FCPS HS Boundary

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there any parts of they are possibly throwing out and not including in the policy vote tonight? Or is this a done deal vote?

Might be a few who abstain or oppose but hard to see it not getting a majority of votes.

Anderson traded away her concerns for the Glasgow deal and there were no other comments or proposed changes. It's over.

Actually, just checked the agenda and it looks like Anderson and Meren are proposing amendments, including grandfathering in 10th-12th grade. That is a big change and this could get interesting.

I really hope they grandfather 11 and 12 at a minimum. 10 would be great too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there any parts of they are possibly throwing out and not including in the policy vote tonight? Or is this a done deal vote?

Might be a few who abstain or oppose but hard to see it not getting a majority of votes.

Anderson traded away her concerns for the Glasgow deal and there were no other comments or proposed changes. It's over.

Actually, just checked the agenda and it looks like Anderson and Meren are proposing amendments, including grandfathering in 10th-12th grade. That is a big change and this could get interesting.

This would be great. I just want 11/12 grade.

I just want them to not destroy FCPS by introducing massive continuous cyclical uncertainty into the system.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:2003
Lee - 2092 students
Roughly 23% F/R lunch, 42% white, medium ESL rate (17.3%)

WS - 2259 students
Roughly 7% F/R lunch, 64% white, low ESL rate (7.5%)

2024
Lewis - 1675 students
Roughly 63% F/R lunch, 12% white, high ESL rate (30%)

WS - 2761 students
Roughly 17% F/R lunch, 48% white, low ESL rate (5%)

In 2003 Lee was middle of the road in FCPS. What happened?

IB put into Lee and several other schools

IB actually enabled easier transfer out with the liberal pupil placement policy

Immigrants concentrated in certain schools

2005 boundary change - removed hundreds of students from Lee just as it was getting expanded - some to South County, some to West Springfield; students that departed were on the wealthier end of the spectrum. FCPS knew this was the case

Pupil placement accelerated - FCPS refuses to budge on dropping IB and Lee

2015 boundary change - removed Daventry students - a relatively wealthy neighborhood

In the middle of all of this Great Schools came along and created winners and losers - English speaking Americans, particularly white, just stopped choosing houses in the Lee/Lewis boundary

That is how we got here. Notice the total number of students in 2003 at the two schools. Only different by 167 students. Now in 2024 - different by 1086 students.

Lewis is much smaller, much poorer, and has many more ESL students. The ESL rate at WS actually went down over the years.

The quality of the school (teachers, admin) is not necessarily different or subpar, but the demographics of the students is much different.

How should this be resolved? Long time homeowner wants to know.

This is an unpopular reality to bring up: there is a relationship between the foreign born population and academic performance of an area. And fairfax county has grown its immigrant population over the past 25 years at a per capita rate that exceeds NYC. Lewis #s over 20 years are an example of this. FCPS has failed this population over time and now wants to shuffle kids around to see if it treats the symptoms of high immigrant areas. Living here means accepting that the county will continue to import a (mostly) disadvantaged immigrant population and concentrate it in pockets that need extra resources to be successful. FCPS’ position is that your children are the those resources that will fix that population.

Um what??? Do you live in Springfield or Burke or something? We live in the part of western Fairfax County where our immigrant population is what you racists and xenophobes would call "high performing". I mean, look at Chantilly - are you telling me the Asian and South Asian populations are BRINGING IT DOWN???? Puh-LEASE.

What are you trying to say? Springfield and Burke are part of Fairfax County.

I am trying to say that only the whitest of white people living in the whitest of white school pyramids would say what you said, sweetheart. Also, shush with your "bad immigrants" commentary. This country is built on the back of immigrants. You would have NOTHING if the "bad immigrant" community disappeared. NOTHING.

Love the hyperbole, someone touched a nerve with this one. So back to immigration and how it impacts the current state of FCPS: how does FCPS fix Lewis and Herndon, two of the worst high schools in the county, also the two with extraordinarily large populations (50+%) of hispanic immigrants. How will adding black/white/asian kids to these schools actually provide uplift to the hispanic student population?

More broadly, will living under the threat of readjusting boundaries every 5 years attract the types of parents who seek control for their children's environment, who seek stability for their children? These are the same types of families that prize academic achievement. The next 24 months of PR on the comprehensive boundary changes will be an inflection point for FCPS and it will never recover to its former status within the US public school system.

Over 50% Hispanic does not mean you are a Hispanic immigrant. Many of these kids are English-speaking kids born in America who identify as Hispanic.

Of course, but there's a direct relationship between where immigrants choose to live and the per capita population of their ethnicity. It's not unreasonable to believe that Springfield and Herndon have a larger % relative to the overall Fairfax hispanic immigrant population. And as you point out, maybe it's not the hispanic immigrant population dragging down the numbers at these two schools, maybe it's the hispanic population overall. In which case we still go back to the same question: how will adding black/white/asian kids to these schools actually provide uplift to the hispanic student population?

The issue can be framed differently. Let’s assume some of these schools with high Hispanic enrollments do an admirable job of supporting these kids, given where they started from, even if their test scores are lower. The schools still have a substantial population of students who aren’t Hispanic, and the opportunities available to those schools may not be the same at a Lewis or Herndon as at a Langley or West Springfield.

The goal might be to try to make those opportunities more comparable, so that we don’t end up with high schools that are entirely Hispanic. Clearly the current opportunities for the non-Hispanic kids at these schools are not similar, or you wouldn’t have groups composed primarily of Langley parents regularly engaged in activities designed to preserve their boundaries and keep kids who aren’t at least UMC out of their school.

I hear the argument that moving more higher SES/higher performing students to Lewis and Herndon will increase the demand for AP courses and electives and allow those schools to offer more of these classes and thus benefit the existing student population. My concern as a parent who lives in an area likely being considered for a move to Lewis (though SCHS makes a lot more sense geographically and is under enrolled by a similar amount) is will there be a lag in offering these courses? If these changes happen beginning the 26/27 school year, my child will be moved between their sophomore and junior year. Will there be a lag were they have to analyze demand, which will result in the students who are moved losing access to courses they would have otherwise had at WSHS and having their academic trajectory altered? I worry that the initial cohort of student relocated could suffer the "growing pains" of the school. Basically, if these moves take place, when will these improvements in course offerings take place? Will it be immediate? My family has the means and motivation to seek pupil placement, move further inbounds, or go private. For FCPS to not lose families like mine, they are going to have to show that our kids will not lose opportunities in a move like this. I'm supportive of more opportunities for all students, but ultimately, as a parent, I'm also going to look out for the best interest of my own children as well.

Makes perfect sense. That’s why people have been saying they need to get rid of IB. No one at an AP school wants to be dumped into an IB school and told it’s “just as good.” It’s not, at least for most kids, and if they want to move WS kids to Lewis they need to accelerate the replacement of IB with AP.

As a parent in this area, what I want to hear from the school board is when and how they will ensure that students moved to schools like Lewis and Herndon will have access to the same AP, DE or elective courses they would have before redistricting. This could go a long way toward alleviating some concerns. I still have concerns about the social emotional aspects of moving kids and the potential loss of leadership and athletic opportunities that may occur as a result of being the "new kids" in a school as sophomores or juniors, as well as the commute (crossing the mixing bowl is unpleasant to say the least), but if the school board can ensure that the course offerings will be increased ahead of the potential move, or not move students who will likely be taking AP or DE courses (juniors and higher), I would feel like my children's well-being is also being considered.

While I completely agree, I also want to hear that they won’t redistrict the same kids several times in a row because there are seats in school across town.

The policy is that they won’t move the same kid more than once every THREE years!

Right, so at worst it would only be four moves during your school years. K (first school)--> 1st, 2nd, 3rd (new school) --> 4th, 5th, 6th (new school)--> 7th, 8th, 9th (new school) --> 10th, 11th, 12th (new school)

Seems like a wonderful plan that will create tons of stability.....

We all know that is never happening and that is not the intention of the five year review. The five year review is so that we never have another McLean HS situation where a school that so obviously needs facilities work is obstructed by outdated queues.
A five year review of queues is an excellent idea so that the county can continuously revisit prior bond proposals that might no longer make sense and rework them for schools in need. If such a policy existed now, McLean could have been getting the attention it needs instead of following rigid outdated queues.

Policy 8130 is about boundary changes, not the renovation queue.

If Robyn Lady wants to make the case that adopting revisions to Policy 8130 will somehow work in tandem with revisions to the renovation queue, let’s hear her say that, but otherwise it’s apples and oranges.

It’s equally likely they’ll continue to ignore McLean’s facility needs, and use the continued overcrowding there as the grounds to move more McLean kids to Langley and Langley kids to Herndon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there any parts of they are possibly throwing out and not including in the policy vote tonight? Or is this a done deal vote?

Might be a few who abstain or oppose but hard to see it not getting a majority of votes.

Anderson traded away her concerns for the Glasgow deal and there were no other comments or proposed changes. It's over.

Actually, just checked the agenda and it looks like Anderson and Meren are proposing amendments, including grandfathering in 10th-12th grade. That is a big change and this could get interesting.

This would be great. I just want 11/12 grade.

I just want them to not destroy FCPS by introducing massive continuous cyclical uncertainty into the system.

+1 10 and up is awesome and will give at least a little stability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there any parts of they are possibly throwing out and not including in the policy vote tonight? Or is this a done deal vote?

Might be a few who abstain or oppose but hard to see it not getting a majority of votes.

Anderson traded away her concerns for the Glasgow deal and there were no other comments or proposed changes. It's over.

Actually, just checked the agenda and it looks like Anderson and Meren are proposing amendments, including grandfathering in 10th-12th grade. That is a big change and this could get interesting.

This would be great. I just want 11/12 grade.

I just want them to not destroy FCPS by introducing massive continuous cyclical uncertainty into the system.

+1 10 and up is awesome and will give at least a little stability.

The proposed amendments all relate to phasing for ES, MS, and HS boundary changes, but say nothing about transportation. So a rising sophomore in high school could have the option to attend the school they attended as a 9th grader, but the family apparently would have to arrange for transportation to the current school for the next three years, just as if they'd pupil placed.

Also, Ricardy Anderson's Glasgow boundary study has been tabled as a stand-alone action item; instead, she is proposing a follow-on motion to direct staff to propose Glasgow changes in connection with the first county-wide study. Looks like she didn't have the votes to move this forward except as part of the wider review.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2003
Lee - 2092 students
Roughly 23% F/R lunch, 42% white, medium ESL rate (17.3%)

WS - 2259 students
Roughly 7% F/R lunch, 64% white, low ESL rate (7.5%)

2024
Lewis - 1675 students
Roughly 63% F/R lunch, 12% white, high ESL rate (30%)

WS - 2761 students
Roughly 17% F/R lunch, 48% white, low ESL rate (5%)

In 2003 Lee was middle of the road in FCPS. What happened?

IB put into Lee and several other schools

IB actually enabled easier transfer out with the liberal pupil placement policy

Immigrants concentrated in certain schools

2005 boundary change - removed hundreds of students from Lee just as it was getting expanded - some to South County, some to West Springfield; students that departed were on the wealthier end of the spectrum. FCPS knew this was the case

Pupil placement accelerated - FCPS refuses to budge on dropping IB and Lee

2015 boundary change - removed Daventry students - a relatively wealthy neighborhood

In the middle of all of this Great Schools came along and created winners and losers - English speaking Americans, particularly white, just stopped choosing houses in the Lee/Lewis boundary

That is how we got here. Notice the total number of students in 2003 at the two schools. Only different by 167 students. Now in 2024 - different by 1086 students.

Lewis is much smaller, much poorer, and has many more ESL students. The ESL rate at WS actually went down over the years.

The quality of the school (teachers, admin) is not necessarily different or subpar, but the demographics of the students is much different.

How should this be resolved? Long time homeowner wants to know.

This is an unpopular reality to bring up: there is a relationship between the foreign born population and academic performance of an area. And fairfax county has grown its immigrant population over the past 25 years at a per capita rate that exceeds NYC. Lewis #s over 20 years are an example of this. FCPS has failed this population over time and now wants to shuffle kids around to see if it treats the symptoms of high immigrant areas. Living here means accepting that the county will continue to import a (mostly) disadvantaged immigrant population and concentrate it in pockets that need extra resources to be successful. FCPS’ position is that your children are the those resources that will fix that population.

Um what??? Do you live in Springfield or Burke or something? We live in the part of western Fairfax County where our immigrant population is what you racists and xenophobes would call "high performing". I mean, look at Chantilly - are you telling me the Asian and South Asian populations are BRINGING IT DOWN???? Puh-LEASE.

What are you trying to say? Springfield and Burke are part of Fairfax County.

I am trying to say that only the whitest of white people living in the whitest of white school pyramids would say what you said, sweetheart. Also, shush with your "bad immigrants" commentary. This country is built on the back of immigrants. You would have NOTHING if the "bad immigrant" community disappeared. NOTHING.

Love the hyperbole, someone touched a nerve with this one. So back to immigration and how it impacts the current state of FCPS: how does FCPS fix Lewis and Herndon, two of the worst high schools in the county, also the two with extraordinarily large populations (50+%) of hispanic immigrants. How will adding black/white/asian kids to these schools actually provide uplift to the hispanic student population?

More broadly, will living under the threat of readjusting boundaries every 5 years attract the types of parents who seek control for their children's environment, who seek stability for their children? These are the same types of families that prize academic achievement. The next 24 months of PR on the comprehensive boundary changes will be an inflection point for FCPS and it will never recover to its former status within the US public school system.

Over 50% Hispanic does not mean you are a Hispanic immigrant. Many of these kids are English-speaking kids born in America who identify as Hispanic.

Of course, but there's a direct relationship between where immigrants choose to live and the per capita population of their ethnicity. It's not unreasonable to believe that Springfield and Herndon have a larger % relative to the overall Fairfax hispanic immigrant population. And as you point out, maybe it's not the hispanic immigrant population dragging down the numbers at these two schools, maybe it's the hispanic population overall. In which case we still go back to the same question: how will adding black/white/asian kids to these schools actually provide uplift to the hispanic student population?

The issue can be framed differently. Let’s assume some of these schools with high Hispanic enrollments do an admirable job of supporting these kids, given where they started from, even if their test scores are lower. The schools still have a substantial population of students who aren’t Hispanic, and the opportunities available to those schools may not be the same at a Lewis or Herndon as at a Langley or West Springfield.

The goal might be to try to make those opportunities more comparable, so that we don’t end up with high schools that are entirely Hispanic. Clearly the current opportunities for the non-Hispanic kids at these schools are not similar, or you wouldn’t have groups composed primarily of Langley parents regularly engaged in activities designed to preserve their boundaries and keep kids who aren’t at least UMC out of their school.

I hear the argument that moving more higher SES/higher performing students to Lewis and Herndon will increase the demand for AP courses and electives and allow those schools to offer more of these classes and thus benefit the existing student population. My concern as a parent who lives in an area likely being considered for a move to Lewis (though SCHS makes a lot more sense geographically and is under enrolled by a similar amount) is will there be a lag in offering these courses? If these changes happen beginning the 26/27 school year, my child will be moved between their sophomore and junior year. Will there be a lag were they have to analyze demand, which will result in the students who are moved losing access to courses they would have otherwise had at WSHS and having their academic trajectory altered? I worry that the initial cohort of student relocated could suffer the "growing pains" of the school. Basically, if these moves take place, when will these improvements in course offerings take place? Will it be immediate? My family has the means and motivation to seek pupil placement, move further inbounds, or go private. For FCPS to not lose families like mine, they are going to have to show that our kids will not lose opportunities in a move like this. I'm supportive of more opportunities for all students, but ultimately, as a parent, I'm also going to look out for the best interest of my own children as well.

Anytime kids are shifted in a big way like this (boundary adjustments, new schools built), the first cohort of kids has the toughest transition. This is true for districts across the country, so yes, it sucks for those kids but it’s also part of the process.

While I wholeheartedly support the SB in this effort, I also expect that they will offer as many reassurances (re: transition steps, academic offerings) and grandfathering flexibilities as possible.

I hope to see concrete assurances on course offerings and grandfathering. Right now, there is only discussion of grandfathering seniors. There is the possibility of true harm to juniors being moved in terms of college admissions if the course offerings are not immediately expanded or the grandfathering is not expanded. It sucks to you but this is for the greater good does not play well when it’s your own children. I want to see improvements for all students but do not want my own to suffer in the process. If the school board is not thoughtful about this process and careful about their messaging, they risk losing the students and families they hope will improve underperforming schools.

[Anonymous]

Kids move in HS and they go onto college, many go on to excellent colleges. They can write their essay about the hardship of moving as a Junior and having to develop new relationships and how that helped them to grow as a person and a leader. It is great essay material for their applications.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Actually, just checked the agenda and it looks like Anderson and Meren are proposing amendments, including grandfathering in 10th-12th grade. That is a big change and this could get interesting.

Oooooo this is great news for my family! That would mean my oldest would not have to switch high schools as a junior and my 2 oldest would not be expected to attend 2 different high schools at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kids move in HS and they go onto college, many go on to excellent colleges. They can write their essay about the hardship of moving as a Junior and having to develop new relationships and how that helped them to grow as a person and a leader. It is great essay material for their applications.

That’s often a result of family choice and for families in the SES group we are talking about moving, it is unlikely to be from a high performing school with extensive AP offerings to an underperforming school with limited advanced course offerings. This could greatly impact kids shooting for flagships or Ivies.

[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:2003
Lee - 2092 students
Roughly 23% F/R lunch, 42% white, medium ESL rate (17.3%)

WS - 2259 students
Roughly 7% F/R lunch, 64% white, low ESL rate (7.5%)

2024
Lewis - 1675 students
Roughly 63% F/R lunch, 12% white, high ESL rate (30%)

WS - 2761 students
Roughly 17% F/R lunch, 48% white, low ESL rate (5%)

In 2003 Lee was middle of the road in FCPS. What happened?

IB put into Lee and several other schools

IB actually enabled easier transfer out with the liberal pupil placement policy

Immigrants concentrated in certain schools

2005 boundary change - removed hundreds of students from Lee just as it was getting expanded - some to South County, some to West Springfield; students that departed were on the wealthier end of the spectrum. FCPS knew this was the case

Pupil placement accelerated - FCPS refuses to budge on dropping IB and Lee

2015 boundary change - removed Daventry students - a relatively wealthy neighborhood

In the middle of all of this Great Schools came along and created winners and losers - English speaking Americans, particularly white, just stopped choosing houses in the Lee/Lewis boundary

That is how we got here. Notice the total number of students in 2003 at the two schools. Only different by 167 students. Now in 2024 - different by 1086 students.

Lewis is much smaller, much poorer, and has many more ESL students. The ESL rate at WS actually went down over the years.

The quality of the school (teachers, admin) is not necessarily different or subpar, but the demographics of the students is much different.

How should this be resolved? Long time homeowner wants to know.

This is an unpopular reality to bring up: there is a relationship between the foreign born population and academic performance of an area. And fairfax county has grown its immigrant population over the past 25 years at a per capita rate that exceeds NYC. Lewis #s over 20 years are an example of this. FCPS has failed this population over time and now wants to shuffle kids around to see if it treats the symptoms of high immigrant areas. Living here means accepting that the county will continue to import a (mostly) disadvantaged immigrant population and concentrate it in pockets that need extra resources to be successful. FCPS’ position is that your children are the those resources that will fix that population.

Um what??? Do you live in Springfield or Burke or something? We live in the part of western Fairfax County where our immigrant population is what you racists and xenophobes would call "high performing". I mean, look at Chantilly - are you telling me the Asian and South Asian populations are BRINGING IT DOWN???? Puh-LEASE.

What are you trying to say? Springfield and Burke are part of Fairfax County.

I am trying to say that only the whitest of white people living in the whitest of white school pyramids would say what you said, sweetheart. Also, shush with your "bad immigrants" commentary. This country is built on the back of immigrants. You would have NOTHING if the "bad immigrant" community disappeared. NOTHING.

Love the hyperbole, someone touched a nerve with this one. So back to immigration and how it impacts the current state of FCPS: how does FCPS fix Lewis and Herndon, two of the worst high schools in the county, also the two with extraordinarily large populations (50+%) of hispanic immigrants. How will adding black/white/asian kids to these schools actually provide uplift to the hispanic student population?

More broadly, will living under the threat of readjusting boundaries every 5 years attract the types of parents who seek control for their children's environment, who seek stability for their children? These are the same types of families that prize academic achievement. The next 24 months of PR on the comprehensive boundary changes will be an inflection point for FCPS and it will never recover to its former status within the US public school system.

Over 50% Hispanic does not mean you are a Hispanic immigrant. Many of these kids are English-speaking kids born in America who identify as Hispanic.

Of course, but there's a direct relationship between where immigrants choose to live and the per capita population of their ethnicity. It's not unreasonable to believe that Springfield and Herndon have a larger % relative to the overall Fairfax hispanic immigrant population. And as you point out, maybe it's not the hispanic immigrant population dragging down the numbers at these two schools, maybe it's the hispanic population overall. In which case we still go back to the same question: how will adding black/white/asian kids to these schools actually provide uplift to the hispanic student population?

The issue can be framed differently. Let’s assume some of these schools with high Hispanic enrollments do an admirable job of supporting these kids, given where they started from, even if their test scores are lower. The schools still have a substantial population of students who aren’t Hispanic, and the opportunities available to those schools may not be the same at a Lewis or Herndon as at a Langley or West Springfield.

The goal might be to try to make those opportunities more comparable, so that we don’t end up with high schools that are entirely Hispanic. Clearly the current opportunities for the non-Hispanic kids at these schools are not similar, or you wouldn’t have groups composed primarily of Langley parents regularly engaged in activities designed to preserve their boundaries and keep kids who aren’t at least UMC out of their school.

I hear the argument that moving more higher SES/higher performing students to Lewis and Herndon will increase the demand for AP courses and electives and allow those schools to offer more of these classes and thus benefit the existing student population. My concern as a parent who lives in an area likely being considered for a move to Lewis (though SCHS makes a lot more sense geographically and is under enrolled by a similar amount) is will there be a lag in offering these courses? If these changes happen beginning the 26/27 school year, my child will be moved between their sophomore and junior year. Will there be a lag were they have to analyze demand, which will result in the students who are moved losing access to courses they would have otherwise had at WSHS and having their academic trajectory altered? I worry that the initial cohort of student relocated could suffer the "growing pains" of the school. Basically, if these moves take place, when will these improvements in course offerings take place? Will it be immediate? My family has the means and motivation to seek pupil placement, move further inbounds, or go private. For FCPS to not lose families like mine, they are going to have to show that our kids will not lose opportunities in a move like this. I'm supportive of more opportunities for all students, but ultimately, as a parent, I'm also going to look out for the best interest of my own children as well.

Anytime kids are shifted in a big way like this (boundary adjustments, new schools built), the first cohort of kids has the toughest transition. This is true for districts across the country, so yes, it sucks for those kids but it’s also part of the process.

While I wholeheartedly support the SB in this effort, I also expect that they will offer as many reassurances (re: transition steps, academic offerings) and grandfathering flexibilities as possible.

I hope to see concrete assurances on course offerings and grandfathering. Right now, there is only discussion of grandfathering seniors. There is the possibility of true harm to juniors being moved in terms of college admissions if the course offerings are not immediately expanded or the grandfathering is not expanded. It sucks to you but this is for the greater good does not play well when it’s your own children. I want to see improvements for all students but do not want my own to suffer in the process. If the school board is not thoughtful about this process and careful about their messaging, they risk losing the students and families they hope will improve underperforming schools.

On an anonymous forum, people can stipulate a slew of conditions that have to be met before they’ll agree to send their kids to a new school. In fact, they may or may not require all these conditions to be satisfied before they accept new assignments. It’s a bit of a gamble for all parties involved.

[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:2003
Lee - 2092 students
Roughly 23% F/R lunch, 42% white, medium ESL rate (17.3%)

WS - 2259 students
Roughly 7% F/R lunch, 64% white, low ESL rate (7.5%)

2024
Lewis - 1675 students
Roughly 63% F/R lunch, 12% white, high ESL rate (30%)

WS - 2761 students
Roughly 17% F/R lunch, 48% white, low ESL rate (5%)

In 2003 Lee was middle of the road in FCPS. What happened?

IB put into Lee and several other schools

IB actually enabled easier transfer out with the liberal pupil placement policy

Immigrants concentrated in certain schools

2005 boundary change - removed hundreds of students from Lee just as it was getting expanded - some to South County, some to West Springfield; students that departed were on the wealthier end of the spectrum. FCPS knew this was the case

Pupil placement accelerated - FCPS refuses to budge on dropping IB and Lee

2015 boundary change - removed Daventry students - a relatively wealthy neighborhood

In the middle of all of this Great Schools came along and created winners and losers - English speaking Americans, particularly white, just stopped choosing houses in the Lee/Lewis boundary

That is how we got here. Notice the total number of students in 2003 at the two schools. Only different by 167 students. Now in 2024 - different by 1086 students.

Lewis is much smaller, much poorer, and has many more ESL students. The ESL rate at WS actually went down over the years.

The quality of the school (teachers, admin) is not necessarily different or subpar, but the demographics of the students is much different.

How should this be resolved? Long time homeowner wants to know.

This is an unpopular reality to bring up: there is a relationship between the foreign born population and academic performance of an area. And fairfax county has grown its immigrant population over the past 25 years at a per capita rate that exceeds NYC. Lewis #s over 20 years are an example of this. FCPS has failed this population over time and now wants to shuffle kids around to see if it treats the symptoms of high immigrant areas. Living here means accepting that the county will continue to import a (mostly) disadvantaged immigrant population and concentrate it in pockets that need extra resources to be successful. FCPS’ position is that your children are the those resources that will fix that population.

Um what??? Do you live in Springfield or Burke or something? We live in the part of western Fairfax County where our immigrant population is what you racists and xenophobes would call "high performing". I mean, look at Chantilly - are you telling me the Asian and South Asian populations are BRINGING IT DOWN???? Puh-LEASE.

What are you trying to say? Springfield and Burke are part of Fairfax County.

I am trying to say that only the whitest of white people living in the whitest of white school pyramids would say what you said, sweetheart. Also, shush with your "bad immigrants" commentary. This country is built on the back of immigrants. You would have NOTHING if the "bad immigrant" community disappeared. NOTHING.

Love the hyperbole, someone touched a nerve with this one. So back to immigration and how it impacts the current state of FCPS: how does FCPS fix Lewis and Herndon, two of the worst high schools in the county, also the two with extraordinarily large populations (50+%) of hispanic immigrants. How will adding black/white/asian kids to these schools actually provide uplift to the hispanic student population?

More broadly, will living under the threat of readjusting boundaries every 5 years attract the types of parents who seek control for their children's environment, who seek stability for their children? These are the same types of families that prize academic achievement. The next 24 months of PR on the comprehensive boundary changes will be an inflection point for FCPS and it will never recover to its former status within the US public school system.

Over 50% Hispanic does not mean you are a Hispanic immigrant. Many of these kids are English-speaking kids born in America who identify as Hispanic.

Of course, but there's a direct relationship between where immigrants choose to live and the per capita population of their ethnicity. It's not unreasonable to believe that Springfield and Herndon have a larger % relative to the overall Fairfax hispanic immigrant population. And as you point out, maybe it's not the hispanic immigrant population dragging down the numbers at these two schools, maybe it's the hispanic population overall. In which case we still go back to the same question: how will adding black/white/asian kids to these schools actually provide uplift to the hispanic student population?

The issue can be framed differently. Let’s assume some of these schools with high Hispanic enrollments do an admirable job of supporting these kids, given where they started from, even if their test scores are lower. The schools still have a substantial population of students who aren’t Hispanic, and the opportunities available to those schools may not be the same at a Lewis or Herndon as at a Langley or West Springfield.

The goal might be to try to make those opportunities more comparable, so that we don’t end up with high schools that are entirely Hispanic. Clearly the current opportunities for the non-Hispanic kids at these schools are not similar, or you wouldn’t have groups composed primarily of Langley parents regularly engaged in activities designed to preserve their boundaries and keep kids who aren’t at least UMC out of their school.

I hear the argument that moving more higher SES/higher performing students to Lewis and Herndon will increase the demand for AP courses and electives and allow those schools to offer more of these classes and thus benefit the existing student population. My concern as a parent who lives in an area likely being considered for a move to Lewis (though SCHS makes a lot more sense geographically and is under enrolled by a similar amount) is will there be a lag in offering these courses? If these changes happen beginning the 26/27 school year, my child will be moved between their sophomore and junior year. Will there be a lag were they have to analyze demand, which will result in the students who are moved losing access to courses they would have otherwise had at WSHS and having their academic trajectory altered? I worry that the initial cohort of student relocated could suffer the "growing pains" of the school. Basically, if these moves take place, when will these improvements in course offerings take place? Will it be immediate? My family has the means and motivation to seek pupil placement, move further inbounds, or go private. For FCPS to not lose families like mine, they are going to have to show that our kids will not lose opportunities in a move like this. I'm supportive of more opportunities for all students, but ultimately, as a parent, I'm also going to look out for the best interest of my own children as well.

Anytime kids are shifted in a big way like this (boundary adjustments, new schools built), the first cohort of kids has the toughest transition. This is true for districts across the country, so yes, it sucks for those kids but it’s also part of the process.

While I wholeheartedly support the SB in this effort, I also expect that they will offer as many reassurances (re: transition steps, academic offerings) and grandfathering flexibilities as possible.

I hope to see concrete assurances on course offerings and grandfathering. Right now, there is only discussion of grandfathering seniors. There is the possibility of true harm to juniors being moved in terms of college admissions if the course offerings are not immediately expanded or the grandfathering is not expanded. It sucks to you but this is for the greater good does not play well when it’s your own children. I want to see improvements for all students but do not want my own to suffer in the process. If the school board is not thoughtful about this process and careful about their messaging, they risk losing the students and families they hope will improve underperforming schools.

It sucks to be you, but we think (incorrectly) that this will be for the greater good is the SB’s motto.

They already are losing families who are in the crosshairs. I now know of two separate families making costly decisions based on the uncertainty. Those two are just the tip of the spear, the Great Reset impact on my neighborhood and Fairfax has begun.

(Hopeful silver lining is that I’ll get some tax relief when my housing value declines further).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kids move in HS and they go onto college, many go on to excellent colleges. They can write their essay about the hardship of moving as a Junior and having to develop new relationships and how that helped them to grow as a person and a leader. It is great essay material for their applications.

Thanks Robyn. Let's make our kids' lives miserable so they have something good to use for their essays. Will be so unique if hundreds of kids write the same essay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids move in HS and they go onto college, many go on to excellent colleges. They can write their essay about the hardship of moving as a Junior and having to develop new relationships and how that helped them to grow as a person and a leader. It is great essay material for their applications.

Thanks Robyn. Let's make our kids' lives miserable so they have something good to use for their essays. Will be so unique if hundreds of kids write the same essay.

+1. Such an absurd rationalization. The SB should all move to a third world country for a couple decades. It would be great to put on their resume when they run for the BoS.

[Anonymous]

I’m sorry I can’t read 300 plus pages. When would they look at this and start implementing it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry I can’t read 300 plus pages. When would they look at this and start implementing it?

Tonight and according to SB members, start the study and implementation ASAP