FCPS HS Boundary

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is sad that we have parents conceding to this point they are happy for the SB's table scraps like including 10th grade for grandfathering. This should not be happening. Also, how will this work? Schools like Langley will have a 100% opt in for grandfathering and remaining, while schools rezoned into Langley will have a 100% opt in for moving over to Langley for 10-12. This would make capacity issues severely unbalanced for 3 years.

[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.

Oh the drama.

Boundaries shift, it sucks for the kids who have to move. In this case, they are going to move with other kids . They will have club and sport and class opportunities at their new schools. But yes, it sucks. If we wait for it to not suck it will never happen. And as much as there are people who are on this board are just fine with that, there are people on this board who think that the boundaries need to be adjusted.

Some families will leave for private. Some families will pupil place, if it is still allowed. Some families will move. Most families will stay where they are. Some will complain and others will adapt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is sad that we have parents conceding to this point they are happy for the SB's table scraps like including 10th grade for grandfathering. This should not be happening. Also, how will this work? Schools like Langley will have a 100% opt in for grandfathering and remaining, while schools rezoned into Langley will have a 100% opt in for moving over to Langley for 10-12. This would make capacity issues severely unbalanced for 3 years.

Meh, only 3 years. That's nothing in the long-term. YOU just don't like it.

[Anonymous]

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

Any changes they make likely won’t go into effect until the 2026-27 school year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Oh the drama.

Boundaries shift, it sucks for the kids who have to move. In this case, they are going to move with other kids . They will have club and sport and class opportunities at their new schools. But yes, it sucks. If we wait for it to not suck it will never happen. And as much as there are people who are on this board are just fine with that, there are people on this board who think that the boundaries need to be adjusted.

Some families will leave for private. Some families will pupil place, if it is still allowed. Some families will move. Most families will stay where they are. Some will complain and others will adapt.

We can complain to the school board and adapt with our children at the same time. You can also foresee all these problems and do nothing to help OR you can allow grandfathering and work with the public when “rebalancing.”

There is always a choice to move forward with compassion or be a jerk about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is sad that we have parents conceding to this point they are happy for the SB's table scraps like including 10th grade for grandfathering. This should not be happening. Also, how will this work? Schools like Langley will have a 100% opt in for grandfathering and remaining, while schools rezoned into Langley will have a 100% opt in for moving over to Langley for 10-12. This would make capacity issues severely unbalanced for 3 years.

Meh, only 3 years. That's nothing in the long-term. YOU just don't like it.

Keep in mind there is no long-term to any of this, it will now be a 5-years-at-a-time-term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

Any changes they make likely won’t go into effect until the 2026-27 school year.

Reid said the study would take 18 months so yes that seems possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is sad that we have parents conceding to this point they are happy for the SB's table scraps like including 10th grade for grandfathering. This should not be happening. Also, how will this work? Schools like Langley will have a 100% opt in for grandfathering and remaining, while schools rezoned into Langley will have a 100% opt in for moving over to Langley for 10-12. This would make capacity issues severely unbalanced for 3 years.

Well, no.

The most likely kids rezoned into Langley would come from McLean. A few years ago, rising freshmen who had attended Langley feeders for ES (Colvin Run and Spring Hill), but a McLean feeder for MS (Longfellow) during Covid (so largely remote) were given the option to attend either school. The majority opted to attend McLean with their MS peers rather than attend Langley and reconnect with their ES peers, although a significant minority opted for Langley. Even if the kids being rezoned to Langley came from another high school, if they had already started HS they would probably want to stay where they started, although things could get more complicated if FCPS does not provide transportation. A family's decisions might also depend upon whether a current student has younger siblings who wouldn't have the same option.

[Anonymous]

Can we assume that the teacher-school assignments will be reviewed as well?

Based on the changes to enrollment associated with moving students, there should be a comprehensive teacher-school assignment review conducted every five years.

No school should have a greater proportion of highly qualified/performing teachers (however that might be assessed) than any another school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Any changes they make likely won’t go into effect until the 2026-27 school year.

Reid said the study would take 18 months so yes that seems possible.

If the study alone will take 18 months, 2027-28 sounds like a more realistic implementation. Could they even conceivably kick off a county wide study in this fiscal year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can we assume that the teacher-school assignments will be reviewed as well?

Based on the changes to enrollment associated with moving students, there should be a comprehensive teacher-school assignment review conducted every five years.

No school should have a greater proportion of highly qualified/performing teachers (however that might be assessed) than any another school.

Very few would come teach in FCPS if this happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is sad that we have parents conceding to this point they are happy for the SB's table scraps like including 10th grade for grandfathering. This should not be happening. Also, how will this work? Schools like Langley will have a 100% opt in for grandfathering and remaining, while schools rezoned into Langley will have a 100% opt in for moving over to Langley for 10-12. This would make capacity issues severely unbalanced for 3 years.

They could bring in the ten room modular from McLean to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we assume that the teacher-school assignments will be reviewed as well?

Based on the changes to enrollment associated with moving students, there should be a comprehensive teacher-school assignment review conducted every five years.

No school should have a greater proportion of highly qualified/performing teachers (however that might be assessed) than any another school.

Very few would come teach in FCPS if this happened.

Maybe the same percentage of families that go private. Whatever percentage of students move from one school to another, the same percent of teachers could be swapped as well.

[Anonymous]

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.

.

Working class black and white Americans would have more and higher paying jobs for one thing.

The “bad immigrants” were attracted to this country for a reason.

[Anonymous]

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.

BS. This country was built on the backs of slaves. We'd be just fine.

Descendants of the enslaved are old news.📰