FCPS Ready to Screw Poorer/GenEd Kids Again

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:13:26. People did bring this up, but you have to remember that at the time the boundary consideration was fluid, so there were more people from Fairhill for instance asking to be part of the group that would move verses being the ones left at Jackson. FCPS never asked the people remaining what they thought directly either. I agree, it was poor thinking on facilities part, but am not surprised because they also initiated the other poor facility movements. I also think that Vienna residents have been asking facilities for awhile to move to Thoreau. That is why Thoreau started a LLIV program there just a few years ago.

No, that is not why Thoreau stated Level 4. They started it b/c they had a significant number of AAP kids (who are eventually going to go on to Madison HS). And parents did not think it was great for their kids to go out of the pyramid for MS, and then come to HS without having those friendships. It is much better to allow kids to build friendships in MS so that they have a peer group to take with them to HS. Although we are in Madison pyramid, my kid is already out of pyramid for elem. school AAP. I'm glad that TMS has AAP so that my kid can get with the group s/he will ultimately be with for HS. As it is now, s/he will have to build all new friendships in 7th grade -- but if the rezoning goes through, there is a possibility that my kid might actually know SOMEONE (perhaps) in the 7th grade. Without the rezoning, my kid will be starting from scratch... but better to get started on that in 7th grade than wait 'til 9th grade (as would happen if there was no AAP at TMS and DC had to go to LJ for AAP).

AAP at TMS was something parents wanted so that kids could be with a single peer group rather than being torn away from friends several times. It wasn't a secret plot to escape LJ.

We are actually saying the same thing. Whether they wanted to escape LJ or wanted a larger peer group before going to Madison, the result of that LLIV program at Thoreau was the same. I do not think they would have argued for more of Madison students to go to LJ either which you seem to be suggesting that it had nothing to do with Thoreau, just a peer group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people are just trying to resolve the single issue of where to put the excess students at Jackson. Some people are trying to define the problem much bigger: how to improve the reputation/test scores of the entire Falls Church pyramid.

Some people are just pretending that moving a number of the highest-income neighborhoods zoned for Jackson to Thoreau won't have a detrimental impact on both Jackson and Falls Church.

i dont understand how this effect falls church high

Right now the middle school is highly rated. If all of the high income families leave the boundary it will affect the neighborhoods that feed into Falls Church negatively.

The high income families were never zoned for falls Church to begin with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They really need to go back to the drawing board on this one and make sure they know what they are doing.

Where did you hear that? At the TMS orientation on 2/15 we were told that all AAP kids whose base MS is Thoreau have already been loaded into TMS's system. If we pick LJ, we need to request a change.

If your child goes to a center for AAP, they are automatically assigned to Jackson (center). If your child went to a local level IV - they will be assigned to Thoreau. If you want to change either one of these, you need to submit a form indicating this change.

Is this how they calculated the future projections for the Thoreau boundary study? It looks like the study is saying all the kids who are in LLIV would elect to go to Jackson instead of Thoreau.

It sure does. And realistically we all know that in a few years most of the AAP-eligible kids at Thoreau will remain there.

The Facilities staff that comes up with these projections just wants to move bodies to meet short-term needs. They have no clue how people actually behave, which is why their forecasts are often laughably wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people are just trying to resolve the single issue of where to put the excess students at Jackson. Some people are trying to define the problem much bigger: how to improve the reputation/test scores of the entire Falls Church pyramid.

Some people are just pretending that moving a number of the highest-income neighborhoods zoned for Jackson to Thoreau won't have a detrimental impact on both Jackson and Falls Church.

i dont understand how this effect falls church high

Right now the middle school is highly rated. If all of the high income families leave the boundary it will affect the neighborhoods that feed into Falls Church negatively.

The high income families were never zoned for falls Church to begin with.

Some areas zoned for Fairhill are high income. But if you pull most of the high income families out of Jackson it will have ripple effects at both the remaining ES feeders to Jackson and at Falls Church. Most people get this so I assume you’re just being deliberately obtuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They really need to go back to the drawing board on this one and make sure they know what they are doing.

Where did you hear that? At the TMS orientation on 2/15 we were told that all AAP kids whose base MS is Thoreau have already been loaded into TMS's system. If we pick LJ, we need to request a change.

If your child goes to a center for AAP, they are automatically assigned to Jackson (center). If your child went to a local level IV - they will be assigned to Thoreau. If you want to change either one of these, you need to submit a form indicating this change.

Is this how they calculated the future projections for the Thoreau boundary study? It looks like the study is saying all the kids who are in LLIV would elect to go to Jackson instead of Thoreau.

It sure does. And realistically we all know that in a few years most of the AAP-eligible kids at Thoreau will remain there.

The Facilities staff that comes up with these projections just wants to move bodies to meet short-term needs. They have no clue how people actually behave, which is why their forecasts are often laughably wrong.

I think FCPS needs to find a new facilities lead. It's obvious he doesn't know what he is doing from a policy perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They really need to go back to the drawing board on this one and make sure they know what they are doing.

Where did you hear that? At the TMS orientation on 2/15 we were told that all AAP kids whose base MS is Thoreau have already been loaded into TMS's system. If we pick LJ, we need to request a change.

If your child goes to a center for AAP, they are automatically assigned to Jackson (center). If your child went to a local level IV - they will be assigned to Thoreau. If you want to change either one of these, you need to submit a form indicating this change.

Is this how they calculated the future projections for the Thoreau boundary study? It looks like the study is saying all the kids who are in LLIV would elect to go to Jackson instead of Thoreau.

It sure does. And realistically we all know that in a few years most of the AAP-eligible kids at Thoreau will remain there.

The Facilities staff that comes up with these projections just wants to move bodies to meet short-term needs. They have no clue how people actually behave, which is why their forecasts are often laughably wrong.

I think FCPS needs to find a new facilities lead. It's obvious he doesn't know what he is doing from a policy perspective.

I think the current head of Facilities came from Loudoun, which is much more homogeneous. He may know how to negotiate with building contractors, but that doesn’t mean he has the skill set to manage boundary studies.

[Anonymous]

Agreed. He should handle construction and someone else should handle population issues.

[Anonymous]

...so be it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The Facilities staff that comes up with these projections just wants to move bodies to meet short-term needs. They have no clue how people actually behave, which is why their forecasts are often laughably wrong.

Kevin Sneed is a big part of the problem. Jeff Platenberg trusts Kevin Sneed to do things right, but Kevin makes many not-so-correct assumptions and they get enveloped in to Facilities recommendations. Then Facilities wraps thing in a pretty wrapper with colored maps for the School Board.

[Anonymous]

8:30 Jeff has definitely tried to cover either for his own incompetence or others. I don't think either of these guys are up to the task of dealing with policy issues like One Fairfax.

[Anonymous]

Wow! Poe is over 450 students below capacity with a projected decline and many other middle schools are below capacity. School boundaries really need to be reviewed at a larger level throughout the county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow! Poe is over 450 students below capacity with a projected decline and many other middle schools are below capacity. School boundaries really need to be reviewed at a larger level throughout the county.

With Thoreau being even more under capacity and the most underutilized in Fairfax at 64% vs Poes 86%...

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/middle2019-20.pdf

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow! Poe is over 450 students below capacity with a projected decline and many other middle schools are below capacity. School boundaries really need to be reviewed at a larger level throughout the county.

With Thoreau being even more under capacity and the most underutilized in Fairfax at 64% vs Poes 86%...

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/middle2019-20.pdf

Stale chart. Try citing the latest projections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow! Poe is over 450 students below capacity with a projected decline and many other middle schools are below capacity. School boundaries really need to be reviewed at a larger level throughout the county.

With Thoreau being even more under capacity and the most underutilized in Fairfax at 64% vs Poes 86%...

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/middle2019-20.pdf

What year is this from? It's been updated.