FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moving all the AAP kids from Franklin at Carson back to Franklin would immediately overcrowd Franklin. Rocky Run's very small base boundaries also reflect the fact that it's pulled AAP kids from other pyramids.

Or maybe they will shift some boundaries and send kids to stone or Herndon?

No. That would not be necessary.

Plenty of AAP kids would remain at Carson: I'm not positive, but I think: Coates; McNair; Floris; Fox Mill; Crossfield; and, Navy? I think the only ones that would go back to Franklin would be Oak Hill and Lees Corner. That would not overcrowd Franklin. The center at Oak Hill said it had 180 kids last year (according to the profile.) That would put, maybe 90? back to Franklin.
I'm not sure where Navy feeds. It may be Franklin rather than Carson, so it could mean more kids at Franklin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moving all the AAP kids from Franklin at Carson back to Franklin would immediately overcrowd Franklin. Rocky Run's very small base boundaries also reflect the fact that it's pulled AAP kids from other pyramids.

Or maybe they will shift some boundaries and send kids to stone or Herndon?

No. That would not be necessary.

Plenty of AAP kids would remain at Carson: I'm not positive, but I think: Coates; McNair; Floris; Fox Mill; Crossfield; and, Navy? I think the only ones that would go back to Franklin would be Oak Hill and Lees Corner. That would not overcrowd Franklin. The center at Oak Hill said it had 180 kids last year (according to the profile.) That would put, maybe 90? back to Franklin.
I'm not sure where Navy feeds. It may be Franklin rather than Carson, so it could mean more kids at Franklin.

273 students transferred from Franklin to Carson this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moving all the AAP kids from Franklin at Carson back to Franklin would immediately overcrowd Franklin. Rocky Run's very small base boundaries also reflect the fact that it's pulled AAP kids from other pyramids.

Or maybe they will shift some boundaries and send kids to stone or Herndon?

No. That would not be necessary.

Plenty of AAP kids would remain at Carson: I'm not positive, but I think: Coates; McNair; Floris; Fox Mill; Crossfield; and, Navy? I think the only ones that would go back to Franklin would be Oak Hill and Lees Corner. That would not overcrowd Franklin. The center at Oak Hill said it had 180 kids last year (according to the profile.) That would put, maybe 90? back to Franklin.
I'm not sure where Navy feeds. It may be Franklin rather than Carson, so it could mean more kids at Franklin.

273 students transferred from Franklin to Carson this year.

Thanks. Just looked at the map. I guess that includes Navy and some Waples Mill in addition to Oak Hill and Lees Corner. Franklin could still handle that. It would even the population of Carson and Franklin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think this thread needs to be hijacked simply so people with strong views about AAP can express them yet again.

The relevance, however, is that current boundaries in many cases have been drawn to reflect whether ES and MS are AAP centers. Do away with AAP centers and you may need to adjust boundaries to deal with former AAP centers that become under-enrolled or other schools that get overcrowded.

If they go through a "comprehensive" boundary review without addressing the future of AAP, it would appear they are locking themselves into the current AAP model until the next county-wide review in five years or so. It's unfortunate that they could be backing into decisions without actually addressing them on the merits first.

And frankly, students at poorer performing schools appear to be using these opportunities to go elsewhere. I don’t begrudge those families for making those decisions, but it’s bonkers that they’re looking to move others into those spots rather than having the students in the current pyramids return. Get rid of AAP Centers and IB, and capacity issues largely disappear.

They would disappear in some instances. For example, getting rid of high school IB programs would mitigate chronic under-enrollment issues at schools like Lewis and Mount Vernon HS. Getting rid of AP at Glasgow MS would also largely deal with the desire of Glasgow parents to reduce the enrollment there, as AAP kids would return to under-enrolled Holmes and Poe.

In some instances getting rid of ES IB programs would itself create capacity imbalances. For example, also in the Justice pyramid, getting rid of the AAP center at Belvedere ES would leave Belvedere, the base boundaries of which reflect that the school also draws from 11 elementary schools for AAP, significantly under-enrolled, and aggravate the current overcrowding at schools like Parklawn ES. You'd have to look at it on a case-by-case basis.

I don't really see "getting rid of IB" as the cure-all that folks seem to think it is. People are transferring out of Lewis and Mount Vernon because they believe if they attend a school with a wealthier demographic, a higher English-speaking population, and thus a higher range of test scores, their children will have higher scores and be more successful in life.

This belief is widespread across FCPS. It's why our school systems are so segregated by both economic status and race. It's why we have wealtheir schools and poorer schools. It's why property values are high in some places and lower in others.

Look at West Springfield's demographics.... There are 2,596 English proficient speakers, and 135 English learners. Compare that to Lewis with 1,103 English proficient speakers and 567 English learners. Yet the schools teach the same materials and are tested at the same levels, and it's no surprise that one school will test higher than the other. English learners are at a disadvantage, it goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. If you moved to a country where you didn't know the language or the culture, you would also be at a disadvantage.

But FCPS parents have been spending arm and leg to ensure their children are in wealthier neighborhoods with English speakers and the higher ranking, higher testing schools. If parents want to spend arm and leg to put their children in private schools, that's great. That's fine. Go ahead.

But public schools are public. Which means they stand to benefit all populations, not just the wealthy. Not just the English proficient speakers. That means if the school board wants to balance a school by moving populations so schools aren't so segregated by class, race, and language, then they should do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think this thread needs to be hijacked simply so people with strong views about AAP can express them yet again.

The relevance, however, is that current boundaries in many cases have been drawn to reflect whether ES and MS are AAP centers. Do away with AAP centers and you may need to adjust boundaries to deal with former AAP centers that become under-enrolled or other schools that get overcrowded.

If they go through a "comprehensive" boundary review without addressing the future of AAP, it would appear they are locking themselves into the current AAP model until the next county-wide review in five years or so. It's unfortunate that they could be backing into decisions without actually addressing them on the merits first.

And frankly, students at poorer performing schools appear to be using these opportunities to go elsewhere. I don’t begrudge those families for making those decisions, but it’s bonkers that they’re looking to move others into those spots rather than having the students in the current pyramids return. Get rid of AAP Centers and IB, and capacity issues largely disappear.

They would disappear in some instances. For example, getting rid of high school IB programs would mitigate chronic under-enrollment issues at schools like Lewis and Mount Vernon HS. Getting rid of AP at Glasgow MS would also largely deal with the desire of Glasgow parents to reduce the enrollment there, as AAP kids would return to under-enrolled Holmes and Poe.

In some instances getting rid of ES IB programs would itself create capacity imbalances. For example, also in the Justice pyramid, getting rid of the AAP center at Belvedere ES would leave Belvedere, the base boundaries of which reflect that the school also draws from 11 elementary schools for AAP, significantly under-enrolled, and aggravate the current overcrowding at schools like Parklawn ES. You'd have to look at it on a case-by-case basis.

I don't really see "getting rid of IB" as the cure-all that folks seem to think it is. People are transferring out of Lewis and Mount Vernon because they believe if they attend a school with a wealthier demographic, a higher English-speaking population, and thus a higher range of test scores, their children will have higher scores and be more successful in life.

This belief is widespread across FCPS. It's why our school systems are so segregated by both economic status and race. It's why we have wealtheir schools and poorer schools. It's why property values are high in some places and lower in others.

Look at West Springfield's demographics.... There are 2,596 English proficient speakers, and 135 English learners. Compare that to Lewis with 1,103 English proficient speakers and 567 English learners. Yet the schools teach the same materials and are tested at the same levels, and it's no surprise that one school will test higher than the other. English learners are at a disadvantage, it goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. If you moved to a country where you didn't know the language or the culture, you would also be at a disadvantage.

But FCPS parents have been spending arm and leg to ensure their children are in wealthier neighborhoods with English speakers and the higher ranking, higher testing schools. If parents want to spend arm and leg to put their children in private schools, that's great. That's fine. Go ahead.

But public schools are public. Which means they stand to benefit all populations, not just the wealthy. Not just the English proficient speakers. That means if the school board wants to balance a school by moving populations so schools aren't so segregated by class, race, and language, then they should do so.

TL;DR - This poster wants to social engineer the county against the wishes of a large majority of its citizens.

You should really spend some time on your second paragraph before you try to drive Fairfax into a death spiral.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think this thread needs to be hijacked simply so people with strong views about AAP can express them yet again.

The relevance, however, is that current boundaries in many cases have been drawn to reflect whether ES and MS are AAP centers. Do away with AAP centers and you may need to adjust boundaries to deal with former AAP centers that become under-enrolled or other schools that get overcrowded.

If they go through a "comprehensive" boundary review without addressing the future of AAP, it would appear they are locking themselves into the current AAP model until the next county-wide review in five years or so. It's unfortunate that they could be backing into decisions without actually addressing them on the merits first.

And frankly, students at poorer performing schools appear to be using these opportunities to go elsewhere. I don’t begrudge those families for making those decisions, but it’s bonkers that they’re looking to move others into those spots rather than having the students in the current pyramids return. Get rid of AAP Centers and IB, and capacity issues largely disappear.

They would disappear in some instances. For example, getting rid of high school IB programs would mitigate chronic under-enrollment issues at schools like Lewis and Mount Vernon HS. Getting rid of AP at Glasgow MS would also largely deal with the desire of Glasgow parents to reduce the enrollment there, as AAP kids would return to under-enrolled Holmes and Poe.

In some instances getting rid of ES IB programs would itself create capacity imbalances. For example, also in the Justice pyramid, getting rid of the AAP center at Belvedere ES would leave Belvedere, the base boundaries of which reflect that the school also draws from 11 elementary schools for AAP, significantly under-enrolled, and aggravate the current overcrowding at schools like Parklawn ES. You'd have to look at it on a case-by-case basis.

I don't really see "getting rid of IB" as the cure-all that folks seem to think it is. People are transferring out of Lewis and Mount Vernon because they believe if they attend a school with a wealthier demographic, a higher English-speaking population, and thus a higher range of test scores, their children will have higher scores and be more successful in life.

This belief is widespread across FCPS. It's why our school systems are so segregated by both economic status and race. It's why we have wealtheir schools and poorer schools. It's why property values are high in some places and lower in others.

Look at West Springfield's demographics.... There are 2,596 English proficient speakers, and 135 English learners. Compare that to Lewis with 1,103 English proficient speakers and 567 English learners. Yet the schools teach the same materials and are tested at the same levels, and it's no surprise that one school will test higher than the other. English learners are at a disadvantage, it goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. If you moved to a country where you didn't know the language or the culture, you would also be at a disadvantage.

But FCPS parents have been spending arm and leg to ensure their children are in wealthier neighborhoods with English speakers and the higher ranking, higher testing schools. If parents want to spend arm and leg to put their children in private schools, that's great. That's fine. Go ahead.

But public schools are public. Which means they stand to benefit all populations, not just the wealthy. Not just the English proficient speakers. That means if the school board wants to balance a school by moving populations so schools aren't so segregated by class, race, and language, then they should do so.

The point is that if they want more affluent families at Lewis the best spot to start is with the people already in boundary for that school but taking steps to cut down the transfers out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think this thread needs to be hijacked simply so people with strong views about AAP can express them yet again.

The relevance, however, is that current boundaries in many cases have been drawn to reflect whether ES and MS are AAP centers. Do away with AAP centers and you may need to adjust boundaries to deal with former AAP centers that become under-enrolled or other schools that get overcrowded.

If they go through a "comprehensive" boundary review without addressing the future of AAP, it would appear they are locking themselves into the current AAP model until the next county-wide review in five years or so. It's unfortunate that they could be backing into decisions without actually addressing them on the merits first.

And frankly, students at poorer performing schools appear to be using these opportunities to go elsewhere. I don’t begrudge those families for making those decisions, but it’s bonkers that they’re looking to move others into those spots rather than having the students in the current pyramids return. Get rid of AAP Centers and IB, and capacity issues largely disappear.

They would disappear in some instances. For example, getting rid of high school IB programs would mitigate chronic under-enrollment issues at schools like Lewis and Mount Vernon HS. Getting rid of AP at Glasgow MS would also largely deal with the desire of Glasgow parents to reduce the enrollment there, as AAP kids would return to under-enrolled Holmes and Poe.

In some instances getting rid of ES IB programs would itself create capacity imbalances. For example, also in the Justice pyramid, getting rid of the AAP center at Belvedere ES would leave Belvedere, the base boundaries of which reflect that the school also draws from 11 elementary schools for AAP, significantly under-enrolled, and aggravate the current overcrowding at schools like Parklawn ES. You'd have to look at it on a case-by-case basis.

I don't really see "getting rid of IB" as the cure-all that folks seem to think it is. People are transferring out of Lewis and Mount Vernon because they believe if they attend a school with a wealthier demographic, a higher English-speaking population, and thus a higher range of test scores, their children will have higher scores and be more successful in life.

This belief is widespread across FCPS. It's why our school systems are so segregated by both economic status and race. It's why we have wealtheir schools and poorer schools. It's why property values are high in some places and lower in others.

Look at West Springfield's demographics.... There are 2,596 English proficient speakers, and 135 English learners. Compare that to Lewis with 1,103 English proficient speakers and 567 English learners. Yet the schools teach the same materials and are tested at the same levels, and it's no surprise that one school will test higher than the other. English learners are at a disadvantage, it goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. If you moved to a country where you didn't know the language or the culture, you would also be at a disadvantage.

But FCPS parents have been spending arm and leg to ensure their children are in wealthier neighborhoods with English speakers and the higher ranking, higher testing schools. If parents want to spend arm and leg to put their children in private schools, that's great. That's fine. Go ahead.

But public schools are public. Which means they stand to benefit all populations, not just the wealthy. Not just the English proficient speakers. That means if the school board wants to balance a school by moving populations so schools aren't so segregated by class, race, and language, then they should do so.

The point is that if they want more affluent families at Lewis the best spot to start is with the people already in boundary for that school but taking steps to cut down the transfers out.

Agreed. The PP is just trying to equitize the county using our kids as a resource.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moving all the AAP kids from Franklin at Carson back to Franklin would immediately overcrowd Franklin. Rocky Run's very small base boundaries also reflect the fact that it's pulled AAP kids from other pyramids.

Or maybe they will shift some boundaries and send kids to stone or Herndon?

The troll’s back, everyone. She’s got nothing worthwhile to say, but damned if she won’t repeat herself incessantly.

DP, what are you talking about? This poster is speaking to AAP and how to adjust the middle schools after another poster commented on schools being lopsided.

[Anonymous]

The point is that if they want more affluent families at Lewis the best spot to start is with the people already in boundary for that school but taking steps to cut down the transfers out.

+1
And, address the issues at hand.
1. Address the language issues. Teach English. Maybe FCPS could spend some of their DEI funds on additional English instruction after school.
2. Address the truancy--and, to the poster who posted links to the cute videos of how FCPS is addressing this at Mt Eagle Elementary--it is going to take more than a 2 minute video to fix the problem. How about taking some of that PR money and investing it in the students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moving all the AAP kids from Franklin at Carson back to Franklin would immediately overcrowd Franklin. Rocky Run's very small base boundaries also reflect the fact that it's pulled AAP kids from other pyramids.

Or maybe they will shift some boundaries and send kids to stone or Herndon?

The troll’s back, everyone. She’s got nothing worthwhile to say, but damned if she won’t repeat herself incessantly.

DP, what are you talking about? This poster is speaking to AAP and how to adjust the middle schools after another poster commented on schools being lopsided.

Not sure. I'm the person she responded to. No need to transfer any. Franklin can easily absorb their boundary AAP kids. Still leaves Carson with more than half of their own boundary AAP kids. There is a troll that really wants kids from other places to transfer to Herndon. Don't know if it is the same one that wants all kids with "Herndon" zip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think this thread needs to be hijacked simply so people with strong views about AAP can express them yet again.

The relevance, however, is that current boundaries in many cases have been drawn to reflect whether ES and MS are AAP centers. Do away with AAP centers and you may need to adjust boundaries to deal with former AAP centers that become under-enrolled or other schools that get overcrowded.

If they go through a "comprehensive" boundary review without addressing the future of AAP, it would appear they are locking themselves into the current AAP model until the next county-wide review in five years or so. It's unfortunate that they could be backing into decisions without actually addressing them on the merits first.

And frankly, students at poorer performing schools appear to be using these opportunities to go elsewhere. I don’t begrudge those families for making those decisions, but it’s bonkers that they’re looking to move others into those spots rather than having the students in the current pyramids return. Get rid of AAP Centers and IB, and capacity issues largely disappear.

They would disappear in some instances. For example, getting rid of high school IB programs would mitigate chronic under-enrollment issues at schools like Lewis and Mount Vernon HS. Getting rid of AP at Glasgow MS would also largely deal with the desire of Glasgow parents to reduce the enrollment there, as AAP kids would return to under-enrolled Holmes and Poe.

In some instances getting rid of ES IB programs would itself create capacity imbalances. For example, also in the Justice pyramid, getting rid of the AAP center at Belvedere ES would leave Belvedere, the base boundaries of which reflect that the school also draws from 11 elementary schools for AAP, significantly under-enrolled, and aggravate the current overcrowding at schools like Parklawn ES. You'd have to look at it on a case-by-case basis.

I don't really see "getting rid of IB" as the cure-all that folks seem to think it is. People are transferring out of Lewis and Mount Vernon because they believe if they attend a school with a wealthier demographic, a higher English-speaking population, and thus a higher range of test scores, their children will have higher scores and be more successful in life.

This belief is widespread across FCPS. It's why our school systems are so segregated by both economic status and race. It's why we have wealtheir schools and poorer schools. It's why property values are high in some places and lower in others.

Look at West Springfield's demographics.... There are 2,596 English proficient speakers, and 135 English learners. Compare that to Lewis with 1,103 English proficient speakers and 567 English learners. Yet the schools teach the same materials and are tested at the same levels, and it's no surprise that one school will test higher than the other. English learners are at a disadvantage, it goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. If you moved to a country where you didn't know the language or the culture, you would also be at a disadvantage.

But FCPS parents have been spending arm and leg to ensure their children are in wealthier neighborhoods with English speakers and the higher ranking, higher testing schools. If parents want to spend arm and leg to put their children in private schools, that's great. That's fine. Go ahead.

But public schools are public. Which means they stand to benefit all populations, not just the wealthy. Not just the English proficient speakers. That means if the school board wants to balance a school by moving populations so schools aren't so segregated by class, race, and language, then they should do so.

If that’s what this School Board wants to do, then it should have the guts to say that is its intent, and then see if it survives either legal scrutiny or the court of public opinion. They haven’t said this is their goal at all; instead, we get a lot of pablum about how this boundary review is mandated by “efficiency” considerations and a looming “fiscal cliff.”

If they can’t be honest about their motivations, they shouldn’t have any role in public education.

[Anonymous]

If kids at Lewis are forbidden from transferring, that will affect all students across FCPS from transferring. Not for language, not for STEM programs, nothing. Because you can't forbid one school district from doing something and then okay it with others.

And that's really not going to solve the problem of the fact that this county has segregated itself -- primarily because of parents who buy into the fear that their children will not learn if their kids go to school with non-English speakers.

That's a pretty interesting fear. I don't know what will fix your thinking, to be honest. Maybe read accounts of parents whose children went through de-segretation efforts after Brown v. Board of Education? American has a history of working to integrate school systems, so what the FCPS school board is doing is along the lines of our country's history. We don't segregate. We shouldn't have school systems where all the predominately white, wealthy, English-speaking kids go. If that bothers you, again, I'd recommend reading a history book or enrolling your child in private school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moving all the AAP kids from Franklin at Carson back to Franklin would immediately overcrowd Franklin. Rocky Run's very small base boundaries also reflect the fact that it's pulled AAP kids from other pyramids.

Or maybe they will shift some boundaries and send kids to stone or Herndon?

The troll’s back, everyone. She’s got nothing worthwhile to say, but damned if she won’t repeat herself incessantly.

DP, what are you talking about? This poster is speaking to AAP and how to adjust the middle schools after another poster commented on schools being lopsided.

Not sure. I'm the person she responded to. No need to transfer any. Franklin can easily absorb their boundary AAP kids. Still leaves Carson with more than half of their own boundary AAP kids. There is a troll that really wants kids from other places to transfer to Herndon. Don't know if it is the same one that wants all kids with "Herndon" zip.

I think you’re over-reacting. Going by the numbers, if all the Franklin kids at Carson returned to Franklin it would be overcrowded. So it’s possible in that scenario they might want to adjust Franklin’s base boundaries with those of other schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If kids at Lewis are forbidden from transferring, that will affect all students across FCPS from transferring. Not for language, not for STEM programs, nothing. Because you can't forbid one school district from doing something and then okay it with others.

And that's really not going to solve the problem of the fact that this county has segregated itself -- primarily because of parents who buy into the fear that their children will not learn if their kids go to school with non-English speakers.

That's a pretty interesting fear. I don't know what will fix your thinking, to be honest. Maybe read accounts of parents whose children went through de-segretation efforts after Brown v. Board of Education? American has a history of working to integrate school systems, so what the FCPS school board is doing is along the lines of our country's history. We don't segregate. We shouldn't have school systems where all the predominately white, wealthy, English-speaking kids go. If that bothers you, again, I'd recommend reading a history book or enrolling your child in private school.

Nah, our country forbids institutionalizing segregation. It also forbids discrimination, including more recently reverse discrimination. The school board and the county have been sued for the latter. The sb is not anywhere close to mainstream, even by Democratic standards.Maybe you should go read some recent Supreme Court law, instead of berating people for not buying into your myopic views?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If kids at Lewis are forbidden from transferring, that will affect all students across FCPS from transferring. Not for language, not for STEM programs, nothing. Because you can't forbid one school district from doing something and then okay it with others.

And that's really not going to solve the problem of the fact that this county has segregated itself -- primarily because of parents who buy into the fear that their children will not learn if their kids go to school with non-English speakers.

That's a pretty interesting fear. I don't know what will fix your thinking, to be honest. Maybe read accounts of parents whose children went through de-segretation efforts after Brown v. Board of Education? American has a history of working to integrate school systems, so what the FCPS school board is doing is along the lines of our country's history. We don't segregate. We shouldn't have school systems where all the predominately white, wealthy, English-speaking kids go. If that bothers you, again, I'd recommend reading a history book or enrolling your child in private school.

Getting rid of IB at multiple schools where the IB diploma rates are ridiculously low and replacing it with AP would save money and eliminate a common basis for pupil placement out of Lewis and some other IB schools. It would also mean that pupil placements out of a few AP schools to IB schools would decline if those IB programs were replaced with AP.

That’s not imposing a unique restriction on transfers out of Lewis. It’s just recognizing that, if a goal is to increase Lewis’s enrollment, you start by putting a more suitable advanced academic option back at Lewis rather than redistricting kids from other schools into Lewis (and then watching as they too look to exploit the existing IB to AP pupil placement option).

All you seem to want to do is redistrict kids in order to make the point that no one is above being reassigned to certain schools into a public school system, regardless of whether they want to or end up attending those schools. That’s a political power play that will simply drive more families out of FCPS and the county.