids unable to move as fast as they could otherwise. But somehow, I bet that's ok with the PP. As long as AAP kids get to be separate.

Do NOT dump your ignorance and nastiness on disabled kids. Disabled kids are not a monolith, and many compete with and exceed AAP kids.
Disgusting.

Look - you've posted several times about this. This has nothing to do with "disabled kids," and everything to do with the fact the people like YOU seem to think AAP kids should be insulated from any of the distractions that Gen Ed kids have to put up with on a daily basis. As long as your AAP kid gets to learn in peace, who cares what kind of experience Gen Ed kids have?

I bet you have no problem claiming, "some Gen Ed kids couldn't possibly keep up with AAP kids!" (there are very few who couldn't, btw). So just be honest and admit that many students with disabilities ALSO aren't able to keep up with the Gen Ed students. It works both ways, whether you find it "disgusting" to speak the truth or not.

Gen Ed kids deserve a learning environment where they are free from distractions too.

Sounds like you are seeking equity for the gen ed students.

If you want to put it in those terms, then sure! You bet I am. FCPS blathers about "equity" all the time yet sees fit to offer AAP kids free busing to go to "special" center schools where they can learn without distraction from those pesky Gen Ed kids who, you know, would only slow them down! Meanwhile, Gen Ed kids are expected to simply deal with the SPED kids who have been mainstreamed into their classes. And if parents complain that *those* kids are slowing down the class, they're called all kinds of names.

The hypocrisy here is so blatant - and truly disgusting, to use your term.

Different poster.

I am calling utter BS on your "special ed kids are overrunning the gen ed classrooms and ruining school for everyone else" mantra.

#1 AAP is full of special ed kids. Half the kids in the class are usually some sort of 2E, on the spectrum, ADHD on hyperspeed, difficult to work with, temperamental genius combination. One of mine was one of these kids and the AAP classes were overflowing with them.

#2 Special Ed kids mainstreamed into the gen ed classroom have dedicated aides with anywhere from a 1:1 to 1:3 ratio. They basically have their very own adult to sit with them and supervise them. They do not disrupt the class and if they struffle with the work, their aide is right there to help them do a modified lesson.

#3 The elementary schools in particular carefully craft the inclusion classes. They pick mainstream kids who are helpful and kids who make the special ed kids feel like they are a welcome part of the class. 2 of my kids have repeatedly been put into the inclusion classes over multiple years. They are great classes and the special ed kids are never the trouble makers and do not slow down the classes, because 1) they are nice kids and 2) they are very well supervised. If your kid was actually in one of these classes, you would know this to be true.

#4 All of the parents of mainstream kids in inclusion classes are either very nice and helpful, don't complain about anything, or are not really involved in the daily life at school. They don't pick kids with pain in the a$$ parents, even if their kids are great. If you had a kid in an inclusion classroom, you would also know this.

It is disgusting to see repeated posts denigrating the special ed kids, especially since the posts are clearly trying to use these kids to enact some sort of twisted revenge on the kids who qualified for AAP.

Wow you are totally wrong on all your points! My kid is in the inclusion class and the gen Ed kids actually can’t stand the special Ed kids. They even have a nickname for them: “Sped.” No one wants to be in their group and the kids feel they absolutely slow the class down with their disruptive and odd behaviors.

The aides coming in and out of the classroom constantly are annoying and disruptive too. Teachers are burned out from all the IEP meetings they must attend and all the different IEPs to follow. Often times these kids aren’t getting the extra help they qualify for. The case loads are just too big for the special Ed teachers. They are pulled in too many directions. The special Ed kids are left floundering in the class and can’t keep up in social studies or science. As a result, the class is dumbed down because the teacher cannot manage all the different levels on their own.

AAP classes are coveted classes at both center and local level IV schools. The kids on the whole are easier to teach and don’t require as much or if any differentiation. The kids can all read and write fairly well. They have some quirky kids and are a bit more talkative on the whole, but are far easier to manage and teach. Most of those kids in AAP are Asians and Indians - their parents place a huge emphasis on academics and don’t care about sports. They want homework! They will never make excuses about how Johnny couldn’t do his math homework because he had sports practice. They also are grateful to the teachers - their cultures respect teachers and they rarely question them. They are appreciative. Subs want to sub for the AAP classes - at some schools they will not sub for gen Ed classes.

IEP parents are super involved and can be a total nightmare. They bring advocates, threaten to sue…the teachers are under enormous stress with these kids. The gen Ed parents are pissed that their “regular” kids are not learning or being challenged bc of all the behavior issues and teaching to the lowest common denominator. They complain loudly and to anyone who will listen. Their kids are also way more active in sports. They don’t want too much homework. If there’s a conflict, sports win.

[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:

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:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

Maybe we can pair this with other needs-based measures such as eliminating after-school programming at Cooper, but not other middle schools. After all, the assumption seems to be that some families can arrange for transportation and other extras, and the wealthy seem willing to make these trade-offs as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.

You always repeat that last phrase about poor kids without anyone ever in the history of this discussion giving that as a justification for wanting to stay in their current pyramid. It says a lot about you that you are trying to foment class warfare with your neighbors.

Nice effort to flip the script but we all know you’d be outraged by the suggestion that FCPS cease providing transportation to your neighborhoods unless you saw it as a possible way to avoid rezoning to a less wealthy school.

What script did I flip. Those were literally your words that I was responding to.

You literally, verbatim said this: “as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.” No one has ever claimed that, like literally not once in this thread or related threads.

Should we not read your words literally? You got some alternative facts that your operating off of, Kellyanne?

Read the FairFACTS Matters comments when this came up. Example: "It was implied that a solution for the Langley pyramid would be that the boundaries wouldn't change, but FCPS would only provide bussing within a certain radius of Langley."

Y'all are so transparent, even when you are grasping at straws.

What is going on? Your quote appears to indicate that FCPS may propose to address a transportation cost concern with a transportation based solution. You read that as a means for one group to avoid grouping with another group based on relative wealth?

Yikes. I hope that you are not involved in this process. You appear to believe that things such as proximity, capacity, and transportation are all just mechanisms for other goals.

Sometimes a bussing issue is just about busses.

Everyone sees through this. You’d be yelling about it except for the fact that it’s a very slender reed (or in this case Reid) you’re hanging onto in hopes they’ll let rich neighborhoods avoid a much closer, yet poorer, school.

DP. Sometimes when you’re in a hole you should stop digging.

DP. This would be an obvious concession to Great Falls snobs trying to keep their kids out of Herndon. Don’t get your hopes up.

Or, just maybe, to stay in the school the neighborhood has attended for decades.

How long was Wakefield Forest at Annandale before it got moved to Woodson? How long was Fox Mill at Oakton before it got moved to South Lakes? Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes, but no one put up as big a fuss as you Langley snobs. You think Herndon is beneath you.

No wonder Reid tosses you a bone to shut you up occasionally.

DP. How soon you forgot! There was, indeed, a big fuss (hugely contentious, actually) when all those neighborhoods were rezoned to South Lakes in 2008. And then when the mythical "western high school" was proposed, families were up in arms that their kids would have to move schools yet again. Maybe get your facts straight?

https://patch.com/virginia/chantilly/guest-column-new-high-school-proposal-will-reverse-cob2f441f3ca

Perhaps you should have read the post before responding ("Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes").

Still, one Patch article isn't the same as months on end of whiny Great Falls parents, and we're still in the early stages of the boundary process.

Another DP. I haven't yet read the article, but I can tell you that there were months of upset parents. I would not call them "whiny" because I was one who wanted my kids to stay put where they were. Fortunately, we were on the periphery and did not get moved But, I still remember how emotional and difficult it was --with neighborhood being pitted against other neighborhoods--many of which were friends from youth sports.

Go watch the videos of the citizen participation at the SB meetings in 2008 if they are still available. Parents literally BEGGING for South Lakes to switch to AP--this was especially parents from the Floris group, I think whose kids were at Westfield at that time. And the SB would not even look at them. They just wanted what was best for their kids. And, Fox Mill, too. I remember one parent from Fox Mill Woods begging to let her pupil place her child at Oakton with the rest of her friends from Crossfield. Her DD was at Carson at the time.

And, let's not forget the woman from Navy boundary who attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor. She was still upset and bitter from being changed from Chantilly to Oakton. (and Oakton is considered "more desirable.")

If you think parents were not upset, you are greatly mistaken. And, no, they weren't "whiny," they were just standing up for their kids. I'm guessing that is what the Great Falls parents are doing now. And, if you think it is just Great Falls parents who are upset about this, you are VERY mistaken.

+100
It's difficult to find anything from 2008, but here's an archived article about how upset Madison/Oakton parents were at the prospect of being rezoned to South Lakes. Funny, their comments and concerns sound EXACTLY like today's conversations and objections over rezoning.
https://m.connectionnewspapers.com/news/2007/dec/04/boundary-bungle/

Oh, my goodness. I had forgotten about the SB not facing the audience. I was at that meeting. I think I was at Chantilly, but it might have been at another school. There were several meetings.

That study had nothing to do with overcrowding and everything to do with Stu Gibson and the South Lakes PTA.

South Lakes was under enrolled. Now it isn’t. Clearly the redistricting worked. Just like it will if the whiny Langley families redistricted. Their kids are no different than other kids who’ve been rezoned.

We get you’ve got a Langley inferiority complex, lady. For your own sanity, you might want to touch some grass.

It’s the Langley families who need to stop looking down their noses at other people. They can deal with a boundary change, just like others have in the past.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And, you think the AAP kids get small group time with the teacher?

Your AAP kids are all on the same level? Gee, that's really great.

The AAP kids are at least getting more work on their level, rather than being left on their own all day with “anchor activities” and busy work. The tier 1/whole group and follow up instruction from the teacher in AAP is somewhat better leveled for them than Tier 1 in a general education setting.

Again, please name the school where you meet with low, middle and high learners in small groups for the same amount of time each week. It doesn’t happen. Everything revolves around test scores and if kids are easily passing the tests, they aren’t getting more or even any small group instruction in gen ed.

Honey, I think you need to change schools if you think bright kids in GenEd are being left on their own all day. Have you never taught GenEd?

Thanks honey, I agree, but no one is naming a school where kids who are on the high end of the learning spectrum meet with the teacher at the same rate other kids do. They aren’t naming any schools because it does not happen anywhere.

I promise, the admin at your child’s school has given instructions that the top kids only need to see the teacher once or twice a week if that much and that the teacher needs to focus on the “middle and high risk kids.”

Remember the early release Mondays this year? During those training sessions, the great commonwealth of VA is also instructing teachers to not meet with students who are “low risk” because they are understanding with regular instruction. Especially the above grade level kids. THis is what the Tiered instruction system is based upon.

As far as switching kids for each subject, no school does that. Math/science are together and reading/social studies are matched together for departmentalization in elementary. Switching kids from one teacher to another takes time. You want to level everyone within a grade, and when you do that, the same kids get placed together (for the most part anyway) and then your child is stuck with the same basic 25 kids from 1-5 grade in their class. At least the current way, the kids get to know and have other peers in their classes during their elementary years. THis is also a benefit to AAP centers because the classes can be mixed up each year rather than LL4 where the same kids are placed in 3-6 grade.

There are pros and cons to everything, but know the parameters of what you are asking. There are consequences to everything. I think both my kids: one aap and one gen ed are getting what they need to be successful.

[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:

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:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

Maybe we can pair this with other needs-based measures such as eliminating after-school programming at Cooper, but not other middle schools. After all, the assumption seems to be that some families can arrange for transportation and other extras, and the wealthy seem willing to make these trade-offs as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.

You always repeat that last phrase about poor kids without anyone ever in the history of this discussion giving that as a justification for wanting to stay in their current pyramid. It says a lot about you that you are trying to foment class warfare with your neighbors.

Nice effort to flip the script but we all know you’d be outraged by the suggestion that FCPS cease providing transportation to your neighborhoods unless you saw it as a possible way to avoid rezoning to a less wealthy school.

What script did I flip. Those were literally your words that I was responding to.

You literally, verbatim said this: “as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.” No one has ever claimed that, like literally not once in this thread or related threads.

Should we not read your words literally? You got some alternative facts that your operating off of, Kellyanne?

Read the FairFACTS Matters comments when this came up. Example: "It was implied that a solution for the Langley pyramid would be that the boundaries wouldn't change, but FCPS would only provide bussing within a certain radius of Langley."

Y'all are so transparent, even when you are grasping at straws.

What is going on? Your quote appears to indicate that FCPS may propose to address a transportation cost concern with a transportation based solution. You read that as a means for one group to avoid grouping with another group based on relative wealth?

Yikes. I hope that you are not involved in this process. You appear to believe that things such as proximity, capacity, and transportation are all just mechanisms for other goals.

Sometimes a bussing issue is just about busses.

Everyone sees through this. You’d be yelling about it except for the fact that it’s a very slender reed (or in this case Reid) you’re hanging onto in hopes they’ll let rich neighborhoods avoid a much closer, yet poorer, school.

DP. Sometimes when you’re in a hole you should stop digging.

DP. This would be an obvious concession to Great Falls snobs trying to keep their kids out of Herndon. Don’t get your hopes up.

Or, just maybe, to stay in the school the neighborhood has attended for decades.

How long was Wakefield Forest at Annandale before it got moved to Woodson? How long was Fox Mill at Oakton before it got moved to South Lakes? Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes, but no one put up as big a fuss as you Langley snobs. You think Herndon is beneath you.

No wonder Reid tosses you a bone to shut you up occasionally.

DP. How soon you forgot! There was, indeed, a big fuss (hugely contentious, actually) when all those neighborhoods were rezoned to South Lakes in 2008. And then when the mythical "western high school" was proposed, families were up in arms that their kids would have to move schools yet again. Maybe get your facts straight?

https://patch.com/virginia/chantilly/guest-column-new-high-school-proposal-will-reverse-cob2f441f3ca

Perhaps you should have read the post before responding ("Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes").

Still, one Patch article isn't the same as months on end of whiny Great Falls parents, and we're still in the early stages of the boundary process.

Another DP. I haven't yet read the article, but I can tell you that there were months of upset parents. I would not call them "whiny" because I was one who wanted my kids to stay put where they were. Fortunately, we were on the periphery and did not get moved But, I still remember how emotional and difficult it was --with neighborhood being pitted against other neighborhoods--many of which were friends from youth sports.

Go watch the videos of the citizen participation at the SB meetings in 2008 if they are still available. Parents literally BEGGING for South Lakes to switch to AP--this was especially parents from the Floris group, I think whose kids were at Westfield at that time. And the SB would not even look at them. They just wanted what was best for their kids. And, Fox Mill, too. I remember one parent from Fox Mill Woods begging to let her pupil place her child at Oakton with the rest of her friends from Crossfield. Her DD was at Carson at the time.

And, let's not forget the woman from Navy boundary who attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor. She was still upset and bitter from being changed from Chantilly to Oakton. (and Oakton is considered "more desirable.")

If you think parents were not upset, you are greatly mistaken. And, no, they weren't "whiny," they were just standing up for their kids. I'm guessing that is what the Great Falls parents are doing now. And, if you think it is just Great Falls parents who are upset about this, you are VERY mistaken.

+100
It's difficult to find anything from 2008, but here's an archived article about how upset Madison/Oakton parents were at the prospect of being rezoned to South Lakes. Funny, their comments and concerns sound EXACTLY like today's conversations and objections over rezoning.
https://m.connectionnewspapers.com/news/2007/dec/04/boundary-bungle/

Oh, my goodness. I had forgotten about the SB not facing the audience. I was at that meeting. I think I was at Chantilly, but it might have been at another school. There were several meetings.

That study had nothing to do with overcrowding and everything to do with Stu Gibson and the South Lakes PTA.

South Lakes was under enrolled. Now it isn’t. Clearly the redistricting worked. Just like it will if the whiny Langley families redistricted. Their kids are no different than other kids who’ve been rezoned.

We get you’ve got a Langley inferiority complex, lady. For your own sanity, you might want to touch some grass.

It’s the Langley families who need to stop looking down their noses at other people. They can deal with a boundary change, just like others have in the past.

No one wants these unnecessary massive changes. Especially because in most cases it’s not to fix over/under crowding issues, we’ve already discussed savings on transportation is dead in the water for 2-9 minute differences especially when shuttling kids all over for centers which is where the extra cost actually are etc. it’s already been discussed Langley can take in some of McLean’s excess and not be cover capacity (especially if they stop the 100 kids who pupil place in). It’s because the county doesn’t know how or won’t actually help the kids who are struggling. They just want to shift kids who perform better to bring up scores. Langley parents and anyone else who doesn’t want this boundary study is not a snob. They just care about their kids and don’t want them used as pawns by the school board

[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:

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:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

Maybe we can pair this with other needs-based measures such as eliminating after-school programming at Cooper, but not other middle schools. After all, the assumption seems to be that some families can arrange for transportation and other extras, and the wealthy seem willing to make these trade-offs as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.

You always repeat that last phrase about poor kids without anyone ever in the history of this discussion giving that as a justification for wanting to stay in their current pyramid. It says a lot about you that you are trying to foment class warfare with your neighbors.

Nice effort to flip the script but we all know you’d be outraged by the suggestion that FCPS cease providing transportation to your neighborhoods unless you saw it as a possible way to avoid rezoning to a less wealthy school.

What script did I flip. Those were literally your words that I was responding to.

You literally, verbatim said this: “as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.” No one has ever claimed that, like literally not once in this thread or related threads.

Should we not read your words literally? You got some alternative facts that your operating off of, Kellyanne?

Read the FairFACTS Matters comments when this came up. Example: "It was implied that a solution for the Langley pyramid would be that the boundaries wouldn't change, but FCPS would only provide bussing within a certain radius of Langley."

Y'all are so transparent, even when you are grasping at straws.

What is going on? Your quote appears to indicate that FCPS may propose to address a transportation cost concern with a transportation based solution. You read that as a means for one group to avoid grouping with another group based on relative wealth?

Yikes. I hope that you are not involved in this process. You appear to believe that things such as proximity, capacity, and transportation are all just mechanisms for other goals.

Sometimes a bussing issue is just about busses.

Everyone sees through this. You’d be yelling about it except for the fact that it’s a very slender reed (or in this case Reid) you’re hanging onto in hopes they’ll let rich neighborhoods avoid a much closer, yet poorer, school.

DP. Sometimes when you’re in a hole you should stop digging.

DP. This would be an obvious concession to Great Falls snobs trying to keep their kids out of Herndon. Don’t get your hopes up.

Or, just maybe, to stay in the school the neighborhood has attended for decades.

How long was Wakefield Forest at Annandale before it got moved to Woodson? How long was Fox Mill at Oakton before it got moved to South Lakes? Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes, but no one put up as big a fuss as you Langley snobs. You think Herndon is beneath you.

No wonder Reid tosses you a bone to shut you up occasionally.

DP. How soon you forgot! There was, indeed, a big fuss (hugely contentious, actually) when all those neighborhoods were rezoned to South Lakes in 2008. And then when the mythical "western high school" was proposed, families were up in arms that their kids would have to move schools yet again. Maybe get your facts straight?

https://patch.com/virginia/chantilly/guest-column-new-high-school-proposal-will-reverse-cob2f441f3ca

Perhaps you should have read the post before responding ("Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes").

Still, one Patch article isn't the same as months on end of whiny Great Falls parents, and we're still in the early stages of the boundary process.

Another DP. I haven't yet read the article, but I can tell you that there were months of upset parents. I would not call them "whiny" because I was one who wanted my kids to stay put where they were. Fortunately, we were on the periphery and did not get moved But, I still remember how emotional and difficult it was --with neighborhood being pitted against other neighborhoods--many of which were friends from youth sports.

Go watch the videos of the citizen participation at the SB meetings in 2008 if they are still available. Parents literally BEGGING for South Lakes to switch to AP--this was especially parents from the Floris group, I think whose kids were at Westfield at that time. And the SB would not even look at them. They just wanted what was best for their kids. And, Fox Mill, too. I remember one parent from Fox Mill Woods begging to let her pupil place her child at Oakton with the rest of her friends from Crossfield. Her DD was at Carson at the time.

And, let's not forget the woman from Navy boundary who attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor. She was still upset and bitter from being changed from Chantilly to Oakton. (and Oakton is considered "more desirable.")

If you think parents were not upset, you are greatly mistaken. And, no, they weren't "whiny," they were just standing up for their kids. I'm guessing that is what the Great Falls parents are doing now. And, if you think it is just Great Falls parents who are upset about this, you are VERY mistaken.

+100
It's difficult to find anything from 2008, but here's an archived article about how upset Madison/Oakton parents were at the prospect of being rezoned to South Lakes. Funny, their comments and concerns sound EXACTLY like today's conversations and objections over rezoning.
https://m.connectionnewspapers.com/news/2007/dec/04/boundary-bungle/

Oh, my goodness. I had forgotten about the SB not facing the audience. I was at that meeting. I think I was at Chantilly, but it might have been at another school. There were several meetings.

That study had nothing to do with overcrowding and everything to do with Stu Gibson and the South Lakes PTA.

South Lakes was under enrolled. Now it isn’t. Clearly the redistricting worked. Just like it will if the whiny Langley families redistricted. Their kids are no different than other kids who’ve been rezoned.

We get you’ve got a Langley inferiority complex, lady. For your own sanity, you might want to touch some grass.

It’s the Langley families who need to stop looking down their noses at other people. They can deal with a boundary change, just like others have in the past.

Surely if you’re advocating for this you agree that school board members’ kids should be moved with everyone else, right? In fact, I think FCPS BRAC members’ kids should be too.

If kids are resilient as Robyn Lady is fond of saying and as you like to pretend, surely their kids would be too.

[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:

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:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

Maybe we can pair this with other needs-based measures such as eliminating after-school programming at Cooper, but not other middle schools. After all, the assumption seems to be that some families can arrange for transportation and other extras, and the wealthy seem willing to make these trade-offs as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.

You always repeat that last phrase about poor kids without anyone ever in the history of this discussion giving that as a justification for wanting to stay in their current pyramid. It says a lot about you that you are trying to foment class warfare with your neighbors.

Nice effort to flip the script but we all know you’d be outraged by the suggestion that FCPS cease providing transportation to your neighborhoods unless you saw it as a possible way to avoid rezoning to a less wealthy school.

What script did I flip. Those were literally your words that I was responding to.

You literally, verbatim said this: “as long as they can send their kids to schools without poor kids.” No one has ever claimed that, like literally not once in this thread or related threads.

Should we not read your words literally? You got some alternative facts that your operating off of, Kellyanne?

Read the FairFACTS Matters comments when this came up. Example: "It was implied that a solution for the Langley pyramid would be that the boundaries wouldn't change, but FCPS would only provide bussing within a certain radius of Langley."

Y'all are so transparent, even when you are grasping at straws.

What is going on? Your quote appears to indicate that FCPS may propose to address a transportation cost concern with a transportation based solution. You read that as a means for one group to avoid grouping with another group based on relative wealth?

Yikes. I hope that you are not involved in this process. You appear to believe that things such as proximity, capacity, and transportation are all just mechanisms for other goals.

Sometimes a bussing issue is just about busses.

Everyone sees through this. You’d be yelling about it except for the fact that it’s a very slender reed (or in this case Reid) you’re hanging onto in hopes they’ll let rich neighborhoods avoid a much closer, yet poorer, school.

DP. Sometimes when you’re in a hole you should stop digging.

DP. This would be an obvious concession to Great Falls snobs trying to keep their kids out of Herndon. Don’t get your hopes up.

Or, just maybe, to stay in the school the neighborhood has attended for decades.

How long was Wakefield Forest at Annandale before it got moved to Woodson? How long was Fox Mill at Oakton before it got moved to South Lakes? Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes, but no one put up as big a fuss as you Langley snobs. You think Herndon is beneath you.

No wonder Reid tosses you a bone to shut you up occasionally.

DP. How soon you forgot! There was, indeed, a big fuss (hugely contentious, actually) when all those neighborhoods were rezoned to South Lakes in 2008. And then when the mythical "western high school" was proposed, families were up in arms that their kids would have to move schools yet again. Maybe get your facts straight?

https://patch.com/virginia/chantilly/guest-column-new-high-school-proposal-will-reverse-cob2f441f3ca

Perhaps you should have read the post before responding ("Some of those folks wanted to stay put as well, and weren't crazy about the boundary changes").

Still, one Patch article isn't the same as months on end of whiny Great Falls parents, and we're still in the early stages of the boundary process.

Another DP. I haven't yet read the article, but I can tell you that there were months of upset parents. I would not call them "whiny" because I was one who wanted my kids to stay put where they were. Fortunately, we were on the periphery and did not get moved But, I still remember how emotional and difficult it was --with neighborhood being pitted against other neighborhoods--many of which were friends from youth sports.

Go watch the videos of the citizen participation at the SB meetings in 2008 if they are still available. Parents literally BEGGING for South Lakes to switch to AP--this was especially parents from the Floris group, I think whose kids were at Westfield at that time. And the SB would not even look at them. They just wanted what was best for their kids. And, Fox Mill, too. I remember one parent from Fox Mill Woods begging to let her pupil place her child at Oakton with the rest of her friends from Crossfield. Her DD was at Carson at the time.

And, let's not forget the woman from Navy boundary who attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor. She was still upset and bitter from being changed from Chantilly to Oakton. (and Oakton is considered "more desirable.")

If you think parents were not upset, you are greatly mistaken. And, no, they weren't "whiny," they were just standing up for their kids. I'm guessing that is what the Great Falls parents are doing now. And, if you think it is just Great Falls parents who are upset about this, you are VERY mistaken.

+100
It's difficult to find anything from 2008, but here's an archived article about how upset Madison/Oakton parents were at the prospect of being rezoned to South Lakes. Funny, their comments and concerns sound EXACTLY like today's conversations and objections over rezoning.
https://m.connectionnewspapers.com/news/2007/dec/04/boundary-bungle/

Oh, my goodness. I had forgotten about the SB not facing the audience. I was at that meeting. I think I was at Chantilly, but it might have been at another school. There were several meetings.

That study had nothing to do with overcrowding and everything to do with Stu Gibson and the South Lakes PTA.

South Lakes was under enrolled. Now it isn’t. Clearly the redistricting worked. Just like it will if the whiny Langley families redistricted. Their kids are no different than other kids who’ve been rezoned.

We get you’ve got a Langley inferiority complex, lady. For your own sanity, you might want to touch some grass.

It’s the Langley families who need to stop looking down their noses at other people. They can deal with a boundary change, just like others have in the past.

No one wants these unnecessary massive changes. Especially because in most cases it’s not to fix over/under crowding issues, we’ve already discussed savings on transportation is dead in the water for 2-9 minute differences especially when shuttling kids all over for centers which is where the extra cost actually are etc. it’s already been discussed Langley can take in some of McLean’s excess and not be cover capacity (especially if they stop the 100 kids who pupil place in). It’s because the county doesn’t know how or won’t actually help the kids who are struggling. They just want to shift kids who perform better to bring up scores. Langley parents and anyone else who doesn’t want this boundary study is not a snob. They just care about their kids and don’t want them used as pawns by the school board

Thank you. Having read these posts, I think it’s pretty clear that there is one poster with a vendetta against Langley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are people finding out specifically what schools are up for grabs? Is if conjecture or is there info somewhere?

Conjecture. An educated guess based on the School Boards comments. I can fully see some of the border shifts that are being discussed, they fit with what the school board has laid out as their reasoning for redistricting.

But there is a lot of fear mongering with the hope that if the groups raise the alarm and FOIAing documents and pointing out how awful the school board is people will place pressure on the school board. This is coming from the same schools with the same posters. I would love to see an analysis of what percent of posters are responsible for the conversation in this topic. I suspect that a relativly small number of posters are responsible for the lions share of the posts.

Anyone who sees pros, to go along with the cons, is shouted down by the people who are violently opposed to any changes that moves their kids. There have been some good suggestions made in the topics, but they are hard to find.

I fully expect there to be large shifts in the Herndon, Centerville, Chantilly, South Lakes, Oakton, Westfield area because of the issues with over crowding and space available in some of the schools. The ES situation is problematic, and those shifts will affect MS and HS. That has been touched on a bit but for the most part the loudest voices have been the Great Falls and WSHS families.

FCPS is too big and really should be broken into smaller districts, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think the opposition is fanning this flame - they keep bringing up Langley and Herndon all the time. It just creates a response. No where was that discussed in any meeting. But - there they are saying it will happen because of equity. The county, in their view, will pay extra, drive longer distances, just to bus people from GF Village all the way to HHS. Going after trans was the last election, CRT the one before, now it's equity driven boundary change.

From Forestville, 2 minutes longer to cooper than HMS. From Forestville, 9 minutes longer to Langley than HHS. Don’t take my word for it. Check on maps at relevant times of the day.

The narrative about transportation savings is a chimera.

That 9 minutes is significant if they are trying to save costs via bus. It’s not just traveling TO Langley, but also the time it takes to get to those neighborhoods potentially out of route.

DP. You know what's a lot more significant? The wasted almost empty buses that traverse the county to take AAP kids to centers - when they already have AAP in their base school. THAT'S not only grossly wasteful and redundant, but also the very definition of INequity. I certainly hope the SB gets rid of centers and their associated busing before moving a single child to a new school.

Agreed! AAP centers should be the first thing to cut when there is a budget shortfall. That includes the elementary school specialists who work with 3 kids a day and give a lesson once a month.

Do you think the AART only visits your kid's class once per month, and not the rest of the school? Think deeper, dingbat. Say there are four classes per grade on average -- that's 28 visits per month and multiple pull-outs per grade from 2-6. Plus dealing with disgruntled parents desperate to get their kids in AAP while simultaneously trashing it and calling for AARTs to be canned.

DP. Again, “pull outs” are a complete waste of time. My son would come home with some ridiculous worksheet that there was never time to finish. They need to stop wasting everyone’s time with that and simply go to flexible groupings, with AAP being one of the groups. Centers and pull outs are absurd.

It sounds like your kid can't keep up. No more pull outs for him, please. Let the kids who can excel stay focused.

Funny you should say this. We finally told the teacher we weren't interested in any more pullouts because not only were they a silly waste of time, but he then had to make up the regular classwork he missed while in the pullout. It was ludicrous. The enrichment he receives at home far exceeds whatever dumb, rushed "exercise" they were given in pullouts.
-PP

Cool story.

[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:How are people finding out specifically what schools are up for grabs? Is if conjecture or is there info somewhere?

Conjecture. An educated guess based on the School Boards comments. I can fully see some of the border shifts that are being discussed, they fit with what the school board has laid out as their reasoning for redistricting.

But there is a lot of fear mongering with the hope that if the groups raise the alarm and FOIAing documents and pointing out how awful the school board is people will place pressure on the school board. This is coming from the same schools with the same posters. I would love to see an analysis of what percent of posters are responsible for the conversation in this topic. I suspect that a relativly small number of posters are responsible for the lions share of the posts.

Anyone who sees pros, to go along with the cons, is shouted down by the people who are violently opposed to any changes that moves their kids. There have been some good suggestions made in the topics, but they are hard to find.

I fully expect there to be large shifts in the Herndon, Centerville, Chantilly, South Lakes, Oakton, Westfield area because of the issues with over crowding and space available in some of the schools. The ES situation is problematic, and those shifts will affect MS and HS. That has been touched on a bit but for the most part the loudest voices have been the Great Falls and WSHS families.

FCPS is too big and really should be broken into smaller districts, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think the opposition is fanning this flame - they keep bringing up Langley and Herndon all the time. It just creates a response. No where was that discussed in any meeting. But - there they are saying it will happen because of equity. The county, in their view, will pay extra, drive longer distances, just to bus people from GF Village all the way to HHS. Going after trans was the last election, CRT the one before, now it's equity driven boundary change.

From Forestville, 2 minutes longer to cooper than HMS. From Forestville, 9 minutes longer to Langley than HHS. Don’t take my word for it. Check on maps at relevant times of the day.

The narrative about transportation savings is a chimera.

That 9 minutes is significant if they are trying to save costs via bus. It’s not just traveling TO Langley, but also the time it takes to get to those neighborhoods potentially out of route.

DP. You know what's a lot more significant? The wasted almost empty buses that traverse the county to take AAP kids to centers - when they already have AAP in their base school. THAT'S not only grossly wasteful and redundant, but also the very definition of INequity. I certainly hope the SB gets rid of centers and their associated busing before moving a single child to a new school.

Agreed! AAP centers should be the first thing to cut when there is a budget shortfall. That includes the elementary school specialists who work with 3 kids a day and give a lesson once a month.

Do you think the AART only visits your kid's class once per month, and not the rest of the school? Think deeper, dingbat. Say there are four classes per grade on average -- that's 28 visits per month and multiple pull-outs per grade from 2-6. Plus dealing with disgruntled parents desperate to get their kids in AAP while simultaneously trashing it and calling for AARTs to be canned.

DP. Again, “pull outs” are a complete waste of time. My son would come home with some ridiculous worksheet that there was never time to finish. They need to stop wasting everyone’s time with that and simply go to flexible groupings, with AAP being one of the groups. Centers and pull outs are absurd.

It sounds like your kid can't keep up. No more pull outs for him, please. Let the kids who can excel stay focused.

Funny you should say this. We finally told the teacher we weren't interested in any more pullouts because not only were they a silly waste of time, but he then had to make up the regular classwork he missed while in the pullout. It was ludicrous. The enrichment he receives at home far exceeds whatever dumb, rushed "exercise" they were given in pullouts.
-PP

Cool story.

You can mock it if you like. I am a DP and this happened at DD's experience a few years ago. The kids didn't enjoy it. DD did not drop out, but some did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The obvious fix to this whole mess is to require the school board members’ kids to be rezoned every time they do a comprehensive boundary review. There is literally no reason not to, We’re supposedly all one school district.

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, right Kyle McDaniel and Sandy Anderson and all the rest of the hypocritical lot?

FCPS School Board Chairman Karl Frisch does not have children. Doubt he plans to.

Why is he even on the Board again?