FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can they point to anything they’ve proposed that would actually help ensure equitable access to programs or minimize travel time for students?

All they’ve really done is punch down and propose to make some random changes to replace one ugly map with another ugly map. I mean, look at the proposed new Chantilly boundaries - they look absurd.

They clearly don’t have the courage to do what they originally set out to do and should just call the whole thing off.

It’s clear that they’ve considered those factors. There is a difference between having considered those factors vs. having considered them with the lens that you want to apply them.

NP.


Only one lens matters here:

Equity.

Everything else discussed will be ignored; the meetings and discussions are merely to provide a fig-leaf covering what the SB and Reid ordered Thru to come up with originally: equity, diversity, and inclusion.

What are you talking about? If you'd never read Policy 8130, and looked at Thru's recommendations, you'd come away with the sense that the SB and Reid did not give a hoot about "equity, diversity, and inclusion."

Instead, you'd assume the marching orders were: (1) come up with a boundary map that looks prettier and eliminates some uneven split feeders when it's easy to accomplish; and (2) redistrict kids at schools over 105% capacity. Nothing else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are probably some recommendations that people are happy with but mostly these seem to be classic examples of changes where the juice is not worth the squeeze.

pretty much sums it up

Are we done with THRU? $500k plus.

This was a foolish idea to start with. The boundary adjustments should be done where needed--like Coates. Chantilly is projected to lose enrollment and will fix itself.

This is the problem with FCPS--throw $$$ around for no reason.

They could have hired four full time teachers to tutor the struggling students in the two schools so much discussed here--or eight instructional aides. More bang for the buck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can they point to anything they’ve proposed that would actually help ensure equitable access to programs or minimize travel time for students?

All they’ve really done is punch down and propose to make some random changes to replace one ugly map with another ugly map. I mean, look at the proposed new Chantilly boundaries - they look absurd.

They clearly don’t have the courage to do what they originally set out to do and should just call the whole thing off.

It’s clear that they’ve considered those factors. There is a difference between having considered those factors vs. having considered them with the lens that you want to apply them.

NP.


Only one lens matters here:

Equity.

Everything else discussed will be ignored; the meetings and discussions are merely to provide a fig-leaf covering what the SB and Reid ordered Thru to come up with originally: equity, diversity, and inclusion.

But that’s not what these maps are doing. It’s a bunch of tinkering around the edges for little benefit in most cases. I can imagine what a full “equity” nuke of the maps would look like (to an extent - there’s not much you can do with how the poverty areas are concentrated in our county) and it doesn’t look like what they came up with.

We’ll never know if a full “equity” redrawing of the boundaries really was on the table. Was it planned and then scrapped due to public outcry, or due to the changing of presidential administrations putting a lot of diversity-related programs under a microscope? I personally think there was probably some advocates for a “nuclear option” on boundaries, but overall that wasn’t supported by the school board and important stakeholders in transportation and facilities who advocated for smaller changes due to logistical reasons. Sizemore and Anderson seemed asleep at the wheel at the WS PTSA virtual meeting and not even aware of the maps that were already released to the public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are probably some recommendations that people are happy with but mostly these seem to be classic examples of changes where the juice is not worth the squeeze.

pretty much sums it up

Are we done with THRU? $500k plus.

This was a foolish idea to start with. The boundary adjustments should be done where needed--like Coates. Chantilly is projected to lose enrollment and will fix itself.

This is the problem with FCPS--throw $$$ around for no reason.

They could have hired four full time teachers to tutor the struggling students in the two schools so much discussed here--or eight instructional aides. More bang for the buck.

It seems to me that, when they started off with the Policy 8130 revisions, they had an equity agenda in mind and some major changes.

But, of course, they didn't want to take the heat for those changes, so they structured it so that a consultant was providing the recommendations to give them "plausible deniability" if things went south.

Somewhere along the way, they lost nerve, and the marching orders conveyed to Thru were to come up with some piddly shit changes that don't move the needle from an equity perspective, but will still be (1) incredibly disruptive for some families; and (2) big enough in scale that grandfathering seems not feasible and therefore unlikely.

I'm not going to say it's the worst of all worlds, because I don't want to underestimate the ability of Reid and the SB to come up with something worse, but it's pretty bad.

[Anonymous]

What do you think would be accomplished with an "equity agenda?"

[Anonymous]

There was no equity agenda to this redistricting. Maybe that was in play years ago? This one is clearly about finding efficiencies, handling capacity unevenness and transportation. It’s all in the policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What do you think would be accomplished with an "equity agenda?"

I think the main things it would accomplish is that we'd really see what Reid's vision for FCPS is, and it would increase the odds of a real debate about whether FCPS ought to be making some changes to programs like IB and AAP before major boundary changes.

That won't happen now. Some of the people who'd be most vocal in driving that discussion are breathing a sigh of relief now, and the sacrificial lambs will be served up so the SB can say it "did something."

[Anonymous]

The poster complaining that they aren’t doing enough when these changes are causing massive disruption across the county is delusional.

There is an all Dem school board that picked Reid and thru - all on her side. And she is still complaining about it because they didn’t F over a particular zip code. Truly petty stuff.

And we know this poster because she’s been going at it for years, obsessively trying to will her agenda to happen.

It is time for her to touch grass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There was no equity agenda to this redistricting. Maybe that was in play years ago? This one is clearly about finding efficiencies, handling capacity unevenness and transportation. It’s all in the policy.

Policy 8130 focuses in the first instance on four factors: (1) equitable access to programming; (2) school capacities; (3) contiguous attendance zones; and (4) limiting transportation times.

What Thru has done to date is all about (2) and (3); factors (1) and (4) have largely been ignored. If your school is at 106% capacity this year, you may get redistricted, even if enrollment is projected to decline over the next five years. If your school has an attendance island, you may get redistricted, even if no one cared about that there was an island. On the other hand, if your school doesn't have access to AP classes, too bad; and, if your kid is commuting over 10 miles to high school, keep enjoying that bus ride.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The poster complaining that they aren’t doing enough when these changes are causing massive disruption across the county is delusional.

There is an all Dem school board that picked Reid and thru - all on her side. And she is still complaining about it because they didn’t F over a particular zip code. Truly petty stuff.

And we know this poster because she’s been going at it for years, obsessively trying to will her agenda to happen.

It is time for her to touch grass.

You need to stop making yourself, your zip code, and your school the center of everything, and assuming that everyone else cares about them as much as you do.

We really don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The poster complaining that they aren’t doing enough when these changes are causing massive disruption across the county is delusional.

There is an all Dem school board that picked Reid and thru - all on her side. And she is still complaining about it because they didn’t F over a particular zip code. Truly petty stuff.

And we know this poster because she’s been going at it for years, obsessively trying to will her agenda to happen.

It is time for her to touch grass.

You need to stop making yourself, your zip code, and your school the center of everything, and assuming that everyone else cares about them as much as you do.

We really don't.

Super funny given the post immediately above yours.

[Anonymous]

Have the community feedback session times been posted?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The poster complaining that they aren’t doing enough when these changes are causing massive disruption across the county is delusional.

There is an all Dem school board that picked Reid and thru - all on her side. And she is still complaining about it because they didn’t F over a particular zip code. Truly petty stuff.

And we know this poster because she’s been going at it for years, obsessively trying to will her agenda to happen.

It is time for her to touch grass.

You need to stop making yourself, your zip code, and your school the center of everything, and assuming that everyone else cares about them as much as you do.

We really don't.

Super funny given the post immediately above yours.

You're like a tween screaming "stop looking at me" at their parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have the community feedback session times been posted?

"No meetings are scheduled at this time."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The poster complaining that they aren’t doing enough when these changes are causing massive disruption across the county is delusional.

There is an all Dem school board that picked Reid and thru - all on her side. And she is still complaining about it because they didn’t F over a particular zip code. Truly petty stuff.

And we know this poster because she’s been going at it for years, obsessively trying to will her agenda to happen.

It is time for her to touch grass.

You need to stop making yourself, your zip code, and your school the center of everything, and assuming that everyone else cares about them as much as you do.

We really don't.

Super funny given the post immediately above yours.

You're like a tween screaming "stop looking at me" at their parents.

I think it’s important to push back on lies. I’m principled that way.

There is somebody saying that the school board’s consultant (Thru) didn’t consider all 8130 factors when it’s clear from the materials that they did.