FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way that the families with kids moving to South Lakes are going to accept that. At the very least, they are not going to want the IB program. Most are happy at Chantilly and will not want to move, even if SLHS was AP, but the IB is most likely a deal breaker.

From a SLHS perspective, adding 100 more kids who are likely to participate in IB would be great, it would increase the pool of kids and increase the chance that the HL classes are offered because there might be more interest. If this move does happen, I expect more principal placing into Oakton and Langley for AP and language purposes.

People don't want to move from AP to IB.

Chantilly kids would get moved to Westfield and Oakton (both AP), and some Westfield families would move to South Lakes. I don’t think anyone at Chantilly would be moved to South Lakes.

Pupil placing into Langley probably won’t be available much longer as it will be over 100% capacity with the reassignment of 200 McLean kids.

Oak Hill kids who currently attend Chantilly were moved to Fox Mill in one of the first two meetings. That shifted them to SLHS. I don't think that necessarily shows up in the third meeting slides because they would have been accounted for in an earlier presentation.

This is correct. People don't seem to understand how to interpret these maps. The changes from the first two are already incorporated into the third. They just aren't highlighting proposed new ES boundaries if the slide is focused on an MS or HS. But they are on there if you look at the overall boundary map.

Can you look at p. 14 of the 5/5 presentation and tell me how anyone at Chantilly is getting moved to South Lakes? I only see Chantilly kids moving to Westfield and Oakton, and no changes to South Lakes incorporated into that map!

One of the April meetings moved Oak Hill kids to Fox Mill. Those kids are already included in the SLHS count for the 5/5 slides which only take into consideration the new shifts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So no changes affecting Lewis? At all?

Guess well have to pupil place.

This says it all. There have been parents throughout this boundary review process who only care about the potential for it to dilute their school's lower income, lower performing demographics. They don't care about solving the problems at the school they are zoned for, and they certainly don't care about impacts to kids who are rezoned.

When you see posts supporting the boundary review, keep in mind that it's primarily parents like this.

Hahah you mean, a parent advocating for the best possible outcomes for their children. Yep, that’s me!

How is rezoning kids to a different school which has an entirely different program (IB vs. AP at WSHS) giving anyone the “best possible outcome.”

“Best possible outcome” FOR MY CHILDREN. Yes, I care more about mine than yours.

Question.

Why don't the involved Lewis parents organize and lobby to eliminate IB and switch to AP, so that the 250 plus high performing students, your neighbors who also purchased in the Lewis zone, who transfer out of Lewis to get away from IB return to Lewis?

Your school would benefit if your 250 neighbors, involved academically focused families, who actuslly live in the community and have a real stake in the success of the school returned home to Lewis.

That would be a far more effective and rapid way to improve Lewis, by bringing in people who have a genuine connection to the school and community.

It is way more effective than trying to replace them with people from outside the community, who are upset and hostile about being removed from their neighborhood high school and switched to a school they don't want to attend, and who will almost certainly be using that same IB loophole to transfer to Lake Braddock or South County.

Lewis families need to strongly organize to eliminate IP and switch to AP if they want to improve their school.

They also need to start pushing their school board rep to get them moved up in the renovation queue.

Maybe because the parents are okay with IB. Lewis also offers AP courses.

Honestly, the biggest factor hurting Lewis is the bigoted discussion that pops up here and elsewhere on social media.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they won’t allow freshmen to transfer for IB/AP.

FCPS needs to eliminate IB first

I don’t understand why this isn’t on the table. It seems like such a failed program. Maybe keep it at a small number of schools as an opt in program but IB shouldn’t be the only advanced option because it creates so many transfers out.

This process is looking only at the boundaries and not the programs. Looking at programs would be a different process. It is clear to everyone that the programs influence what is happening with the boundaries but they are different topics.

But yes, most people seem to think that IB should be eliminated or kept at the 2 HS that have a higher rate of completed IB diplomas and students can be allowed to opt into the IB programs at those schools. AP at all schools would reduce the principal placement issues. I have no issues with schools having different languages that are taught but not allowing Principal Placement for languages outside of the kids who enroll in language immersion. If there is an interest at those schools for those languages, then that is fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way that the families with kids moving to South Lakes are going to accept that. At the very least, they are not going to want the IB program. Most are happy at Chantilly and will not want to move, even if SLHS was AP, but the IB is most likely a deal breaker.

From a SLHS perspective, adding 100 more kids who are likely to participate in IB would be great, it would increase the pool of kids and increase the chance that the HL classes are offered because there might be more interest. If this move does happen, I expect more principal placing into Oakton and Langley for AP and language purposes.

People don't want to move from AP to IB.

Chantilly kids would get moved to Westfield and Oakton (both AP), and some Westfield families would move to South Lakes. I don’t think anyone at Chantilly would be moved to South Lakes.

Pupil placing into Langley probably won’t be available much longer as it will be over 100% capacity with the reassignment of 200 McLean kids.

Oak Hill kids who currently attend Chantilly were moved to Fox Mill in one of the first two meetings. That shifted them to SLHS. I don't think that necessarily shows up in the third meeting slides because they would have been accounted for in an earlier presentation.

This is correct. People don't seem to understand how to interpret these maps. The changes from the first two are already incorporated into the third. They just aren't highlighting proposed new ES boundaries if the slide is focused on an MS or HS. But they are on there if you look at the overall boundary map.

Can you look at p. 14 of the 5/5 presentation and tell me how anyone at Chantilly is getting moved to South Lakes? I only see Chantilly kids moving to Westfield and Oakton, and no changes to South Lakes incorporated into that map!

One of the April meetings moved Oak Hill kids to Fox Mill. Those kids are already included in the SLHS count for the 5/5 slides which only take into consideration the new shifts.

The Oak Hill adjustment was to move the kids assigned to Carson/Westfield out of Oak Hill. The move from Westfield to South Lakes is covered in slide 12 of the 5/5 presentation. It does not impact any kids currently assigned to Chantilly. It looks like the only Oak Hill/Chantilly families impacted are ones moved to Oakton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So no changes affecting Lewis? At all?

Guess well have to pupil place.

This says it all. There have been parents throughout this boundary review process who only care about the potential for it to dilute their school's lower income, lower performing demographics. They don't care about solving the problems at the school they are zoned for, and they certainly don't care about impacts to kids who are rezoned.

When you see posts supporting the boundary review, keep in mind that it's primarily parents like this.

Hahah you mean, a parent advocating for the best possible outcomes for their children. Yep, that’s me!

How is rezoning kids to a different school which has an entirely different program (IB vs. AP at WSHS) giving anyone the “best possible outcome.”

“Best possible outcome” FOR MY CHILDREN. Yes, I care more about mine than yours.

Question.

Why don't the involved Lewis parents organize and lobby to eliminate IB and switch to AP, so that the 250 plus high performing students, your neighbors who also purchased in the Lewis zone, who transfer out of Lewis to get away from IB return to Lewis?

Your school would benefit if your 250 neighbors, involved academically focused families, who actuslly live in the community and have a real stake in the success of the school returned home to Lewis.

That would be a far more effective and rapid way to improve Lewis, by bringing in people who have a genuine connection to the school and community.

It is way more effective than trying to replace them with people from outside the community, who are upset and hostile about being removed from their neighborhood high school and switched to a school they don't want to attend, and who will almost certainly be using that same IB loophole to transfer to Lake Braddock or South County.

Lewis families need to strongly organize to eliminate IP and switch to AP if they want to improve their school.

They also need to start pushing their school board rep to get them moved up in the renovation queue.

Maybe because the parents are okay with IB. Lewis also offers AP courses.

Honestly, the biggest factor hurting Lewis is the bigoted discussion that pops up here and elsewhere on social media.

They added AP when they opened the special program at Lewis. I think they added the AP because they knew that there would be fewer applicants for the special program if Lewis was IB. But AP is a recent addition to Lewis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way that the families with kids moving to South Lakes are going to accept that. At the very least, they are not going to want the IB program. Most are happy at Chantilly and will not want to move, even if SLHS was AP, but the IB is most likely a deal breaker.

From a SLHS perspective, adding 100 more kids who are likely to participate in IB would be great, it would increase the pool of kids and increase the chance that the HL classes are offered because there might be more interest. If this move does happen, I expect more principal placing into Oakton and Langley for AP and language purposes.

People don't want to move from AP to IB.

Chantilly kids would get moved to Westfield and Oakton (both AP), and some Westfield families would move to South Lakes. I don’t think anyone at Chantilly would be moved to South Lakes.

Pupil placing into Langley probably won’t be available much longer as it will be over 100% capacity with the reassignment of 200 McLean kids.

Oak Hill kids who currently attend Chantilly were moved to Fox Mill in one of the first two meetings. That shifted them to SLHS. I don't think that necessarily shows up in the third meeting slides because they would have been accounted for in an earlier presentation.

This is correct. People don't seem to understand how to interpret these maps. The changes from the first two are already incorporated into the third. They just aren't highlighting proposed new ES boundaries if the slide is focused on an MS or HS. But they are on there if you look at the overall boundary map.

Can you look at p. 14 of the 5/5 presentation and tell me how anyone at Chantilly is getting moved to South Lakes? I only see Chantilly kids moving to Westfield and Oakton, and no changes to South Lakes incorporated into that map!

One of the April meetings moved Oak Hill kids to Fox Mill. Those kids are already included in the SLHS count for the 5/5 slides which only take into consideration the new shifts.

I’m not convinced but if that’s the case the presentations are extremely sloppy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So no changes affecting Lewis? At all?

Guess well have to pupil place.

This says it all. There have been parents throughout this boundary review process who only care about the potential for it to dilute their school's lower income, lower performing demographics. They don't care about solving the problems at the school they are zoned for, and they certainly don't care about impacts to kids who are rezoned.

When you see posts supporting the boundary review, keep in mind that it's primarily parents like this.

Hahah you mean, a parent advocating for the best possible outcomes for their children. Yep, that’s me!

How is rezoning kids to a different school which has an entirely different program (IB vs. AP at WSHS) giving anyone the “best possible outcome.”

“Best possible outcome” FOR MY CHILDREN. Yes, I care more about mine than yours.

Question.

Why don't the involved Lewis parents organize and lobby to eliminate IB and switch to AP, so that the 250 plus high performing students, your neighbors who also purchased in the Lewis zone, who transfer out of Lewis to get away from IB return to Lewis?

Your school would benefit if your 250 neighbors, involved academically focused families, who actuslly live in the community and have a real stake in the success of the school returned home to Lewis.

That would be a far more effective and rapid way to improve Lewis, by bringing in people who have a genuine connection to the school and community.

It is way more effective than trying to replace them with people from outside the community, who are upset and hostile about being removed from their neighborhood high school and switched to a school they don't want to attend, and who will almost certainly be using that same IB loophole to transfer to Lake Braddock or South County.

Lewis families need to strongly organize to eliminate IP and switch to AP if they want to improve their school.

They also need to start pushing their school board rep to get them moved up in the renovation queue.

Maybe because the parents are okay with IB. Lewis also offers AP courses.

Honestly, the biggest factor hurting Lewis is the bigoted discussion that pops up here and elsewhere on social media.

DP. You think that DCUM is the source of the school’s issues? Like you honestly believe that an anonymous thread on DCUM is “the biggest factor hurting Lewis”?

Bit hyperbolic don’t you think?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way that the families with kids moving to South Lakes are going to accept that. At the very least, they are not going to want the IB program. Most are happy at Chantilly and will not want to move, even if SLHS was AP, but the IB is most likely a deal breaker.

From a SLHS perspective, adding 100 more kids who are likely to participate in IB would be great, it would increase the pool of kids and increase the chance that the HL classes are offered because there might be more interest. If this move does happen, I expect more principal placing into Oakton and Langley for AP and language purposes.

People don't want to move from AP to IB.

Chantilly kids would get moved to Westfield and Oakton (both AP), and some Westfield families would move to South Lakes. I don’t think anyone at Chantilly would be moved to South Lakes.

Pupil placing into Langley probably won’t be available much longer as it will be over 100% capacity with the reassignment of 200 McLean kids.

Oak Hill kids who currently attend Chantilly were moved to Fox Mill in one of the first two meetings. That shifted them to SLHS. I don't think that necessarily shows up in the third meeting slides because they would have been accounted for in an earlier presentation.

This is correct. People don't seem to understand how to interpret these maps. The changes from the first two are already incorporated into the third. They just aren't highlighting proposed new ES boundaries if the slide is focused on an MS or HS. But they are on there if you look at the overall boundary map.

Can you look at p. 14 of the 5/5 presentation and tell me how anyone at Chantilly is getting moved to South Lakes? I only see Chantilly kids moving to Westfield and Oakton, and no changes to South Lakes incorporated into that map!

One of the April meetings moved Oak Hill kids to Fox Mill. Those kids are already included in the SLHS count for the 5/5 slides which only take into consideration the new shifts.

I’m not convinced but if that’s the case the presentations are extremely sloppy.

The Oak Hill families I know are discussing the move to Fox Mill and South Lakes and they are not happy about it. So either they have been misreading the presentations and are upset for no good reason or the presentations are just that sloppy. My money is on sloppy presentations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So no changes affecting Lewis? At all?

Guess well have to pupil place.

This says it all. There have been parents throughout this boundary review process who only care about the potential for it to dilute their school's lower income, lower performing demographics. They don't care about solving the problems at the school they are zoned for, and they certainly don't care about impacts to kids who are rezoned.

When you see posts supporting the boundary review, keep in mind that it's primarily parents like this.

Hahah you mean, a parent advocating for the best possible outcomes for their children. Yep, that’s me!

How is rezoning kids to a different school which has an entirely different program (IB vs. AP at WSHS) giving anyone the “best possible outcome.”

“Best possible outcome” FOR MY CHILDREN. Yes, I care more about mine than yours.

Question.

Why don't the involved Lewis parents organize and lobby to eliminate IB and switch to AP, so that the 250 plus high performing students, your neighbors who also purchased in the Lewis zone, who transfer out of Lewis to get away from IB return to Lewis?

Your school would benefit if your 250 neighbors, involved academically focused families, who actuslly live in the community and have a real stake in the success of the school returned home to Lewis.

That would be a far more effective and rapid way to improve Lewis, by bringing in people who have a genuine connection to the school and community.

It is way more effective than trying to replace them with people from outside the community, who are upset and hostile about being removed from their neighborhood high school and switched to a school they don't want to attend, and who will almost certainly be using that same IB loophole to transfer to Lake Braddock or South County.

Lewis families need to strongly organize to eliminate IP and switch to AP if they want to improve their school.

They also need to start pushing their school board rep to get them moved up in the renovation queue.

Maybe because the parents are okay with IB. Lewis also offers AP courses.

Honestly, the biggest factor hurting Lewis is the bigoted discussion that pops up here and elsewhere on social media.

They added AP when they opened the special program at Lewis. I think they added the AP because they knew that there would be fewer applicants for the special program if Lewis was IB. But AP is a recent addition to Lewis.

No. About 10 years ago some parents did try to get Lee to switch to AP but the county refused. They did add some AP classes.

I firmly believe now that they keep IB so that kids can transfer out, particularly high achieving kids. This reduces the burden on the school as they concentrate on the ESL population. Otherwise statistics should have long ago pushed the county to change back to AP.

[Anonymous]

Is WSHS transfer closed to teachers who want to pupil place their kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is WSHS transfer closed to teachers who want to pupil place their kids?

No, for teachers who teach at a school, pupil placement is open regardless of capacity. However, the teacher pupil placement option to other schools in the pyramid is dependent on capacity. So, a WSHS teacher could place their DC at WSHS but might not be able to place younger siblings at Irving due to capacity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So no changes affecting Lewis? At all?

Guess well have to pupil place.

This says it all. There have been parents throughout this boundary review process who only care about the potential for it to dilute their school's lower income, lower performing demographics. They don't care about solving the problems at the school they are zoned for, and they certainly don't care about impacts to kids who are rezoned.

When you see posts supporting the boundary review, keep in mind that it's primarily parents like this.

Hahah you mean, a parent advocating for the best possible outcomes for their children. Yep, that’s me!

How is rezoning kids to a different school which has an entirely different program (IB vs. AP at WSHS) giving anyone the “best possible outcome.”

“Best possible outcome” FOR MY CHILDREN. Yes, I care more about mine than yours.

Question.

Why don't the involved Lewis parents organize and lobby to eliminate IB and switch to AP, so that the 250 plus high performing students, your neighbors who also purchased in the Lewis zone, who transfer out of Lewis to get away from IB return to Lewis?

Your school would benefit if your 250 neighbors, involved academically focused families, who actuslly live in the community and have a real stake in the success of the school returned home to Lewis.

That would be a far more effective and rapid way to improve Lewis, by bringing in people who have a genuine connection to the school and community.

It is way more effective than trying to replace them with people from outside the community, who are upset and hostile about being removed from their neighborhood high school and switched to a school they don't want to attend, and who will almost certainly be using that same IB loophole to transfer to Lake Braddock or South County.

Lewis families need to strongly organize to eliminate IP and switch to AP if they want to improve their school.

They also need to start pushing their school board rep to get them moved up in the renovation queue.

There are a huge number of Herndon students pupil placing to South Lakes, an IB school.

If they make Lewis AP, but leave Edison IB, Lewis kids will transfer to Edison in larger numbers and it will be like Herndon students transferring to South Lakes. With FCPS/Thru proposing to move 372 Edison kids to Annandale, space at Edison won't be an issue. Annandale would be a lot larger (again, as it was before 2011), Edison would pick up more pupil placements from Lewis, and Lewis would remain tiny. If Key kids currently attend Twain for AAP, this would be even more likely.

Isn't Edison at capacity?

Edison should be closed to transfers too.

Any school above 95% should be closed to transfers to stave off rezoning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So no changes affecting Lewis? At all?

Guess well have to pupil place.

No objection to you pupil placing, but doesn’t make a lick of sense that the decision would have hinged on whether they brought students into your school.

^^ WSHS and Lewis pyramid BRAC members please take note. WSHS is at 105% after Thru's proposals. Betting if Lewis to WSHS transfers are returned to their base school then WSHS will reduce to 100%.

WSHS is closed to transfers, and the few that are allowed aren’t coming from Lewis. Fewer than 10 are. There is no smoking gun for fixing Lewis transfers. There’s not a high concentration of 200 students going to a specific school like with Herndon to South Lakes and Mount Vernon to Hayfield.

But completely replacing IB with AP at Lewis and elsewhere would have an impact. No transfers for AP to Lake Braddock or Hayfield (or to Edison if Lewis had AP and Edison IB).

Then come up with a new renovation queue so those at Lewis had some idea when the building would be renovated.

FCPS does not engage in strategic planning, only periodic widget moving. And then they prove themselves to be cowards when it comes to widget moving. Utterly disgraceful.

"Widget moving" is not the answer. When you have a delta of 228 kids transferring out--well more than 10 percent, there is a problem.
And, when they did the boundary study, the in-boundary membership should have been considered--not the number attending. It was deceptive to do otherwise.

The answer: work to teach the kids rather than cover them up.

Completely agree.

A big part of the fury over rezoning is that students who actually live in the high school boundaries are getting rezoned while kids that don't live in boundary get to stay and are included in the enrollment numbers.

There wouldn’t be any instant gratification in capacity balancing, but the first comprehensive review should have been to adjust AAP maps so the assignment of centers remained in pyramid. That includes having an AAP middle school in every pyramid. That would naturally divert the flow of a lot of the high school pupil placements.

Yes! And replacing IB with AP across the board. It is simply not worth the extra cost, given the low IB diploma rates and how it complicates any attempts at redistricting.

Simultaneously release a new renovation queue that gives people some idea when the older schools that got the cut-rate renovations in the early 2000s will be brought up to current standards.

Further, update the projection methodology so that it gives a better indication as to the impact of planned/approved development on future school enrollments.

These things should have happened before consultants were retained to adjust boundaries. But they just wanted to "do something" as a flex (and then the flex largely is turning out to be a nothingburger, except it still sucks if you live in one of the areas that they treat as soft targets/low-hanging fruit).

The final step before rezoning should have bedn AAP at every middle school with no out of pyramid transfers for AAP.

Additionally, FCPS needs to enforce the no transfers rule stsrting at when a school hits 95% capacity.

This, plus the changes you mentioned above, would organically fix most of the capacity issues, and a large portion of achievement disparities, at very low cost and eithout rezoning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no way that the families with kids moving to South Lakes are going to accept that. At the very least, they are not going to want the IB program. Most are happy at Chantilly and will not want to move, even if SLHS was AP, but the IB is most likely a deal breaker.

From a SLHS perspective, adding 100 more kids who are likely to participate in IB would be great, it would increase the pool of kids and increase the chance that the HL classes are offered because there might be more interest. If this move does happen, I expect more principal placing into Oakton and Langley for AP and language purposes.

People don't want to move from AP to IB.

Moving to IB is a good reason to be upset. Moving to a school with a larger Hispanic population is a bad reason to be upset.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So no changes affecting Lewis? At all?

Guess well have to pupil place.

This says it all. There have been parents throughout this boundary review process who only care about the potential for it to dilute their school's lower income, lower performing demographics. They don't care about solving the problems at the school they are zoned for, and they certainly don't care about impacts to kids who are rezoned.

When you see posts supporting the boundary review, keep in mind that it's primarily parents like this.

Hahah you mean, a parent advocating for the best possible outcomes for their children. Yep, that’s me!

How is rezoning kids to a different school which has an entirely different program (IB vs. AP at WSHS) giving anyone the “best possible outcome.”

“Best possible outcome” FOR MY CHILDREN. Yes, I care more about mine than yours.

Question.

Why don't the involved Lewis parents organize and lobby to eliminate IB and switch to AP, so that the 250 plus high performing students, your neighbors who also purchased in the Lewis zone, who transfer out of Lewis to get away from IB return to Lewis?

Your school would benefit if your 250 neighbors, involved academically focused families, who actuslly live in the community and have a real stake in the success of the school returned home to Lewis.

That would be a far more effective and rapid way to improve Lewis, by bringing in people who have a genuine connection to the school and community.

It is way more effective than trying to replace them with people from outside the community, who are upset and hostile about being removed from their neighborhood high school and switched to a school they don't want to attend, and who will almost certainly be using that same IB loophole to transfer to Lake Braddock or South County.

Lewis families need to strongly organize to eliminate IP and switch to AP if they want to improve their school.

They also need to start pushing their school board rep to get them moved up in the renovation queue.

Maybe because the parents are okay with IB. Lewis also offers AP courses.

Honestly, the biggest factor hurting Lewis is the bigoted discussion that pops up here and elsewhere on social media.

No, Lewis parents are not okay with IB.

Lewis loses well over 200 students each year of families fleeing IB. And Lewis only has low single digits of students pursuing an IB diploma. Its less than a half percentage of the school.

That is the biggest factor hurting Lewis.