Draft 2026-2030 CIP Discussion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why they're projecting so much growth at WSHS. There aren't any new housing developments in the area. The CIP doesn't really explain the change and why they'd think so many more kids would live in the area when there is an overall decline of kids across the district.

That area has been built out for years, yet WSHS has still seen solid growth every year since 2017, including during the Covid period when overall FCPS enrollments dropped sharply.

2017: 2191 students
2018: 2281
2019: 2382
2020: 2485
2021: 2545
2022: 2650
2023: 2742
2024: 2791

Of course projections should be looking forward, not backwards, but there have also been WSHS parents claiming for years that the enrollment would drop the next year only for that not to turn out to be the case.

FCPS doubled the number of transfers into WSHS over the past few years, from under 30 students average before 2022, to 59 students the current school year, even though WSHS is supposed to be closed to transfers.

The 2024 enrollment should be around 2730-50 based on the transfer numbers, depending on how many of the transfers are teachers' kids.

The transfers into WSHS should not have been allowed to double these past 3 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why they're projecting so much growth at WSHS. There aren't any new housing developments in the area. The CIP doesn't really explain the change and why they'd think so many more kids would live in the area when there is an overall decline of kids across the district.

That area has been built out for years, yet WSHS has still seen solid growth every year since 2017, including during the Covid period when overall FCPS enrollments dropped sharply.

2017: 2191 students
2018: 2281
2019: 2382
2020: 2485
2021: 2545
2022: 2650
2023: 2742
2024: 2791

Of course projections should be looking forward, not backwards, but there have also been WSHS parents claiming for years that the enrollment would drop the next year only for that not to turn out to be the case.

FCPS doubled the number of transfers into WSHS over the past few years, from under 30 students average before 2022, to 59 students the current school year, even though WSHS is supposed to be closed to transfers.

The 2024 enrollment should be around 2730-50 based on the transfer numbers, depending on how many of the transfers are teachers' kids.

The transfers into WSHS should not have been allowed to double these past 3 years.

It seems odd to me to focus so much on the transfers as opposed to the total enrollment. You could eliminate all the transfers into WSHS and it would still have a much larger enrollment than Lewis and raise all the same questions about potential boundary adjustment. Maybe it would have some impact on projections, but again not a significant enough impact to avoid the discussion you probably don't want to have about a WS/Lewis boundary adjustment.

Also, do you even know why the number of transfers increased? If it's WS deciding to admit freshmen transfers to study German, that's something that lends itself to a "sorry, no room" discussion. But if it's a rising WS senior whose family ended up getting a new rental in the Lake Braddock or Lewis district after they'd attended WS three years, it would be pretty harsh to turn them away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why they're projecting so much growth at WSHS. There aren't any new housing developments in the area. The CIP doesn't really explain the change and why they'd think so many more kids would live in the area when there is an overall decline of kids across the district.

That area has been built out for years, yet WSHS has still seen solid growth every year since 2017, including during the Covid period when overall FCPS enrollments dropped sharply.

2017: 2191 students
2018: 2281
2019: 2382
2020: 2485
2021: 2545
2022: 2650
2023: 2742
2024: 2791

Of course projections should be looking forward, not backwards, but there have also been WSHS parents claiming for years that the enrollment would drop the next year only for that not to turn out to be the case.

FCPS doubled the number of transfers into WSHS over the past few years, from under 30 students average before 2022, to 59 students the current school year, even though WSHS is supposed to be closed to transfers.

The 2024 enrollment should be around 2730-50 based on the transfer numbers, depending on how many of the transfers are teachers' kids.

The transfers into WSHS should not have been allowed to double these past 3 years.

And for anyone who argues "but it's only 60 kids," this transfers in data is a symptom that is likely comorbid with other symptoms like residency fraud that contribute to the over capacity diagnosis for WSHS.

[Anonymous]

School board is getting raked over the coals for the continuing data and projection issues in the draft CIP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:School board is getting raked over the coals for the continuing data and projection issues in the draft CIP.

By whom?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School board is getting raked over the coals for the continuing data and projection issues in the draft CIP.

By whom?

Langley parents at the CIP public hearing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School board is getting raked over the coals for the continuing data and projection issues in the draft CIP.

By whom?

Langley parents at the CIP public hearing.

LOL, always the Langley parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School board is getting raked over the coals for the continuing data and projection issues in the draft CIP.

By whom?

Fairfax residents concerned about the faulty projections when FCPS chronically undercounts planned development slated to be built in three to five years.

[Anonymous]

noticeably absent from the draft is the "program recommendations" by region. Interesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why they're projecting so much growth at WSHS. There aren't any new housing developments in the area. The CIP doesn't really explain the change and why they'd think so many more kids would live in the area when there is an overall decline of kids across the district.

That area has been built out for years, yet WSHS has still seen solid growth every year since 2017, including during the Covid period when overall FCPS enrollments dropped sharply.

2017: 2191 students
2018: 2281
2019: 2382
2020: 2485
2021: 2545
2022: 2650
2023: 2742
2024: 2791

Of course projections should be looking forward, not backwards, but there have also been WSHS parents claiming for years that the enrollment would drop the next year only for that not to turn out to be the case.

FCPS doubled the number of transfers into WSHS over the past few years, from under 30 students average before 2022, to 59 students the current school year, even though WSHS is supposed to be closed to transfers.

The 2024 enrollment should be around 2730-50 based on the transfer numbers, depending on how many of the transfers are teachers' kids.

The transfers into WSHS should not have been allowed to double these past 3 years.

It seems odd to me to focus so much on the transfers as opposed to the total enrollment. You could eliminate all the transfers into WSHS and it would still have a much larger enrollment than Lewis and raise all the same questions about potential boundary adjustment. Maybe it would have some impact on projections, but again not a significant enough impact to avoid the discussion you probably don't want to have about a WS/Lewis boundary adjustment.

Also, do you even know why the number of transfers increased? If it's WS deciding to admit freshmen transfers to study German, that's something that lends itself to a "sorry, no room" discussion. But if it's a rising WS senior whose family ended up getting a new rental in the Lake Braddock or Lewis district after they'd attended WS three years, it would be pretty harsh to turn them away.

It seems odd that you would bring up Lewis, as Lewis is irrelevant to this discussion of WSHS doubling the numbers of transfers into the school, which is closed to transfers and has been for over a decade.

It is not about Lewis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why they're projecting so much growth at WSHS. There aren't any new housing developments in the area. The CIP doesn't really explain the change and why they'd think so many more kids would live in the area when there is an overall decline of kids across the district.

That area has been built out for years, yet WSHS has still seen solid growth every year since 2017, including during the Covid period when overall FCPS enrollments dropped sharply.

2017: 2191 students
2018: 2281
2019: 2382
2020: 2485
2021: 2545
2022: 2650
2023: 2742
2024: 2791

Of course projections should be looking forward, not backwards, but there have also been WSHS parents claiming for years that the enrollment would drop the next year only for that not to turn out to be the case.

FCPS doubled the number of transfers into WSHS over the past few years, from under 30 students average before 2022, to 59 students the current school year, even though WSHS is supposed to be closed to transfers.

The 2024 enrollment should be around 2730-50 based on the transfer numbers, depending on how many of the transfers are teachers' kids.

The transfers into WSHS should not have been allowed to double these past 3 years.

It seems odd to me to focus so much on the transfers as opposed to the total enrollment. You could eliminate all the transfers into WSHS and it would still have a much larger enrollment than Lewis and raise all the same questions about potential boundary adjustment. Maybe it would have some impact on projections, but again not a significant enough impact to avoid the discussion you probably don't want to have about a WS/Lewis boundary adjustment.

Also, do you even know why the number of transfers increased? If it's WS deciding to admit freshmen transfers to study German, that's something that lends itself to a "sorry, no room" discussion. But if it's a rising WS senior whose family ended up getting a new rental in the Lake Braddock or Lewis district after they'd attended WS three years, it would be pretty harsh to turn them away.

It seems odd that you would bring up Lewis, as Lewis is irrelevant to this discussion of WSHS doubling the numbers of transfers into the school, which is closed to transfers and has been for over a decade.

It is not about Lewis.

Sure it is. LOL.