FCPS High School Poverty and Enrollment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just looked at Justice boundary. Justice is over 2000 and the boundary looks fairly compact with the school in the middle.

If you put in wealthier kids where are you going to put Justice kids?

If they wanted to reassign some additional wealthier areas to Justice, they'd have to take single-family areas out of Annandale HS or Falls Church HS, and they aren't going to do that. Conversely, the poorest areas zoned to Justice are areas that border Arlington and Alexandria, and can't be reassigned to other FCPS schools without creating attendance islands.

Part of the reason they are expanding Justice to 2500 seats now, even though they could have waited and reassigned part of Justice to nearby Falls Church when Falls Church's renovation/expansion to 2500 seats is finished, is probably that the Justice areas closest to Falls Church are single-family areas in Sleepy Hollow or Annandale. If they waited and reassigned those areas to Falls Church, it would push up the FARMS rates at Justice to near 70%. So expanding Justice allows them to accommodate growth within the existing boundaries. In Justice's case, FCPS can't do much to affect the concentration of poverty in the pyramid. The Board of Supervisors, on the other hand, could do a lot if it either (1) enforced zoning laws or (2) encouraged redevelopment of the run-down garden apartments in Seven Corners and Culmore.

That is different from other situations (for example, Annandale/Woodson or Lewis/West Springfield) where the School Board could theoretically make changes that would balance demographics or enrollments between schools that share a border.

I don't think it would result in the "balance" you think it would. Many people would not send their kids and the poor population shows no signs of slowing down. Look at the demographics now over the last three years. Why are White, Black, and Asian numbers--not just percentages--all going down dramatically? Private? Moving? Pupil placement? Do you really think reassigning a middle class neighborhood is going to change that?

In this context, "balance" just means reduce the differences, not result in identical numbers of students, much less identical demographics.

If you look at enrollments over the past five years, there are some high schools where the White, Black, and Asian enrollments have gone down and the Hispanic enrollments have increased. There are also more high schools in FCPS where the Hispanic enrollments have increased over the past five years along with increases in White, Black and/or Asian enrollments. So I don't think the picture is quite the one that you're trying to suggest (that everyone else flees from schools with growing Hispanic enrollments).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just looked at Justice boundary. Justice is over 2000 and the boundary looks fairly compact with the school in the middle.

If you put in wealthier kids where are you going to put Justice kids?

If they wanted to reassign some additional wealthier areas to Justice, they'd have to take single-family areas out of Annandale HS or Falls Church HS, and they aren't going to do that. Conversely, the poorest areas zoned to Justice are areas that border Arlington and Alexandria, and can't be reassigned to other FCPS schools without creating attendance islands.

Part of the reason they are expanding Justice to 2500 seats now, even though they could have waited and reassigned part of Justice to nearby Falls Church when Falls Church's renovation/expansion to 2500 seats is finished, is probably that the Justice areas closest to Falls Church are single-family areas in Sleepy Hollow or Annandale. If they waited and reassigned those areas to Falls Church, it would push up the FARMS rates at Justice to near 70%. So expanding Justice allows them to accommodate growth within the existing boundaries. In Justice's case, FCPS can't do much to affect the concentration of poverty in the pyramid. The Board of Supervisors, on the other hand, could do a lot if it either (1) enforced zoning laws or (2) encouraged redevelopment of the run-down garden apartments in Seven Corners and Culmore.

That is different from other situations (for example, Annandale/Woodson or Lewis/West Springfield) where the School Board could theoretically make changes that would balance demographics or enrollments between schools that share a border.

I don't think it would result in the "balance" you think it would. Many people would not send their kids and the poor population shows no signs of slowing down. Look at the demographics now over the last three years. Why are White, Black, and Asian numbers--not just percentages--all going down dramatically? Private? Moving? Pupil placement? Do you really think reassigning a middle class neighborhood is going to change that?

In this context, "balance" just means reduce the differences, not result in identical numbers of students, much less identical demographics.

If you look at enrollments over the past five years, there are some high schools where the White, Black, and Asian enrollments have gone down and the Hispanic enrollments have increased. There are also more high schools in FCPS where the Hispanic enrollments have increased over the past five years along with increases in White, Black and/or Asian enrollments. So I don't think the picture is quite the one that you're trying to suggest (that everyone else flees from schools with growing Hispanic enrollments).

All of this comes back to the county choosing to concentrate poverty. If they just stopped subsidizing low income housing within pyramids that already have heavy farms populations and stopped grating zoning exemptions to new developments, the situation would at least stabilize

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just looked at Justice boundary. Justice is over 2000 and the boundary looks fairly compact with the school in the middle.

If you put in wealthier kids where are you going to put Justice kids?

If they wanted to reassign some additional wealthier areas to Justice, they'd have to take single-family areas out of Annandale HS or Falls Church HS, and they aren't going to do that. Conversely, the poorest areas zoned to Justice are areas that border Arlington and Alexandria, and can't be reassigned to other FCPS schools without creating attendance islands.

Part of the reason they are expanding Justice to 2500 seats now, even though they could have waited and reassigned part of Justice to nearby Falls Church when Falls Church's renovation/expansion to 2500 seats is finished, is probably that the Justice areas closest to Falls Church are single-family areas in Sleepy Hollow or Annandale. If they waited and reassigned those areas to Falls Church, it would push up the FARMS rates at Justice to near 70%. So expanding Justice allows them to accommodate growth within the existing boundaries. In Justice's case, FCPS can't do much to affect the concentration of poverty in the pyramid. The Board of Supervisors, on the other hand, could do a lot if it either (1) enforced zoning laws or (2) encouraged redevelopment of the run-down garden apartments in Seven Corners and Culmore.

That is different from other situations (for example, Annandale/Woodson or Lewis/West Springfield) where the School Board could theoretically make changes that would balance demographics or enrollments between schools that share a border.

I don't think it would result in the "balance" you think it would. Many people would not send their kids and the poor population shows no signs of slowing down. Look at the demographics now over the last three years. Why are White, Black, and Asian numbers--not just percentages--all going down dramatically? Private? Moving? Pupil placement? Do you really think reassigning a middle class neighborhood is going to change that?

In this context, "balance" just means reduce the differences, not result in identical numbers of students, much less identical demographics.

If you look at enrollments over the past five years, there are some high schools where the White, Black, and Asian enrollments have gone down and the Hispanic enrollments have increased. There are also more high schools in FCPS where the Hispanic enrollments have increased over the past five years along with increases in White, Black and/or Asian enrollments. So I don't think the picture is quite the one that you're trying to suggest (that everyone else flees from schools with growing Hispanic enrollments).

The question is: why are they fleeing from Lewis?

How many are pupil placing out? I have trouble deciphering the FCPS information. Are they pupil placing out for AP? Are they moving out of the community?

Is there an administrative problem?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s a nice sentiment, but is there any proof that dropping 20% MC/UMC students into a school of low income students actually results in higher scores for the lower income students?

No. Just covers it up for the school total.

It does not help the students. It will result in more private schools. Some will move.

Disagree. Having a functioning group of students in the classroom makes a world of difference. Role models, students able to answer questions rather than just sitting there, learning about the benefits of higher education/SES, learning how to be polite/codeswitch. It drastically improves the rhythm of teaching being able to separate the trouble makers by at least three kids paying attention. The trouble makers are no longer the leaders of the classroom experience. The middle group of students who want to learn are better able to focus and be successful. The bottom 20% are much slower to change, but at least they get to see peers become successful and they can internalize that effort equals success. However, they can be very resistant resistant to intervention due to generational poverty/drugs/family issues/etc. This is where the budling relationships piece comes into play. But again that is a slow process, since these kids have a lot of trust issues and are often the most sensitive kids in the room.

But you are ignoring effects in the other direction. You are putting average/above average students into a situation where there are a group of trouble makers and some kids dont know how to be successful students. You are lowering their opportunity to just be average students in a nominal learning environment and are now looking to them to have to deal with these issues too. A lot of parents arent going to want that.

And a lot of parents are definitely NOT going to willingly put their kids into a situation where 20% are "very resistant" and have issues relating to "generational poverty/drugs/family issues/etc."

Sorry but these "role models" deserve just as much consideration as the kids at Lewis, and I think that is a disconnect in this conversation. They are not resources to be used for equity.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe electing more men to the School Board this fall will make a difference. The last time the School Board had any guts was when Stuart Gibson pushed through the boundary change in 2008 that moved kids to South Lakes.

Stu Gibson has so much guts he let the SL PTSA run the show and make the decisions. And, it was composed of IB moms.

They didn’t take the heat from the people insisting they had a God-given right to stay at their then-current schools. He did.

In comparison, current SB members are spineless ninnies.

They did not say that. If you had watched the public hearings and citizen participation--as I did--you would have seen the majority of parents begging for South Lakes to switch to AP. Many of those parents still feel that way.

Other parents were upset that this was their third switch in a very short period of time. Some parents ended up with kids who went to three different high schools--without moving.

And, if you really followed it, you would have seen the SLPTA postings on their website that outlined their plans. They took it down when the link was posted on FairfaxUnderground. But, they spelled out exactly what they wanted and did not want. They wanted NO poor neighborhoods. They made that perfectly clear. This was not about numbers, it was all about demographics. The SL PTA was a perfect example of "limousine liberals." They wanted to be at South Lakes so they could claim they were tolerant. They wanted to keep IB so they could be progressive and they wanted wealthier kids so their kids could remain isolated from the poor kids.

Of course it was also about numbers. South Lakes was at about 1400 kids at the time. Westfield had about 2900 back then.

So maybe Lewis has to lose a couple more hundred before some of these lazy SB members do something (though most of the schools had lower enrollments in 2008 so 1400 them is about like 1600-1700 now).

SL was saved from a potential "death spiral" where it would have lost its middle and upper middle class support in the surrounding neighborhoods. It is a robust and popular school today thanks to the parents who pushed for the boundary change to bring in more wealthy residential areas. However, the promised AP courses were never adopted, and that's on the school board. Regarding Lewis, I don't think the school board will do anything unless the Lewis PTA or parent groups make it an issue.

Saving one school from a death spiral doesn't make the kids you don't want at the school disappear. They end up concentrated and no schools want them and no parents want their neighborhoods zoned for those schools. But hooray for keeping poors out of South Lakes and allowing it to thrive.

What is stopping Lewis from thriving.

Look at the assessments

https://schoolquality.virginia.gov/schools/lewis-high#fndtn-desktopTabs-assessments

50% of the school is farms, and fcps's own study has 40% as a tipping point past which a school can't really succeed.

But why is this? Why does FARMs mean no success?

It does not mean that. But, when you have hundreds of new students in a year who do not speak English and, perhaps, have not been in school at all, there is a problem. This problem will not be solved by adding more affluent neighborhoods to the boundary.

It does mean that. The resources that the school has go to meeting more basic needs and to remedial instruction.

Here is a study that FCPS commissioned laying it out.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/9DG4KP71B0DB/$file/fcps_tipping-point.pdf

The gist is that "almost all schools with poverty levels of 45 percent or higher were unable to reach expected pass rate levels in reading or math. Follow‐up statistical analyses found statistical evidence that two tipping points exist in FCPS. The reading data provided the most consistent findings as it indicated two tipping points occurring at 20 and 40‐45 percent school‐level poverty. Thus, FCPS schools with greater than 20 percent poverty are much less likely to meet performance expectations than those with less than 20 percent poverty. And, once poverty levels at a school reach 40 percent or more, FCPS schools are unlikely to meet expectations for school performance."

By their own numbers, Lewis, MVHs, Annandale, West Potomac, Falls Church and Justice are all at or past the 40% tipping point and Herndon and Edison are close. Most of those schools have lower FARMs rate schools bordering them, but that would mean unpopular redistricting

Also, the poverty rate of the county is above 20%. Moving students around won't fix this problem. It's mathematically impossible.

You want homogenous school district. Well, we don't have one.

The county poverty rate is below 40% and some schools have rates well below 10% including schools that border high poverty schools.

Which schools below 10% border high poverty schools?

Langley borders herndon, part of McLean borders Falls Church and the boundary is very close to justice if you cut through Arlington. Go to 15% and Oakton borders Falls Church, Woodson borders Falls Church and Annandale, West Springfield borders Annandale and Lewis, and Lake Braddock borders Annandale. Part of the problem is the school board, more of the problem is the county zoning and granting zoning exemptions in a way that concentrates poverty. The development in Tysons and along Rt 7 could have have been required to include low income housing, but they prefer to keep that in the east part of the county

The poverty in Herndon is no where near Langley.

You cannot change geography. I am not familiar with the other areas and the pockets of poverty. The zoning is done. I am not famliar with where the county has built low income housing--but there is quite a bit of low income housing in Herndon--but there are lots of pockets of poverty in other areas besides the east.

Many current Langley neighborhoods are nowhere near Langley, either.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe electing more men to the School Board this fall will make a difference. The last time the School Board had any guts was when Stuart Gibson pushed through the boundary change in 2008 that moved kids to South Lakes.

Stu Gibson has so much guts he let the SL PTSA run the show and make the decisions. And, it was composed of IB moms.

They didn’t take the heat from the people insisting they had a God-given right to stay at their then-current schools. He did.

In comparison, current SB members are spineless ninnies.

They did not say that. If you had watched the public hearings and citizen participation--as I did--you would have seen the majority of parents begging for South Lakes to switch to AP. Many of those parents still feel that way.

Other parents were upset that this was their third switch in a very short period of time. Some parents ended up with kids who went to three different high schools--without moving.

And, if you really followed it, you would have seen the SLPTA postings on their website that outlined their plans. They took it down when the link was posted on FairfaxUnderground. But, they spelled out exactly what they wanted and did not want. They wanted NO poor neighborhoods. They made that perfectly clear. This was not about numbers, it was all about demographics. The SL PTA was a perfect example of "limousine liberals." They wanted to be at South Lakes so they could claim they were tolerant. They wanted to keep IB so they could be progressive and they wanted wealthier kids so their kids could remain isolated from the poor kids.

Of course it was also about numbers. South Lakes was at about 1400 kids at the time. Westfield had about 2900 back then.

So maybe Lewis has to lose a couple more hundred before some of these lazy SB members do something (though most of the schools had lower enrollments in 2008 so 1400 them is about like 1600-1700 now).

SL was saved from a potential "death spiral" where it would have lost its middle and upper middle class support in the surrounding neighborhoods. It is a robust and popular school today thanks to the parents who pushed for the boundary change to bring in more wealthy residential areas. However, the promised AP courses were never adopted, and that's on the school board. Regarding Lewis, I don't think the school board will do anything unless the Lewis PTA or parent groups make it an issue.

Saving one school from a death spiral doesn't make the kids you don't want at the school disappear. They end up concentrated and no schools want them and no parents want their neighborhoods zoned for those schools. But hooray for keeping poors out of South Lakes and allowing it to thrive.

What is stopping Lewis from thriving.

Look at the assessments

https://schoolquality.virginia.gov/schools/lewis-high#fndtn-desktopTabs-assessments

50% of the school is farms, and fcps's own study has 40% as a tipping point past which a school can't really succeed.

But why is this? Why does FARMs mean no success?

It does not mean that. But, when you have hundreds of new students in a year who do not speak English and, perhaps, have not been in school at all, there is a problem. This problem will not be solved by adding more affluent neighborhoods to the boundary.

It does mean that. The resources that the school has go to meeting more basic needs and to remedial instruction.

Here is a study that FCPS commissioned laying it out.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/9DG4KP71B0DB/$file/fcps_tipping-point.pdf

The gist is that "almost all schools with poverty levels of 45 percent or higher were unable to reach expected pass rate levels in reading or math. Follow‐up statistical analyses found statistical evidence that two tipping points exist in FCPS. The reading data provided the most consistent findings as it indicated two tipping points occurring at 20 and 40‐45 percent school‐level poverty. Thus, FCPS schools with greater than 20 percent poverty are much less likely to meet performance expectations than those with less than 20 percent poverty. And, once poverty levels at a school reach 40 percent or more, FCPS schools are unlikely to meet expectations for school performance."

By their own numbers, Lewis, MVHs, Annandale, West Potomac, Falls Church and Justice are all at or past the 40% tipping point and Herndon and Edison are close. Most of those schools have lower FARMs rate schools bordering them, but that would mean unpopular redistricting

Also, the poverty rate of the county is above 20%. Moving students around won't fix this problem. It's mathematically impossible.

You want homogenous school district. Well, we don't have one.

The county poverty rate is below 40% and some schools have rates well below 10% including schools that border high poverty schools.

Which schools below 10% border high poverty schools?

Langley borders herndon, part of McLean borders Falls Church and the boundary is very close to justice if you cut through Arlington. Go to 15% and Oakton borders Falls Church, Woodson borders Falls Church and Annandale, West Springfield borders Annandale and Lewis, and Lake Braddock borders Annandale. Part of the problem is the school board, more of the problem is the county zoning and granting zoning exemptions in a way that concentrates poverty. The development in Tysons and along Rt 7 could have have been required to include low income housing, but they prefer to keep that in the east part of the county

The poverty in Herndon is no where near Langley.

You cannot change geography. I am not familiar with the other areas and the pockets of poverty. The zoning is done. I am not famliar with where the county has built low income housing--but there is quite a bit of low income housing in Herndon--but there are lots of pockets of poverty in other areas besides the east.

Many current Langley neighborhoods are nowhere near Langley, either.

In the recent boundary adjustment, Langley absorbed all of Spring Hill ES except for the part with apartments. The boundaries for Langley, McLean, and Marshall are a mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just looked at Justice boundary. Justice is over 2000 and the boundary looks fairly compact with the school in the middle.

If you put in wealthier kids where are you going to put Justice kids?

If they wanted to reassign some additional wealthier areas to Justice, they'd have to take single-family areas out of Annandale HS or Falls Church HS, and they aren't going to do that. Conversely, the poorest areas zoned to Justice are areas that border Arlington and Alexandria, and can't be reassigned to other FCPS schools without creating attendance islands.

Part of the reason they are expanding Justice to 2500 seats now, even though they could have waited and reassigned part of Justice to nearby Falls Church when Falls Church's renovation/expansion to 2500 seats is finished, is probably that the Justice areas closest to Falls Church are single-family areas in Sleepy Hollow or Annandale. If they waited and reassigned those areas to Falls Church, it would push up the FARMS rates at Justice to near 70%. So expanding Justice allows them to accommodate growth within the existing boundaries. In Justice's case, FCPS can't do much to affect the concentration of poverty in the pyramid. The Board of Supervisors, on the other hand, could do a lot if it either (1) enforced zoning laws or (2) encouraged redevelopment of the run-down garden apartments in Seven Corners and Culmore.

That is different from other situations (for example, Annandale/Woodson or Lewis/West Springfield) where the School Board could theoretically make changes that would balance demographics or enrollments between schools that share a border.

I don't think it would result in the "balance" you think it would. Many people would not send their kids and the poor population shows no signs of slowing down. Look at the demographics now over the last three years. Why are White, Black, and Asian numbers--not just percentages--all going down dramatically? Private? Moving? Pupil placement? Do you really think reassigning a middle class neighborhood is going to change that?

In this context, "balance" just means reduce the differences, not result in identical numbers of students, much less identical demographics.

If you look at enrollments over the past five years, there are some high schools where the White, Black, and Asian enrollments have gone down and the Hispanic enrollments have increased. There are also more high schools in FCPS where the Hispanic enrollments have increased over the past five years along with increases in White, Black and/or Asian enrollments. So I don't think the picture is quite the one that you're trying to suggest (that everyone else flees from schools with growing Hispanic enrollments).

The question is: why are they fleeing from Lewis?

How many are pupil placing out? I have trouble deciphering the FCPS information. Are they pupil placing out for AP? Are they moving out of the community?

Is there an administrative problem?

You have to be careful using a term like "flight." If you look at enrollment trends, you can see that certain cohorts aren't being fully replaced. That doesn't necessarily mean they "fled" an area.

As for pupil placements, you can access the transfer information on the FCPS web site. Lewis has a significant number of pupil placements, and they are transferring to both AP and other IB schools.

You'd have to get more granular to do a "root cause" analysis. Maybe some kids transferred for the Academy program at Edison. Maybe others transferred for AP at Hayfield or Lake Braddock. Others might have transferred so they could play sports at Mount Vernon.

I assume every school has positives and negatives. However, the suggestion that one could never do a boundary change involving Lewis unless there were a far more detailed analysis of the conditions at the school than has been undertaken with past boundary changes suggests the intent is just to create obstacles, not to foster improvements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just looked at Justice boundary. Justice is over 2000 and the boundary looks fairly compact with the school in the middle.

If you put in wealthier kids where are you going to put Justice kids?

If they wanted to reassign some additional wealthier areas to Justice, they'd have to take single-family areas out of Annandale HS or Falls Church HS, and they aren't going to do that. Conversely, the poorest areas zoned to Justice are areas that border Arlington and Alexandria, and can't be reassigned to other FCPS schools without creating attendance islands.

Part of the reason they are expanding Justice to 2500 seats now, even though they could have waited and reassigned part of Justice to nearby Falls Church when Falls Church's renovation/expansion to 2500 seats is finished, is probably that the Justice areas closest to Falls Church are single-family areas in Sleepy Hollow or Annandale. If they waited and reassigned those areas to Falls Church, it would push up the FARMS rates at Justice to near 70%. So expanding Justice allows them to accommodate growth within the existing boundaries. In Justice's case, FCPS can't do much to affect the concentration of poverty in the pyramid. The Board of Supervisors, on the other hand, could do a lot if it either (1) enforced zoning laws or (2) encouraged redevelopment of the run-down garden apartments in Seven Corners and Culmore.

That is different from other situations (for example, Annandale/Woodson or Lewis/West Springfield) where the School Board could theoretically make changes that would balance demographics or enrollments between schools that share a border.

I don't think it would result in the "balance" you think it would. Many people would not send their kids and the poor population shows no signs of slowing down. Look at the demographics now over the last three years. Why are White, Black, and Asian numbers--not just percentages--all going down dramatically? Private? Moving? Pupil placement? Do you really think reassigning a middle class neighborhood is going to change that?

In this context, "balance" just means reduce the differences, not result in identical numbers of students, much less identical demographics.

If you look at enrollments over the past five years, there are some high schools where the White, Black, and Asian enrollments have gone down and the Hispanic enrollments have increased. There are also more high schools in FCPS where the Hispanic enrollments have increased over the past five years along with increases in White, Black and/or Asian enrollments. So I don't think the picture is quite the one that you're trying to suggest (that everyone else flees from schools with growing Hispanic enrollments).

The question is: why are they fleeing from Lewis?

How many are pupil placing out? I have trouble deciphering the FCPS information. Are they pupil placing out for AP? Are they moving out of the community?

Is there an administrative problem?

You have to be careful using a term like "flight." If you look at enrollment trends, you can see that certain cohorts aren't being fully replaced. That doesn't necessarily mean they "fled" an area.

As for pupil placements, you can access the transfer information on the FCPS web site. Lewis has a significant number of pupil placements, and they are transferring to both AP and other IB schools.

You'd have to get more granular to do a "root cause" analysis. Maybe some kids transferred for the Academy program at Edison. Maybe others transferred for AP at Hayfield or Lake Braddock. Others might have transferred so they could play sports at Mount Vernon.

I assume every school has positives and negatives. However, the suggestion that one could never do a boundary change involving Lewis unless there were a far more detailed analysis of the conditions at the school than has been undertaken with past boundary changes suggests the intent is just to create obstacles, not to foster improvements.

Seems to me it would be more productive to foster improvements. Your "obstacle" involves taking other--more successful--students out of their current positive environment.

First improvement: reduce pupil placements Get rid of IB. Look at why kids are pupil placing. Perhaps, put an academy at Lewis that teaches real work skills instead of fake ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just looked at Justice boundary. Justice is over 2000 and the boundary looks fairly compact with the school in the middle.

If you put in wealthier kids where are you going to put Justice kids?

If they wanted to reassign some additional wealthier areas to Justice, they'd have to take single-family areas out of Annandale HS or Falls Church HS, and they aren't going to do that. Conversely, the poorest areas zoned to Justice are areas that border Arlington and Alexandria, and can't be reassigned to other FCPS schools without creating attendance islands.

Part of the reason they are expanding Justice to 2500 seats now, even though they could have waited and reassigned part of Justice to nearby Falls Church when Falls Church's renovation/expansion to 2500 seats is finished, is probably that the Justice areas closest to Falls Church are single-family areas in Sleepy Hollow or Annandale. If they waited and reassigned those areas to Falls Church, it would push up the FARMS rates at Justice to near 70%. So expanding Justice allows them to accommodate growth within the existing boundaries. In Justice's case, FCPS can't do much to affect the concentration of poverty in the pyramid. The Board of Supervisors, on the other hand, could do a lot if it either (1) enforced zoning laws or (2) encouraged redevelopment of the run-down garden apartments in Seven Corners and Culmore.

That is different from other situations (for example, Annandale/Woodson or Lewis/West Springfield) where the School Board could theoretically make changes that would balance demographics or enrollments between schools that share a border.

I don't think it would result in the "balance" you think it would. Many people would not send their kids and the poor population shows no signs of slowing down. Look at the demographics now over the last three years. Why are White, Black, and Asian numbers--not just percentages--all going down dramatically? Private? Moving? Pupil placement? Do you really think reassigning a middle class neighborhood is going to change that?

In this context, "balance" just means reduce the differences, not result in identical numbers of students, much less identical demographics.

If you look at enrollments over the past five years, there are some high schools where the White, Black, and Asian enrollments have gone down and the Hispanic enrollments have increased. There are also more high schools in FCPS where the Hispanic enrollments have increased over the past five years along with increases in White, Black and/or Asian enrollments. So I don't think the picture is quite the one that you're trying to suggest (that everyone else flees from schools with growing Hispanic enrollments).

The question is: why are they fleeing from Lewis?

How many are pupil placing out? I have trouble deciphering the FCPS information. Are they pupil placing out for AP? Are they moving out of the community?

Is there an administrative problem?

You have to be careful using a term like "flight." If you look at enrollment trends, you can see that certain cohorts aren't being fully replaced. That doesn't necessarily mean they "fled" an area.

As for pupil placements, you can access the transfer information on the FCPS web site. Lewis has a significant number of pupil placements, and they are transferring to both AP and other IB schools.

You'd have to get more granular to do a "root cause" analysis. Maybe some kids transferred for the Academy program at Edison. Maybe others transferred for AP at Hayfield or Lake Braddock. Others might have transferred so they could play sports at Mount Vernon.

I assume every school has positives and negatives. However, the suggestion that one could never do a boundary change involving Lewis unless there were a far more detailed analysis of the conditions at the school than has been undertaken with past boundary changes suggests the intent is just to create obstacles, not to foster improvements.

Seems to me it would be more productive to foster improvements. Your "obstacle" involves taking other--more successful--students out of their current positive environment.

First improvement: reduce pupil placements Get rid of IB. Look at why kids are pupil placing. Perhaps, put an academy at Lewis that teaches real work skills instead of fake ones.

You think the kids who are pupil placing out of Lewis for AP would be attracted by an HVAC program?

[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:Maybe electing more men to the School Board this fall will make a difference. The last time the School Board had any guts was when Stuart Gibson pushed through the boundary change in 2008 that moved kids to South Lakes.

Stu Gibson has so much guts he let the SL PTSA run the show and make the decisions. And, it was composed of IB moms.

They didn’t take the heat from the people insisting they had a God-given right to stay at their then-current schools. He did.

In comparison, current SB members are spineless ninnies.

They did not say that. If you had watched the public hearings and citizen participation--as I did--you would have seen the majority of parents begging for South Lakes to switch to AP. Many of those parents still feel that way.

Other parents were upset that this was their third switch in a very short period of time. Some parents ended up with kids who went to three different high schools--without moving.

And, if you really followed it, you would have seen the SLPTA postings on their website that outlined their plans. They took it down when the link was posted on FairfaxUnderground. But, they spelled out exactly what they wanted and did not want. They wanted NO poor neighborhoods. They made that perfectly clear. This was not about numbers, it was all about demographics. The SL PTA was a perfect example of "limousine liberals." They wanted to be at South Lakes so they could claim they were tolerant. They wanted to keep IB so they could be progressive and they wanted wealthier kids so their kids could remain isolated from the poor kids.

Of course it was also about numbers. South Lakes was at about 1400 kids at the time. Westfield had about 2900 back then.

So maybe Lewis has to lose a couple more hundred before some of these lazy SB members do something (though most of the schools had lower enrollments in 2008 so 1400 them is about like 1600-1700 now).

SL was saved from a potential "death spiral" where it would have lost its middle and upper middle class support in the surrounding neighborhoods. It is a robust and popular school today thanks to the parents who pushed for the boundary change to bring in more wealthy residential areas. However, the promised AP courses were never adopted, and that's on the school board. Regarding Lewis, I don't think the school board will do anything unless the Lewis PTA or parent groups make it an issue.

Saving one school from a death spiral doesn't make the kids you don't want at the school disappear. They end up concentrated and no schools want them and no parents want their neighborhoods zoned for those schools. But hooray for keeping poors out of South Lakes and allowing it to thrive.

What is stopping Lewis from thriving.

Look at the assessments

https://schoolquality.virginia.gov/schools/lewis-high#fndtn-desktopTabs-assessments

50% of the school is farms, and fcps's own study has 40% as a tipping point past which a school can't really succeed.

But why is this? Why does FARMs mean no success?

It does not mean that. But, when you have hundreds of new students in a year who do not speak English and, perhaps, have not been in school at all, there is a problem. This problem will not be solved by adding more affluent neighborhoods to the boundary.

I wish the county had a program for ESL kids with limited education. They should not be thrust into a gen ed classroom.

The problem isn't ESL kids, the problem is the limited education/the low performing students, which is not just an issue with ESL. I was an ESL kid who came to the this country and quickly a) went on to gen ed then GT classes and b) thought the science and math were far too easy. Public schools (not just FCPS) keep passing students along who have very limited grasp of the material. The number of FARMS students is just going to get higher. Not just because of immigrants. Neither side seems willing to save public schools. I think public schools will end up being for the poor while middle and upper classes will run to privates.

[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:Maybe electing more men to the School Board this fall will make a difference. The last time the School Board had any guts was when Stuart Gibson pushed through the boundary change in 2008 that moved kids to South Lakes.

Stu Gibson has so much guts he let the SL PTSA run the show and make the decisions. And, it was composed of IB moms.

They didn’t take the heat from the people insisting they had a God-given right to stay at their then-current schools. He did.

In comparison, current SB members are spineless ninnies.

They did not say that. If you had watched the public hearings and citizen participation--as I did--you would have seen the majority of parents begging for South Lakes to switch to AP. Many of those parents still feel that way.

Other parents were upset that this was their third switch in a very short period of time. Some parents ended up with kids who went to three different high schools--without moving.

And, if you really followed it, you would have seen the SLPTA postings on their website that outlined their plans. They took it down when the link was posted on FairfaxUnderground. But, they spelled out exactly what they wanted and did not want. They wanted NO poor neighborhoods. They made that perfectly clear. This was not about numbers, it was all about demographics. The SL PTA was a perfect example of "limousine liberals." They wanted to be at South Lakes so they could claim they were tolerant. They wanted to keep IB so they could be progressive and they wanted wealthier kids so their kids could remain isolated from the poor kids.

Of course it was also about numbers. South Lakes was at about 1400 kids at the time. Westfield had about 2900 back then.

So maybe Lewis has to lose a couple more hundred before some of these lazy SB members do something (though most of the schools had lower enrollments in 2008 so 1400 them is about like 1600-1700 now).

SL was saved from a potential "death spiral" where it would have lost its middle and upper middle class support in the surrounding neighborhoods. It is a robust and popular school today thanks to the parents who pushed for the boundary change to bring in more wealthy residential areas. However, the promised AP courses were never adopted, and that's on the school board. Regarding Lewis, I don't think the school board will do anything unless the Lewis PTA or parent groups make it an issue.

Saving one school from a death spiral doesn't make the kids you don't want at the school disappear. They end up concentrated and no schools want them and no parents want their neighborhoods zoned for those schools. But hooray for keeping poors out of South Lakes and allowing it to thrive.

What is stopping Lewis from thriving.

Look at the assessments

https://schoolquality.virginia.gov/schools/lewis-high#fndtn-desktopTabs-assessments

50% of the school is farms, and fcps's own study has 40% as a tipping point past which a school can't really succeed.

But why is this? Why does FARMs mean no success?

It does not mean that. But, when you have hundreds of new students in a year who do not speak English and, perhaps, have not been in school at all, there is a problem. This problem will not be solved by adding more affluent neighborhoods to the boundary.

I wish the county had a program for ESL kids with limited education. They should not be thrust into a gen ed classroom.

The problem isn't ESL kids, the problem is the limited education/the low performing students, which is not just an issue with ESL. I was an ESL kid who came to the this country and quickly a) went on to gen ed then GT classes and b) thought the science and math were far too easy. Public schools (not just FCPS) keep passing students along who have very limited grasp of the material. The number of FARMS students is just going to get higher. Not just because of immigrants. Neither side seems willing to save public schools. I think public schools will end up being for the poor while middle and upper classes will run to privates.

I likely agree with you. If Fairfax starts shifting kids to even things out it will backfire. The BOS does not want tax income to go down. And, it will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s a nice sentiment, but is there any proof that dropping 20% MC/UMC students into a school of low income students actually results in higher scores for the lower income students?

No. Just covers it up for the school total.

It does not help the students. It will result in more private schools. Some will move.

Disagree. Having a functioning group of students in the classroom makes a world of difference. Role models, students able to answer questions rather than just sitting there, learning about the benefits of higher education/SES, learning how to be polite/codeswitch. It drastically improves the rhythm of teaching being able to separate the trouble makers by at least three kids paying attention. The trouble makers are no longer the leaders of the classroom experience. The middle group of students who want to learn are better able to focus and be successful. The bottom 20% are much slower to change, but at least they get to see peers become successful and they can internalize that effort equals success. However, they can be very resistant resistant to intervention due to generational poverty/drugs/family issues/etc. This is where the budling relationships piece comes into play. But again that is a slow process, since these kids have a lot of trust issues and are often the most sensitive kids in the room.

But you are ignoring effects in the other direction. You are putting average/above average students into a situation where there are a group of trouble makers and some kids dont know how to be successful students. You are lowering their opportunity to just be average students in a nominal learning environment and are now looking to them to have to deal with these issues too. A lot of parents arent going to want that.

And a lot of parents are definitely NOT going to willingly put their kids into a situation where 20% are "very resistant" and have issues relating to "generational poverty/drugs/family issues/etc."

Sorry but these "role models" deserve just as much consideration as the kids at Lewis, and I think that is a disconnect in this conversation. They are not resources to be used for equity.

I wish the "role model" reasoning would go away, and I say that as a supporter of making sensible changes across the county one way or another. It's not so much that UMC kids are used as pawns to be role models, but rather that UMC kids bring critical mass to course offerings that otherwise don't exist.

And that is the actual equal opportunity problem: when parents are forced to seek alternative placements just to have the same course opportunity that all other high schools have. Because not all parents have the luxury of time and availability for driving their kids to other school sites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe electing more men to the School Board this fall will make a difference. The last time the School Board had any guts was when Stuart Gibson pushed through the boundary change in 2008 that moved kids to South Lakes.

Stu Gibson has so much guts he let the SL PTSA run the show and make the decisions. And, it was composed of IB moms.

They didn’t take the heat from the people insisting they had a God-given right to stay at their then-current schools. He did.

In comparison, current SB members are spineless ninnies.

They did not say that. If you had watched the public hearings and citizen participation--as I did--you would have seen the majority of parents begging for South Lakes to switch to AP. Many of those parents still feel that way.

Other parents were upset that this was their third switch in a very short period of time. Some parents ended up with kids who went to three different high schools--without moving.

And, if you really followed it, you would have seen the SLPTA postings on their website that outlined their plans. They took it down when the link was posted on FairfaxUnderground. But, they spelled out exactly what they wanted and did not want. They wanted NO poor neighborhoods. They made that perfectly clear. This was not about numbers, it was all about demographics. The SL PTA was a perfect example of "limousine liberals." They wanted to be at South Lakes so they could claim they were tolerant. They wanted to keep IB so they could be progressive and they wanted wealthier kids so their kids could remain isolated from the poor kids.

Of course it was also about numbers. South Lakes was at about 1400 kids at the time. Westfield had about 2900 back then.

So maybe Lewis has to lose a couple more hundred before some of these lazy SB members do something (though most of the schools had lower enrollments in 2008 so 1400 them is about like 1600-1700 now).

SL was saved from a potential "death spiral" where it would have lost its middle and upper middle class support in the surrounding neighborhoods. It is a robust and popular school today thanks to the parents who pushed for the boundary change to bring in more wealthy residential areas. However, the promised AP courses were never adopted, and that's on the school board. Regarding Lewis, I don't think the school board will do anything unless the Lewis PTA or parent groups make it an issue.

Saving one school from a death spiral doesn't make the kids you don't want at the school disappear. They end up concentrated and no schools want them and no parents want their neighborhoods zoned for those schools. But hooray for keeping poors out of South Lakes and allowing it to thrive.

This statement is so awful on so many levels.

What kind of adult refers to an entire group of kids like this??

Could it be that the Lewis poster is the one who "doesn't want" these kids?

[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:Maybe electing more men to the School Board this fall will make a difference. The last time the School Board had any guts was when Stuart Gibson pushed through the boundary change in 2008 that moved kids to South Lakes.

Stu Gibson has so much guts he let the SL PTSA run the show and make the decisions. And, it was composed of IB moms.

They didn’t take the heat from the people insisting they had a God-given right to stay at their then-current schools. He did.

In comparison, current SB members are spineless ninnies.

They did not say that. If you had watched the public hearings and citizen participation--as I did--you would have seen the majority of parents begging for South Lakes to switch to AP. Many of those parents still feel that way.

Other parents were upset that this was their third switch in a very short period of time. Some parents ended up with kids who went to three different high schools--without moving.

And, if you really followed it, you would have seen the SLPTA postings on their website that outlined their plans. They took it down when the link was posted on FairfaxUnderground. But, they spelled out exactly what they wanted and did not want. They wanted NO poor neighborhoods. They made that perfectly clear. This was not about numbers, it was all about demographics. The SL PTA was a perfect example of "limousine liberals." They wanted to be at South Lakes so they could claim they were tolerant. They wanted to keep IB so they could be progressive and they wanted wealthier kids so their kids could remain isolated from the poor kids.

Of course it was also about numbers. South Lakes was at about 1400 kids at the time. Westfield had about 2900 back then.

So maybe Lewis has to lose a couple more hundred before some of these lazy SB members do something (though most of the schools had lower enrollments in 2008 so 1400 them is about like 1600-1700 now).

SL was saved from a potential "death spiral" where it would have lost its middle and upper middle class support in the surrounding neighborhoods. It is a robust and popular school today thanks to the parents who pushed for the boundary change to bring in more wealthy residential areas. However, the promised AP courses were never adopted, and that's on the school board. Regarding Lewis, I don't think the school board will do anything unless the Lewis PTA or parent groups make it an issue.

Saving one school from a death spiral doesn't make the kids you don't want at the school disappear. They end up concentrated and no schools want them and no parents want their neighborhoods zoned for those schools. But hooray for keeping poors out of South Lakes and allowing it to thrive.

What is stopping Lewis from thriving.

Look at the assessments

https://schoolquality.virginia.gov/schools/lewis-high#fndtn-desktopTabs-assessments

50% of the school is farms, and fcps's own study has 40% as a tipping point past which a school can't really succeed.

But why is this? Why does FARMs mean no success?

It does not mean that. But, when you have hundreds of new students in a year who do not speak English and, perhaps, have not been in school at all, there is a problem. This problem will not be solved by adding more affluent neighborhoods to the boundary.

I wish the county had a program for ESL kids with limited education. They should not be thrust into a gen ed classroom.

The problem isn't ESL kids, the problem is the limited education/the low performing students, which is not just an issue with ESL. I was an ESL kid who came to the this country and quickly a) went on to gen ed then GT classes and b) thought the science and math were far too easy. Public schools (not just FCPS) keep passing students along who have very limited grasp of the material. The number of FARMS students is just going to get higher. Not just because of immigrants. Neither side seems willing to save public schools. I think public schools will end up being for the poor while middle and upper classes will run to privates.

I likely agree with you. If Fairfax starts shifting kids to even things out it will backfire. The BOS does not want tax income to go down. And, it will.

Fairfax does everything they can to avoid it. Certain schools are pariahs and parents who care about public school can easily avoid them.

[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:Maybe electing more men to the School Board this fall will make a difference. The last time the School Board had any guts was when Stuart Gibson pushed through the boundary change in 2008 that moved kids to South Lakes.

Stu Gibson has so much guts he let the SL PTSA run the show and make the decisions. And, it was composed of IB moms.

They didn’t take the heat from the people insisting they had a God-given right to stay at their then-current schools. He did.

In comparison, current SB members are spineless ninnies.

They did not say that. If you had watched the public hearings and citizen participation--as I did--you would have seen the majority of parents begging for South Lakes to switch to AP. Many of those parents still feel that way.

Other parents were upset that this was their third switch in a very short period of time. Some parents ended up with kids who went to three different high schools--without moving.

And, if you really followed it, you would have seen the SLPTA postings on their website that outlined their plans. They took it down when the link was posted on FairfaxUnderground. But, they spelled out exactly what they wanted and did not want. They wanted NO poor neighborhoods. They made that perfectly clear. This was not about numbers, it was all about demographics. The SL PTA was a perfect example of "limousine liberals." They wanted to be at South Lakes so they could claim they were tolerant. They wanted to keep IB so they could be progressive and they wanted wealthier kids so their kids could remain isolated from the poor kids.

Of course it was also about numbers. South Lakes was at about 1400 kids at the time. Westfield had about 2900 back then.

So maybe Lewis has to lose a couple more hundred before some of these lazy SB members do something (though most of the schools had lower enrollments in 2008 so 1400 them is about like 1600-1700 now).

SL was saved from a potential "death spiral" where it would have lost its middle and upper middle class support in the surrounding neighborhoods. It is a robust and popular school today thanks to the parents who pushed for the boundary change to bring in more wealthy residential areas. However, the promised AP courses were never adopted, and that's on the school board. Regarding Lewis, I don't think the school board will do anything unless the Lewis PTA or parent groups make it an issue.

Saving one school from a death spiral doesn't make the kids you don't want at the school disappear. They end up concentrated and no schools want them and no parents want their neighborhoods zoned for those schools. But hooray for keeping poors out of South Lakes and allowing it to thrive.

What is stopping Lewis from thriving.

Look at the assessments

https://schoolquality.virginia.gov/schools/lewis-high#fndtn-desktopTabs-assessments

50% of the school is farms, and fcps's own study has 40% as a tipping point past which a school can't really succeed.

But why is this? Why does FARMs mean no success?

It does not mean that. But, when you have hundreds of new students in a year who do not speak English and, perhaps, have not been in school at all, there is a problem. This problem will not be solved by adding more affluent neighborhoods to the boundary.

I wish the county had a program for ESL kids with limited education. They should not be thrust into a gen ed classroom.

The problem isn't ESL kids, the problem is the limited education/the low performing students, which is not just an issue with ESL. I was an ESL kid who came to the this country and quickly a) went on to gen ed then GT classes and b) thought the science and math were far too easy. Public schools (not just FCPS) keep passing students along who have very limited grasp of the material. The number of FARMS students is just going to get higher. Not just because of immigrants. Neither side seems willing to save public schools. I think public schools will end up being for the poor while middle and upper classes will run to privates.

Middle class can't afford private. Their choice will be an even worse commute and LCPS or living with public