Is it better to go to Vienna vs. McLean schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The higher the income neighborhood, the harder to go in. Also, try to NOT go to a center school. Easier to get in.

Disagree with the advice to not move to the center. Yes it feels awful to not get in AAP but at least your kid is rubbing elbows with a big pool of AAP kids at recess, lunch, etc. this may lead to friendships with bright kids, and better potential dating pool if your kid is into that (ie: if your kid has a pulse).

This is a very bizarre, even disturbing, take. You're concerned about a potential dating pool for a 3rd to 8th grade student? Gross.

Kids in AAP are not "better" than other kids. I teach AAP in middle school. Two of my classes are AAP, two are general education, and one is honors. Guess which classes have at least 75% of my most significant behavior issues? That's right, the AAP classes! Those classes are 40% of my students, but 75% of my behavior issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The higher the income neighborhood, the harder to go in. Also, try to NOT go to a center school. Easier to get in.

Disagree with the advice to not move to the center. Yes it feels awful to not get in AAP but at least your kid is rubbing elbows with a big pool of AAP kids at recess, lunch, etc. this may lead to friendships with bright kids, and better potential dating pool if your kid is into that (ie: if your kid has a pulse).

This is a very bizarre, even disturbing, take. You're concerned about a potential dating pool for a 3rd to 8th grade student? Gross.

Kids in AAP are not "better" than other kids. I teach AAP in middle school. Two of my classes are AAP, two are general education, and one is honors. Guess which classes have at least 75% of my most significant behavior issues? That's right, the AAP classes! Those classes are 40% of my students, but 75% of my behavior issues.

You are a liar. You're not a teacher. You're a parent of a child that didn't get into AAP. And of course you're not concerned about the dating pool for your child, it's nonexistent. Regardless of yours or my feelings on the matter, the reality is that kids have crushes and want to date each other as young as 4th/5th grade. It happens (and you would know that if you were actually a teacher) but don't worry, your child will not have to deal with it because... well, you already know why.

[Anonymous]

If you are really focus into academic, Mclean could be better because of the peers.
If your kid is chill type, who also into sports or music or something else (and also non Asian) Vienna would works better.

And to add, you can worry the least about the dating pool at either place 😬

[Anonymous]

Chesterbrook, Longfellow, McLean HS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The higher the income neighborhood, the harder to go in. Also, try to NOT go to a center school. Easier to get in.

Disagree with the advice to not move to the center. Yes it feels awful to not get in AAP but at least your kid is rubbing elbows with a big pool of AAP kids at recess, lunch, etc. this may lead to friendships with bright kids, and better potential dating pool if your kid is into that (ie: if your kid has a pulse).

“Rubbing elbows” with the AAP kids? Seriously? The AAP kids make friends in their own classes and barely play with gen Ed kids once in. Seen it multiple times. Not their fault either… you just end up being friends with people in your class. Even in gen Ed… kids who move to different home rooms don’t even hang out as much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, no. It doesn’t really matter the way people think it does.

AAP Level IV is the same across FCPS. Same curriculum, same eligibility, same expectations. It’s not “harder” or more impressive in McLean/Langley than in Vienna.

The bigger difference is parent culture, not academics. Some areas have more test prep and pressure, which makes it feel more competitive, but the instruction itself isn’t meaningfully different.

As for high school, Langley, McLean, Madison, and Oakton all send kids to top colleges every year. Colleges review students in the context of their own school, and being in AAP or a specific pyramid doesn’t give an edge on applications.

Bottom line: pick the area that works best for your family and your kid. From an AAP and college standpoint, they’re all excellent and essentially equivalent.

All of the HSs in FCPS send kids to the top colleges. Langley, McLean, and Oakton send more but that is due to things like parents who can afford to pay for those colleges, parents who are aware of those colleges, and parents who have spent their lives making sure that their kids know that those are the colleges to aim for. Schools wiht higher FARMS rates send fewer kids because there have been fewer kids guided down the path needed to get into those colleges. The ones who go tend to be UMC families at that school, which was partially selected because there would be less competition applying from those schools. Welcome to Northern Virginia.

Yeah, every school in FCPS has a group of parents and students who are focused on college applications. And yes, they generally tend to be educated parents who can afford enrichment so while their kid might be at a higher-FARMS school, they are the ones doing outside SAT classes and joining the private pools.

[Anonymous]

Appearances matter.

The Langley school has a very beautiful and clean appearance fitting such an institution.

The same cannot be said for the McLean high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Appearances matter.

The Langley school has a very beautiful and clean appearance fitting such an institution.

The same cannot be said for the McLean high school.

Appearances matter to those who care a lot about appearances. Langley people care more about appearances than anyone else in the county, so naturally they prioritize its "very beautiful and clean appearance."

We only looked at Madison and McLean, two older schools, because they have closer-knit communities. We didn't want our kids on Georgetown Pike schlepping miles and miles to either get to Langley or visit friends living out towards Herndon. We've heard good things about Oakton (and Carson), but it was too far out for us.

As between Madison and McLean from an AAP perspective, the main difference is that the Madison pyramid doesn't have an AAP middle school within the pyramid (yet), so the AAP kids who want a center go to Jackson and Kilmer, whereas Longfellow is an AAP center. At some point they'll probably make all the middle schools, including Thoreau, into AAP centers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The higher the income neighborhood, the harder to go in. Also, try to NOT go to a center school. Easier to get in.

Disagree with the advice to not move to the center. Yes it feels awful to not get in AAP but at least your kid is rubbing elbows with a big pool of AAP kids at recess, lunch, etc. this may lead to friendships with bright kids, and better potential dating pool if your kid is into that (ie: if your kid has a pulse).

This is a very bizarre, even disturbing, take. You're concerned about a potential dating pool for a 3rd to 8th grade student? Gross.

Kids in AAP are not "better" than other kids. I teach AAP in middle school. Two of my classes are AAP, two are general education, and one is honors. Guess which classes have at least 75% of my most significant behavior issues? That's right, the AAP classes! Those classes are 40% of my students, but 75% of my behavior issues.

You are a liar. You're not a teacher. You're a parent of a child that didn't get into AAP. And of course you're not concerned about the dating pool for your child, it's nonexistent. Regardless of yours or my feelings on the matter, the reality is that kids have crushes and want to date each other as young as 4th/5th grade. It happens (and you would know that if you were actually a teacher) but don't worry, your child will not have to deal with it because... well, you already know why.

I’m not lying. I am in fact a teacher. It is incredibly disturbing to focus on a “dating pool” for children who are 8–13 years old.

Some research about early vs. late dating behavior that you may find interesting, and hopefully persuasive:

- Developmental readiness: National public health guidance emphasizes supporting physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral development in childhood and early adolescence, prioritizing sleep, school success, and secure relationships with caregivers, none of which require or benefit from romantic involvement at ages 8–13. Introducing dating, or even the idea of dating, during this stage can add stressors that conflict with core developmental needs and preventive-care priorities.

- Risk of victimization and harm: Adolescent dating violence is a documented public health problem. National-level research shows substantial prevalence of verbal, emotional, physical, and sexual dating violence among teens, with associations to depression, anxiety, substance use, and suicidal ideation. Beginning romantic relationships even earlier than teen years increases exposure to these risks before children have developed the skills to navigate them safely.

- Prevention models target pre-dating ages: Evidence-based programs like the CDC’s "Dating Matters" focus on teaching healthy relationship skills to 11–to-14-year-olds “before they start dating,” precisely to reduce risk behaviors and prevent victimization, underscoring that early adolescence is for skill-building rather than dating itself.


Outcomes of delaying dating versus early dating:

Factor: Exposure to interpersonal violence risk
--- Early dating (middle school/early HS): Higher prevalence and earlier exposure to dating violence and associated harms
--- Delayed dating (late HS or later): Reduced exposure during skill-building years; prevention benefits align with later initiation

Factor: Mental health correlates
--- Early dating (middle school/early HS): Increased depression, anxiety, and substance use correlates in populations experiencing teen dating violence
--- Delayed dating (late HS or later): Lower near-term risk profiles when skills are taught before dating; better fit with developmental priorities

Factor: Skill development timing
--- Early dating (middle school/early HS): Relationship skills often underdeveloped, increasing conflict and coercion risk
--- Delayed dating (late HS or later): Skills taught first, then applied, improving safety and boundary-setting


Delaying dating aligns with best practices for physical and mental health: teach communication, boundaries, and safety first; then introduce romantic contexts. Longitudinal work on teen dating violence shows trajectories from adolescent victimization into adulthood, reinforcing the value of later initiation after skills and supports are in place.


>>> In short: early romantic involvement can outpace children's emotional regulation and safety skills, elevating risks that all the public health frameworks explicitly aim to prevent in early adolescence. We are fighting to keep kids safe in this ever-changing world, and promoting early dating elevates risk to children's physical and mental health.<<<

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The higher the income neighborhood, the harder to go in. Also, try to NOT go to a center school. Easier to get in.

Disagree with the advice to not move to the center. Yes it feels awful to not get in AAP but at least your kid is rubbing elbows with a big pool of AAP kids at recess, lunch, etc. this may lead to friendships with bright kids, and better potential dating pool if your kid is into that (ie: if your kid has a pulse).

This is a very bizarre, even disturbing, take. You're concerned about a potential dating pool for a 3rd to 8th grade student? Gross.

Kids in AAP are not "better" than other kids. I teach AAP in middle school. Two of my classes are AAP, two are general education, and one is honors. Guess which classes have at least 75% of my most significant behavior issues? That's right, the AAP classes! Those classes are 40% of my students, but 75% of my behavior issues.

You are a liar. You're not a teacher. You're a parent of a child that didn't get into AAP. And of course you're not concerned about the dating pool for your child, it's nonexistent. Regardless of yours or my feelings on the matter, the reality is that kids have crushes and want to date each other as young as 4th/5th grade. It happens (and you would know that if you were actually a teacher) but don't worry, your child will not have to deal with it because... well, you already know why.

I’m not lying. I am in fact a teacher. It is incredibly disturbing to focus on a “dating pool” for children who are 8–13 years old.

Some research about early vs. late dating behavior that you may find interesting, and hopefully persuasive:

- Developmental readiness: National public health guidance emphasizes supporting physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral development in childhood and early adolescence, prioritizing sleep, school success, and secure relationships with caregivers, none of which require or benefit from romantic involvement at ages 8–13. Introducing dating, or even the idea of dating, during this stage can add stressors that conflict with core developmental needs and preventive-care priorities.

- Risk of victimization and harm: Adolescent dating violence is a documented public health problem. National-level research shows substantial prevalence of verbal, emotional, physical, and sexual dating violence among teens, with associations to depression, anxiety, substance use, and suicidal ideation. Beginning romantic relationships even earlier than teen years increases exposure to these risks before children have developed the skills to navigate them safely.

- Prevention models target pre-dating ages: Evidence-based programs like the CDC’s "Dating Matters" focus on teaching healthy relationship skills to 11–to-14-year-olds “before they start dating,” precisely to reduce risk behaviors and prevent victimization, underscoring that early adolescence is for skill-building rather than dating itself.


Outcomes of delaying dating versus early dating:

Factor: Exposure to interpersonal violence risk
--- Early dating (middle school/early HS): Higher prevalence and earlier exposure to dating violence and associated harms
--- Delayed dating (late HS or later): Reduced exposure during skill-building years; prevention benefits align with later initiation

Factor: Mental health correlates
--- Early dating (middle school/early HS): Increased depression, anxiety, and substance use correlates in populations experiencing teen dating violence
--- Delayed dating (late HS or later): Lower near-term risk profiles when skills are taught before dating; better fit with developmental priorities

Factor: Skill development timing
--- Early dating (middle school/early HS): Relationship skills often underdeveloped, increasing conflict and coercion risk
--- Delayed dating (late HS or later): Skills taught first, then applied, improving safety and boundary-setting


Delaying dating aligns with best practices for physical and mental health: teach communication, boundaries, and safety first; then introduce romantic contexts. Longitudinal work on teen dating violence shows trajectories from adolescent victimization into adulthood, reinforcing the value of later initiation after skills and supports are in place.


>>> In short: early romantic involvement can outpace children's emotional regulation and safety skills, elevating risks that all the public health frameworks explicitly aim to prevent in early adolescence. We are fighting to keep kids safe in this ever-changing world, and promoting early dating elevates risk to children's physical and mental health.<<<

No one actually thinks kids should be dating. But the reality is, they do whether we like it or not. Sure we can keep pretending they don't try to partner up together, that the dating pool of peers doesn't matter because they would never ever get together ever... but really? I mean yeah, I wish I could just close my eyes and DC doesn't have any feelings for anyone until they hit junior/senior year of college. But just because I want that, doesn't make it true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They're both great places to live and have excellent schools. Just my 2 cents, but I don't think there's a big difference at the elementary school level at all. From what I can tell the high schools are also comparable. However, one thing I've learned is that the two years of middle school can be quite different between the Vienna schools (Thoreau/Jackson/Kilmer) and the McLean schools (Longfellow/Cooper). Not so much in terms of the classes themselves, but things like Science Olympiad are much more competitive and serious at the McLean schools, which seems to have its good and bad sides, as you would expect. This also has potentially complex implications if you're interested in TJ as a high school option...

Agree. We are McLean parents with one TJ student.

Our child did not pursue SO at Longfellow after attending the initial seminar. While the local chapter wins or places almost every year, they demand parental commitments which effectively eliminate the possibility of most other sports and extracurricular activities.

SO is not a requirement for TJ admission.

Not sure what the Vienna chapter is like.

[Anonymous]

Langley is ranked over Oakton, which is ranked over McLean. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/virginia/rankings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Langley is ranked over Oakton, which is ranked over McLean. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/virginia/rankings

Okey ton

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hi, I’m looking to purchase a home either in McLean or Vienna. For purposes of AAP and beyond (college acceptances etc) does it really matter which school district my kid attends. Considering Langley or McLean High in McLean and Madison and Oakton High in Vienna. Is AAP any different or harder?

Are you / your child BIPOC?

McLean HS is majority-BIPOCs. Also, the new principal is a BIPOC, in case these are important factors in deciding if your child should come to McLean (which is a GREAT school!). I recommend it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi, I’m looking to purchase a home either in McLean or Vienna. For purposes of AAP and beyond (college acceptances etc) does it really matter which school district my kid attends. Considering Langley or McLean High in McLean and Madison and Oakton High in Vienna. Is AAP any different or harder?

Are you / your child BIPOC?

McLean HS is majority-BIPOCs. Also, the new principal is a BIPOC, in case these are important factors in deciding if your child should come to McLean (which is a GREAT school!). I recommend it.

McLean is majority minority, as are Langley and Oakton. It is not majority BIPOC.