FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If nobody in the community wants to be re-zoned then it makes no sense to do it. Shouldn't the decision be driven by the tax payers who this most impacts? Seems logical to me. In this situation the school board is going against the ENTIRE community. Thats literally dictatorship.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

You do not realize how staffing works. Coates is in crisis now, but I am confident they do not have 40 students in a class.
When there is no solution outside of changing boundaries--as at Coates now, something needs to be done now. Not in two years.

Now, tell me what other schools are in crisis. I'll wait.

We had a teacher from Coates in our breakout session at the last boundary meeting and it was truly heart breaking to hear about the conditions. Obviously you see the % overcapacity and can tell its not great, but that doesn't give you the whole story. She mentioned that they have 9 1st grade classes and at least 6 classes in each grade. There are 20 trailers and they had to build a modular bathroom outside for all of those trailers to use and its not nearly big enough. They are converting closets into offices to max the use of space. The County should be absolutely prioritizing addressing Coates right now before they do anything else.

Why did they wait this long? I just checked the growth over the last three years. Plus at least 300. There is tons of new construction in that area and it is continuing.

This is malpractice on the part of the School Board. They could have at least taken out the portion on the other side of the DTR and put them in Huthicson.

I suspect that a good number of parents would object to being moved to Hutchinson. We have friends who bought in the nieghborhood and moved after kindergarten. The admin and teachers were wonderful but any kid who knew their letters, numbers, colors, shapes, and the like was ignored in K. First grade did not look promising. They moved to a different school with a lower FARMs percentage and were far happier with the results.

Can someone help me understand what "FARMs" means/stands for? Seen it used on here a lot, but never heard the term before.

Free and reduced meal kids aka poor, mostly minority, kids.

And aparently people think their special little snow flake can't learn when they are in the same class as them.

Hutchinson has almost 1000 kids. It's not like they really need to be adding kids there, especially given the high needs of its student population.

Just checked. There's not much room there, but there is some. Coates is bursting at the seams, though More than 200 over capacity.
They could peal off some to McNair(s) Both have some space. Floris also has space, That would help and should have been done last summer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

You do not realize how staffing works. Coates is in crisis now, but I am confident they do not have 40 students in a class.
When there is no solution outside of changing boundaries--as at Coates now, something needs to be done now. Not in two years.

Now, tell me what other schools are in crisis. I'll wait.

We had a teacher from Coates in our breakout session at the last boundary meeting and it was truly heart breaking to hear about the conditions. Obviously you see the % overcapacity and can tell its not great, but that doesn't give you the whole story. She mentioned that they have 9 1st grade classes and at least 6 classes in each grade. There are 20 trailers and they had to build a modular bathroom outside for all of those trailers to use and its not nearly big enough. They are converting closets into offices to max the use of space. The County should be absolutely prioritizing addressing Coates right now before they do anything else.

Why did they wait this long? I just checked the growth over the last three years. Plus at least 300. There is tons of new construction in that area and it is continuing.

This is malpractice on the part of the School Board. They could have at least taken out the portion on the other side of the DTR and put them in Huthicson.

I suspect that a good number of parents would object to being moved to Hutchinson. We have friends who bought in the nieghborhood and moved after kindergarten. The admin and teachers were wonderful but any kid who knew their letters, numbers, colors, shapes, and the like was ignored in K. First grade did not look promising. They moved to a different school with a lower FARMs percentage and were far happier with the results.

Can someone help me understand what "FARMs" means/stands for? Seen it used on here a lot, but never heard the term before.

Free and reduced meal kids aka poor, mostly minority, kids.

And aparently people think their special little snow flake can't learn when they are in the same class as them.

Hutchinson has almost 1000 kids. It's not like they really need to be adding kids there, especially given the high needs of its student population.

Just checked. There's not much room there, but there is some. Coates is bursting at the seams, though More than 200 over capacity.
They could peal off some to McNair(s) Both have some space. Floris also has space, That would help and should have been done last summer.

Doesn’t the superintendent have the authority to make emergency changes as long as they’re temporary? Can’t they do something while they work out a more long term solution? Given Thru’s current work, I don’t think they’re qualified to make these sorts of decisions. They need legitimate community input. Not upvotes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If nobody in the community wants to be re-zoned then it makes no sense to do it. Shouldn't the decision be driven by the tax payers who this most impacts? Seems logical to me. In this situation the school board is going against the ENTIRE community. Thats literally dictatorship.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If nobody in the community wants to be re-zoned then it makes no sense to do it. Shouldn't the decision be driven by the tax payers who this most impacts? Seems logical to me. In this situation the school board is going against the ENTIRE community. Thats literally dictatorship.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

I disagree. No group should have an outsized weight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

You do not realize how staffing works. Coates is in crisis now, but I am confident they do not have 40 students in a class.
When there is no solution outside of changing boundaries--as at Coates now, something needs to be done now. Not in two years.

Now, tell me what other schools are in crisis. I'll wait.

We had a teacher from Coates in our breakout session at the last boundary meeting and it was truly heart breaking to hear about the conditions. Obviously you see the % overcapacity and can tell its not great, but that doesn't give you the whole story. She mentioned that they have 9 1st grade classes and at least 6 classes in each grade. There are 20 trailers and they had to build a modular bathroom outside for all of those trailers to use and its not nearly big enough. They are converting closets into offices to max the use of space. The County should be absolutely prioritizing addressing Coates right now before they do anything else.

Why did they wait this long? I just checked the growth over the last three years. Plus at least 300. There is tons of new construction in that area and it is continuing.

This is malpractice on the part of the School Board. They could have at least taken out the portion on the other side of the DTR and put them in Huthicson.

I suspect that a good number of parents would object to being moved to Hutchinson. We have friends who bought in the nieghborhood and moved after kindergarten. The admin and teachers were wonderful but any kid who knew their letters, numbers, colors, shapes, and the like was ignored in K. First grade did not look promising. They moved to a different school with a lower FARMs percentage and were far happier with the results.

Can someone help me understand what "FARMs" means/stands for? Seen it used on here a lot, but never heard the term before.

Free and reduced meal kids aka poor, mostly minority, kids.

And aparently people think their special little snow flake can't learn when they are in the same class as them.

People understand that FARMs families tend not to prioritize academics with their kids when they are toddlers and do not send their kids to preschool. High FARMs schools have more kids starting K who don't know their letters, sounds, numbers, shapes, colors or the like. Any child who has been exposed to the basic concepts is going to receive little attention because the emphasis, rightly so, is on teaching the kids who do not know these things. The kids who already know the basics have parents who are reading to them at home and probably playing math games. They will continue to learn, at home, but not at school. The reality is that those kids will get little to no attention in school, so no, the kids are not going to learn anything in a class where the vast majority of kids are starting with no academic background.

My friends thought that it would be fine because the admin and teachersat Hutchinson were amazing. It took one year for them to realize that all the stereotypes of how the kid who is ong rade level is treated at a Title 1 school were true. Their child brought books to school to read on theri own. Mom and Dad reviewed academic stuff at home. Their kid received no real instruction at school. So yeah, they moved. I have other friends who attended a different Title 1 school who did whatever they needed to do to get their kids into AAP because their kids were learning little to nothing in the classroom.

Poverty has many impacts on a family and academics is one of them. This is not exactly a new concept. You can mock people who do not want their kid to be the kid reading on their won and learning math from computer program while the teacher is teaching numbers and basic addition to kids who have never been exposed to the concepts before, but I get it. The kids can be lovely and the admin and teachers wonderful but a kid on grade level is going to be ignored.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If nobody in the community wants to be re-zoned then it makes no sense to do it. Shouldn't the decision be driven by the tax payers who this most impacts? Seems logical to me. In this situation the school board is going against the ENTIRE community. Thats literally dictatorship.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If nobody in the community wants to be re-zoned then it makes no sense to do it. Shouldn't the decision be driven by the tax payers who this most impacts? Seems logical to me. In this situation the school board is going against the ENTIRE community. Thats literally dictatorship.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

I disagree. No group should have an outsized weight.

Absolutely, parents whoukd have more weight than childless like Karl Frisch and the empty nesters trying to distupt the lives of other people's kids from neighborhoods in different towns, just to try to pad their housing value.

The primary voice in the process should be parents of school aged kids, and teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If nobody in the community wants to be re-zoned then it makes no sense to do it. Shouldn't the decision be driven by the tax payers who this most impacts? Seems logical to me. In this situation the school board is going against the ENTIRE community. Thats literally dictatorship.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

I disagree. No group should have an outsized weight.

Absolutely, parents whoukd have more weight than childless like Karl Frisch and the empty nesters trying to distupt the lives of other people's kids from neighborhoods in different towns, just to try to pad their housing value.

The primary voice in the process should be parents of school aged kids, and teachers.

Concur here, I don't really care about the Boomer's property values. Although I would add parents with little kids who aren't yet in school yet should have an equal voice as well. We've got a lot of young families in our neighborhood who had no idea what was going on because their kids weren't in school yet, so we've been doing our best to make sure they are informed and a lot are now getting engaged in the meetings/process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If nobody in the community wants to be re-zoned then it makes no sense to do it. Shouldn't the decision be driven by the tax payers who this most impacts? Seems logical to me. In this situation the school board is going against the ENTIRE community. Thats literally dictatorship.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

I disagree. No group should have an outsized weight.

I would think that students should have the most weight in this process. It impacts them the most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If nobody in the community wants to be re-zoned then it makes no sense to do it. Shouldn't the decision be driven by the tax payers who this most impacts? Seems logical to me. In this situation the school board is going against the ENTIRE community. Thats literally dictatorship.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If nobody in the community wants to be re-zoned then it makes no sense to do it. Shouldn't the decision be driven by the tax payers who this most impacts? Seems logical to me. In this situation the school board is going against the ENTIRE community. Thats literally dictatorship.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If nobody in the community wants to be re-zoned then it makes no sense to do it. Shouldn't the decision be driven by the tax payers who this most impacts? Seems logical to me. In this situation the school board is going against the ENTIRE community. Thats literally dictatorship.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

Oh please

South County parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent Lake Braddock.

Lake Braddock and West Springfield parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent South County.

All of those schools are quite diverse with similar socioeconomic levels and similar communities.

People want to stay in their neighborhood schools, within their home communities, in the schools they were zoned for when they purchased their houses, where their kids have put down roots.

[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:If nobody in the community wants to be re-zoned then it makes no sense to do it. Shouldn't the decision be driven by the tax payers who this most impacts? Seems logical to me. In this situation the school board is going against the ENTIRE community. Thats literally dictatorship.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

Oh please

South County parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent Lake Braddock.

Lake Braddock and West Springfield parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent South County.

All of those schools are quite diverse with similar socioeconomic levels and similar communities.

People want to stay in their neighborhood schools, within their home communities, in the schools they were zoned for when they purchased their houses, where their kids have put down roots.

So we should keep attendance islands and split feeders because it'll be a little less convenient for some of you all in West Springfield and Lake Braddock. Got it. Maintaining schools within a specific pyramid (i.e. neighborhood/home community) by removing attendance islands and split feeders is not important unless it is the one you are currently in. God the entitlement on this board is so completely disturbing.

[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:If nobody in the community wants to be re-zoned then it makes no sense to do it. Shouldn't the decision be driven by the tax payers who this most impacts? Seems logical to me. In this situation the school board is going against the ENTIRE community. Thats literally dictatorship.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

Oh please

South County parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent Lake Braddock.

Lake Braddock and West Springfield parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent South County.

All of those schools are quite diverse with similar socioeconomic levels and similar communities.

People want to stay in their neighborhood schools, within their home communities, in the schools they were zoned for when they purchased their houses, where their kids have put down roots.

So we should keep attendance islands and split feeders because it'll be a little less convenient for some of you all in West Springfield and Lake Braddock. Got it. Maintaining schools within a specific pyramid (i.e. neighborhood/home community) by removing attendance islands and split feeders is not important unless it is the one you are currently in. God the entitlement on this board is so completely disturbing.

What on earth are you talking about? In Scenario 3, Thru proposes creating a new split feeder in WSHS (for Hunt Valley) and swapping some Lake Braddock and South County students (roughly 20 or so students) simply to make the maps look cleaner. That's now got both of those neighborhoods up in arms because their kids will get sent to different schools for no obvious benefit (transportation times aren't better, they don't really impact capacity). It's insane. And that's just one example in one part of the county.

Maybe stop making everything about you. Residents have a lot of legitimate complaints about this process. And the idea that kids shouldn't be taken into account during the process is absolutely bizarre.