Boundaries assessment update 2023

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The basic bargain in Fairfax is we get a bunch of Democrats who are far-left on issues like trans rights and far-right when it comes to school boundaries.

Perfect example is snobby Elaine Tholen, who appointed a trans activist to the FCPS Family Life Committee, but fought to make sure not a single apartment or condo is zoned to Langley High.

The board care deeply about equity as long as the poor kids don't start getting crazy notions about being rezoned to better schools

No one has yet answered the question: who would you zone into Langley to make it 30% FARMS?

Someone already answered your dumb question-its not logistically possible to get to 30%. Maybe 10%.

I am the poster who asked the question. I know you are correct, but there are people on this thread who insist that all schools should be 30%. That is why I asked where they would get the students?

My point is that it is impossible to have the same demographics all across the county.

That’s no excuse for leaving Langley at 3-4% FARMS. That only happens when rich snobs like Elaine Tholen and her predecessors make a concerted effort to keep the school free of low or even middle-income kids.

Otherwise you do not end up with a school where kids get bussed 12 miles to attend the school yet it has no apartments or condos. Meanwhile it borders a series of schools that range from 15% to 50% FARMS.

Then, please tell us how you would make Langley 10% FARMS. Where would you get the students to do that and how would you do it.

There are areas in Reston and Tysons zoned to South Lakes, Marshall, and/or McLean that could be reassigned to Langley and would increase the FARMS % there. And every one of those areas is closer to Langley than the Forestville ES area.

Are these areas closer to Langley than to their current high schools? Would transportation be a problem for them? For their families?

Look at the pocket right on Wiehle zoned to Langley. Those kids could bike to Herndon, but no one seems to have a problem sending them the length of the county to Langley. Why do we only care about bussing when it involves FARMs kids potentially getting zoned to langley?

That would make a split feeder I think? But, this probably goes back to builder getting the zoning in order to sell houses. FCPS or county must have agreed.

Sure, just don't talk about busing like it's something that doesn't already occur.

This shows how little some people understand about the issues with the communities that are struggling. Here are some reasons not to do this:

1. Truancy is already a huge problem--especially among the poor students. Miss the bus? They will not get to school that day.
2. Have an afterschool job? Sure send the kids far away and prevent this.
3. Help out with younger siblings after school? (pretty common among high school kids) Good luck with that.
4. Need to talk to the parents? That's already pretty difficult. Just add a thirty minute commute to the problem.
5. Want the kids to participate in after school activities? Sure there are activity buses--but not convenient.

Whoever thinks that sending kids from Reston or Herndon to Langley need to spend some time with the people they are so "concerned" about. I taught in the projects. I doubt many people on this thread have any idea of the issues these families deal with.

But, the biggest problem will be truancy. And it is already a huge problem with these communities.

Got it, bussing is ok to make sure that rich kids can attend good schools, but not ok if it means poor kids attending good schools. It's probably also not ok to send rich kids to poor school, but your reasons only assume to apply to poor kids

What makes a good school vs a poor school?

According to FCPS, a FARMs rate below 20%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The basic bargain in Fairfax is we get a bunch of Democrats who are far-left on issues like trans rights and far-right when it comes to school boundaries.

Perfect example is snobby Elaine Tholen, who appointed a trans activist to the FCPS Family Life Committee, but fought to make sure not a single apartment or condo is zoned to Langley High.

The board care deeply about equity as long as the poor kids don't start getting crazy notions about being rezoned to better schools

No one has yet answered the question: who would you zone into Langley to make it 30% FARMS?

Someone already answered your dumb question-its not logistically possible to get to 30%. Maybe 10%.

I am the poster who asked the question. I know you are correct, but there are people on this thread who insist that all schools should be 30%. That is why I asked where they would get the students?

My point is that it is impossible to have the same demographics all across the county.

That’s no excuse for leaving Langley at 3-4% FARMS. That only happens when rich snobs like Elaine Tholen and her predecessors make a concerted effort to keep the school free of low or even middle-income kids.

Otherwise you do not end up with a school where kids get bussed 12 miles to attend the school yet it has no apartments or condos. Meanwhile it borders a series of schools that range from 15% to 50% FARMS.

Then, please tell us how you would make Langley 10% FARMS. Where would you get the students to do that and how would you do it.

There are areas in Reston and Tysons zoned to South Lakes, Marshall, and/or McLean that could be reassigned to Langley and would increase the FARMS % there. And every one of those areas is closer to Langley than the Forestville ES area.

Are these areas closer to Langley than to their current high schools? Would transportation be a problem for them? For their families?

Look at the pocket right on Wiehle zoned to Langley. Those kids could bike to Herndon, but no one seems to have a problem sending them the length of the county to Langley. Why do we only care about bussing when it involves FARMs kids potentially getting zoned to langley?

That would make a split feeder I think? But, this probably goes back to builder getting the zoning in order to sell houses. FCPS or county must have agreed.

Sure, just don't talk about busing like it's something that doesn't already occur.

This shows how little some people understand about the issues with the communities that are struggling. Here are some reasons not to do this:

1. Truancy is already a huge problem--especially among the poor students. Miss the bus? They will not get to school that day.
2. Have an afterschool job? Sure send the kids far away and prevent this.
3. Help out with younger siblings after school? (pretty common among high school kids) Good luck with that.
4. Need to talk to the parents? That's already pretty difficult. Just add a thirty minute commute to the problem.
5. Want the kids to participate in after school activities? Sure there are activity buses--but not convenient.

Whoever thinks that sending kids from Reston or Herndon to Langley need to spend some time with the people they are so "concerned" about. I taught in the projects. I doubt many people on this thread have any idea of the issues these families deal with.

But, the biggest problem will be truancy. And it is already a huge problem with these communities.

But very very few HS kids in FCPS are walking distance to their schools. Only being walking distance would solve some of these problems and that's not realistic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The basic bargain in Fairfax is we get a bunch of Democrats who are far-left on issues like trans rights and far-right when it comes to school boundaries.

Perfect example is snobby Elaine Tholen, who appointed a trans activist to the FCPS Family Life Committee, but fought to make sure not a single apartment or condo is zoned to Langley High.

The board care deeply about equity as long as the poor kids don't start getting crazy notions about being rezoned to better schools

No one has yet answered the question: who would you zone into Langley to make it 30% FARMS?

Big difference between a three mile bike ride and a 12 mile one.

Someone already answered your dumb question-its not logistically possible to get to 30%. Maybe 10%.

I am the poster who asked the question. I know you are correct, but there are people on this thread who insist that all schools should be 30%. That is why I asked where they would get the students?

My point is that it is impossible to have the same demographics all across the county.

That’s no excuse for leaving Langley at 3-4% FARMS. That only happens when rich snobs like Elaine Tholen and her predecessors make a concerted effort to keep the school free of low or even middle-income kids.

Otherwise you do not end up with a school where kids get bussed 12 miles to attend the school yet it has no apartments or condos. Meanwhile it borders a series of schools that range from 15% to 50% FARMS.

Then, please tell us how you would make Langley 10% FARMS. Where would you get the students to do that and how would you do it.

There are areas in Reston and Tysons zoned to South Lakes, Marshall, and/or McLean that could be reassigned to Langley and would increase the FARMS % there. And every one of those areas is closer to Langley than the Forestville ES area.

Are these areas closer to Langley than to their current high schools? Would transportation be a problem for them? For their families?

Look at the pocket right on Wiehle zoned to Langley. Those kids could bike to Herndon, but no one seems to have a problem sending them the length of the county to Langley. Why do we only care about bussing when it involves FARMs kids potentially getting zoned to langley?

That would make a split feeder I think? But, this probably goes back to builder getting the zoning in order to sell houses. FCPS or county must have agreed.

Sure, just don't talk about busing like it's something that doesn't already occur.

This shows how little some people understand about the issues with the communities that are struggling. Here are some reasons not to do this:

1. Truancy is already a huge problem--especially among the poor students. Miss the bus? They will not get to school that day.
2. Have an afterschool job? Sure send the kids far away and prevent this.
3. Help out with younger siblings after school? (pretty common among high school kids) Good luck with that.
4. Need to talk to the parents? That's already pretty difficult. Just add a thirty minute commute to the problem.
5. Want the kids to participate in after school activities? Sure there are activity buses--but not convenient.

Whoever thinks that sending kids from Reston or Herndon to Langley need to spend some time with the people they are so "concerned" about. I taught in the projects. I doubt many people on this thread have any idea of the issues these families deal with.

But, the biggest problem will be truancy. And it is already a huge problem with these communities.

But very very few HS kids in FCPS are walking distance to their schools. Only being walking distance would solve some of these problems and that's not realistic.

[Anonymous]

I have to laugh any time someone mentions the "new western high school," as if they actually believe it's going to be built.

[Anonymous]

But very very few HS kids in FCPS are walking distance to their schools. Only being walking distance would solve some of these problems and that's not realistic.

Big difference between a five minute drive and a thirty minute drive--which some on these forums have suggested as a way to balance FARMS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

But very very few HS kids in FCPS are walking distance to their schools. Only being walking distance would solve some of these problems and that's not realistic.

Big difference between a five minute drive and a thirty minute drive--which some on these forums have suggested as a way to balance FARMS.

As long as we continue to have rich Langley kids with 30-minute or longer trips to Langley you can take a seat and shut up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But very very few HS kids in FCPS are walking distance to their schools. Only being walking distance would solve some of these problems and that's not realistic.

Big difference between a five minute drive and a thirty minute drive--which some on these forums have suggested as a way to balance FARMS.

As long as we continue to have rich Langley kids with 30-minute or longer trips to Langley you can take a seat and shut up.

If you don't see the difference between families who can afford to make this trip and those who cannot, I think you should take a seat yourself! As for "shut up"--I was taught that was a rude demand and do not ever use that phrase. It describes the accuser more than the accused.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But very very few HS kids in FCPS are walking distance to their schools. Only being walking distance would solve some of these problems and that's not realistic.

Big difference between a five minute drive and a thirty minute drive--which some on these forums have suggested as a way to balance FARMS.

As long as we continue to have rich Langley kids with 30-minute or longer trips to Langley you can take a seat and shut up.

If you don't see the difference between families who can afford to make this trip and those who cannot, I think you should take a seat yourself! As for "shut up"--I was taught that was a rude demand and do not ever use that phrase. It describes the accuser more than the accused.

All you do is offer a flimsy excuse for the concentration of poverty and wealth in different pyramids. It’s tired and you repeat the same thing constantly - all to defend a status quo that leaves a 3% FARMS school bordering a 50% one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But very very few HS kids in FCPS are walking distance to their schools. Only being walking distance would solve some of these problems and that's not realistic.

Big difference between a five minute drive and a thirty minute drive--which some on these forums have suggested as a way to balance FARMS.

As long as we continue to have rich Langley kids with 30-minute or longer trips to Langley you can take a seat and shut up.

If you don't see the difference between families who can afford to make this trip and those who cannot, I think you should take a seat yourself! As for "shut up"--I was taught that was a rude demand and do not ever use that phrase. It describes the accuser more than the accused.

All you do is offer a flimsy excuse for the concentration of poverty and wealth in different pyramids. It’s tired and you repeat the same thing constantly - all to defend a status quo that leaves a 3% FARMS school bordering a 50% one.

No. It is absolutely not a "flimsy excuse." I have experience with teaching extremely impoverished students. I understand how difficult it is to get them to school and to stay in school.

I agree that it is a shame that Langley has such low FARMS compared to other schools. However, I also have the ability to understand maps and geography. The location of Langley is the issue and there is no way to change the demographics without extreme busing.
I don't know the neighborhoods near Langley that could change that. If there are some nearby, then by all means, send them there. But, I've not seen anything that would make a difference.

It sounds like you want to take people who are happy at Langley and move them in exchange for those who would have an extreme hardship if assigned there. All in order to balance demographics. Does this make sense? I think it would result in a LOT of unhappy families--wealthy and poor.

[Anonymous]

There has never been a real effort to get lower income kids currently zoned for, I would guess Herndon, to Langley. The bus commute would be horrible because of Langley’s physical location - it’s obviously much closer to McLean and to the border with North Arlington.

Now there was briefly some chatter years ago about sending kids from the western Langley boundary to Herndon, which was also the boundary many years ago. That’s what started all the One Great Falls stuff. That would also likely give those kids a shorter commute to school. But problems with that, 1 the well off parents of Great Falls obviously did not want that, and 2 Langley is quite under capacity and Herndon is at capacity and couldn’t absorb, likely, a whole additional elementary school or at least parts of all of Forestvile, GFES, or even Colvin Run just looking at the maps.

So it wouldn’t have been as easy as just shipping Great Falls kids to their technically closer school in Herndon. It would be a whole redoing of boundaries out there involving, at a minimum, GF kids to Herndon, McLean and probably Marshall kids to Langley, now Herndon is even more overcrowded and you have to hope that South Lakes and Westfield etc. can absorb many more kids (they can’t), and without the additional Western HS being built probably none of this is going to happen. There’s no political will for it, everyone would paint it as “busing my kids to Herndon for ~*~*~equity*~*~*~” and if it was seriously tried it would dominate the news cycle in Fairfax for years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But very very few HS kids in FCPS are walking distance to their schools. Only being walking distance would solve some of these problems and that's not realistic.

Big difference between a five minute drive and a thirty minute drive--which some on these forums have suggested as a way to balance FARMS.

As long as we continue to have rich Langley kids with 30-minute or longer trips to Langley you can take a seat and shut up.

If you don't see the difference between families who can afford to make this trip and those who cannot, I think you should take a seat yourself! As for "shut up"--I was taught that was a rude demand and do not ever use that phrase. It describes the accuser more than the accused.

All you do is offer a flimsy excuse for the concentration of poverty and wealth in different pyramids. It’s tired and you repeat the same thing constantly - all to defend a status quo that leaves a 3% FARMS school bordering a 50% one.

No. It is absolutely not a "flimsy excuse." I have experience with teaching extremely impoverished students. I understand how difficult it is to get them to school and to stay in school.

I agree that it is a shame that Langley has such low FARMS compared to other schools. However, I also have the ability to understand maps and geography. The location of Langley is the issue and there is no way to change the demographics without extreme busing.
I don't know the neighborhoods near Langley that could change that. If there are some nearby, then by all means, send them there. But, I've not seen anything that would make a difference.

It sounds like you want to take people who are happy at Langley and move them in exchange for those who would have an extreme hardship if assigned there. All in order to balance demographics. Does this make sense? I think it would result in a LOT of unhappy families--wealthy and poor.

Where do you live? You seem not to really have any handle on different areas of the county, their demographics, or their relative proximity to Langley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But very very few HS kids in FCPS are walking distance to their schools. Only being walking distance would solve some of these problems and that's not realistic.

Big difference between a five minute drive and a thirty minute drive--which some on these forums have suggested as a way to balance FARMS.

As long as we continue to have rich Langley kids with 30-minute or longer trips to Langley you can take a seat and shut up.

If you don't see the difference between families who can afford to make this trip and those who cannot, I think you should take a seat yourself! As for "shut up"--I was taught that was a rude demand and do not ever use that phrase. It describes the accuser more than the accused.

All you do is offer a flimsy excuse for the concentration of poverty and wealth in different pyramids. It’s tired and you repeat the same thing constantly - all to defend a status quo that leaves a 3% FARMS school bordering a 50% one.

No. It is absolutely not a "flimsy excuse." I have experience with teaching extremely impoverished students. I understand how difficult it is to get them to school and to stay in school.

I agree that it is a shame that Langley has such low FARMS compared to other schools. However, I also have the ability to understand maps and geography. The location of Langley is the issue and there is no way to change the demographics without extreme busing.
I don't know the neighborhoods near Langley that could change that. If there are some nearby, then by all means, send them there. But, I've not seen anything that would make a difference.

It sounds like you want to take people who are happy at Langley and move them in exchange for those who would have an extreme hardship if assigned there. All in order to balance demographics. Does this make sense? I think it would result in a LOT of unhappy families--wealthy and poor.

Where do you live? You seem not to really have any handle on different areas of the county, their demographics, or their relative proximity to Langley.

not the PP to whom you are replying, but one with similar views. I do not live in that area. I have attended games, etc., at Langley and am aware of the types of vehicles in the parking lot (expensive.)
DS has done lots of youth sports and I have attended youth games in that area, as well. I have never passed through a "poor" neighborhood when visiting there.
As for familiarity with the area--I have said that I do not know the areas near Langley that could provide a higher FARMS rate--and I have seen no solid suggestion on this forum. I asked earlier for someone to suggest neighborhoods that could provide that. The only suggestion I have seen is to send kids from Herndon or Reston. I am quite familiar with both of those areas and know that is a ridiculous suggestion as the commute would make it very difficult. I also see the difference between communities who are already making that commute and those for whom it would be a hardhip.

[Anonymous]

Laughing at the faux concern about the potential hardship on others as an excuse to keep Langley segregated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Laughing at the faux concern about the potential hardship on others as an excuse to keep Langley segregated.

Not a Langley parent. Not a Herndon parent.

It is not "faux concern." It is a real issue.

But, it sounds to me like your goal is to get some poor kids out of your school rather than to do what is reasonable.

Why does it bother you so much that Langley has low FARMS?

FWIW, my kids' high school is fairly high FARMS--though not 30%. But, I can see that there is little poverty in the Langley area. That is just a fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Laughing at the faux concern about the potential hardship on others as an excuse to keep Langley segregated.

Transportation is a real concern. Have you seen the list of buses that are 15+ minutes late? It’s a lot.