How did Herndon/Westfield HS go from top to bottom?

[Anonymous]

I know, I know. But that’s why it’s a lot easier to move kids (particarly kids from not poor areas) from less desirable schools to more desirable schools. Much less resistance from parents whose kids gets redistricted. But this would also mean the less desirable schools keep losing students while the more desirable schools keep having capacity issues.

The 2008 boundary change got a bad rep on this board partly because it was the only significant boundary change that moved well establied single family house neighorhood to a less respected school. I bet the response would have been quite different if the kids were moved to Madison instead of SLHS.

I also have to say this. Back then Herndon High school parents fought hard to make sure their kids were not moved to SLHS. These days many HHS parents send (and give rides to) their kids to SLHS for the IB program.

Somehow, I suspect that you have never been through a redistricting.

And, you seem to forget there were other schools involved and people that were unhappy.

It was manipulated by the SL PTA and the School Board. Especially, Gibson, Strauss, and Smith. They changed "policies" to enable the redistricting. They had just expanded Westfield and then decided that high schools should be much smaller than before. I can't recall the exact number, but it was not more than 2000. This is after they had just expanded Westfield to 3000 capacity. The whole thing was manipulated--and, in those days, it caught the communities by surprise--except, of course, for SL PTA.

SL PTA refused to take the McNair kids which was a logical choice because of location. (Ironic, since it is now a more desirable school than before.) That is why they go to Westfield--passing those that go to South Lakes. The irony is that the demographics of McNair are now more affluent than they were then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I know, I know. But that’s why it’s a lot easier to move kids (particarly kids from not poor areas) from less desirable schools to more desirable schools. Much less resistance from parents whose kids gets redistricted. But this would also mean the less desirable schools keep losing students while the more desirable schools keep having capacity issues.

The 2008 boundary change got a bad rep on this board partly because it was the only significant boundary change that moved well establied single family house neighorhood to a less respected school. I bet the response would have been quite different if the kids were moved to Madison instead of SLHS.

I also have to say this. Back then Herndon High school parents fought hard to make sure their kids were not moved to SLHS. These days many HHS parents send (and give rides to) their kids to SLHS for the IB program.

Somehow, I suspect that you have never been through a redistricting.

And, you seem to forget there were other schools involved and people that were unhappy.

It was manipulated by the SL PTA and the School Board. Especially, Gibson, Strauss, and Smith. They changed "policies" to enable the redistricting. They had just expanded Westfield and then decided that high schools should be much smaller than before. I can't recall the exact number, but it was not more than 2000. This is after they had just expanded Westfield to 3000 capacity. The whole thing was manipulated--and, in those days, it caught the communities by surprise--except, of course, for SL PTA.

SL PTA refused to take the McNair kids which was a logical choice because of location. (Ironic, since it is now a more desirable school than before.) That is why they go to Westfield--passing those that go to South Lakes. The irony is that the demographics of McNair are now more affluent than they were then.

Fairfax Villa boundary got redisticted from Fairfax High to Woodson High in 2013. Have you seen many complaints?

Oakton was and still is very crowded. It was not unreasonale to move the westmost boundary to SLHS. McNair is further west and it won’t provide any relief to Oakton. By the way, McNair is still not very desirable. Their rating went up mainly because the board designated it as an AAP center.

[Anonymous]

Oakton was and still is very crowded. It was not unreasonale to move the westmost boundary to SLHS.

But, then they took Chantilly community that did not want to go to Oakton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I know, I know. But that’s why it’s a lot easier to move kids (particarly kids from not poor areas) from less desirable schools to more desirable schools. Much less resistance from parents whose kids gets redistricted. But this would also mean the less desirable schools keep losing students while the more desirable schools keep having capacity issues.

The 2008 boundary change got a bad rep on this board partly because it was the only significant boundary change that moved well establied single family house neighorhood to a less respected school. I bet the response would have been quite different if the kids were moved to Madison instead of SLHS.

I also have to say this. Back then Herndon High school parents fought hard to make sure their kids were not moved to SLHS. These days many HHS parents send (and give rides to) their kids to SLHS for the IB program.

Somehow, I suspect that you have never been through a redistricting.

And, you seem to forget there were other schools involved and people that were unhappy.

It was manipulated by the SL PTA and the School Board. Especially, Gibson, Strauss, and Smith. They changed "policies" to enable the redistricting. They had just expanded Westfield and then decided that high schools should be much smaller than before. I can't recall the exact number, but it was not more than 2000. This is after they had just expanded Westfield to 3000 capacity. The whole thing was manipulated--and, in those days, it caught the communities by surprise--except, of course, for SL PTA.

SL PTA refused to take the McNair kids which was a logical choice because of location. (Ironic, since it is now a more desirable school than before.) That is why they go to Westfield--passing those that go to South Lakes. The irony is that the demographics of McNair are now more affluent than they were then.

Fairfax Villa boundary got redisticted from Fairfax High to Woodson High in 2013. Have you seen many complaints?

Oakton was and still is very crowded. It was not unreasonale to move the westmost boundary to SLHS. McNair is further west and it won’t provide any relief to Oakton. By the way, McNair is still not very desirable. Their rating went up mainly because the board designated it as an AAP center.

McNair Upper has the worst principal on the east coast. My goodness, she’s bad.

[Anonymous]

Oakton was and still is very crowded. It was not unreasonale to move the westmost boundary to SLHS. McNair is further west and it won’t provide any relief to Oakton. By the way, McNair is still not very desirable. Their rating went up mainly because the board designated it as an AAP center.

Oakton was not the central player in this. McNair was already at Westfield. It stayed there, but others that were closer to Westfield than McNair were pulled for South Lakes. McNair was an option for South Lakes and Herndon in the proposals. Both schools did not want them and objected. It was ugly. I doubt that McNair parents were very involved at the time.

This whole thing was orchestrated by SL PTA. That really made people angry. Would you want DCUM orchestrating your boundary redistricting? Same thing.SL PTA was playing chess while others were not playing at all--they were not even aware there was going to be a redistricting. Once they found out, the best they could do was play checkers. SL PTA owned the chessboard and the pieces. They even posted their proposals with pros and cons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Oh please, learn to read between the lines. Cohen specifically announced during the MGT meeting that she had just then received emails from Daventry parents, literally as the MGT consultant was presenting his PowerPoint, asking her not to reverse the boundary change back to Lewis. Cohen felt the need to publicly reassure them that wasn't happening to take some heat off her back. Call it what you will (classism, elitism, racism, or plain selfishness), but it's glaringly obvious that the reason the Board is so defensive on the topic of boundaries is because they all know the elephant in the room.

And in case you don't know the elephant in the room either: some communities clearly feel threatened that adjustments may lead to more ELL/FARMs populations in their catchment areas.

No sweetie that was her lamenting that not enough poorer/limited English people engage with attempts to get their input in policy discussions. That was a recurring theme, and she provided an example in real time. At the 53:50 mark she expresses dissatisfied with who answered. At the 58 min mark she says she’s already gotten emails during the meeting (from well-off English speakers it is implied, I presume that is the predominantly makeup of Daventry). She never said anything about the content of the emails you liar.

She mentioned Lewis at the tail end of her initial remarks as an example that differing programs affect operations and not just boundaries. She mentioned Key Center during those remarks as well.

I don’t even like most of this clown car but you don’t need to lie on them, the truth is bad enough.

I am not a liar. The MGT consultant at 58:12 says "very rarely do you have anyone in the community raising their hand saying move me" and at 58:20, Cohen responds and literally says "I would say the 11 emails I've gotten from people from Daventry in the last 24 minutes that you've been talking, I definitely... um" and proceeds to change topic slightly to talk about consistency.

What else could concerned parents from Daventry be emailing her about as a boundary consultation is ongoing? It's obviously implied that their emails are about the boundary since they had most recently been switched from Lewis to WSHS.

I admit I can't find the comment where Cohen reassures the public that boundaries aren't changing and it was only a consultation, maybe it was a different member. I don't want to watch it all again.

[Anonymous]

Question: West Fairfax here. Is Daventry one of the communities that is being moved out of Springfield Supervisor District?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Question: West Fairfax here. Is Daventry one of the communities that is being moved out of Springfield Supervisor District?

Much if not all of Daventry is in the West Springfield precinct, which was moved from the Springfield to the Lee magisterial district in December 2021.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question: West Fairfax here. Is Daventry one of the communities that is being moved out of Springfield Supervisor District?

Much if not all of Daventry is in the West Springfield precinct, which was moved from the Springfield to the Lee magisterial district in December 2021.

So, Cohen wouldn't risk losing votes...interesting that they moved that group at this time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:McLean HS is a mess -capacity wise- current enrollment 2368- capacity 1993. Don't the McLean parents have any pull-compared to GF?

No, because McLean will vote blue no matter who and GF is willing to vote their interests.
No one has to cater to a sure thing. The sure thing comes running when you call at the last minute. The one with options makes you buy flowers and schedule a date in advance, and it better be Wildfire or Capital Grille. You can throw cold fries from McDonald’s at the sure thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McLean HS is a mess -capacity wise- current enrollment 2368- capacity 1993. Don't the McLean parents have any pull-compared to GF?

Apparently not, or at least not with Elaine Tholen (a Great Falls resident and parent of a Langley graduate). She pushed through a limited boundary change that placed Great Falls' interests ahead of meaningful action to relieve the overcrowding at McLean. And now she's doing next to nothing to get funding for the overdue addition at the school.

And, yes, there were some Colvin Run parents (generally those with younger kids without siblings already at Longfellow or McLean) who said they welcomed the move. FCPS/Tholen created a dynamic where people were encouraged to bid against each other to escape the overcrowded ship. Some obliged. This is how FCPS finds a way to trash schools.

Wait someone said McLean kicked some neighbors out, now I’m hearing people were competing to be the section that escaped. Which is it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They hired a consultant because they love wasting money.

Them stating at the work session that they weren’t tackling boundaries that day wasn’t racism, which is what was suggested earlier.

Admitting that there was Anti Asian sentiment behind the push to change TJ admissions and going forward anyway? Racist

calling Brabrand “dumb and white” as a reason why he can’t manage correctly? Racist

TJ Harvard and the likes are all changing and manuevering to exclude Asians. Seems like ppl think this is ok. But it’s not. Stop shifting the criterias to hurt Asians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McLean HS is a mess -capacity wise- current enrollment 2368- capacity 1993. Don't the McLean parents have any pull-compared to GF?

Apparently not, or at least not with Elaine Tholen (a Great Falls resident and parent of a Langley graduate). She pushed through a limited boundary change that placed Great Falls' interests ahead of meaningful action to relieve the overcrowding at McLean. And now she's doing next to nothing to get funding for the overdue addition at the school.

And, yes, there were some Colvin Run parents (generally those with younger kids without siblings already at Longfellow or McLean) who said they welcomed the move. FCPS/Tholen created a dynamic where people were encouraged to bid against each other to escape the overcrowded ship. Some obliged. This is how FCPS finds a way to trash schools.

Wait someone said McLean kicked some neighbors out, now I’m hearing people were competing to be the section that escaped. Which is it?

It shouldn’t be that hard to appreciate that FCPS created a dynamic designed to encourage people to jump, but others still felt pushed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Oh please, learn to read between the lines. Cohen specifically announced during the MGT meeting that she had just then received emails from Daventry parents, literally as the MGT consultant was presenting his PowerPoint, asking her not to reverse the boundary change back to Lewis. Cohen felt the need to publicly reassure them that wasn't happening to take some heat off her back. Call it what you will (classism, elitism, racism, or plain selfishness), but it's glaringly obvious that the reason the Board is so defensive on the topic of boundaries is because they all know the elephant in the room.

And in case you don't know the elephant in the room either: some communities clearly feel threatened that adjustments may lead to more ELL/FARMs populations in their catchment areas.

No sweetie that was her lamenting that not enough poorer/limited English people engage with attempts to get their input in policy discussions. That was a recurring theme, and she provided an example in real time. At the 53:50 mark she expresses dissatisfied with who answered. At the 58 min mark she says she’s already gotten emails during the meeting (from well-off English speakers it is implied, I presume that is the predominantly makeup of Daventry). She never said anything about the content of the emails you liar.

She mentioned Lewis at the tail end of her initial remarks as an example that differing programs affect operations and not just boundaries. She mentioned Key Center during those remarks as well.

I don’t even like most of this clown car but you don’t need to lie on them, the truth is bad enough.

I am not a liar. The MGT consultant at 58:12 says "very rarely do you have anyone in the community raising their hand saying move me" and at 58:20, Cohen responds and literally says "I would say the 11 emails I've gotten from people from Daventry in the last 24 minutes that you've been talking, I definitely... um" and proceeds to change topic slightly to talk about consistency.

What else could concerned parents from Daventry be emailing her about as a boundary consultation is ongoing? It's obviously implied that their emails are about the boundary since they had most recently been switched from Lewis to WSHS.

I admit I can't find the comment where Cohen reassures the public that boundaries aren't changing and it was only a consultation, maybe it was a different member. I don't want to watch it all again.

Your original claim was a lie.

I could believe that people did email her with that specific request, but she announced no such thing.

Like I said, you don’t need to lie on the clown car. We have plenty of actual evidence of their nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McLean HS is a mess -capacity wise- current enrollment 2368- capacity 1993. Don't the McLean parents have any pull-compared to GF?

Apparently not, or at least not with Elaine Tholen (a Great Falls resident and parent of a Langley graduate). She pushed through a limited boundary change that placed Great Falls' interests ahead of meaningful action to relieve the overcrowding at McLean. And now she's doing next to nothing to get funding for the overdue addition at the school.

And, yes, there were some Colvin Run parents (generally those with younger kids without siblings already at Longfellow or McLean) who said they welcomed the move. FCPS/Tholen created a dynamic where people were encouraged to bid against each other to escape the overcrowded ship. Some obliged. This is how FCPS finds a way to trash schools.

Wait someone said McLean kicked some neighbors out, now I’m hearing people were competing to be the section that escaped. Which is it?

It shouldn’t be that hard to appreciate that FCPS created a dynamic designed to encourage people to jump, but others still felt pushed.

In other words a claim without evidence.