FCPS Boundary Review Updates

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The School Board adopted a policy that, on its face, troubled many Langley parents because it expressly said the Superintendent needed to focus on transportation times when considering any boundary changes.

And then Reid went out and hired a consultant that has paid no attention to transportation times, and the School Board has done nothing to object to the non-compliance with the policy they adopted just last year.

The corruption could not be more obvious, regardless of whose nephew may or may not attend Langley.


You and your fellow obsessives are mentally unwell. Langley didn't need to be moved, so it wasn't. Herndon wasn't, either. Maybe you should seek medical advice before you develop an ulcer over this non-issue.


Doesn’t Herndon have like 500 empty seats now? I wonder what justification was given when they decided to expand it so much.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:So Lewis is still burdened with IB. Only offers Spanish and Arabic. And will continue to shrink - projected to be under 1500 students in five years.

I used to think they might care to turn it around. But it is clear now that it is a designated high ESL/FRL school. The school administration and county must like it this way. I can only think they stick with IB to allow students to pupil place out.

There is no reason for the high-achieving students to remain. I will recommend to everyone I know to get out - pupil place, go private, move, or even homeschool.


Yep. Whether intended or not, they really are picking winners and losers and only reinforcing many current disparities.
Anonymous
A few days ago there was at least one “egalitarian” Langley poster who claimed they would fight for others even if they were not moved.

Well…
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Per FairFacts Matters FB page...

PTSA Meeting May 6, 7:30 pm WSHS Sandy and Rachna School Board Attend
*No lines have been drawn don’t know where changes will be
*Will propose what lines could be drawn
*Then draw proposed lines
*We are currently a few steps behind proposed boundary lines.
*Q-Is HVES turning into a split feeder? (Asked by numerous people)
A-Sandy that wouldn’t be the intention or something the board would support
Q-So then the intention is to turn the neighborhoods south of FFX Parkway zoned for NFES? (Numerous people asked)
A-Rachna No plans yet. Waiting on draft of first maps.
Q-CIP school projection numbers have been historically off. Paraphrase-What are you doing to rectify the problem? No answer. Ignored question.
*Sandy grew up in Middle Valley area and recognizes Middle Valley area vocalizing concerns.
*3,700 student transfers in FCPS
400 Student athletes transfers
*No maps you can rely on for boundary changes.
*These are maps to determine the SCOPE of the problem.
*Briefing to SB Jan 2026 of maps. Then vote on implementation for 2026-2027.
*Funding exists for MS after school programs for one year and crossing guards one year 2025-2026.
Will reevaluate following year


It sounds like they couldn’t have showed up to the meeting less prepared.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:The map is really hard to read. I live in Emerald Chase - are we now zoned for Oakton?


It looks like Emerald Chase (and that sliver of Bradley Farm adjacent to Emerald Chase) would be Fox Mill/Carson/South Lakes
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:If I’m reading this correctly, no changes to Langley? Just the poorer and middle class schools?


As many of us have been saying from the beginning, there is zero need to move anyone from Langley or Forestville. Those schools are not overcrowded, so it would be a ridiculous thing to do. And notice, there is no one moving to/from Herndon, either.

I'm so sorry your vendetta wound up falling flat.


DP. It kind of sucks they are going to move a bunch of other people who live a LOT closer to their schools than Forestville is to Langley just so they can say they did something, while ignoring the real elephants in the room.

But that’s FCPS. A bunch of folks who talk a good game but are absolute chicken shit when it comes to taking on the noisiest parents.

Gloat away.


No one's gloating, you twit. If anything, people like you were pre-gloating, in anticipation of moving Forestville, even though there was zero need to do so. Now that you realize it isn't happening, you're even more unhinged than usual.

Take your complaints to the SB. Organize and speak up. Stop calling other communities names when they do exactly that and stop whining when you refuse to fight back.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Looks like the slides are up: https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/5-5-2025SuperintendentBoundaryReviewAdvisoryCommitteePresentation.pdf


Interesting that instead of starting new, they used the prior fixes from the other two meetings.

And yes, this just goes further to confirm that they are going to tinker around the edges and not move many kids.


Well I guess all the parents on freaking out about their high schoolers can just calm the F down.

-Carson mom who is still in shock that they didn't touch our school (except that tiny chunk of Chantilly Highlands they are now sending to Oakton)


High schools where kids may be reassigned to other schools possibly without grandfathering under Thru Consulting proposals:

Centreville
Chantilly
Edison
Fairfax
Lake Braddock
Marshall
McLean
Mount Vernon
South County
Westfield
West Potomac
West Springfield
Woodson

School with by far the longest commutes where no kids would be reassigned under Thru Consulting proposals:

Langley

The courage of Dr. Reid and the School Board is truly impressive, lol.


There is no need to rezone students from Langley as Langley is not over capacity (even with absorbing McLean’s overcapacity). The families from Langley have made it clear that they don’t want to break up the school. Parents all bought houses zoned for Langley knowing how long the commute would be.

Reid and the School Board also know that their plans to lower the FARMS rate at Herndon by transferring Langley students (their original plan) won’t go over well with parents/lawyers in the community.

See below for the study the school board used for their “idea” for boundary changes to change the poverty levels of schools by adding more wealthy students:

FCPS Socio-economic Tipping Point of Elementary Schools

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


“FCPS could consider reducing the level of poverty at schools that have demonstrated persistent achievement challenges despite other efforts. More specifically, the following is a list of potential opportunities for considering reductions in school poverty:

New schools: Assigning students to new schools may be considered towards the goal of balancing or minimizing the level of overall school poverty as much as reasonably possible at the new school and nearby schools.

Special academic programs at school sites: Higher poverty schools may be considered as host sites for programs that traditionally attract higher socio-economic populations to draw voluntarily a broader economic population of students.

Under- or over-filled schools: When student membership at schools considerably exceeds or falls short of expected levels, explore the opportunity for moving students with the goal of maximizing the number of schools with poverty levels below 20 percent.

New neighborhood construction: Work with county agencies that influence socio-economic integration of neighborhoods to create natural distributions of socio-economic levels.”

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I think it's annoying that they didn't provide clearer maps with streets. I also think they need to explain the elementary school plan for the Hunt Valley kids that got moved to South County. Is Hunt Valley now a split feeder? Or are those kids also moving to Newington Forest (putting it way over capacity)? That's a pretty crucial part of the equation to leave out. How do you give community feedback without knowing that?

Also, is that a Sangster attendance island that is now going to SC? I can't understand that part of the map. Would that mean Sangster now has kids going to LBSS, SCSS, and WSHS?


Yes with the AAP center, Sangster would have students going to 3 different middle/high schools.


The Sangster island going to SoCo will no longer be a Sangster zoned neighborhood.

They will be zoned to Newington Forest.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:A few days ago there was at least one “egalitarian” Langley poster who claimed they would fight for others even if they were not moved.

Well…


I'm not that poster but I totally agree with the sentiment. Who do you think started FairFacts? You know, the group that was constantly mocked by people like you? That group is for *everyone* in FCPS. Maybe you should consider joining them and utilizing their resources instead of sniping at all their efforts.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:A few days ago there was at least one “egalitarian” Langley poster who claimed they would fight for others even if they were not moved.

Well…


Also, it's pretty amusing that now you expect a community you've spent months (probably years) deriding to come in and fight for you.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Per FairFacts Matters FB page...

PTSA Meeting May 6, 7:30 pm WSHS Sandy and Rachna School Board Attend
*No lines have been drawn don’t know where changes will be
*Will propose what lines could be drawn
*Then draw proposed lines
*We are currently a few steps behind proposed boundary lines.
*Q-Is HVES turning into a split feeder? (Asked by numerous people)
A-Sandy that wouldn’t be the intention or something the board would support
Q-So then the intention is to turn the neighborhoods south of FFX Parkway zoned for NFES? (Numerous people asked)
A-Rachna No plans yet. Waiting on draft of first maps.
Q-CIP school projection numbers have been historically off. Paraphrase-What are you doing to rectify the problem? No answer. Ignored question.
*Sandy grew up in Middle Valley area and recognizes Middle Valley area vocalizing concerns.
*3,700 student transfers in FCPS
400 Student athletes transfers
*No maps you can rely on for boundary changes.
*These are maps to determine the SCOPE of the problem.
*Briefing to SB Jan 2026 of maps. Then vote on implementation for 2026-2027.
*Funding exists for MS after school programs for one year and crossing guards one year 2025-2026.
Will reevaluate following year


Anderson has not been a good school board rep for West Springfield neighborhoods.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Looks like the slides are up: https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/5-5-2025SuperintendentBoundaryReviewAdvisoryCommitteePresentation.pdf


Interesting that instead of starting new, they used the prior fixes from the other two meetings.

And yes, this just goes further to confirm that they are going to tinker around the edges and not move many kids.


Well I guess all the parents on freaking out about their high schoolers can just calm the F down.

-Carson mom who is still in shock that they didn't touch our school (except that tiny chunk of Chantilly Highlands they are now sending to Oakton)


High schools where kids may be reassigned to other schools possibly without grandfathering under Thru Consulting proposals:

Centreville
Chantilly
Edison
Fairfax
Lake Braddock
Marshall
McLean
Mount Vernon
South County
Westfield
West Potomac
West Springfield
Woodson

School with by far the longest commutes where no kids would be reassigned under Thru Consulting proposals:

Langley

The courage of Dr. Reid and the School Board is truly impressive, lol.


There is no need to rezone students from Langley as Langley is not over capacity (even with absorbing McLean’s overcapacity). The families from Langley have made it clear that they don’t want to break up the school. Parents all bought houses zoned for Langley knowing how long the commute would be.

Reid and the School Board also know that their plans to lower the FARMS rate at Herndon by transferring Langley students (their original plan) won’t go over well with parents/lawyers in the community.

See below for the study the school board used for their “idea” for boundary changes to change the poverty levels of schools by adding more wealthy students:

FCPS Socio-economic Tipping Point of Elementary Schools

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


“FCPS could consider reducing the level of poverty at schools that have demonstrated persistent achievement challenges despite other efforts. More specifically, the following is a list of potential opportunities for considering reductions in school poverty:

New schools: Assigning students to new schools may be considered towards the goal of balancing or minimizing the level of overall school poverty as much as reasonably possible at the new school and nearby schools.

Special academic programs at school sites: Higher poverty schools may be considered as host sites for programs that traditionally attract higher socio-economic populations to draw voluntarily a broader economic population of students.

Under- or over-filled schools: When student membership at schools considerably exceeds or falls short of expected levels, explore the opportunity for moving students with the goal of maximizing the number of schools with poverty levels below 20 percent.

New neighborhood construction: Work with county agencies that influence socio-economic integration of neighborhoods to create natural distributions of socio-economic levels.”



+100
Thank you for posting this. How disgusting that they were planning on social engineering as a (misguided) way to improve schools. You'd think the very first thing they would do is work on improving the failing schools themselves, rather than importing wealthier kids to raise test scores. FIX THE SCHOOLS, FCPS. What a bunch of morons.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:A few days ago there was at least one “egalitarian” Langley poster who claimed they would fight for others even if they were not moved.

Well…


That was me. And I would like to push back against FCPS on behalf of any students and families who are being moved against their will.

To that end, which areas are getting a raw deal here?
Anonymous
Now they need to do away with AAP centers and IB.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:It seems like Thru came up with something because they HAD to, but were far more limited than FCPS originally intended. The result is some things that do not appear to make any sense and run counter to the existing guidance in 8130.8.

If you are affected by a weird proposal, I would treat the “odd proposals” as a softball tossed to you by Thru. Identify all the relevant factors in 8130.8 and how they are not met/guide counter to the proposal. Then provide that feedback in the upcoming sessions and to your SB reps.

The way I understand the process, Thru will take thud feedback, but it is up to Reid to make a proposal and the SB to accept or deny the proposal. 8130.8 provides for a number of areas for superintendent discretion. Focus on those:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/D7HREM6DA7C5/$file/P8130.pdf

Focus on the factors on page 3.



So HV families should question the creation of a new split feeder when they were aiming to get rid of them?
Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)
Go to: