Western High School Boundary Map options (A/B/C/D)

[Anonymous]

I have a hard time they will let South Lakes fall to 83% (~1867) or 81% utilization (~1822) from scenarios 2 and 3, and with the chunk they are losing being some of the higher performers from Fox Mill. The rest of South Lakes should be pitching a fit if they care about having advanced courses available to the remaining kids.
Also seems really strange they opt for scenario 2 and do nothing about Oakton being over capacity during a boundary review specifically to address overcrowding.

[Anonymous]

This consulting team was a total joke. Chat gpt must have hallucinated when they input their prompt of, “how can we really screw up the boundaries scenarios in FCPS”. No human would come up with these senseless scenarios. Scenario 3 is the most ridiculous. Have these guys ever seen a map?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a hard time they will let South Lakes fall to 83% (~1867) or 81% utilization (~1822) from scenarios 2 and 3, and with the chunk they are losing being some of the higher performers from Fox Mill. The rest of South Lakes should be pitching a fit if they care about having advanced courses available to the remaining kids.
Also seems really strange they opt for scenario 2 and do nothing about Oakton being over capacity during a boundary review specifically to address overcrowding.

Go back to Option A from initial boundaries. Add all of Floris. Done.

Take the neighborhoods off Walney and send them to Westfield. Add Centreville neighborhoods W of 28. Maybe leave the Bull Run portion at Centreville that is really close to Centreville.

Done. This makes geographic sense.

Figure out the middle schools later. We've had split middle schools for years.

Leave elementary schools alone except for the Coates adjustments and the Navy Island.

[Anonymous]

Did anyone ask if these middle school maps include projections of AAP center phase outs that last I heard, are proposed to start around the same time these maps would go into effect? What a mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a hard time they will let South Lakes fall to 83% (~1867) or 81% utilization (~1822) from scenarios 2 and 3, and with the chunk they are losing being some of the higher performers from Fox Mill. The rest of South Lakes should be pitching a fit if they care about having advanced courses available to the remaining kids.
Also seems really strange they opt for scenario 2 and do nothing about Oakton being over capacity during a boundary review specifically to address overcrowding.

Absolutely agree with this. No way Meren is going to let this happen to South Lakes. They added a few neighborhoods from Floris to Fox Mill, my bet is they keep Fox Mill at SLHS.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone have a link to the boundary maps proposed today?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone ask if these middle school maps include projections of AAP center phase outs that last I heard, are proposed to start around the same time these maps would go into effect? What a mess.

Sounds like you have a good question to ask at Thursday's meeting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have a link to the boundary maps proposed today?

https://fcpswesternboundary.org

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone ask if these middle school maps include projections of AAP center phase outs that last I heard, are proposed to start around the same time these maps would go into effect? What a mess.

Sounds like you have a good question to ask at Thursday's meeting.

The left hand in FCPS rarely knows what the right hand is doing. The people involved don’t always even appear to acknowledge they have two hands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a hard time they will let South Lakes fall to 83% (~1867) or 81% utilization (~1822) from scenarios 2 and 3, and with the chunk they are losing being some of the higher performers from Fox Mill. The rest of South Lakes should be pitching a fit if they care about having advanced courses available to the remaining kids.
Also seems really strange they opt for scenario 2 and do nothing about Oakton being over capacity during a boundary review specifically to address overcrowding.

Absolutely agree with this. No way Meren is going to let this happen to South Lakes. They added a few neighborhoods from Floris to Fox Mill, my bet is they keep Fox Mill at SLHS.

The only thing they did correctly was send FMES to Skyview in all 3 scenarios. FMES to Carson to Skyview makes sense. We live in Oak Hill and Skyview is our new Oak Hill HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a hard time they will let South Lakes fall to 83% (~1867) or 81% utilization (~1822) from scenarios 2 and 3, and with the chunk they are losing being some of the higher performers from Fox Mill. The rest of South Lakes should be pitching a fit if they care about having advanced courses available to the remaining kids.
Also seems really strange they opt for scenario 2 and do nothing about Oakton being over capacity during a boundary review specifically to address overcrowding.

Absolutely agree with this. No way Meren is going to let this happen to South Lakes. They added a few neighborhoods from Floris to Fox Mill, my bet is they keep Fox Mill at SLHS.

The only thing they did correctly was send FMES to Skyview in all 3 scenarios. FMES to Carson to Skyview makes sense. We live in Oak Hill and Skyview is our new Oak Hill HS.

But not in all three scenarios for everyone in Fox Mill. One of the scenarios has at least some of them staying at South Lakes. I think that one splits the neighborhood in a funny way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a hard time they will let South Lakes fall to 83% (~1867) or 81% utilization (~1822) from scenarios 2 and 3, and with the chunk they are losing being some of the higher performers from Fox Mill. The rest of South Lakes should be pitching a fit if they care about having advanced courses available to the remaining kids.
Also seems really strange they opt for scenario 2 and do nothing about Oakton being over capacity during a boundary review specifically to address overcrowding.

Absolutely agree with this. No way Meren is going to let this happen to South Lakes. They added a few neighborhoods from Floris to Fox Mill, my bet is they keep Fox Mill at SLHS.

The only thing they did correctly was send FMES to Skyview in all 3 scenarios. FMES to Carson to Skyview makes sense. We live in Oak Hill and Skyview is our new Oak Hill HS.

Isn't Fox Mill still at SLHS in scenario 1?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a hard time they will let South Lakes fall to 83% (~1867) or 81% utilization (~1822) from scenarios 2 and 3, and with the chunk they are losing being some of the higher performers from Fox Mill. The rest of South Lakes should be pitching a fit if they care about having advanced courses available to the remaining kids.
Also seems really strange they opt for scenario 2 and do nothing about Oakton being over capacity during a boundary review specifically to address overcrowding.

Absolutely agree with this. No way Meren is going to let this happen to South Lakes. They added a few neighborhoods from Floris to Fox Mill, my bet is they keep Fox Mill at SLHS.

The only thing they did correctly was send FMES to Skyview in all 3 scenarios. FMES to Carson to Skyview makes sense. We live in Oak Hill and Skyview is our new Oak Hill HS.

But not in all three scenarios for everyone in Fox Mill. One of the scenarios has at least some of them staying at South Lakes. I think that one splits the neighborhood in a funny way.

Scenarios 1 and 3 were so far off the mark, I didn’t even seriously consider them. The consultants basically said, “whoops, our bad,” and said they would use the information and feedback gathered during this week’s meetings to guide the next scenario(s).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have a link to the boundary maps proposed today?

https://fcpswesternboundary.org

Does yellow shaded area (draft change area) indicate it's all Skyview?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone ask if these middle school maps include projections of AAP center phase outs that last I heard, are proposed to start around the same time these maps would go into effect? What a mess.

Sounds like you have a good question to ask at Thursday's meeting.

The left hand in FCPS rarely knows what the right hand is doing. The people involved don’t always even appear to acknowledge they have two hands.

Accurate.

I forever the exact numbers, but they said yesterday they had X people signed up to come in person and 40 people signed up online. I think they said tonight there were at least 200 people in-person and almost 400 people online?

They will not please everyone with their final vote, but they need to make the shifts make sense. Right now Scenario 2 disrupts the fewest ES & MS students.