FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand the community fears, but maybe trust that one community can be just as kind and welcoming as another. Otherwise, the message becomes, "We only want to be a part of this community. We don't want anything to do with those people." And that is not a good message to send -- not to the children or to the people who live in a different community.

Yes, of course. "Honey, we've enjoyed having you for a while, but now we are going to give you to another family. I'm sure you will like them."

Since 2008 kids have been redistricted out of Oakton, Madison, Westfield, Chantilly, Annandale, Lewis, Fairfax, and McLean to other high schools. And of course there were big boundary changes when South County opened in 2005.

If kids get redistricted out of Langley, they’ll do fine. Stop being such babies and model better behavior for your kids. You are no more “tight knit” than any other part of the county, except to the extent that you find common ground in fearing and disrespecting others.

The behaviors that I care to model is to stand up for what you believe in and don’t let others force their extreme ideology on you. I actually am a big believer in compassion, but you can’t bring compassion about by forcing somebody to do something against their will.

Another principle that I am instilling in my kids is to never let people consider you to just be an object to achieve their goals or desires. I understand that complicates your equity agenda, but sorry, not going let my kids be offered up on your altar.

There really isn’t anything extreme in what’s likely to emerge from this boundary review. Sending kids to schools closer to their homes where feasible is just common sense.

If they kowtow to the obvious segregationists in the county, they will fail to have acted in the best interests of all the kids.

Again, you turn a lot of people off from your political party when you pretend that there is some racist civil war-type activity happening here.

Did you happen to look at the Langley dashboard? It’s not quite as sterling white segregationist as you pretend it is.

Get yourself a more compelling argument.

Langley has a lot of wealthy Asian and Middle Eastern families (and a very small number of wealthy Black families) who are just as prejudiced towards kids from less affluent families, especially Hispanic kids, as their wealthy white neighbors.

The fact that they regularly make the same types of arguments as white segregationists made in the past doesn’t make them white (although notions of “whiteness” have certainly evolved over time) but it also doesn’t mean they aren’t segregationists.

DP. WTH did I just read? Do you even live in the Langley pyramid or know anyone who does? Rhetorical question because it’s clear you don’t. Wanting to remain at an excellent high school - that many sacrificed to send their children to - does not make one prejudiced. How completely absurd. Grow up.

Other high schools are excellent as well and probably even better than Langley in some respects.

You think Langley is better because it has wealthier demographics. That's your problem, but FCPS has no obligation to keep catering to your prejudices. Deal with it.

No.

She thinks Langley is better because that is her neighborhood school.

Her kids are not your or any other equity warrior's political pawns.

Trafficking in right-wing rhetoric ("equity warrior") will get you nowhere in this county.

FCPS leadership absolutely has the right and an obligation to manage the school system as a whole, and make boundary adjustments as necessary to address overcrowding, under-enrollment, transportation efficiencies, and disparities in access to academic and extra-curricular programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You people act like school districts never redistricting kids! It’s actually regular practice in most districts. FCPS has not done it in decades because they always caved to the loudest voices. At the expense of running an efficient school system and reducing costs. FCPS needs to do the comprehensive look now, make changes that might be temporarily painful, and then revisit every five years for much smaller changes. You will be fine, your kids will be fine. And the system will be better run.

One can easily argue that the large over capacity school with some of the shortest commutes and tighest boundaries in the county and strong dedicated community involvement (WSHS) is one of the most effective models of taxpayer stewardship and should be duplicated wherever possible, instead of throwing money away and bussing kids all over for equity, lowering achievement and increasing taxpayer unhappiness.

If WSHS can successfully educate a larger number of students using fewer funds and maximizing space, and limiting commuting dollars spent bussing kids, then they are doing things right, being more efficient and effective, and should be left alone to do their thing.

WSHS was the beneficiary of a big expansion courtesy of taxpayers and a former Facilities head who was a WSHS graduate. If it got that expansion, still is above capacity, and borders a school with hundreds of available seats, it's hard to argue that it's poor stewardship to move some kids to the other school.

Otherwise you are basically arguing that there are good schools and bad schools, and that it's in the greater interests to triage and let the smaller schools decline with their students having access to fewer academic and extra-curricular opportunities. The "planned shrinkage" model was popular in the Reagan era among economists who argued that cities should deny basic services to areas like the South Bronx until they were totally depopulated and could then be redeveloped.

You argument holds no water

WSHS would be successful without the rezoning.

If WSHS was not renovated, not a single family would support rezoning to Lewis. They might be clamoring to get a renovation, but they wouldn't be asking to get rezoned.

WSHS is educating more kids effectively using fewer resources. They don't even have or need a single trailer, which is generally the first step to address overcrowding before rezoning is even mentioned.

Why do you want to target and punish WSHS kids for doing well in school, for having school admins and teachers who are successful at saving taxpayer money by successfully educating more kids for less money by having larger teacher/student ratios, and for having one the smallest boundary footprints in the entire FCPS?

DP. You seem to think that the teachers at WS are superior to the teachers at Lewis, completely ignoring that the Lewis teachers have to deal with a very different student population.

Lewis, 11.5% white, 55% F/R Lunch, 34% English Learners
WS, 48% white, 18% F/R lunch, 5% English Learners

That last number is probably the biggest key. The Lewis teachers have 7 times the number of English Learners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You people act like school districts never redistricting kids! It’s actually regular practice in most districts. FCPS has not done it in decades because they always caved to the loudest voices. At the expense of running an efficient school system and reducing costs. FCPS needs to do the comprehensive look now, make changes that might be temporarily painful, and then revisit every five years for much smaller changes. You will be fine, your kids will be fine. And the system will be better run.

One can easily argue that the large over capacity school with some of the shortest commutes and tighest boundaries in the county and strong dedicated community involvement (WSHS) is one of the most effective models of taxpayer stewardship and should be duplicated wherever possible, instead of throwing money away and bussing kids all over for equity, lowering achievement and increasing taxpayer unhappiness.

If WSHS can successfully educate a larger number of students using fewer funds and maximizing space, and limiting commuting dollars spent bussing kids, then they are doing things right, being more efficient and effective, and should be left alone to do their thing.

WSHS was the beneficiary of a big expansion courtesy of taxpayers and a former Facilities head who was a WSHS graduate. If it got that expansion, still is above capacity, and borders a school with hundreds of available seats, it's hard to argue that it's poor stewardship to move some kids to the other school.

Otherwise you are basically arguing that there are good schools and bad schools, and that it's in the greater interests to triage and let the smaller schools decline with their students having access to fewer academic and extra-curricular opportunities. The "planned shrinkage" model was popular in the Reagan era among economists who argued that cities should deny basic services to areas like the South Bronx until they were totally depopulated and could then be redeveloped.

You argument holds no water

WSHS would be successful without the rezoning.

If WSHS was not renovated, not a single family would support rezoning to Lewis. They might be clamoring to get a renovation, but they wouldn't be asking to get rezoned.

WSHS is educating more kids effectively using fewer resources. They don't even have or need a single trailer, which is generally the first step to address overcrowding before rezoning is even mentioned.

Why do you want to target and punish WSHS kids for doing well in school, for having school admins and teachers who are successful at saving taxpayer money by successfully educating more kids for less money by having larger teacher/student ratios, and for having one the smallest boundary footprints in the entire FCPS?

I don't equate doing what's right by Lewis as "punishing" anyone. Your argument starts and ends with a flawed premise.

Also, if having compact boundaries ("smallest boundary footprints") is one of the top one or two considerations, then clearly revising the expansive Langley boundaries should be a top priority.

Why should Lewis take priority over the families of WSHS?

Equity rezoning is wildly unpopular.


Other people's kids are not your political pawns.

A few dozen posters on DCUM doesn't make potential redistricting "wildly unpopular," and "equity" isn't quite the dirty word you think it is.

In a county-wide system, boundary adjustments to deal with overcrowding, under-enrollment, transportation inefficiencies, and disparities in access to academic and extra-curricular opportunities are entirely prudent and certainly within the discretion of an elected school board under VA law.

If you don't like it, move, go private, or try to vote out the current SB in 2027. You have complete control over the first two options and the third will reveal whether the fine-tuning of boundaries is as "wildly unpopular" as you claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand the community fears, but maybe trust that one community can be just as kind and welcoming as another. Otherwise, the message becomes, "We only want to be a part of this community. We don't want anything to do with those people." And that is not a good message to send -- not to the children or to the people who live in a different community.

Yes, of course. "Honey, we've enjoyed having you for a while, but now we are going to give you to another family. I'm sure you will like them."

Since 2008 kids have been redistricted out of Oakton, Madison, Westfield, Chantilly, Annandale, Lewis, Fairfax, and McLean to other high schools. And of course there were big boundary changes when South County opened in 2005.

If kids get redistricted out of Langley, they’ll do fine. Stop being such babies and model better behavior for your kids. You are no more “tight knit” than any other part of the county, except to the extent that you find common ground in fearing and disrespecting others.

The behaviors that I care to model is to stand up for what you believe in and don’t let others force their extreme ideology on you. I actually am a big believer in compassion, but you can’t bring compassion about by forcing somebody to do something against their will.

Another principle that I am instilling in my kids is to never let people consider you to just be an object to achieve their goals or desires. I understand that complicates your equity agenda, but sorry, not going let my kids be offered up on your altar.

There really isn’t anything extreme in what’s likely to emerge from this boundary review. Sending kids to schools closer to their homes where feasible is just common sense.

If they kowtow to the obvious segregationists in the county, they will fail to have acted in the best interests of all the kids.

Again, you turn a lot of people off from your political party when you pretend that there is some racist civil war-type activity happening here.

Did you happen to look at the Langley dashboard? It’s not quite as sterling white segregationist as you pretend it is.

Get yourself a more compelling argument.

Langley has a lot of wealthy Asian and Middle Eastern families (and a very small number of wealthy Black families) who are just as prejudiced towards kids from less affluent families, especially Hispanic kids, as their wealthy white neighbors.

The fact that they regularly make the same types of arguments as white segregationists made in the past doesn’t make them white (although notions of “whiteness” have certainly evolved over time) but it also doesn’t mean they aren’t segregationists.

DP. WTH did I just read? Do you even live in the Langley pyramid or know anyone who does? Rhetorical question because it’s clear you don’t. Wanting to remain at an excellent high school - that many sacrificed to send their children to - does not make one prejudiced. How completely absurd. Grow up.

Other high schools are excellent as well and probably even better than Langley in some respects.

You think Langley is better because it has wealthier demographics. That's your problem, but FCPS has no obligation to keep catering to your prejudices. Deal with it.

No.

She thinks Langley is better because that is her neighborhood school.

Her kids are not your or any other equity warrior's political pawns.

Trafficking in right-wing rhetoric ("equity warrior") will get you nowhere in this county.

FCPS leadership absolutely has the right and an obligation to manage the school system as a whole, and make boundary adjustments as necessary to address overcrowding, under-enrollment, transportation efficiencies, and disparities in access to academic and extra-curricular programs.

This is why Virginia needs school choice...

[Anonymous]

I attended one of the virtual boundary review meetings. If you haven’t, the breakout rooms are facilitated by FCPS staff members. The last section is “what questions do you want answered?” and one participant asked for more info on Thru Consulting. I felt like our staff member was a little naive to the sensitivity this entire exercise and explained they are starting with a clean slate and using GIS to redraw. This consulting firm is from up north - they have NO idea about the regional breakdown or impacts of Northern Virginia changes.

The staff member did say their preliminary suggestions will be released for more community feedback. They are going to be eaten alive!! But I also fear very minimal changes will be made post that draft release.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand the community fears, but maybe trust that one community can be just as kind and welcoming as another. Otherwise, the message becomes, "We only want to be a part of this community. We don't want anything to do with those people." And that is not a good message to send -- not to the children or to the people who live in a different community.

Yes, of course. "Honey, we've enjoyed having you for a while, but now we are going to give you to another family. I'm sure you will like them."

Since 2008 kids have been redistricted out of Oakton, Madison, Westfield, Chantilly, Annandale, Lewis, Fairfax, and McLean to other high schools. And of course there were big boundary changes when South County opened in 2005.

If kids get redistricted out of Langley, they’ll do fine. Stop being such babies and model better behavior for your kids. You are no more “tight knit” than any other part of the county, except to the extent that you find common ground in fearing and disrespecting others.

The behaviors that I care to model is to stand up for what you believe in and don’t let others force their extreme ideology on you. I actually am a big believer in compassion, but you can’t bring compassion about by forcing somebody to do something against their will.

Another principle that I am instilling in my kids is to never let people consider you to just be an object to achieve their goals or desires. I understand that complicates your equity agenda, but sorry, not going let my kids be offered up on your altar.

There really isn’t anything extreme in what’s likely to emerge from this boundary review. Sending kids to schools closer to their homes where feasible is just common sense.

If they kowtow to the obvious segregationists in the county, they will fail to have acted in the best interests of all the kids.

Again, you turn a lot of people off from your political party when you pretend that there is some racist civil war-type activity happening here.

Did you happen to look at the Langley dashboard? It’s not quite as sterling white segregationist as you pretend it is.

Get yourself a more compelling argument.

Langley has a lot of wealthy Asian and Middle Eastern families (and a very small number of wealthy Black families) who are just as prejudiced towards kids from less affluent families, especially Hispanic kids, as their wealthy white neighbors.

The fact that they regularly make the same types of arguments as white segregationists made in the past doesn’t make them white (although notions of “whiteness” have certainly evolved over time) but it also doesn’t mean they aren’t segregationists.

DP. WTH did I just read? Do you even live in the Langley pyramid or know anyone who does? Rhetorical question because it’s clear you don’t. Wanting to remain at an excellent high school - that many sacrificed to send their children to - does not make one prejudiced. How completely absurd. Grow up.

Other high schools are excellent as well and probably even better than Langley in some respects.

You think Langley is better because it has wealthier demographics. That's your problem, but FCPS has no obligation to keep catering to your prejudices. Deal with it.

No.

She thinks Langley is better because that is her neighborhood school.

Her kids are not your or any other equity warrior's political pawns.

Trafficking in right-wing rhetoric ("equity warrior") will get you nowhere in this county.

FCPS leadership absolutely has the right and an obligation to manage the school system as a whole, and make boundary adjustments as necessary to address overcrowding, under-enrollment, transportation efficiencies, and disparities in access to academic and extra-curricular programs.

Keep trying.

Reid explicitly stated, on video record, that rezoning is about One Fairfax and equity.

At the community boundary meetings, FCPS listed "equity" as its first reason for changing policy 8130 and for county wide rezoning.

Calling out FCPS and its supporters over being equity focused above all else is just restating FCPS own written and verbal statements.

You want to use other peoples kids as political pawns to push equity goals.

Other people's kids are not your equity pawns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You people act like school districts never redistricting kids! It’s actually regular practice in most districts. FCPS has not done it in decades because they always caved to the loudest voices. At the expense of running an efficient school system and reducing costs. FCPS needs to do the comprehensive look now, make changes that might be temporarily painful, and then revisit every five years for much smaller changes. You will be fine, your kids will be fine. And the system will be better run.

One can easily argue that the large over capacity school with some of the shortest commutes and tighest boundaries in the county and strong dedicated community involvement (WSHS) is one of the most effective models of taxpayer stewardship and should be duplicated wherever possible, instead of throwing money away and bussing kids all over for equity, lowering achievement and increasing taxpayer unhappiness.

If WSHS can successfully educate a larger number of students using fewer funds and maximizing space, and limiting commuting dollars spent bussing kids, then they are doing things right, being more efficient and effective, and should be left alone to do their thing.

WSHS was the beneficiary of a big expansion courtesy of taxpayers and a former Facilities head who was a WSHS graduate. If it got that expansion, still is above capacity, and borders a school with hundreds of available seats, it's hard to argue that it's poor stewardship to move some kids to the other school.

Otherwise you are basically arguing that there are good schools and bad schools, and that it's in the greater interests to triage and let the smaller schools decline with their students having access to fewer academic and extra-curricular opportunities. The "planned shrinkage" model was popular in the Reagan era among economists who argued that cities should deny basic services to areas like the South Bronx until they were totally depopulated and could then be redeveloped.

You argument holds no water

WSHS would be successful without the rezoning.

If WSHS was not renovated, not a single family would support rezoning to Lewis. They might be clamoring to get a renovation, but they wouldn't be asking to get rezoned.

WSHS is educating more kids effectively using fewer resources. They don't even have or need a single trailer, which is generally the first step to address overcrowding before rezoning is even mentioned.

Why do you want to target and punish WSHS kids for doing well in school, for having school admins and teachers who are successful at saving taxpayer money by successfully educating more kids for less money by having larger teacher/student ratios, and for having one the smallest boundary footprints in the entire FCPS?

DP. You seem to think that the teachers at WS are superior to the teachers at Lewis, completely ignoring that the Lewis teachers have to deal with a very different student population.

Lewis, 11.5% white, 55% F/R Lunch, 34% English Learners
WS, 48% white, 18% F/R lunch, 5% English Learners

That last number is probably the biggest key. The Lewis teachers have 7 times the number of English Learners.

If you read the whole convo, you would see that is not at all what I said nor what I was responding to.

If you click the button to expand the convo you will see the discussion you are missing based on your response.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You people act like school districts never redistricting kids! It’s actually regular practice in most districts. FCPS has not done it in decades because they always caved to the loudest voices. At the expense of running an efficient school system and reducing costs. FCPS needs to do the comprehensive look now, make changes that might be temporarily painful, and then revisit every five years for much smaller changes. You will be fine, your kids will be fine. And the system will be better run.

One can easily argue that the large over capacity school with some of the shortest commutes and tighest boundaries in the county and strong dedicated community involvement (WSHS) is one of the most effective models of taxpayer stewardship and should be duplicated wherever possible, instead of throwing money away and bussing kids all over for equity, lowering achievement and increasing taxpayer unhappiness.

If WSHS can successfully educate a larger number of students using fewer funds and maximizing space, and limiting commuting dollars spent bussing kids, then they are doing things right, being more efficient and effective, and should be left alone to do their thing.

WSHS was the beneficiary of a big expansion courtesy of taxpayers and a former Facilities head who was a WSHS graduate. If it got that expansion, still is above capacity, and borders a school with hundreds of available seats, it's hard to argue that it's poor stewardship to move some kids to the other school.

Otherwise you are basically arguing that there are good schools and bad schools, and that it's in the greater interests to triage and let the smaller schools decline with their students having access to fewer academic and extra-curricular opportunities. The "planned shrinkage" model was popular in the Reagan era among economists who argued that cities should deny basic services to areas like the South Bronx until they were totally depopulated and could then be redeveloped.

Silly me, I thought that we are pouring money into these poor performing schools. Well, might as well claw those back if they have fewer opportunities and nothing to show for it.

And once again, for you ladies in the back, our kids are not a resource to be deployed for your equity or social justice agenda.

And neighborhoods are not entitled to attend a certain school for eternity. Though if you live right next to the school you certainly increase the odds. But if your kids are in a bus zone, with as many schools as Fairfax has, you have to assume that you might be rezoned. Proximity isn't and can't be the only factor.

[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:I understand the community fears, but maybe trust that one community can be just as kind and welcoming as another. Otherwise, the message becomes, "We only want to be a part of this community. We don't want anything to do with those people." And that is not a good message to send -- not to the children or to the people who live in a different community.

Yes, of course. "Honey, we've enjoyed having you for a while, but now we are going to give you to another family. I'm sure you will like them."

Since 2008 kids have been redistricted out of Oakton, Madison, Westfield, Chantilly, Annandale, Lewis, Fairfax, and McLean to other high schools. And of course there were big boundary changes when South County opened in 2005.

If kids get redistricted out of Langley, they’ll do fine. Stop being such babies and model better behavior for your kids. You are no more “tight knit” than any other part of the county, except to the extent that you find common ground in fearing and disrespecting others.

The behaviors that I care to model is to stand up for what you believe in and don’t let others force their extreme ideology on you. I actually am a big believer in compassion, but you can’t bring compassion about by forcing somebody to do something against their will.

Another principle that I am instilling in my kids is to never let people consider you to just be an object to achieve their goals or desires. I understand that complicates your equity agenda, but sorry, not going let my kids be offered up on your altar.

There really isn’t anything extreme in what’s likely to emerge from this boundary review. Sending kids to schools closer to their homes where feasible is just common sense.

If they kowtow to the obvious segregationists in the county, they will fail to have acted in the best interests of all the kids.

Again, you turn a lot of people off from your political party when you pretend that there is some racist civil war-type activity happening here.

Did you happen to look at the Langley dashboard? It’s not quite as sterling white segregationist as you pretend it is.

Get yourself a more compelling argument.

Langley has a lot of wealthy Asian and Middle Eastern families (and a very small number of wealthy Black families) who are just as prejudiced towards kids from less affluent families, especially Hispanic kids, as their wealthy white neighbors.

The fact that they regularly make the same types of arguments as white segregationists made in the past doesn’t make them white (although notions of “whiteness” have certainly evolved over time) but it also doesn’t mean they aren’t segregationists.

DP. WTH did I just read? Do you even live in the Langley pyramid or know anyone who does? Rhetorical question because it’s clear you don’t. Wanting to remain at an excellent high school - that many sacrificed to send their children to - does not make one prejudiced. How completely absurd. Grow up.

Other high schools are excellent as well and probably even better than Langley in some respects.

You think Langley is better because it has wealthier demographics. That's your problem, but FCPS has no obligation to keep catering to your prejudices. Deal with it.

No.

She thinks Langley is better because that is her neighborhood school.

Her kids are not your or any other equity warrior's political pawns.

Trafficking in right-wing rhetoric ("equity warrior") will get you nowhere in this county.

FCPS leadership absolutely has the right and an obligation to manage the school system as a whole, and make boundary adjustments as necessary to address overcrowding, under-enrollment, transportation efficiencies, and disparities in access to academic and extra-curricular programs.

Keep trying.

Reid explicitly stated, on video record, that rezoning is about One Fairfax and equity.

At the community boundary meetings, FCPS listed "equity" as its first reason for changing policy 8130 and for county wide rezoning.

Calling out FCPS and its supporters over being equity focused above all else is just restating FCPS own written and verbal statements.

You want to use other peoples kids as political pawns to push equity goals.

Other people's kids are not your equity pawns.

Soooo about that DEIAtrust email?

[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:I understand the community fears, but maybe trust that one community can be just as kind and welcoming as another. Otherwise, the message becomes, "We only want to be a part of this community. We don't want anything to do with those people." And that is not a good message to send -- not to the children or to the people who live in a different community.

Yes, of course. "Honey, we've enjoyed having you for a while, but now we are going to give you to another family. I'm sure you will like them."

Since 2008 kids have been redistricted out of Oakton, Madison, Westfield, Chantilly, Annandale, Lewis, Fairfax, and McLean to other high schools. And of course there were big boundary changes when South County opened in 2005.

If kids get redistricted out of Langley, they’ll do fine. Stop being such babies and model better behavior for your kids. You are no more “tight knit” than any other part of the county, except to the extent that you find common ground in fearing and disrespecting others.

The behaviors that I care to model is to stand up for what you believe in and don’t let others force their extreme ideology on you. I actually am a big believer in compassion, but you can’t bring compassion about by forcing somebody to do something against their will.

Another principle that I am instilling in my kids is to never let people consider you to just be an object to achieve their goals or desires. I understand that complicates your equity agenda, but sorry, not going let my kids be offered up on your altar.

There really isn’t anything extreme in what’s likely to emerge from this boundary review. Sending kids to schools closer to their homes where feasible is just common sense.

If they kowtow to the obvious segregationists in the county, they will fail to have acted in the best interests of all the kids.

Again, you turn a lot of people off from your political party when you pretend that there is some racist civil war-type activity happening here.

Did you happen to look at the Langley dashboard? It’s not quite as sterling white segregationist as you pretend it is.

Get yourself a more compelling argument.

Langley has a lot of wealthy Asian and Middle Eastern families (and a very small number of wealthy Black families) who are just as prejudiced towards kids from less affluent families, especially Hispanic kids, as their wealthy white neighbors.

The fact that they regularly make the same types of arguments as white segregationists made in the past doesn’t make them white (although notions of “whiteness” have certainly evolved over time) but it also doesn’t mean they aren’t segregationists.

DP. WTH did I just read? Do you even live in the Langley pyramid or know anyone who does? Rhetorical question because it’s clear you don’t. Wanting to remain at an excellent high school - that many sacrificed to send their children to - does not make one prejudiced. How completely absurd. Grow up.

Other high schools are excellent as well and probably even better than Langley in some respects.

You think Langley is better because it has wealthier demographics. That's your problem, but FCPS has no obligation to keep catering to your prejudices. Deal with it.

No.

She thinks Langley is better because that is her neighborhood school.

Her kids are not your or any other equity warrior's political pawns.

Trafficking in right-wing rhetoric ("equity warrior") will get you nowhere in this county.

FCPS leadership absolutely has the right and an obligation to manage the school system as a whole, and make boundary adjustments as necessary to address overcrowding, under-enrollment, transportation efficiencies, and disparities in access to academic and extra-curricular programs.

Keep trying.

Reid explicitly stated, on video record, that rezoning is about One Fairfax and equity.

At the community boundary meetings, FCPS listed "equity" as its first reason for changing policy 8130 and for county wide rezoning.

Calling out FCPS and its supporters over being equity focused above all else is just restating FCPS own written and verbal statements.

You want to use other peoples kids as political pawns to push equity goals.

Other people's kids are not your equity pawns.

Here's the One Fairfax definition of "equity":

Equity: The commitment to promote fairness and justice in the formation of public policy that results in all residents – regardless of age, race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, national origin, marital status, disability, socio-economic status or neighborhood of residence or other characteristics – having opportunity to fully participate in the region’s economic vitality, contribute to its readiness for the future, and connect to its assets and resources.

What about that definition do you find objectionable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have a copy of the leaked map showing WMES changing to Fairfax HS?

+1


Would like to see the maps as well.

They’re not real. Just some dcum poster making stuff up. Nothing has been proposed yet. You need to wait for facts and not believe the crazy stories on an anonymous website.

At least one FCPS SB rep has publicly shared comments addressing this:

https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/VAEDUFCPS/bulletins/3d1f239

Other, less public, assurances have also been made. In every instance that I have seen, FCPS firmly disclaims the existence of any “secret maps.” FCPS also firmly denies that any formal proposals have been made.

However, among those who have seen these statements, it is widely believed that the leaks reflect some level of internal, informal discussions. Those informal discussions will lead to maps and proposals if you do not reach out to your representatives and let your voice be heard now.

I’ll believe that “there’s nothing to see here” when FCPS drops their actual proposals in June.

That’s right, June. We won’t get “formal” confirmation until June. Maybe all those angry people calling their reps will just calm down and forget about all of this by June.

FCPS states they plan to release the proposals in June, allow time for comments, then make decisions in the fall. That means that the time that affected communities will have to review and respond to proposed changes has been limited to summer, after the school year ends, and when engagement and focus on school matters is typically lower.

Reach out to your representatives now, before informal discussions become maps and proposals. Organize your community now before families get distracted this summer. When this hits, your community needs to be ready to respond.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You people act like school districts never redistricting kids! It’s actually regular practice in most districts. FCPS has not done it in decades because they always caved to the loudest voices. At the expense of running an efficient school system and reducing costs. FCPS needs to do the comprehensive look now, make changes that might be temporarily painful, and then revisit every five years for much smaller changes. You will be fine, your kids will be fine. And the system will be better run.

One can easily argue that the large over capacity school with some of the shortest commutes and tighest boundaries in the county and strong dedicated community involvement (WSHS) is one of the most effective models of taxpayer stewardship and should be duplicated wherever possible, instead of throwing money away and bussing kids all over for equity, lowering achievement and increasing taxpayer unhappiness.

If WSHS can successfully educate a larger number of students using fewer funds and maximizing space, and limiting commuting dollars spent bussing kids, then they are doing things right, being more efficient and effective, and should be left alone to do their thing.

WSHS was the beneficiary of a big expansion courtesy of taxpayers and a former Facilities head who was a WSHS graduate. If it got that expansion, still is above capacity, and borders a school with hundreds of available seats, it's hard to argue that it's poor stewardship to move some kids to the other school.

Otherwise you are basically arguing that there are good schools and bad schools, and that it's in the greater interests to triage and let the smaller schools decline with their students having access to fewer academic and extra-curricular opportunities. The "planned shrinkage" model was popular in the Reagan era among economists who argued that cities should deny basic services to areas like the South Bronx until they were totally depopulated and could then be redeveloped.

You argument holds no water

WSHS would be successful without the rezoning.

If WSHS was not renovated, not a single family would support rezoning to Lewis. They might be clamoring to get a renovation, but they wouldn't be asking to get rezoned.

WSHS is educating more kids effectively using fewer resources. They don't even have or need a single trailer, which is generally the first step to address overcrowding before rezoning is even mentioned.

Why do you want to target and punish WSHS kids for doing well in school, for having school admins and teachers who are successful at saving taxpayer money by successfully educating more kids for less money by having larger teacher/student ratios, and for having one the smallest boundary footprints in the entire FCPS?

I don't equate doing what's right by Lewis as "punishing" anyone. Your argument starts and ends with a flawed premise.

Also, if having compact boundaries ("smallest boundary footprints") is one of the top one or two considerations, then clearly revising the expansive Langley boundaries should be a top priority.

Why should Lewis take priority over the families of WSHS?

Equity rezoning is wildly unpopular.


Other people's kids are not your political pawns.

A few dozen posters on DCUM doesn't make potential redistricting "wildly unpopular," and "equity" isn't quite the dirty word you think it is.

In a county-wide system, boundary adjustments to deal with overcrowding, under-enrollment, transportation inefficiencies, and disparities in access to academic and extra-curricular opportunities are entirely prudent and certainly within the discretion of an elected school board under VA law.

If you don't like it, move, go private, or try to vote out the current SB in 2027. You have complete control over the first two options and the third will reveal whether the fine-tuning of boundaries is as "wildly unpopular" as you claim.

A few posters on dcum might not, but the community meetings showed that universally, even in districts like Lewis, Herndon and Mount Vernon, this rezoning is wildly unpopular.

Ask the committee members who are combing through the feedback.

Ironically, at the boundary meetings, I sat next to a parent at one of the lower performing under capacity schools frequently mentioned here as a recipient of rezoning.

Her response was interesting.

She wanted her high school renovated and the sports fields fixed to be comparable to all the other high schools.

She wanted IB out and AP in. To her, this addressed the equity.

She didn't want the leadership academy. She wanted AP so kids stop transferring out, and something more practical for the low performing kids, like a trades academy.

Her statement at the end summed it up " If you don't fix those three issues (the junky facilities, being an IB school, and no viable programs for the lower performing kids) then it doesn't matter who you transfer in because they will just find ways not to attend our school and the problems won't be fixed."

Just so you know, she didn't complain about the teachers and admin, or really the student population either.

Her issues were #1 the junky building and embarrassing sports fields compared to other high schools and #2 IB/IB transfer loophole and #3 FCPS taking the wrong approach for the sizeable low performing population

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have a copy of the leaked map showing WMES changing to Fairfax HS?

+1


Would like to see the maps as well.

They’re not real. Just some dcum poster making stuff up. Nothing has been proposed yet. You need to wait for facts and not believe the crazy stories on an anonymous website.

At least one FCPS SB rep has publicly shared comments addressing this:

https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/VAEDUFCPS/bulletins/3d1f239

Other, less public, assurances have also been made. In every instance that I have seen, FCPS firmly disclaims the existence of any “secret maps.” FCPS also firmly denies that any formal proposals have been made.

However, among those who have seen these statements, it is widely believed that the leaks reflect some level of internal, informal discussions. Those informal discussions will lead to maps and proposals if you do not reach out to your representatives and let your voice be heard now.

I’ll believe that “there’s nothing to see here” when FCPS drops their actual proposals in June.

That’s right, June. We won’t get “formal” confirmation until June. Maybe all those angry people calling their reps will just calm down and forget about all of this by June.

FCPS states they plan to release the proposals in June, allow time for comments, then make decisions in the fall. That means that the time that affected communities will have to review and respond to proposed changes has been limited to summer, after the school year ends, and when engagement and focus on school matters is typically lower.

Reach out to your representatives now, before informal discussions become maps and proposals. Organize your community now before families get distracted this summer. When this hits, your community needs to be ready to respond.

Genuinely asking. Should we reach out to school board reps or electoral district reps? Both?

Mantua-1.org has some good terminology to use. And we know they are fighting like hell to avoid rezoning. Going to copy!

[Anonymous]

In the case of West Springfield and Lewis, no one has to make a socioeconomic argument. You could, however, make an argument that the kids at Lewis are not being served well by the small enrollment relative to other FCPS high schools (WS could soon be twice the size of Lewis). It reduces the variety of classes and the instances of those classes. So kids at surrounding schools have options that Lewis kids do not. And moving almost any WS kids into Lewis will likely pick up a population with a much lower F/R lunch rate. Not as clear what the effect of pulling in kids from Edison would do (aside from simply increasing the numbers).

I do agree that the first step should be to review programming. IB really needs to go. But if the languages are not standardized people will force their kids into languages just to escape Lewis (or similar schools). Probably need to review whether the STEM academy might be better if relocated from Edison to Lewis since there is so much room.

[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:I understand the community fears, but maybe trust that one community can be just as kind and welcoming as another. Otherwise, the message becomes, "We only want to be a part of this community. We don't want anything to do with those people." And that is not a good message to send -- not to the children or to the people who live in a different community.

Yes, of course. "Honey, we've enjoyed having you for a while, but now we are going to give you to another family. I'm sure you will like them."

Since 2008 kids have been redistricted out of Oakton, Madison, Westfield, Chantilly, Annandale, Lewis, Fairfax, and McLean to other high schools. And of course there were big boundary changes when South County opened in 2005.

If kids get redistricted out of Langley, they’ll do fine. Stop being such babies and model better behavior for your kids. You are no more “tight knit” than any other part of the county, except to the extent that you find common ground in fearing and disrespecting others.

The behaviors that I care to model is to stand up for what you believe in and don’t let others force their extreme ideology on you. I actually am a big believer in compassion, but you can’t bring compassion about by forcing somebody to do something against their will.

Another principle that I am instilling in my kids is to never let people consider you to just be an object to achieve their goals or desires. I understand that complicates your equity agenda, but sorry, not going let my kids be offered up on your altar.

There really isn’t anything extreme in what’s likely to emerge from this boundary review. Sending kids to schools closer to their homes where feasible is just common sense.

If they kowtow to the obvious segregationists in the county, they will fail to have acted in the best interests of all the kids.

Again, you turn a lot of people off from your political party when you pretend that there is some racist civil war-type activity happening here.

Did you happen to look at the Langley dashboard? It’s not quite as sterling white segregationist as you pretend it is.

Get yourself a more compelling argument.

Langley has a lot of wealthy Asian and Middle Eastern families (and a very small number of wealthy Black families) who are just as prejudiced towards kids from less affluent families, especially Hispanic kids, as their wealthy white neighbors.

The fact that they regularly make the same types of arguments as white segregationists made in the past doesn’t make them white (although notions of “whiteness” have certainly evolved over time) but it also doesn’t mean they aren’t segregationists.

DP. WTH did I just read? Do you even live in the Langley pyramid or know anyone who does? Rhetorical question because it’s clear you don’t. Wanting to remain at an excellent high school - that many sacrificed to send their children to - does not make one prejudiced. How completely absurd. Grow up.

Other high schools are excellent as well and probably even better than Langley in some respects.

You think Langley is better because it has wealthier demographics. That's your problem, but FCPS has no obligation to keep catering to your prejudices. Deal with it.

No.

She thinks Langley is better because that is her neighborhood school.

Her kids are not your or any other equity warrior's political pawns.

Trafficking in right-wing rhetoric ("equity warrior") will get you nowhere in this county.

FCPS leadership absolutely has the right and an obligation to manage the school system as a whole, and make boundary adjustments as necessary to address overcrowding, under-enrollment, transportation efficiencies, and disparities in access to academic and extra-curricular programs.

Keep trying.

Reid explicitly stated, on video record, that rezoning is about One Fairfax and equity.

At the community boundary meetings, FCPS listed "equity" as its first reason for changing policy 8130 and for county wide rezoning.

Calling out FCPS and its supporters over being equity focused above all else is just restating FCPS own written and verbal statements.

You want to use other peoples kids as political pawns to push equity goals.

Other people's kids are not your equity pawns.

Here's the One Fairfax definition of "equity":

Equity: The commitment to promote fairness and justice in the formation of public policy that results in all residents – regardless of age, race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, national origin, marital status, disability, socio-economic status or neighborhood of residence or other characteristics – having opportunity to fully participate in the region’s economic vitality, contribute to its readiness for the future, and connect to its assets and resources.

What about that definition do you find objectionable?

You missed the first paragraph.

"One Fairfax logoOne Fairfax is a joint racial and social equity policy of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors and School Board. The 2016 One Fairfax Resolution commits the county and schools to intentionally consider equity when making policies or delivering programs and services"


https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/topics/one-fairfax