FCPS High School Poverty and Enrollment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that the first step to boundary changes at the high school level would be to standardize on AP at all schools. Only then can the discussion of boundaries even happen.

I know the IB fans will protest, but AP is already in 2/3rds of the schools and is less expensive. AP is more flexible and has a simpler course structure (for example, no two year courses).

But there are people out there who cheer for IB to stay either so they can pupil place or use it as a tool to fight boundary changes. They couldn't care less about the IB program itself.

Why do some parents not believe that some people want IB? I know it’s not the majority but we are out there. I do agree that they should just keep the 3 strongest programs in the county. But the people who cheer AP as a better fit for poor students are just as full of crap. You think poor student X who won’t do IB, will all of a sudden be taking tons of AP classes? And don’t parents also use AP to get out of their local IB school?

DP but the bigger point is that the general preference for AP will continue to paralyze FCPS with respect to potential HS boundary changes involving schools that are currently IB schools. Yes, they could have a couple of IB schools to accommodate the families that prefer IB but there’s no clear justification for having 8 and good reason to believe that it’s contributed to the ongoing decline of multiple pyramids.

It not the preference for AP, it's the preference to not have your kid in a failing school. It doesn't matter what program MVHS offers - Hayfield parents would never want their kids sent there

I think what PP and others are saying is that if you get rid of the IB at some of the lower schools, and put AP in, students will not have the choice to "opt out" of those lower schools, and with the right communication, perhaps those families will go back to their base schools in enough numbers that the schools won't be considered so bad. By having IB, FCPS is giving parents a way to get out of certain schools ... which causes them to have an abundance of low-performing kids, and few high-performing kids... which becomes a vicious cycle.

If IB were removed, there is still a transfer out option: World Languages. According to the FCPS website, you can request a transfer to another high school if a language you want to take is not offered at your base high school. Mount Vernon only offers Spanish, French and German. So if you want to take Latin or Arabic or Japanese, you can request a transfer to Hayfield.

I don't know how many students use the World Language transfer option, but as long as FCPS allows transfers, people will find a way to transfer out.

[Anonymous]

It does not make sense to have some schools be IB and some AP with no transportation option. Those programs are very different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that the first step to boundary changes at the high school level would be to standardize on AP at all schools. Only then can the discussion of boundaries even happen.

I know the IB fans will protest, but AP is already in 2/3rds of the schools and is less expensive. AP is more flexible and has a simpler course structure (for example, no two year courses).

But there are people out there who cheer for IB to stay either so they can pupil place or use it as a tool to fight boundary changes. They couldn't care less about the IB program itself.

Why do some parents not believe that some people want IB? I know it’s not the majority but we are out there. I do agree that they should just keep the 3 strongest programs in the county. But the people who cheer AP as a better fit for poor students are just as full of crap. You think poor student X who won’t do IB, will all of a sudden be taking tons of AP classes? And don’t parents also use AP to get out of their local IB school?

DP but the bigger point is that the general preference for AP will continue to paralyze FCPS with respect to potential HS boundary changes involving schools that are currently IB schools. Yes, they could have a couple of IB schools to accommodate the families that prefer IB but there’s no clear justification for having 8 and good reason to believe that it’s contributed to the ongoing decline of multiple pyramids.

It not the preference for AP, it's the preference to not have your kid in a failing school. It doesn't matter what program MVHS offers - Hayfield parents would never want their kids sent there

I think what PP and others are saying is that if you get rid of the IB at some of the lower schools, and put AP in, students will not have the choice to "opt out" of those lower schools, and with the right communication, perhaps those families will go back to their base schools in enough numbers that the schools won't be considered so bad. By having IB, FCPS is giving parents a way to get out of certain schools ... which causes them to have an abundance of low-performing kids, and few high-performing kids... which becomes a vicious cycle.

To put it quantitatively here are the number for Lewis because they are the most under-enrolled. They had 226 transfers out this year so the total student body was 1685 kids. It's safe to assume these 226 kids are likely White or Asian and have high-SES parents. Hypothetically, if all 226 kids had not transferred out, they would make up 12% of the would-be student body of 1911 kids. They would have a non-trivial effect on test scores and would put the school closely in line with Edison, for example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that the first step to boundary changes at the high school level would be to standardize on AP at all schools. Only then can the discussion of boundaries even happen.

I know the IB fans will protest, but AP is already in 2/3rds of the schools and is less expensive. AP is more flexible and has a simpler course structure (for example, no two year courses).

But there are people out there who cheer for IB to stay either so they can pupil place or use it as a tool to fight boundary changes. They couldn't care less about the IB program itself.

Why do some parents not believe that some people want IB? I know it’s not the majority but we are out there. I do agree that they should just keep the 3 strongest programs in the county. But the people who cheer AP as a better fit for poor students are just as full of crap. You think poor student X who won’t do IB, will all of a sudden be taking tons of AP classes? And don’t parents also use AP to get out of their local IB school?

DP but the bigger point is that the general preference for AP will continue to paralyze FCPS with respect to potential HS boundary changes involving schools that are currently IB schools. Yes, they could have a couple of IB schools to accommodate the families that prefer IB but there’s no clear justification for having 8 and good reason to believe that it’s contributed to the ongoing decline of multiple pyramids.

It not the preference for AP, it's the preference to not have your kid in a failing school. It doesn't matter what program MVHS offers - Hayfield parents would never want their kids sent there

I think what PP and others are saying is that if you get rid of the IB at some of the lower schools, and put AP in, students will not have the choice to "opt out" of those lower schools, and with the right communication, perhaps those families will go back to their base schools in enough numbers that the schools won't be considered so bad. By having IB, FCPS is giving parents a way to get out of certain schools ... which causes them to have an abundance of low-performing kids, and few high-performing kids... which becomes a vicious cycle.

To put it quantitatively here are the number for Lewis because they are the most under-enrolled. They had 226 transfers out this year so the total student body was 1685 kids. It's safe to assume these 226 kids are likely White or Asian and have high-SES parents. Hypothetically, if all 226 kids had not transferred out, they would make up 12% of the would-be student body of 1911 kids. They would have a non-trivial effect on test scores and would put the school closely in line with Edison, for example.

Probably end up seperating in AP/Honors classes anyway. And then the complaints of equity would arise due to score differentials and then grading/curriculums would most likely change even more and most likely rob the kids who would have left of a better education. This result in people leaving the area entirely vs transferring schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that the first step to boundary changes at the high school level would be to standardize on AP at all schools. Only then can the discussion of boundaries even happen.

I know the IB fans will protest, but AP is already in 2/3rds of the schools and is less expensive. AP is more flexible and has a simpler course structure (for example, no two year courses).

But there are people out there who cheer for IB to stay either so they can pupil place or use it as a tool to fight boundary changes. They couldn't care less about the IB program itself.

Why do some parents not believe that some people want IB? I know it’s not the majority but we are out there. I do agree that they should just keep the 3 strongest programs in the county. But the people who cheer AP as a better fit for poor students are just as full of crap. You think poor student X who won’t do IB, will all of a sudden be taking tons of AP classes? And don’t parents also use AP to get out of their local IB school?

DP but the bigger point is that the general preference for AP will continue to paralyze FCPS with respect to potential HS boundary changes involving schools that are currently IB schools. Yes, they could have a couple of IB schools to accommodate the families that prefer IB but there’s no clear justification for having 8 and good reason to believe that it’s contributed to the ongoing decline of multiple pyramids.

It not the preference for AP, it's the preference to not have your kid in a failing school. It doesn't matter what program MVHS offers - Hayfield parents would never want their kids sent there

I think what PP and others are saying is that if you get rid of the IB at some of the lower schools, and put AP in, students will not have the choice to "opt out" of those lower schools, and with the right communication, perhaps those families will go back to their base schools in enough numbers that the schools won't be considered so bad. By having IB, FCPS is giving parents a way to get out of certain schools ... which causes them to have an abundance of low-performing kids, and few high-performing kids... which becomes a vicious cycle.

To put it quantitatively here are the number for Lewis because they are the most under-enrolled. They had 226 transfers out this year so the total student body was 1685 kids. It's safe to assume these 226 kids are likely White or Asian and have high-SES parents. Hypothetically, if all 226 kids had not transferred out, they would make up 12% of the would-be student body of 1911 kids. They would have a non-trivial effect on test scores and would put the school closely in line with Edison, for example.

That 226 includes students going to TJ as well as Bryant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that the first step to boundary changes at the high school level would be to standardize on AP at all schools. Only then can the discussion of boundaries even happen.

I know the IB fans will protest, but AP is already in 2/3rds of the schools and is less expensive. AP is more flexible and has a simpler course structure (for example, no two year courses).

But there are people out there who cheer for IB to stay either so they can pupil place or use it as a tool to fight boundary changes. They couldn't care less about the IB program itself.

Why do some parents not believe that some people want IB? I know it’s not the majority but we are out there. I do agree that they should just keep the 3 strongest programs in the county. But the people who cheer AP as a better fit for poor students are just as full of crap. You think poor student X who won’t do IB, will all of a sudden be taking tons of AP classes? And don’t parents also use AP to get out of their local IB school?

DP but the bigger point is that the general preference for AP will continue to paralyze FCPS with respect to potential HS boundary changes involving schools that are currently IB schools. Yes, they could have a couple of IB schools to accommodate the families that prefer IB but there’s no clear justification for having 8 and good reason to believe that it’s contributed to the ongoing decline of multiple pyramids.

It not the preference for AP, it's the preference to not have your kid in a failing school. It doesn't matter what program MVHS offers - Hayfield parents would never want their kids sent there

I think what PP and others are saying is that if you get rid of the IB at some of the lower schools, and put AP in, students will not have the choice to "opt out" of those lower schools, and with the right communication, perhaps those families will go back to their base schools in enough numbers that the schools won't be considered so bad. By having IB, FCPS is giving parents a way to get out of certain schools ... which causes them to have an abundance of low-performing kids, and few high-performing kids... which becomes a vicious cycle.

To put it quantitatively here are the number for Lewis because they are the most under-enrolled. They had 226 transfers out this year so the total student body was 1685 kids. It's safe to assume these 226 kids are likely White or Asian and have high-SES parents. Hypothetically, if all 226 kids had not transferred out, they would make up 12% of the would-be student body of 1911 kids. They would have a non-trivial effect on test scores and would put the school closely in line with Edison, for example.

That 226 includes students going to TJ as well as Bryant

Does Lewis have many kids going to TJ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that the first step to boundary changes at the high school level would be to standardize on AP at all schools. Only then can the discussion of boundaries even happen.

I know the IB fans will protest, but AP is already in 2/3rds of the schools and is less expensive. AP is more flexible and has a simpler course structure (for example, no two year courses).

But there are people out there who cheer for IB to stay either so they can pupil place or use it as a tool to fight boundary changes. They couldn't care less about the IB program itself.

Why do some parents not believe that some people want IB? I know it’s not the majority but we are out there. I do agree that they should just keep the 3 strongest programs in the county. But the people who cheer AP as a better fit for poor students are just as full of crap. You think poor student X who won’t do IB, will all of a sudden be taking tons of AP classes? And don’t parents also use AP to get out of their local IB school?

DP but the bigger point is that the general preference for AP will continue to paralyze FCPS with respect to potential HS boundary changes involving schools that are currently IB schools. Yes, they could have a couple of IB schools to accommodate the families that prefer IB but there’s no clear justification for having 8 and good reason to believe that it’s contributed to the ongoing decline of multiple pyramids.

It not the preference for AP, it's the preference to not have your kid in a failing school. It doesn't matter what program MVHS offers - Hayfield parents would never want their kids sent there

I think what PP and others are saying is that if you get rid of the IB at some of the lower schools, and put AP in, students will not have the choice to "opt out" of those lower schools, and with the right communication, perhaps those families will go back to their base schools in enough numbers that the schools won't be considered so bad. By having IB, FCPS is giving parents a way to get out of certain schools ... which causes them to have an abundance of low-performing kids, and few high-performing kids... which becomes a vicious cycle.

To put it quantitatively here are the number for Lewis because they are the most under-enrolled. They had 226 transfers out this year so the total student body was 1685 kids. It's safe to assume these 226 kids are likely White or Asian and have high-SES parents. Hypothetically, if all 226 kids had not transferred out, they would make up 12% of the would-be student body of 1911 kids. They would have a non-trivial effect on test scores and would put the school closely in line with Edison, for example.

That 226 includes students going to TJ as well as Bryant

Does Lewis have many kids going to TJ?

The schools that appear to have received more than 10 pupil placements from Lewis: 43 to Edison, 30 to TJ, 26 to Lake Braddock, 25 to Bryant, 19 to Mount Vernon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that the first step to boundary changes at the high school level would be to standardize on AP at all schools. Only then can the discussion of boundaries even happen.

I know the IB fans will protest, but AP is already in 2/3rds of the schools and is less expensive. AP is more flexible and has a simpler course structure (for example, no two year courses).

But there are people out there who cheer for IB to stay either so they can pupil place or use it as a tool to fight boundary changes. They couldn't care less about the IB program itself.

Why do some parents not believe that some people want IB? I know it’s not the majority but we are out there. I do agree that they should just keep the 3 strongest programs in the county. But the people who cheer AP as a better fit for poor students are just as full of crap. You think poor student X who won’t do IB, will all of a sudden be taking tons of AP classes? And don’t parents also use AP to get out of their local IB school?

DP but the bigger point is that the general preference for AP will continue to paralyze FCPS with respect to potential HS boundary changes involving schools that are currently IB schools. Yes, they could have a couple of IB schools to accommodate the families that prefer IB but there’s no clear justification for having 8 and good reason to believe that it’s contributed to the ongoing decline of multiple pyramids.

It not the preference for AP, it's the preference to not have your kid in a failing school. It doesn't matter what program MVHS offers - Hayfield parents would never want their kids sent there

I think what PP and others are saying is that if you get rid of the IB at some of the lower schools, and put AP in, students will not have the choice to "opt out" of those lower schools, and with the right communication, perhaps those families will go back to their base schools in enough numbers that the schools won't be considered so bad. By having IB, FCPS is giving parents a way to get out of certain schools ... which causes them to have an abundance of low-performing kids, and few high-performing kids... which becomes a vicious cycle.

To put it quantitatively here are the number for Lewis because they are the most under-enrolled. They had 226 transfers out this year so the total student body was 1685 kids. It's safe to assume these 226 kids are likely White or Asian and have high-SES parents. Hypothetically, if all 226 kids had not transferred out, they would make up 12% of the would-be student body of 1911 kids. They would have a non-trivial effect on test scores and would put the school closely in line with Edison, for example.

That 226 includes students going to TJ as well as Bryant

Does Lewis have many kids going to TJ?

The schools that appear to have received more than 10 pupil placements from Lewis: 43 to Edison, 30 to TJ, 26 to Lake Braddock, 25 to Bryant, 19 to Mount Vernon.

And the 30 kids at TJ whose base school from Lewis could have moved into the area after their kids got into TJ. TJ isn't too far from some of the North Springfield areas zoned to Lewis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that the first step to boundary changes at the high school level would be to standardize on AP at all schools. Only then can the discussion of boundaries even happen.

I know the IB fans will protest, but AP is already in 2/3rds of the schools and is less expensive. AP is more flexible and has a simpler course structure (for example, no two year courses).

But there are people out there who cheer for IB to stay either so they can pupil place or use it as a tool to fight boundary changes. They couldn't care less about the IB program itself.

Why do some parents not believe that some people want IB? I know it’s not the majority but we are out there. I do agree that they should just keep the 3 strongest programs in the county. But the people who cheer AP as a better fit for poor students are just as full of crap. You think poor student X who won’t do IB, will all of a sudden be taking tons of AP classes? And don’t parents also use AP to get out of their local IB school?

DP but the bigger point is that the general preference for AP will continue to paralyze FCPS with respect to potential HS boundary changes involving schools that are currently IB schools. Yes, they could have a couple of IB schools to accommodate the families that prefer IB but there’s no clear justification for having 8 and good reason to believe that it’s contributed to the ongoing decline of multiple pyramids.

It not the preference for AP, it's the preference to not have your kid in a failing school. It doesn't matter what program MVHS offers - Hayfield parents would never want their kids sent there

I think what PP and others are saying is that if you get rid of the IB at some of the lower schools, and put AP in, students will not have the choice to "opt out" of those lower schools, and with the right communication, perhaps those families will go back to their base schools in enough numbers that the schools won't be considered so bad. By having IB, FCPS is giving parents a way to get out of certain schools ... which causes them to have an abundance of low-performing kids, and few high-performing kids... which becomes a vicious cycle.

To put it quantitatively here are the number for Lewis because they are the most under-enrolled. They had 226 transfers out this year so the total student body was 1685 kids. It's safe to assume these 226 kids are likely White or Asian and have high-SES parents. Hypothetically, if all 226 kids had not transferred out, they would make up 12% of the would-be student body of 1911 kids. They would have a non-trivial effect on test scores and would put the school closely in line with Edison, for example.

That 226 includes students going to TJ as well as Bryant

Does Lewis have many kids going to TJ?

The schools that appear to have received more than 10 pupil placements from Lewis: 43 to Edison, 30 to TJ, 26 to Lake Braddock, 25 to Bryant, 19 to Mount Vernon.

And the 30 kids at TJ whose base school from Lewis could have moved into the area after their kids got into TJ. TJ isn't too far from some of the North Springfield areas zoned to Lewis.

Although there are now guaranteed slots at TJ for kids from Key.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that the first step to boundary changes at the high school level would be to standardize on AP at all schools. Only then can the discussion of boundaries even happen.

I know the IB fans will protest, but AP is already in 2/3rds of the schools and is less expensive. AP is more flexible and has a simpler course structure (for example, no two year courses).

But there are people out there who cheer for IB to stay either so they can pupil place or use it as a tool to fight boundary changes. They couldn't care less about the IB program itself.

Why do some parents not believe that some people want IB? I know it’s not the majority but we are out there. I do agree that they should just keep the 3 strongest programs in the county. But the people who cheer AP as a better fit for poor students are just as full of crap. You think poor student X who won’t do IB, will all of a sudden be taking tons of AP classes? And don’t parents also use AP to get out of their local IB school?

DP but the bigger point is that the general preference for AP will continue to paralyze FCPS with respect to potential HS boundary changes involving schools that are currently IB schools. Yes, they could have a couple of IB schools to accommodate the families that prefer IB but there’s no clear justification for having 8 and good reason to believe that it’s contributed to the ongoing decline of multiple pyramids.

It not the preference for AP, it's the preference to not have your kid in a failing school. It doesn't matter what program MVHS offers - Hayfield parents would never want their kids sent there

I think what PP and others are saying is that if you get rid of the IB at some of the lower schools, and put AP in, students will not have the choice to "opt out" of those lower schools, and with the right communication, perhaps those families will go back to their base schools in enough numbers that the schools won't be considered so bad. By having IB, FCPS is giving parents a way to get out of certain schools ... which causes them to have an abundance of low-performing kids, and few high-performing kids... which becomes a vicious cycle.

To put it quantitatively here are the number for Lewis because they are the most under-enrolled. They had 226 transfers out this year so the total student body was 1685 kids. It's safe to assume these 226 kids are likely White or Asian and have high-SES parents. Hypothetically, if all 226 kids had not transferred out, they would make up 12% of the would-be student body of 1911 kids. They would have a non-trivial effect on test scores and would put the school closely in line with Edison, for example.

That 226 includes students going to TJ as well as Bryant

Does Lewis have many kids going to TJ?

The schools that appear to have received more than 10 pupil placements from Lewis: 43 to Edison, 30 to TJ, 26 to Lake Braddock, 25 to Bryant, 19 to Mount Vernon.

So of the 226, 55 have nothing to do with pupil placements and another 19 aren't pacing for AP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that the first step to boundary changes at the high school level would be to standardize on AP at all schools. Only then can the discussion of boundaries even happen.

I know the IB fans will protest, but AP is already in 2/3rds of the schools and is less expensive. AP is more flexible and has a simpler course structure (for example, no two year courses).

But there are people out there who cheer for IB to stay either so they can pupil place or use it as a tool to fight boundary changes. They couldn't care less about the IB program itself.

Why do some parents not believe that some people want IB? I know it’s not the majority but we are out there. I do agree that they should just keep the 3 strongest programs in the county. But the people who cheer AP as a better fit for poor students are just as full of crap. You think poor student X who won’t do IB, will all of a sudden be taking tons of AP classes? And don’t parents also use AP to get out of their local IB school?

DP but the bigger point is that the general preference for AP will continue to paralyze FCPS with respect to potential HS boundary changes involving schools that are currently IB schools. Yes, they could have a couple of IB schools to accommodate the families that prefer IB but there’s no clear justification for having 8 and good reason to believe that it’s contributed to the ongoing decline of multiple pyramids.

It not the preference for AP, it's the preference to not have your kid in a failing school. It doesn't matter what program MVHS offers - Hayfield parents would never want their kids sent there

I think what PP and others are saying is that if you get rid of the IB at some of the lower schools, and put AP in, students will not have the choice to "opt out" of those lower schools, and with the right communication, perhaps those families will go back to their base schools in enough numbers that the schools won't be considered so bad. By having IB, FCPS is giving parents a way to get out of certain schools ... which causes them to have an abundance of low-performing kids, and few high-performing kids... which becomes a vicious cycle.

To put it quantitatively here are the number for Lewis because they are the most under-enrolled. They had 226 transfers out this year so the total student body was 1685 kids. It's safe to assume these 226 kids are likely White or Asian and have high-SES parents. Hypothetically, if all 226 kids had not transferred out, they would make up 12% of the would-be student body of 1911 kids. They would have a non-trivial effect on test scores and would put the school closely in line with Edison, for example.

That 226 includes students going to TJ as well as Bryant

Does Lewis have many kids going to TJ?

The schools that appear to have received more than 10 pupil placements from Lewis: 43 to Edison, 30 to TJ, 26 to Lake Braddock, 25 to Bryant, 19 to Mount Vernon.

So of the 226, 55 have nothing to do with pupil placements and another 19 aren't pacing for AP.

One can only imagine what the volume of pupil placements would be if West Springfield were still open to transfers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that the first step to boundary changes at the high school level would be to standardize on AP at all schools. Only then can the discussion of boundaries even happen.

I know the IB fans will protest, but AP is already in 2/3rds of the schools and is less expensive. AP is more flexible and has a simpler course structure (for example, no two year courses).

But there are people out there who cheer for IB to stay either so they can pupil place or use it as a tool to fight boundary changes. They couldn't care less about the IB program itself.

Why do some parents not believe that some people want IB? I know it’s not the majority but we are out there. I do agree that they should just keep the 3 strongest programs in the county. But the people who cheer AP as a better fit for poor students are just as full of crap. You think poor student X who won’t do IB, will all of a sudden be taking tons of AP classes? And don’t parents also use AP to get out of their local IB school?

DP but the bigger point is that the general preference for AP will continue to paralyze FCPS with respect to potential HS boundary changes involving schools that are currently IB schools. Yes, they could have a couple of IB schools to accommodate the families that prefer IB but there’s no clear justification for having 8 and good reason to believe that it’s contributed to the ongoing decline of multiple pyramids.

It not the preference for AP, it's the preference to not have your kid in a failing school. It doesn't matter what program MVHS offers - Hayfield parents would never want their kids sent there

I think what PP and others are saying is that if you get rid of the IB at some of the lower schools, and put AP in, students will not have the choice to "opt out" of those lower schools, and with the right communication, perhaps those families will go back to their base schools in enough numbers that the schools won't be considered so bad. By having IB, FCPS is giving parents a way to get out of certain schools ... which causes them to have an abundance of low-performing kids, and few high-performing kids... which becomes a vicious cycle.

What are the numbers though? People who pupil place have to provide their own transportation--and they can only go if the receiving school has room. I'd want to see how many people pupil place to know whether would make a measurable difference. In addition, if it's not an option, how many people would just move out at HS then. The people who have the means to pupil place and provide transportation are the people who have the means to move (and who would be more likely prioritize education to move on that basis). I think the issue is not IB/AP, it's that high poverty schools are challenging.

Which is why it was so bad for Fairfax to concentrate poverty in the first place. They actively made changes to boundaries that took wealthier families out of poorer schools and moved them to wealthier schools. The School Board and Superintendent weren't just innocent bystanders. Now it is broken beyond repair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that the first step to boundary changes at the high school level would be to standardize on AP at all schools. Only then can the discussion of boundaries even happen.

I know the IB fans will protest, but AP is already in 2/3rds of the schools and is less expensive. AP is more flexible and has a simpler course structure (for example, no two year courses).

But there are people out there who cheer for IB to stay either so they can pupil place or use it as a tool to fight boundary changes. They couldn't care less about the IB program itself.

Why do some parents not believe that some people want IB? I know it’s not the majority but we are out there. I do agree that they should just keep the 3 strongest programs in the county. But the people who cheer AP as a better fit for poor students are just as full of crap. You think poor student X who won’t do IB, will all of a sudden be taking tons of AP classes? And don’t parents also use AP to get out of their local IB school?

DP but the bigger point is that the general preference for AP will continue to paralyze FCPS with respect to potential HS boundary changes involving schools that are currently IB schools. Yes, they could have a couple of IB schools to accommodate the families that prefer IB but there’s no clear justification for having 8 and good reason to believe that it’s contributed to the ongoing decline of multiple pyramids.

It not the preference for AP, it's the preference to not have your kid in a failing school. It doesn't matter what program MVHS offers - Hayfield parents would never want their kids sent there

I think what PP and others are saying is that if you get rid of the IB at some of the lower schools, and put AP in, students will not have the choice to "opt out" of those lower schools, and with the right communication, perhaps those families will go back to their base schools in enough numbers that the schools won't be considered so bad. By having IB, FCPS is giving parents a way to get out of certain schools ... which causes them to have an abundance of low-performing kids, and few high-performing kids... which becomes a vicious cycle.

What are the numbers though? People who pupil place have to provide their own transportation--and they can only go if the receiving school has room. I'd want to see how many people pupil place to know whether would make a measurable difference. In addition, if it's not an option, how many people would just move out at HS then. The people who have the means to pupil place and provide transportation are the people who have the means to move (and who would be more likely prioritize education to move on that basis). I think the issue is not IB/AP, it's that high poverty schools are challenging.

Which is why it was so bad for Fairfax to concentrate poverty in the first place. They actively made changes to boundaries that took wealthier families out of poorer schools and moved them to wealthier schools. The School Board and Superintendent weren't just innocent bystanders. Now it is broken beyond repair.

Where/when did they do this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that the first step to boundary changes at the high school level would be to standardize on AP at all schools. Only then can the discussion of boundaries even happen.

I know the IB fans will protest, but AP is already in 2/3rds of the schools and is less expensive. AP is more flexible and has a simpler course structure (for example, no two year courses).

But there are people out there who cheer for IB to stay either so they can pupil place or use it as a tool to fight boundary changes. They couldn't care less about the IB program itself.

Why do some parents not believe that some people want IB? I know it’s not the majority but we are out there. I do agree that they should just keep the 3 strongest programs in the county. But the people who cheer AP as a better fit for poor students are just as full of crap. You think poor student X who won’t do IB, will all of a sudden be taking tons of AP classes? And don’t parents also use AP to get out of their local IB school?

DP but the bigger point is that the general preference for AP will continue to paralyze FCPS with respect to potential HS boundary changes involving schools that are currently IB schools. Yes, they could have a couple of IB schools to accommodate the families that prefer IB but there’s no clear justification for having 8 and good reason to believe that it’s contributed to the ongoing decline of multiple pyramids.

It not the preference for AP, it's the preference to not have your kid in a failing school. It doesn't matter what program MVHS offers - Hayfield parents would never want their kids sent there

I think what PP and others are saying is that if you get rid of the IB at some of the lower schools, and put AP in, students will not have the choice to "opt out" of those lower schools, and with the right communication, perhaps those families will go back to their base schools in enough numbers that the schools won't be considered so bad. By having IB, FCPS is giving parents a way to get out of certain schools ... which causes them to have an abundance of low-performing kids, and few high-performing kids... which becomes a vicious cycle.

What are the numbers though? People who pupil place have to provide their own transportation--and they can only go if the receiving school has room. I'd want to see how many people pupil place to know whether would make a measurable difference. In addition, if it's not an option, how many people would just move out at HS then. The people who have the means to pupil place and provide transportation are the people who have the means to move (and who would be more likely prioritize education to move on that basis). I think the issue is not IB/AP, it's that high poverty schools are challenging.

Which is why it was so bad for Fairfax to concentrate poverty in the first place. They actively made changes to boundaries that took wealthier families out of poorer schools and moved them to wealthier schools. The School Board and Superintendent weren't just innocent bystanders. Now it is broken beyond repair.

Where/when did they do this?

Annandale to both Woodson and Lake Braddock, Lee (Lewis) to West Springfield.

Also refused to use the available space at Mount Vernon and instead enlarged West Potomac to 3000.

Fairfax has fed the vicious cycle - they have essentially written off certain pyramids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that the first step to boundary changes at the high school level would be to standardize on AP at all schools. Only then can the discussion of boundaries even happen.

I know the IB fans will protest, but AP is already in 2/3rds of the schools and is less expensive. AP is more flexible and has a simpler course structure (for example, no two year courses).

But there are people out there who cheer for IB to stay either so they can pupil place or use it as a tool to fight boundary changes. They couldn't care less about the IB program itself.

Why do some parents not believe that some people want IB? I know it’s not the majority but we are out there. I do agree that they should just keep the 3 strongest programs in the county. But the people who cheer AP as a better fit for poor students are just as full of crap. You think poor student X who won’t do IB, will all of a sudden be taking tons of AP classes? And don’t parents also use AP to get out of their local IB school?

DP but the bigger point is that the general preference for AP will continue to paralyze FCPS with respect to potential HS boundary changes involving schools that are currently IB schools. Yes, they could have a couple of IB schools to accommodate the families that prefer IB but there’s no clear justification for having 8 and good reason to believe that it’s contributed to the ongoing decline of multiple pyramids.

It not the preference for AP, it's the preference to not have your kid in a failing school. It doesn't matter what program MVHS offers - Hayfield parents would never want their kids sent there

I think what PP and others are saying is that if you get rid of the IB at some of the lower schools, and put AP in, students will not have the choice to "opt out" of those lower schools, and with the right communication, perhaps those families will go back to their base schools in enough numbers that the schools won't be considered so bad. By having IB, FCPS is giving parents a way to get out of certain schools ... which causes them to have an abundance of low-performing kids, and few high-performing kids... which becomes a vicious cycle.

What are the numbers though? People who pupil place have to provide their own transportation--and they can only go if the receiving school has room. I'd want to see how many people pupil place to know whether would make a measurable difference. In addition, if it's not an option, how many people would just move out at HS then. The people who have the means to pupil place and provide transportation are the people who have the means to move (and who would be more likely prioritize education to move on that basis). I think the issue is not IB/AP, it's that high poverty schools are challenging.

Which is why it was so bad for Fairfax to concentrate poverty in the first place. They actively made changes to boundaries that took wealthier families out of poorer schools and moved them to wealthier schools. The School Board and Superintendent weren't just innocent bystanders. Now it is broken beyond repair.

Where/when did they do this?

Annandale to both Woodson and Lake Braddock, Lee (Lewis) to West Springfield.

Also refused to use the available space at Mount Vernon and instead enlarged West Potomac to 3000.

Fairfax has fed the vicious cycle - they have essentially written off certain pyramids.

What does adding even 20% MC/UMC do for a school like Lewis?