FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[Anonymous]

I'll have to admit, I'm kind of surprised to hear that people in last nights boundary meeting were also against significant boundary changes. I wasn't able to attend, so this is all hearsay......but maybe those schools (Lewis) are better than they're made out to be if those families want to stay?
Be curious to hear from any Lewis parents on here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll have to admit, I'm kind of surprised to hear that people in last nights boundary meeting were also against significant boundary changes. I wasn't able to attend, so this is all hearsay......but maybe those schools (Lewis) are better than they're made out to be if those families want to stay?
Be curious to hear from any Lewis parents on here.

Sorry but I’d find it hard to believe that many Lewis parents were at that meeting. I can’t think of a single negative, other than potentially the loss of IB, as to why parents in this pyramid would be against adjustments. We don’t show up at the meetings because - why would we step into the Lion’s den?

[Anonymous]

What you hear time and time again is that people may want more resources for their schools but not to be redistricted.

If this School Board really thinks redistricting is necessary for financial reasons they ought to discuss why they recently expanded West Potomac to 3000 seats or are budgeting over $80M for the totally unnecessary Dunn Loring ES. Neither of these actions suggests they care very much about saving money. They won’t do that because they have no capacity for self-reflection or to admit that prior SBs also controlled by their party made mistakes, but until they come clean they don’t deserve the public’s trust.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of upset parents tonight at the boundary meeting. I wonder if the school board is getting the message when they keep hearing from parents over and over again that they don’t want the boundary changes.

Upset parents wanting rezoning? Or against rezoning?

If the vibe was against rezoning, I ber they were caught off guard.

Parents against rezoning.

I’m sure the SB was NOT caught off guard by parents against rezoning.

Normally, yes.

But this is the pyramid that has schools that the school board is using to justify rezoning. I am sure they did not expect that the Lewis parents would be just as much against the disruptions of rezoning and just as strongly wanting to keep their kids in their neighborhood schools, as all of the other parents at other schools

I am not surprised, but I bet the school board was surprised, along with some of the pro rezoning non parents who post here regularly.

The Mount Vernon HS meeting with lots of Lewis folks was back on Monday, and the parents there were generally supportive of making changes and having saner boundaries than some of the craziness of the current setup.

Tonight's meeting was at Annandale, and the feedback was most uniformly supportive of changes that would allow more equitable access to programming, and specifically access for students WITHIN THEIR PYRAMID. Saying you can technically "access" a program but to do so you have to be bussed over to some other pyramid doesn't count. This seems mainly about local AAP and also the AP/IB split. But overall folks seemed more concerned about this programming issue than the boundary lines, but also understood that one could impact the other.

There was also some incongruent feedback, for example one table emphasized making sure that when they do this that they make purposeful changes that actually have an impact, don't just bow to the fear of "making the fewest people upset about changes". But on the other hand the most common phrase was "minimize disruptions", yet in the same breath many of those same groups were also supportive of some changes, especially pertaining to islands and split feeders. So minimize disruptions =/= no disruptions, it seems... basically, "only disruptions that I personally think are reasonable".

Finally, some requested looking at "more creative" changes than boundary adjustments, and one said that overcrowding wasn't the worst thing, a sense of school community is more important, and different communities want different things.

Really one sided summary. At my table, and from the reporters, the responses to the boundary changes was very negative.

There was a table who asked to make sure that each school has a similar composition of race. Definitely illegal, but curious that there are people who still think like that.

The one-sided-ness would be characterizing the feedback as "very negative". There may have been some negative elements, sure, but there were also some positive ones, and again moreso than at other meetings the emphasis was on access to programming with in the pyramid, which is a currently-related but potentially-independent issue from boundary changes (depending what programmatic changes they might make to equalize offerings across pyramids).

I think you are interpreting the consistent feedback of "minimize disruptions" as people being opposed to any changes, but that's not what I heard at my table or in the group readouts. There was only one person at our table who wanted no changes, of course driven by the fact they don't want changes for themselves and their individual child, and not thinking about the problem system-wide. Most people on the other hand are recognizing there need to be some adjustments made. Frankly, it's some reallly impressive mental gymnastics if you can look so much as glance at a feeder map and not quickly come to the same conclusion. People seem to be asking that the changes be kept to a minimum possible to achieve some of the understood goals (e.g. eliminating islands and split feeders, haven't heard a single person argue against rezoning for that purpose) and also emphasize neighborhoods/communities staying together. They don't want them to start from whole cloth and make changes just for the sake of it. But they're also not saying "no changes, period".

There is mental gymnastics occurring if you look at the compact WSHS map and argue that the school should be rezoned.

This isn't about one school. If you could say that about every school in the district, you'd have a point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll have to admit, I'm kind of surprised to hear that people in last nights boundary meeting were also against significant boundary changes. I wasn't able to attend, so this is all hearsay......but maybe those schools (Lewis) are better than they're made out to be if those families want to stay?
Be curious to hear from any Lewis parents on here.

Sorry but I’d find it hard to believe that many Lewis parents were at that meeting. I can’t think of a single negative, other than potentially the loss of IB, as to why parents in this pyramid would be against adjustments. We don’t show up at the meetings because - why would we step into the Lion’s den?

I'm not sure what you're expecting if you're not prepared to at least show up and articulate what you want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll have to admit, I'm kind of surprised to hear that people in last nights boundary meeting were also against significant boundary changes. I wasn't able to attend, so this is all hearsay......but maybe those schools (Lewis) are better than they're made out to be if those families want to stay?
Be curious to hear from any Lewis parents on here.

Sorry but I’d find it hard to believe that many Lewis parents were at that meeting. I can’t think of a single negative, other than potentially the loss of IB, as to why parents in this pyramid would be against adjustments. We don’t show up at the meetings because - why would we step into the Lion’s den?

I'm not sure what you're expecting if you're not prepared to at least show up and articulate what you want.

I suspect that most would be glad to lose IB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll have to admit, I'm kind of surprised to hear that people in last nights boundary meeting were also against significant boundary changes. I wasn't able to attend, so this is all hearsay......but maybe those schools (Lewis) are better than they're made out to be if those families want to stay?
Be curious to hear from any Lewis parents on here.

Lewis parent here, and I was at the meeting at Annandale. I would prefer not to have my children zoned out of Lewis, thank you very much.

Most of the Lewis parents went to the Mount Vernon meeting. I think you'll find that there are many, many parents who are very happy with the school and do not want to be rezoned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll have to admit, I'm kind of surprised to hear that people in last nights boundary meeting were also against significant boundary changes. I wasn't able to attend, so this is all hearsay......but maybe those schools (Lewis) are better than they're made out to be if those families want to stay?
Be curious to hear from any Lewis parents on here.

Lewis parent here, and I was at the meeting at Annandale. I would prefer not to have my children zoned out of Lewis, thank you very much.

Most of the Lewis parents went to the Mount Vernon meeting. I think you'll find that there are many, many parents who are very happy with the school and do not want to be rezoned.

Are you Hispanic? My black and white neighbors do not share your love for Key MS or Lewis. I suspect Hispanic families feel more comfortable at these schools given they are the majority population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll have to admit, I'm kind of surprised to hear that people in last nights boundary meeting were also against significant boundary changes. I wasn't able to attend, so this is all hearsay......but maybe those schools (Lewis) are better than they're made out to be if those families want to stay?
Be curious to hear from any Lewis parents on here.

People don’t want to be bussed out of their known neighborhood schools. People don’t want to be bussed to a “better” school if it means losing some of the established support systems at certain schools in terms of stuff like universal free lunch and breakfast and additional family resources. People don’t want to be put on a bus if they’re currently walkers. There’s lots of reasons.

[Anonymous]

Fairfax is a very large and rather anonymous county, and school communities are one strong source of community ties (even if not the only source). I think Reid lives in a fantasy land where everyone would enthusiastically embrace a "Great Reset" where new school boundaries come out that are slightly prettier or do a bit more to get kids out of trailers/modulars and into schools that may have been unnecessarily expanded in the past. What people mostly want is for FCPS to serve them, not the other way around.

But Reid is not the only culprit here; none of this would be happening if Karl Frisch wasn't trying to cram this down people's throats and then pretend all the decisions have been made by "experts," so that the budding politicians on the School Board themselves have no accountability for the disruption that would follow. That false hope was always going to crash and burn, because people know who is calling the shots at the end of the day and who has to approve or reject any boundary changes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll have to admit, I'm kind of surprised to hear that people in last nights boundary meeting were also against significant boundary changes. I wasn't able to attend, so this is all hearsay......but maybe those schools (Lewis) are better than they're made out to be if those families want to stay?
Be curious to hear from any Lewis parents on here.

Sorry but I’d find it hard to believe that many Lewis parents were at that meeting. I can’t think of a single negative, other than potentially the loss of IB, as to why parents in this pyramid would be against adjustments. We don’t show up at the meetings because - why would we step into the Lion’s den?

How about to be involved and advocate for the best education for you kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll have to admit, I'm kind of surprised to hear that people in last nights boundary meeting were also against significant boundary changes. I wasn't able to attend, so this is all hearsay......but maybe those schools (Lewis) are better than they're made out to be if those families want to stay?
Be curious to hear from any Lewis parents on here.

Sorry but I’d find it hard to believe that many Lewis parents were at that meeting. I can’t think of a single negative, other than potentially the loss of IB, as to why parents in this pyramid would be against adjustments. We don’t show up at the meetings because - why would we step into the Lion’s den?

How about to be involved and advocate for the best education for you kids?

Yeah, that's an incredibly odd take. Why step into the lion's den? well.....I'd do everything within my power for my kids. To each their own, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll have to admit, I'm kind of surprised to hear that people in last nights boundary meeting were also against significant boundary changes. I wasn't able to attend, so this is all hearsay......but maybe those schools (Lewis) are better than they're made out to be if those families want to stay?
Be curious to hear from any Lewis parents on here.

Sorry but I’d find it hard to believe that many Lewis parents were at that meeting. I can’t think of a single negative, other than potentially the loss of IB, as to why parents in this pyramid would be against adjustments. We don’t show up at the meetings because - why would we step into the Lion’s den?

How about to be involved and advocate for the best education for you kids?

Yeah, that's an incredibly odd take. Why step into the lion's den? well.....I'd do everything within my power for my kids. To each their own, I guess.

I'm not sure I would speak out about how awful my kid's school is in a room full of involved parents and administrators.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll have to admit, I'm kind of surprised to hear that people in last nights boundary meeting were also against significant boundary changes. I wasn't able to attend, so this is all hearsay......but maybe those schools (Lewis) are better than they're made out to be if those families want to stay?
Be curious to hear from any Lewis parents on here.

Lewis parent here, and I was at the meeting at Annandale. I would prefer not to have my children zoned out of Lewis, thank you very much.

Most of the Lewis parents went to the Mount Vernon meeting. I think you'll find that there are many, many parents who are very happy with the school and do not want to be rezoned.

Are you Hispanic? My black and white neighbors do not share your love for Key MS or Lewis. I suspect Hispanic families feel more comfortable at these schools given they are the majority population.

Seems kinda racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll have to admit, I'm kind of surprised to hear that people in last nights boundary meeting were also against significant boundary changes. I wasn't able to attend, so this is all hearsay......but maybe those schools (Lewis) are better than they're made out to be if those families want to stay?
Be curious to hear from any Lewis parents on here.

Sorry but I’d find it hard to believe that many Lewis parents were at that meeting. I can’t think of a single negative, other than potentially the loss of IB, as to why parents in this pyramid would be against adjustments. We don’t show up at the meetings because - why would we step into the Lion’s den?

How about to be involved and advocate for the best education for you kids?

Yeah, that's an incredibly odd take. Why step into the lion's den? well.....I'd do everything within my power for my kids. To each their own, I guess.

DP. I had the exact same thought as the person who you are responding to, just seems like an excuse to not show up.

Regardless, it is crystal clear that the passion lies with the majority (opponents of these boundary changes). The school board would be wise to realize that.