FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They really shouldn’t be doing these boundary changes and not considering Dunn Loring. That is going to affect Shrevewood and thereby Timber Lane.

Dunn Loring will definitely affect Shrevewood, Freedom Hill, and Stenwood (a lot), but not necessarily Timber Lane.

Not directly, but when they take W of 495 away from Shrevewood (which is almost a certainty), that will leave Shrevewood underenrolled unless they take AAP IV back from Lemon Road in which case Lemon Road would be underenrolled. These moves likely affect everyone N of 29, including Timber Lane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They really shouldn’t be doing these boundary changes and not considering Dunn Loring. That is going to affect Shrevewood and thereby Timber Lane.

Dunn Loring will definitely affect Shrevewood, Freedom Hill, and Stenwood (a lot), but not necessarily Timber Lane.

Not directly, but when they take W of 495 away from Shrevewood (which is almost a certainty), that will leave Shrevewood underenrolled unless they take AAP IV back from Lemon Road in which case Lemon Road would be underenrolled. These moves likely affect everyone N of 29, including Timber Lane.

I’m pretty sure Shrevewood still has local level IV, it’s just grown very unpopular in recent years and parents have been favoring the center at Lemon Road.

These notes are from 2022, but Dunn Loring is expected to impact Stenwood, Cunningham Park, Fairhill (have they learned nothing about mixing pyramids?), Freedom Hill, Shrevewood, and Vienna ES. Impacts could potentially impact Lemon Road, Westbriar, Westgate, and Timber Lane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am very curious if most of the pro rezoning posts from the past 10-20 pages are from just 1-2 people posting repeatedly.

The pro-boundary update people watching the thread have very little incentive to post. If someone posts how they'd like to fix their split feeder they are hounded incessantly by claims of "you just want to hurt the mental health of my kids", or "you're just trying to increase your property value at the expense of others" (the Emerald Chase people come to mind most recently) - all the while the people posting against them are happy to do the same to keep the status quo. I notice hardly any Emerald Chase people post here anymore because of it.
You don't have the super majority you think you have. It's just an echo chamber in here.

If you are posting the majority of the posts in support of boundary changes here, then it is likely that you have as little support throughout FCPS as you do here.

No, usually I post maybe once a week - twice if I reply to someone afterward. I'm not in a split feeder ES, but one kid basically was because of AAP. He was split from his friends where roughly 30% of the kids go to the center - so it's a situation Thru wouldn't have addressed either. Now he goes to Carson for AAP where he'll be split from most of his peers once again for high school. Split feeders are not ideal and should be eliminated whenever possible. The only people okay with them are the ones that are just happy they got the "better" end of the split for their future middle and high school and don't want it fixed if they end up somewhere "worse."

DP but you could have left him at Franklin for AAP with more kids who are going to go to his High School but you didn't. You did this to your own child.

I let him choose. How many of his classmates do you think chose to go to Franklin with kids they haven't seen since 2nd grade? Almost none. They all go to Carson to be with their friends from the last 4 years. Middle school already sucks. No one wants to go to a school where they don't know anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also if your neighborhood friends told you they go for the Catholic education, why do not believe it or why do you care why they do not go to Timber Lane? They are not bad-mouthing the school, their choices literally have nothing to do with you. I think it’s time for you to realize families make their own choices independent of what their friends families might be doing. It does not mean they are judging your choice.

Bc they aren’t just going for the catholic education. Suddenly public school becomes ok in middle and high school, as long as it isn’t at Timber Lane (or Shrevewood, for that matter). So now these same people suddenly claiming to care about the FARMs students at Timberlane is quite frankly disgusting.

We are a family from a different area that sent our kids to Catholic grade school and public high school, specifically so they would have experience being around kids from all sorts of religious and non religious backgrounds to prepare them to transition from a Catholic, religious community with shared values, to going away to college with people from all walks of life.

That is not uncommon for Catholic families to enroll their kids in Catholic grade school to enrich their spiritual like and understanding and have their kids in a teaching structure and institution that incorporates Catholic values in everything from religious classes and faith formation, to math class, science and even art and music classes. Later, they send them into the public system for preparation for living and thriving in a secular world that is often hostile to people of faith.

That is a very Catholic thing to do, and has nothing to do with FCPS zoning or FARMS rates.

We did the same thing. We could have sent our kids to PVI or DJO, but decided our kids needed a reality check. They now attend a high school with majority FARMS rate. Their parrochial K-8 experience gave them a great foundation in Catholic Social Teaching, ELA, organization skills, and they got to participate in CYO sports.

They joined athletic teams at their high school and quickly made new friends. No mental health issues at all!

Which aligns with research that says when kids switch at natural breaks (when everyone else in their class is also going to s anew school - ex 8th grade middle to 9th grade high school) then the effects of switching is much less/non existent. When kids are forced to switch schools at other times, they have worse outcomes.

It is like the board can’t even understand research or doesn’t care because they are blinded with the power of their jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am very curious if most of the pro rezoning posts from the past 10-20 pages are from just 1-2 people posting repeatedly.

The pro-boundary update people watching the thread have very little incentive to post. If someone posts how they'd like to fix their split feeder they are hounded incessantly by claims of "you just want to hurt the mental health of my kids", or "you're just trying to increase your property value at the expense of others" (the Emerald Chase people come to mind most recently) - all the while the people posting against them are happy to do the same to keep the status quo. I notice hardly any Emerald Chase people post here anymore because of it.
You don't have the super majority you think you have. It's just an echo chamber in here.

If you are posting the majority of the posts in support of boundary changes here, then it is likely that you have as little support throughout FCPS as you do here.

No, usually I post maybe once a week - twice if I reply to someone afterward. I'm not in a split feeder ES, but one kid basically was because of AAP. He was split from his friends where roughly 30% of the kids go to the center - so it's a situation Thru wouldn't have addressed either. Now he goes to Carson for AAP where he'll be split from most of his peers once again for high school. Split feeders are not ideal and should be eliminated whenever possible. The only people okay with them are the ones that are just happy they got the "better" end of the split for their future middle and high school and don't want it fixed if they end up somewhere "worse."

I understand concerns about split feeders, but there is no rule that said you had to send your child to a "center." That is a totally different situation and a choice.

The choice was go to the center or you don't get AAP. Our ES didn't offer local level 4, and the level 3 once a week pull out is a joke. My kid consistently scores in the 99th percentile on standardized tests and 600 or close to it on every SOL. There was no choice to leave him back at the base school. I'm not about to let him be bored to death in school every day and then force him to go to Kumon or Aops or whatever else people do for outside enrichment as punishment for being too smart. I'd rather he stay with the other smart kids his age - and they all go to the center.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am very curious if most of the pro rezoning posts from the past 10-20 pages are from just 1-2 people posting repeatedly.

The pro-boundary update people watching the thread have very little incentive to post. If someone posts how they'd like to fix their split feeder they are hounded incessantly by claims of "you just want to hurt the mental health of my kids", or "you're just trying to increase your property value at the expense of others" (the Emerald Chase people come to mind most recently) - all the while the people posting against them are happy to do the same to keep the status quo. I notice hardly any Emerald Chase people post here anymore because of it.
You don't have the super majority you think you have. It's just an echo chamber in here.

If you are posting the majority of the posts in support of boundary changes here, then it is likely that you have as little support throughout FCPS as you do here.

No, usually I post maybe once a week - twice if I reply to someone afterward. I'm not in a split feeder ES, but one kid basically was because of AAP. He was split from his friends where roughly 30% of the kids go to the center - so it's a situation Thru wouldn't have addressed either. Now he goes to Carson for AAP where he'll be split from most of his peers once again for high school. Split feeders are not ideal and should be eliminated whenever possible. The only people okay with them are the ones that are just happy they got the "better" end of the split for their future middle and high school and don't want it fixed if they end up somewhere "worse."

I understand concerns about split feeders, but there is no rule that said you had to send your child to a "center." That is a totally different situation and a choice.

The choice was go to the center or you don't get AAP. Our ES didn't offer local level 4, and the level 3 once a week pull out is a joke. My kid consistently scores in the 99th percentile on standardized tests and 600 or close to it on every SOL. There was no choice to leave him back at the base school. I'm not about to let him be bored to death in school every day and then force him to go to Kumon or Aops or whatever else people do for outside enrichment as punishment for being too smart. I'd rather he stay with the other smart kids his age - and they all go to the center.

You are the problem. Just reread what you wrote. Humble brag much? God damn. Just keep your kid with his friends. You are picking “smart kids”. What an a-hole you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They really shouldn’t be doing these boundary changes and not considering Dunn Loring. That is going to affect Shrevewood and thereby Timber Lane.

Dunn Loring will definitely affect Shrevewood, Freedom Hill, and Stenwood (a lot), but not necessarily Timber Lane.

Not directly, but when they take W of 495 away from Shrevewood (which is almost a certainty), that will leave Shrevewood underenrolled unless they take AAP IV back from Lemon Road in which case Lemon Road would be underenrolled. These moves likely affect everyone N of 29, including Timber Lane.

I think it's more likely that, if Lemon Road got under-enrolled, they'd just move some of Westgate and/or Haycock there to balance things out. Don't necessarily see it affecting Timber Lane, and the Thru proposals call for increasing its enrollment by about 60 kids with the boundary shifts south of Route 29. But who knows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They really shouldn’t be doing these boundary changes and not considering Dunn Loring. That is going to affect Shrevewood and thereby Timber Lane.

Dunn Loring will definitely affect Shrevewood, Freedom Hill, and Stenwood (a lot), but not necessarily Timber Lane.

Not directly, but when they take W of 495 away from Shrevewood (which is almost a certainty), that will leave Shrevewood underenrolled unless they take AAP IV back from Lemon Road in which case Lemon Road would be underenrolled. These moves likely affect everyone N of 29, including Timber Lane.

I’m pretty sure Shrevewood still has local level IV, it’s just grown very unpopular in recent years and parents have been favoring the center at Lemon Road.

These notes are from 2022, but Dunn Loring is expected to impact Stenwood, Cunningham Park, Fairhill (have they learned nothing about mixing pyramids?), Freedom Hill, Shrevewood, and Vienna ES. Impacts could potentially impact Lemon Road, Westbriar, Westgate, and Timber Lane.

The craziest thing about this is that, when Shrevewood actually was overcrowded (and it's not overcrowded any longer), the simple solution would have been to move part of Shrevewood to Stenwood and part of Stenwood to Freedom Hill.

The contortions they'll go through, and the unnecessary boundary changes they may end up making, if and when Dunn Loring finally gets built will be insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am very curious if most of the pro rezoning posts from the past 10-20 pages are from just 1-2 people posting repeatedly.

The pro-boundary update people watching the thread have very little incentive to post. If someone posts how they'd like to fix their split feeder they are hounded incessantly by claims of "you just want to hurt the mental health of my kids", or "you're just trying to increase your property value at the expense of others" (the Emerald Chase people come to mind most recently) - all the while the people posting against them are happy to do the same to keep the status quo. I notice hardly any Emerald Chase people post here anymore because of it.
You don't have the super majority you think you have. It's just an echo chamber in here.

If you are posting the majority of the posts in support of boundary changes here, then it is likely that you have as little support throughout FCPS as you do here.

No, usually I post maybe once a week - twice if I reply to someone afterward. I'm not in a split feeder ES, but one kid basically was because of AAP. He was split from his friends where roughly 30% of the kids go to the center - so it's a situation Thru wouldn't have addressed either. Now he goes to Carson for AAP where he'll be split from most of his peers once again for high school. Split feeders are not ideal and should be eliminated whenever possible. The only people okay with them are the ones that are just happy they got the "better" end of the split for their future middle and high school and don't want it fixed if they end up somewhere "worse."

I understand concerns about split feeders, but there is no rule that said you had to send your child to a "center." That is a totally different situation and a choice.

The choice was go to the center or you don't get AAP. Our ES didn't offer local level 4, and the level 3 once a week pull out is a joke. My kid consistently scores in the 99th percentile on standardized tests and 600 or close to it on every SOL. There was no choice to leave him back at the base school. I'm not about to let him be bored to death in school every day and then force him to go to Kumon or Aops or whatever else people do for outside enrichment as punishment for being too smart. I'd rather he stay with the other smart kids his age - and they all go to the center.

You are the problem. Just reread what you wrote. Humble brag much? God damn. Just keep your kid with his friends. You are picking “smart kids”. What an a-hole you are.

Someone asked why I chose to send him to the center and I answered. Wasn't volunteering in order to brag. Sorry it hurts your feelings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also if your neighborhood friends told you they go for the Catholic education, why do not believe it or why do you care why they do not go to Timber Lane? They are not bad-mouthing the school, their choices literally have nothing to do with you. I think it’s time for you to realize families make their own choices independent of what their friends families might be doing. It does not mean they are judging your choice.

Bc they aren’t just going for the catholic education. Suddenly public school becomes ok in middle and high school, as long as it isn’t at Timber Lane (or Shrevewood, for that matter). So now these same people suddenly claiming to care about the FARMs students at Timberlane is quite frankly disgusting.

We are a family from a different area that sent our kids to Catholic grade school and public high school, specifically so they would have experience being around kids from all sorts of religious and non religious backgrounds to prepare them to transition from a Catholic, religious community with shared values, to going away to college with people from all walks of life.

That is not uncommon for Catholic families to enroll their kids in Catholic grade school to enrich their spiritual like and understanding and have their kids in a teaching structure and institution that incorporates Catholic values in everything from religious classes and faith formation, to math class, science and even art and music classes. Later, they send them into the public system for preparation for living and thriving in a secular world that is often hostile to people of faith.

That is a very Catholic thing to do, and has nothing to do with FCPS zoning or FARMS rates.

We did the same thing. We could have sent our kids to PVI or DJO, but decided our kids needed a reality check. They now attend a high school with majority FARMS rate. Their parrochial K-8 experience gave them a great foundation in Catholic Social Teaching, ELA, organization skills, and they got to participate in CYO sports.

They joined athletic teams at their high school and quickly made new friends. No mental health issues at all!

Which aligns with research that says when kids switch at natural breaks (when everyone else in their class is also going to s anew school - ex 8th grade middle to 9th grade high school) then the effects of switching is much less/non existent. When kids are forced to switch schools at other times, they have worse outcomes.

It is like the board can’t even understand research or doesn’t care because they are blinded with the power of their jobs.

Exactly this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is amazing how stark the difference is between McLean and Falls Church.

37% English Learner at FCHS vs 7% at McLean
64% Free&Reduced at FCHS vs 12% at McLean

And yet there are families who prefer FCHS.

And absolutely no one is pushing for them to be rezoned out of FCHS, except for that one Fairhill guy who was hoping they'd rearrange enough boundaries for his kids to get moved from Falls Church to Oakton, Woodson, or Madison.

You miss the point, which is that maybe—if folks took a moment to look beyond the FARMS rate—they would see that FCHS has some real positives and could be a great experience for their kids too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am very curious if most of the pro rezoning posts from the past 10-20 pages are from just 1-2 people posting repeatedly.

The pro-boundary update people watching the thread have very little incentive to post. If someone posts how they'd like to fix their split feeder they are hounded incessantly by claims of "you just want to hurt the mental health of my kids", or "you're just trying to increase your property value at the expense of others" (the Emerald Chase people come to mind most recently) - all the while the people posting against them are happy to do the same to keep the status quo. I notice hardly any Emerald Chase people post here anymore because of it.
You don't have the super majority you think you have. It's just an echo chamber in here.

If you are posting the majority of the posts in support of boundary changes here, then it is likely that you have as little support throughout FCPS as you do here.

No, usually I post maybe once a week - twice if I reply to someone afterward. I'm not in a split feeder ES, but one kid basically was because of AAP. He was split from his friends where roughly 30% of the kids go to the center - so it's a situation Thru wouldn't have addressed either. Now he goes to Carson for AAP where he'll be split from most of his peers once again for high school. Split feeders are not ideal and should be eliminated whenever possible. The only people okay with them are the ones that are just happy they got the "better" end of the split for their future middle and high school and don't want it fixed if they end up somewhere "worse."

I understand concerns about split feeders, but there is no rule that said you had to send your child to a "center." That is a totally different situation and a choice.

The choice was go to the center or you don't get AAP. Our ES didn't offer local level 4, and the level 3 once a week pull out is a joke. My kid consistently scores in the 99th percentile on standardized tests and 600 or close to it on every SOL. There was no choice to leave him back at the base school. I'm not about to let him be bored to death in school every day and then force him to go to Kumon or Aops or whatever else people do for outside enrichment as punishment for being too smart. I'd rather he stay with the other smart kids his age - and they all go to the center.

You are the problem. Just reread what you wrote. Humble brag much? God damn. Just keep your kid with his friends. You are picking “smart kids”. What an a-hole you are.

Someone asked why I chose to send him to the center and I answered. Wasn't volunteering in order to brag. Sorry it hurts your feelings.

It’s ok. I accept your apology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is amazing how stark the difference is between McLean and Falls Church.

37% English Learner at FCHS vs 7% at McLean
64% Free&Reduced at FCHS vs 12% at McLean

And yet there are families who prefer FCHS.

And absolutely no one is pushing for them to be rezoned out of FCHS, except for that one Fairhill guy who was hoping they'd rearrange enough boundaries for his kids to get moved from Falls Church to Oakton, Woodson, or Madison.

You miss the point, which is that maybe—if folks took a moment to look beyond the FARMS rate—they would see that FCHS has some real positives and could be a great experience for their kids too.

I missed the point because that's not what you said earlier. I agree FCHS has many positives as well, but people preferring to stay at their currently assigned schools doesn't mean they think another school is "bad" - even if they make comparisons to support their argument they shouldn't be rezoned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also if your neighborhood friends told you they go for the Catholic education, why do not believe it or why do you care why they do not go to Timber Lane? They are not bad-mouthing the school, their choices literally have nothing to do with you. I think it’s time for you to realize families make their own choices independent of what their friends families might be doing. It does not mean they are judging your choice.

Bc they aren’t just going for the catholic education. Suddenly public school becomes ok in middle and high school, as long as it isn’t at Timber Lane (or Shrevewood, for that matter). So now these same people suddenly claiming to care about the FARMs students at Timberlane is quite frankly disgusting.

DP. It's nothing new for families to send their kids to K-6 parochial schools and then to public middle and high schools or to K-8 parochial schools and then to public high school. Langley HS has a lot of families who sent their kids to St. Luke when they could have gone to Churchill Road and Cooper, and McLean HS has a lot of families who sent their kids to St. Mark when they could have gone to Chesterbrook and Longfellow. I'm not convinced you have quite as much insight into the motives of all these families as you think you do.

DP but some of these people are my friends and they 100% are sending their children to St. James with the intent to send them to McLean for high school because they don't want to send their children to Timber Lane. They're all very open about it. I am a Shrevewood parent whose child's pyramid is going to stay the same but I'm sad that my children's friends will go to a different high school.

Someone above mentioned sports leagues. All of our kids - Shrevewood and Timber Lane - play in the Falls Church City rec league. We don't play sports with kids who live in McLean and Vienna except for maybe a handful of kids who go to Haycock. For the most part, my kids' soccer, baseball, and basketball friends go to Oak St, Mt. Daniel, Shrevewood, and Timber Lane.

Agreed. Plus Pine Spring.

And many of these are also the kids they hang with every summer at the pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also if your neighborhood friends told you they go for the Catholic education, why do not believe it or why do you care why they do not go to Timber Lane? They are not bad-mouthing the school, their choices literally have nothing to do with you. I think it’s time for you to realize families make their own choices independent of what their friends families might be doing. It does not mean they are judging your choice.

Bc they aren’t just going for the catholic education. Suddenly public school becomes ok in middle and high school, as long as it isn’t at Timber Lane (or Shrevewood, for that matter). So now these same people suddenly claiming to care about the FARMs students at Timberlane is quite frankly disgusting.

DP. It's nothing new for families to send their kids to K-6 parochial schools and then to public middle and high schools or to K-8 parochial schools and then to public high school. Langley HS has a lot of families who sent their kids to St. Luke when they could have gone to Churchill Road and Cooper, and McLean HS has a lot of families who sent their kids to St. Mark when they could have gone to Chesterbrook and Longfellow. I'm not convinced you have quite as much insight into the motives of all these families as you think you do.

DP but some of these people are my friends and they 100% are sending their children to St. James with the intent to send them to McLean for high school because they don't want to send their children to Timber Lane. They're all very open about it. I am a Shrevewood parent whose child's pyramid is going to stay the same but I'm sad that my children's friends will go to a different high school.

Someone above mentioned sports leagues. All of our kids - Shrevewood and Timber Lane - play in the Falls Church City rec league. We don't play sports with kids who live in McLean and Vienna except for maybe a handful of kids who go to Haycock. For the most part, my kids' soccer, baseball, and basketball friends go to Oak St, Mt. Daniel, Shrevewood, and Timber Lane.

Agreed. Plus Pine Spring.

And many of these are also the kids they hang with every summer at the pool.

A lot of Marshall kids go to the same pre-schools and are members of the same pools in Vienna as Madison kids. Doesn't mean they have to attend the same high school.