FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They've stated what the priority criteria for this process are, it's in their presentations if you attend any of the community meetings. Equity is not one of them.

6th grade MS would indeed require some changes... more or bigger MS (could potentially repurpose some of the admin centers similar to Dunn-Loring) and/or create some more secondary schools. They might need to phase it in over time rather than in one fell swoop. A 6th grade academy program would be a nice idea, but given the transport issues they're already dealing with trying to shift start times, etc. I doubt it would be realistic to implement. Anyway, point is I think there are options other than whatever massive rezoning you imagine as the only plausible alternative.

I don't think there's anything ridiculous about wanting both HS and MS students to start at 830a or later as research suggests is best. I also don't think balancing capacity across schools periodically is idiotic, it's a sane best practice.

The problem is there have been so few changes for so long that many (vocal) people are ossified into this view that they're somehow entitled to attend the school they are currently zoned for in perpetuity. If you're looking for arrogance and ridiculousness, start there.

Ha you have a LOT to learn about the way school systems run
Did you WaATCH or attend any work sessions or board meetings about policy 8130?
This is definitely about equity. Both sandy anderson (whose kids go to majority white elementary schools) and st John’s Cummings have had tirades about parents who they think are racist in not wanting their kids moved. In fact Cummings said “equity is at the heart of this policy”

No one wants their kid moved in high school. No one wants their kid moved in middle school. Stability is important.

I think if you are talkin by about entitled people having a bunch of teens never ever have to wake up early with ensure these kids are late for work and never make that early college class because the logic in entitlement will spill over.

T
Yiu have some warped priorities

PP that you are responding to is just being her typical dense self. Priority one: “ensure equitable access to programs…” she’s made this argument before, and has been told this exact information, but there isn’t any daylight between equitable and equity. look at Merriam-Webster: equitable is “having or exhibiting equity.”

She’s a frequent poster and the chief sympathizer for the school board. She loves to assert, without any argument, fact, data, etc. that is imperative to make changes at the schools just because.

Her pastime is trying to meddle in her neighbors’ kids lives. It’s really pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They've stated what the priority criteria for this process are, it's in their presentations if you attend any of the community meetings. Equity is not one of them.

6th grade MS would indeed require some changes... more or bigger MS (could potentially repurpose some of the admin centers similar to Dunn-Loring) and/or create some more secondary schools. They might need to phase it in over time rather than in one fell swoop. A 6th grade academy program would be a nice idea, but given the transport issues they're already dealing with trying to shift start times, etc. I doubt it would be realistic to implement. Anyway, point is I think there are options other than whatever massive rezoning you imagine as the only plausible alternative.

I don't think there's anything ridiculous about wanting both HS and MS students to start at 830a or later as research suggests is best. I also don't think balancing capacity across schools periodically is idiotic, it's a sane best practice.

The problem is there have been so few changes for so long that many (vocal) people are ossified into this view that they're somehow entitled to attend the school they are currently zoned for in perpetuity. If you're looking for arrogance and ridiculousness, start there.

Ha you have a LOT to learn about the way school systems run
Did you WaATCH or attend any work sessions or board meetings about policy 8130?
This is definitely about equity. Both sandy anderson (whose kids go to majority white elementary schools) and st John’s Cummings have had tirades about parents who they think are racist in not wanting their kids moved. In fact Cummings said “equity is at the heart of this policy”

No one wants their kid moved in high school. No one wants their kid moved in middle school. Stability is important.

I think if you are talkin by about entitled people having a bunch of teens never ever have to wake up early with ensure these kids are late for work and never make that early college class because the logic in entitlement will spill over.

T
Yiu have some warped priorities

PP that you are responding to is just being her typical dense self. Priority one: “ensure equitable access to programs…” she’s made this argument before, and has been told this exact information, but there isn’t any daylight between equitable and equity. look at Merriam-Webster: equitable is “having or exhibiting equity.”

She’s a frequent poster and the chief sympathizer for the school board. She loves to assert, without any argument, fact, data, etc. that is imperative to make changes at the schools just because.

Her pastime is trying to meddle in her neighbors’ kids lives. It’s really pathetic.

What’s pathetic is you responding to every post. Yikes!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They've stated what the priority criteria for this process are, it's in their presentations if you attend any of the community meetings. Equity is not one of them.

6th grade MS would indeed require some changes... more or bigger MS (could potentially repurpose some of the admin centers similar to Dunn-Loring) and/or create some more secondary schools. They might need to phase it in over time rather than in one fell swoop. A 6th grade academy program would be a nice idea, but given the transport issues they're already dealing with trying to shift start times, etc. I doubt it would be realistic to implement. Anyway, point is I think there are options other than whatever massive rezoning you imagine as the only plausible alternative.

I don't think there's anything ridiculous about wanting both HS and MS students to start at 830a or later as research suggests is best. I also don't think balancing capacity across schools periodically is idiotic, it's a sane best practice.

The problem is there have been so few changes for so long that many (vocal) people are ossified into this view that they're somehow entitled to attend the school they are currently zoned for in perpetuity. If you're looking for arrogance and ridiculousness, start there.

Ha you have a LOT to learn about the way school systems run
Did you WaATCH or attend any work sessions or board meetings about policy 8130?
This is definitely about equity. Both sandy anderson (whose kids go to majority white elementary schools) and st John’s Cummings have had tirades about parents who they think are racist in not wanting their kids moved. In fact Cummings said “equity is at the heart of this policy”

No one wants their kid moved in high school. No one wants their kid moved in middle school. Stability is important.

I think if you are talkin by about entitled people having a bunch of teens never ever have to wake up early with ensure these kids are late for work and never make that early college class because the logic in entitlement will spill over.

T
Yiu have some warped
priorities

If stabilty is so important, why do so many parents say they will move their kids to private if they get re-zoned?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They've stated what the priority criteria for this process are, it's in their presentations if you attend any of the community meetings. Equity is not one of them.

6th grade MS would indeed require some changes... more or bigger MS (could potentially repurpose some of the admin centers similar to Dunn-Loring) and/or create some more secondary schools. They might need to phase it in over time rather than in one fell swoop. A 6th grade academy program would be a nice idea, but given the transport issues they're already dealing with trying to shift start times, etc. I doubt it would be realistic to implement. Anyway, point is I think there are options other than whatever massive rezoning you imagine as the only plausible alternative.

I don't think there's anything ridiculous about wanting both HS and MS students to start at 830a or later as research suggests is best. I also don't think balancing capacity across schools periodically is idiotic, it's a sane best practice.

The problem is there have been so few changes for so long that many (vocal) people are ossified into this view that they're somehow entitled to attend the school they are currently zoned for in perpetuity. If you're looking for arrogance and ridiculousness, start there.

8:30 start is whong for high school
They need to leep is right where it is, 8:00-3:00. Their activities go very late. Messing with the high school schedule is a terrible idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They've stated what the priority criteria for this process are, it's in their presentations if you attend any of the community meetings. Equity is not one of them.

6th grade MS would indeed require some changes... more or bigger MS (could potentially repurpose some of the admin centers similar to Dunn-Loring) and/or create some more secondary schools. They might need to phase it in over time rather than in one fell swoop. A 6th grade academy program would be a nice idea, but given the transport issues they're already dealing with trying to shift start times, etc. I doubt it would be realistic to implement. Anyway, point is I think there are options other than whatever massive rezoning you imagine as the only plausible alternative.

I don't think there's anything ridiculous about wanting both HS and MS students to start at 830a or later as research suggests is best. I also don't think balancing capacity across schools periodically is idiotic, it's a sane best practice.

The problem is there have been so few changes for so long that many (vocal) people are ossified into this view that they're somehow entitled to attend the school they are currently zoned for in perpetuity. If you're looking for arrogance and ridiculousness, start there.

Ha you have a LOT to learn about the way school systems run
Did you WaATCH or attend any work sessions or board meetings about policy 8130?
This is definitely about equity. Both sandy anderson (whose kids go to majority white elementary schools) and st John’s Cummings have had tirades about parents who they think are racist in not wanting their kids moved. In fact Cummings said “equity is at the heart of this policy”

No one wants their kid moved in high school. No one wants their kid moved in middle school. Stability is important.

I think if you are talkin by about entitled people having a bunch of teens never ever have to wake up early with ensure these kids are late for work and never make that early college class because the logic in entitlement will spill over.

T
Yiu have some warped
priorities

If stabilty is so important, why do so many parents say they will move their kids to private if they get re-zoned?

DP. Guess they are saying that if there is going to be disruption either way, they will make the best of the situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They've stated what the priority criteria for this process are, it's in their presentations if you attend any of the community meetings. Equity is not one of them.

6th grade MS would indeed require some changes... more or bigger MS (could potentially repurpose some of the admin centers similar to Dunn-Loring) and/or create some more secondary schools. They might need to phase it in over time rather than in one fell swoop. A 6th grade academy program would be a nice idea, but given the transport issues they're already dealing with trying to shift start times, etc. I doubt it would be realistic to implement. Anyway, point is I think there are options other than whatever massive rezoning you imagine as the only plausible alternative.

I don't think there's anything ridiculous about wanting both HS and MS students to start at 830a or later as research suggests is best. I also don't think balancing capacity across schools periodically is idiotic, it's a sane best practice.

The problem is there have been so few changes for so long that many (vocal) people are ossified into this view that they're somehow entitled to attend the school they are currently zoned for in perpetuity. If you're looking for arrogance and ridiculousness, start there.

Ha you have a LOT to learn about the way school systems run
Did you WaATCH or attend any work sessions or board meetings about policy 8130?
This is definitely about equity. Both sandy anderson (whose kids go to majority white elementary schools) and st John’s Cummings have had tirades about parents who they think are racist in not wanting their kids moved. In fact Cummings said “equity is at the heart of this policy”

No one wants their kid moved in high school. No one wants their kid moved in middle school. Stability is important.

I think if you are talkin by about entitled people having a bunch of teens never ever have to wake up early with ensure these kids are late for work and never make that early college class because the logic in entitlement will spill over.

T
Yiu have some warped
priorities

If stabilty is so important, why do so many parents say they will move their kids to private if they get re-zoned?

Maybe because moving to a private school will be the stable option people are looking for. There won’t be the risk of changing boundaries/schools every five years. There won’t be the risk of moving kids from a top-tier school to one that potentially will lose accreditation soon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They've stated what the priority criteria for this process are, it's in their presentations if you attend any of the community meetings. Equity is not one of them.

6th grade MS would indeed require some changes... more or bigger MS (could potentially repurpose some of the admin centers similar to Dunn-Loring) and/or create some more secondary schools. They might need to phase it in over time rather than in one fell swoop. A 6th grade academy program would be a nice idea, but given the transport issues they're already dealing with trying to shift start times, etc. I doubt it would be realistic to implement. Anyway, point is I think there are options other than whatever massive rezoning you imagine as the only plausible alternative.

I don't think there's anything ridiculous about wanting both HS and MS students to start at 830a or later as research suggests is best. I also don't think balancing capacity across schools periodically is idiotic, it's a sane best practice.

The problem is there have been so few changes for so long that many (vocal) people are ossified into this view that they're somehow entitled to attend the school they are currently zoned for in perpetuity. If you're looking for arrogance and ridiculousness, start there.

Ha you have a LOT to learn about the way school systems run
Did you WaATCH or attend any work sessions or board meetings about policy 8130?
This is definitely about equity. Both sandy anderson (whose kids go to majority white elementary schools) and st John’s Cummings have had tirades about parents who they think are racist in not wanting their kids moved. In fact Cummings said “equity is at the heart of this policy”

No one wants their kid moved in high school. No one wants their kid moved in middle school. Stability is important.

I think if you are talkin by about entitled people having a bunch of teens never ever have to wake up early with ensure these kids are late for work and never make that early college class because the logic in entitlement will spill over.

T
Yiu have some warped
priorities

If stabilty is so important, why do so many parents say they will move their kids to private if they get re-zoned?

My kid is in an AP pyramid. The only real possibility of rezoning will be an IB school. By the time this happens, they will be either a sophomore or a junior and it will be too late for an IB diploma. The choice is private with a curriculum that aligns with their current curriculum or jumping into IB even though IB has to be started earlier than they will have a chance to start it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They've stated what the priority criteria for this process are, it's in their presentations if you attend any of the community meetings. Equity is not one of them.

6th grade MS would indeed require some changes... more or bigger MS (could potentially repurpose some of the admin centers similar to Dunn-Loring) and/or create some more secondary schools. They might need to phase it in over time rather than in one fell swoop. A 6th grade academy program would be a nice idea, but given the transport issues they're already dealing with trying to shift start times, etc. I doubt it would be realistic to implement. Anyway, point is I think there are options other than whatever massive rezoning you imagine as the only plausible alternative.

I don't think there's anything ridiculous about wanting both HS and MS students to start at 830a or later as research suggests is best. I also don't think balancing capacity across schools periodically is idiotic, it's a sane best practice.

The problem is there have been so few changes for so long that many (vocal) people are ossified into this view that they're somehow entitled to attend the school they are currently zoned for in perpetuity. If you're looking for arrogance and ridiculousness, start there.

Ha you have a LOT to learn about the way school systems run
Did you WaATCH or attend any work sessions or board meetings about policy 8130?
This is definitely about equity. Both sandy anderson (whose kids go to majority white elementary schools) and st John’s Cummings have had tirades about parents who they think are racist in not wanting their kids moved. In fact Cummings said “equity is at the heart of this policy”

No one wants their kid moved in high school. No one wants their kid moved in middle school. Stability is important.

I think if you are talkin by about entitled people having a bunch of teens never ever have to wake up early with ensure these kids are late for work and never make that early college class because the logic in entitlement will spill over.

T
Yiu have some warped
priorities

If stabilty is so important, why do so many parents say they will move their kids to private if they get re-zoned?

DP. Guess they are saying that if there is going to be disruption either way, they will make the best of the situation.

Another DP and I agree with this. If you’re going to blow up a school community and kids end up going to a different school from their friends, might as well go private and get to choose the school environment. I think it also depends on the age of people’s kids. If your kids are still young and they have this policy that they can review every 5 years and make more changes, then maybe you go private to make sure your kids can stay at the same school from K-8 or whatever.

It’s concerning to me that people who are in favor of these large scale boundary changes don’t seem capable of thinking through all the different scenarios and how different families might respond.

Reid and the school board do not care about individual schools or students. They care about getting test scores to be more similar across schools because the disparities (and some schools “failing”) makes them look bad. If you believe otherwise you are falling for some BS.

I get to decide whether or not these people use my kids in order to make themselves look better. If my kids get moved to a lower performing school so they can try to bring that school up, we are out… either a move to a different county or private. I suspect many others feel the same way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They've stated what the priority criteria for this process are, it's in their presentations if you attend any of the community meetings. Equity is not one of them.

6th grade MS would indeed require some changes... more or bigger MS (could potentially repurpose some of the admin centers similar to Dunn-Loring) and/or create some more secondary schools. They might need to phase it in over time rather than in one fell swoop. A 6th grade academy program would be a nice idea, but given the transport issues they're already dealing with trying to shift start times, etc. I doubt it would be realistic to implement. Anyway, point is I think there are options other than whatever massive rezoning you imagine as the only plausible alternative.

I don't think there's anything ridiculous about wanting both HS and MS students to start at 830a or later as research suggests is best. I also don't think balancing capacity across schools periodically is idiotic, it's a sane best practice.

The problem is there have been so few changes for so long that many (vocal) people are ossified into this view that they're somehow entitled to attend the school they are currently zoned for in perpetuity. If you're looking for arrogance and ridiculousness, start there.

Ha you have a LOT to learn about the way school systems run
Did you WaATCH or attend any work sessions or board meetings about policy 8130?
This is definitely about equity. Both sandy anderson (whose kids go to majority white elementary schools) and st John’s Cummings have had tirades about parents who they think are racist in not wanting their kids moved. In fact Cummings said “equity is at the heart of this policy”

No one wants their kid moved in high school. No one wants their kid moved in middle school. Stability is important.

I think if you are talkin by about entitled people having a bunch of teens never ever have to wake up early with ensure these kids are late for work and never make that early college class because the logic in entitlement will spill over.

T
Yiu have some warped
priorities

If stabilty is so important, why do so many parents say they will move their kids to private if they get re-zoned?

I’m a dinosaur. Did this just get DCUM ratioed?

Further evidence that SJWs are grasping at anything they can as they realize their agenda is deeply unpopular.

[Anonymous]

We specifically moved to get away from an IB school. If they stick us back in one, we are done with FCPS.

[Anonymous]

This whole thing is a big waste of time until they can stop kids from transferring so easily or letting athletes just claim to be homeless.

There are hundreds of kids zoned for the “bad” high schools that don’t attend. Adding more to that number solves absolutely nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They've stated what the priority criteria for this process are, it's in their presentations if you attend any of the community meetings. Equity is not one of them.

6th grade MS would indeed require some changes... more or bigger MS (could potentially repurpose some of the admin centers similar to Dunn-Loring) and/or create some more secondary schools. They might need to phase it in over time rather than in one fell swoop. A 6th grade academy program would be a nice idea, but given the transport issues they're already dealing with trying to shift start times, etc. I doubt it would be realistic to implement. Anyway, point is I think there are options other than whatever massive rezoning you imagine as the only plausible alternative.

I don't think there's anything ridiculous about wanting both HS and MS students to start at 830a or later as research suggests is best. I also don't think balancing capacity across schools periodically is idiotic, it's a sane best practice.

The problem is there have been so few changes for so long that many (vocal) people are ossified into this view that they're somehow entitled to attend the school they are currently zoned for in perpetuity. If you're looking for arrogance and ridiculousness, start there.

Ha you have a LOT to learn about the way school systems run
Did you WaATCH or attend any work sessions or board meetings about policy 8130?
This is definitely about equity. Both sandy anderson (whose kids go to majority white elementary schools) and st John’s Cummings have had tirades about parents who they think are racist in not wanting their kids moved. In fact Cummings said “equity is at the heart of this policy”

No one wants their kid moved in high school. No one wants their kid moved in middle school. Stability is important.

I think if you are talkin by about entitled people having a bunch of teens never ever have to wake up early with ensure these kids are late for work and never make that early college class because the logic in entitlement will spill over.

T
Yiu have some warped
priorities

If stabilty is so important, why do so many parents say they will move their kids to private if they get re-zoned?

DP. Guess they are saying that if there is going to be disruption either way, they will make the best of the situation.

Another DP and I agree with this. If you’re going to blow up a school community and kids end up going to a different school from their friends, might as well go private and get to choose the school environment. I think it also depends on the age of people’s kids. If your kids are still young and they have this policy that they can review every 5 years and make more changes, then maybe you go private to make sure your kids can stay at the same school from K-8 or whatever.

It’s concerning to me that people who are in favor of these large scale boundary changes don’t seem capable of thinking through all the different scenarios and how different families might respond.

Reid and the school board do not care about individual schools or students. They care about getting test scores to be more similar across schools because the disparities (and some schools “failing”) makes them look bad. If you believe otherwise you are falling for some BS.

I get to decide whether or not these people use my kids in order to make themselves look better. If my kids get moved to a lower performing school so they can try to bring that school up, we are out… either a move to a different county or private. I suspect many others feel the same way.

Not everybody has the means for private school. Real estate is already incredibly expensive around here, so this is a very privileged response. Note everybody is able to spend 20-40k PER year PER kid for school. I do recognize that much of FFX likely can, but many in those income brackets are already sending their kids to private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They've stated what the priority criteria for this process are, it's in their presentations if you attend any of the community meetings. Equity is not one of them.

6th grade MS would indeed require some changes... more or bigger MS (could potentially repurpose some of the admin centers similar to Dunn-Loring) and/or create some more secondary schools. They might need to phase it in over time rather than in one fell swoop. A 6th grade academy program would be a nice idea, but given the transport issues they're already dealing with trying to shift start times, etc. I doubt it would be realistic to implement. Anyway, point is I think there are options other than whatever massive rezoning you imagine as the only plausible alternative.

I don't think there's anything ridiculous about wanting both HS and MS students to start at 830a or later as research suggests is best. I also don't think balancing capacity across schools periodically is idiotic, it's a sane best practice.

The problem is there have been so few changes for so long that many (vocal) people are ossified into this view that they're somehow entitled to attend the school they are currently zoned for in perpetuity. If you're looking for arrogance and ridiculousness, start there.

Ha you have a LOT to learn about the way school systems run
Did you WaATCH or attend any work sessions or board meetings about policy 8130?
This is definitely about equity. Both sandy anderson (whose kids go to majority white elementary schools) and st John’s Cummings have had tirades about parents who they think are racist in not wanting their kids moved. In fact Cummings said “equity is at the heart of this policy”

No one wants their kid moved in high school. No one wants their kid moved in middle school. Stability is important.

I think if you are talkin by about entitled people having a bunch of teens never ever have to wake up early with ensure these kids are late for work and never make that early college class because the logic in entitlement will spill over.

T
Yiu have some warped
priorities

If stabilty is so important, why do so many parents say they will move their kids to private if they get re-zoned?

DP. Guess they are saying that if there is going to be disruption either way, they will make the best of the situation.

Another DP and I agree with this. If you’re going to blow up a school community and kids end up going to a different school from their friends, might as well go private and get to choose the school environment. I think it also depends on the age of people’s kids. If your kids are still young and they have this policy that they can review every 5 years and make more changes, then maybe you go private to make sure your kids can stay at the same school from K-8 or whatever.

It’s concerning to me that people who are in favor of these large scale boundary changes don’t seem capable of thinking through all the different scenarios and how different families might respond.

Reid and the school board do not care about individual schools or students. They care about getting test scores to be more similar across schools because the disparities (and some schools “failing”) makes them look bad. If you believe otherwise you are falling for some BS.

I get to decide whether or not these people use my kids in order to make themselves look better. If my kids get moved to a lower performing school so they can try to bring that school up, we are out… either a move to a different county or private. I suspect many others feel the same way.

One hundred percent agree. Almost out of principal I wouldn’t send my kids to the new school to prevent any benefits accruing to the county for this move. They won’t get my pta time at the other school nor will they get my kids’ test scores (and not so humble brag, my kids are the types of kids that the sb would love to have at the other schools).

Most (90%+) parents that I’ve talked with feel the same way. They’ll move, go private, rent an empty house (which the superintendent is okay with, right hayfield?), etc. That is why the equity venture is doomed, and all that will happen is five years from now they’ll target a couple other areas and they’ll just have a moving target that brings down the caliber of the entire county as we all get sick of their games.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They've stated what the priority criteria for this process are, it's in their presentations if you attend any of the community meetings. Equity is not one of them.

6th grade MS would indeed require some changes... more or bigger MS (could potentially repurpose some of the admin centers similar to Dunn-Loring) and/or create some more secondary schools. They might need to phase it in over time rather than in one fell swoop. A 6th grade academy program would be a nice idea, but given the transport issues they're already dealing with trying to shift start times, etc. I doubt it would be realistic to implement. Anyway, point is I think there are options other than whatever massive rezoning you imagine as the only plausible alternative.

I don't think there's anything ridiculous about wanting both HS and MS students to start at 830a or later as research suggests is best. I also don't think balancing capacity across schools periodically is idiotic, it's a sane best practice.

The problem is there have been so few changes for so long that many (vocal) people are ossified into this view that they're somehow entitled to attend the school they are currently zoned for in perpetuity. If you're looking for arrogance and ridiculousness, start there.

Ha you have a LOT to learn about the way school systems run
Did you WaATCH or attend any work sessions or board meetings about policy 8130?
This is definitely about equity. Both sandy anderson (whose kids go to majority white elementary schools) and st John’s Cummings have had tirades about parents who they think are racist in not wanting their kids moved. In fact Cummings said “equity is at the heart of this policy”

No one wants their kid moved in high school. No one wants their kid moved in middle school. Stability is important.

I think if you are talkin by about entitled people having a bunch of teens never ever have to wake up early with ensure these kids are late for work and never make that early college class because the logic in entitlement will spill over.

T
Yiu have some warped
priorities

If stabilty is so important, why do so many parents say they will move their kids to private if they get re-zoned?

I will bite.

If my kid is going to be disrupted and moved in the middle of high school from our neighborhood high school 2.2 miles away to a 2 ranked school farther away, then we are going to control the move by switching to a private high school, even if we have to dip into savings to do it. Several families in our high school zone closest to the 2 school have already made the decision to send their 6th-9th graders to lrivate and Catholic high school so they will not have to move to a sub par 2 ranked school mid way theough high school. For some lf them, it means they have an older junior or senior at the neighborhood high school, and a freshman at private. If my kids are going to be forced to move as a sophomore or junior, or I am going to be forced to have kids at 2 different schools of such different quality, it will be to an equal or better school. If the high schooler is our youngest, we might accelerate our empty nest plans and sell our house and move to a house, townhouse or apartment in the high school zone they are currently attending until they graduate. If we are in a situation with a senior and say rising sophomore where we will be forced to have one kid move in the middle of high school to a sub par far away 2 school, while 12th grade sibling is at our neighborhood school, and we can't afford private school or find a rental house to move to, we will rent a room from someone in the zone and use that address while living in our preferred house, like several people zoned for other schools have done for years because FCPS refuses to do a county wide residency check.

The final plan, which is fully endorsed and encouraged by Reid and the school board, is to go the Hayfield football route and pick any random address in our current high school zone, such as Llanet Fitness, and claim to be homeless.

At least we know that the "Hayfield Method" has the full, public, and unequivoval endorsement of the superintendent, with no consequences if you get caught. The one silver lining of Reid being so complicit with ignoring and hiding the Hayfield residency fraud, is that she gave everyone a superintendent improved way to keep their kids at the neighborhood high schools that we spent a lot of money and research to buy in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They've stated what the priority criteria for this process are, it's in their presentations if you attend any of the community meetings. Equity is not one of them.

6th grade MS would indeed require some changes... more or bigger MS (could potentially repurpose some of the admin centers similar to Dunn-Loring) and/or create some more secondary schools. They might need to phase it in over time rather than in one fell swoop. A 6th grade academy program would be a nice idea, but given the transport issues they're already dealing with trying to shift start times, etc. I doubt it would be realistic to implement. Anyway, point is I think there are options other than whatever massive rezoning you imagine as the only plausible alternative.

I don't think there's anything ridiculous about wanting both HS and MS students to start at 830a or later as research suggests is best. I also don't think balancing capacity across schools periodically is idiotic, it's a sane best practice.

The problem is there have been so few changes for so long that many (vocal) people are ossified into this view that they're somehow entitled to attend the school they are currently zoned for in perpetuity. If you're looking for arrogance and ridiculousness, start there.

Ha you have a LOT to learn about the way school systems run
Did you WaATCH or attend any work sessions or board meetings about policy 8130?
This is definitely about equity. Both sandy anderson (whose kids go to majority white elementary schools) and st John’s Cummings have had tirades about parents who they think are racist in not wanting their kids moved. In fact Cummings said “equity is at the heart of this policy”

No one wants their kid moved in high school. No one wants their kid moved in middle school. Stability is important.

I think if you are talkin by about entitled people having a bunch of teens never ever have to wake up early with ensure these kids are late for work and never make that early college class because the logic in entitlement will spill over.

T
Yiu have some warped
priorities

If stabilty is so important, why do so many parents say they will move their kids to private if they get re-zoned?

DP. Guess they are saying that if there is going to be disruption either way, they will make the best of the situation.

Another DP and I agree with this. If you’re going to blow up a school community and kids end up going to a different school from their friends, might as well go private and get to choose the school environment. I think it also depends on the age of people’s kids. If your kids are still young and they have this policy that they can review every 5 years and make more changes, then maybe you go private to make sure your kids can stay at the same school from K-8 or whatever.

It’s concerning to me that people who are in favor of these large scale boundary changes don’t seem capable of thinking through all the different scenarios and how different families might respond.

Reid and the school board do not care about individual schools or students. They care about getting test scores to be more similar across schools because the disparities (and some schools “failing”) makes them look bad. If you believe otherwise you are falling for some BS.

I get to decide whether or not these people use my kids in order to make themselves look better. If my kids get moved to a lower performing school so they can try to bring that school up, we are out… either a move to a different county or private. I suspect many others feel the same way.

Not everybody has the means for private school. Real estate is already incredibly expensive around here, so this is a very privileged response. Note everybody is able to spend 20-40k PER year PER kid for school. I do recognize that much of FFX likely can, but many in those income brackets are already sending their kids to private.

You’re pointing out that private school is expensive but the sub-text is that you think FCPS can do whatever the hell it wants because it has a captive market. They are going to be surprised by the different ways people who quite honestly are much smarter than they are react.