Boundaries assessment update 2023

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People need to stop taking about Langley and Great Falls. Nothing will happen.

The real issue is out west with Chantilly/Centreville/Westfield.

Right, but the mostly middle class/LMC/poor people that are the Centreville/Westfield demographics don't have any political sway with the SB. Heck, Stella Whatsherface lives in Centreville and hasn't done a thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Westfield is under capacity. For now growth near the Silver Line extension can be accommodated at Westfield and Herndon.

2657 is hardly small. I do realize Westfield was expanded to 3000(?) but the Silver LIne area might add to it.

Please don't add more kids to Westfield. 2657 students is absolutely enormous already.

[Anonymous]

If you look at the projections for SY 2027, Centreville, Chantilly, and Westfield would by then have 8404 seats and 8010 kids. If they move 250 kids out of Chantilly (whether directly to Centreville or to Westfield with some Westfield kids moving to Centreville), that would leave each of those schools with 2600-2700 kids (Chantilly’s enrollment would go down, Westfield’s would be about the same, and Centreville’s enrollment would increase).

That would be contentious with the Chantilly families not wanting to be moved, but it would take advantage of the Centreville expansion, avoid the cost of a new school and the controversy over its boundaries, and be irrelevant to the Great Falls folks who might meddle under other scenarios.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about giving FARMs families the option of being bussed to Langley? Start with the highest FARMs school and continue to fill spaces until Langley is near capacity? Allow the families that want to leave the schools that are high FARMs and low opportunity the chance to attend one of the low FARMs schools? Make it a choice so that the families who are below the poverty line but are invested in their kids education have the chance to attend a better school.

There is not much we can do to help the kids who come from families were the parents are not invested in school or where the family pressures demand that the kid miss school to work or watch siblings. We know that the kids with high rates of absenteeism need a different solution then what we are providing them. Bussing won’t help those kids. But the kids who do want more and are looking for more opportunities would have the choice to move to a different commute.

We really need to invest in alternative programs for many of the FARMs kids. Schools that offer classes at different times of day or even a modified school schedule so that the child is taking 2 classes at a time but the school year runs all year. Some way to meet those kids at a place where they can attend school in a non-traditional manner but get an education that will give them a chance at improving their quality of life. Hopefully then they can be in a better place where their kids can access school in a traditional manner and further improve their life.


All the boundary changes in the world are not going to address the real issues that the low FARMs schools have and we already know that the current form of education is not working for many of those kids.

We need creative solutions like this to solve for kids assigned to underperforming schools. Full school choice starting with kids in the lowest performing schools is a great start using the current pupil placement system. This is a better solution then boundary changes which require a level of analysis and future predicting FCPS seems incapable of doing well. FWIW, according to FCPS Langley was at 91% of their expanded capacity last year and would be over-capacity had they not expanded the school when they did the reno (1st since it was built in 1965). https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/fcps.fts/viz/SY2022-23CapacityDashboard/ReadMe
When the phased in boundary change with McLean completes next year, Langley will likely be close to 95+%. Still, plenty of room but hardly underutilized.

FCPS lost close to 10,000 students during their pandemic shut down and those students dont seem to be coming back. They were mostly at the early elementary school level so as the years tick by, the current trend is for fewer high school students at FCPS, not more. How do you justify the cost of a new high school for a system that lost the equivalent of 4+ high schools in recent years? We do need another TJ or two.....more STEM focused schools to create more opportunities for our kids rather than reallocating the precious few spaces at current TJ. Maybe Herndon and a school in south county area? I pray the incoming school board has some creative thinkers who can push FCPS to focus on more effective solutions and not rearranging the deck chairs on a sinking ship.

I don't know if PP is one or two people.

However, I don't think PP(s) know many FARMS families or they would not think this will solve the problem. I have experience in teaching in a school where FARMS families lived outside the community. It does not work. Family support is difficult enough when the school is close by. It is almost nil when the school is hard to reach.

Good idea in theory--not in practice.

Agree it's not THE solution but as a suite of solutions, I think its worth a try - not every high performing school is hard to get to. Although I do agree that community based schools are the best solution for most students and the community, when another school can meet a specific need and help balance school capacity without disrupting communities, we should at least look at it.

I honestly dont think that FCPS is fixable at its current size. It's too large and too geographically spread out to work well. Smaller, community based school systems are more nimble, responsive to specific community needs and accountable. Totally support more funding for schools with more needs but the Large Corporate FCPS version is irreparably broken.

I imagine breaking up FCPS into smaller chunks will lead to more disparity across the county. Wouldn't high SES regions (Gf and Mclean) thrive while low SES regions (SE fairfax) be continually underfunded?

It could but if you kept the current disparate funding (most people don't realize that the lower SES schools actually receive more $/pupil than the higher SES schools - something I agree with btw) so that under-resourced schools continue to get more money from the county/state to ensure they have sufficient resources to address needs, I dont think it would be any worse than the current situation. More local control, more accountability as they can't hide behind the huge bureaucracy as easily, more transparency, more easily customized to whatever the unique needs of the community might be......

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People need to stop taking about Langley and Great Falls. Nothing will happen.

The real issue is out west with Chantilly/Centreville/Westfield.

It looks like the next School Board member for Dranesville will come from Herndon. She might be a wild card. She isn’t going to prioritize Langley’s interests over everyone else’s like Elaine Tholen does, though she seems to care more about increasing teacher pay than anything else.

It's not going to make a difference. Current school board is 12 Democrat backed members and 0 any other party backed members.....it's been a supermajority for over a decade (last school board was 10 Dems and 2 Rs....nobody else) and will likely remain one for another four years. The likely winner for Elaine's seat is another Democrat. I don't know that Elaine protected Langley as much as the inertia of a board distracted by a pandemic, change of superintendent and a preoccupation with social justice delayed any plans to overhaul the county boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course, SB could also opt for a new Western HS (assuming it’s eventually built) to be a choice/option/magnet program… either a TJ clone/spinoff (due to demand) or perhaps an Arts or other focus… but basically make it a “more reasonable commute distance” option for some folks, which could help alleviate crowding at a number of schools without requiring dramatic boundary changes.

So the county could have two magnets almost inaccessible from the eastern portion of the county? Would a kid who got into a humanities magnet really get bussed from West Potomac or Edison an hour an a half west (no busses in the HOV lanes) for school every morning?

Agree.... Herndon and West Potomac seem like good candidates for TJ2 and TJ3. We need MORE and easily accessed opportunities for all kids. Why we only have ONE STEM magnet high school in all of Northern Virginia is a travesty and a mystery.....it's egregious mismanagement by the collective school boards. Good grief, one to serve all the counties of Northern Virginia??? 🙄 Investing in opportunities like a more robust STEM program and skilled trades preparation/internships is the best way to lift kids out of poverty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the time, it made sense to send the kids to Langley--Herndon was full and Langley was not. It made sense--and, contrary to what some on here think, it still makes sense. Otherwise, just close Langley in the name of "equity."

It might not make sense if more of the families living in the Langley area sent their kids to public school, or if Jeff Platenberg hadn’t wasted taxpayer money on an expansion Langley didn’t need.

Will you ever stop harping on this non-issue? It's been stated repeatedly, in multiple threads, that if a school is being renovated anyway, and there is room to expand, that's the time to do it. Taxpayer money would have been "wasted" had the opportunity to expand not been taken when they had the chance. Langley is barely under enrolled at this point, and it won't be long before it's at capacity, especially if more McLean students are sent there to alleviate that school's overcrowding. Good for the planners for having some foresight.

The chips on your collective shoulders are staggering. Do you have anything other than other people's schools to worry about?

You seem to be a very recognizable Langley poster repeating herself constantly on this forum. It doesn’t make what you say any more convincing.

Expanding a school in a remote location that had a flat, if not declining, enrollment wasn’t especially smart planning. In the long run, it just means longer commutes for more kids, which isn’t good for the environment. It probably made some building contractors happy, though.

How wrong you are. Had they not expanded the capacity during the renovation, Langley would be over-capacity now and everyone would be even more mad at Facilities Planning's lack of planning. Langley was at 101% capacity at the time construction started and has hovered around 1950-2100 students since 2014. Prior capacity was 1996 and current capacity is 2326 - so room to grow about 10% or take in special programs or students from overcapacity schools like nearby McLean but hardly poor planning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the time, it made sense to send the kids to Langley--Herndon was full and Langley was not. It made sense--and, contrary to what some on here think, it still makes sense. Otherwise, just close Langley in the name of "equity."

It might not make sense if more of the families living in the Langley area sent their kids to public school, or if Jeff Platenberg hadn’t wasted taxpayer money on an expansion Langley didn’t need.

Will you ever stop harping on this non-issue? It's been stated repeatedly, in multiple threads, that if a school is being renovated anyway, and there is room to expand, that's the time to do it. Taxpayer money would have been "wasted" had the opportunity to expand not been taken when they had the chance. Langley is barely under enrolled at this point, and it won't be long before it's at capacity, especially if more McLean students are sent there to alleviate that school's overcrowding. Good for the planners for having some foresight.

The chips on your collective shoulders are staggering. Do you have anything other than other people's schools to worry about?

You seem to be a very recognizable Langley poster repeating herself constantly on this forum. It doesn’t make what you say any more convincing.

Expanding a school in a remote location that had a flat, if not declining, enrollment wasn’t especially smart planning. In the long run, it just means longer commutes for more kids, which isn’t good for the environment. It probably made some building contractors happy, though.

How wrong you are. Had they not expanded the capacity during the renovation, Langley would be over-capacity now and everyone would be even more mad at Facilities Planning's lack of planning. Langley was at 101% capacity at the time construction started and has hovered around 1950-2100 students since 2014. Prior capacity was 1996 and current capacity is 2326 - so room to grow about 10% or take in special programs or students from overcapacity schools like nearby McLean but hardly poor planning.

There is little growth expected within Langley’s boundaries, so expanding it to 2100 rather than just shy of 2400 probably would have been just about right. Instead, it got a larger expansion than it needed, and FCPS is now bussing even more kids who live closer to other schools to Langley instead.

And while you might suggest the excess capacity at Langley could still accommodate more kids from a new special program, or from McLean, past experience suggests Great Falls would fight that. They want the buffer because it’s what reassures them that no one in GF will get sent back to Herndon, which is not only closer to many GF neighborhoods but now also has extra capacity as well.

None of this is good planning, and some would argue it’s bad policy as well (but that’s a different issue).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course, SB could also opt for a new Western HS (assuming it’s eventually built) to be a choice/option/magnet program… either a TJ clone/spinoff (due to demand) or perhaps an Arts or other focus… but basically make it a “more reasonable commute distance” option for some folks, which could help alleviate crowding at a number of schools without requiring dramatic boundary changes.

So the county could have two magnets almost inaccessible from the eastern portion of the county? Would a kid who got into a humanities magnet really get bussed from West Potomac or Edison an hour an a half west (no busses in the HOV lanes) for school every morning?

Agree.... Herndon and West Potomac seem like good candidates for TJ2 and TJ3. We need MORE and easily accessed opportunities for all kids. Why we only have ONE STEM magnet high school in all of Northern Virginia is a travesty and a mystery.....it's egregious mismanagement by the collective school boards. Good grief, one to serve all the counties of Northern Virginia??? 🙄 Investing in opportunities like a more robust STEM program and skilled trades preparation/internships is the best way to lift kids out of poverty.

TJ is a huge time suck to administer and there is heavy resistance to making it a full-time academy that could serve more students. It’s hard to see FCPS adding more selective magnets beyond TJ.

Edison and Chantilly already have academy programs with a STEM focus. And West Potomac already has an academy with a vocational focus. Maybe more can be done to market those programs? And maybe Herndon could get an academy with a vocational focus to complement the existing academy at Chantilly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the time, it made sense to send the kids to Langley--Herndon was full and Langley was not. It made sense--and, contrary to what some on here think, it still makes sense. Otherwise, just close Langley in the name of "equity."

It might not make sense if more of the families living in the Langley area sent their kids to public school, or if Jeff Platenberg hadn’t wasted taxpayer money on an expansion Langley didn’t need.

Will you ever stop harping on this non-issue? It's been stated repeatedly, in multiple threads, that if a school is being renovated anyway, and there is room to expand, that's the time to do it. Taxpayer money would have been "wasted" had the opportunity to expand not been taken when they had the chance. Langley is barely under enrolled at this point, and it won't be long before it's at capacity, especially if more McLean students are sent there to alleviate that school's overcrowding. Good for the planners for having some foresight.

The chips on your collective shoulders are staggering. Do you have anything other than other people's schools to worry about?

You seem to be a very recognizable Langley poster repeating herself constantly on this forum. It doesn’t make what you say any more convincing.

Expanding a school in a remote location that had a flat, if not declining, enrollment wasn’t especially smart planning. In the long run, it just means longer commutes for more kids, which isn’t good for the environment. It probably made some building contractors happy, though.

Wow, the irony. It is you whose posts are very recognizable - you regurgitate the same grievances over and over, year after year. As I just stated, it made sense to expand a school which was already scheduled for renovation and which had the space. Now they have room to take some of the kids from McLean to help with their overcrowding. It was a smart move and they will be back at capacity in no time - if they’re not already. I’m sorry this particular school keeps you up at night, even though your own kids don’t go there.

You need to stop trying to gaslight people. It’s not convincing, and your facts are typically wrong.

For example, you’re apparently the same poster who falsely claimed a Westbriar attendance island - where kids get bussed past Colvin Run on their way to Westbriar - now goes to Colvin Run. And the suggestion that Langley is now close to full capacity - also wrong.

You don’t know what you’re talking about, yet you never stop running your mouth.

Whoa - you are attributing a post to me that I never wrote? Might want to take a seat and calm yourself. And to think, you have the nerve to accuse others of gaslighting? It's pretty clear you need a time out. Maybe it would help you mature just a little.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People need to stop taking about Langley and Great Falls. Nothing will happen.

The real issue is out west with Chantilly/Centreville/Westfield.

+1

+2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course, SB could also opt for a new Western HS (assuming it’s eventually built) to be a choice/option/magnet program… either a TJ clone/spinoff (due to demand) or perhaps an Arts or other focus… but basically make it a “more reasonable commute distance” option for some folks, which could help alleviate crowding at a number of schools without requiring dramatic boundary changes.

So the county could have two magnets almost inaccessible from the eastern portion of the county? Would a kid who got into a humanities magnet really get bussed from West Potomac or Edison an hour an a half west (no busses in the HOV lanes) for school every morning?

What? You do know that kids from as far west as Loudoun Co. are being bused to an hour and a half EAST every day to TJ, right? TJ is located in the eastern part of the county. Time for the western part to have a magnet school, preferably humanities-based.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the time, it made sense to send the kids to Langley--Herndon was full and Langley was not. It made sense--and, contrary to what some on here think, it still makes sense. Otherwise, just close Langley in the name of "equity."

It might not make sense if more of the families living in the Langley area sent their kids to public school, or if Jeff Platenberg hadn’t wasted taxpayer money on an expansion Langley didn’t need.

Will you ever stop harping on this non-issue? It's been stated repeatedly, in multiple threads, that if a school is being renovated anyway, and there is room to expand, that's the time to do it. Taxpayer money would have been "wasted" had the opportunity to expand not been taken when they had the chance. Langley is barely under enrolled at this point, and it won't be long before it's at capacity, especially if more McLean students are sent there to alleviate that school's overcrowding. Good for the planners for having some foresight.

The chips on your collective shoulders are staggering. Do you have anything other than other people's schools to worry about?

You seem to be a very recognizable Langley poster repeating herself constantly on this forum. It doesn’t make what you say any more convincing.

Expanding a school in a remote location that had a flat, if not declining, enrollment wasn’t especially smart planning. In the long run, it just means longer commutes for more kids, which isn’t good for the environment. It probably made some building contractors happy, though.

How wrong you are. Had they not expanded the capacity during the renovation, Langley would be over-capacity now and everyone would be even more mad at Facilities Planning's lack of planning. Langley was at 101% capacity at the time construction started and has hovered around 1950-2100 students since 2014. Prior capacity was 1996 and current capacity is 2326 - so room to grow about 10% or take in special programs or students from overcapacity schools like nearby McLean but hardly poor planning.

Exactly. The PP will grouse about anything and everything Langley-related. It's what she does, apparently full time. Expanding a school that is already being renovated is a smart idea - and thank goodness they did, as that space was needed immediately. It won't be long before they're at capacity again, especially if they take more kids from McLean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the time, it made sense to send the kids to Langley--Herndon was full and Langley was not. It made sense--and, contrary to what some on here think, it still makes sense. Otherwise, just close Langley in the name of "equity."

It might not make sense if more of the families living in the Langley area sent their kids to public school, or if Jeff Platenberg hadn’t wasted taxpayer money on an expansion Langley didn’t need.

Will you ever stop harping on this non-issue? It's been stated repeatedly, in multiple threads, that if a school is being renovated anyway, and there is room to expand, that's the time to do it. Taxpayer money would have been "wasted" had the opportunity to expand not been taken when they had the chance. Langley is barely under enrolled at this point, and it won't be long before it's at capacity, especially if more McLean students are sent there to alleviate that school's overcrowding. Good for the planners for having some foresight.

The chips on your collective shoulders are staggering. Do you have anything other than other people's schools to worry about?

You seem to be a very recognizable Langley poster repeating herself constantly on this forum. It doesn’t make what you say any more convincing.

Expanding a school in a remote location that had a flat, if not declining, enrollment wasn’t especially smart planning. In the long run, it just means longer commutes for more kids, which isn’t good for the environment. It probably made some building contractors happy, though.

How wrong you are. Had they not expanded the capacity during the renovation, Langley would be over-capacity now and everyone would be even more mad at Facilities Planning's lack of planning. Langley was at 101% capacity at the time construction started and has hovered around 1950-2100 students since 2014. Prior capacity was 1996 and current capacity is 2326 - so room to grow about 10% or take in special programs or students from overcapacity schools like nearby McLean but hardly poor planning.

There is little growth expected within Langley’s boundaries, so expanding it to 2100 rather than just shy of 2400 probably would have been just about right. Instead, it got a larger expansion than it needed, and FCPS is now bussing even more kids who live closer to other schools to Langley instead.

And while you might suggest the excess capacity at Langley could still accommodate more kids from a new special program, or from McLean, past experience suggests Great Falls would fight that. They want the buffer because it’s what reassures them that no one in GF will get sent back to Herndon, which is not only closer to many GF neighborhoods but now also has extra capacity as well.

None of this is good planning, and some would argue it’s bad policy as well (but that’s a different issue).

DP. The only person arguing that a commonsense expansion is "bad policy" is you. Because you are desperate to meddle with Langley's boundaries, even though your kids don't even go there. That chip on your shoulder must be so weighty!

[Anonymous]

I agree it was dumb to expand Langley as much as they did. It just means more kids on more buses for longer trips to compensate for the locals who turn up their noses at Langley and send their kids to Potomac, Madeira, etc.