When are Herndon Middle and Herndon High going to get a break?!??

[Anonymous]

Does it make sense to have one high school at 1.6% FARM next to a high school with 49% FARM? Does that seem fair to you? You can laugh all you want, but the kids are suffering for it. If the FCPS board members can stand up to the smug racists in GF and bring equity to the pyramids then ALL kids will benefit.

Please explain how you would do this to benefit ALL kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The law says we have to educate kids who need language services until they are 22 years old as long as they entered school before they're 18. If someone was new to our school system at say 14, and in 4-5 years learns enough English to be placed in 9th grade at a base school, would they be placed in 9th grade classes with everyone else even though they're 18 or 19?

Probably not. I'd like to hear an official answer, though.

[Anonymous]

So the plan to help Herndon is to send great falls families that live out by Herndon to Herndon HS? How does that help kids in Herndon? Are we assuming these Great Falls kids will influence the Herndon kids ot do better in school?

[Anonymous]

There is no plan.

There are some Republicans who think moving more kids from “connected” families into Herndon will get them to “do something” about the undocumented kids or the kids of undocumented parents at Herndon.

There are some Democrats who want to bust up Langley because it’s too rich for their tastes.

Few of them have given any thought as to whether is actually space at Herndon for this.

It is virtue signaling in reverse (i.e., “anger signaling”), with a boost from those who want to mislead Great Falls families into thinking this could actually happen under “One Fairfax” so they’ll vote for anyone who trashes that policy.

[Anonymous]

Why would they want to "bust up" Langley? Isn't it under-enrolled? Shouldn't we be sending more kids to Langley, not taking kids from Langley and putting them elsewhere?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why would they want to "bust up" Langley? Isn't it under-enrolled? Shouldn't we be sending more kids to Langley, not taking kids from Langley and putting them elsewhere?

This is why I thought the plan was to send McLean students to Langley. Not sure where all this talk about Herndon is coming from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the plan to help Herndon is to send great falls families that live out by Herndon to Herndon HS? How does that help kids in Herndon? Are we assuming these Great Falls kids will influence the Herndon kids ot do better in school?

The average scores would go up if enough families accept sending their children there. It would make Herndon not look so bad and give the impression at first glance that some progress was being made there.

Herndon High School is ranked 261st in the state vs. Langley High School's number 9 on the schooldigger site.

Greatschools rates HHS 3/10 and Langley 9/10.

Some would count it a great victory to have both schools at a 5 or 6.

[Anonymous]

But if the goal is to help students, just moving Great Falls students to Herndon isn't going to help current Herndon students. Based on your post, you're assuming the test scores go up as a result because the Great Falls students presumably have better test scores. But if Herndon high school looks better, it is becuase GF students scores are being attributed to the school, so the scores don't actually reflect the Herndon students doing better or being put in a better position.

Here's to hoping the Board focuses on what is best for the students and not what makes a school "look" better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why would they want to "bust up" Langley? Isn't it under-enrolled? Shouldn't we be sending more kids to Langley, not taking kids from Langley and putting them elsewhere?

Because some of them resent the people who send their kids there.

Yes.

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would they want to "bust up" Langley? Isn't it under-enrolled? Shouldn't we be sending more kids to Langley, not taking kids from Langley and putting them elsewhere?

This is why I thought the plan was to send McLean students to Langley. Not sure where all this talk about Herndon is coming from.

Apparently the sup is on record ( last year or the year before I think) tabling addressing McLean's overcrowding with a boundary change until a new policy on boundary changes in place. This would signal that there is some plan to do a major redrawing for reasons other than an overcrowded school sitting a few miles away from an underenrolled school. I am going to be looking this weekend at those videos from meetings discussing this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But if the goal is to help students, just moving Great Falls students to Herndon isn't going to help current Herndon students. Based on your post, you're assuming the test scores go up as a result because the Great Falls students presumably have better test scores. But if Herndon high school looks better, it is becuase GF students scores are being attributed to the school, so the scores don't actually reflect the Herndon students doing better or being put in a better position.

Here's to hoping the Board focuses on what is best for the students and not what makes a school "look" better.

Yeah, I even wonder if PP was serious, because that was about the purest form of the “cosmetic” argument (let’s just move bodies around to make sure the school averages are closer) one could imagine. It does nothing for individual kids and is just an effort to hide where the problems are and transfer wealth from Great Falls homeowners to Herndon homeowners.

If PP could make the argument that it would lead to better academic outcomes for some students and no worse outcomes for others, it might be a conversation worth having. But they made no effort to present that argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would they want to "bust up" Langley? Isn't it under-enrolled? Shouldn't we be sending more kids to Langley, not taking kids from Langley and putting them elsewhere?

Because some of them resent the people who send their kids there.

Yes.

Yes.

Langley is "too rich" and it's not fair.

Apparently some view "equity" as a similar income distribution of students and not making sure that all the schools are properly maintained, staffed by good teachers/counselors/coaches/support, and have similar facilities (sports fields, auditoriums etc)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would they want to "bust up" Langley? Isn't it under-enrolled? Shouldn't we be sending more kids to Langley, not taking kids from Langley and putting them elsewhere?

This is why I thought the plan was to send McLean students to Langley. Not sure where all this talk about Herndon is coming from.

Apparently the sup is on record ( last year or the year before I think) tabling addressing McLean's overcrowding with a boundary change until a new policy on boundary changes in place. This would signal that there is some plan to do a major redrawing for reasons other than an overcrowded school sitting a few miles away from an underenrolled school. I am going to be looking this weekend at those videos from meetings discussing this.

It is complicated. Since 2013, the School Board has had a policy that allows the superintendent to change boundaries on an expedited basis without public hearings, so long as the percentage of affected students at both schools is below a specific percentage. In the past, that policy was used to adjust some boundaries, and it usually resulted in moving kids from higher-income families out of lower-performing schools to schools with more higher-performing students.

When Scott Brabrand arrived in 2017, there was a pending effort on the part of some Springfield parents to get an area moved out of Lee HS to West Springfield HS using the expedited boundary process. In response, Brabrand put a moratorium on expedited boundary changes. And, when the overcrowding at McLean started to get more attention last year, Brabrand reiterated that he would not use his authority to adjust the Langley/McLean boundaries on an expedited basis. Instead, he asserted that he wanted to wait until the Board had considered any adjustments to its current boundary policy that might be deemed appropriate under “One Fairfax.” The Board then spent the better part of the last year discussing possible adjustments to its boundary policy without making any obvious progress.

Finally, FCPS produced a draft of a revised boundary policy, which was discussed at a work session earlier this week. The draft policy eliminated the concept of expedited boundary adjustments, which Brabrand and some Board members claimed lack transparency and do not allow sufficient public input. At the same meeting, however, several Board members specifically mentioned the overcrowding at McLean and suggested that FCPS needed to start working quickly on a solution, most likely involving a shift of kids to Langley, and that this should move forward on a one-off basis even if the Board decides to hire a consultant to look at boundaries on a county-wide basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
In 2002-2003 Herndon HS had a F/R lunch rate of around 14%. The rate is now around 40%. Langley's rate meantime has barely moved and is around 2%. So some schools have seen a much larger impact. You can understand why people who bought a home in Herndon might be upset. They have seen drastic changes just in the lifetime of a baby growing into high school.

Blaming Langley parents is not going to engender much good will.

They do face unfortunate circumstances, I would not want to be in that position either. The difference is, I would find a way over, around, or under the problem instead of blaming the next school boundary over. Homeschool. Sell and move. Rent out the house and move. Stay and go private. Stay and find a way to send your kid elsewhere for public (there are a few ways).

The "if everyone can't have it, no one should" attitude doesn't help.

FARMS has been steadily increasing at Herndon since 1998.

I wonder how many former residents of Herndon observed the trajectory and moved to Great Falls, McLean, Loudoun county, and the neighborhoods zoned for Langley in that time.

In 98 it was 8.3%. In 2004 it was 18.1%. The rate more than doubled in six years.

[Anonymous]

I would think the solution would be to move the kids in Herndon that live close to Great Falls to Langley to alleviate the overcrowding at Herndon HS. This would bring Langley up to 100% (along with the additional kids from McLean, alleviating McLean's overcrowding).

Seems simple enough.