FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dos anyone know what happens after the next BRAC meeting? Like where do they go from there?

Thru releases one or more full draft scenarios (the slides have been just isolated examples looking at one factor) in early summer. Then they do community engagement over the summer while everyone is gone and then try to cram the changes through.

Thru scenarioss or current boundaries that bus walkers should be fixed. Westgate according to Thru: enter Westgate Elementary School on google maps and directions to Violet Ridge Place. I see the walk and sidewalks - 4.2 minutes - google street view.

Union Park at Mclean- new Toll Brothers replaced apartments- Providence District. https://www.tysonsreporter.com/2019/06/27/new-condos-expected-to-replace-tysons-east-residential-property/

Why isn't Thru first placing the walkers? That Westgate mess, the Timberlane bridge, plus no refinement on Spring Hill and Westbriar islands, is unacceptable.

SY 2029-30 Marshall and Mclean are overcapacity even with modulars. Totally wrong to use capacity range of 60% to 105%. . Elementary is basic K-6, 7 years. HS 4 years. MS 2 so it frankly should be flex especially since FCPS/school board never got off on what to do about AAP at every middle school [Dunne budget question].

For SY 2029-30 total capacities for Falls Church, Langley, Madison, Marshall, Mclean are:

capacity with modulars 11680
capacity without modulars 11270
membership 11161
average total with modulars 96% - Marshall and Mclean at 103%
average without modulars 99% - Marshall 109% and Mclean 118%

What's the available space for staging trailers during construction at HS's with modulars and trailers?

FCPS doesn't really look at those five high schools together. They are in multiple regions (Regions 1, 2, and 5).

If they really just wanted to align membership at those five schools with capacity without modulars, they'd be moving Marshall kids in Vienna to Madison (got expansion it didn't need) and McLean kids to Falls Church (to take advantage of the FCHS expansion), and leaving Langley alone. They've given no indication they are thinking that way.

I used those 5 schools based on residential locations. Regions are artificial constructs for FCPS jut like it once has 3 areas and then 8 clusters. The fact is in a normal boundary process those high school pyramids would be accurate.

Marshall is a Region 5 island. Decades ago FCPS had contiguous groupings on the CIP. Bypass any administrative grouping. So that got scrapped because it showed the obvious like West Potomac and Mount Vernon. I simply am applying learned knowledge from FCPS and boundary processes.

I understand but you're tossing out your "learned knowledge," as if it's a framework that others would recognize and apply. It really isn't - it's just your own grouping. You could group two schools, or five, or a dozen.

Stick a dozen or all high schools on a spreadsheet and call Marshall and Mclean ground zero. Overcapacity with modulars. What would you do? 1st look at contiguous schools or plop over to Region 5 for Marshall? Those sites are the immediate changes pre dominos. Add in Herndon, South Lakes, and Oakton. Why the last two? Hunter Mill corridor. Gibson moved some Madison to South Lakes in 2008.

Not Gibson, South Lakes PTA did all the choosing of who would move. Seriously. They even had plans and, I think, maps on their website (which was deleted after someone posted the link on Fairfaxunderground.)
The goal of the South Lakes PTA was to enhance the IB program and they only wanted neighborhoods that they thought would do that. They rejected close neighborhoods with high FARMS.

[Anonymous]

For capacity discussion BRAC should ask for clear data for each school on: Transfers in (and from where) + transfers out (and where to)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For capacity discussion BRAC should ask for clear data for each school on: Transfers in (and from where) + transfers out (and where to)

Yes, this data is available on the dashboard, but it should be included with BRAC. I wonder if BRAC is even taking that into consideration. The reasons for the transfer should also be included. Is that information available to the public? It is not on the dashboard, but it is pretty easy to assume that AP vs IB is a big driver.

If the already inbound students are not attending the school and transferring elsewhere, why would we redistrict other students to that school when keeping inbound students would solve low numbers? It makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For capacity discussion BRAC should ask for clear data for each school on: Transfers in (and from where) + transfers out (and where to)

They did that for the March 26 presentation, but they don’t seem to understand or care about AAP centers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For capacity discussion BRAC should ask for clear data for each school on: Transfers in (and from where) + transfers out (and where to)

Yes, this data is available on the dashboard, but it should be included with BRAC. I wonder if BRAC is even taking that into consideration. The reasons for the transfer should also be included. Is that information available to the public? It is not on the dashboard, but it is pretty easy to assume that AP vs IB is a big driver.

If the already inbound students are not attending the school and transferring elsewhere, why would we redistrict other students to that school when keeping inbound students would solve low numbers? It makes no sense.

All of the over capacity schools have a negative net transfer rate. More students transfer out than transfer in because they are closed to transfers and it’s mostly TJ students leaving. Edison is the only exception. Since they’re objective is to hit 60% capacity, which every school hits, I don’t think there’s a huge threat in “balancing” otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Significant changes have to be coming to the boundaries in the coming years.

Take Centreville High School for example. Centreville's enrollment has been steadily declining over the past 5 years, by hundreds of students per year, yet FCPS is doing all they can to push through the Centreville Capital Improvement Project to renovate Centreville in hopes of expanding capacity to more than 3,000 students which is almost 1,000 more than 24-25 SY enrollment.

Well, according to Thru, as long as a school is at 60% capacity or greater, it’s fine. We can just keep ignoring when FCPS wastes money on unnecessary expansions and occasionally move kids out of schools where the investments should have been made.

This is why accurate projections matter. Without them, they’re flying blind.

The 60% must be because they don’t want to deal with the fallback from the parents if their students are reasoned to Lewis or Herndon. Those are some of the most vocal against the boundary changes. I don’t know any parents who would be happy to be reasoned to either of those schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For capacity discussion BRAC should ask for clear data for each school on: Transfers in (and from where) + transfers out (and where to)

Yes, this data is available on the dashboard, but it should be included with BRAC. I wonder if BRAC is even taking that into consideration. The reasons for the transfer should also be included. Is that information available to the public? It is not on the dashboard, but it is pretty easy to assume that AP vs IB is a big driver.

If the already inbound students are not attending the school and transferring elsewhere, why would we redistrict other students to that school when keeping inbound students would solve low numbers? It makes no sense.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For capacity discussion BRAC should ask for clear data for each school on: Transfers in (and from where) + transfers out (and where to)

Yes, this data is available on the dashboard, but it should be included with BRAC. I wonder if BRAC is even taking that into consideration. The reasons for the transfer should also be included. Is that information available to the public? It is not on the dashboard, but it is pretty easy to assume that AP vs IB is a big driver.

If the already inbound students are not attending the school and transferring elsewhere, why would we redistrict other students to that school when keeping inbound students would solve low numbers? It makes no sense.

+ 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Significant changes have to be coming to the boundaries in the coming years.

Take Centreville High School for example. Centreville's enrollment has been steadily declining over the past 5 years, by hundreds of students per year, yet FCPS is doing all they can to push through the Centreville Capital Improvement Project to renovate Centreville in hopes of expanding capacity to more than 3,000 students which is almost 1,000 more than 24-25 SY enrollment.

Well, according to Thru, as long as a school is at 60% capacity or greater, it’s fine. We can just keep ignoring when FCPS wastes money on unnecessary expansions and occasionally move kids out of schools where the investments should have been made.

This is why accurate projections matter. Without them, they’re flying blind.

The 60% must be because they don’t want to deal with the fallback from the parents if their students are reasoned to Lewis or Herndon. Those are some of the most vocal against the boundary changes. I don’t know any parents who would be happy to be reasoned to either of those schools.

You have to look at both sides of the equation. A 60% threshold keeps Lewis from triggering a boundary change specifically to address under-enrollment there, but a 105% threshold triggers a change to address purported overcrowding at West Springfield, in which case Lewis and/or South County could be part of the “fix.”

But with a 60-105% range, Herndon is above 60% and Langley is below 105%, so they both may get a pass. It’s also possible they’ll propose to move kids into Herndon as part of a multi-school move to bring down the enrollment at Chantilly, which is also over 105%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dos anyone know what happens after the next BRAC meeting? Like where do they go from there?

Thru releases one or more full draft scenarios (the slides have been just isolated examples looking at one factor) in early summer. Then they do community engagement over the summer while everyone is gone and then try to cram the changes through.

Thru scenarioss or current boundaries that bus walkers should be fixed. Westgate according to Thru: enter Westgate Elementary School on google maps and directions to Violet Ridge Place. I see the walk and sidewalks - 4.2 minutes - google street view.

Union Park at Mclean- new Toll Brothers replaced apartments- Providence District. https://www.tysonsreporter.com/2019/06/27/new-condos-expected-to-replace-tysons-east-residential-property/

Why isn't Thru first placing the walkers? That Westgate mess, the Timberlane bridge, plus no refinement on Spring Hill and Westbriar islands, is unacceptable.

SY 2029-30 Marshall and Mclean are overcapacity even with modulars. Totally wrong to use capacity range of 60% to 105%. . Elementary is basic K-6, 7 years. HS 4 years. MS 2 so it frankly should be flex especially since FCPS/school board never got off on what to do about AAP at every middle school [Dunne budget question].

For SY 2029-30 total capacities for Falls Church, Langley, Madison, Marshall, Mclean are:

capacity with modulars 11680
capacity without modulars 11270
membership 11161
average total with modulars 96% - Marshall and Mclean at 103%
average without modulars 99% - Marshall 109% and Mclean 118%

What's the available space for staging trailers during construction at HS's with modulars and trailers?

FCPS doesn't really look at those five high schools together. They are in multiple regions (Regions 1, 2, and 5).

If they really just wanted to align membership at those five schools with capacity without modulars, they'd be moving Marshall kids in Vienna to Madison (got expansion it didn't need) and McLean kids to Falls Church (to take advantage of the FCHS expansion), and leaving Langley alone. They've given no indication they are thinking that way.

I used those 5 schools based on residential locations. Regions are artificial constructs for FCPS jut like it once has 3 areas and then 8 clusters. The fact is in a normal boundary process those high school pyramids would be accurate.

Marshall is a Region 5 island. Decades ago FCPS had contiguous groupings on the CIP. Bypass any administrative grouping. So that got scrapped because it showed the obvious like West Potomac and Mount Vernon. I simply am applying learned knowledge from FCPS and boundary processes.

I understand but you're tossing out your "learned knowledge," as if it's a framework that others would recognize and apply. It really isn't - it's just your own grouping. You could group two schools, or five, or a dozen.

Stick a dozen or all high schools on a spreadsheet and call Marshall and Mclean ground zero. Overcapacity with modulars. What would you do? 1st look at contiguous schools or plop over to Region 5 for Marshall? Those sites are the immediate changes pre dominos. Add in Herndon, South Lakes, and Oakton. Why the last two? Hunter Mill corridor. Gibson moved some Madison to South Lakes in 2008.

They could have taken a different approach and treated Tysons with its ongoing growth and growth potential as a hot spot. In that case more capital spending could have been directed to Marshall and McLean, as the two high schools serving Tysons.

They never did this, so Marshall got a modest addition (smaller than Langley, Madison, and Herndon) when renovated, McLean got no addition, and both schools got modulars. It’s ironic to now suggest they should be “ground zero” for boundary changes when they were anything but “ground zero” when it came to prudent capital allocation.

I’m not sure what any of this has to do with the “Hunter Mill corridor.” I’m sure you have something in mind, but you’d have to fill in the blanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Significant changes have to be coming to the boundaries in the coming years.

Take Centreville High School for example. Centreville's enrollment has been steadily declining over the past 5 years, by hundreds of students per year, yet FCPS is doing all they can to push through the Centreville Capital Improvement Project to renovate Centreville in hopes of expanding capacity to more than 3,000 students which is almost 1,000 more than 24-25 SY enrollment.

Well, according to Thru, as long as a school is at 60% capacity or greater, it’s fine. We can just keep ignoring when FCPS wastes money on unnecessary expansions and occasionally move kids out of schools where the investments should have been made.

This is why accurate projections matter. Without them, they’re flying blind.

The 60% must be because they don’t want to deal with the fallback from the parents if their students are reasoned to Lewis or Herndon. Those are some of the most vocal against the boundary changes. I don’t know any parents who would be happy to be reasoned to either of those schools.

You have to look at both sides of the equation. A 60% threshold keeps Lewis from triggering a boundary change specifically to address under-enrollment there, but a 105% threshold triggers a change to address purported overcrowding at West Springfield, in which case Lewis and/or South County could be part of the “fix.”

But with a 60-105% range, Herndon is above 60% and Langley is below 105%, so they both may get a pass. It’s also possible they’ll propose to move kids into Herndon as part of a multi-school move to bring down the enrollment at Chantilly, which is also over 105%.

Add net transfers out for actual in boundary % capacity.

Then fix what make kids leave before moving other kids in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Significant changes have to be coming to the boundaries in the coming years.

Take Centreville High School for example. Centreville's enrollment has been steadily declining over the past 5 years, by hundreds of students per year, yet FCPS is doing all they can to push through the Centreville Capital Improvement Project to renovate Centreville in hopes of expanding capacity to more than 3,000 students which is almost 1,000 more than 24-25 SY enrollment.

Well, according to Thru, as long as a school is at 60% capacity or greater, it’s fine. We can just keep ignoring when FCPS wastes money on unnecessary expansions and occasionally move kids out of schools where the investments should have been made.

This is why accurate projections matter. Without them, they’re flying blind.

The 60% must be because they don’t want to deal with the fallback from the parents if their students are reasoned to Lewis or Herndon. Those are some of the most vocal against the boundary changes. I don’t know any parents who would be happy to be reasoned to either of those schools.

You have to look at both sides of the equation. A 60% threshold keeps Lewis from triggering a boundary change specifically to address under-enrollment there, but a 105% threshold triggers a change to address purported overcrowding at West Springfield, in which case Lewis and/or South County could be part of the “fix.”

But with a 60-105% range, Herndon is above 60% and Langley is below 105%, so they both may get a pass. It’s also possible they’ll propose to move kids into Herndon as part of a multi-school move to bring down the enrollment at Chantilly, which is also over 105%.

Add net transfers out for actual in boundary % capacity.

Then fix what make kids leave before moving other kids in.

+ 1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Significant changes have to be coming to the boundaries in the coming years.

Take Centreville High School for example. Centreville's enrollment has been steadily declining over the past 5 years, by hundreds of students per year, yet FCPS is doing all they can to push through the Centreville Capital Improvement Project to renovate Centreville in hopes of expanding capacity to more than 3,000 students which is almost 1,000 more than 24-25 SY enrollment.

Well, according to Thru, as long as a school is at 60% capacity or greater, it’s fine. We can just keep ignoring when FCPS wastes money on unnecessary expansions and occasionally move kids out of schools where the investments should have been made.

This is why accurate projections matter. Without them, they’re flying blind.

The 60% must be because they don’t want to deal with the fallback from the parents if their students are reasoned to Lewis or Herndon. Those are some of the most vocal against the boundary changes. I don’t know any parents who would be happy to be reasoned to either of those schools.

You have to look at both sides of the equation. A 60% threshold keeps Lewis from triggering a boundary change specifically to address under-enrollment there, but a 105% threshold triggers a change to address purported overcrowding at West Springfield, in which case Lewis and/or South County could be part of the “fix.”

But with a 60-105% range, Herndon is above 60% and Langley is below 105%, so they both may get a pass. It’s also possible they’ll propose to move kids into Herndon as part of a multi-school move to bring down the enrollment at Chantilly, which is also over 105%.

Ding, ding, ding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dos anyone know what happens after the next BRAC meeting? Like where do they go from there?

Thru releases one or more full draft scenarios (the slides have been just isolated examples looking at one factor) in early summer. Then they do community engagement over the summer while everyone is gone and then try to cram the changes through.

Thru scenarioss or current boundaries that bus walkers should be fixed. Westgate according to Thru: enter Westgate Elementary School on google maps and directions to Violet Ridge Place. I see the walk and sidewalks - 4.2 minutes - google street view.

Union Park at Mclean- new Toll Brothers replaced apartments- Providence District. https://www.tysonsreporter.com/2019/06/27/new-condos-expected-to-replace-tysons-east-residential-property/

Why isn't Thru first placing the walkers? That Westgate mess, the Timberlane bridge, plus no refinement on Spring Hill and Westbriar islands, is unacceptable.

SY 2029-30 Marshall and Mclean are overcapacity even with modulars. Totally wrong to use capacity range of 60% to 105%. . Elementary is basic K-6, 7 years. HS 4 years. MS 2 so it frankly should be flex especially since FCPS/school board never got off on what to do about AAP at every middle school [Dunne budget question].

For SY 2029-30 total capacities for Falls Church, Langley, Madison, Marshall, Mclean are:

capacity with modulars 11680
capacity without modulars 11270
membership 11161
average total with modulars 96% - Marshall and Mclean at 103%
average without modulars 99% - Marshall 109% and Mclean 118%

What's the available space for staging trailers during construction at HS's with modulars and trailers?

FCPS doesn't really look at those five high schools together. They are in multiple regions (Regions 1, 2, and 5).

If they really just wanted to align membership at those five schools with capacity without modulars, they'd be moving Marshall kids in Vienna to Madison (got expansion it didn't need) and McLean kids to Falls Church (to take advantage of the FCHS expansion), and leaving Langley alone. They've given no indication they are thinking that way.

They are all Tyson’s adjacent and need to be seen together for planning for the growth that is expected in Tysons. It might be easier if they were in the same region. I don’t think leaving Langely alone is the answer, Langley can certainly take some of Tysons from Marshall and McLean very easily.

what is the current enrollment at Langley and what is it at Herndon?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Significant changes have to be coming to the boundaries in the coming years.

Take Centreville High School for example. Centreville's enrollment has been steadily declining over the past 5 years, by hundreds of students per year, yet FCPS is doing all they can to push through the Centreville Capital Improvement Project to renovate Centreville in hopes of expanding capacity to more than 3,000 students which is almost 1,000 more than 24-25 SY enrollment.

Well, according to Thru, as long as a school is at 60% capacity or greater, it’s fine. We can just keep ignoring when FCPS wastes money on unnecessary expansions and occasionally move kids out of schools where the investments should have been made.

This is why accurate projections matter. Without them, they’re flying blind.

The 60% must be because they don’t want to deal with the fallback from the parents if their students are reasoned to Lewis or Herndon. Those are some of the most vocal against the boundary changes. I don’t know any parents who would be happy to be reasoned to either of those schools.

You have to look at both sides of the equation. A 60% threshold keeps Lewis from triggering a boundary change specifically to address under-enrollment there, but a 105% threshold triggers a change to address purported overcrowding at West Springfield, in which case Lewis and/or South County could be part of the “fix.”

But with a 60-105% range, Herndon is above 60% and Langley is below 105%, so they both may get a pass. It’s also possible they’ll propose to move kids into Herndon as part of a multi-school move to bring down the enrollment at Chantilly, which is also over 105%.

Ding, ding, ding.

That would be fine with me. We live in Great Falls and our son goes to Langley, and we would much prefer he stay there than go to Herndon.