Churchill elementary
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
I think you're making a straw-man argument. I haven't seen anyone argue that Cooper will have an AAP program identical to Longfellow or Cooper within a year. On the other hand, it could start off with LLIV and become a full-fledged center within a couple of years. As that happens, all three schools will evolve. The AAP program at Cooper would increase in size and the programs at the other schools would get smaller. As for Cooper's renovation, it is specifically referenced in the CIP, even if other schools are going to be renovated first. The more important point, however, is that Cooper's enrollment has clearly been dropping in recent years and it is now well under its current capacity. You keep implying at AAP kids can't possibly be expected to attend Cooper until it has been renovated, but you apparently have no problem having GenEd kids at Kilmer and Longfellow relegated to trailers. If you have evidence that the projections for Cooper's future enrollment are flawed, you should share them with others here, and with FCPS. Otherwise, you simply come across as arrogant and demanding. |
Anonymous
The "reference" to a potential Cooper renovation in the CIP, is just that -- a reference that it's needed. It's listed among renovations to be under construction "OR IN PLANNING" by FY2019. http://www.fcps.edu/fts/planning/cip/cip2015-2019pres.pdf Funds have not even been allocated, a step that usually happens years before an actual renovation. http://www.fcps.edu/schlbd/docs/sb%20follow%20up%20responses/fy%202014/SBfollow-up14-19.pdf No one is saying AAP kids can't go to Cooper until it's renovated nor would it only be GE kids at LMS or KMS in trailers, that doesn't make sense -- stop trying to make this AAP vs GE. It's in all students' interests for Cooper to build capacity before a lot of additional kids come to the school. Moreover, there is a 10 room mod at Cooper now & last I heard Longfellow either had no trailers or maybe were just getting 1-2. |
Anonymous
What did he say? |
Anonymous
Basically that the research is all over the place for class size. The distribution is an inverted U, meaning that a class size that's too small isn't good, as is one that's too big. He didn't give exact numbers, but there is a sweet spot. It was interesting because he talked about how everyone wants to reduce class size but it can be too small as well as too large. |
Anonymous
Since no one is saying AAP kids can't go to Cooper until it's renovated, then, let's focus on the fact that Cooper has no trailers currently, whereas Kilmer has over a dozen and Longfellow already has several this year despite having just been renovated. Combine that with the projections that Kilmer will be at 133% of capacity by 2018, Longfellow will be at 115% of capacity, and Cooper will only be at 70% of capacity. That's a compelling case for taking steps now to introduce Local Level IV services to Cooper as soon as possible, with the goal of having all LLIV-eligible students in the Cooper district receiving those services there within a few years, before Kilmer becomes a Tysons trailer park. |
Anonymous
You conveniently choose not to focus on the fact that Cooper's capacity is listed as only 894 based on the current space in the building. It now has 753 students, with 341 AAP students "migrated out." Sending them back to Cooper would result in an enrollment of 1094, 200 over capacity. That's not based on questionable 5 year projections, it's actual student numbers right now. Longfellow is just under capacity now. Kilmer is clearly over capacity now, but just shifting the problem to Cooper is not a great solution. |
Anonymous
| Cooper's building capacity is 1080, not 894. That is stated in the CIP at page 38. If it is currently configured for fewer students, that's a function of its under-enrollment and can be addressed. The enrollment at Cooper is down 100 students over the past five years to roughly 750 students and projected to continue to decline over the next few years. There is no perfect solution here, but FCPS needs to make better use of its resources and the existing space at Cooper. Ceasing to bus AAP kids from Great Falls to Tysons clearly should be one part of the equation. |
Anonymous
| What about reshifting school boundaries? Clearly, some of the kids at Chesterbrook and Franklin Sherman could be shifted to 1/2 Cooper and 1/2 Longfellow. |
Anonymous
| Or Kent Gardens could go to Cooper, since their AAP population currently attends Churchill. |
Anonymous
| No. Send the Cooper AAP kids to Cooper. |
Anonymous
| I think Franklin Sherman is a good candidate to switch to Cooper Langley. Right now it's a split feeder with some districted to Longfellow McLean and others to Cooper Langley. Since Cooper Langley seems to be less crowded, that makes more sense than switching Kent Gardens to Cooper Langley, since all but the AAP kids from KG go to LMS/McLean. |
Anonymous
Switching FS to Cooper/Langley would leave the McLean pyramid with only four ES and would give Langley six. I don't think that will fly. What might make sense is to redistrict some of the apartments in Tysons currently zoned to McLean or Marshall to Langley, which would shore up the declining enrollment and add a bit of much-needed SES diversity to Langley. |
Anonymous
|
Neighborhood Colvin Run, Spring Hill, Sherman, and Churchill to Cooper
Neighborhood KG, Chesterbrook, and Haycock to LMS. Neighborhood Westgate, Shrevewood, Lemon Road, and Timberlane to Kilmer or Thoreau. |
Anonymous
Numbers wouldn't even begin to work. |
Anonymous
| Because why? |