Is Langley HS loosing its appeal compared to Mclean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:im gonna loose my mind over this discushion. Please don't go to Langley.

Defanitely not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I heard from my kid is that Langley is full of mean and pretentious kids.

Maybe a little status driven - you really can't avoid it since the kids come from families that are among the most successful. Their parents are competitive, so they have competitive kids.

No doubt some elements in this environment is not healthy, but on the whole, it's a great school with great academic achievements. If a kid cannot stand the pressures of a high school like Langley, then he/she is going to have bigger problems in college and life in general.

Utter BS. For too many kids pressure-cooker high schools like Langley and some others around here are toxic and unhealthy. I know several graduates who moved on to college and had great experiences and still look back on their stressful high school years at Langley as some of the worst in their life.

In my experience, anyone who makes gross generalizations about someone's life based on how they felt in high school no probably peaked in high school. And we all know what those people are like.

[Anonymous]

Not the PP, but I've never understood why some people are so quick to call Langley a pressure-cooker. It seems to me that, if your parents have as much money as many Langley parents, you probably end up having more options and less pressure than students at other schools, where the parents have less money and are very adamant that their children get into certain schools like U.Va. or William and Mary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I heard from my kid is that Langley is full of mean and pretentious kids.

Maybe a little status driven - you really can't avoid it since the kids come from families that are among the most successful. Their parents are competitive, so they have competitive kids.

No doubt some elements in this environment is not healthy, but on the whole, it's a great school with great academic achievements. If a kid cannot stand the pressures of a high school like Langley, then he/she is going to have bigger problems in college and life in general.

My kid transferred from Langley due to the pressure. She's at Emory and doing wonderfully.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are cheaper houses in the Langley boundaries. I don't know if this was always the case.

We could not afford any single family homes in McLean's boundaries. There were a large handful of houses that we looked over listings for in the Langley boundaries. We decided that there is little to no appeal to living in Great Falls, and that its cache will go by the wayside as people lean toward more urban living.

You go right on telling yourself that.

Affluent folks are embracing more urban living. This is not something that I need to tell myself - it is a bonafide trend. My DH and I work in DC and Arlington respectively - ain't nobody got time to commute from Great Falls. Is it aesthetically nice? Of course. But at the end of the day, that only counts for so much when you have a decent housing budget.

Why the fuck don't people understand there's a huge tech corridor in Western FFX and not everyone works in DC and Arlington? How narrow-minded DC people are!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are cheaper houses in the Langley boundaries. I don't know if this was always the case.

We could not afford any single family homes in McLean's boundaries. There were a large handful of houses that we looked over listings for in the Langley boundaries. We decided that there is little to no appeal to living in Great Falls, and that its cache will go by the wayside as people lean toward more urban living.

You go right on telling yourself that.

Affluent folks are embracing more urban living. This is not something that I need to tell myself - it is a bonafide trend. My DH and I work in DC and Arlington respectively - ain't nobody got time to commute from Great Falls. Is it aesthetically nice? Of course. But at the end of the day, that only counts for so much when you have a decent housing budget.

Interesting. We've seen exactly the opposite trend. Affluent families moving further away from DC in order to have some acreage and privacy. Most people we know work in Reston, McLean, Vienna, Herndon, etc. so commuting to DC is a non-issue for many.

I really don't know where to even link to the most credible source of information for this. There is most definitely a surging collective desire to live in walkable neighborhoods. I see it in this region. There is very little to appeal (for many) for the extremely large Great Falls lots, and to live off of country roads that have no sidewalks, and on top of that, to be far away from denser core areas like Arlington and DC. And yes, I am talking about people who have $800k - $1 million to spend on a house.

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/kbenfield/why_urban_demographers_are_rig.html

Perhaps you're talking about people like yourself. The families who live in Great Falls and areas like it, are there precisely because they don't have any interest in living in a "denser core area" such as Arlington and DC. Those of us who choose to live here prefer the large lots with plenty of acreage, open space, and wooded areas, as opposed to crowded, congested, urban and semi-urban areas. It's a matter of personal preference and judging by the brisk sales of homes in this area, it seems there are many people who prefer it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are cheaper houses in the Langley boundaries. I don't know if this was always the case.

We could not afford any single family homes in McLean's boundaries. There were a large handful of houses that we looked over listings for in the Langley boundaries. We decided that there is little to no appeal to living in Great Falls, and that its cache will go by the wayside as people lean toward more urban living.

You go right on telling yourself that.

Affluent folks are embracing more urban living. This is not something that I need to tell myself - it is a bonafide trend. My DH and I work in DC and Arlington respectively - ain't nobody got time to commute from Great Falls. Is it aesthetically nice? Of course. But at the end of the day, that only counts for so much when you have a decent housing budget.

Interesting. We've seen exactly the opposite trend. Affluent families moving further away from DC in order to have some acreage and privacy. Most people we know work in Reston, McLean, Vienna, Herndon, etc. so commuting to DC is a non-issue for many.

I really don't know where to even link to the most credible source of information for this. There is most definitely a surging collective desire to live in walkable neighborhoods. I see it in this region. There is very little to appeal (for many) for the extremely large Great Falls lots, and to live off of country roads that have no sidewalks, and on top of that, to be far away from denser core areas like Arlington and DC. And yes, I am talking about people who have $800k - $1 million to spend on a house.

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/kbenfield/why_urban_demographers_are_rig.html

Actually the trend is in the opposite direction...the greatest growth is projected even further out than Great Falls in the exurbs
http://www.washingtonian.com/blogs/capitalcomment/real-estate/the-fastest-growing-suburbs-of-washington-are-in-counties-youve-never-heard-of.php

Exactly. This article pretty much sums up how my husband and I (and plenty of our neighbors) feel about the suburbs. Ideally, we'd love to move out even further than Great Falls, maybe to Waterford, Winchester, Aldie, or someplace where we could get acres of land and maybe some horses. It's a dream of ours!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I heard from my kid is that Langley is full of mean and pretentious kids.

Maybe a little status driven - you really can't avoid it since the kids come from families that are among the most successful. Their parents are competitive, so they have competitive kids.

No doubt some elements in this environment is not healthy, but on the whole, it's a great school with great academic achievements. If a kid cannot stand the pressures of a high school like Langley, then he/she is going to have bigger problems in college and life in general.

Utter BS. For too many kids pressure-cooker high schools like Langley and some others around here are toxic and unhealthy. I know several graduates who moved on to college and had great experiences and still look back on their stressful high school years at Langley as some of the worst in their life.

In my experience, anyone who makes gross generalizations about someone's life based on how they felt in high school no probably peaked in high school. And we all know what those people are like.

And yet here you are, making gross generalizations about the experiences of kids who attend Langley. I have no doubt there are some kids who had a terrible experience there - just as there are always kids IN EVERY HIGH SCHOOL who hated their four years there. Interestingly, there are far more kids who have a wonderful experience attending Langley and the other "toxic and unhealthy" schools in the area. Please. Spare us your melodrama.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are cheaper houses in the Langley boundaries. I don't know if this was always the case.

We could not afford any single family homes in McLean's boundaries. There were a large handful of houses that we looked over listings for in the Langley boundaries. We decided that there is little to no appeal to living in Great Falls, and that its cache will go by the wayside as people lean toward more urban living.

You go right on telling yourself that.

Affluent folks are embracing more urban living. This is not something that I need to tell myself - it is a bonafide trend. My DH and I work in DC and Arlington respectively - ain't nobody got time to commute from Great Falls. Is it aesthetically nice? Of course. But at the end of the day, that only counts for so much when you have a decent housing budget.

Interesting. We've seen exactly the opposite trend. Affluent families moving further away from DC in order to have some acreage and privacy. Most people we know work in Reston, McLean, Vienna, Herndon, etc. so commuting to DC is a non-issue for many.

I really don't know where to even link to the most credible source of information for this. There is most definitely a surging collective desire to live in walkable neighborhoods. I see it in this region. There is very little to appeal (for many) for the extremely large Great Falls lots, and to live off of country roads that have no sidewalks, and on top of that, to be far away from denser core areas like Arlington and DC. And yes, I am talking about people who have $800k - $1 million to spend on a house.

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/kbenfield/why_urban_demographers_are_rig.html

Perhaps you're talking about people like yourself. The families who live in Great Falls and areas like it, are there precisely because they don't have any interest in living in a "denser core area" such as Arlington and DC. Those of us who choose to live here prefer the large lots with plenty of acreage, open space, and wooded areas, as opposed to crowded, congested, urban and semi-urban areas. It's a matter of personal preference and judging by the brisk sales of homes in this area, it seems there are many people who prefer it.

Exactly! I love living in Great Falls. Actually, we are only three miles from the Silver Line, and that stretch of Route 7 moves pretty quickly during rush hour.

[Anonymous]

Go Highlanders! Scots rule, Saxons drool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Go Highlanders! Scots rule, Saxons drool.

Who rocks the house?
THE SAXONS rock the house!
And when THE SAXONS rock the house
We rock it ALL THE WAY DOWN!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I heard from my kid is that Langley is full of mean and pretentious kids.

Maybe a little status driven - you really can't avoid it since the kids come from families that are among the most successful. Their parents are competitive, so they have competitive kids.

No doubt some elements in this environment is not healthy, but on the whole, it's a great school with great academic achievements. If a kid cannot stand the pressures of a high school like Langley, then he/she is going to have bigger problems in college and life in general.

Utter BS. For too many kids pressure-cooker high schools like Langley and some others around here are toxic and unhealthy. I know several graduates who moved on to college and had great experiences and still look back on their stressful high school years at Langley as some of the worst in their life.

In my experience, anyone who makes gross generalizations about someone's life based on how they felt in high school no probably peaked in high school. And we all know what those people are like.

And yet here you are, making gross generalizations about the experiences of kids who attend Langley. I have no doubt there are some kids who had a terrible experience there - just as there are always kids IN EVERY HIGH SCHOOL who hated their four years there. Interestingly, there are far more kids who have a wonderful experience attending Langley and the other "toxic and unhealthy" schools in the area. Please. Spare us your melodrama.[/quote]

Oops sorry... https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/langley-high-school-students-mourn-two-student-deaths/2014/02/05/34bbdbb0-8ea6-11e3-b46a-5a3d0d2130da_story.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I heard from my kid is that Langley is full of mean and pretentious kids.

Maybe a little status driven - you really can't avoid it since the kids come from families that are among the most successful. Their parents are competitive, so they have competitive kids.

No doubt some elements in this environment is not healthy, but on the whole, it's a great school with great academic achievements. If a kid cannot stand the pressures of a high school like Langley, then he/she is going to have bigger problems in college and life in general.

Utter BS. For too many kids pressure-cooker high schools like Langley and some others around here are toxic and unhealthy. I know several graduates who moved on to college and had great experiences and still look back on their stressful high school years at Langley as some of the worst in their life.

In my experience, anyone who makes gross generalizations about someone's life based on how they felt in high school no probably peaked in high school. And we all know what those people are like.

And yet here you are, making gross generalizations about the experiences of kids who attend Langley. I have no doubt there are some kids who had a terrible experience there - just as there are always kids IN EVERY HIGH SCHOOL who hated their four years there. Interestingly, there are far more kids who have a wonderful experience attending Langley and the other "toxic and unhealthy" schools in the area. Please. Spare us your melodrama.[/quote]

Oops sorry... https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/langley-high-school-students-mourn-two-student-deaths/2014/02/05/34bbdbb0-8ea6-11e3-b46a-5a3d0d2130da_story.html

Wow, you are vile. These kids had personal issues most do not, but I suppose it's convenient to blame their deaths on the school at large.

Where's your link to every other teen suicide? When I was growing up, far from here, we also had some student suicides occur. However, no one placed the blame on the school itself. Though I suppose if you have an axe to grind in the first place, then it's mighty convenient, right?

[Anonymous]

I really hate to see what is a fairly trivial thread about two close-by schools with similar SAT scores devolve into someone bringing up two suicides to score debating points and drive home with a sledgehammer the obvious point that not every student will thrive at every school. Regardless of the motive, it's cruel and disrespectful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really hate to see what is a fairly trivial thread about two close-by schools with similar SAT scores devolve into someone bringing up two suicides to score debating points and drive home with a sledgehammer the obvious point that not every student will thrive at every school. Regardless of the motive, it's cruel and disrespectful.

+1

Unfortunately, both schools have had more than their fair share of suicides and student tradegies in the past few years.