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:It will be interesting to see if Sears proposes vouchers for all in her campaign. I'd consider voting for her if she did that. Also waiting to see how the sanctuary policy Youngkin is proposing shakes out

+1. We don’t need it to afford private, but FCPS school board does not deserve our funding after this equity-based redistricting.

What equity-based redistricting?

When they move MC/UMC kids to schools that are high FARMS and high ELL in an attempt to cover up the fact that they are failing the kids at those schools. Adults don't know how to do their jobs to enact policy to improve individual learners so instead they move kids around so that the test scores and other benchmarks don't look as terrible on paper.

It’s actually the exact opposite that has happened repeatedly in FCPS for the past 15+ years, but you know that. God forbid they try to undo even a small part of the damage they’ve inflicted on schools like Annandale and Lewis.

DP. What damage? Be specific.

They won't be specific of course because to do so would be to admit that they believe that certain children damage schools just by having demographics they also deem undesirable. That would be admitting to having the same thoughts as those that are trying to denigrate. Such hypocrisy.

Sounds like a self-own on your part.

It’s clear that MC/UMC kids are more likely to enable a school to offer more challenging academics and a wider range of electives and extra-curricular activities. The MC/UMC families are also far more able (and likely) to have the time and resources to participate in PTAs and booster programs.

For over 15 years, FCPS has only redistricted to move MC/UMC neighborhoods into wealthier schools. Moving Annandale kids to Woodson and Lewis kids to West Springfield are just two examples. It increased both the actual and the perceived disparities between neighboring schools. The wealthier schools got expanded and saw their enrollments grow, while the older, poorer schools get neglected.

Of course people pick up on this, and then object to potentially getting moved to the schools that FCPS itself has treated poorly. Now that FCPS is implicitly acknowledging its mistakes, and possibly poised to do something about it, people who benefitted from their past actions predictably object.

And, not surprisingly, no group defends the status quo as much as Langley parents, since that school is a case study in economic segregation facilitated by prior School Board members. They are today’s equivalent of the white supremacists who fought integration at every turn in the 1950s and 1960s.

Thanks for confirming. Poor schools don't need more kids to get improved facilities. As Justice shows, you can have brand new everything and still people avoid it like the plague.

Odd that you'd bring Justice into the conversation, as unlike Annandale and Lewis its boundaries haven't changed much for a long time.

Justice doesn't have "brand-new everything." It recently got an addition, but the rest of the school was last renovated about 20 years ago. And I guess only some people count as "people" to you. Justice has over 100 more students than Langley and over 200 more than Madison.

If you want to argue that FCPS is failing Lewis and Annandale by not providing new facilities, just say that. That is separate from whether other kids should be rezone there. You are the on making the argument that lot of poor kids make the school undesirable.

FCPS has served schools like Lewis and Annandale poorly both by neglecting the physical plants and by redistricting single-family neighborhoods to other schools. These things are not mutually exclusive, but together they promote the concentration of poverty at those schools.

So the poor kids are the problem. Thank you for finally acknowledging that you have the same viewpoint as others. The only difference is that some parents aren't going to sacrifice their kid's education at one of those schools where poverty is concentrated.

[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:It will be interesting to see if Sears proposes vouchers for all in her campaign. I'd consider voting for her if she did that. Also waiting to see how the sanctuary policy Youngkin is proposing shakes out

+1. We don’t need it to afford private, but FCPS school board does not deserve our funding after this equity-based redistricting.

What equity-based redistricting?

When they move MC/UMC kids to schools that are high FARMS and high ELL in an attempt to cover up the fact that they are failing the kids at those schools. Adults don't know how to do their jobs to enact policy to improve individual learners so instead they move kids around so that the test scores and other benchmarks don't look as terrible on paper.

It’s actually the exact opposite that has happened repeatedly in FCPS for the past 15+ years, but you know that. God forbid they try to undo even a small part of the damage they’ve inflicted on schools like Annandale and Lewis.

DP. What damage? Be specific.

They won't be specific of course because to do so would be to admit that they believe that certain children damage schools just by having demographics they also deem undesirable. That would be admitting to having the same thoughts as those that are trying to denigrate. Such hypocrisy.

Sounds like a self-own on your part.

It’s clear that MC/UMC kids are more likely to enable a school to offer more challenging academics and a wider range of electives and extra-curricular activities. The MC/UMC families are also far more able (and likely) to have the time and resources to participate in PTAs and booster programs.

For over 15 years, FCPS has only redistricted to move MC/UMC neighborhoods into wealthier schools. Moving Annandale kids to Woodson and Lewis kids to West Springfield are just two examples. It increased both the actual and the perceived disparities between neighboring schools. The wealthier schools got expanded and saw their enrollments grow, while the older, poorer schools get neglected.

Of course people pick up on this, and then object to potentially getting moved to the schools that FCPS itself has treated poorly. Now that FCPS is implicitly acknowledging its mistakes, and possibly poised to do something about it, people who benefitted from their past actions predictably object.

And, not surprisingly, no group defends the status quo as much as Langley parents, since that school is a case study in economic segregation facilitated by prior School Board members. They are today’s equivalent of the white supremacists who fought integration at every turn in the 1950s and 1960s.

Thanks for confirming. Poor schools don't need more kids to get improved facilities. As Justice shows, you can have brand new everything and still people avoid it like the plague.

Odd that you'd bring Justice into the conversation, as unlike Annandale and Lewis its boundaries haven't changed much for a long time.

Justice doesn't have "brand-new everything." It recently got an addition, but the rest of the school was last renovated about 20 years ago. And I guess only some people count as "people" to you. Justice has over 100 more students than Langley and over 200 more than Madison.

If you want to argue that FCPS is failing Lewis and Annandale by not providing new facilities, just say that. That is separate from whether other kids should be rezone there. You are the on making the argument that lot of poor kids make the school undesirable.

FCPS has served schools like Lewis and Annandale poorly both by neglecting the physical plants and by redistricting single-family neighborhoods to other schools. These things are not mutually exclusive, but together they promote the concentration of poverty at those schools.

So the poor kids are the problem. Thank you for finally acknowledging that you have the same viewpoint as others. The only difference is that some parents aren't going to sacrifice their kid's education at one of those schools where poverty is concentrated.

You aren't very good at either drawing conclusions or twisting words. Plan to work on that in 2025.

[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:It will be interesting to see if Sears proposes vouchers for all in her campaign. I'd consider voting for her if she did that. Also waiting to see how the sanctuary policy Youngkin is proposing shakes out

+1. We don’t need it to afford private, but FCPS school board does not deserve our funding after this equity-based redistricting.

What equity-based redistricting?

When they move MC/UMC kids to schools that are high FARMS and high ELL in an attempt to cover up the fact that they are failing the kids at those schools. Adults don't know how to do their jobs to enact policy to improve individual learners so instead they move kids around so that the test scores and other benchmarks don't look as terrible on paper.

It’s actually the exact opposite that has happened repeatedly in FCPS for the past 15+ years, but you know that. God forbid they try to undo even a small part of the damage they’ve inflicted on schools like Annandale and Lewis.

+1

I’m confused- wasn’t most of the “damage” done by the zoning commission adding more apartments not in fact the school board?

DP. Several boundary changes moved wealthier, single-family homes out of Annandale and Lewis into Woodson and West Springfield, respectively. I think this is the type of change to which the previous poster is referring.

And don't forget the wealthier homes in Herndon being sent to langley.

Ha, looks like the SJW inadvertently finally figured out what causes property values to be high. 😂

SJW?

DP. PP thinks that anyone who comments on how weird it is that single-family areas miles away from Langley in Herndon, Reston and Vienna get sent to Langley (while Langley has no apartments or condos in closer-in areas in Reston and Tysons) must be an "SJW" ("Social Justice Warrior").

They seem to be experimenting to find out just how far out they can keep sticking their neck before the School Board cuts it off and sends them back to Herndon. Much of western Great Falls was zoned to Herndon until the mid-1990s.

I experimented back in college. Today I contingency plan (very well I might add!) Sorry to ruin your SJW agenda.

Back to property values- why are those specific Herndon homes’ property values so high?

You're very odd. Constantly boasting about your contingency plans yet even more frequently complaining about boundary changes that haven't even been proposed yet and bashing other posters.

Are you sure you didn't experiment a little too much in college?

Just fighting for my community.

But I noticed you didn’t tell us why the property values of those Herndon addresses that go to Langley are so high.

Maybe it has to do with the school pyramid? Bring school pyramids down to the LCD and destroy the tax base. From what I keep hearing the reason our school system is in such a state is because we don’t have enough money. Decimating the tax rolls ain’t going to help that. The quicker the SB learns that, the less damage will be done- just not sure they are capable of exiting the echo chamber.

pj's!

Ohhhhh lol.

They distracted single family homes and not more apartments/condos to Langley. It's so obvious to everybody.

WTH did I just read??
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see if Sears proposes vouchers for all in her campaign. I'd consider voting for her if she did that. Also waiting to see how the sanctuary policy Youngkin is proposing shakes out

+1. We don’t need it to afford private, but FCPS school board does not deserve our funding after this equity-based redistricting.

What equity-based redistricting?

When they move MC/UMC kids to schools that are high FARMS and high ELL in an attempt to cover up the fact that they are failing the kids at those schools. Adults don't know how to do their jobs to enact policy to improve individual learners so instead they move kids around so that the test scores and other benchmarks don't look as terrible on paper.

It’s actually the exact opposite that has happened repeatedly in FCPS for the past 15+ years, but you know that. God forbid they try to undo even a small part of the damage they’ve inflicted on schools like Annandale and Lewis.

DP. What damage? Be specific.

They won't be specific of course because to do so would be to admit that they believe that certain children damage schools just by having demographics they also deem undesirable. That would be admitting to having the same thoughts as those that are trying to denigrate. Such hypocrisy.

Sounds like a self-own on your part.

It’s clear that MC/UMC kids are more likely to enable a school to offer more challenging academics and a wider range of electives and extra-curricular activities. The MC/UMC families are also far more able (and likely) to have the time and resources to participate in PTAs and booster programs.

For over 15 years, FCPS has only redistricted to move MC/UMC neighborhoods into wealthier schools. Moving Annandale kids to Woodson and Lewis kids to West Springfield are just two examples. It increased both the actual and the perceived disparities between neighboring schools. The wealthier schools got expanded and saw their enrollments grow, while the older, poorer schools get neglected.

Of course people pick up on this, and then object to potentially getting moved to the schools that FCPS itself has treated poorly. Now that FCPS is implicitly acknowledging its mistakes, and possibly poised to do something about it, people who benefitted from their past actions predictably object.

And, not surprisingly, no group defends the status quo as much as Langley parents, since that school is a case study in economic segregation facilitated by prior School Board members. They are today’s equivalent of the white supremacists who fought integration at every turn in the 1950s and 1960s.

DP. Could you please explain your first paragraph? How would sending MC/UMC kids to an underperforming school help that school? Your "argument" makes no sense at all - and your last paragraph is just the rantings of a crazy person. I mean, seriously? Do you hear yourself?

[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:It will be interesting to see if Sears proposes vouchers for all in her campaign. I'd consider voting for her if she did that. Also waiting to see how the sanctuary policy Youngkin is proposing shakes out

+1. We don’t need it to afford private, but FCPS school board does not deserve our funding after this equity-based redistricting.

What equity-based redistricting?

When they move MC/UMC kids to schools that are high FARMS and high ELL in an attempt to cover up the fact that they are failing the kids at those schools. Adults don't know how to do their jobs to enact policy to improve individual learners so instead they move kids around so that the test scores and other benchmarks don't look as terrible on paper.

It’s actually the exact opposite that has happened repeatedly in FCPS for the past 15+ years, but you know that. God forbid they try to undo even a small part of the damage they’ve inflicted on schools like Annandale and Lewis.

DP. What damage? Be specific.

They won't be specific of course because to do so would be to admit that they believe that certain children damage schools just by having demographics they also deem undesirable. That would be admitting to having the same thoughts as those that are trying to denigrate. Such hypocrisy.

Sounds like a self-own on your part.

It’s clear that MC/UMC kids are more likely to enable a school to offer more challenging academics and a wider range of electives and extra-curricular activities. The MC/UMC families are also far more able (and likely) to have the time and resources to participate in PTAs and booster programs.

For over 15 years, FCPS has only redistricted to move MC/UMC neighborhoods into wealthier schools. Moving Annandale kids to Woodson and Lewis kids to West Springfield are just two examples. It increased both the actual and the perceived disparities between neighboring schools. The wealthier schools got expanded and saw their enrollments grow, while the older, poorer schools get neglected.

Of course people pick up on this, and then object to potentially getting moved to the schools that FCPS itself has treated poorly. Now that FCPS is implicitly acknowledging its mistakes, and possibly poised to do something about it, people who benefitted from their past actions predictably object.

And, not surprisingly, no group defends the status quo as much as Langley parents, since that school is a case study in economic segregation facilitated by prior School Board members. They are today’s equivalent of the white supremacists who fought integration at every turn in the 1950s and 1960s.

Thanks for confirming. Poor schools don't need more kids to get improved facilities. As Justice shows, you can have brand new everything and still people avoid it like the plague.

Odd that you'd bring Justice into the conversation, as unlike Annandale and Lewis its boundaries haven't changed much for a long time.

Justice doesn't have "brand-new everything." It recently got an addition, but the rest of the school was last renovated about 20 years ago. And I guess only some people count as "people" to you. Justice has over 100 more students than Langley and over 200 more than Madison.

If you want to argue that FCPS is failing Lewis and Annandale by not providing new facilities, just say that. That is separate from whether other kids should be rezone there. You are the on making the argument that lot of poor kids make the school undesirable.

FCPS has served schools like Lewis and Annandale poorly both by neglecting the physical plants and by redistricting single-family neighborhoods to other schools. These things are not mutually exclusive, but together they promote the concentration of poverty at those schools.

So the poor kids are the problem. Thank you for finally acknowledging that you have the same viewpoint as others. The only difference is that some parents aren't going to sacrifice their kid's education at one of those schools where poverty is concentrated.

+1000
I love how the PP *finally* self-owned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see if Sears proposes vouchers for all in her campaign. I'd consider voting for her if she did that. Also waiting to see how the sanctuary policy Youngkin is proposing shakes out

+1. We don’t need it to afford private, but FCPS school board does not deserve our funding after this equity-based redistricting.

What equity-based redistricting?

When they move MC/UMC kids to schools that are high FARMS and high ELL in an attempt to cover up the fact that they are failing the kids at those schools. Adults don't know how to do their jobs to enact policy to improve individual learners so instead they move kids around so that the test scores and other benchmarks don't look as terrible on paper.

It’s actually the exact opposite that has happened repeatedly in FCPS for the past 15+ years, but you know that. God forbid they try to undo even a small part of the damage they’ve inflicted on schools like Annandale and Lewis.

DP. What damage? Be specific.

They won't be specific of course because to do so would be to admit that they believe that certain children damage schools just by having demographics they also deem undesirable. That would be admitting to having the same thoughts as those that are trying to denigrate. Such hypocrisy.

Sounds like a self-own on your part.

It’s clear that MC/UMC kids are more likely to enable a school to offer more challenging academics and a wider range of electives and extra-curricular activities. The MC/UMC families are also far more able (and likely) to have the time and resources to participate in PTAs and booster programs.

For over 15 years, FCPS has only redistricted to move MC/UMC neighborhoods into wealthier schools. Moving Annandale kids to Woodson and Lewis kids to West Springfield are just two examples. It increased both the actual and the perceived disparities between neighboring schools. The wealthier schools got expanded and saw their enrollments grow, while the older, poorer schools get neglected.

Of course people pick up on this, and then object to potentially getting moved to the schools that FCPS itself has treated poorly. Now that FCPS is implicitly acknowledging its mistakes, and possibly poised to do something about it, people who benefitted from their past actions predictably object.

And, not surprisingly, no group defends the status quo as much as Langley parents, since that school is a case study in economic segregation facilitated by prior School Board members. They are today’s equivalent of the white supremacists who fought integration at every turn in the 1950s and 1960s.

DP. Could you please explain your first paragraph? How would sending MC/UMC kids to an underperforming school help that school? Your "argument" makes no sense at all - and your last paragraph is just the rantings of a crazy person. I mean, seriously? Do you hear yourself?

NP:

It would allow the underperforming schools to offer programs and clubs and teams that currently don’t exist. If the small underperforming school only has 6 kids interested in playing tennis, that program gets cut and they don’t have the opportunity to play. Once another neighborhood or 5 gets redistricted in, those 6 kids get peers to play with.

Repeat for foreign languages (some only offer Spanish/one other), electives, advanced classes. If there isn’t a critical mass of kids, those classes get dropped from the master schedule out of necessity. We need a minimum of 12 to run a class, but in reality if we run one class of 12, then 4 other classes at 25 kids get bumped up to 30, so it’s hard to justify less than 20. That means a lot of stuff just isn’t offered.

It seems reasonable to me that any kid in Fairfax county should have an opportunity to play a VHSL sport, play in a jazz band, have multiple choices for foreign languages, and take a full repertoire of college level classes without having to go to another campus.

—teacher at one of the underperforming middle schools (whose elective offerings have been shrinking year over year as population dwindles)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see if Sears proposes vouchers for all in her campaign. I'd consider voting for her if she did that. Also waiting to see how the sanctuary policy Youngkin is proposing shakes out

+1. We don’t need it to afford private, but FCPS school board does not deserve our funding after this equity-based redistricting.

What equity-based redistricting?

When they move MC/UMC kids to schools that are high FARMS and high ELL in an attempt to cover up the fact that they are failing the kids at those schools. Adults don't know how to do their jobs to enact policy to improve individual learners so instead they move kids around so that the test scores and other benchmarks don't look as terrible on paper.

It’s actually the exact opposite that has happened repeatedly in FCPS for the past 15+ years, but you know that. God forbid they try to undo even a small part of the damage they’ve inflicted on schools like Annandale and Lewis.

DP. What damage? Be specific.

They won't be specific of course because to do so would be to admit that they believe that certain children damage schools just by having demographics they also deem undesirable. That would be admitting to having the same thoughts as those that are trying to denigrate. Such hypocrisy.

Sounds like a self-own on your part.

It’s clear that MC/UMC kids are more likely to enable a school to offer more challenging academics and a wider range of electives and extra-curricular activities. The MC/UMC families are also far more able (and likely) to have the time and resources to participate in PTAs and booster programs.

For over 15 years, FCPS has only redistricted to move MC/UMC neighborhoods into wealthier schools. Moving Annandale kids to Woodson and Lewis kids to West Springfield are just two examples. It increased both the actual and the perceived disparities between neighboring schools. The wealthier schools got expanded and saw their enrollments grow, while the older, poorer schools get neglected.

Of course people pick up on this, and then object to potentially getting moved to the schools that FCPS itself has treated poorly. Now that FCPS is implicitly acknowledging its mistakes, and possibly poised to do something about it, people who benefitted from their past actions predictably object.

And, not surprisingly, no group defends the status quo as much as Langley parents, since that school is a case study in economic segregation facilitated by prior School Board members. They are today’s equivalent of the white supremacists who fought integration at every turn in the 1950s and 1960s.

DP. Could you please explain your first paragraph? How would sending MC/UMC kids to an underperforming school help that school? Your "argument" makes no sense at all - and your last paragraph is just the rantings of a crazy person. I mean, seriously? Do you hear yourself?

NP:

It would allow the underperforming schools to offer programs and clubs and teams that currently don’t exist. If the small underperforming school only has 6 kids interested in playing tennis, that program gets cut and they don’t have the opportunity to play. Once another neighborhood or 5 gets redistricted in, those 6 kids get peers to play with.

Repeat for foreign languages (some only offer Spanish/one other), electives, advanced classes. If there isn’t a critical mass of kids, those classes get dropped from the master schedule out of necessity. We need a minimum of 12 to run a class, but in reality if we run one class of 12, then 4 other classes at 25 kids get bumped up to 30, so it’s hard to justify less than 20. That means a lot of stuff just isn’t offered.

It seems reasonable to me that any kid in Fairfax county should have an opportunity to play a VHSL sport, play in a jazz band, have multiple choices for foreign languages, and take a full repertoire of college level classes without having to go to another campus.

—teacher at one of the underperforming middle schools (whose elective offerings have been shrinking year over year as population dwindles)

+1. This is what PP was addressing as well.

At this point the Langley posters are just being deliberately obtuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see if Sears proposes vouchers for all in her campaign. I'd consider voting for her if she did that. Also waiting to see how the sanctuary policy Youngkin is proposing shakes out

+1. We don’t need it to afford private, but FCPS school board does not deserve our funding after this equity-based redistricting.

What equity-based redistricting?

When they move MC/UMC kids to schools that are high FARMS and high ELL in an attempt to cover up the fact that they are failing the kids at those schools. Adults don't know how to do their jobs to enact policy to improve individual learners so instead they move kids around so that the test scores and other benchmarks don't look as terrible on paper.

It’s actually the exact opposite that has happened repeatedly in FCPS for the past 15+ years, but you know that. God forbid they try to undo even a small part of the damage they’ve inflicted on schools like Annandale and Lewis.

DP. What damage? Be specific.

They won't be specific of course because to do so would be to admit that they believe that certain children damage schools just by having demographics they also deem undesirable. That would be admitting to having the same thoughts as those that are trying to denigrate. Such hypocrisy.

Sounds like a self-own on your part.

It’s clear that MC/UMC kids are more likely to enable a school to offer more challenging academics and a wider range of electives and extra-curricular activities. The MC/UMC families are also far more able (and likely) to have the time and resources to participate in PTAs and booster programs.

For over 15 years, FCPS has only redistricted to move MC/UMC neighborhoods into wealthier schools. Moving Annandale kids to Woodson and Lewis kids to West Springfield are just two examples. It increased both the actual and the perceived disparities between neighboring schools. The wealthier schools got expanded and saw their enrollments grow, while the older, poorer schools get neglected.

Of course people pick up on this, and then object to potentially getting moved to the schools that FCPS itself has treated poorly. Now that FCPS is implicitly acknowledging its mistakes, and possibly poised to do something about it, people who benefitted from their past actions predictably object.

And, not surprisingly, no group defends the status quo as much as Langley parents, since that school is a case study in economic segregation facilitated by prior School Board members. They are today’s equivalent of the white supremacists who fought integration at every turn in the 1950s and 1960s.

DP. Could you please explain your first paragraph? How would sending MC/UMC kids to an underperforming school help that school? Your "argument" makes no sense at all - and your last paragraph is just the rantings of a crazy person. I mean, seriously? Do you hear yourself?

NP:

It would allow the underperforming schools to offer programs and clubs and teams that currently don’t exist. If the small underperforming school only has 6 kids interested in playing tennis, that program gets cut and they don’t have the opportunity to play. Once another neighborhood or 5 gets redistricted in, those 6 kids get peers to play with.

Repeat for foreign languages (some only offer Spanish/one other), electives, advanced classes. If there isn’t a critical mass of kids, those classes get dropped from the master schedule out of necessity. We need a minimum of 12 to run a class, but in reality if we run one class of 12, then 4 other classes at 25 kids get bumped up to 30, so it’s hard to justify less than 20. That means a lot of stuff just isn’t offered.

It seems reasonable to me that any kid in Fairfax county should have an opportunity to play a VHSL sport, play in a jazz band, have multiple choices for foreign languages, and take a full repertoire of college level classes without having to go to another campus.

—teacher at one of the underperforming middle schools (whose elective offerings have been shrinking year over year as population dwindles)

There it is. Finally admitting you are using other people’s kids as a resource. Really gross.

Instead, do your job better.

[Anonymous]

Wait - why can’t they figure out scheduling for a class with an enrollment less than 20? I went to a good if somewhat small HS (graduating classes around 350), not every kid did AP’s, and some of the AP sections were quite small with around 12 students but they were still on the schedule every year. That sounds like an FCPS problem if they can’t figure that out. Not something to just throw additional kids at the school and hope it works.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, not understanding why kids need to be rezoned so that other kids can have a tennis team.

To be frank, it sounds like the schools that don't offer advanced classes or have a lot of ECs are in fact serving the population they have. That's why so many transfer out- to find schools more in line with their preferred high school experience.

[Anonymous]

Shouldn’t public schools strive to educate ALL students by offering as many courses and athletic options as possible?

If you think your kid might be a “pawn” in this possible plan, private school might be an option or a home closer to your desired school.

[Anonymous]

When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.
-Franklin Leonard

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.
-Franklin Leonard

You sound like you probably got selected for the Boundary Review advisory committee.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn’t public schools strive to educate ALL students by offering as many courses and athletic options as possible?

If you think your kid might be a “pawn” in this possible plan, private school might be an option or a home closer to your desired school.

[phone]

[Anonymous]

I’ve gone to some of the community meetings for other issues. The school board and superintendent totally do not care what the public thinks. These public meetings are staged - the questions asked are tilted. Family Vision group is given questions and issues to talk about. We are presented data (which they source) to discuss on these issues.

I went to a few. It is all just a show and I can not take it seriously. I gave up. We are supposed to have a group discussion with 50 people at a table. I can’t even hear what anyone else is saying on the other end. But that doesn’t matter.

They want to hear from us on issues that they want to hear from us on. We are told what to talk about - we are not brining up issues that concern us. It is for show and like a survey - the questions are asked so they get the response they want.

I’m not believing that they care about these committees on redistributing. They will do what they want.

My family is prepared to do what we have to do if they redistrict us to a school we do not think will benefit our rising 9th grader. I do not want my kid being forced to changed schools.

I’ll move away from the area.