How would you change the FCPS boundary maps?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
If there is one benefit about COVID, it is that Shrevewood’s attendance is down. My kid’s class size is in the teens. |
Anonymous
+1. More schools and spread them out. I live within 2 miles of four different elementaries and two high schools. When schools are close together like that, some kids are traveling a looong way to school and others are passing their nearest school on the way to their zoned school. They should be more evenly distributed. |
Anonymous
Pray tell, what make you say that? It begins by TJ reform. It continues with an outside firm hired to examine AAP through an equity lens. It then follows with eliminating centers and expensive busing. Finishes with AAP for all. FCPS needs to serve all students. |
Anonymous
While we're at it, just give everyone a perfect GPA. |
Anonymous
This is an idea which actually makes sense to me. Especially when you consider that most of the kids who were in AAP programs end up going to their base HS anyway. It's not like all of them go to TJHSST; if that were the case their existence would be more justified. And while I am sure they end up having good class ranks and good SAT/ACT scores in their HS, it is not clear to me that they are noticeably better than the students who went to all the "regular" schools but still took the honors/AP/IB courses which were available. |
Anonymous
Is that for real? Where did everyone go? Is it an AAP class? |
Anonymous
|
There are so many factors that reduce the odds of major boundary changes. The PP's touch on a really big one, which is the impact of academic programs on enrollments. It turns into a big chicken vs. egg exercise. The boundary changes that you might make if a Carson isn't going to remain a mega-AAP center forever are very different than the changes you might make if it is.
The other big factor is the reluctance of the recent and current School Board to talk about sending kids to lower rated schools except in the most abstract terms. It's one thing for a Pat Hynes to talk generally about using boundaries as a tool to promote equity. It's another thing to actually do it - hasn't been done in FCPS for over a decade. And of course we've seen the members like Elaine Tholen who pay lip service to equity but make sure no apartments go to Langley. |
Anonymous
Last year or 2 years ago they basically decided to give each ES and MS a local level IV. Most people assume that will eliminate centers. Then there’s that pilot math thread down the page with an email that, if real, says FCPS wants to move away from advanced math altogether. |
Anonymous
Meanwhile, the Kindergarten classes are HUGE. |
Anonymous
Yes. I am sour on the whole "attendance island" situation, though. There were changes this summer based on eliminating attendance islands, that did nothing of the sort. The kids on the opposite side of Beech Tree will always be an island as long as they are zoned to a school across route 50. Either open another school on that side, zone them to a school on that side, or don't use that as a pretense to move kids on the opposite side of route 50. To be clear, the Sleepy Hollow neighborhood was moved to BTES from SHES to theoretically eliminate an attendance island. IMO, it does nothing of the sort. I don't actually have an issue with being moved to BTES, but the logic for it did not make sense to me. |
Anonymous
There is technically no island at Beech Tree following the changes, just a gerrymandered boundary. |
Anonymous
I don't know about Shrevewood, but our AAP classes are large and a lot of people left for private after their kids didn't get into AAP, so grades 3+ are much smaller than K-2 |
Anonymous
| PP again - I mean to say the GenEd classes are small and the AAP class is large. |
Anonymous
Falls Church to Madison does not make any sense. |
Anonymous
At one point I saw a map that had all of these combined. What happened to that map? |