FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When is the next FCPS BRAC meeting?

They’re supposed to meet every 2 weeks, and last met Feb 21, so it should be this week. Wonder how long it will take the scenarios presented to leak.

Was thinking the same, this week or next. As for leaking, I do think they may post the “scenarios” with their minutes. Alexandria city public recently did the same and very much claimed them to be “scenarios”. Fcps has been transparent about what’s been presented in the meetings and the fact they directly posted that BRAC will be reviewing them just invites speculation.

If they don’t, I would be FairFACTs submits a FOIA request and rightfully so!

Therefore, I do think we will know some initial thoughts soon albeit not the official “Drafts for public comment”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Before any discussion of changing boundaries, the SB needs to eliminate ALL AAP centers and just ensure every school has AAP classes. The skewing and confusion of borders is due in large part to the absurd busing of certain students to center schools. At this point, the center model is redundant and wasteful and needs to end.

Boundaries should only be addressed if there is a need to do so AFTER all kids are back in their community schools.

Agreed. At the next BRAC meeting, they are reviewing a scenario of everyone returning to their zoned school. So many of these inflated schools are influenced by those they allow attend from other zone, and often those over-achievers looking for more!

Bring students back to their home zones, offer fair and enticing programming within all pyramids and then assess capacity issues. See how testing and scores level out before their next equity brigade.

This seems like such a simple, practical way to start. For goodness sake stop brain draining home schools by having AAP centers and a million different options you can only get at one high school or another. It's absolutely ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Before any discussion of changing boundaries, the SB needs to eliminate ALL AAP centers and just ensure every school has AAP classes. The skewing and confusion of borders is due in large part to the absurd busing of certain students to center schools. At this point, the center model is redundant and wasteful and needs to end.

Boundaries should only be addressed if there is a need to do so AFTER all kids are back in their community schools.

Agreed. At the next BRAC meeting, they are reviewing a scenario of everyone returning to their zoned school. So many of these inflated schools are influenced by those they allow attend from other zone, and often those over-achievers looking for more!

Bring students back to their home zones, offer fair and enticing programming within all pyramids and then assess capacity issues. See how testing and scores level out before their next equity brigade.

This seems like such a simple, practical way to start. For goodness sake stop brain draining home schools by having AAP centers and a million different options you can only get at one high school or another. It's absolutely ridiculous.

It's OK as a modeling exercise but no one should be reassigned to an IB high school without a pupil placement option to an AP high school. IB is a niche program and kids need to have AP options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Before any discussion of changing boundaries, the SB needs to eliminate ALL AAP centers and just ensure every school has AAP classes. The skewing and confusion of borders is due in large part to the absurd busing of certain students to center schools. At this point, the center model is redundant and wasteful and needs to end.

Boundaries should only be addressed if there is a need to do so AFTER all kids are back in their community schools.

Agreed. At the next BRAC meeting, they are reviewing a scenario of everyone returning to their zoned school. So many of these inflated schools are influenced by those they allow attend from other zone, and often those over-achievers looking for more!

Bring students back to their home zones, offer fair and enticing programming within all pyramids and then assess capacity issues. See how testing and scores level out before their next equity brigade.

That should be a given. But, this won't work unless they eliminate IB.

This seems like such a simple, practical way to start. For goodness sake stop brain draining home schools by having AAP centers and a million different options you can only get at one high school or another. It's absolutely ridiculous.

It's OK as a modeling exercise but no one should be reassigned to an IB high school without a pupil placement option to an AP high school. IB is a niche program and kids need to have AP options.

[Anonymous]

OP, I've no experience with this. But, my question is--are you okay with your base school if you do not get in? It seems likely to me that #4 would be a very good number, but I'm no expert.

So, i guess it is a gamble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I've no experience with this. But, my question is--are you okay with your base school if you do not get in? It seems likely to me that #4 would be a very good number, but I'm no expert.

So, i guess it is a gamble.

OOPs wrong thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Before any discussion of changing boundaries, the SB needs to eliminate ALL AAP centers and just ensure every school has AAP classes. The skewing and confusion of borders is due in large part to the absurd busing of certain students to center schools. At this point, the center model is redundant and wasteful and needs to end.

Boundaries should only be addressed if there is a need to do so AFTER all kids are back in their community schools.

Agreed. At the next BRAC meeting, they are reviewing a scenario of everyone returning to their zoned school. So many of these inflated schools are influenced by those they allow attend from other zone, and often those over-achievers looking for more!

Bring students back to their home zones, offer fair and enticing programming within all pyramids and then assess capacity issues. See how testing and scores level out before their next equity brigade.

This seems like such a simple, practical way to start. For goodness sake stop brain draining home schools by having AAP centers and a million different options you can only get at one high school or another. It's absolutely ridiculous.

It's OK as a modeling exercise but no one should be reassigned to an IB high school without a pupil placement option to an AP high school. IB is a niche program and kids need to have AP options.

Why can't all the high schools switch to AP? Isn't IB just as expensive?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Before any discussion of changing boundaries, the SB needs to eliminate ALL AAP centers and just ensure every school has AAP classes. The skewing and confusion of borders is due in large part to the absurd busing of certain students to center schools. At this point, the center model is redundant and wasteful and needs to end.

Boundaries should only be addressed if there is a need to do so AFTER all kids are back in their community schools.

Agreed. At the next BRAC meeting, they are reviewing a scenario of everyone returning to their zoned school. So many of these inflated schools are influenced by those they allow attend from other zone, and often those over-achievers looking for more!

Bring students back to their home zones, offer fair and enticing programming within all pyramids and then assess capacity issues. See how testing and scores level out before their next equity brigade.

This seems like such a simple, practical way to start. For goodness sake stop brain draining home schools by having AAP centers and a million different options you can only get at one high school or another. It's absolutely ridiculous.

It's OK as a modeling exercise but no one should be reassigned to an IB high school without a pupil placement option to an AP high school. IB is a niche program and kids need to have AP options.

Why can't all the high schools switch to AP? Isn't IB just as expensive?

IB is more expensive and more restrictive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Before any discussion of changing boundaries, the SB needs to eliminate ALL AAP centers and just ensure every school has AAP classes. The skewing and confusion of borders is due in large part to the absurd busing of certain students to center schools. At this point, the center model is redundant and wasteful and needs to end.

Boundaries should only be addressed if there is a need to do so AFTER all kids are back in their community schools.

Agreed. At the next BRAC meeting, they are reviewing a scenario of everyone returning to their zoned school. So many of these inflated schools are influenced by those they allow attend from other zone, and often those over-achievers looking for more!

Bring students back to their home zones, offer fair and enticing programming within all pyramids and then assess capacity issues. See how testing and scores level out before their next equity brigade.

Was not aware this option was being considered (returning everyone to their zoned school). I think this is what many of us wanted as a start point for this whole review process, very pleased it's being presented to the BRAC.

There are now just 2 options under consideration, but that might change again.

Option #1

Return everyone to their base school


Option #2

Move 6th grade from elementary school to middle school, which will require extensive rezoning in every neighborhood and school, including converting some elementary schools to middle schools and moving 6th graders as young as 10 years old into the secondary schools with students as old as 21.

Most of the oldest students will be 18/19 or younger, but if they are severely special needs or a recent migrant, they can attend high school until they are 21, as long as they are 20 years old the first day of school.

The significant expense of Option #2 was not accounted for in the most recent CIP, but it is now Dr. Reid's #1 priority by her own words at multiple community meetings, so logic and expense be damned.

If I were a Robinson, SoCo, or Lake Braddock zoned parent of elementary kids, I would be raising holy hell with my school board reps about this, before they finalize the move.

The 21 year old migrant and special needs high school students are federal law. I would also be raising hell with Tim Kaine, Connolly and Mark Warner about the 21 year old migrant men being allowed to attend traditional high school. The special needs students makes sense, but perfectly capable adult men allowed to be students in high schools and secondary schools does not.

If they are old enough to be charged with statuatory rape if they date anyone in their high school class, then they do not belong in traditional high school, especially if FCPS is moving 10 and 11 year old 6th graders into the building and school busses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When is the next FCPS BRAC meeting?

They’re supposed to meet every 2 weeks, and last met Feb 21, so it should be this week. Wonder how long it will take the scenarios presented to leak.

Was thinking the same, this week or next. As for leaking, I do think they may post the “scenarios” with their minutes. Alexandria city public recently did the same and very much claimed them to be “scenarios”. Fcps has been transparent about what’s been presented in the meetings and the fact they directly posted that BRAC will be reviewing them just invites speculation.

If they don’t, I would be FairFACTs submits a FOIA request and rightfully so!

Therefore, I do think we will know some initial thoughts soon albeit not the official “Drafts for public comment”

Fcps has NOT been transparent for these meetings. They should be public per FOIA laws.

Don’t let the bi-weekly high-level, curated summaries distract you from the fact that these meetings should be open to the public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Before any discussion of changing boundaries, the SB needs to eliminate ALL AAP centers and just ensure every school has AAP classes. The skewing and confusion of borders is due in large part to the absurd busing of certain students to center schools. At this point, the center model is redundant and wasteful and needs to end.

Boundaries should only be addressed if there is a need to do so AFTER all kids are back in their community schools.

They just need to eliminate IB.

No one wants it


Agreed. At the next BRAC meeting, they are reviewing a scenario of everyone returning to their zoned school. So many of these inflated schools are influenced by those they allow attend from other zone, and often those over-achievers looking for more!

Bring students back to their home zones, offer fair and enticing programming within all pyramids and then assess capacity issues. See how testing and scores level out before their next equity brigade.

This seems like such a simple, practical way to start. For goodness sake stop brain draining home schools by having AAP centers and a million different options you can only get at one high school or another. It's absolutely ridiculous.

It's OK as a modeling exercise but no one should be reassigned to an IB high school without a pupil placement option to an AP high school. IB is a niche program and kids need to have AP options.

[Anonymous]

The 21 year old migrant and special needs high school students are federal law. I would also be raising hell with Tim Kaine, Connolly and Mark Warner about the 21 year old migrant men being allowed to attend traditional high school. The special needs students makes sense, but perfectly capable adult men allowed to be students in high schools and secondary schools does not.

I realize this is the law. But, I wonder if these young men could be accommodated separately like at Mountain View..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When is the next FCPS BRAC meeting?

They’re supposed to meet every 2 weeks, and last met Feb 21, so it should be this week. Wonder how long it will take the scenarios presented to leak.

Was thinking the same, this week or next. As for leaking, I do think they may post the “scenarios” with their minutes. Alexandria city public recently did the same and very much claimed them to be “scenarios”. Fcps has been transparent about what’s been presented in the meetings and the fact they directly posted that BRAC will be reviewing them just invites speculation.

If they don’t, I would be FairFACTs submits a FOIA request and rightfully so!

Therefore, I do think we will know some initial thoughts soon albeit not the official “Drafts for public comment”

Fcps has NOT been transparent for these meetings. They should be public per FOIA laws.

Don’t let the bi-weekly high-level, curated summaries distract you from the fact that these meetings should be open to the public.

Oh, I am still very skeptical and not a fan of the SB or Reid. A coworker is on BRAC and said the meetings have been lackluster. But he does say everything presented is found online, though we don’t get verbal recorded read outs.

Therefore, hoping something physical like a scenario would be included to review. Again, if not, FairFACTS will retrieve it and easily so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Before any discussion of changing boundaries, the SB needs to eliminate ALL AAP centers and just ensure every school has AAP classes. The skewing and confusion of borders is due in large part to the absurd busing of certain students to center schools. At this point, the center model is redundant and wasteful and needs to end.

Boundaries should only be addressed if there is a need to do so AFTER all kids are back in their community schools.

Agreed. At the next BRAC meeting, they are reviewing a scenario of everyone returning to their zoned school. So many of these inflated schools are influenced by those they allow attend from other zone, and often those over-achievers looking for more!

Bring students back to their home zones, offer fair and enticing programming within all pyramids and then assess capacity issues. See how testing and scores level out before their next equity brigade.

Was not aware this option was being considered (returning everyone to their zoned school). I think this is what many of us wanted as a start point for this whole review process, very pleased it's being presented to the BRAC.

There are now just 2 options under consideration, but that might change again.

Option #1

Return everyone to their base school


Option #2

Move 6th grade from elementary school to middle school, which will require extensive rezoning in every neighborhood and school, including converting some elementary schools to middle schools and moving 6th graders as young as 10 years old into the secondary schools with students as old as 21.

Most of the oldest students will be 18/19 or younger, but if they are severely special needs or a recent migrant, they can attend high school until they are 21, as long as they are 20 years old the first day of school.

The significant expense of Option #2 was not accounted for in the most recent CIP, but it is now Dr. Reid's #1 priority by her own words at multiple community meetings, so logic and expense be damned.

If I were a Robinson, SoCo, or Lake Braddock zoned parent of elementary kids, I would be raising holy hell with my school board reps about this, before they finalize the move.

The 21 year old migrant and special needs high school students are federal law. I would also be raising hell with Tim Kaine, Connolly and Mark Warner about the 21 year old migrant men being allowed to attend traditional high school. The special needs students makes sense, but perfectly capable adult men allowed to be students in high schools and secondary schools does not.

If they are old enough to be charged with statuatory rape if they date anyone in their high school class, then they do not belong in traditional high school, especially if FCPS is moving 10 and 11 year old 6th graders into the building and school busses.

Option #2 is “nuclear”, per previous FCPS words. Totally understand and agree that 6-8 is very common throughout the country but FCPS facilities has not, nor is, built to support this. The fact Reid is even considering this shows she doesn’t understand the county’s limitations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Before any discussion of changing boundaries, the SB needs to eliminate ALL AAP centers and just ensure every school has AAP classes. The skewing and confusion of borders is due in large part to the absurd busing of certain students to center schools. At this point, the center model is redundant and wasteful and needs to end.

Boundaries should only be addressed if there is a need to do so AFTER all kids are back in their community schools.

Agreed. At the next BRAC meeting, they are reviewing a scenario of everyone returning to their zoned school. So many of these inflated schools are influenced by those they allow attend from other zone, and often those over-achievers looking for more!

Bring students back to their home zones, offer fair and enticing programming within all pyramids and then assess capacity issues. See how testing and scores level out before their next equity brigade.

This seems like such a simple, practical way to start. For goodness sake stop brain draining home schools by having AAP centers and a million different options you can only get at one high school or another. It's absolutely ridiculous.

It's OK as a modeling exercise but no one should be reassigned to an IB high school without a pupil placement option to an AP high school. IB is a niche program and kids need to have AP options.

Why can't all the high schools switch to AP? Isn't IB just as expensive?

It’s more expensive and they should, but they’ve given no indication they are even considering it.