FFX vs Arlington County Schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I must say, I am very offended by the "Follow the Asians" comment. Are we then undermining everybody else as not being smart enough to go to any of the good schools??!! I happen to be from North Dakota and have a master's degree, thankyouverymuch! I would like to think I am as "followable" to a good school as any "Asian" that is being referred to by the PP. Zheesh, you guys. Get a grip!

neither a master's degree or being from north Dakota makes smart

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS mom here. I think that as more people continue to move to the 'burbs (whichever one they choose), we all run the risk of getting redistricted and not getting what we bargained for.

As far as Yorktown is concerned, it, along with several of the FFX schools is consistently ranked in the top 50 in the country. So no, I am not concerned that my kid is going to get a second rate education. Rather, this feels like an endless p*$$ing contest where one is arguing over differences without distinction. It's what causes you to haggle over what appears to be a lot of money in a foreign country, when it's really pennies. #stoparguingaboutpesos

And as reported in Arlington Magazine, the college acceptances for W-L (into the ivies and top privates and publics) slightly exceeds those of McLean. Arlington schools are quite good, despite all the negative comments.

Arlington Magazine is not a reliable source of information, nor do its reporters have unfettered access to school administrators in different counties. It's mostly an excuse for house advertisements by Arlington real estate brokers. Of course they will try to make the local schools sound good.

Langley and McLean both have higher SAT and SOL scores than W-L, more National Merit Semifinalists, and higher GreatSchools and US News ratings. Marshall, Madison, Woodson and Oakton are also typically higher ranked than W-L.

The college data was compiled from APS and FCPS. George Mason HS in Falls Church did not report any college acceptance data. Bethesda Magazine also publishes a similar table of college acceptances, and it is fairly accurate. The acceptances don't prove much other than that there are a lot of educated families with high expectations for their children in Arlington and McLean. The schools all seem to be doing a fine job.

[Anonymous]

Those averages are just that--and the admittances are those kids who got in. It's what YOUR child learns and does that matters. Most kids can get a good education anywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS mom here. I think that as more people continue to move to the 'burbs (whichever one they choose), we all run the risk of getting redistricted and not getting what we bargained for.

As far as Yorktown is concerned, it, along with several of the FFX schools is consistently ranked in the top 50 in the country. So no, I am not concerned that my kid is going to get a second rate education. Rather, this feels like an endless p*$$ing contest where one is arguing over differences without distinction. It's what causes you to haggle over what appears to be a lot of money in a foreign country, when it's really pennies. #stoparguingaboutpesos

And as reported in Arlington Magazine, the college acceptances for W-L (into the ivies and top privates and publics) slightly exceeds those of McLean. Arlington schools are quite good, despite all the negative comments.

Arlington Magazine is not a reliable source of information, nor do its reporters have unfettered access to school administrators in different counties. It's mostly an excuse for house advertisements by Arlington real estate brokers. Of course they will try to make the local schools sound good.

Langley and McLean both have higher SAT and SOL scores than W-L, more National Merit Semifinalists, and higher GreatSchools and US News ratings. Marshall, Madison, Woodson and Oakton are also typically higher ranked than W-L.

The college data was compiled from APS and FCPS. George Mason HS in Falls Church did not report any college acceptance data. Bethesda Magazine also publishes a similar table of college acceptances, and it is fairly accurate. The acceptances don't prove much other than that there are a lot of educated families with high expectations for their children in Arlington and McLean. The schools all seem to be doing a fine job.

The information, such as it is, is not complete or particularly meaningful. There was one year where the acceptance rate at U.Va. at South Lakes in Reston was higher than at Langley, but Langley students, on average, regularly outperform those at South Lakes. The same would be true where W-L is concerned.

[Anonymous]

Do you really think that if you picked up your family from Langley and moved to the South Lakes district that your children's chances of current and future happiness and success would be materially affected? Are your children really so fragile? Do you have so little confidence in their innate abilities and the home life and environment you provide?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you really think that if you picked up your family from Langley and moved to the South Lakes district that your children's chances of current and future happiness and success would be materially affected? Are your children really so fragile? Do you have so little confidence in their innate abilities and the home life and environment you provide?

South Lakes pulls heavily from some very affluent areas. The interesting comparison (re college acceptance rates) would be between South Lakes and schools like Lee or Falls Church, which draw from more disadvantaged areas where there are likely fewer college track students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you really think that if you picked up your family from Langley and moved to the South Lakes district that your children's chances of current and future happiness and success would be materially affected? Are your children really so fragile? Do you have so little confidence in their innate abilities and the home life and environment you provide?

Not necessarily, although it is telling that, when part of Madison got moved to South Lakes a few years ago, home values in those neighborhoods declined sharply. Had students been moved from Langley to South Lakes, the reaction presumably would have been similar.
It tells you that, despite your rhetoric, parents do assign considerable value to sending their kids to schools such as Madison and Langley with larger cohorts of higher-achieving students.

But the more salient point here is that purported data on college admissions at a handful of schools in a particular year is not especially instructive as to school quality. If the other poster wants to argue that W-L is equal or superior to schools in FCPS, he or she ought to cone up with something more persuasive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you really think that if you picked up your family from Langley and moved to the South Lakes district that your children's chances of current and future happiness and success would be materially affected? Are your children really so fragile? Do you have so little confidence in their innate abilities and the home life and environment you provide?

Not necessarily, although it is telling that, when part of Madison got moved to South Lakes a few years ago, home values in those neighborhoods declined sharply. Had students been moved from Langley to South Lakes, the reaction presumably would have been similar.
It tells you that, despite your rhetoric, parents do assign considerable value to sending their kids to schools such as Madison and Langley with larger cohorts of higher-achieving students.

But the more salient point here is that purported data on college admissions at a handful of schools in a particular year is not especially instructive as to school quality. If the other poster wants to argue that W-L is equal or superior to schools in FCPS, he or she ought to cone up with something more persuasive.

Peer effects are huge, especially in high school. Any parent who really thinks they have that much influence that school quality doesn't matter, that the expectations that their peers and peers's parents hold don't matter, are delusional.

On a similar 1% note, from someone probably in the 10%, and who grew up somewhere way down (just sold our 30 yr old family home for 50k, so DC and Northeast are a completely different word), having relationships and contacts into an entire 4+ cohort of people who will likely attend world class colleges, head companies, start companies, or be appointed to run think tanks or foundations, there are real limitations to the opportunities your child will have later in life. And with the growing inequality, and the necessity of 'knowing' someone to get that job or secure that funding, sadly 'friends from high school' could really reflect a divergence in their life's path.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you really think that if you picked up your family from Langley and moved to the South Lakes district that your children's chances of current and future happiness and success would be materially affected? Are your children really so fragile? Do you have so little confidence in their innate abilities and the home life and environment you provide?

Not necessarily, although it is telling that, when part of Madison got moved to South Lakes a few years ago, home values in those neighborhoods declined sharply. Had students been moved from Langley to South Lakes, the reaction presumably would have been similar.
It tells you that, despite your rhetoric, parents do assign considerable value to sending their kids to schools such as Madison and Langley with larger cohorts of higher-achieving students.

But the more salient point here is that purported data on college admissions at a handful of schools in a particular year is not especially instructive as to school quality. If the other poster wants to argue that W-L is equal or superior to schools in FCPS, he or she ought to cone up with something more persuasive.

Peer effects are huge, especially in high school. Any parent who really thinks they have that much influence that school quality doesn't matter, that the expectations that their peers and peers's parents hold don't matter, are delusional.

On a similar 1% note, from someone probably in the 10%, and who grew up somewhere way down (just sold our 30 yr old family home for 50k, so DC and Northeast are a completely different word), having relationships and contacts into an entire 4+ cohort of people who will likely attend world class colleges, head companies, start companies, or be appointed to run think tanks or foundations, there are real limitations to the opportunities your child will have later in life. And with the growing inequality, and the necessity of 'knowing' someone to get that job or secure that funding, sadly 'friends from high school' could really reflect a divergence in their life's path.

Oh for goodness sake. I'm in the 10% too, but grew up solidly middle class (daughter of a teacher and a nurse) in a blue collar town. Only about half my high school class went on to higher education, and that included community and technical colleges. I went to a highly ranked state college and a middling state university for grad school. I graduated from college in the late 80s, terrible job market. Somehow I managed. Our children will not need to rub elbows with CEOs and hedge fund managers to have comfortable and satisfying lives. Get a grip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Peer effects are huge, especially in high school. Any parent who really thinks they have that much influence that school quality doesn't matter, that the expectations that their peers and peers's parents hold don't matter, are delusional.

No one is saying that school quality doesn't matter. What I AM saying is that it is patently ridiculous to attach any meaning to a 3 percent difference in scores or acceptance rates to UVA. That kind of difference is not going to matter for any child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you really think that if you picked up your family from Langley and moved to the South Lakes district that your children's chances of current and future happiness and success would be materially affected? Are your children really so fragile? Do you have so little confidence in their innate abilities and the home life and environment you provide?

Not necessarily, although it is telling that, when part of Madison got moved to South Lakes a few years ago, home values in those neighborhoods declined sharply. Had students been moved from Langley to South Lakes, the reaction presumably would have been similar.
It tells you that, despite your rhetoric, parents do assign considerable value to sending their kids to schools such as Madison and Langley with larger cohorts of higher-achieving students.

Of course parents assign considerable value to sending their kids to schools like Madison and Langley with larger cohorts of higher-achieving (I would say wealthy, but have it your way) students. That's exactly what we are talking about. What I'm asking is whether attending Madison or Langley over an obviously strong school like South Lakes really makes that much of a difference. Obviously some people *think* it does. I think it matters much, much less than they think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you really think that if you picked up your family from Langley and moved to the South Lakes district that your children's chances of current and future happiness and success would be materially affected? Are your children really so fragile? Do you have so little confidence in their innate abilities and the home life and environment you provide?

Not necessarily, although it is telling that, when part of Madison got moved to South Lakes a few years ago, home values in those neighborhoods declined sharply. Had students been moved from Langley to South Lakes, the reaction presumably would have been similar.
It tells you that, despite your rhetoric, parents do assign considerable value to sending their kids to schools such as Madison and Langley with larger cohorts of higher-achieving students.

But the more salient point here is that purported data on college admissions at a handful of schools in a particular year is not especially instructive as to school quality. If the other poster wants to argue that W-L is equal or superior to schools in FCPS, he or she ought to cone up with something more persuasive.

Peer effects are huge, especially in high school. Any parent who really thinks they have that much influence that school quality doesn't matter, that the expectations that their peers and peers's parents hold don't matter, are delusional.

On a similar 1% note, from someone probably in the 10%, and who grew up somewhere way down (just sold our 30 yr old family home for 50k, so DC and Northeast are a completely different word), having relationships and contacts into an entire 4+ cohort of people who will likely attend world class colleges, head companies, start companies, or be appointed to run think tanks or foundations, there are real limitations to the opportunities your child will have later in life. And with the growing inequality, and the necessity of 'knowing' someone to get that job or secure that funding, sadly 'friends from high school' could really reflect a divergence in their life's path.

Oh for goodness sake. I'm in the 10% too, but grew up solidly middle class (daughter of a teacher and a nurse) in a blue collar town. Only about half my high school class went on to higher education, and that included community and technical colleges. I went to a highly ranked state college and a middling state university for grad school. I graduated from college in the late 80s, terrible job market. Somehow I managed. Our children will not need to rub elbows with CEOs and hedge fund managers to have comfortable and satisfying lives. Get a grip.

Not to turn this into a generational feud, but you are a late baby boomer who lived through a golden age and was ramping up your career in the 90s. You probably bought your first house before any hint of the bubble and boom

For gen x and y, things are way different ; housing costs make for ridiculous compromises (middle class in most major cities translates into hour plus commutes or crappy schools; look at DC, San Francisco, NYC). You can say live in cheaper places, but there are no jobs in the cheaper places

The last fifteen years we've had massive escalation of cost of living but a decline in wages and employment; the economy is bifurcating, probably as bad as in the 20s.

Every edge counts, and the high school cohort you send your kid too sadly has way too much importance on where they land on this economic divide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you really think that if you picked up your family from Langley and moved to the South Lakes district that your children's chances of current and future happiness and success would be materially affected? Are your children really so fragile? Do you have so little confidence in their innate abilities and the home life and environment you provide?

Not necessarily, although it is telling that, when part of Madison got moved to South Lakes a few years ago, home values in those neighborhoods declined sharply. Had students been moved from Langley to South Lakes, the reaction presumably would have been similar.
It tells you that, despite your rhetoric, parents do assign considerable value to sending their kids to schools such as Madison and Langley with larger cohorts of higher-achieving students.

But the more salient point here is that purported data on college admissions at a handful of schools in a particular year is not especially instructive as to school quality. If the other poster wants to argue that W-L is equal or superior to schools in FCPS, he or she ought to cone up with something more persuasive.

Peer effects are huge, especially in high school. Any parent who really thinks they have that much influence that school quality doesn't matter, that the expectations that their peers and peers's parents hold don't matter, are delusional.

On a similar 1% note, from someone probably in the 10%, and who grew up somewhere way down (just sold our 30 yr old family home for 50k, so DC and Northeast are a completely different word), having relationships and contacts into an entire 4+ cohort of people who will likely attend world class colleges, head companies, start companies, or be appointed to run think tanks or foundations, there are real limitations to the opportunities your child will have later in life. And with the growing inequality, and the necessity of 'knowing' someone to get that job or secure that funding, sadly 'friends from high school' could really reflect a divergence in their life's path.

Oh for goodness sake. I'm in the 10% too, but grew up solidly middle class (daughter of a teacher and a nurse) in a blue collar town. Only about half my high school class went on to higher education, and that included community and technical colleges. I went to a highly ranked state college and a middling state university for grad school. I graduated from college in the late 80s, terrible job market. Somehow I managed. Our children will not need to rub elbows with CEOs and hedge fund managers to have comfortable and satisfying lives. Get a grip.

Not to turn this into a generational feud, but you are a late baby boomer who lived through a golden age and was ramping up your career in the 90s. You probably bought your first house before any hint of the bubble and boom

For gen x and y, things are way different ; housing costs make for ridiculous compromises (middle class in most major cities translates into hour plus commutes or crappy schools; look at DC, San Francisco, NYC). You can say live in cheaper places, but there are no jobs in the cheaper places

The last fifteen years we've had massive escalation of cost of living but a decline in wages and employment; the economy is bifurcating, probably as bad as in the 20s.

Every edge counts, and the high school cohort you send your kid too sadly has way too much importance on where they land on this economic divide.

This was not the first bubble/boom that burst. People who bought in this area in the late 80's and early 90's did not see any gain in their house value for nearly a decade. THe boom was in the mid to late 80's and then it went down ~20% and stayed there until 1997/98. We sold our first house, that we owned for 8+ years, at a loss - in Arlington- Westover area. There will be another boom and bust in your working lifetime- at least one. Yes, our current house has triple in value since we purchased it, but we have also put quite a bit of money into it. Our money has doubled- but over a 25 year period- hardly a huge jump- especially considering what the stock market has done in that time.

There was also a boom bust in the later 70's into the early 80's. You have to think in terms of multiple decades with house purchases- and don't think of them as investments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you really think that if you picked up your family from Langley and moved to the South Lakes district that your children's chances of current and future happiness and success would be materially affected? Are your children really so fragile? Do you have so little confidence in their innate abilities and the home life and environment you provide?

Not necessarily, although it is telling that, when part of Madison got moved to South Lakes a few years ago, home values in those neighborhoods declined sharply. Had students been moved from Langley to South Lakes, the reaction presumably would have been similar.
It tells you that, despite your rhetoric, parents do assign considerable value to sending their kids to schools such as Madison and Langley with larger cohorts of higher-achieving students.

But the more salient point here is that purported data on college admissions at a handful of schools in a particular year is not especially instructive as to school quality. If the other poster wants to argue that W-L is equal or superior to schools in FCPS, he or she ought to cone up with something more persuasive.

Peer effects are huge, especially in high school. Any parent who really thinks they have that much influence that school quality doesn't matter, that the expectations that their peers and peers's parents hold don't matter, are delusional.

On a similar 1% note, from someone probably in the 10%, and who grew up somewhere way down (just sold our 30 yr old family home for 50k, so DC and Northeast are a completely different word), having relationships and contacts into an entire 4+ cohort of people who will likely attend world class colleges, head companies, start companies, or be appointed to run think tanks or foundations, there are real limitations to the opportunities your child will have later in life. And with the growing inequality, and the necessity of 'knowing' someone to get that job or secure that funding, sadly 'friends from high school' could really reflect a divergence in their life's path.

Oh for goodness sake. I'm in the 10% too, but grew up solidly middle class (daughter of a teacher and a nurse) in a blue collar town. Only about half my high school class went on to higher education, and that included community and technical colleges. I went to a highly ranked state college and a middling state university for grad school. I graduated from college in the late 80s, terrible job market. Somehow I managed. Our children will not need to rub elbows with CEOs and hedge fund managers to have comfortable and satisfying lives. Get a grip.

Not to turn this into a generational feud, but you are a late baby boomer who lived through a golden age and was ramping up your career in the 90s. You probably bought your first house before any hint of the bubble and boom

For gen x and y, things are way different ; housing costs make for ridiculous compromises (middle class in most major cities translates into hour plus commutes or crappy schools; look at DC, San Francisco, NYC). You can say live in cheaper places, but there are no jobs in the cheaper places

The last fifteen years we've had massive escalation of cost of living but a decline in wages and employment; the economy is bifurcating, probably as bad as in the 20s.

Every edge counts, and the high school cohort you send your kid too sadly has way too much importance on where they land on this economic divide.

This was not the first bubble/boom that burst. People who bought in this area in the late 80's and early 90's did not see any gain in their house value for nearly a decade. THe boom was in the mid to late 80's and then it went down ~20% and stayed there until 1997/98. We sold our first house, that we owned for 8+ years, at a loss - in Arlington- Westover area. There will be another boom and bust in your working lifetime- at least one. Yes, our current house has triple in value since we purchased it, but we have also put quite a bit of money into it. Our money has doubled- but over a 25 year period- hardly a huge jump- especially considering what the stock market has done in that time.

There was also a boom bust in the later 70's into the early 80's. You have to think in terms of multiple decades with house purchases- and don't think of them as investments.

True, there have been regional bubbles before. Look at Florida and its endless cycle.

But for Gen X and Y, the cost of housing (buying and renting) vs income is unprecedentedly high in post war America.

Mate your house value went down, but I am sure you income went up, even after inflation. Our generation has suffered this squeeze, and it looks like it will be worse for our kids as the developing world basically provides and endless supply of labor for manufacturing, engineering, even law and doctors from India.

Welcome to the new gilded age, and make sure you arm your children with every possible advantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you really think that if you picked up your family from Langley and moved to the South Lakes district that your children's chances of current and future happiness and success would be materially affected? Are your children really so fragile? Do you have so little confidence in their innate abilities and the home life and environment you provide?

Not necessarily, although it is telling that, when part of Madison got moved to South Lakes a few years ago, home values in those neighborhoods declined sharply. Had students been moved from Langley to South Lakes, the reaction presumably would have been similar.
It tells you that, despite your rhetoric, parents do assign considerable value to sending their kids to schools such as Madison and Langley with larger cohorts of higher-achieving students.

But the more salient point here is that purported data on college admissions at a handful of schools in a particular year is not especially instructive as to school quality. If the other poster wants to argue that W-L is equal or superior to schools in FCPS, he or she ought to cone up with something more persuasive.

Peer effects are huge, especially in high school. Any parent who really thinks they have that much influence that school quality doesn't matter, that the expectations that their peers and peers's parents hold don't matter, are delusional.

On a similar 1% note, from someone probably in the 10%, and who grew up somewhere way down (just sold our 30 yr old family home for 50k, so DC and Northeast are a completely different word), having relationships and contacts into an entire 4+ cohort of people who will likely attend world class colleges, head companies, start companies, or be appointed to run think tanks or foundations, there are real limitations to the opportunities your child will have later in life. And with the growing inequality, and the necessity of 'knowing' someone to get that job or secure that funding, sadly 'friends from high school' could really reflect a divergence in their life's path.

Oh for goodness sake. I'm in the 10% too, but grew up solidly middle class (daughter of a teacher and a nurse) in a blue collar town. Only about half my high school class went on to higher education, and that included community and technical colleges. I went to a highly ranked state college and a middling state university for grad school. I graduated from college in the late 80s, terrible job market. Somehow I managed. Our children will not need to rub elbows with CEOs and hedge fund managers to have comfortable and satisfying lives. Get a grip.

Not to turn this into a generational feud, but you are a late baby boomer who lived through a golden age and was ramping up your career in the 90s. You probably bought your first house before any hint of the bubble and boom

For gen x and y, things are way different ; housing costs make for ridiculous compromises (middle class in most major cities translates into hour plus commutes or crappy schools; look at DC, San Francisco, NYC). You can say live in cheaper places, but there are no jobs in the cheaper places

The last fifteen years we've had massive escalation of cost of living but a decline in wages and employment; the economy is bifurcating, probably as bad as in the 20s.

Every edge counts, and the high school cohort you send your kid too sadly has way too much importance on where they land on this economic divide.

This was not the first bubble/boom that burst. People who bought in this area in the late 80's and early 90's did not see any gain in their house value for nearly a decade. THe boom was in the mid to late 80's and then it went down ~20% and stayed there until 1997/98. We sold our first house, that we owned for 8+ years, at a loss - in Arlington- Westover area. There will be another boom and bust in your working lifetime- at least one. Yes, our current house has triple in value since we purchased it, but we have also put quite a bit of money into it. Our money has doubled- but over a 25 year period- hardly a huge jump- especially considering what the stock market has done in that time.

There was also a boom bust in the later 70's into the early 80's. You have to think in terms of multiple decades with house purchases- and don't think of them as investments.

I remember. That late 80s boom crashed hard in Northern Va. Home values went way down in the early 90s and took nearly ten years to crawl back up. That's back when 250k was considered a fairly expensive home for the area.