Mclean boundary changes - can someone please update?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well one of my kids basically loses her closest
friends if scenario a or c are chosen and she does not make friends easily. Such is life, but still sad.

Kids change friends going into middle schools a lot. I would not worry about that.

They also change a lot in high school and they haven't even been in school together for almost an entire year now.....

[Anonymous]

The staff recommendation to the School Board has now been posted - it's a modified version of Option C. No one would move from Colvin Run, and only part of the current Spring Hill/Longfellow/McLean area would move to Cooper/Langley.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BXATRN7802F7/$file/Presentation%20-%20McLean%20Langley%20High%20School%20Boundary%20Study.pdf

It would leave McLean with more attendance islands, but they clearly were trying (1) to move some Tysons apartments to Langley and (2) not over-compensate and move too many kids out of Longfellow/McLean.

[Anonymous]

Oh no!!!! I was really hoping Colvin Run would switch to Cooper. Does anyone think this could possibly change?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh no!!!! I was really hoping Colvin Run would switch to Cooper. Does anyone think this could possibly change?

Do you mean all of Colvin Run? Most of those kids already go to Cooper. I would have thought they’d move all of them too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh no!!!! I was really hoping Colvin Run would switch to Cooper. Does anyone think this could possibly change?

Contact your school board member and all at large members.

The loudest voices from Colvin run were the ones against that boundary change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh no!!!! I was really hoping Colvin Run would switch to Cooper. Does anyone think this could possibly change?

Do you mean all of Colvin Run? Most of those kids already go to Cooper. I would have thought they’d move all of them too.

One of the options (Option A) was to move all the Colvin Run kids who currently go to Longfellow/McLean to Cooper/Langley. That is not part of the staff's final recommendation.

The final recommendation is to move some of the Spring Hill kids who currently go to Longfellow/McLean to Cooper/Langley - the kids who live off Laurel Hill and Jarrett Valley in Vienna and the kids who live in some of the apartments such as the Rotonda and the Adaire in Tysons. Other apartments on the other side of International Drive (such as The Fountains of McLean, Park Crest, Highgate, Nouvelle) would stay at Spring Hill/Longfellow/McLean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh no!!!! I was really hoping Colvin Run would switch to Cooper. Does anyone think this could possibly change?

Contact your school board member and all at large members.

The loudest voices from Colvin run were the ones against that boundary change.

I'd expect the staff's final recommendation reflects input in advance from School Board members.

It's a crappy process when the School Board doesn't add seats where they are most needed and then ends up encouraging people to bid against one another to move out of two great schools - Longfellow/McLean - to other schools.

But the final staff recommendation will have people for and against it just like any of the earlier options. From an objective perspective, the final recommendation does two things that neither Option A or B did, which is to move some multi-family housing into Langley. At the same time, it avoids moving too many kids out of Longfellow/McLean, as option C (which also would have left all of Colvin Run at Longfellow/McLean) might have done.

[Anonymous]

Dumb not to move the Colvin Run kids and get rid of it as a split feeder

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh no!!!! I was really hoping Colvin Run would switch to Cooper. Does anyone think this could possibly change?

Contact your school board member and all at large members.

The loudest voices from Colvin run were the ones against that boundary change.

I'd expect the staff's final recommendation reflects input in advance from School Board members.

It's a crappy process when the School Board doesn't add seats where they are most needed and then ends up encouraging people to bid against one another to move out of two great schools - Longfellow/McLean - to other schools.

But the final staff recommendation will have people for and against it just like any of the earlier options. From an objective perspective, the final recommendation does two things that neither Option A or B did, which is to move some multi-family housing into Langley. At the same time, it avoids moving too many kids out of Longfellow/McLean, as option C (which also would have left all of Colvin Run at Longfellow/McLean) might have done.

I think you are giving the staff too much credit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dumb not to move the Colvin Run kids and get rid of it as a split feeder

Not dumb if you think it would have been a bad idea to just move more SFHs into Langley. And the Colvin Run area is still closer to McLean than to Langley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh no!!!! I was really hoping Colvin Run would switch to Cooper. Does anyone think this could possibly change?

Contact your school board member and all at large members.

The loudest voices from Colvin run were the ones against that boundary change.

I'd expect the staff's final recommendation reflects input in advance from School Board members.

It's a crappy process when the School Board doesn't add seats where they are most needed and then ends up encouraging people to bid against one another to move out of two great schools - Longfellow/McLean - to other schools.

But the final staff recommendation will have people for and against it just like any of the earlier options. From an objective perspective, the final recommendation does two things that neither Option A or B did, which is to move some multi-family housing into Langley. At the same time, it avoids moving too many kids out of Longfellow/McLean, as option C (which also would have left all of Colvin Run at Longfellow/McLean) might have done.

I think you are giving the staff too much credit.

Happy to give School Board members credit for getting staff to modify one of the earlier options, rather than just picking one of them, if that is what happened.

[Anonymous]

Why not send all of Spring Hill to Langley?

Looking at a map, Colvin Run seems to be the more obvious school to send to Langley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dumb not to move the Colvin Run kids and get rid of it as a split feeder

Not dumb if you think it would have been a bad idea to just move more SFHs into Langley. And the Colvin Run area is still closer to McLean than to Langley.

They should stop trying to social engineer demographics. Isn’t that illegal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why not send all of Spring Hill to Langley?

Looking at a map, Colvin Run seems to be the more obvious school to send to Langley.

They look at the map and other factors.

I believe that staff concluded that moving all of Spring Hill would move too many kids, and possibly force McLean to shed too many teachers and electives.

On the other hand, moving Colvin Run would only move SFHs to Langley, which is not consistent with their commitment to considering equity in their decisions.

Each of the original options and the final recommendation has pros and cons, but I think the final recommendation is better than the original options. It doesn't move too many kids right away, and by moving part of Tysons to Langley it means that Langley will also pick up some kids from future development in the area between International Drive and Leesburg Pike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dumb not to move the Colvin Run kids and get rid of it as a split feeder

Not dumb if you think it would have been a bad idea to just move more SFHs into Langley. And the Colvin Run area is still closer to McLean than to Langley.

They should stop trying to social engineer demographics. Isn’t that illegal?

No. It's not race-specific.