FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain many people’s dislike for HS with IB?

AP courses are better for STEM (Math in particular) and map more cleanly to college-level math courses. There are very few (as in low double digit or even single digit) numbers of students completing an IB diploma at many of the schools that offer it. IB is more expensive for the schools that offer it vs. AP.

Push comes to shove it isn’t a bad program for the well-motivated student, but it’s also a fact that people use AP course availability to pupil place out of some of the worst rated HS, most of which happen to have IB. People are rightfully questioning if enrollment at the IB high schools could be bumped up by curtailing student placements out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to the website, materials will be posted the following business day so tomorrow (Tuesday) probably late afternoon

It's going to get VERY interesting if they propose to move people out of Chantilly and West Springfield but leave Langley untouched. Once again FCPS will have talked a good game about equity, and then turned around and screwed the middle class while favoring the wealthiest.

West Springfield is currently at 112% capacity and expected to go to 120% capacity by 2029-2030.

Chantilly is currently at 125% capacity if you don’t include modulars and expected to be at 118% capacity without modulars by 2029-2030.

Langley is currently at 94% capacity and expected to be at 96% capacity by 2029-2030.

How is there even a comparison? It makes sense to lower the numbers of students at over capacity schools. It doesn’t make sense to unnecessarily rezone kids from an under capacity school.

Sure it does, if kids live closer to a school that has even more extra capacity. Why should others pay to bus your kids longer distances than necessary? Also, your numbers for Langley don't include the additional kids from closer-in Tysons they're going to move to Langley.

And why should we bother moving kids out of "over capacity" schools - and capacity should take the modular seats that cost millions to install into account - now if those schools are expected to see declines in enrollment?

But let's see what they come up with today. If they propose to move kids out of Chantilly and West Springfield, with their compact boundaries, while leaving Langley with its far-flung boundaries untouched, it will be a political disaster for the Democrats in Sully and Springfield.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to the website, materials will be posted the following business day so tomorrow (Tuesday) probably late afternoon

It's going to get VERY interesting if they propose to move people out of Chantilly and West Springfield but leave Langley untouched. Once again FCPS will have talked a good game about equity, and then turned around and screwed the middle class while favoring the wealthiest.

West Springfield is currently at 112% capacity and expected to go to 120% capacity by 2029-2030.

Chantilly is currently at 125% capacity if you don’t include modulars and expected to be at 118% capacity without modulars by 2029-2030.

Langley is currently at 94% capacity and expected to be at 96% capacity by 2029-2030.

How is there even a comparison? It makes sense to lower the numbers of students at over capacity schools. It doesn’t make sense to unnecessarily rezone kids from an under capacity school.

Sure it does, if kids live closer to a school that has even more extra capacity. Why should others pay to bus your kids longer distances than necessary? Also, your numbers for Langley don't include the additional kids from closer-in Tysons they're going to move to Langley.

And why should we bother moving kids out of "over capacity" schools - and capacity should take the modular seats that cost millions to install into account - now if those schools are expected to see declines in enrollment?

But let's see what they come up with today. If they propose to move kids out of Chantilly and West Springfield, with their compact boundaries, while leaving Langley with its far-flung boundaries untouched, it will be a political disaster for the Democrats in Sully and Springfield.

“Political disaster”? Literal LOL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to the website, materials will be posted the following business day so tomorrow (Tuesday) probably late afternoon

It's going to get VERY interesting if they propose to move people out of Chantilly and West Springfield but leave Langley untouched. Once again FCPS will have talked a good game about equity, and then turned around and screwed the middle class while favoring the wealthiest.

West Springfield is currently at 112% capacity and expected to go to 120% capacity by 2029-2030.

Chantilly is currently at 125% capacity if you don’t include modulars and expected to be at 118% capacity without modulars by 2029-2030.

Langley is currently at 94% capacity and expected to be at 96% capacity by 2029-2030.

How is there even a comparison? It makes sense to lower the numbers of students at over capacity schools. It doesn’t make sense to unnecessarily rezone kids from an under capacity school.

Sure it does, if kids live closer to a school that has even more extra capacity. Why should others pay to bus your kids longer distances than necessary? Also, your numbers for Langley don't include the additional kids from closer-in Tysons they're going to move to Langley.

And why should we bother moving kids out of "over capacity" schools - and capacity should take the modular seats that cost millions to install into account - now if those schools are expected to see declines in enrollment?

But let's see what they come up with today. If they propose to move kids out of Chantilly and West Springfield, with their compact boundaries, while leaving Langley with its far-flung boundaries untouched, it will be a political disaster for the Democrats in Sully and Springfield.

“Political disaster”? Literal LOL.

Sully and Springfield are already the two most conservative magisterial districts in Fairfax. Goodbye, Dixit and Anderson if they screw the middle class while giving the Langley rich another pass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to the website, materials will be posted the following business day so tomorrow (Tuesday) probably late afternoon

It's going to get VERY interesting if they propose to move people out of Chantilly and West Springfield but leave Langley untouched. Once again FCPS will have talked a good game about equity, and then turned around and screwed the middle class while favoring the wealthiest.

West Springfield is currently at 112% capacity and expected to go to 120% capacity by 2029-2030.

Chantilly is currently at 125% capacity if you don’t include modulars and expected to be at 118% capacity without modulars by 2029-2030.

Langley is currently at 94% capacity and expected to be at 96% capacity by 2029-2030.

How is there even a comparison? It makes sense to lower the numbers of students at over capacity schools. It doesn’t make sense to unnecessarily rezone kids from an under capacity school.

Sure it does, if kids live closer to a school that has even more extra capacity. Why should others pay to bus your kids longer distances than necessary? Also, your numbers for Langley don't include the additional kids from closer-in Tysons they're going to move to Langley.

And why should we bother moving kids out of "over capacity" schools - and capacity should take the modular seats that cost millions to install into account - now if those schools are expected to see declines in enrollment?

But let's see what they come up with today. If they propose to move kids out of Chantilly and West Springfield, with their compact boundaries, while leaving Langley with its far-flung boundaries untouched, it will be a political disaster for the Democrats in Sully and Springfield.

“Political disaster”? Literal LOL.

Sully and Springfield are already the two most conservative magisterial districts in Fairfax. Goodbye, Dixit and Anderson if they screw the middle class while giving the Langley rich another pass.

I think how you frame it is so funny. You could just say that families shouldn’t be moved against their wishes, but instead you add the modifier and lose all credibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to the website, materials will be posted the following business day so tomorrow (Tuesday) probably late afternoon

It's going to get VERY interesting if they propose to move people out of Chantilly and West Springfield but leave Langley untouched. Once again FCPS will have talked a good game about equity, and then turned around and screwed the middle class while favoring the wealthiest.

West Springfield is currently at 112% capacity and expected to go to 120% capacity by 2029-2030.

Chantilly is currently at 125% capacity if you don’t include modulars and expected to be at 118% capacity without modulars by 2029-2030.

Langley is currently at 94% capacity and expected to be at 96% capacity by 2029-2030.

How is there even a comparison? It makes sense to lower the numbers of students at over capacity schools. It doesn’t make sense to unnecessarily rezone kids from an under capacity school.

Sure it does, if kids live closer to a school that has even more extra capacity. Why should others pay to bus your kids longer distances than necessary? Also, your numbers for Langley don't include the additional kids from closer-in Tysons they're going to move to Langley.

And why should we bother moving kids out of "over capacity" schools - and capacity should take the modular seats that cost millions to install into account - now if those schools are expected to see declines in enrollment?

But let's see what they come up with today. If they propose to move kids out of Chantilly and West Springfield, with their compact boundaries, while leaving Langley with its far-flung boundaries untouched, it will be a political disaster for the Democrats in Sully and Springfield.

“Political disaster”? Literal LOL.

Sully and Springfield are already the two most conservative magisterial districts in Fairfax. Goodbye, Dixit and Anderson if they screw the middle class while giving the Langley rich another pass.

As someone who lives in WSHS area and whose kid could get moved, my anger about all this will not be impacted by what they do to Langley. I will be angry either way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to the website, materials will be posted the following business day so tomorrow (Tuesday) probably late afternoon

It's going to get VERY interesting if they propose to move people out of Chantilly and West Springfield but leave Langley untouched. Once again FCPS will have talked a good game about equity, and then turned around and screwed the middle class while favoring the wealthiest.

West Springfield is currently at 112% capacity and expected to go to 120% capacity by 2029-2030.

Chantilly is currently at 125% capacity if you don’t include modulars and expected to be at 118% capacity without modulars by 2029-2030.

Langley is currently at 94% capacity and expected to be at 96% capacity by 2029-2030.

How is there even a comparison? It makes sense to lower the numbers of students at over capacity schools. It doesn’t make sense to unnecessarily rezone kids from an under capacity school.

Sure it does, if kids live closer to a school that has even more extra capacity. Why should others pay to bus your kids longer distances than necessary? Also, your numbers for Langley don't include the additional kids from closer-in Tysons they're going to move to Langley.

And why should we bother moving kids out of "over capacity" schools - and capacity should take the modular seats that cost millions to install into account - now if those schools are expected to see declines in enrollment?

But let's see what they come up with today. If they propose to move kids out of Chantilly and West Springfield, with their compact boundaries, while leaving Langley with its far-flung boundaries untouched, it will be a political disaster for the Democrats in Sully and Springfield.

“Political disaster”? Literal LOL.

Sully and Springfield are already the two most conservative magisterial districts in Fairfax. Goodbye, Dixit and Anderson if they screw the middle class while giving the Langley rich another pass.

As someone who lives in WSHS area and whose kid could get moved, my anger about all this will not be impacted by what they do to Langley. I will be angry either way.

Not me. We live close to our current schools and they may rezone us anyway, so if they are going to continue busing Langley kids 10 miles while upending our kids lives in furtherance of unclear goals I will be doubly pissed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We don't need ANOTHER high school need near Tysons, we need a high school in western Fairfax county.

DP. Then your first step should be talking them out of expanding Centreville to 3000 seats. That is the final nail in the coffin of a new western HS.

We all know why we don’t have a western high school and who has been pushing against any investment in addressing capacity.

Armstrong ES is projected to have 41% capacity in five years. Will the new Thru threshold be 45%-105% in five years? For no particular reason at all?

And if you get your wish, and the Centreville HS expansion is shut down, kids right next door will be bussed across Fairfax city to attend Fairfax high instead of attending the school right next door.

But your kids will attend Langley high and not Herndon. We see how this works.

I’m not at Langley and would have fully supported a new western HS.

But they’ve already expanded Langley, Madison, Oakton, South Lakes, and Herndon, and have a big expansion of Centreville planned now. All six of those schools serve kids in western Fairfax, even if not in western Fairfax themselves.

These expansions and expansion plans are inconsistent with a new western HS, which is why I suggest you advocate for scaling back (not eliminating) the Centreville expansion if you really think a western HS will ever get built.

If all you want is a huge expansion of Centreville to absorb the western part of the Fairfax HS catchment area, then advocate for that and stop talking about a new western HS. While you’re at it, let us know who is going to attend Fairfax, with its 2400 seats, if all these kids move to Centreville.

The expansion should absolutely proceed at Centrevillle HS to allow neighborhoods in western Fairfax that are right next to Centreville HS attend the newly renovated high school next door instead of being bussed across Fairfax city.

As for the bold, there are multiple new developments just down Jermantown road from Providence ES and KJ that are converting commercial sites to residential sites:

The Flint Hill one is currently zoned for Fairfax Providence/KJ/Fairfafx:

https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/02/21/proposed-redevelopments-on-jermantown-road-in-oakton-receive-final-approval/

The AT&T site is commercial land that is currently in the Oakton ES boundary, but is also on Jermantown road (literally across the street from the Flint Hill development) and can be rezoned to Providence/KJ/Fairfax:

https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/02/21/proposed-redevelopments-on-jermantown-road-in-oakton-receive-final-approval/

So, expand Centreville so that in five years, you have capacity to shift adjacent neighborhoods to attend, and Fairfax HS has capacity to meet the conversion of commercial sites to residential sites.

Why on earth do you go on and on about zoning Oakton kids away from Oakton HS???

Dude is desperate to move kids out of Oakton and then argue his Falls Church kid should get rezoned there.

The post is about the AT&T site. No one lives there now. No. One. It is currently a commercial site. It happens to be zoned for Oakton. It should be zone for Fairfax.

Again, no one lives there right now. Go look. It’s a commercial site that is being converted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We don't need ANOTHER high school need near Tysons, we need a high school in western Fairfax county.

DP. Then your first step should be talking them out of expanding Centreville to 3000 seats. That is the final nail in the coffin of a new western HS.

We all know why we don’t have a western high school and who has been pushing against any investment in addressing capacity.

Armstrong ES is projected to have 41% capacity in five years. Will the new Thru threshold be 45%-105% in five years? For no particular reason at all?

And if you get your wish, and the Centreville HS expansion is shut down, kids right next door will be bussed across Fairfax city to attend Fairfax high instead of attending the school right next door.

But your kids will attend Langley high and not Herndon. We see how this works.

I’m not at Langley and would have fully supported a new western HS.

But they’ve already expanded Langley, Madison, Oakton, South Lakes, and Herndon, and have a big expansion of Centreville planned now. All six of those schools serve kids in western Fairfax, even if not in western Fairfax themselves.

These expansions and expansion plans are inconsistent with a new western HS, which is why I suggest you advocate for scaling back (not eliminating) the Centreville expansion if you really think a western HS will ever get built.

If all you want is a huge expansion of Centreville to absorb the western part of the Fairfax HS catchment area, then advocate for that and stop talking about a new western HS. While you’re at it, let us know who is going to attend Fairfax, with its 2400 seats, if all these kids move to Centreville.

The expansion should absolutely proceed at Centrevillle HS to allow neighborhoods in western Fairfax that are right next to Centreville HS attend the newly renovated high school next door instead of being bussed across Fairfax city.

As for the bold, there are multiple new developments just down Jermantown road from Providence ES and KJ that are converting commercial sites to residential sites:

The Flint Hill one is currently zoned for Fairfax Providence/KJ/Fairfafx:

https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/02/21/proposed-redevelopments-on-jermantown-road-in-oakton-receive-final-approval/

The AT&T site is commercial land that is currently in the Oakton ES boundary, but is also on Jermantown road (literally across the street from the Flint Hill development) and can be rezoned to Providence/KJ/Fairfax:

https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/02/21/proposed-redevelopments-on-jermantown-road-in-oakton-receive-final-approval/

So, expand Centreville so that in five years, you have capacity to shift adjacent neighborhoods to attend, and Fairfax HS has capacity to meet the conversion of commercial sites to residential sites.

Why on earth do you go on and on about zoning Oakton kids away from Oakton HS???

Dude is desperate to move kids out of Oakton and then argue his Falls Church kid should get rezoned there.

The post is about the AT&T site. No one lives there now. No. One. It is currently a commercial site. It happens to be zoned for Oakton. It should be zone for Fairfax.

Again, no one lives there right now. Go look. It’s a commercial site that is being converted.

We understand your frustration. But if more kids feed into Oakton, it's even less likely your far-fetched dream of getting moved from Falls Church to Oakton will ever come to pass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Happy BRAC day!

Regardless of your feelings on the boundaries, the fact that you revel in this knowing that tens of thousands of your community will suffer negative impacts, including mental health issues for lots of these kids, makes you a truly repugnant person.

Or some people might have a different thought on all of this and think that it won’t be nearly as dramatic as you think it is. There are many different opinions.

Kids moving from one school to another will be moving with their classmates from their same ES and will have the support of their family, friends, and the new school they are moving to. More likely then not, there will be other kids moving into that school and others moving out. They are not moving by themselves. I am sure some kids will struggle but I doubt that there will be the massive mental health issues that you seem to think that there will be. The move might even be good for some kids.

The fact that they will be moving with friends from same elementary school is not necessarily true. And, you sound like someone who has not understood how this will affect families that have kids in more than one high school--or elementary school. I guess it is unlikely that you would have kids in two middle schools, but that also might be possible.
Have you considered the support of family in these circumstances? Having to go in two different directions for activities, sports, etc? Think of the single parent. Two PTA dues. Two sets of spirit gear. Etc.
We've talked a lot about this as it applies to high schools, but this could also affect elementary.

And, the issue of IB/AP has not been addressed.

You sound like a parent who wants other kids districted into your school. In this case, you are not going to have the very difficult adjustments.

And, we have yet to discuss staffing.

I see, so your point of view is the only one that matters and that there are other people with different thoughts and considerations is immaterial. Got it. You do your best to try and make anyone who posts a different thought then yours look selfish while you are trying to defend the mental well being of all kids and don’t have any personal bias for wanting to stay where you are.

We get it, you don’t want your child to change schools for a variety or legitimate reasons. The problem is that there are legitimate reasons to adjust boundaries and that boundaries are going to shift. You could careless if kids are moved from a school that isn’t yours because you don’t want to move to Lewis or Herndon or whatever school that is not as good as the school you are currently at.

Guess what? I don’t want my kid to move schools. We are in the middle of the Centerville, Chantilly, Oakton, Westfield, South Lakes, Herndon mess. The number of ways kids have moved my kids cohort is impressive. I fully expect that my kid will move or his friends will move and it will be disruptive. I don’t see how the County maintains its current boundaries with the way some of the schools are overcrowded. And I don’t think that it is a matter of moving on the margins. The moves to fix the overcrowding in this area is likely to have ripple effects. The question is how do we make those moves with as much support as possible while diminishing disruption.

My kids were at a split feeder elementary school, so their friends went to one of two middle schools. They are currently at a split feeder middle school, so their friends will go to one of four (I think) different high schools. IT'S ALREADY DISRUPTIVE FOR A LOT OF KIDS!!!! I would absolutely love for this to be fixed, so that my kids could be K-12 with the same kids like I was, but interestingly, neither their elementary school, nor their middle school seems to be under consideration for rezoning. Some of us are actually okay with the prospect of rezoning because our kids' friends groups are changing all over the place anyway. I know I'm not the only parent in this situation so I wish folks would stop speaking for everyone.

I agree with this and would not want my children to go through this. But how the heck was Oakton not touched during the split feeder assessment? Maybe that will come with capacity maps tonight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain many people’s dislike for HS with IB?

AP courses are better for STEM (Math in particular) and map more cleanly to college-level math courses. There are very few (as in low double digit or even single digit) numbers of students completing an IB diploma at many of the schools that offer it. IB is more expensive for the schools that offer it vs. AP.

Push comes to shove it isn’t a bad program for the well-motivated student, but it’s also a fact that people use AP course availability to pupil place out of some of the worst rated HS, most of which happen to have IB. People are rightfully questioning if enrollment at the IB high schools could be bumped up by curtailing student placements out.

There are many great IB schools in our country, but FCPS hasn’t developed them to be very strong. There are too many and that deflates the passion. Keep one and make it robust for children interested in it. Right now, all the IB schools besides one have high levels of transfers out for AP programs.

AP and dual enrollment also provide college credits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to the website, materials will be posted the following business day so tomorrow (Tuesday) probably late afternoon

It's going to get VERY interesting if they propose to move people out of Chantilly and West Springfield but leave Langley untouched. Once again FCPS will have talked a good game about equity, and then turned around and screwed the middle class while favoring the wealthiest.

West Springfield is currently at 112% capacity and expected to go to 120% capacity by 2029-2030.

Chantilly is currently at 125% capacity if you don’t include modulars and expected to be at 118% capacity without modulars by 2029-2030.

Langley is currently at 94% capacity and expected to be at 96% capacity by 2029-2030.

How is there even a comparison? It makes sense to lower the numbers of students at over capacity schools. It doesn’t make sense to unnecessarily rezone kids from an under capacity school.

Sure it does, if kids live closer to a school that has even more extra capacity. Why should others pay to bus your kids longer distances than necessary? Also, your numbers for Langley don't include the additional kids from closer-in Tysons they're going to move to Langley.

And why should we bother moving kids out of "over capacity" schools - and capacity should take the modular seats that cost millions to install into account - now if those schools are expected to see declines in enrollment?

But let's see what they come up with today. If they propose to move kids out of Chantilly and West Springfield, with their compact boundaries, while leaving Langley with its far-flung boundaries untouched, it will be a political disaster for the Democrats in Sully and Springfield.

“Political disaster”? Literal LOL.

Sully and Springfield are already the two most conservative magisterial districts in Fairfax. Goodbye, Dixit and Anderson if they screw the middle class while giving the Langley rich another pass.

As someone who lives in WSHS area and whose kid could get moved, my anger about all this will not be impacted by what they do to Langley. I will be angry either way.

Not me. We live close to our current schools and they may rezone us anyway, so if they are going to continue busing Langley kids 10 miles while upending our kids lives in furtherance of unclear goals I will be doubly pissed.

Well, I think you’ve just outed yourself as a big ol hypocrite. It’s gotta be tough having that much cognitive dissonance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Happy BRAC day!

Regardless of your feelings on the boundaries, the fact that you revel in this knowing that tens of thousands of your community will suffer negative impacts, including mental health issues for lots of these kids, makes you a truly repugnant person.

Or some people might have a different thought on all of this and think that it won’t be nearly as dramatic as you think it is. There are many different opinions.

Kids moving from one school to another will be moving with their classmates from their same ES and will have the support of their family, friends, and the new school they are moving to. More likely then not, there will be other kids moving into that school and others moving out. They are not moving by themselves. I am sure some kids will struggle but I doubt that there will be the massive mental health issues that you seem to think that there will be. The move might even be good for some kids.

The fact that they will be moving with friends from same elementary school is not necessarily true. And, you sound like someone who has not understood how this will affect families that have kids in more than one high school--or elementary school. I guess it is unlikely that you would have kids in two middle schools, but that also might be possible.
Have you considered the support of family in these circumstances? Having to go in two different directions for activities, sports, etc? Think of the single parent. Two PTA dues. Two sets of spirit gear. Etc.
We've talked a lot about this as it applies to high schools, but this could also affect elementary.

And, the issue of IB/AP has not been addressed.

You sound like a parent who wants other kids districted into your school. In this case, you are not going to have the very difficult adjustments.

And, we have yet to discuss staffing.

I see, so your point of view is the only one that matters and that there are other people with different thoughts and considerations is immaterial. Got it. You do your best to try and make anyone who posts a different thought then yours look selfish while you are trying to defend the mental well being of all kids and don’t have any personal bias for wanting to stay where you are.

We get it, you don’t want your child to change schools for a variety or legitimate reasons. The problem is that there are legitimate reasons to adjust boundaries and that boundaries are going to shift. You could careless if kids are moved from a school that isn’t yours because you don’t want to move to Lewis or Herndon or whatever school that is not as good as the school you are currently at.

Guess what? I don’t want my kid to move schools. We are in the middle of the Centerville, Chantilly, Oakton, Westfield, South Lakes, Herndon mess. The number of ways kids have moved my kids cohort is impressive. I fully expect that my kid will move or his friends will move and it will be disruptive. I don’t see how the County maintains its current boundaries with the way some of the schools are overcrowded. And I don’t think that it is a matter of moving on the margins. The moves to fix the overcrowding in this area is likely to have ripple effects. The question is how do we make those moves with as much support as possible while diminishing disruption.

My kids were at a split feeder elementary school, so their friends went to one of two middle schools. They are currently at a split feeder middle school, so their friends will go to one of four (I think) different high schools. IT'S ALREADY DISRUPTIVE FOR A LOT OF KIDS!!!! I would absolutely love for this to be fixed, so that my kids could be K-12 with the same kids like I was, but interestingly, neither their elementary school, nor their middle school seems to be under consideration for rezoning. Some of us are actually okay with the prospect of rezoning because our kids' friends groups are changing all over the place anyway. I know I'm not the only parent in this situation so I wish folks would stop speaking for everyone.

I agree with this and would not want my children to go through this. But how the heck was Oakton not touched during the split feeder assessment? Maybe that will come with capacity maps tonight.

Thru was fairly upfront about acknowledging that they weren't going to tackle the really tough situations like when a split feeder school is physically located in an area that sends less than 25% of its kids to a particular MS or HS. It mostly seems to be about targeting low-hanging fruit and coming up with "fixes" that in many instances create as many new problems as they solve.

It just shows the incompetence and cowardice of this School Board. They want to claim to have "accomplished" things, but they don't actually accomplish anything particularly valuable or useful, and they spend next to no time focusing on the root causes of the problems they are trying to fix.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Happy BRAC day!

Regardless of your feelings on the boundaries, the fact that you revel in this knowing that tens of thousands of your community will suffer negative impacts, including mental health issues for lots of these kids, makes you a truly repugnant person.

Or some people might have a different thought on all of this and think that it won’t be nearly as dramatic as you think it is. There are many different opinions.

Kids moving from one school to another will be moving with their classmates from their same ES and will have the support of their family, friends, and the new school they are moving to. More likely then not, there will be other kids moving into that school and others moving out. They are not moving by themselves. I am sure some kids will struggle but I doubt that there will be the massive mental health issues that you seem to think that there will be. The move might even be good for some kids.

The fact that they will be moving with friends from same elementary school is not necessarily true. And, you sound like someone who has not understood how this will affect families that have kids in more than one high school--or elementary school. I guess it is unlikely that you would have kids in two middle schools, but that also might be possible.
Have you considered the support of family in these circumstances? Having to go in two different directions for activities, sports, etc? Think of the single parent. Two PTA dues. Two sets of spirit gear. Etc.
We've talked a lot about this as it applies to high schools, but this could also affect elementary.

And, the issue of IB/AP has not been addressed.

You sound like a parent who wants other kids districted into your school. In this case, you are not going to have the very difficult adjustments.

And, we have yet to discuss staffing.

I see, so your point of view is the only one that matters and that there are other people with different thoughts and considerations is immaterial. Got it. You do your best to try and make anyone who posts a different thought then yours look selfish while you are trying to defend the mental well being of all kids and don’t have any personal bias for wanting to stay where you are.

We get it, you don’t want your child to change schools for a variety or legitimate reasons. The problem is that there are legitimate reasons to adjust boundaries and that boundaries are going to shift. You could careless if kids are moved from a school that isn’t yours because you don’t want to move to Lewis or Herndon or whatever school that is not as good as the school you are currently at.

Guess what? I don’t want my kid to move schools. We are in the middle of the Centerville, Chantilly, Oakton, Westfield, South Lakes, Herndon mess. The number of ways kids have moved my kids cohort is impressive. I fully expect that my kid will move or his friends will move and it will be disruptive. I don’t see how the County maintains its current boundaries with the way some of the schools are overcrowded. And I don’t think that it is a matter of moving on the margins. The moves to fix the overcrowding in this area is likely to have ripple effects. The question is how do we make those moves with as much support as possible while diminishing disruption.

My kids were at a split feeder elementary school, so their friends went to one of two middle schools. They are currently at a split feeder middle school, so their friends will go to one of four (I think) different high schools. IT'S ALREADY DISRUPTIVE FOR A LOT OF KIDS!!!! I would absolutely love for this to be fixed, so that my kids could be K-12 with the same kids like I was, but interestingly, neither their elementary school, nor their middle school seems to be under consideration for rezoning. Some of us are actually okay with the prospect of rezoning because our kids' friends groups are changing all over the place anyway. I know I'm not the only parent in this situation so I wish folks would stop speaking for everyone.

I agree with this and would not want my children to go through this. But how the heck was Oakton not touched during the split feeder assessment? Maybe that will come with capacity maps tonight.

Thru was fairly upfront about acknowledging that they weren't going to tackle the really tough situations like when a split feeder school is physically located in an area that sends less than 25% of its kids to a particular MS or HS. It mostly seems to be about targeting low-hanging fruit and coming up with "fixes" that in many instances create as many new problems as they solve.

It just shows the incompetence and cowardice of this School Board. They want to claim to have "accomplished" things, but they don't actually accomplish anything particularly valuable or useful, and they spend next to no time focusing on the root causes of the problems they are trying to fix.

Lighting money on fire on some third-rate consultants

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to the website, materials will be posted the following business day so tomorrow (Tuesday) probably late afternoon

It's going to get VERY interesting if they propose to move people out of Chantilly and West Springfield but leave Langley untouched. Once again FCPS will have talked a good game about equity, and then turned around and screwed the middle class while favoring the wealthiest.

West Springfield is currently at 112% capacity and expected to go to 120% capacity by 2029-2030.

Chantilly is currently at 125% capacity if you don’t include modulars and expected to be at 118% capacity without modulars by 2029-2030.

Langley is currently at 94% capacity and expected to be at 96% capacity by 2029-2030.

How is there even a comparison? It makes sense to lower the numbers of students at over capacity schools. It doesn’t make sense to unnecessarily rezone kids from an under capacity school.

Sure it does, if kids live closer to a school that has even more extra capacity. Why should others pay to bus your kids longer distances than necessary? Also, your numbers for Langley don't include the additional kids from closer-in Tysons they're going to move to Langley.

And why should we bother moving kids out of "over capacity" schools - and capacity should take the modular seats that cost millions to install into account - now if those schools are expected to see declines in enrollment?

But let's see what they come up with today. If they propose to move kids out of Chantilly and West Springfield, with their compact boundaries, while leaving Langley with its far-flung boundaries untouched, it will be a political disaster for the Democrats in Sully and Springfield.

“Political disaster”? Literal LOL.

Sully and Springfield are already the two most conservative magisterial districts in Fairfax. Goodbye, Dixit and Anderson if they screw the middle class while giving the Langley rich another pass.

As someone who lives in WSHS area and whose kid could get moved, my anger about all this will not be impacted by what they do to Langley. I will be angry either way.

Not me. We live close to our current schools and they may rezone us anyway, so if they are going to continue busing Langley kids 10 miles while upending our kids lives in furtherance of unclear goals I will be doubly pissed.

Well, I think you’ve just outed yourself as a big ol hypocrite. It’s gotta be tough having that much cognitive dissonance.

Nothing hypocritical about it at all. If county-wide boundary changes are really needed like they're claiming they should go all in and not just look for soft targets while letting the rich people who'd make the biggest stink off the hook again.