FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Move ROTC and academies to Centreville from Chantilly. Will free up space at the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Move ROTC and academies to Centreville from Chantilly. Will free up space at the school.

Isn't jrotc st every high school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Move ROTC and academies to Centreville from Chantilly. Will free up space at the school.

Isn't jrotc st every high school?

Only about 1/3:

https://www.fcps.edu/academics/high/career-and-technical-education/jrotc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The status quo isn't really working for Lewis, boundaries or academics. Yet nothing is being done. People on here talk about community, but Lewis really has no strong community. I would wager the neighborhoods that feed it have some of the highest private, homeschool, or pupil placement rates. Not a lot of Lewis graduate signs up right now.

And, some hope to improve it with a boundary adjustment.

The boundary adjustment is NOT the answer.

The School Board should look to improve Lewis. It is possible. They should not look to other students to improve it, but look to see what can be done to improve opportunities and instruction.
Is that not what a school is for?

I don't know the Lewis community. I live in another part of the county. But, I do remember when the Graham Road community wanted the school to stay put--because they had a community there. Instead the School Board "knew better" and moved them to a brand new school that requires walking along busy streets to get there.
And, now, I've read somewhere on this forum that the School Board wants to change that around and switch them to a different school. And, put another neighborhood in the new school.

How is that for creating community?

You're talking about the Graham Road/Timber Lane situation.

The "old" Graham Road ES mostly used to serve kids in the large, low-income Kingsley Commons community right next to the school.

The school was up for a renovation and, rather than renovate on a small plot, FCPS built a new school further away on Graham Road just south of Route 29. However, that site lay within the boundaries of Timber Lane ES, and they didn't want to change the boundaries. So for 13 years Kingsley Commons kids traveled to the "new" Graham Road school inside the Timber Lane attendance area.

Along comes Reid and Thru, and they decide that's a problem and the boundaries should be drawn so Graham Road lies within its attendance area. Sounds logical, but the solution involves moving the Kingsley Commons kids to Timber Lane, which is even further away than "new" Graham Road, and then changing Timber Lane's boundaries so that some of the Timber Lane kids north of Route 29 go to Shrevewood and the Timber Lane kids south of Route 29 flip to Graham Road, while Timber Lane south of Routh 29 is redrawn to pick up kids currently at Pine Spring and Graham Road.

Add to this the fact that Timber Lane north of Route 29 currently goes to McLean and Timber Lane south of Route 29 goes to Falls Church. Thru has proposed to move the area north of Route 29 to Falls Church, apparently to justify their expansion of Falls Church, and those Timber Lane families aren't happy about that. And then the Timber Lane families south of Route 29 feel like they're being disrespected, but they're all being moved to Graham Road anyway, so whatever "community" exists currently at Timber Lane is apparently going to be upended in any event.

It's kind of a mess.

Thanks for the explanation. Does not sound like FCPS supports our struggling communities very well. They don't understand what makes a community.

I taught in a very poor Title I community where the boundary was split with a major highway. Most of the kids lived in projects across this road. Many did not have reliable transportation, if any. Getting support was extremely difficult.

If any community needs to attend schools in their own community, it is a poor one.
I remember reading about Graham Rd when they were asking to stay there. It sounded like they had built a community there. And, then, they moved them.

Has there been any kind of "study" on this? I'm betting they lost a lot in this move.

No common sense at all.

The only other thing I remember is that, at one point when Kingsley Commons was adjacent to the "old" Graham Road, the school had a really close relationship with the community and the Graham Road kids were outperforming kids at much wealthier schools on some of the SOL-type tests.

That's no longer happening, but I can't say it's because they relocated the school. It's possible later administrations just de-emphasized standardized test prep, which can be a drudge, or the kids who live in the complex now are less prepared for school than kids a decade ago.

The old Graham Road school was a dump, located at an extremely busy intersection and had no green space at all. Leveraging the Devonshire location was a no brainer. The change in performance was not a result of the move but because they lost an amazing principal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The status quo isn't really working for Lewis, boundaries or academics. Yet nothing is being done. People on here talk about community, but Lewis really has no strong community. I would wager the neighborhoods that feed it have some of the highest private, homeschool, or pupil placement rates. Not a lot of Lewis graduate signs up right now.

And, some hope to improve it with a boundary adjustment.

The boundary adjustment is NOT the answer.

The School Board should look to improve Lewis. It is possible. They should not look to other students to improve it, but look to see what can be done to improve opportunities and instruction.
Is that not what a school is for?

I don't know the Lewis community. I live in another part of the county. But, I do remember when the Graham Road community wanted the school to stay put--because they had a community there. Instead the School Board "knew better" and moved them to a brand new school that requires walking along busy streets to get there.
And, now, I've read somewhere on this forum that the School Board wants to change that around and switch them to a different school. And, put another neighborhood in the new school.

How is that for creating community?

You're talking about the Graham Road/Timber Lane situation.

The "old" Graham Road ES mostly used to serve kids in the large, low-income Kingsley Commons community right next to the school.

The school was up for a renovation and, rather than renovate on a small plot, FCPS built a new school further away on Graham Road just south of Route 29. However, that site lay within the boundaries of Timber Lane ES, and they didn't want to change the boundaries. So for 13 years Kingsley Commons kids traveled to the "new" Graham Road school inside the Timber Lane attendance area.

Along comes Reid and Thru, and they decide that's a problem and the boundaries should be drawn so Graham Road lies within its attendance area. Sounds logical, but the solution involves moving the Kingsley Commons kids to Timber Lane, which is even further away than "new" Graham Road, and then changing Timber Lane's boundaries so that some of the Timber Lane kids north of Route 29 go to Shrevewood and the Timber Lane kids south of Route 29 flip to Graham Road, while Timber Lane south of Routh 29 is redrawn to pick up kids currently at Pine Spring and Graham Road.

Add to this the fact that Timber Lane north of Route 29 currently goes to McLean and Timber Lane south of Route 29 goes to Falls Church. Thru has proposed to move the area north of Route 29 to Falls Church, apparently to justify their expansion of Falls Church, and those Timber Lane families aren't happy about that. And then the Timber Lane families south of Route 29 feel like they're being disrespected, but they're all being moved to Graham Road anyway, so whatever "community" exists currently at Timber Lane is apparently going to be upended in any event.

It's kind of a mess.

Thanks for the explanation. Does not sound like FCPS supports our struggling communities very well. They don't understand what makes a community.

I taught in a very poor Title I community where the boundary was split with a major highway. Most of the kids lived in projects across this road. Many did not have reliable transportation, if any. Getting support was extremely difficult.

If any community needs to attend schools in their own community, it is a poor one.
I remember reading about Graham Rd when they were asking to stay there. It sounded like they had built a community there. And, then, they moved them.

Has there been any kind of "study" on this? I'm betting they lost a lot in this move.

No common sense at all.

The only other thing I remember is that, at one point when Kingsley Commons was adjacent to the "old" Graham Road, the school had a really close relationship with the community and the Graham Road kids were outperforming kids at much wealthier schools on some of the SOL-type tests.

That's no longer happening, but I can't say it's because they relocated the school. It's possible later administrations just de-emphasized standardized test prep, which can be a drudge, or the kids who live in the complex now are less prepared for school than kids a decade ago.

The old Graham Road school was a dump, located at an extremely busy intersection and had no green space at all. Leveraging the Devonshire location was a no brainer. The change in performance was not a result of the move but because they lost an amazing principal.

But, they had community support where they were. I taught in a poor school. That is the most difficult thing to get: support at home.
There are things far more important than the building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The status quo isn't really working for Lewis, boundaries or academics. Yet nothing is being done. People on here talk about community, but Lewis really has no strong community. I would wager the neighborhoods that feed it have some of the highest private, homeschool, or pupil placement rates. Not a lot of Lewis graduate signs up right now.

And, some hope to improve it with a boundary adjustment.

The boundary adjustment is NOT the answer.

The School Board should look to improve Lewis. It is possible. They should not look to other students to improve it, but look to see what can be done to improve opportunities and instruction.
Is that not what a school is for?

I don't know the Lewis community. I live in another part of the county. But, I do remember when the Graham Road community wanted the school to stay put--because they had a community there. Instead the School Board "knew better" and moved them to a brand new school that requires walking along busy streets to get there.
And, now, I've read somewhere on this forum that the School Board wants to change that around and switch them to a different school. And, put another neighborhood in the new school.

How is that for creating community?

You're talking about the Graham Road/Timber Lane situation.

The "old" Graham Road ES mostly used to serve kids in the large, low-income Kingsley Commons community right next to the school.

The school was up for a renovation and, rather than renovate on a small plot, FCPS built a new school further away on Graham Road just south of Route 29. However, that site lay within the boundaries of Timber Lane ES, and they didn't want to change the boundaries. So for 13 years Kingsley Commons kids traveled to the "new" Graham Road school inside the Timber Lane attendance area.

Along comes Reid and Thru, and they decide that's a problem and the boundaries should be drawn so Graham Road lies within its attendance area. Sounds logical, but the solution involves moving the Kingsley Commons kids to Timber Lane, which is even further away than "new" Graham Road, and then changing Timber Lane's boundaries so that some of the Timber Lane kids north of Route 29 go to Shrevewood and the Timber Lane kids south of Route 29 flip to Graham Road, while Timber Lane south of Routh 29 is redrawn to pick up kids currently at Pine Spring and Graham Road.

Add to this the fact that Timber Lane north of Route 29 currently goes to McLean and Timber Lane south of Route 29 goes to Falls Church. Thru has proposed to move the area north of Route 29 to Falls Church, apparently to justify their expansion of Falls Church, and those Timber Lane families aren't happy about that. And then the Timber Lane families south of Route 29 feel like they're being disrespected, but they're all being moved to Graham Road anyway, so whatever "community" exists currently at Timber Lane is apparently going to be upended in any event.

It's kind of a mess.

Thanks for the explanation. Does not sound like FCPS supports our struggling communities very well. They don't understand what makes a community.

I taught in a very poor Title I community where the boundary was split with a major highway. Most of the kids lived in projects across this road. Many did not have reliable transportation, if any. Getting support was extremely difficult.

If any community needs to attend schools in their own community, it is a poor one.
I remember reading about Graham Rd when they were asking to stay there. It sounded like they had built a community there. And, then, they moved them.

Has there been any kind of "study" on this? I'm betting they lost a lot in this move.

No common sense at all.

The only other thing I remember is that, at one point when Kingsley Commons was adjacent to the "old" Graham Road, the school had a really close relationship with the community and the Graham Road kids were outperforming kids at much wealthier schools on some of the SOL-type tests.

That's no longer happening, but I can't say it's because they relocated the school. It's possible later administrations just de-emphasized standardized test prep, which can be a drudge, or the kids who live in the complex now are less prepared for school than kids a decade ago.

The old Graham Road school was a dump, located at an extremely busy intersection and had no green space at all. Leveraging the Devonshire location was a no brainer. The change in performance was not a result of the move but because they lost an amazing principal.

It was a brainer, because they spent a fair amount of time agonizing over whether to renovate or build new and the Devonshire location isn’t as accessible to the Kingsley Commons families.

Now they are proposing to assign them to a completely different school even further away and reduce the enrollment at Graham Road, the newest school in that general area, by over 100 kids. More strategery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not about distance - it takes 8 minutes from our community to get to jackson ms and 9 minutes to get to Longfellow. It’s basically the same so why we need to disrupt kids in middle/high school for that is not clear and more important not consistent with the non-changes that were made in other parts of the county with significant differences in commute time.

So you’d be fine with your kids going to Longfellow and then Falls Church HS? Because FCHS is half the distance to McLean.

RE: other parts of the county - Langley isn’t overcrowded. If it was, those kids would likely be headed to Herndon.

Honestly, they be should phasing in all changes by cohort so current HS and MS’ers can finish at the school they attend. Maybe upper elementary too.

It’s kind of cruel to stick to that poster that Falls Church is closer to them than McLean when they are way closer (as is Marshall) than most of Forestville is to Langley.

They obviously just want to stay zoned to their current schools like most people. McLean’s enrollment is coming down so the only real reason to move them is to try and justify all the money being poured into the FCHS expansion.

Nah. This is about FCPS having spent all that money on the Thru contract. If they back down from significant boundary changes now it will look like a waste of money. They’ve basically forced their own hand, and gerrymandered peninsulas like Timber Lane are low-hanging fruit.

These things aren’t mutually exclusive. It wasn’t until the latest set of Thru changes that they started moving McLean kids kids to Falls Church and Marshall kids to Madison (two schools that got additions). They needed a triggering event to do so, whether it was an attendance island at McLean or overcrowding at Kilmer, but it was clear they’d gotten a message to start moving kids to schools that had been expanded. They don’t have a trigger yet to move Langley kids to Herndon, but that’s probably a matter of time.

Maybe. But there was also lots of negative feedback about Thru’s initial plan to move kids from Jackson to Longfellow and create a new lopsided split-feeder for McLean and Falls Church. If a goal is to minimize split-feeders, and the families south of 29 don’t move to Longfellow/McLean (and they don’t want to, BTW) it means the families north of 29 get sent to Jackson/Falls Church.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not about distance - it takes 8 minutes from our community to get to jackson ms and 9 minutes to get to Longfellow. It’s basically the same so why we need to disrupt kids in middle/high school for that is not clear and more important not consistent with the non-changes that were made in other parts of the county with significant differences in commute time.

So you’d be fine with your kids going to Longfellow and then Falls Church HS? Because FCHS is half the distance to McLean.

RE: other parts of the county - Langley isn’t overcrowded. If it was, those kids would likely be headed to Herndon.

Honestly, they be should phasing in all changes by cohort so current HS and MS’ers can finish at the school they attend. Maybe upper elementary too.

It’s kind of cruel to stick to that poster that Falls Church is closer to them than McLean when they are way closer (as is Marshall) than most of Forestville is to Langley.

They obviously just want to stay zoned to their current schools like most people. McLean’s enrollment is coming down so the only real reason to move them is to try and justify all the money being poured into the FCHS expansion.

Nah. This is about FCPS having spent all that money on the Thru contract. If they back down from significant boundary changes now it will look like a waste of money. They’ve basically forced their own hand, and gerrymandered peninsulas like Timber Lane are low-hanging fruit.

These things aren’t mutually exclusive. It wasn’t until the latest set of Thru changes that they started moving McLean kids kids to Falls Church and Marshall kids to Madison (two schools that got additions). They needed a triggering event to do so, whether it was an attendance island at McLean or overcrowding at Kilmer, but it was clear they’d gotten a message to start moving kids to schools that had been expanded. They don’t have a trigger yet to move Langley kids to Herndon, but that’s probably a matter of time.

Maybe. But there was also lots of negative feedback about Thru’s initial plan to move kids from Jackson to Longfellow and create a new lopsided split-feeder for McLean and Falls Church. If a goal is to minimize split-feeders, and the families south of 29 don’t move to Longfellow/McLean (and they don’t want to, BTW) it means the families north of 29 get sent to Jackson/Falls Church.

I disagree.

Thru generally only tried to address split feeders where one split was under 25%. Timber Lane has been a 60-40% split to McLean and Falls Church.

With the proposed changes, including moving west of Hollywood Road to Shrevewood/Kilmer/Marshall and changing the neighborhoods south of 29 assigned to Timber Lane, the split would be different, but the TL areas north of 29 would still be about 40% of the school and could stay at Longfellow/McLean, consistent with the overall approach to split feeders, assuming they either bridge the island or recognize that having an island isn’t that big a deal.

The TL families south of 29 can’t move to McLean, as there’s not enough space, and creating what actually would have been a lopsided feeder at Longfellow (with well under 10% going to Falls Church) never made any sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about this? I realize it's too late...but tell SB and Thru they can't move any kids to worse-performing schools. There will still be folks upset about changes but far less. And it respects both students and property values.

Newsflash:
FCPS doesn’t give a rat’s behind about your property values. And they shouldn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about this? I realize it's too late...but tell SB and Thru they can't move any kids to worse-performing schools. There will still be folks upset about changes but far less. And it respects both students and property values.

Newsflash:
FCPS doesn’t give a rat’s behind about your property values. And they shouldn’t.

So they say, but it wants a bigger transfer from the Board of Supervisors every year, and that depends largely on tax revenues from residential properties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. move western langley to herndon west of great falls

2. split western oakton between south lakes and fairfax

3. western madison oakton es area to oakton, wolf trap to langley, mclean islands to marshall

4. after centreville expansion move most of western fairfax hs island near willow springs to centreville

5. renovate chantilly by adding expansion where its modular is as well as a third floor and through filling in its second floor, bring capacity to 3500

6. Langley takes in far eastern part of south lakes attendance zone

This entire list is a joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about this? I realize it's too late...but tell SB and Thru they can't move any kids to worse-performing schools. There will still be folks upset about changes but far less. And it respects both students and property values.

Newsflash:
FCPS doesn’t give a rat’s behind about your property values. And they shouldn’t.

Ignorant take. They sure as $hit care about property values, and if you don’t believe it, I have a $150mm FCPS budgetary shortfall to show you.

“But they don’t care about individual property value” you’ll likely reply. To which I’ll respond that they are categorically lowering the tax base around the county with this uncertainty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about this? I realize it's too late...but tell SB and Thru they can't move any kids to worse-performing schools. There will still be folks upset about changes but far less. And it respects both students and property values.

Newsflash:
FCPS doesn’t give a rat’s behind about your property values. And they shouldn’t.

Ignorant take. They sure as $hit care about property values, and if you don’t believe it, I have a $150mm FCPS budgetary shortfall to show you.

“But they don’t care about individual property value” you’ll likely reply. To which I’ll respond that they are categorically lowering the tax base around the county with this uncertainty.

Sure. And then the process is over, uncertainty ends, and values stabilize again, albeit with some areas worth more and others worth less.

In the meanwhile, please feel free to whine that your house shouldn’t be re-zoned because it hurts your property values. See where that gets you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about this? I realize it's too late...but tell SB and Thru they can't move any kids to worse-performing schools. There will still be folks upset about changes but far less. And it respects both students and property values.

Newsflash:
FCPS doesn’t give a rat’s behind about your property values. And they shouldn’t.

Ignorant take. They sure as $hit care about property values, and if you don’t believe it, I have a $150mm FCPS budgetary shortfall to show you.

“But they don’t care about individual property value” you’ll likely reply. To which I’ll respond that they are categorically lowering the tax base around the county with this uncertainty.

Sure. And then the process is over, uncertainty ends, and values stabilize again, albeit with some areas worth more and others worth less.

In the meanwhile, please feel free to whine that your house shouldn’t be re-zoned because it hurts your property values. See where that gets you.

The process is over, and uncertainty ends? You mean after the in perpetuity five year review cycles?

The brash ignorance of this take is astounding. Straight up FCPS propaganda.

[Anonymous]

From looking at scenario 3, are they adding students to McLean Hs?