FCPS comprehensive boundary review

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

Question: Has any "suggestions" been made about particular moves? Or is everyone just confused?

Do we have theories on who would be moved?


So the starting point would be the schools that are severely overcrowded. Taking those schools and trying to shift those populations to schools not as crowded.

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/Proposed-FCPS-FY-2025-29-CIP.pdf


Langley at 98% capacity and Herndon at 71% should have great falls worried


Nope. Westfield to Herndon first.


I say leave McLean, Westfield, and Chantilly alone.

McLean needs a renovation plan, not a boundary change. McLean kids deserve better than to be treated as a foil for moving Great Falls kids from Langley to Herndon.

The Westfield kids who would move to Herndon (Coates) would further drive up the poverty at HHS. That doesn’t seem too smart.

Chantilly kids can move, if necessary, after Centreville has been expanded.


Ummm, you realize the only pretext for moving Great Falls to HHS is if they move some of McLean to Langley? Langley is under capacity. McLean kids wouldn’t be the foil in any way shape or form.

Gotta get your facts straight before trying to stir up a hornets nest.


McLean kids do not want to go to Langley.


Kids already at McLean don't want to go to Langley. The schools are rivals.

But the families of the younger kids at Spring Hill ES, which is a split feeder to Langley/McLean, who are zoned for McLean now likely would be happy to get moved there. Those kids are in the Tysons "attendance island." Spring Hill splits about 65-70% to Langley and 30-35% to McLean now.

As to whether moving those kids to Cooper/Langley, considered in conjunction with the additional growth planned in that part of Tysons, would play into the SB's potentially moving part of
Great Falls from Langley to Herndon is a question best left to others.


Well, if we’re going to consider growth in Tyson’s shouldn’t we also factor in the many thousands of units coming online in Herndon over the coming years? Or are we just planning to alleviate overcrowding at McLean by overcrowding Herndon?


Comstock just pulled out of its planned development in Herndon. So you shouldn’t count it.


Comstock pulled out of a plan to develop 200 residences. There are over 8,000 anticipated housing units for Herndon in the coming years.
It is an example of why planned development isn’t a good planning guide for school population in the next 5 years.


When you factor in planned development, you take a haircut for things like this. A probability model is infinitely better than a wait until the ground breaks model, unless you are trying to cook the books to suit an agenda.

Frankly, the people who think like you do are the reason that we find ourselves with one of the worst capital improvement plans in existence.
If they are addressing boundaries every five years, it does not make sense to count a development that has not even broken ground. The kids won’t show up until the next boundary change anyway.


That whipsaws kids within a span of a few years from one school and back again.

Under your approach, mental health is an afterthought.

I swear the people who advocate for this crap are devoid of any concern for Fcps students.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

Question: Has any "suggestions" been made about particular moves? Or is everyone just confused?

Do we have theories on who would be moved?


So the starting point would be the schools that are severely overcrowded. Taking those schools and trying to shift those populations to schools not as crowded.

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/Proposed-FCPS-FY-2025-29-CIP.pdf


Langley at 98% capacity and Herndon at 71% should have great falls worried


Nope. Westfield to Herndon first.


I say leave McLean, Westfield, and Chantilly alone.

McLean needs a renovation plan, not a boundary change. McLean kids deserve better than to be treated as a foil for moving Great Falls kids from Langley to Herndon.

The Westfield kids who would move to Herndon (Coates) would further drive up the poverty at HHS. That doesn’t seem too smart.

Chantilly kids can move, if necessary, after Centreville has been expanded.


Ummm, you realize the only pretext for moving Great Falls to HHS is if they move some of McLean to Langley? Langley is under capacity. McLean kids wouldn’t be the foil in any way shape or form.

Gotta get your facts straight before trying to stir up a hornets nest.


McLean kids do not want to go to Langley.


Kids already at McLean don't want to go to Langley. The schools are rivals.

But the families of the younger kids at Spring Hill ES, which is a split feeder to Langley/McLean, who are zoned for McLean now likely would be happy to get moved there. Those kids are in the Tysons "attendance island." Spring Hill splits about 65-70% to Langley and 30-35% to McLean now.

As to whether moving those kids to Cooper/Langley, considered in conjunction with the additional growth planned in that part of Tysons, would play into the SB's potentially moving part of
Great Falls from Langley to Herndon is a question best left to others.


Well, if we’re going to consider growth in Tyson’s shouldn’t we also factor in the many thousands of units coming online in Herndon over the coming years? Or are we just planning to alleviate overcrowding at McLean by overcrowding Herndon?


Comstock just pulled out of its planned development in Herndon. So you shouldn’t count it.


Comstock pulled out of a plan to develop 200 residences. There are over 8,000 anticipated housing units for Herndon in the coming years.
It is an example of why planned development isn’t a good planning guide for school population in the next 5 years.


When you factor in planned development, you take a haircut for things like this. A probability model is infinitely better than a wait until the ground breaks model, unless you are trying to cook the books to suit an agenda.

Frankly, the people who think like you do are the reason that we find ourselves with one of the worst capital improvement plans in existence.
If they are addressing boundaries every five years, it does not make sense to count a development that has not even broken ground. The kids won’t show up until the next boundary change anyway.


You’re just talking about enrollment forecasts. Since the actual capital expenditures on FCPS are based primarily on an obsolete 2008 plan, your point is largely moot. FCPS facilities planning has been and remains a joke.
Anonymous

What company are they using to figure this out?

The parameters are vague, to say the least. Is this a situation where the company being used, is a friend of the board and a backroom deal to feed money?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

Question: Has any "suggestions" been made about particular moves? Or is everyone just confused?

Do we have theories on who would be moved?


So the starting point would be the schools that are severely overcrowded. Taking those schools and trying to shift those populations to schools not as crowded.

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/Proposed-FCPS-FY-2025-29-CIP.pdf


Langley at 98% capacity and Herndon at 71% should have great falls worried


Nope. Westfield to Herndon first.


I say leave McLean, Westfield, and Chantilly alone.

McLean needs a renovation plan, not a boundary change. McLean kids deserve better than to be treated as a foil for moving Great Falls kids from Langley to Herndon.

The Westfield kids who would move to Herndon (Coates) would further drive up the poverty at HHS. That doesn’t seem too smart.

Chantilly kids can move, if necessary, after Centreville has been expanded.


Ummm, you realize the only pretext for moving Great Falls to HHS is if they move some of McLean to Langley? Langley is under capacity. McLean kids wouldn’t be the foil in any way shape or form.

Gotta get your facts straight before trying to stir up a hornets nest.


McLean kids do not want to go to Langley.


Kids already at McLean don't want to go to Langley. The schools are rivals.

But the families of the younger kids at Spring Hill ES, which is a split feeder to Langley/McLean, who are zoned for McLean now likely would be happy to get moved there. Those kids are in the Tysons "attendance island." Spring Hill splits about 65-70% to Langley and 30-35% to McLean now.

As to whether moving those kids to Cooper/Langley, considered in conjunction with the additional growth planned in that part of Tysons, would play into the SB's potentially moving part of
Great Falls from Langley to Herndon is a question best left to others.


Well, if we’re going to consider growth in Tyson’s shouldn’t we also factor in the many thousands of units coming online in Herndon over the coming years? Or are we just planning to alleviate overcrowding at McLean by overcrowding Herndon?


Comstock just pulled out of its planned development in Herndon. So you shouldn’t count it.


Comstock pulled out of a plan to develop 200 residences. There are over 8,000 anticipated housing units for Herndon in the coming years.
It is an example of why planned development isn’t a good planning guide for school population in the next 5 years.


When you factor in planned development, you take a haircut for things like this. A probability model is infinitely better than a wait until the ground breaks model, unless you are trying to cook the books to suit an agenda.

Frankly, the people who think like you do are the reason that we find ourselves with one of the worst capital improvement plans in existence.
If they are addressing boundaries every five years, it does not make sense to count a development that has not even broken ground. The kids won’t show up until the next boundary change anyway.


That whipsaws kids within a span of a few years from one school and back again.

Under your approach, mental health is an afterthought.

I swear the people who advocate for this crap are devoid of any concern for Fcps students.
It’s not my approach. I am looking at the parameters.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

Question: Has any "suggestions" been made about particular moves? Or is everyone just confused?

Do we have theories on who would be moved?


So the starting point would be the schools that are severely overcrowded. Taking those schools and trying to shift those populations to schools not as crowded.

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/Proposed-FCPS-FY-2025-29-CIP.pdf


Langley at 98% capacity and Herndon at 71% should have great falls worried


Nope. Westfield to Herndon first.


I say leave McLean, Westfield, and Chantilly alone.

McLean needs a renovation plan, not a boundary change. McLean kids deserve better than to be treated as a foil for moving Great Falls kids from Langley to Herndon.

The Westfield kids who would move to Herndon (Coates) would further drive up the poverty at HHS. That doesn’t seem too smart.

Chantilly kids can move, if necessary, after Centreville has been expanded.


Ummm, you realize the only pretext for moving Great Falls to HHS is if they move some of McLean to Langley? Langley is under capacity. McLean kids wouldn’t be the foil in any way shape or form.

Gotta get your facts straight before trying to stir up a hornets nest.


McLean kids do not want to go to Langley.


Kids already at McLean don't want to go to Langley. The schools are rivals.

But the families of the younger kids at Spring Hill ES, which is a split feeder to Langley/McLean, who are zoned for McLean now likely would be happy to get moved there. Those kids are in the Tysons "attendance island." Spring Hill splits about 65-70% to Langley and 30-35% to McLean now.

As to whether moving those kids to Cooper/Langley, considered in conjunction with the additional growth planned in that part of Tysons, would play into the SB's potentially moving part of
Great Falls from Langley to Herndon is a question best left to others.


Well, if we’re going to consider growth in Tyson’s shouldn’t we also factor in the many thousands of units coming online in Herndon over the coming years? Or are we just planning to alleviate overcrowding at McLean by overcrowding Herndon?


Comstock just pulled out of its planned development in Herndon. So you shouldn’t count it.


Comstock pulled out of a plan to develop 200 residences. There are over 8,000 anticipated housing units for Herndon in the coming years.
It is an example of why planned development isn’t a good planning guide for school population in the next 5 years.


When you factor in planned development, you take a haircut for things like this. A probability model is infinitely better than a wait until the ground breaks model, unless you are trying to cook the books to suit an agenda.

Frankly, the people who think like you do are the reason that we find ourselves with one of the worst capital improvement plans in existence.
If they are addressing boundaries every five years, it does not make sense to count a development that has not even broken ground. The kids won’t show up until the next boundary change anyway.


You’re just talking about enrollment forecasts. Since the actual capital expenditures on FCPS are based primarily on an obsolete 2008 plan, your point is largely moot. FCPS facilities planning has been and remains a joke.
I suspect the “obsolete 2008” plan will be adjusted to reflect the boundary changes.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

Question: Has any "suggestions" been made about particular moves? Or is everyone just confused?

Do we have theories on who would be moved?


So the starting point would be the schools that are severely overcrowded. Taking those schools and trying to shift those populations to schools not as crowded.

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/Proposed-FCPS-FY-2025-29-CIP.pdf


Langley at 98% capacity and Herndon at 71% should have great falls worried


Nope. Westfield to Herndon first.


I say leave McLean, Westfield, and Chantilly alone.

McLean needs a renovation plan, not a boundary change. McLean kids deserve better than to be treated as a foil for moving Great Falls kids from Langley to Herndon.

The Westfield kids who would move to Herndon (Coates) would further drive up the poverty at HHS. That doesn’t seem too smart.

Chantilly kids can move, if necessary, after Centreville has been expanded.


Ummm, you realize the only pretext for moving Great Falls to HHS is if they move some of McLean to Langley? Langley is under capacity. McLean kids wouldn’t be the foil in any way shape or form.

Gotta get your facts straight before trying to stir up a hornets nest.


McLean kids do not want to go to Langley.


Kids already at McLean don't want to go to Langley. The schools are rivals.

But the families of the younger kids at Spring Hill ES, which is a split feeder to Langley/McLean, who are zoned for McLean now likely would be happy to get moved there. Those kids are in the Tysons "attendance island." Spring Hill splits about 65-70% to Langley and 30-35% to McLean now.

As to whether moving those kids to Cooper/Langley, considered in conjunction with the additional growth planned in that part of Tysons, would play into the SB's potentially moving part of
Great Falls from Langley to Herndon is a question best left to others.


Well, if we’re going to consider growth in Tyson’s shouldn’t we also factor in the many thousands of units coming online in Herndon over the coming years? Or are we just planning to alleviate overcrowding at McLean by overcrowding Herndon?


Comstock just pulled out of its planned development in Herndon. So you shouldn’t count it.


Comstock pulled out of a plan to develop 200 residences. There are over 8,000 anticipated housing units for Herndon in the coming years.


It would be logical to have a rep [5]from each of the City of Fairfax, Towns of Herndon, Vienna plus Reston and Mclean special tax districts on the Boundary Review Advisory Committee in addition to the 48 pyramid randoms. 8000 housing units Town of Herndon or a Herndon address? Comstock was 281 residential units in "classic" downtown Herndon. Herndon HS is actually in something called Sugarland precinct [schools Langley HS and Herndon HS]and then there's Herndon 1, 2, 3 plus Clearview, Hutchison etc. North of Sugarland [route 7 partial border ] is Seneca.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

Question: Has any "suggestions" been made about particular moves? Or is everyone just confused?

Do we have theories on who would be moved?


So the starting point would be the schools that are severely overcrowded. Taking those schools and trying to shift those populations to schools not as crowded.

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/Proposed-FCPS-FY-2025-29-CIP.pdf


Langley at 98% capacity and Herndon at 71% should have great falls worried


Nope. Westfield to Herndon first.


I say leave McLean, Westfield, and Chantilly alone.

McLean needs a renovation plan, not a boundary change. McLean kids deserve better than to be treated as a foil for moving Great Falls kids from Langley to Herndon.

The Westfield kids who would move to Herndon (Coates) would further drive up the poverty at HHS. That doesn’t seem too smart.

Chantilly kids can move, if necessary, after Centreville has been expanded.


Ummm, you realize the only pretext for moving Great Falls to HHS is if they move some of McLean to Langley? Langley is under capacity. McLean kids wouldn’t be the foil in any way shape or form.

Gotta get your facts straight before trying to stir up a hornets nest.


McLean kids do not want to go to Langley.


Kids already at McLean don't want to go to Langley. The schools are rivals.

But the families of the younger kids at Spring Hill ES, which is a split feeder to Langley/McLean, who are zoned for McLean now likely would be happy to get moved there. Those kids are in the Tysons "attendance island." Spring Hill splits about 65-70% to Langley and 30-35% to McLean now.

As to whether moving those kids to Cooper/Langley, considered in conjunction with the additional growth planned in that part of Tysons, would play into the SB's potentially moving part of
Great Falls from Langley to Herndon is a question best left to others.


Well, if we’re going to consider growth in Tyson’s shouldn’t we also factor in the many thousands of units coming online in Herndon over the coming years? Or are we just planning to alleviate overcrowding at McLean by overcrowding Herndon?


Comstock just pulled out of its planned development in Herndon. So you shouldn’t count it.


Comstock pulled out of a plan to develop 200 residences. There are over 8,000 anticipated housing units for Herndon in the coming years.
It is an example of why planned development isn’t a good planning guide for school population in the next 5 years.


When you factor in planned development, you take a haircut for things like this. A probability model is infinitely better than a wait until the ground breaks model, unless you are trying to cook the books to suit an agenda.

Frankly, the people who think like you do are the reason that we find ourselves with one of the worst capital improvement plans in existence.
If they are addressing boundaries every five years, it does not make sense to count a development that has not even broken ground. The kids won’t show up until the next boundary change anyway.


That whipsaws kids within a span of a few years from one school and back again.

Under your approach, mental health is an afterthought.

I swear the people who advocate for this crap are devoid of any concern for Fcps students.
It’s not my approach. I am looking at the parameters.


They are in way over their heads. Pretending it’s 1984 again when FCPS has spent the last 40 years installing different programs at different schools and then encouraging parents to find the schools that appeal most to their families will backfire spectacularly. If there is any consolation it is knowing this debacle in the making may spell the end of the political careers of idiots like Karl Frisch.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
What company are they using to figure this out?

The parameters are vague, to say the least. Is this a situation where the company being used, is a friend of the board and a backroom deal to feed money?


The company hired is Thru.

https://www.thru.co/
Anonymous
Fairfax County is composed--I think- of mostly people from other places in the United States and around the world. One thing that most of the people share in common is that they are from "somewhere else."

The one thing people crave is stability. Why would a school system destroy that?

What is going to be the result?

A fruitbasket turnover. Even the kids who stay where they are are likely to lose friends to other schools. Some will be transferred with lots of friends. Others will be transferred with just a few. Some will stay in their community where they have played sports and participated in other activities, etc. Others will be shifted to a place where they may not know anyone.

The School Board needs to look at themselves. How many of them have come from elsewhere? Most or all of them. Do they not understand? Would they want their own kids (most of whom are grown) to go through this? That is doubtful.
I'm guessing that McElveen would like his girls to have a stable environment and likely bought his own home with that in mind. Do you think Rachna would have appreciated this for her son? Do you think Moon's community wants this? Lady wants Great Falls for her Herndon school. Who knows what Frisch really wants except to get political points from his Progressive base.

I think most of us want what is best for ALL children, but our own come first. I just don't see where any kids are going to benefit from this. This is NOT about the kids, it is about test scores on paper. Just like the renaming--it has no effect.

Most of the boundaries were created for a reason. Until 2008, it was for convenience. Then, it became extremely political when one school's PTA was given the power to pick and choose from other schools. It worked for that school at the expense of others.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
What company are they using to figure this out?

The parameters are vague, to say the least. Is this a situation where the company being used, is a friend of the board and a backroom deal to feed money?


The company hired is Thru.

https://www.thru.co/


This does not give me any confidence in this process. People who have made a career of telling other people what to do without doing it themselves. Think Instructional Coaches on steroids.

I saw nothing about redistricting. I saw nothing about a sense of the communities in Fairfax County. I saw nothing about IB/AP. I also saw nothing about success.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
What company are they using to figure this out?

The parameters are vague, to say the least. Is this a situation where the company being used, is a friend of the board and a backroom deal to feed money?


The company hired is Thru.

https://www.thru.co/


This does not give me any confidence in this process. People who have made a career of telling other people what to do without doing it themselves. Think Instructional Coaches on steroids.

I saw nothing about redistricting. I saw nothing about a sense of the communities in Fairfax County. I saw nothing about IB/AP. I also saw nothing about success.


“Thru Consulting” is a fair name. They are basically a conduit for the left-wing zealots on the School Board to effect the changes they want to make. The changes can be laundered “thru” the consulting firm so board members can assert they are acting based on third-party recommendations.
Anonymous
So it appears this GIS tool is designed to play around with boundaries on a map to "capture" the right amount of non-poor kids just outside of an existing low-SES HS boundary.

The options to make this whole thing work appear to be:
1) cut over entire high SES elementary schools to adjacent low-SES pyramid
pros: only affects a concentrated localized population
cons: maximum disruption to that population
2) adjust the majority of ES boundaries across multiple pyramids to 'equitize' two adjacent high schools
pros: maintains proximity, community, transportation
cons: highest level of disruption, potentially affects all not living a stone's throw from elementary school
3) low-SES high school pyramid captures adjacent high-SES high school student population,
pros: minimizes the breadth of population disruption within donor pyramids
cons: maximizes negative impact on that population (proximity, community, transportation)

The unspoken con for each of these options is that it results in papering up the low-SES high school to mask instead of help its failing student population.

I am in the WSHS pyramid and am thinking how terrible the consequences could be for a Hunt Valley family that is told either Saratoga is their new ES, or HVES is now cutover to Lewis.
Anonymous
Can't help but think of these consultants doing this based only on numbers and percentages. They have no idea of the communities involved.

For years, I have thought that the SB was clueless. They have finally completed "jumping the shark."
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
What company are they using to figure this out?

The parameters are vague, to say the least. Is this a situation where the company being used, is a friend of the board and a backroom deal to feed money?


The company hired is Thru.

https://www.thru.co/


This does not give me any confidence in this process. People who have made a career of telling other people what to do without doing it themselves. Think Instructional Coaches on steroids.

I saw nothing about redistricting. I saw nothing about a sense of the communities in Fairfax County. I saw nothing about IB/AP. I also saw nothing about success.


They work with Alexandria City Schools so you know that they know their stuff *sarcasm*
Anonymous
I also think that if they are doing this every 5 years, they should wait to see if these schools they are saying will be over capacity actually are. I really and truly don't think WSHS will be over capacity.
Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)
Go to: