FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[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: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

UGH! It’s the savior mentality for me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

I have been called a “social warrior” and a LWNJ on this thread before, and I think these moves are excellent if they really do shorten the commute times for these students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

I have been called a “social warrior” and a LWNJ on this thread before, and I think these moves are excellent if they really do shorten the commute times for these students.

Sacrifice those kids mental health for your equity cause. You wouldn’t have it any other way.

[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.

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

UGH! It’s the savior mentality for me.

To the pro-boundary change crowd like Sandy Anderson, they think skin color determines value in the school system. It’s really gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

I have been called a “social warrior” and a LWNJ on this thread before, and I think these moves are excellent if they really do shorten the commute times for these students.

Sacrifice those kids mental health for your equity cause. You wouldn’t have it any other way.

What do you mean? Kids should attend the closest school to their house. Low income students are forced to move all the time because parents loose their jobs, they cannot afford their home, divorce. Moving to a new school probably probably barely registers in their already challenging lives. If shorter commutes will help them stay in school, that seems like a positive thing, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

There are also some lower and higher-income students proposed to move from Marshall to McLean to offset the proposed elimination of both of the McLean attendance islands (Tysons and Timber Lane) and to reduce overcrowding at Kilmer and keep Longfellow from getting too under-capacity.

[Anonymous]

What do you mean? Kids should attend the closest school to their house. Low income students are forced to move all the time because parents loose their jobs, they cannot afford their home, divorce. Moving to a new school probably probably barely registers in their already challenging lives. If shorter commutes will help them stay in school, that seems like a positive thing, right?

You've never taught kids with a lot of "mobility" have you? You think because they are low income that the school is insignificant?

Agree, I've posted before that it is extremely important for poor kids to go to the closest school, but moving them is a very different story. If any kid needs stability, it is the impoverished kids.

[Anonymous]

I live in Fairfax County. I have no idea of all the moves regarding Marshall/Mclean/Falls Church, etc. I have been to those schools, but know nothing about the surrounding neighborhoods. I do know poor kids benefit from stability and attending a school that is close by. If the move will make attendance easier, it might be worth it. If there is not a true savings in time and convenience, etc, I'd vote to keep them put.

The question is--is THRU considering these factors? A slight savings in time may not be worth the move.
This is not a game.

[Anonymous]

100% if we are talking about a 2 minute drive improvement in commute time…stability is school, teachers, network is more important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:100% if we are talking about a 2 minute drive improvement in commute time…stability is school, teachers, network is more important.

If you're talking about the Timber Lane area Google maps currently shows the commuting time from some of the low-income apartments that would be rezoned as 16-19 minutes to McLean, 12-14 minutes to Marshall, and 8 minutes to Falls Church. We're not talking about the 45 minute commutes some kids have to their high school.

In any event, I don't think they were guided primarily by a desire to reduce commuting times for low-income kids. They were trying to eliminate an "attendance island" at McLean, reduce the continued overcrowding there, and demonstrate that the ongoing expansion of Falls Church HS is worth the expense. They are proposing to move part of that island to Marshall rather than Falls Church because of an overlap with a separate effort to address an elementary school in the FCHS pyramid that lies outside its attendance area (Graham Road), the proposed solution to which involves moving more kids to Timber Lane south of Route 29 and then moving some kids north of Route 29 to a nearby ES in the Marshall pyramid (Shrevewood) to avoid overcrowding Timber Lane. Since Shrevewood is in the Marshall pyramid, they are proposing to move them to Kilmer and Marshall as well.

[Anonymous]

It sounds like the maps presented by Thru are not the maps and rezoning that the school board intended to implement.

Both Dr. Reid and our school board rep had said at public meeting that the proposed map for our area is not what was supposed to happen, and that our school will likely move as a unit, not a split feeder as it has been on all the Thru maps.

If this is happening in one pyramid, it means it is happening everywhere. It also means Thru came up with different solutions than the ones the school board intended when they changed 8130, which might explain why Thru came up with making Hunt Valley a split feeder to SoCo (a better solution than to Lewis), instead of rezoning the entire school to Lewis like was on the leaked maps from last summer.

Based on the reactions this and last week from Dr. Reid and at least one school board rep, it appears that the summer maps are going to be a huge summer surprise and probably very different from the Thru maps so far.

Buckle up, parents. It is going to get worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the maps presented by Thru are not the maps and rezoning that the school board intended to implement.

Both Dr. Reid and our school board rep had said at public meeting that the proposed map for our area is not what was supposed to happen, and that our school will likely move as a unit, not a split feeder as it has been on all the Thru maps.

If this is happening in one pyramid, it means it is happening everywhere. It also means Thru came up with different solutions than the ones the school board intended when they changed 8130, which might explain why Thru came up with making Hunt Valley a split feeder to SoCo (a better solution than to Lewis), instead of rezoning the entire school to Lewis like was on the leaked maps from last summer.

Based on the reactions this and last week from Dr. Reid and at least one school board rep, it appears that the summer maps are going to be a huge summer surprise and probably very different from the Thru maps so far.

Buckle up, parents. It is going to get worse.

Nah, they can’t go bigger, it’d have to shrink. Thru tied their hands if they ever want to have a career in politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the maps presented by Thru are not the maps and rezoning that the school board intended to implement.

Both Dr. Reid and our school board rep had said at public meeting that the proposed map for our area is not what was supposed to happen, and that our school will likely move as a unit, not a split feeder as it has been on all the Thru maps.

If this is happening in one pyramid, it means it is happening everywhere. It also means Thru came up with different solutions than the ones the school board intended when they changed 8130, which might explain why Thru came up with making Hunt Valley a split feeder to SoCo (a better solution than to Lewis), instead of rezoning the entire school to Lewis like was on the leaked maps from last summer.

Based on the reactions this and last week from Dr. Reid and at least one school board rep, it appears that the summer maps are going to be a huge summer surprise and probably very different from the Thru maps so far.

Buckle up, parents. It is going to get worse.

Dr. Reid and her staff are responsible for supervising Thru Consulting and giving them direction as to what they want to accomplish. If what Thru then comes up with doesn't meet or align with their expectations, they shouldn't be providing these scenarios to either the BRAC or the general public. Already we have board members back-tracking left and right.

The incompetence on display here is truly stunning. Michelle Reid needs to be fired.

[Anonymous]

It may not be Reid. It may just be that Sandy Anderson is an idiot who had no idea what she was doing when she approved this work. Karl Frisch is an idiot, too, so it's not like he would have given her any sound advice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the maps presented by Thru are not the maps and rezoning that the school board intended to implement.

Both Dr. Reid and our school board rep had said at public meeting that the proposed map for our area is not what was supposed to happen, and that our school will likely move as a unit, not a split feeder as it has been on all the Thru maps.

If this is happening in one pyramid, it means it is happening everywhere. It also means Thru came up with different solutions than the ones the school board intended when they changed 8130, which might explain why Thru came up with making Hunt Valley a split feeder to SoCo (a better solution than to Lewis), instead of rezoning the entire school to Lewis like was on the leaked maps from last summer.

Based on the reactions this and last week from Dr. Reid and at least one school board rep, it appears that the summer maps are going to be a huge summer surprise and probably very different from the Thru maps so far.

Buckle up, parents. It is going to get worse.

I’ve heard the same. What will happen? Go back to the Lewis proposal or keep things as is? They can’t move the whole
HV to south county schools.