FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the mental health of the low-income kids is taken into consideration as well.

They get more attention and funding per student than anyone else, along with special education kids.

[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:Most parents of kids currently in school don't want their kids moved because being split from a chunk of your friend group sucks. Unfortunately with so many split feeders in FCPS that happens every single year to a new group of kids. The boundary review is meant to reduce that as much as possible. I wish they were able to do more to make true pyramids, but the uneven distribution of schools prevents that.
It is understandable that current parents are fighting to stop it from happening once to their kids. They don't outweigh years and years of new kids starting school in future years who won't have to face it if the boundaries are fixed. (speaking about split feeders only)

I get that. But then offer grandfathering to kids and deal with that for a few years and then move on to the new boundaries. I will have kids the worst grades for this move (8,10,12) and their best friends are friends from elementary who are on the other side of a proposed split.

In a few years the schools might not need the boundary adjustment. That is the point.

Schools that are overcrowded, and I would put that at 101% or more, should have their boundaries adjusted. That is going to affect other schools nearby as kids are moved. Let's see how much of that can be used to fix the split feeders and attendance islands. I suspect most of the families in the attendance islands are happy where they are and don't feel the need to be moved anyway. And there are people at split feeders that don't want to move because they would be moving form a strong school to a weak school.

I get that. They should focus on untangling boundaries and not balancing capacity, unless the capacity issues are burdening the community. Phase in the changes over the next 5-6 years to allow for grandfathering. Look into fixing capacity issues, if needed, during the next round. Untangling the web of split feeders shouldn’t hinge on balancing capacity at Chantilly and West Springfield.

Boundary changes for thee, but not for me!

What a bunch of hypocrites. You’ll throw other areas under a bus in a heartbeat as long as it means you can avoid redistricting.

The fact is that they should either be all-in or just leave boundaries alone except for those two ES that are really overcrowded.

Actually, I’m in the Marshall pyramid which might be the most heavily impacted by changes. I’d love to see Kilmer and Thoreau detangled and minimize the number of split elementary schools. The problem is that the proposals to “fix” West Springfield and Chantilly is to create more split feeders, so they’re solving one problem by creating another and the first problem might not even exist in five years.

I am also in the Marshall Pyramid and have a question. A neighbor mentioned that implementing any one of the three options could increase the poverty rate in Marshall by 15-20 percent. Does anyone know if this statement is accurate?

Oh no! Do not let more poor people into my child’s school. 27% is more than enough!

I’m sure you’ve volunteered for your kids to be moved, right? Right?

These folks always say they've happy at their high FARMS schools and yet nothing on earth seems to give them as much pleasure as the possibility that other kids will be redistricted into high FARMS schools or other schools will be turned into high FARMS schools.

"Live and let live" doesn't seem to be in their wheelhouse.

Or maybe they are annoyed by parents who try to prevent any meaningful change which may improve outcomes for a disproportionate number of kids in the District? Maybe they don't feel the sense of entitlement that seems to permeate on this forum? Are you all as libertarian in your general politics as you are when it comes to schooling? Never figured that Rand Paul was so popular in this area.

Boundary change opponents see your “meaningful change” and know it doesn’t consider mental health of students, won’t actually lift disadvantaged students up, and will create a downward spiral in the county.

Come to think of it, I guess really bad negative change qualifies as “meaningful,” so I’m guessing that’s what you meant.

Ah, yes. That evil school board doing all they can to harm the kids in this district! Such villains!

If you are so ok with split feeders sending kids off to other schools every year without any real negative affects on their mental health... I am sure your kids can also transition into another school without having a mental health breakdown. Assuming they aren't snow flakes like their parents, which is probably not the greatest assumption. Just admit it. You think you are entitled and that the school district should pander to you.

Do you even understand the extent of your hypocrisy?

It's act your age, honey, not act your rage. All that free-floating resentment on display is NOT a good look.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most parents of kids currently in school don't want their kids moved because being split from a chunk of your friend group sucks. Unfortunately with so many split feeders in FCPS that happens every single year to a new group of kids. The boundary review is meant to reduce that as much as possible. I wish they were able to do more to make true pyramids, but the uneven distribution of schools prevents that.
It is understandable that current parents are fighting to stop it from happening once to their kids. They don't outweigh years and years of new kids starting school in future years who won't have to face it if the boundaries are fixed. (speaking about split feeders only)

I get that. But then offer grandfathering to kids and deal with that for a few years and then move on to the new boundaries. I will have kids the worst grades for this move (8,10,12) and their best friends are friends from elementary who are on the other side of a proposed split.

In a few years the schools might not need the boundary adjustment. That is the point.

Schools that are overcrowded, and I would put that at 101% or more, should have their boundaries adjusted. That is going to affect other schools nearby as kids are moved. Let's see how much of that can be used to fix the split feeders and attendance islands. I suspect most of the families in the attendance islands are happy where they are and don't feel the need to be moved anyway. And there are people at split feeders that don't want to move because they would be moving form a strong school to a weak school.

I get that. They should focus on untangling boundaries and not balancing capacity, unless the capacity issues are burdening the community. Phase in the changes over the next 5-6 years to allow for grandfathering. Look into fixing capacity issues, if needed, during the next round. Untangling the web of split feeders shouldn’t hinge on balancing capacity at Chantilly and West Springfield.

Boundary changes for thee, but not for me!

What a bunch of hypocrites. You’ll throw other areas under a bus in a heartbeat as long as it means you can avoid redistricting.

The fact is that they should either be all-in or just leave boundaries alone except for those two ES that are really overcrowded.

Actually, I’m in the Marshall pyramid which might be the most heavily impacted by changes. I’d love to see Kilmer and Thoreau detangled and minimize the number of split elementary schools. The problem is that the proposals to “fix” West Springfield and Chantilly is to create more split feeders, so they’re solving one problem by creating another and the first problem might not even exist in five years.

I am also in the Marshall Pyramid and have a question. A neighbor mentioned that implementing any one of the three options could increase the poverty rate in Marshall by 15-20 percent. Does anyone know if this statement is accurate?

Oh no! Do not let more poor people into my child’s school. 27% is more than enough!

I’m sure you’ve volunteered for your kids to be moved, right? Right?

These folks always say they've happy at their high FARMS schools and yet nothing on earth seems to give them as much pleasure as the possibility that other kids will be redistricted into high FARMS schools or other schools will be turned into high FARMS schools.

"Live and let live" doesn't seem to be in their wheelhouse.

Or maybe they are annoyed by parents who try to prevent any meaningful change which may improve outcomes for a disproportionate number of kids in the District? Maybe they don't feel the sense of entitlement that seems to permeate on this forum? Are you all as libertarian in your general politics as you are when it comes to schooling? Never figured that Rand Paul was so popular in this area.

If you can't fix your school, why do you think bussing in 100 kids from 30 minutes away who don't want to be there will fix your school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the mental health of the low-income kids is taken into consideration as well.

Yes. Their mental health should be considered too. They shouldn’t be moved unnecessarily either.

[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:Most parents of kids currently in school don't want their kids moved because being split from a chunk of your friend group sucks. Unfortunately with so many split feeders in FCPS that happens every single year to a new group of kids. The boundary review is meant to reduce that as much as possible. I wish they were able to do more to make true pyramids, but the uneven distribution of schools prevents that.
It is understandable that current parents are fighting to stop it from happening once to their kids. They don't outweigh years and years of new kids starting school in future years who won't have to face it if the boundaries are fixed. (speaking about split feeders only)

I get that. But then offer grandfathering to kids and deal with that for a few years and then move on to the new boundaries. I will have kids the worst grades for this move (8,10,12) and their best friends are friends from elementary who are on the other side of a proposed split.

In a few years the schools might not need the boundary adjustment. That is the point.

Schools that are overcrowded, and I would put that at 101% or more, should have their boundaries adjusted. That is going to affect other schools nearby as kids are moved. Let's see how much of that can be used to fix the split feeders and attendance islands. I suspect most of the families in the attendance islands are happy where they are and don't feel the need to be moved anyway. And there are people at split feeders that don't want to move because they would be moving form a strong school to a weak school.

I get that. They should focus on untangling boundaries and not balancing capacity, unless the capacity issues are burdening the community. Phase in the changes over the next 5-6 years to allow for grandfathering. Look into fixing capacity issues, if needed, during the next round. Untangling the web of split feeders shouldn’t hinge on balancing capacity at Chantilly and West Springfield.

Boundary changes for thee, but not for me!

What a bunch of hypocrites. You’ll throw other areas under a bus in a heartbeat as long as it means you can avoid redistricting.

The fact is that they should either be all-in or just leave boundaries alone except for those two ES that are really overcrowded.

Actually, I’m in the Marshall pyramid which might be the most heavily impacted by changes. I’d love to see Kilmer and Thoreau detangled and minimize the number of split elementary schools. The problem is that the proposals to “fix” West Springfield and Chantilly is to create more split feeders, so they’re solving one problem by creating another and the first problem might not even exist in five years.

I am also in the Marshall Pyramid and have a question. A neighbor mentioned that implementing any one of the three options could increase the poverty rate in Marshall by 15-20 percent. Does anyone know if this statement is accurate?

Oh no! Do not let more poor people into my child’s school. 27% is more than enough!

I’m sure you’ve volunteered for your kids to be moved, right? Right?

These folks always say they've happy at their high FARMS schools and yet nothing on earth seems to give them as much pleasure as the possibility that other kids will be redistricted into high FARMS schools or other schools will be turned into high FARMS schools.

"Live and let live" doesn't seem to be in their wheelhouse.

Or maybe they are annoyed by parents who try to prevent any meaningful change which may improve outcomes for a disproportionate number of kids in the District? Maybe they don't feel the sense of entitlement that seems to permeate on this forum? Are you all as libertarian in your general politics as you are when it comes to schooling? Never figured that Rand Paul was so popular in this area.

Boundary change opponents see your “meaningful change” and know it doesn’t consider mental health of students, won’t actually lift disadvantaged students up, and will create a downward spiral in the county.

Come to think of it, I guess really bad negative change qualifies as “meaningful,” so I’m guessing that’s what you meant.

Ah, yes. That evil school board doing all they can to harm the kids in this district! Such villains!

If you are so ok with split feeders sending kids off to other schools every year without any real negative affects on their mental health... I am sure your kids can also transition into another school without having a mental health breakdown. Assuming they aren't snow flakes like their parents, which is probably not the greatest assumption. Just admit it. You think you are entitled and that the school district should pander to you.

Do you even understand the extent of your hypocrisy?

It's act your age, honey, not act your rage. All that free-floating resentment on display is NOT a good look.

Well, sweetie, neither is the self entitled hypocrisy.

[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:Most parents of kids currently in school don't want their kids moved because being split from a chunk of your friend group sucks. Unfortunately with so many split feeders in FCPS that happens every single year to a new group of kids. The boundary review is meant to reduce that as much as possible. I wish they were able to do more to make true pyramids, but the uneven distribution of schools prevents that.
It is understandable that current parents are fighting to stop it from happening once to their kids. They don't outweigh years and years of new kids starting school in future years who won't have to face it if the boundaries are fixed. (speaking about split feeders only)

I get that. But then offer grandfathering to kids and deal with that for a few years and then move on to the new boundaries. I will have kids the worst grades for this move (8,10,12) and their best friends are friends from elementary who are on the other side of a proposed split.

In a few years the schools might not need the boundary adjustment. That is the point.

Schools that are overcrowded, and I would put that at 101% or more, should have their boundaries adjusted. That is going to affect other schools nearby as kids are moved. Let's see how much of that can be used to fix the split feeders and attendance islands. I suspect most of the families in the attendance islands are happy where they are and don't feel the need to be moved anyway. And there are people at split feeders that don't want to move because they would be moving form a strong school to a weak school.

I get that. They should focus on untangling boundaries and not balancing capacity, unless the capacity issues are burdening the community. Phase in the changes over the next 5-6 years to allow for grandfathering. Look into fixing capacity issues, if needed, during the next round. Untangling the web of split feeders shouldn’t hinge on balancing capacity at Chantilly and West Springfield.

Boundary changes for thee, but not for me!

What a bunch of hypocrites. You’ll throw other areas under a bus in a heartbeat as long as it means you can avoid redistricting.

The fact is that they should either be all-in or just leave boundaries alone except for those two ES that are really overcrowded.

Actually, I’m in the Marshall pyramid which might be the most heavily impacted by changes. I’d love to see Kilmer and Thoreau detangled and minimize the number of split elementary schools. The problem is that the proposals to “fix” West Springfield and Chantilly is to create more split feeders, so they’re solving one problem by creating another and the first problem might not even exist in five years.

I am also in the Marshall Pyramid and have a question. A neighbor mentioned that implementing any one of the three options could increase the poverty rate in Marshall by 15-20 percent. Does anyone know if this statement is accurate?

Oh no! Do not let more poor people into my child’s school. 27% is more than enough!

I’m sure you’ve volunteered for your kids to be moved, right? Right?

These folks always say they've happy at their high FARMS schools and yet nothing on earth seems to give them as much pleasure as the possibility that other kids will be redistricted into high FARMS schools or other schools will be turned into high FARMS schools.

"Live and let live" doesn't seem to be in their wheelhouse.

Or maybe they are annoyed by parents who try to prevent any meaningful change which may improve outcomes for a disproportionate number of kids in the District? Maybe they don't feel the sense of entitlement that seems to permeate on this forum? Are you all as libertarian in your general politics as you are when it comes to schooling? Never figured that Rand Paul was so popular in this area.

Boundary change opponents see your “meaningful change” and know it doesn’t consider mental health of students, won’t actually lift disadvantaged students up, and will create a downward spiral in the county.

Come to think of it, I guess really bad negative change qualifies as “meaningful,” so I’m guessing that’s what you meant.

Ah, yes. That evil school board doing all they can to harm the kids in this district! Such villains!

If you are so ok with split feeders sending kids off to other schools every year without any real negative affects on their mental health... I am sure your kids can also transition into another school without having a mental health breakdown. Assuming they aren't snow flakes like their parents, which is probably not the greatest assumption. Just admit it. You think you are entitled and that the school district should pander to you.

Do you even understand the extent of your hypocrisy?

I am not sure you’re using “hypocrisy” right, or at least you haven’t explained why I’m a hypocrite.

You probably intended to call me a Jim Crow racist again.

[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:Most parents of kids currently in school don't want their kids moved because being split from a chunk of your friend group sucks. Unfortunately with so many split feeders in FCPS that happens every single year to a new group of kids. The boundary review is meant to reduce that as much as possible. I wish they were able to do more to make true pyramids, but the uneven distribution of schools prevents that.
It is understandable that current parents are fighting to stop it from happening once to their kids. They don't outweigh years and years of new kids starting school in future years who won't have to face it if the boundaries are fixed. (speaking about split feeders only)

I get that. But then offer grandfathering to kids and deal with that for a few years and then move on to the new boundaries. I will have kids the worst grades for this move (8,10,12) and their best friends are friends from elementary who are on the other side of a proposed split.

In a few years the schools might not need the boundary adjustment. That is the point.

Schools that are overcrowded, and I would put that at 101% or more, should have their boundaries adjusted. That is going to affect other schools nearby as kids are moved. Let's see how much of that can be used to fix the split feeders and attendance islands. I suspect most of the families in the attendance islands are happy where they are and don't feel the need to be moved anyway. And there are people at split feeders that don't want to move because they would be moving form a strong school to a weak school.

I get that. They should focus on untangling boundaries and not balancing capacity, unless the capacity issues are burdening the community. Phase in the changes over the next 5-6 years to allow for grandfathering. Look into fixing capacity issues, if needed, during the next round. Untangling the web of split feeders shouldn’t hinge on balancing capacity at Chantilly and West Springfield.

Boundary changes for thee, but not for me!

What a bunch of hypocrites. You’ll throw other areas under a bus in a heartbeat as long as it means you can avoid redistricting.

The fact is that they should either be all-in or just leave boundaries alone except for those two ES that are really overcrowded.

Actually, I’m in the Marshall pyramid which might be the most heavily impacted by changes. I’d love to see Kilmer and Thoreau detangled and minimize the number of split elementary schools. The problem is that the proposals to “fix” West Springfield and Chantilly is to create more split feeders, so they’re solving one problem by creating another and the first problem might not even exist in five years.

I am also in the Marshall Pyramid and have a question. A neighbor mentioned that implementing any one of the three options could increase the poverty rate in Marshall by 15-20 percent. Does anyone know if this statement is accurate?

Oh no! Do not let more poor people into my child’s school. 27% is more than enough!

I’m sure you’ve volunteered for your kids to be moved, right? Right?

These folks always say they've happy at their high FARMS schools and yet nothing on earth seems to give them as much pleasure as the possibility that other kids will be redistricted into high FARMS schools or other schools will be turned into high FARMS schools.

"Live and let live" doesn't seem to be in their wheelhouse.

Or maybe they are annoyed by parents who try to prevent any meaningful change which may improve outcomes for a disproportionate number of kids in the District? Maybe they don't feel the sense of entitlement that seems to permeate on this forum? Are you all as libertarian in your general politics as you are when it comes to schooling? Never figured that Rand Paul was so popular in this area.

Boundary change opponents see your “meaningful change” and know it doesn’t consider mental health of students, won’t actually lift disadvantaged students up, and will create a downward spiral in the county.

Come to think of it, I guess really bad negative change qualifies as “meaningful,” so I’m guessing that’s what you meant.

Ah, yes. That evil school board doing all they can to harm the kids in this district! Such villains!

If you are so ok with split feeders sending kids off to other schools every year without any real negative affects on their mental health... I am sure your kids can also transition into another school without having a mental health breakdown. Assuming they aren't snow flakes like their parents, which is probably not the greatest assumption. Just admit it. You think you are entitled and that the school district should pander to you.

Do you even understand the extent of your hypocrisy?

I am not sure you’re using “hypocrisy” right, or at least you haven’t explained why I’m a hypocrite.

You probably intended to call me a Jim Crow racist again.

Called you a Jim Crow racist, eh? Reading comprehension is clearly not a strong suit for you.

[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:Most parents of kids currently in school don't want their kids moved because being split from a chunk of your friend group sucks. Unfortunately with so many split feeders in FCPS that happens every single year to a new group of kids. The boundary review is meant to reduce that as much as possible. I wish they were able to do more to make true pyramids, but the uneven distribution of schools prevents that.
It is understandable that current parents are fighting to stop it from happening once to their kids. They don't outweigh years and years of new kids starting school in future years who won't have to face it if the boundaries are fixed. (speaking about split feeders only)

I get that. But then offer grandfathering to kids and deal with that for a few years and then move on to the new boundaries. I will have kids the worst grades for this move (8,10,12) and their best friends are friends from elementary who are on the other side of a proposed split.

In a few years the schools might not need the boundary adjustment. That is the point.

Schools that are overcrowded, and I would put that at 101% or more, should have their boundaries adjusted. That is going to affect other schools nearby as kids are moved. Let's see how much of that can be used to fix the split feeders and attendance islands. I suspect most of the families in the attendance islands are happy where they are and don't feel the need to be moved anyway. And there are people at split feeders that don't want to move because they would be moving form a strong school to a weak school.

I get that. They should focus on untangling boundaries and not balancing capacity, unless the capacity issues are burdening the community. Phase in the changes over the next 5-6 years to allow for grandfathering. Look into fixing capacity issues, if needed, during the next round. Untangling the web of split feeders shouldn’t hinge on balancing capacity at Chantilly and West Springfield.

Boundary changes for thee, but not for me!

What a bunch of hypocrites. You’ll throw other areas under a bus in a heartbeat as long as it means you can avoid redistricting.

The fact is that they should either be all-in or just leave boundaries alone except for those two ES that are really overcrowded.

Actually, I’m in the Marshall pyramid which might be the most heavily impacted by changes. I’d love to see Kilmer and Thoreau detangled and minimize the number of split elementary schools. The problem is that the proposals to “fix” West Springfield and Chantilly is to create more split feeders, so they’re solving one problem by creating another and the first problem might not even exist in five years.

I am also in the Marshall Pyramid and have a question. A neighbor mentioned that implementing any one of the three options could increase the poverty rate in Marshall by 15-20 percent. Does anyone know if this statement is accurate?

Oh no! Do not let more poor people into my child’s school. 27% is more than enough!

I’m sure you’ve volunteered for your kids to be moved, right? Right?

These folks always say they've happy at their high FARMS schools and yet nothing on earth seems to give them as much pleasure as the possibility that other kids will be redistricted into high FARMS schools or other schools will be turned into high FARMS schools.

"Live and let live" doesn't seem to be in their wheelhouse.

Or maybe they are annoyed by parents who try to prevent any meaningful change which may improve outcomes for a disproportionate number of kids in the District? Maybe they don't feel the sense of entitlement that seems to permeate on this forum? Are you all as libertarian in your general politics as you are when it comes to schooling? Never figured that Rand Paul was so popular in this area.

Boundary change opponents see your “meaningful change” and know it doesn’t consider mental health of students, won’t actually lift disadvantaged students up, and will create a downward spiral in the county.

Come to think of it, I guess really bad negative change qualifies as “meaningful,” so I’m guessing that’s what you meant.

Ah, yes. That evil school board doing all they can to harm the kids in this district! Such villains!

If you are so ok with split feeders sending kids off to other schools every year without any real negative affects on their mental health... I am sure your kids can also transition into another school without having a mental health breakdown. Assuming they aren't snow flakes like their parents, which is probably not the greatest assumption. Just admit it. You think you are entitled and that the school district should pander to you.

Do you even understand the extent of your hypocrisy?

I am not sure you’re using “hypocrisy” right, or at least you haven’t explained why I’m a hypocrite.

You probably intended to call me a Jim Crow racist again.

Called you a Jim Crow racist, eh? Reading comprehension is clearly not a strong suit for you.

Yikes, hinge becoming un’ed in real time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the mental health of the low-income kids is taken into consideration as well.

Yes. Their mental health should be considered too. They shouldn’t be moved unnecessarily either.

Do you really think staying in their schools is that much of a priority for these kids? They have bigger things to worry about like food, safety, sexual violence, housing. Having to move to new school is the norm for many.

[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:Most parents of kids currently in school don't want their kids moved because being split from a chunk of your friend group sucks. Unfortunately with so many split feeders in FCPS that happens every single year to a new group of kids. The boundary review is meant to reduce that as much as possible. I wish they were able to do more to make true pyramids, but the uneven distribution of schools prevents that.
It is understandable that current parents are fighting to stop it from happening once to their kids. They don't outweigh years and years of new kids starting school in future years who won't have to face it if the boundaries are fixed. (speaking about split feeders only)

I get that. But then offer grandfathering to kids and deal with that for a few years and then move on to the new boundaries. I will have kids the worst grades for this move (8,10,12) and their best friends are friends from elementary who are on the other side of a proposed split.

In a few years the schools might not need the boundary adjustment. That is the point.

Schools that are overcrowded, and I would put that at 101% or more, should have their boundaries adjusted. That is going to affect other schools nearby as kids are moved. Let's see how much of that can be used to fix the split feeders and attendance islands. I suspect most of the families in the attendance islands are happy where they are and don't feel the need to be moved anyway. And there are people at split feeders that don't want to move because they would be moving form a strong school to a weak school.

I get that. They should focus on untangling boundaries and not balancing capacity, unless the capacity issues are burdening the community. Phase in the changes over the next 5-6 years to allow for grandfathering. Look into fixing capacity issues, if needed, during the next round. Untangling the web of split feeders shouldn’t hinge on balancing capacity at Chantilly and West Springfield.

Boundary changes for thee, but not for me!

What a bunch of hypocrites. You’ll throw other areas under a bus in a heartbeat as long as it means you can avoid redistricting.

The fact is that they should either be all-in or just leave boundaries alone except for those two ES that are really overcrowded.

Actually, I’m in the Marshall pyramid which might be the most heavily impacted by changes. I’d love to see Kilmer and Thoreau detangled and minimize the number of split elementary schools. The problem is that the proposals to “fix” West Springfield and Chantilly is to create more split feeders, so they’re solving one problem by creating another and the first problem might not even exist in five years.

I am also in the Marshall Pyramid and have a question. A neighbor mentioned that implementing any one of the three options could increase the poverty rate in Marshall by 15-20 percent. Does anyone know if this statement is accurate?

Oh no! Do not let more poor people into my child’s school. 27% is more than enough!

I’m sure you’ve volunteered for your kids to be moved, right? Right?

These folks always say they've happy at their high FARMS schools and yet nothing on earth seems to give them as much pleasure as the possibility that other kids will be redistricted into high FARMS schools or other schools will be turned into high FARMS schools.

"Live and let live" doesn't seem to be in their wheelhouse.

Or maybe they are annoyed by parents who try to prevent any meaningful change which may improve outcomes for a disproportionate number of kids in the District? Maybe they don't feel the sense of entitlement that seems to permeate on this forum? Are you all as libertarian in your general politics as you are when it comes to schooling? Never figured that Rand Paul was so popular in this area.

Boundary change opponents see your “meaningful change” and know it doesn’t consider mental health of students, won’t actually lift disadvantaged students up, and will create a downward spiral in the county.

Come to think of it, I guess really bad negative change qualifies as “meaningful,” so I’m guessing that’s what you meant.

Ah, yes. That evil school board doing all they can to harm the kids in this district! Such villains!

If you are so ok with split feeders sending kids off to other schools every year without any real negative affects on their mental health... I am sure your kids can also transition into another school without having a mental health breakdown. Assuming they aren't snow flakes like their parents, which is probably not the greatest assumption. Just admit it. You think you are entitled and that the school district should pander to you.

Do you even understand the extent of your hypocrisy?

I am not sure you’re using “hypocrisy” right, or at least you haven’t explained why I’m a hypocrite.

You probably intended to call me a Jim Crow racist again.

Not PP here. But she (he?) is not wrong. You are saying your kids will have a mental health issue by being routed into a new school. I think PP's point was that plenty of kids are forced to do that now as things stand with the feeder schools.

[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:Most parents of kids currently in school don't want their kids moved because being split from a chunk of your friend group sucks. Unfortunately with so many split feeders in FCPS that happens every single year to a new group of kids. The boundary review is meant to reduce that as much as possible. I wish they were able to do more to make true pyramids, but the uneven distribution of schools prevents that.
It is understandable that current parents are fighting to stop it from happening once to their kids. They don't outweigh years and years of new kids starting school in future years who won't have to face it if the boundaries are fixed. (speaking about split feeders only)

I get that. But then offer grandfathering to kids and deal with that for a few years and then move on to the new boundaries. I will have kids the worst grades for this move (8,10,12) and their best friends are friends from elementary who are on the other side of a proposed split.

In a few years the schools might not need the boundary adjustment. That is the point.

Schools that are overcrowded, and I would put that at 101% or more, should have their boundaries adjusted. That is going to affect other schools nearby as kids are moved. Let's see how much of that can be used to fix the split feeders and attendance islands. I suspect most of the families in the attendance islands are happy where they are and don't feel the need to be moved anyway. And there are people at split feeders that don't want to move because they would be moving form a strong school to a weak school.

I get that. They should focus on untangling boundaries and not balancing capacity, unless the capacity issues are burdening the community. Phase in the changes over the next 5-6 years to allow for grandfathering. Look into fixing capacity issues, if needed, during the next round. Untangling the web of split feeders shouldn’t hinge on balancing capacity at Chantilly and West Springfield.

Boundary changes for thee, but not for me!

What a bunch of hypocrites. You’ll throw other areas under a bus in a heartbeat as long as it means you can avoid redistricting.

The fact is that they should either be all-in or just leave boundaries alone except for those two ES that are really overcrowded.

Actually, I’m in the Marshall pyramid which might be the most heavily impacted by changes. I’d love to see Kilmer and Thoreau detangled and minimize the number of split elementary schools. The problem is that the proposals to “fix” West Springfield and Chantilly is to create more split feeders, so they’re solving one problem by creating another and the first problem might not even exist in five years.

I am also in the Marshall Pyramid and have a question. A neighbor mentioned that implementing any one of the three options could increase the poverty rate in Marshall by 15-20 percent. Does anyone know if this statement is accurate?

Oh no! Do not let more poor people into my child’s school. 27% is more than enough!

I’m sure you’ve volunteered for your kids to be moved, right? Right?

These folks always say they've happy at their high FARMS schools and yet nothing on earth seems to give them as much pleasure as the possibility that other kids will be redistricted into high FARMS schools or other schools will be turned into high FARMS schools.

"Live and let live" doesn't seem to be in their wheelhouse.

Or maybe they are annoyed by parents who try to prevent any meaningful change which may improve outcomes for a disproportionate number of kids in the District? Maybe they don't feel the sense of entitlement that seems to permeate on this forum? Are you all as libertarian in your general politics as you are when it comes to schooling? Never figured that Rand Paul was so popular in this area.

Boundary change opponents see your “meaningful change” and know it doesn’t consider mental health of students, won’t actually lift disadvantaged students up, and will create a downward spiral in the county.

Come to think of it, I guess really bad negative change qualifies as “meaningful,” so I’m guessing that’s what you meant.

Ah, yes. That evil school board doing all they can to harm the kids in this district! Such villains!

If you are so ok with split feeders sending kids off to other schools every year without any real negative affects on their mental health... I am sure your kids can also transition into another school without having a mental health breakdown. Assuming they aren't snow flakes like their parents, which is probably not the greatest assumption. Just admit it. You think you are entitled and that the school district should pander to you.

Do you even understand the extent of your hypocrisy?

I am not sure you’re using “hypocrisy” right, or at least you haven’t explained why I’m a hypocrite.

You probably intended to call me a Jim Crow racist again.

Not PP here. But she (he?) is not wrong. You are saying your kids will have a mental health issue by being routed into a new school. I think PP's point was that plenty of kids are forced to do that now as things stand with the feeder schools.

Question:
How many split feeders have they eliminated?
How many have they created?
How many long commutes have they eliminated?
How many long commutes have they created?

And, the key question:
How does this improve the education of any student?

Just from my neighborhood, they have:

created a major split feeder
split a neighborhood
created 2 new islands at elementary and high school level
sent part of the neighborhood on a much longer commute


I think you will find this boundary study suggestions is not all it is cracked up to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the mental health of the low-income kids is taken into consideration as well.

Yes. Their mental health should be considered too. They shouldn’t be moved unnecessarily either.

Do you really think staying in their schools is that much of a priority for these kids? They have bigger things to worry about like food, safety, sexual violence, housing. Having to move to new school is the norm for many.

I'm not familiar with the poor neighborhoods being moved. i've looked in the maps of my immediate area, and it appears that most poor neighborhoods are staying put.

Are they moving any poor neighborhoods further away from their schools?
If so, that is a terrible, terrible idea. Those kids need the sense of community and proximity for transportation, child care, work, etc.
I taught impoverished students. If the families did not live close by, it was almost impossible to get any support from home. It also creates a huge truancy problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the mental health of the low-income kids is taken into consideration as well.

Yes. Their mental health should be considered too. They shouldn’t be moved unnecessarily either.

Do you really think staying in their schools is that much of a priority for these kids? They have bigger things to worry about like food, safety, sexual violence, housing. Having to move to new school is the norm for many.

I'm not familiar with the poor neighborhoods being moved. i've looked in the maps of my immediate area, and it appears that most poor neighborhoods are staying put.

Are they moving any poor neighborhoods further away from their schools?
If so, that is a terrible, terrible idea. Those kids need the sense of community and proximity for transportation, child care, work, etc.
I taught impoverished students. If the families did not live close by, it was almost impossible to get any support from home. It also creates a huge truancy problem.

It seems like most high FARMS areas/schools are moving closer or staying put, at least on the eastern end of the county where I’m most familiar. They want to end “bussing” where lower income areas are sent further away to a higher income school because, as you mentioned, transportation is a big barrier to attendance for these families. A kid who misses the school bus may not have a way to get to school if they can’t walk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most parents of kids currently in school don't want their kids moved because being split from a chunk of your friend group sucks. Unfortunately with so many split feeders in FCPS that happens every single year to a new group of kids. The boundary review is meant to reduce that as much as possible. I wish they were able to do more to make true pyramids, but the uneven distribution of schools prevents that.
It is understandable that current parents are fighting to stop it from happening once to their kids. They don't outweigh years and years of new kids starting school in future years who won't have to face it if the boundaries are fixed. (speaking about split feeders only)

I get that. But then offer grandfathering to kids and deal with that for a few years and then move on to the new boundaries. I will have kids the worst grades for this move (8,10,12) and their best friends are friends from elementary who are on the other side of a proposed split.

In a few years the schools might not need the boundary adjustment. That is the point.

Schools that are overcrowded, and I would put that at 101% or more, should have their boundaries adjusted. That is going to affect other schools nearby as kids are moved. Let's see how much of that can be used to fix the split feeders and attendance islands. I suspect most of the families in the attendance islands are happy where they are and don't feel the need to be moved anyway. And there are people at split feeders that don't want to move because they would be moving form a strong school to a weak school.

I get that. They should focus on untangling boundaries and not balancing capacity, unless the capacity issues are burdening the community. Phase in the changes over the next 5-6 years to allow for grandfathering. Look into fixing capacity issues, if needed, during the next round. Untangling the web of split feeders shouldn’t hinge on balancing capacity at Chantilly and West Springfield.

Boundary changes for thee, but not for me!

What a bunch of hypocrites. You’ll throw other areas under a bus in a heartbeat as long as it means you can avoid redistricting.

The fact is that they should either be all-in or just leave boundaries alone except for those two ES that are really overcrowded.

Actually, I’m in the Marshall pyramid which might be the most heavily impacted by changes. I’d love to see Kilmer and Thoreau detangled and minimize the number of split elementary schools. The problem is that the proposals to “fix” West Springfield and Chantilly is to create more split feeders, so they’re solving one problem by creating another and the first problem might not even exist in five years.

I am also in the Marshall Pyramid and have a question. A neighbor mentioned that implementing any one of the three options could increase the poverty rate in Marshall by 15-20 percent. Does anyone know if this statement is accurate?

Oh no! Do not let more poor people into my child’s school. 27% is more than enough!

I’m sure you’ve volunteered for your kids to be moved, right? Right?

These folks always say they've happy at their high FARMS schools and yet nothing on earth seems to give them as much pleasure as the possibility that other kids will be redistricted into high FARMS schools or other schools will be turned into high FARMS schools.

"Live and let live" doesn't seem to be in their wheelhouse.

Or maybe they are annoyed by parents who try to prevent any meaningful change which may improve outcomes for a disproportionate number of kids in the District? Maybe they don't feel the sense of entitlement that seems to permeate on this forum? Are you all as libertarian in your general politics as you are when it comes to schooling? Never figured that Rand Paul was so popular in this area.

The meaningful change shouldn’t come at the expense of moving other higher performing kids. It’s not kids jobs to increase school test scores to compensate for ESOL kids. FCPS should focus on meeting those kids where they are to help them. Masking test scores isn’t helping anyone

[Anonymous]

Some lower-income students are being moved from McLean to Marshall and from McLean to Falls Church, but those moves should both shorten commute times.