FCPS HS Boundary

[Anonymous]

Just put those daventry kids back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just put those daventry kids back.

Didn’t that neighborhood try for quite some time to get their rezoning, and it was finally approved w/o public hearings since the impact on either high school was so minuscule. I don’t think they would take too kindly to your suggestion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just put those daventry kids back.

Didn’t that neighborhood try for quite some time to get their rezoning, and it was finally approved w/o public hearings since the impact on either high school was so minuscule. I don’t think they would take too kindly to your suggestion.

Yeah- but they just yanked IB from Lewis so that will bring some kids back into Lewis who placed out. Wasn’t that the point of taking IB out of Lewis?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just put those daventry kids back.

Didn’t that neighborhood try for quite some time to get their rezoning, and it was finally approved w/o public hearings since the impact on either high school was so minuscule. I don’t think they would take too kindly to your suggestion.

Yeah- but they just yanked IB from Lewis so that will bring some kids back into Lewis who placed out. Wasn’t that the point of taking IB out of Lewis?

It appears they are keeping IB at Lewis but also adding a lot of AP courses. That will still make it harder to pupil place out of the school. The enrollment is really low this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just put those daventry kids back.

Didn’t that neighborhood try for quite some time to get their rezoning, and it was finally approved w/o public hearings since the impact on either high school was so minuscule. I don’t think they would take too kindly to your suggestion.

Yeah- but they just yanked IB from Lewis so that will bring some kids back into Lewis who placed out. Wasn’t that the point of taking IB out of Lewis?

It appears they are keeping IB at Lewis but also adding a lot of AP courses. That will still make it harder to pupil place out of the school. The enrollment is really low this year.

Could just be the process to phase out IB. Can't pull those courses if students are already enrolled in the IB Diploma program. With such low enrollment it is hard to imagine them keeping IB and adding even more AP courses (they already had some).

And West Springfield is already over capacity and projected to be more so in the next five years. Move some kids to Lewis. Enrollment and proper use of available space is the only argument you need to justify this move.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just put those daventry kids back.

Didn’t that neighborhood try for quite some time to get their rezoning, and it was finally approved w/o public hearings since the impact on either high school was so minuscule. I don’t think they would take too kindly to your suggestion.

Yeah- but they just yanked IB from Lewis so that will bring some kids back into Lewis who placed out. Wasn’t that the point of taking IB out of Lewis?

It appears they are keeping IB at Lewis but also adding a lot of AP courses. That will still make it harder to pupil place out of the school. The enrollment is really low this year.

Could just be the process to phase out IB. Can't pull those courses if students are already enrolled in the IB Diploma program. With such low enrollment it is hard to imagine them keeping IB and adding even more AP courses (they already had some).

And West Springfield is already over capacity and projected to be more so in the next five years. Move some kids to Lewis. Enrollment and proper use of available space is the only argument you need to justify this move.

And Kyle McDaniel has entered the chat!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SB floated three proposals in the latest draft. Do a comprehensive review 1) every 5 years, 2) every 5 years but not until 2035, and 3) every 10 years.

They shouldn't be worrying about the frequency yet. They should see if they can pull it off just once.

And start with the most obvious one - moving 400 kids out of crowded West Springfield to Lewis (which now only has about 1650 kids).

They can see how well that trial balloon goes and then start making the other changes they are salivating to make, like moving 1/2 of Great Falls to Herndon.

It's no skin off Kyle McDaniel's back, since he's zoned for recently expanded and renovated Oakton. But his old boss Pat Herrity might want to have a word or two with him.

The fact that some SB member is or isn’t at a renovated school is independent of boundary changes. The schools are what they are when looking at balancing student numbers. Some school or another will be older than others any time a study is done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is ridiculous they are trying to screw over the public and avoid accountability for their decisions. People need to attend these meetings and stop these poorly thought out policy disasters. This will do nothing to improve school performance. Parents need stability for school enrollment to plan their schedules and transportation decisions. The reason why the schools cannot keep up with enrollment growth is because our idiotic county supervisors keep on approving large housing developments when the schools do not have room for them.

Ding ding ding!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SB floated three proposals in the latest draft. Do a comprehensive review 1) every 5 years, 2) every 5 years but not until 2035, and 3) every 10 years.

They shouldn't be worrying about the frequency yet. They should see if they can pull it off just once.

And start with the most obvious one - moving 400 kids out of crowded West Springfield to Lewis (which now only has about 1650 kids).

They can see how well that trial balloon goes and then start making the other changes they are salivating to make, like moving 1/2 of Great Falls to Herndon.

It's no skin off Kyle McDaniel's back, since he's zoned for recently expanded and renovated Oakton. But his old boss Pat Herrity might want to have a word or two with him.

The fact that some SB member is or isn’t at a renovated school is independent of boundary changes. The schools are what they are when looking at balancing student numbers. Some school or another will be older than others any time a study is done.

DP. I completely disagree with you. McDaniel wouldn’t be pushing for boundary changes if his kids would be significantly impacted. He’s only interested in messing with his constituents’ kids, not his own.

In fact, I’d be willing to bet every board member’s kids end up in the same school or better than their original ones as part of this process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just put those daventry kids back.

Didn’t that neighborhood try for quite some time to get their rezoning, and it was finally approved w/o public hearings since the impact on either high school was so minuscule. I don’t think they would take too kindly to your suggestion.

Yeah- but they just yanked IB from Lewis so that will bring some kids back into Lewis who placed out. Wasn’t that the point of taking IB out of Lewis?

It appears they are keeping IB at Lewis but also adding a lot of AP courses. That will still make it harder to pupil place out of the school. The enrollment is really low this year.

Could just be the process to phase out IB. Can't pull those courses if students are already enrolled in the IB Diploma program. With such low enrollment it is hard to imagine them keeping IB and adding even more AP courses (they already had some).

And West Springfield is already over capacity and projected to be more so in the next five years. Move some kids to Lewis. Enrollment and proper use of available space is the only argument you need to justify this move.

Curious- why do you want this so badly? It seems like more than wanting to create a better environment at Lewis (changing Ap vs IB), you want to stick it to people who you think have something you don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just put those daventry kids back.

Didn’t that neighborhood try for quite some time to get their rezoning, and it was finally approved w/o public hearings since the impact on either high school was so minuscule. I don’t think they would take too kindly to your suggestion.

Yeah- but they just yanked IB from Lewis so that will bring some kids back into Lewis who placed out. Wasn’t that the point of taking IB out of Lewis?

It appears they are keeping IB at Lewis but also adding a lot of AP courses. That will still make it harder to pupil place out of the school. The enrollment is really low this year.

Could just be the process to phase out IB. Can't pull those courses if students are already enrolled in the IB Diploma program. With such low enrollment it is hard to imagine them keeping IB and adding even more AP courses (they already had some).

And West Springfield is already over capacity and projected to be more so in the next five years. Move some kids to Lewis. Enrollment and proper use of available space is the only argument you need to justify this move.

Curious- why do you want this so badly? It seems like more than wanting to create a better environment at Lewis (changing Ap vs IB), you want to stick it to people who you think have something you don’t.

Lee/Lewis was not always a pariah. The School Board made changes that contributed to its current situation.

At the current enrollment and projected further enrollment decrease it can't offer the same opportunities as neighboring schools. The opportunity is not the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SB floated three proposals in the latest draft. Do a comprehensive review 1) every 5 years, 2) every 5 years but not until 2035, and 3) every 10 years.

They shouldn't be worrying about the frequency yet. They should see if they can pull it off just once.

And start with the most obvious one - moving 400 kids out of crowded West Springfield to Lewis (which now only has about 1650 kids).

They can see how well that trial balloon goes and then start making the other changes they are salivating to make, like moving 1/2 of Great Falls to Herndon.

It's no skin off Kyle McDaniel's back, since he's zoned for recently expanded and renovated Oakton. But his old boss Pat Herrity might want to have a word or two with him.

The fact that some SB member is or isn’t at a renovated school is independent of boundary changes. The schools are what they are when looking at balancing student numbers. Some school or another will be older than others any time a study is done.

DP. I completely disagree with you. McDaniel wouldn’t be pushing for boundary changes if his kids would be significantly impacted. He’s only interested in messing with his constituents’ kids, not his own.

In fact, I’d be willing to bet every board member’s kids end up in the same school or better than their original ones as part of this process.

Again, that has nothing to do with whether he lives in a zone with a recently updated or expanded school.

[Anonymous]

Agree to disagree then. It’s pretty clear to me that McDaniel is willing to F with other kids in the district but would be less willing to if his kids would be impacted (i.e. if his kids’ school was at capacity and potentially redistricted).

That goes for all of the board. “Change for your kids, not mine” is their motto.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SB floated three proposals in the latest draft. Do a comprehensive review 1) every 5 years, 2) every 5 years but not until 2035, and 3) every 10 years.

They shouldn't be worrying about the frequency yet. They should see if they can pull it off just once.

And start with the most obvious one - moving 400 kids out of crowded West Springfield to Lewis (which now only has about 1650 kids).

They can see how well that trial balloon goes and then start making the other changes they are salivating to make, like moving 1/2 of Great Falls to Herndon.

It's no skin off Kyle McDaniel's back, since he's zoned for recently expanded and renovated Oakton. But his old boss Pat Herrity might want to have a word or two with him.

The fact that some SB member is or isn’t at a renovated school is independent of boundary changes. The schools are what they are when looking at balancing student numbers. Some school or another will be older than others any time a study is done.

What are you smoking? These people always look out after their own kids and neighborhoods. It’s other people’s kids and schools they are happy to screw. Happened with Tessie Wilson, Kathy Smith, and Elaine Tholen, and it’s what Kyle McDaniel is warming up to as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just put those daventry kids back.

Didn’t that neighborhood try for quite some time to get their rezoning, and it was finally approved w/o public hearings since the impact on either high school was so minuscule. I don’t think they would take too kindly to your suggestion.

Yeah- but they just yanked IB from Lewis so that will bring some kids back into Lewis who placed out. Wasn’t that the point of taking IB out of Lewis?

It appears they are keeping IB at Lewis but also adding a lot of AP courses. That will still make it harder to pupil place out of the school. The enrollment is really low this year.

Could just be the process to phase out IB. Can't pull those courses if students are already enrolled in the IB Diploma program. With such low enrollment it is hard to imagine them keeping IB and adding even more AP courses (they already had some).

And West Springfield is already over capacity and projected to be more so in the next five years. Move some kids to Lewis. Enrollment and proper use of available space is the only argument you need to justify this move.

Curious- why do you want this so badly? It seems like more than wanting to create a better environment at Lewis (changing Ap vs IB), you want to stick it to people who you think have something you don’t.

Some people here look at MC/UMC kids from other schools as a form of enrichment for schools like Lewis…. and they could even bring back baseball. Lmao