Boundaries assessment update 2023

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It's circular because Langley's boundaries are intentionally drawn to exclude any poorer areas, and then you point out there's little poverty in the "Langley area."

Duh.

Now let's see what they could do with their tools if they tried to add some diversity to the school rather than exclude it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It's circular because Langley's boundaries are intentionally drawn to exclude any poorer areas, and then you point out there's little poverty in the "Langley area."

Duh.

Now let's see what they could do with their tools if they tried to add some diversity to the school rather than exclude it.

Why did they send Great Falls to Langley in the first place? I'm sure they have been there for at least thirty years. Was there poverty near Langley then that could have been sent there? Was Herndon overcrowded? Was it maybe because they needed more kids at Langley? To avoid split feeders, perhaps?

Again, who are you going to send to Langley? Where are the FARMS kids coming from? Since you seem to be familiar with the issue, please give concrete suggestions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly still think the two best things to address some of the underlying issues are to get rid of AAP centers (have LLIV at every ES/MS) and IB (thereby reducing the number of pupil placements).

If you think that getting rid of IB will fix Lewis, you are not coming from a place of good faith.

Lewis has large out-placements to AP schools. Get rid of IB at Lewis and offer a full menu of AP courses - even if some of those AP classes only have a small number of kids - and the number of pupil placements immediately goes down significantly.

Or make it an ESOL magnet.

[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?

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.

Minimizing driving distance is important too when you are talking about 1,000-1,500 teen dtivers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Pulling poor kids out of their neighborhhod school and moving them to an inconveniently located school with a long commute to make rich upper middle class families at the giving school happy at getting rid of some poor is the ultimate in out of touch rich privilege.

Poor kids and minority kids are not pawns for rich people to socially engineer their ideal society balance, fyi.

Signed,
Former poor minority kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Pulling poor kids out of their neighborhhod school and moving them to an inconveniently located school with a long commute to make rich upper middle class families at the giving school happy at getting rid of some poor is the ultimate in out of touch rich privilege.

Poor kids and minority kids are not pawns for rich people to socially engineer their ideal society balance, fyi.

Signed,
Former poor minority kid.

Concentrating poor minority kids in one school deprives them of opportunities that are only available at certain schools in the county.

- former poor minority kid that had to suffer in the worst-performing high school in the county. Fortunately, my parents valued my education enough to drive me to the "rich" high school for after-school activities that were unavailable at my base school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Pulling poor kids out of their neighborhhod school and moving them to an inconveniently located school with a long commute to make rich upper middle class families at the giving school happy at getting rid of some poor is the ultimate in out of touch rich privilege.

Poor kids and minority kids are not pawns for rich people to socially engineer their ideal society balance, fyi.

Signed,
Former poor minority kid.

Concentrating poor minority kids in one school deprives them of opportunities that are only available at certain schools in the county.

- former poor minority kid that had to suffer in the worst-performing high school in the county. Fortunately, my parents valued my education enough to drive me to the "rich" high school for after-school activities that were unavailable at my base school.

Fortunate for you that they were able to do so. Langley has space. Most of the kids being discussed are extremely poor Hispanic kids from families that have not been here long. They don't all have vehicles to go the distance needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly still think the two best things to address some of the underlying issues are to get rid of AAP centers (have LLIV at every ES/MS) and IB (thereby reducing the number of pupil placements).

If you think that getting rid of IB will fix Lewis, you are not coming from a place of good faith.

Lewis has large out-placements to AP schools. Get rid of IB at Lewis and offer a full menu of AP courses - even if some of those AP classes only have a small number of kids - and the number of pupil placements immediately goes down significantly.

Or make it an ESOL magnet.

Great idea. Give all these really poor kids long, long commutes.

[Anonymous]

Maybe they should build some affordable housing apartments right next to Langley HS. That would kill two birds with one stone.

[Anonymous]

How about focusing on teaching the kids rather than moving them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Pulling poor kids out of their neighborhhod school and moving them to an inconveniently located school with a long commute to make rich upper middle class families at the giving school happy at getting rid of some poor is the ultimate in out of touch rich privilege.

Poor kids and minority kids are not pawns for rich people to socially engineer their ideal society balance, fyi.

Signed,
Former poor minority kid.

Democrats love to socially engineer everything. The most obvious example is Langley but there's other areas where it's clear someone went out of their way to exclude some apartments from an entire pyramid or include a SFH to a school with a better reputation. Frankly boundaries should be about proximity, with none of the carve outs or carve ins baeed on housing type. That would probably do more for "equity" than any of these other grand schemes they like to come up with to be honest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Pulling poor kids out of their neighborhhod school and moving them to an inconveniently located school with a long commute to make rich upper middle class families at the giving school happy at getting rid of some poor is the ultimate in out of touch rich privilege.

Poor kids and minority kids are not pawns for rich people to socially engineer their ideal society balance, fyi.

Signed,
Former poor minority kid.

Democrats love to socially engineer everything. The most obvious example is Langley but there's other areas where it's clear someone went out of their way to exclude some apartments from an entire pyramid or include a SFH to a school with a better reputation. Frankly boundaries should be about proximity, with none of the carve outs or carve ins baeed on housing type. That would probably do more for "equity" than any of these other grand schemes they like to come up with to be honest.

Langley is not a new school. The "social engineering" is a result of location. McLean was there first, I'm pretty sure and Great Falls was put into Langley --where did Great Falls go before that? Wasn't it mostly rural in those days? I suspect it just kind of grew into this. And, the community also grew accustomed to it.

[Anonymous]

Langley boundaries are all about exclusivity, not proximity. It’s really quite disgusting in a county run by Democrats that pretends to care about equity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Langley boundaries are all about exclusivity, not proximity. It’s really quite disgusting in a county run by Democrats that pretends to care about equity.

Once more, who is in proximity to Langley that would add FARMS? No one has yet given a good response to that.

[Anonymous]

Easy peasy. Reassign some of the Marshall area contiguous to Langley in Tysons to Langley and Langley would immediately pick up the largest “all-affordable” housing complex getting built in Tysons - Dominion Square West.