FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[Anonymous]

Chantilly is gaining new students every month. There is not much new construction--a very small amount--to justify that growth. Where are these kids coming from? Looks to me like they are transferring for one reason or another.
Compare it to the other high schools.

Ask yourself why?

[Anonymous]

Lewis has a big new housing building going in by the mall with dozens of units that will be filled with families with kids. It appears that it will be operational in a matter of months.

Isn't there also a big housing development going in where Lewis, Hayfield and Edison meet? And a housing development near edison?

The mall development is zoned for Lewis already.

The one between the 3 high schools should be zoned for Lewis.

FCPS can easily make up capacity at Lewis with just those 2 new developments.

Edison is full. There could be some adjustments on that end with special programs or new housing.

FCPS can increase Lewis enrollment with minimum rezoning and disruption, just by new housing plus closing the IB program at Lewis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So basically if you have more money, you will move to a school district where more wealthy people live. Low income students will continue to rot in poorly rated schools. I didn’t grow up here, so the PUBLIC school system here seems to benefit high income families for the most part. I wish this system could be fixed in the future.

Isn't that the system everywhere? FCPS cannot fix kids' home life or socioeconomic status.

Sure, but doesn’t this system just perpetuate and reinforce the socioeconomic divide?

It's not the school system's role to fix this.

+1. At some point these SJWs need to realize that their advocacy to upset the apple cart is going to diminish the entire system and leave everyone, especially the kids they believe they are trying to help, worse off.

The neighborhoods effected by boundary changes will be infuriated. The rest of the county will not care. Do you think families in McLean really care about West Springfield's boundaries?

Yes, we do. Because we care about the integrity and quality of the FCPS system. I care about every area of the county that might see an equity redistricting. These moves are going to significantly diminish FCPS as a whole, but the sb echo chamber doesn’t seem to care.

When is changing boundaries between schools at or over capacity next to under capacity schools allowed? Are the boundaries just set in stone for all eternity?

When there is an urgent compelling need (eg, park lawn and Coates). Rather, the comprehensive review has ill defined conflicting criteria that is meant to allow the school board to do the equity boundary moves started five years ago with a thin veneer if it being for other purposes.

WSHS is at 112% of capacity, Lewis is at 87%. Is that not enough of a disparity?

It’s actually not. Not compelling at all.

What number is compelling? Does WSHS have to get to 125? Lewis below 70?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Chantilly is gaining new students every month. There is not much new construction--a very small amount--to justify that growth. Where are these kids coming from? Looks to me like they are transferring for one reason or another.
Compare it to the other high schools.

Ask yourself why?

FCPS,needs to do a residency check before rezoning, and actually enforce "closed to transfers"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So basically if you have more money, you will move to a school district where more wealthy people live. Low income students will continue to rot in poorly rated schools. I didn’t grow up here, so the PUBLIC school system here seems to benefit high income families for the most part. I wish this system could be fixed in the future.

Isn't that the system everywhere? FCPS cannot fix kids' home life or socioeconomic status.

Sure, but doesn’t this system just perpetuate and reinforce the socioeconomic divide?

It's not the school system's role to fix this.

+1. At some point these SJWs need to realize that their advocacy to upset the apple cart is going to diminish the entire system and leave everyone, especially the kids they believe they are trying to help, worse off.

The neighborhoods effected by boundary changes will be infuriated. The rest of the county will not care. Do you think families in McLean really care about West Springfield's boundaries?

Yes, we do. Because we care about the integrity and quality of the FCPS system. I care about every area of the county that might see an equity redistricting. These moves are going to significantly diminish FCPS as a whole, but the sb echo chamber doesn’t seem to care.

When is changing boundaries between schools at or over capacity next to under capacity schools allowed? Are the boundaries just set in stone for all eternity?

When there is an urgent compelling need (eg, park lawn and Coates). Rather, the comprehensive review has ill defined conflicting criteria that is meant to allow the school board to do the equity boundary moves started five years ago with a thin veneer if it being for other purposes.

WSHS is at 112% of capacity, Lewis is at 87%. Is that not enough of a disparity?

SCHS is at 88% capacity and is closer to current HVES neighborhoods.

[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:So basically if you have more money, you will move to a school district where more wealthy people live. Low income students will continue to rot in poorly rated schools. I didn’t grow up here, so the PUBLIC school system here seems to benefit high income families for the most part. I wish this system could be fixed in the future.

Isn't that the system everywhere? FCPS cannot fix kids' home life or socioeconomic status.

Sure, but doesn’t this system just perpetuate and reinforce the socioeconomic divide?

It's not the school system's role to fix this.

+1. At some point these SJWs need to realize that their advocacy to upset the apple cart is going to diminish the entire system and leave everyone, especially the kids they believe they are trying to help, worse off.

The neighborhoods effected by boundary changes will be infuriated. The rest of the county will not care. Do you think families in McLean really care about West Springfield's boundaries?

Yes, we do. Because we care about the integrity and quality of the FCPS system. I care about every area of the county that might see an equity redistricting. These moves are going to significantly diminish FCPS as a whole, but the sb echo chamber doesn’t seem to care.

When is changing boundaries between schools at or over capacity next to under capacity schools allowed? Are the boundaries just set in stone for all eternity?

When there is an urgent compelling need (eg, park lawn and Coates). Rather, the comprehensive review has ill defined conflicting criteria that is meant to allow the school board to do the equity boundary moves started five years ago with a thin veneer if it being for other purposes.

WSHS is at 112% of capacity, Lewis is at 87%. Is that not enough of a disparity?

It’s actually not. Not compelling at all.

What number is compelling? Does WSHS have to get to 125? Lewis below 70?

Now you are just creating hyperbole.

FCPS should do a residency check at WSHS and actually enforce "closed to transfers"

The transfer students into WsHS hav doubled over the past 3 years, even though WSHS has been closed to transfers for over a decade.

If they do these 2 things, WSHS will notbe over capacity.

And use accurate numbers on the CIP. The WSHS numbers are grosslt inflated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Big committee to tackle a problem being solved by declining population in K-12, coupled with shifts to private schools and kids being home schooled.

Which will only accelerate if they make boundary changes that local residents oppose. Over the last decade the School Board has shown a real knack for driving people away from FCPS.

They don't care as long as our tax dollars are flowing for them to squander away. The solution to this sb is vouchers so that the parent's tax money moves with their kids to private schools.

The upcoming boundary changes will make vouchers a reality.

+1,000

Vouchers will never be a reality in Virginia because they are really about cutting costs not school choice. The state government offers a $10K voucher instead of contributing $12 to $15K to the public school. We’ll never see a Virginia-wide voucher program that can cover even 1/3 the tuition of a good school in Northern Virginia. Additionally, in nearly all instances, when state-wide vouchers are implemented, tuition at decent private schools increases by 50 to 80% of the value of the voucher.

The free market would work well here. Northern Virginia parents
A) have the money to make up the difference in cost - vouchers were never meant to fully cover tuition costs which is why poor children don't use them
B) are type A enough to demand any new schools that crop up are worth the money.

So even if the big privates increase prices, there will be others to fill in the gap. Not everyone who can afford privates now want to deal with the type of environment found in the current schools.

The first to crop up will be killer elementary homeschool co-ops with proven and traditional methods (physical textbooks, phonics instruction, ample time for fresh and exercise, activities to hone gross and fine motor skills etc.) It would be a whole new and wonderful world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So basically if you have more money, you will move to a school district where more wealthy people live. Low income students will continue to rot in poorly rated schools. I didn’t grow up here, so the PUBLIC school system here seems to benefit high income families for the most part. I wish this system could be fixed in the future.

You have it wrong, the school board says all the schools are the same.

But in reality, the county pumps a ton of money into the poorer performing schools, so you are just misinformed.

Visit Langley and Oakton and then visit Lewis and MVHS. Which two look like they educate rich kids?

DP. Visit West Potomac and Edison and then visit McLean. Which one looks the most neglected?

I'm assume the schools with the auto collision, dental hygienist, emergency dispatcher, HVAC, and cosmetology class rooms are not targeting the county's wealthy children

All those specialist Academy classrooms cost a lot of money, compared to what they spend on McLean. Edison and West Potomac also have a ton more renovated, basic classrooms.

[Anonymous]

They actually consider capacity in the mid 80s and lower 90s to be ideal from what I’m hearing. It means kids don’t have to eat lunch super early or late, the parking situation is better at the HS level, there is room to move around in the hallways, there are some classrooms not constantly in use that they can use in case they need to start another section of a class, or for extra storage, or for flexible groupings/more pull outs at the ES level. So a school at 87%, they wouldn’t necessarily consider terribly under enrolled. Lewis’s capacity is also a lot less than WS and many other schools, keep that in mind as well. Adding even 200 students would be a significant change there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They actually consider capacity in the mid 80s and lower 90s to be ideal from what I’m hearing. It means kids don’t have to eat lunch super early or late, the parking situation is better at the HS level, there is room to move around in the hallways, there are some classrooms not constantly in use that they can use in case they need to start another section of a class, or for extra storage, or for flexible groupings/more pull outs at the ES level. So a school at 87%, they wouldn’t necessarily consider terribly under enrolled. Lewis’s capacity is also a lot less than WS and many other schools, keep that in mind as well. Adding even 200 students would be a significant change there.

And, you forgot to add the staffing and destaffing issues. Look for more retirements among teachers rather than moving schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They actually consider capacity in the mid 80s and lower 90s to be ideal from what I’m hearing. It means kids don’t have to eat lunch super early or late, the parking situation is better at the HS level, there is room to move around in the hallways, there are some classrooms not constantly in use that they can use in case they need to start another section of a class, or for extra storage, or for flexible groupings/more pull outs at the ES level. So a school at 87%, they wouldn’t necessarily consider terribly under enrolled. Lewis’s capacity is also a lot less than WS and many other schools, keep that in mind as well. Adding even 200 students would be a significant change there.

The CIP categorizes:
> 115% as substantial capacity deficit
105-114% as moderate deficit
95-104% as approaching deficit
85-94% as sufficient capacity
< 85% as surplus

What makes Lewis unique is that their program capacity is much lower than any other high school. Only 1886. So with 1632 enrolled, it’s at 87%. Five years ago, the program capacity was 2028, which would put Lewis at 77% today.

The fact that they’re incrementally decreasing the program capacity year after year makes me wonder if they’re preparing to shut it down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So basically if you have more money, you will move to a school district where more wealthy people live. Low income students will continue to rot in poorly rated schools. I didn’t grow up here, so the PUBLIC school system here seems to benefit high income families for the most part. I wish this system could be fixed in the future.

Isn't that the system everywhere? FCPS cannot fix kids' home life or socioeconomic status.

Sure, but doesn’t this system just perpetuate and reinforce the socioeconomic divide?

So, since FCPS cannot fix a kid's home life or socioeconomic status despite educational policies and boundary changes, they perpetuate and reinforce the socioeconomic divide? What system do you suggest we implement? One where all children are removed from their parents at birth and raised in institutions where the government ensures they have the same food, bedtimes, books read to them and everything else identical to end the unfairness of having different families?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They actually consider capacity in the mid 80s and lower 90s to be ideal from what I’m hearing. It means kids don’t have to eat lunch super early or late, the parking situation is better at the HS level, there is room to move around in the hallways, there are some classrooms not constantly in use that they can use in case they need to start another section of a class, or for extra storage, or for flexible groupings/more pull outs at the ES level. So a school at 87%, they wouldn’t necessarily consider terribly under enrolled. Lewis’s capacity is also a lot less than WS and many other schools, keep that in mind as well. Adding even 200 students would be a significant change there.

And, you forgot to add the staffing and destaffing issues. Look for more retirements among teachers rather than moving schools.

I do wonder what the teacher union/groups think about this whole exercise. Especially at the high school level where there seems to be less teacher turnover than at the elementaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Chantilly is gaining new students every month. There is not much new construction--a very small amount--to justify that growth. Where are these kids coming from? Looks to me like they are transferring for one reason or another.
Compare it to the other high schools.

Ask yourself why?

At the CIP hearing this week one thing that Dr. Reid said is that they are seeing situations where large numbers of families will quickly move in and out of school zones when rents at a particular complex increase. It can result in unanticipated spikes and declines in school enrollments.

I don’t know if that accounts for any of the spikes at Chantilly. They could also have families doubling up in single-family homes for access to Chantilly and its Academy courses for all I know. Or maybe it’s just residential turnover. But it was an interesting observation on her part.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They actually consider capacity in the mid 80s and lower 90s to be ideal from what I’m hearing. It means kids don’t have to eat lunch super early or late, the parking situation is better at the HS level, there is room to move around in the hallways, there are some classrooms not constantly in use that they can use in case they need to start another section of a class, or for extra storage, or for flexible groupings/more pull outs at the ES level. So a school at 87%, they wouldn’t necessarily consider terribly under enrolled. Lewis’s capacity is also a lot less than WS and many other schools, keep that in mind as well. Adding even 200 students would be a significant change there.

I think they’ve historically focused primarily on whether schools were below 85% or above 115%. Lewis is trending below 85% and WS above 115% over the next five years, according to the latest projections.

In WS’s case, it appears they could put in a modular and get WS below 115%. But Lewis is getting towards the point where South Lakes was in 2008, and that did result in a redistricting from schools that weren’t themselves overcrowded. The WS parents focus on whether WS is massively overcrowded, but that is only one side of the equation. Their big problem, though, is that if they just move kids into Lewis without an host of other changes and commitments there will be a lot of attrition.