FCPS HS Boundary

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: All FCPS schools should be equal. Clearly they are not given the panic on here about redistricting. If schools are not equal then the board should correct the problem. In other words, high SES kids are not entitled to better public schools than low SES kids.

The schools are equal. The students are not, and no amount of boundary shuffling will fix it. Poorly-performing students will still perform poorly, and they will suck resources away from good students. In some cases (like Herndon) they will expose those good students to things like bullying, assault, gang activity, and drugs. On paper I suppose average test scores will increase for some schools with large poorly-performing student populations, but that is not a win (unless you're stupid, like our school board).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I also don’t doubt that the incentives not to report incidents at Langley are greater, given that the parents there think their kids can do no wrong and quickly lawyer up.

You're kidding, right? The incentives to not report are at Herndon, not Langley, because the optics of factual evidence of a violent population are embarrasing to FCPS.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we back to the basics? What is the timeline for these boundary changes?

Fall 2025 is the school board's stated goal.

They have mentioned this timeline at multiple work sessions.

If you have a high school student in the class of 2027 or 2028 (current rising sophomores and freshmen) you need to be VERY concerned, especially if you are not within the walk zone to your high school.

The school board has mentioned this timeline, and minimal grandfathering of high school students many times.

When someone gives you insight to their plans, believe them.

When a politician lies by omission, hiding their true plans during their campaigns so they can get elected, expect nothing less from them than a complete disregard for constituents when they are in power.

If they prioritized student's well being, they would allow grandfathering for all enrolled high school students.

If they prioritized educational quality for the kids in failing schools like Lewis, they would have removed IB a long time ago and looked for real solutions, that do not require disrupting a bunch of kids to hopefully hide the failures without actually fixing the problems.

If they valued constituents, they would not have voted for a plan that concentrates power affecting student well being, communities, and housing values, with a single, unelected, overpaid bureaucrat, to try to remove the responsibility of elected officials to their voters in their district.

If the Springfield district representative was actually representing the will of her actual voters, she would have either come out strongly against the rezoning plan, OR very strongly in support of extensive grandfathering of high school students.

She did neither, so she is clearly not performing her duties to represent her constituents.

Please vote better in 2027. Ultimately, this is the outcome of voting choices made by the voters in our county, not just for school board but also for the board of supervisors that gerrymandered 22152 and the Springfield district to try to get rid of the last moderate politician in all of Northern Virginia. If you get rezoned, and voted blue no matter who, this is the policies you support being put into action.

Reid is the one will be driving this bus. She had said a company will study it and they will take 18 months. So that would be fall 2026.

Do we think that in 1 year they will have boundaries redrawn?

You think 🤔 that with computer modeling, other forms of A.I and the general ideas they clearly already have that they couldn’t get this done in a year? 🤣
Facilities could do it themselves and certainly a consultant can.
Expect your “listening sessions” early in the spring and your final boundaries around June.

The board members will look at them and then there will be time for tinkering around the edges to protect this community or that. This particular battle has only just begun.

Protect from what?

Come on, the board members don’t all believe in equity rezoning. Some are true believers and some are asleep at the wheel. But others will be able to be convinced to change a neighborhood here or there to give them a better deal. Or to nakedly protect their own neighborhoods, to keep them at the current schools or reassign them to the “better” ones. Some board members have higher political ambitions. There will 100% be back door wheelings and dealings.

You didn't answer the question. Is there danger? Why the need to protect?

DP. Ask Karen Corbett Sanders and Matt Dunne.

The correlation between the recent expansion of West Potomac HS to 3000 seats when there was space at Mount Vernon and the answer to your question should be roughly 100%.

[That having been accomplished, Dunne - Corbett-Sanders' hand-picked successor - is all about saving money and not investing in facilities anywhere else.]

Be honest. Why are you unwilling to say what the danger is?

THE DANGER IS BEING ASSIGNED TO A LESSER PERFORMING SCHOOL YOU DERP. The same thing people have been fighting about for the last 400 pages. Try to keep up!

Why is this a danger to high performing UMC kids?

I think you’re sealioning, first of all. But:

1) Moving schools in the middle of HS means that you lose out on the leadership opportunities you may have had at your former HS, had you been allowed to stay there. This is particularly bad for juniors and possibly sophomores. There has been at least one poster on here who said she would send a rising 9th grader to Lewis with other kids from the neighborhood if need be, but sending a junior to another school for 2 years is hugely disruptive. There needs to be grandfathering, even if WSHS kids need to find their own transportation. Fortunately their boundaries are compact to the point that a kid could likely bike from the southern end of the boundary to WSHS.

2) The SB has not guaranteed classes that would be available at Lewis vs. WSHS. A kid on the highest math track could end up simply not having classes to take as a senior, and would end up less prepared for college than if they had been at WSHS all 4 years. I also don’t know if Lewis is all AP at this point or if they’re still partially holding on to IB. Whereas WSHS is all AP.

3) they aren’t reporting any of this anymore, but the last school year that had safety and security data accurately reported for the full SY was 2018-2019. WSHS had 87 safety offenses and 0 weapons offenses. Lewis had 238 safety offenses, with a smaller student population, and 3 weapons offenses - and 7 in SY 2019-2020 which was cut short due to Covid!

4) You can’t say that every WSHS kid is from a nice graduate educated $300k+ income family and will immediately go to another school and be a shining star. There are lots of kids who are kept on the fairly straight and narrow just by having a largely good peer group.

Hopefully reassigned families can encourage their kids to become leaders in the new school, push for more AP and demand safe schools.

So why should a couple dozen teenagers from another school be bussed in and tasked to fix the problems that you and the other parents whose kids are zoned for that school were unable to fix?

If you, an adult parent at that school, and the other parents at that school, can't fix the problems, why should it be the responsibility of a group of teenagers who belong at their original school?

Interesting word choice.

DP. I just read this to mean “deserve to attend” the HS they were already attending or expected to attend.

Enough with the constant insinuations - it just makes you and the School Board members you are shilling for look like nut jobs.

All FCPS schools should be equal. Clearly they are not given the panic on here about redistricting. If schools are not equal then the board should correct the problem. In other words, high SES kids are not entitled to better public schools than low SES kids.

I don’t think anyone is saying they are. What people are saying is you shouldn’t use high SES to fix problems at lower SES schools. That’s the reason for this move. FCPS isn’t trying to help the students who need it. Just move kids to raise the optics and test scores etc that the school is improving. The kids who are struggling there will no magically pass SOLs or whatever because Johnny and Sally moved in. Nor will these kids affect the chronic absenteeism. Dr Reid thinks if kids at schools with high absenteeism see kids going to school regularly they may want to also. Not sure that’s how it works

The literature disagrees. https://www.tc.columbia.edu/articles/2016/february/school-integration-is-making-a-comeback-as-research-documents-its-benefits-/#:~:text=Students%20of%20all%20races%20who,segregated%2C%20high%2Dpoverty%20schools.

Literature funded by a liberal think tank. Whodathunk they’d reach such a conclusion.

Where is the study that supports your opinion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The literature disagrees. https://www.tc.columbia.edu/articles/2016/february/school-integration-is-making-a-comeback-as-research-documents-its-benefits-/#:~:text=Students%20of%20all%20races%20who,segregated%2C%20high%2Dpoverty%20schools.

Oh yes, there's that one study from 2016 that the school board was waving around back in 2019 as they tried to change the boundary policy to explicity balance out race and socioeconomic (before their lawyers said it was unconstitutional).

In case you just fell off the turnip truck, the soft sciences have a huge problem with massaging (and making up) data to fit their preferred hypothesis, and this study is no different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where is the study that supports your opinion?

It's called common sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is the study that supports your opinion?

It's called common sense.

You don’t have a cite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: All FCPS schools should be equal. Clearly they are not given the panic on here about redistricting. If schools are not equal then the board should correct the problem. In other words, high SES kids are not entitled to better public schools than low SES kids.

The schools are equal. The students are not, and no amount of boundary shuffling will fix it. Poorly-performing students will still perform poorly, and they will suck resources away from good students. In some cases (like Herndon) they will expose those good students to things like bullying, assault, gang activity, and drugs. On paper I suppose average test scores will increase for some schools with large poorly-performing student populations, but that is not a win (unless you're stupid, like our school board).

It's hard to imagine any FCPS high school with as many drugs floating around as Langley, given the students' access to money and the extreme levels of anxiety given the social competitiveness and parental pressure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The literature disagrees. https://www.tc.columbia.edu/articles/2016/february/school-integration-is-making-a-comeback-as-research-documents-its-benefits-/#:~:text=Students%20of%20all%20races%20who,segregated%2C%20high%2Dpoverty%20schools.

Oh yes, there's that one study from 2016 that the school board was waving around back in 2019 as they tried to change the boundary policy to explicity balance out race and socioeconomic (before their lawyers said it was unconstitutional).

In case you just fell off the turnip truck, the soft sciences have a huge problem with massaging (and making up) data to fit their preferred hypothesis, and this study is no different.

Do you have data for your hypothesis?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting civil war taking place now on the FairFACTS Matters page on FB between Langley parents who are trying to protect Langley's boundaries under the guise of doing what's best for everyone in the county and hard-core conservatives like Luke Rosiak who are vocally advocating for the group to adopt an anti-immigrant stance, vote for Republican candidates, pull their kids ASAP from FCPS, and advocate for vouchers and other private school subsidies.

Not surprisingly, the insurgents (Rosiak and his sympathizers) get the support of a lot of the local parents, who are already quite conservative and have been confused by statements from FairFACTS Matters leaders suggesting that FCPS should look at public-private partnerships in Detroit as a model. Great Falls residents aren't very used to seeing Detroit held out as a useful model for their community.

If he is just pointing out what we all know— that it’s democrats who oppose school choice, favor “surging” to the border and on the county level are the ones who began working on boundary policy with an “equal outcomes for all” aim, he’s not wrong.

That group is free to prioritize other school board values like standards-based grading (another policy designed to make outcomes equal), graphic books in school libraries and boys who feel like a girl today having access to spaces meant for females OVER and above keeping their community school.

What goes on in schools is way more important than which child/neighborhood goes to which building.

In the end, most of them are democrats and will come around to the school board’s way of thinking. You’ll see.

Here’s where we will see if the rich 🤑 liberals of Great Falls really have enough money to exit the school system.

They are reacting like the rich liberals of Martha’s Vineyard when the poor brown illegals whose arrival to America they supported actually showed up in their town.
They pouted and protested and paid good money to send them away (after they gave them some sandwiches and iced tea)

What about it, Great Falls? You have enough to buy your way out of the “problem” you helped create?

It doesn’t take Martha’s Vineyard money to rent an apartment in a different school district for a few years. In fact most of us paid more in daycare for our kids than that would cost.

It’ll crowd out other families who need that housing, but that’s the law of unintended consequences.

Where there is a will, there is a way.

Where are the apartments in Langley’s district?

None yet, but that will change.

Pp swearing 100s of families are going to rent apartments to stay at Langley is pretty funny.

Well, for the mathematically challenged SJW, you just said that apartments will get moved to Langley. Unless they are apartments that are designated affordable housing, those will rent out somewhere around 2,000-2,500 per apartment. That’s 24,000 to 30,000 per year. Not a small amount of money, but less than 50-60k for elite private, and no application required.

Now, what will happen? Rents will go up pricing some LMC families out of the market and even if they don’t, these families would have to compete for those houses against Great Falls neighbors with likely higher income and credit scores. It’s no question who will get rented to. (No not because the landlords are racist, it’s just that a 750+ credit score and 200,000 per year beats 650+ and 50,000.

In summary, 24k - 30k will buy you entry into any public school that’s drivable, not even just Langley! Will everyone go this route? Surely not. But you are underestimating the willingness to pay 25k/30k for a desired school situation.

Nope. Once boundaries are changed from elementary to high school with the promise that they will be redone every five years, those people who can spare the extra tens of thousands will co op homeschool and go private.
Langley Madison Oakton McLean all the schools will be entirely new.

Renting makes sense if the boundary change is small and stable. Renting after a massive boundary change that entirely recomposes a school and that will change every few years is dumb (unless you are just really attached to the building itself).

And don’t think that the school board won’t be conducting residency checks if a school is suddenly overcrowded. Especially for Great Falls and McLean, who we all know they have deep affection for.

You think hundreds will actually rent, furnish and live in a 1,000 sq ft apartment Monday through Friday rather than stay comfortable in a 5,000 sq foot house with a backyard fire pit a short drive from Riverbend and send their kids private (or for the littles join up with other parents for co-ops)?

Nope.

Look at Langley on the map, there’s only so many farms kids that they can bring in.

Also, who said anything about living full time in those apartments?

If they move the Marshall/Langley line such that Langley now has the lower income apartments currently being built at The Exchange, but not other apartment buildings, there will not be any apartments for those families to rent inside of Langley’s district.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also don’t doubt that the incentives not to report incidents at Langley are greater, given that the parents there think their kids can do no wrong and quickly lawyer up.

You're kidding, right? The incentives to not report are at Herndon, not Langley, because the optics of factual evidence of a violent population are embarrasing to FCPS.

A “violent population”?! Yikes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting civil war taking place now on the FairFACTS Matters page on FB between Langley parents who are trying to protect Langley's boundaries under the guise of doing what's best for everyone in the county and hard-core conservatives like Luke Rosiak who are vocally advocating for the group to adopt an anti-immigrant stance, vote for Republican candidates, pull their kids ASAP from FCPS, and advocate for vouchers and other private school subsidies.

Not surprisingly, the insurgents (Rosiak and his sympathizers) get the support of a lot of the local parents, who are already quite conservative and have been confused by statements from FairFACTS Matters leaders suggesting that FCPS should look at public-private partnerships in Detroit as a model. Great Falls residents aren't very used to seeing Detroit held out as a useful model for their community.

If he is just pointing out what we all know— that it’s democrats who oppose school choice, favor “surging” to the border and on the county level are the ones who began working on boundary policy with an “equal outcomes for all” aim, he’s not wrong.

That group is free to prioritize other school board values like standards-based grading (another policy designed to make outcomes equal), graphic books in school libraries and boys who feel like a girl today having access to spaces meant for females OVER and above keeping their community school.

What goes on in schools is way more important than which child/neighborhood goes to which building.

In the end, most of them are democrats and will come around to the school board’s way of thinking. You’ll see.

Here’s where we will see if the rich 🤑 liberals of Great Falls really have enough money to exit the school system.

They are reacting like the rich liberals of Martha’s Vineyard when the poor brown illegals whose arrival to America they supported actually showed up in their town.
They pouted and protested and paid good money to send them away (after they gave them some sandwiches and iced tea)

What about it, Great Falls? You have enough to buy your way out of the “problem” you helped create?

It doesn’t take Martha’s Vineyard money to rent an apartment in a different school district for a few years. In fact most of us paid more in daycare for our kids than that would cost.

It’ll crowd out other families who need that housing, but that’s the law of unintended consequences.

Where there is a will, there is a way.

Where are the apartments in Langley’s district?

None yet, but that will change.

Pp swearing 100s of families are going to rent apartments to stay at Langley is pretty funny.

Well, for the mathematically challenged SJW, you just said that apartments will get moved to Langley. Unless they are apartments that are designated affordable housing, those will rent out somewhere around 2,000-2,500 per apartment. That’s 24,000 to 30,000 per year. Not a small amount of money, but less than 50-60k for elite private, and no application required.

Now, what will happen? Rents will go up pricing some LMC families out of the market and even if they don’t, these families would have to compete for those houses against Great Falls neighbors with likely higher income and credit scores. It’s no question who will get rented to. (No not because the landlords are racist, it’s just that a 750+ credit score and 200,000 per year beats 650+ and 50,000.

In summary, 24k - 30k will buy you entry into any public school that’s drivable, not even just Langley! Will everyone go this route? Surely not. But you are underestimating the willingness to pay 25k/30k for a desired school situation.

When did any SJW ever in the history of ever-ness advocate that people remove their kids from government school rather than do whatever it takes to keep them in leftist run government schools exposed to Marxist indoctrination, inadequate academics and lax discipline?

You think they want a sudden mass exodus to private and homeschooling.

You really are mentally challenged.

[Anonymous]

RESIDENCY CHECKS/MEMBERSHIP VERIFICATION

^^^this absolutely should be within the scope of Dr. Reid's project management plan she said her team will develop and present by the end of the summer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Herndon mom here. I hope my children never have to interact with kids whose parents are happy to bend the rules for their advantage. Is that how the rich get ahead? If that is the case, I will happily stay poor, but honest. Go Herndon Hornets!

Some bend rules to get the perceived advantage of a certain school.

Some break laws to get the advantages of a certain country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

"Tell me you haven't attended both a high-poverty public school and a low-poverty public school without telling me you haven't...."

My thoughts exactly. Many of these posts are clearly from privileged people that have never been in a high-poverty school. Or perhaps from parents at terrible schools that have no idea how bad their kids school is.

For the record, I made it out of my high-poverty public high school and am doing fine. But I know people that were not as lucky. The crime, drugs, violence and rampant behavior issues are not an experience I want for my kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to imagine any FCPS high school with as many drugs floating around as Langley, given the students' access to money and the extreme levels of anxiety given the social competitiveness and parental pressure.

OK, sure. I'll take Langley over the school with active MS-13 recruitment and 10-100x the safety issues, thanks. And so would literally everyone else who cares about their kids.