FCPS High School prestige ranking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DS attends one of the 4th tier, low prestige schools. The school sent lots of kids to UVA, VT, W&M this year, as they do every year, plus a number get into Ivies, MIT, CMU, UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan, Duke, Hopkins, etc.

So your “prestige” rankings are meaningless. Or maybe they even work against you, if you believe colleges have “quotas” from each high school.

Nobody cares what high school you went to. And a few years after you graduate from college, nobody will care what college you went to.

Capable students from below average HS’s CAN do well. The college acceptances at ACHS for example are often really strong.

The problems are as follows: 1, this is not as much an issue in FCPS as our schools are larger. But some smaller, low income HS will not be able to offer many, if any, AP classes (or IB or whatever). This leaves students at a huge disadvantage when it comes to college readiness. They simply aren’t ready for a demanding college class having had only general education math/English up to what you might be tested on in a standardized state test. 2, people worry about what their kids might be exposed to in terms of fights and behavior at a lower SES school. 3, adults at low SES schools perpetuate a more restrictive, punitive environment on the kids. There is little to no trust from adults to students. There are more punishments and the school environment feels very negative. 4, a kid who is borderline - intelligent and capable but vulnerable to a “bad crowd,” and there are lots of teens like this - will be lifted up by a higher income, higher education, rule following peer group, but potentially brought down by low achievers and peers/parents who don’t emphasize attendance and achievement. Not as much an issue if your kid is more self-motivated, but not all kids are, some need more help to be kept on the straight and narrow as impressionable teens.

Obviously a really smart kid can stand out a lot at a lower SES HS. But students who are just average or even “above average” good students will fall through the cracks in a big way because the admin’s emphasis will be on the larger population of at risk kids.

This statement is more speculative of what life is like at a smaller, low-income school, rather than what actually happens.

1. All FCPS schools must offer advanced courses. Perhaps one school offers more niche advanced courses, like AP Music Theory, but that does not negate the fact that one can take advanced courses and be prepared for college regardless of what high school. (And as many have pointed out on this forum, those at the "tier 4" schools can go on to successfully attend "tier 1" colleges.)

2. This is working off the assumption that lower-income students are fighting, doing drugs, members of MS-13, etc. On the contrary, many of the kids at the "tier 4" school my child attends are actually working part time in their spare time while also juggling school. They take their future seriously, they have to work harder to pay for things like college, and no, they're not MS-13.

3. This is working off the assumption that the teachers at the lower-income schools are of poor quality and lacking in empathy, while the "richer" schools draw the best teachers out there. That's a cruel statement to make regarding the teachers at those schools. I can say from first-hand experience that my child at a "tier 4" school has encountered wonderful, supportive teachers.

4. See point 2. Again, you're working off the assumption that poor equals MS-13 or the like. You're also assuming that rich equals well-behaved, and that's not always the case.

I do tire of how some parents on this forum continually tear down schools in this county with wild hyperbole. Maybe it helps those parents feel better about pouring so much money into real estate? They don't want to believe that someone paying less in property taxes could also have a child receive a strong, well-rounded high school education and go on to a competitive college?

Let me just say it's okay for you to buy the super expensive house. If that's what you feel your kid needs, you do you. You don't need to reassure yourself by putting down the successful kids in other schools.

Add to this, your highly motivated student will have more leadership opportunities at tier 4 schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DS attends one of the 4th tier, low prestige schools. The school sent lots of kids to UVA, VT, W&M this year, as they do every year, plus a number get into Ivies, MIT, CMU, UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan, Duke, Hopkins, etc.

So your “prestige” rankings are meaningless. Or maybe they even work against you, if you believe colleges have “quotas” from each high school.

Nobody cares what high school you went to. And a few years after you graduate from college, nobody will care what college you went to.

Capable students from below average HS’s CAN do well. The college acceptances at ACHS for example are often really strong.

The problems are as follows: 1, this is not as much an issue in FCPS as our schools are larger. But some smaller, low income HS will not be able to offer many, if any, AP classes (or IB or whatever). This leaves students at a huge disadvantage when it comes to college readiness. They simply aren’t ready for a demanding college class having had only general education math/English up to what you might be tested on in a standardized state test. 2, people worry about what their kids might be exposed to in terms of fights and behavior at a lower SES school. 3, adults at low SES schools perpetuate a more restrictive, punitive environment on the kids. There is little to no trust from adults to students. There are more punishments and the school environment feels very negative. 4, a kid who is borderline - intelligent and capable but vulnerable to a “bad crowd,” and there are lots of teens like this - will be lifted up by a higher income, higher education, rule following peer group, but potentially brought down by low achievers and peers/parents who don’t emphasize attendance and achievement. Not as much an issue if your kid is more self-motivated, but not all kids are, some need more help to be kept on the straight and narrow as impressionable teens.

Obviously a really smart kid can stand out a lot at a lower SES HS. But students who are just average or even “above average” good students will fall through the cracks in a big way because the admin’s emphasis will be on the larger population of at risk kids.

This statement is more speculative of what life is like at a smaller, low-income school, rather than what actually happens.

1. All FCPS schools must offer advanced courses. Perhaps one school offers more niche advanced courses, like AP Music Theory, but that does not negate the fact that one can take advanced courses and be prepared for college regardless of what high school. (And as many have pointed out on this forum, those at the "tier 4" schools can go on to successfully attend "tier 1" colleges.)

2. This is working off the assumption that lower-income students are fighting, doing drugs, members of MS-13, etc. On the contrary, many of the kids at the "tier 4" school my child attends are actually working part time in their spare time while also juggling school. They take their future seriously, they have to work harder to pay for things like college, and no, they're not MS-13.

3. This is working off the assumption that the teachers at the lower-income schools are of poor quality and lacking in empathy, while the "richer" schools draw the best teachers out there. That's a cruel statement to make regarding the teachers at those schools. I can say from first-hand experience that my child at a "tier 4" school has encountered wonderful, supportive teachers.

4. See point 2. Again, you're working off the assumption that poor equals MS-13 or the like. You're also assuming that rich equals well-behaved, and that's not always the case.

I do tire of how some parents on this forum continually tear down schools in this county with wild hyperbole. Maybe it helps those parents feel better about pouring so much money into real estate? They don't want to believe that someone paying less in property taxes could also have a child receive a strong, well-rounded high school education and go on to a competitive college?

Let me just say it's okay for you to buy the super expensive house. If that's what you feel your kid needs, you do you. You don't need to reassure yourself by putting down the successful kids in other schools.

Add to this, your highly motivated student will have more leadership opportunities at tier 4 schools.

There are competing schools of thought. One is to push the narrative that a "highly motivated" kid will get to be the big fish in the little pond at a lower performing school. The other believes that kids are less likely to be "highly motivated" if most of the other students are aiming lower and that it's better prep for college to be challenged by a stronger peer group in high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think has to do a lot more some people trying to avoid schools with high FARMS and URM rates. This, of course, happens all over the US, and not surprisingly, in many countries in the Americas and Europe.

Right. South Lakes is mostly affluent and white, but it has more low income students than Lake Braddock for example, so it is perceived to be inferior.

South lakes is inferior because of IB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DS attends one of the 4th tier, low prestige schools. The school sent lots of kids to UVA, VT, W&M this year, as they do every year, plus a number get into Ivies, MIT, CMU, UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan, Duke, Hopkins, etc.

So your “prestige” rankings are meaningless. Or maybe they even work against you, if you believe colleges have “quotas” from each high school.

Nobody cares what high school you went to. And a few years after you graduate from college, nobody will care what college you went to.

Capable students from below average HS’s CAN do well. The college acceptances at ACHS for example are often really strong.

The problems are as follows: 1, this is not as much an issue in FCPS as our schools are larger. But some smaller, low income HS will not be able to offer many, if any, AP classes (or IB or whatever). This leaves students at a huge disadvantage when it comes to college readiness. They simply aren’t ready for a demanding college class having had only general education math/English up to what you might be tested on in a standardized state test. 2, people worry about what their kids might be exposed to in terms of fights and behavior at a lower SES school. 3, adults at low SES schools perpetuate a more restrictive, punitive environment on the kids. There is little to no trust from adults to students. There are more punishments and the school environment feels very negative. 4, a kid who is borderline - intelligent and capable but vulnerable to a “bad crowd,” and there are lots of teens like this - will be lifted up by a higher income, higher education, rule following peer group, but potentially brought down by low achievers and peers/parents who don’t emphasize attendance and achievement. Not as much an issue if your kid is more self-motivated, but not all kids are, some need more help to be kept on the straight and narrow as impressionable teens.

Obviously a really smart kid can stand out a lot at a lower SES HS. But students who are just average or even “above average” good students will fall through the cracks in a big way because the admin’s emphasis will be on the larger population of at risk kids.

A review of the numbers transferring out of some of some of the lower performing schools would indicate that a much fuller schedule of classes could be offered if FCPS eliminated IB.
A simple step that could lead to a solution. It could also solve problems of low enrollment in some schools.

If there is demand for the IB diploma, maybe FCPS should consider how other districts around the country do it. For example, MCPS and APS offer IB diploma magnet programs where transfers or other accepted students are expected to work towards the diploma. The high schools with the magnet programs also offer the typical AP program of study for the in-bounds students.

So, if FCPS graduates roughly 500 diploma candidates a year on average, then maybe two high schools could offer an IB magnet with the IB diploma as the expected goal. (If the students decide midway not to pursue the diploma, they would have to transfer back to their neighborhood hs.) The two high schools with the IB magnets would also offer a complete AP programs.

The VDOE data for 2023-24 indicates there were 487 IB diploma candidates and 330 IB diplomas, so a 67.8% success rate across the current 8 IB schools.

Robinson is carrying most of the load for successful IB diplomas, with a bit of help from 2 other high schools.

Most of the FCPS IB schools are graduating fewer than 20 IB diplomas each year.

An alarming number are graduating fewer than 1 dozen IB diplomas.

Your 67.8% success rate is such a farce, especially when you consider that number includes schools like Lewis getting close to a 100% candidate to diploma succes rates, when in reality the school average below 10 IB candidates per year in a class of roughly 400 graduates, and that almost 100% rate bringing up your average might just be 6 diplomas out of 7 candidates. IB is a complete failure and waste of money at most FCPS high schools, except for 2-3 of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DS attends one of the 4th tier, low prestige schools. The school sent lots of kids to UVA, VT, W&M this year, as they do every year, plus a number get into Ivies, MIT, CMU, UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan, Duke, Hopkins, etc.

So your “prestige” rankings are meaningless. Or maybe they even work against you, if you believe colleges have “quotas” from each high school.

Nobody cares what high school you went to. And a few years after you graduate from college, nobody will care what college you went to.

Right...did you mean to say they sent some kids to VT (easiest to get into) because the rest were rejected from UVA and WandM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DS attends one of the 4th tier, low prestige schools. The school sent lots of kids to UVA, VT, W&M this year, as they do every year, plus a number get into Ivies, MIT, CMU, UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan, Duke, Hopkins, etc.

So your “prestige” rankings are meaningless. Or maybe they even work against you, if you believe colleges have “quotas” from each high school.

Nobody cares what high school you went to. And a few years after you graduate from college, nobody will care what college you went to.

Right...did you mean to say they sent some kids to VT (easiest to get into) because the rest were rejected from UVA and WandM?

As a parent of a child who was accepted to UVA, WM, and VT, I think this is an awful slam. DD picked WM because of the location and size. Not because of the prestige. She is also more of a liberal arts person.

I have another child who was accepted to a "2nd tier" Virginia school--ranked lower than VT-- and he has done just fine. LIkely makes more $$ than his sibling if that is your measure.

Picking based on prestige is not a good idea. It is where your child fits in and is more comfortable.

FWIW, I've never known anyone who went to VT and did not really, really like it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DS attends one of the 4th tier, low prestige schools. The school sent lots of kids to UVA, VT, W&M this year, as they do every year, plus a number get into Ivies, MIT, CMU, UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan, Duke, Hopkins, etc.

So your “prestige” rankings are meaningless. Or maybe they even work against you, if you believe colleges have “quotas” from each high school.

Nobody cares what high school you went to. And a few years after you graduate from college, nobody will care what college you went to.

Right...did you mean to say they sent some kids to VT (easiest to get into) because the rest were rejected from UVA and WandM?

As a parent of a child who was accepted to UVA, WM, and VT, I think this is an awful slam. DD picked WM because of the location and size. Not because of the prestige. She is also more of a liberal arts person.

I have another child who was accepted to a "2nd tier" Virginia school--ranked lower than VT-- and he has done just fine. LIkely makes more $$ than his sibling if that is your measure.

Picking based on prestige is not a good idea. It is where your child fits in and is more comfortable.

FWIW, I've never known anyone who went to VT and did not really, really like it.

+1. The main thing you see when you compare less affluent schools with more affluent schools is that the former send a lot more kids to NVCC, GMU, and VCU. The latter send a lot more kids to T20 schools, SLACs, and (especially) out of state flagships. Every FCPS high school will send a fair number of kids to other state schools in Virginia, including VT, although the higher rated schools send more kids to UVA. W&M seems to like IB schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Better schools have wealthier families. That is it. I am a former private school teacher and taught a lot of white kids. They weren’t regurlaly the brightest. Wealthy students of any race/background raise test scores. It is that simple.

This. The list is just a list of which schools have higher socio-economic status.

But here's the thing: kids can still get into top-ranked colleges even while attending a school in a lower socio-economic area. So parents could pay less for a mortgage and still get the same college success.

Yup.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s important to avoid URMs in ES and MS (AAP works well here), but in most FCPS HS, you can find high achieving groups of kids. I wouldn’t want my kid to go to small number of FCPS HS but for the most part it’s not that big of a deal

There's an interesting thread on Next Door from a Marshall parent considering a pupil placement to Falls Church for AP. The thread is full of Falls Church parents talking about how good the school is, and there is only one post from a Falls Church student, which I've noted below, slightly edited for spelling:

Hello my name is R***, I am currently a student at FCHS. To be quite honest, if you have the choice to not go to Falls Church I would take it. I would highly recommend not transferring your kid. The school has been under renovation for quite some time, and will continue to be under renovation for the next couple years, we have no ceiling in the hallways and the pipes often leak causing floods. The people at FC are not a good influence, 70% of the students are immigrants and don't speak English, and there is rampant drug use all throughout the school. We are also extremely poor, our prom this year was in our cafeteria, and we rarely have money to do school things such as field trips, etc. Not to mention a good number of the staff and admin are extremely unfriendly and seem like they hate their life. I'm graduating in a year and I am glad I am almost out of this place. I would highly recommend sending your kid somewhere else.

Sure, there will always be disaffected teens, but it was a reminder that the accounts from parents, who tend to look out for their property values, are often different from the accounts of kids actually attending some of these schools.

Like I said, there are a few schools I wouldn’t want my kids going to.

Are you referring to Justice ?

Justice has some impressive college admissions this year. I also hear the new principal is good.

My son attends the school and he is happy there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Better schools have wealthier families. That is it. I am a former private school teacher and taught a lot of white kids. They weren’t regurlaly the brightest. Wealthy students of any race/background raise test scores. It is that simple.

This. The list is just a list of which schools have higher socio-economic status.

But here's the thing: kids can still get into top-ranked colleges even while attending a school in a lower socio-economic area. So parents could pay less for a mortgage and still get the same college success.

Yup.

Maybe. Or they could pay less and end up with a kid who isn’t prepared as well and has less college success.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Better schools have wealthier families. That is it. I am a former private school teacher and taught a lot of white kids. They weren’t regurlaly the brightest. Wealthy students of any race/background raise test scores. It is that simple.

This. The list is just a list of which schools have higher socio-economic status.

But here's the thing: kids can still get into top-ranked colleges even while attending a school in a lower socio-economic area. So parents could pay less for a mortgage and still get the same college success.

Yup.

Maybe. Or they could pay less and end up with a kid who isn’t prepared as well and has less college success.

It can be really hard to accept that someone may have spent less money on housing, only to have their kid obtain a really good public education. To realize that that poor FARMs kid can do just as well as your kid, maybe even better. It can be a hard thing to wrap your mind around.

[Anonymous]

SLHS is affluent???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Better schools have wealthier families. That is it. I am a former private school teacher and taught a lot of white kids. They weren’t regurlaly the brightest. Wealthy students of any race/background raise test scores. It is that simple.

This. The list is just a list of which schools have higher socio-economic status.

But here's the thing: kids can still get into top-ranked colleges even while attending a school in a lower socio-economic area. So parents could pay less for a mortgage and still get the same college success.

Yup.

Maybe. Or they could pay less and end up with a kid who isn’t prepared as well and has less college success.

It can be really hard to accept that someone may have spent less money on housing, only to have their kid obtain a really good public education. To realize that that poor FARMs kid can do just as well as your kid, maybe even better. It can be a hard thing to wrap your mind around.

DP. I have no objection to your outlook. But, as you are probably aware, it has limitations. Sure, the right tail of the bell curve at some of these schools may send a kid to Stanford or some Ivy, but when you compare the bell curve to a better performing school, there is a difference.

I want nothing more than for all kids to succeed, and I hope kids at your school do well, but it’s a weird flex to somehow think your kids are going to do better at a worse performing school. You are just full of bluster with nothing to back up your assertions. Might want to check that ego at some point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SLHS is affluent???

Yes. Especially since the controversial boundary changes back in 2008 or so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do you measure "prestige?"

Real estate pricing?