FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So are West Springfield/Lewis and Langley/Herndon boundaries back in play now that we have School Board members like Dunne saying the October maps are going to be “substantially different” from the Thru proposals released in May?

They really do know how to waste people’s time and money. We very much regret having bought in Fairfax County.

West Springfield, maybe, because THRU has already thrown out their current recommendation due to the split feeder. Langley/Herndon? Doubtful.

WS’s boundaries are in play if they create a split feeder moving 35% of Hunt Valley to South County. There’s also a proposal to close the Rolling Valley split feeder by sending the whole thing to Saratoga, but that’s just at the elementary level as those neighborhoods already nominally attend Key/Lewis. But didn’t Sandy Anderson stick her neck out for that one and say she would not only try to keep them at RV but also try to get them back to Irving/WS? Interesting times …

She did. She continues to bring up the RV pocket and bringing them to WSHS when talking to families who are concerned about being redistricted out of WSHS. It’s a, “but we have to help these kids” talking point that isn’t going over well with other groups who are advocating for their own children.

Yeah, she's mentioned that the families in that area don't have time to advocate for this because they're so busy so she's taking on that mantle a bit for them. I find it all odd. If they cared deeply about moving into WSHS this is the time to advocate for it.

That’s the school board’s shtick. It pretends it knows what certain communities want and then ignores the communities who are actually speaking up.

Overall, it makes for junk decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So are West Springfield/Lewis and Langley/Herndon boundaries back in play now that we have School Board members like Dunne saying the October maps are going to be “substantially different” from the Thru proposals released in May?

They really do know how to waste people’s time and money. We very much regret having bought in Fairfax County.

West Springfield, maybe, because THRU has already thrown out their current recommendation due to the split feeder. Langley/Herndon? Doubtful.

WS’s boundaries are in play if they create a split feeder moving 35% of Hunt Valley to South County. There’s also a proposal to close the Rolling Valley split feeder by sending the whole thing to Saratoga, but that’s just at the elementary level as those neighborhoods already nominally attend Key/Lewis. But didn’t Sandy Anderson stick her neck out for that one and say she would not only try to keep them at RV but also try to get them back to Irving/WS? Interesting times …

She did. She continues to bring up the RV pocket and bringing them to WSHS when talking to families who are concerned about being redistricted out of WSHS. It’s a, “but we have to help these kids” talking point that isn’t going over well with other groups who are advocating for their own children.

Yeah, she's mentioned that the families in that area don't have time to advocate for this because they're so busy so she's taking on that mantle a bit for them. I find it all odd. If they cared deeply about moving into WSHS this is the time to advocate for it.

As if the rest of us don’t have full time jobs and kids with many activities. We are both full time civil servants in our household. She made this comment to our advocacy group and it fell very flat. We aren’t full time activists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So are West Springfield/Lewis and Langley/Herndon boundaries back in play now that we have School Board members like Dunne saying the October maps are going to be “substantially different” from the Thru proposals released in May?

They really do know how to waste people’s time and money. We very much regret having bought in Fairfax County.

West Springfield, maybe, because THRU has already thrown out their current recommendation due to the split feeder. Langley/Herndon? Doubtful.

WS’s boundaries are in play if they create a split feeder moving 35% of Hunt Valley to South County. There’s also a proposal to close the Rolling Valley split feeder by sending the whole thing to Saratoga, but that’s just at the elementary level as those neighborhoods already nominally attend Key/Lewis. But didn’t Sandy Anderson stick her neck out for that one and say she would not only try to keep them at RV but also try to get them back to Irving/WS? Interesting times …

She did. She continues to bring up the RV pocket and bringing them to WSHS when talking to families who are concerned about being redistricted out of WSHS. It’s a, “but we have to help these kids” talking point that isn’t going over well with other groups who are advocating for their own children.

Yeah, she's mentioned that the families in that area don't have time to advocate for this because they're so busy so she's taking on that mantle a bit for them. I find it all odd. If they cared deeply about moving into WSHS this is the time to advocate for it.

As if the rest of us don’t have full time jobs and kids with many activities. We are both full time civil servants in our household. She made this comment to our advocacy group and it fell very flat. We aren’t full time activists.

Was she sniveling when she said it? That’s her thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So are West Springfield/Lewis and Langley/Herndon boundaries back in play now that we have School Board members like Dunne saying the October maps are going to be “substantially different” from the Thru proposals released in May?

They really do know how to waste people’s time and money. We very much regret having bought in Fairfax County.

West Springfield, maybe, because THRU has already thrown out their current recommendation due to the split feeder. Langley/Herndon? Doubtful.

WS’s boundaries are in play if they create a split feeder moving 35% of Hunt Valley to South County. There’s also a proposal to close the Rolling Valley split feeder by sending the whole thing to Saratoga, but that’s just at the elementary level as those neighborhoods already nominally attend Key/Lewis. But didn’t Sandy Anderson stick her neck out for that one and say she would not only try to keep them at RV but also try to get them back to Irving/WS? Interesting times …

She did. She continues to bring up the RV pocket and bringing them to WSHS when talking to families who are concerned about being redistricted out of WSHS. It’s a, “but we have to help these kids” talking point that isn’t going over well with other groups who are advocating for their own children.

So if I'm following Thru proposed to move the 106 Rolling Valley kids at Key/Lewis to Saratoga to eliminate the split feeder, and her response is that she's going to find a way to eliminate the split feeder by moving them to Irving/West Springfield instead. On its face, that suggest she'd pull roughly 60 kids out of under-enrolled Lewis (although we can debate whether many of those families currently find a way to avoid Lewis), which isn't something that St. John-Cunning and others will support unless there's a separate but not yet disclosed plan to move other WSHS kids into Lewis?

Is that the gist of it? It's insane that we're already so many months into this boundary review and yet so much uncertainty continues to exist. Reid should be fired, and these School Board members should never hold public office again.

[Anonymous]

One thing for sure:

This is a mess. Reading about West Springfield and neighborhoods I know nothing about just illustrates what a mess this whole thing is. They likely know nothing about the issues in my neighborhood and others know nothing about any of this.

Boundary adjustments should be made on a case by case basis. One thing is the same: no one knows the neighborhoods anywhere near as well as the people living in them.

My neighborhood also has distinctive issues that others would not understand.

Why the School Board thought that this should be done on a county wide basis could only be done because they did not want to be tainted by it. They had ideas, but they have not panned out because they were so out of touch with their neighbors. Now, they are all tainted by it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So are West Springfield/Lewis and Langley/Herndon boundaries back in play now that we have School Board members like Dunne saying the October maps are going to be “substantially different” from the Thru proposals released in May?

They really do know how to waste people’s time and money. We very much regret having bought in Fairfax County.

West Springfield, maybe, because THRU has already thrown out their current recommendation due to the split feeder. Langley/Herndon? Doubtful.

WS’s boundaries are in play if they create a split feeder moving 35% of Hunt Valley to South County. There’s also a proposal to close the Rolling Valley split feeder by sending the whole thing to Saratoga, but that’s just at the elementary level as those neighborhoods already nominally attend Key/Lewis. But didn’t Sandy Anderson stick her neck out for that one and say she would not only try to keep them at RV but also try to get them back to Irving/WS? Interesting times …

She did. She continues to bring up the RV pocket and bringing them to WSHS when talking to families who are concerned about being redistricted out of WSHS. It’s a, “but we have to help these kids” talking point that isn’t going over well with other groups who are advocating for their own children.

So if I'm following Thru proposed to move the 106 Rolling Valley kids at Key/Lewis to Saratoga to eliminate the split feeder, and her response is that she's going to find a way to eliminate the split feeder by moving them to Irving/West Springfield instead. On its face, that suggest she'd pull roughly 60 kids out of under-enrolled Lewis (although we can debate whether many of those families currently find a way to avoid Lewis), which isn't something that St. John-Cunning and others will support unless there's a separate but not yet disclosed plan to move other WSHS kids into Lewis?

Is that the gist of it? It's insane that we're already so many months into this boundary review and yet so much uncertainty continues to exist. Reid should be fired, and these School Board members should never hold public office again.

I don’t know if they wouldn’t support it if there wasn’t a tit for tat. Many of them seem asleep at the wheel. When was the last time you heard anything about St. John-Cunning compared to like … anyone else, literally anyone on the entire SB? She’s a non entity.

Plus the level of feedback received in that general region (on the slides someone posted upthread) was quite low. Seems like no one really cares and if 70 kids or whatever in the RV split feeder went back to WS, who would notice at Key/Lewis?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did they get what everyone is trying to say? Will it work in people’s favor or not?

https://www.fcps.edu/about-fcps/maps/2024-2026-boundary-review/boundary-review-community-feedback-results

Finally some acknowledgement of Lewis's underenrollment. It seemed crazy to me that all the gears were turning and a high school with 1600 kids was not even part of the picture.

Man, I would kill for a 1600 size school for my kids.

Yeah, until you found out about the courses (or number of sessions) and activities not offered at that school.

That is on the leadership, not the school size

At 1600, Lewis is larger than all the private and Catholic high schools that all offer a full slate of class options for advanced students.

Lewis could too

Lewis has a poor and high ESL population. Not sure you understand what impact that has. Certainly is not like a small, private Catholic high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One thing for sure:

This is a mess. Reading about West Springfield and neighborhoods I know nothing about just illustrates what a mess this whole thing is. They likely know nothing about the issues in my neighborhood and others know nothing about any of this.

Boundary adjustments should be made on a case by case basis. One thing is the same: no one knows the neighborhoods anywhere near as well as the people living in them.

My neighborhood also has distinctive issues that others would not understand.

Why the School Board thought that this should be done on a county wide basis could only be done because they did not want to be tainted by it. They had ideas, but they have not panned out because they were so out of touch with their neighbors. Now, they are all tainted by it.

Remember Reid being so out of touch that she thought they could just move 6th graders into existing middle schoolers? These people have NO CLUE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One thing for sure:

This is a mess. Reading about West Springfield and neighborhoods I know nothing about just illustrates what a mess this whole thing is. They likely know nothing about the issues in my neighborhood and others know nothing about any of this.

Boundary adjustments should be made on a case by case basis. One thing is the same: no one knows the neighborhoods anywhere near as well as the people living in them.

My neighborhood also has distinctive issues that others would not understand.

Why the School Board thought that this should be done on a county wide basis could only be done because they did not want to be tainted by it. They had ideas, but they have not panned out because they were so out of touch with their neighbors. Now, they are all tainted by it.

And when we explain our neighborhood dynamics and why staying in our current boundary is important and makes more sense, it felt like minds were already made up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did they get what everyone is trying to say? Will it work in people’s favor or not?

https://www.fcps.edu/about-fcps/maps/2024-2026-boundary-review/boundary-review-community-feedback-results

The feedback is a broad repudiation of the Thru proposals but more fundamentally of the priorities the School Board identified in amended Policy 8130. The consultants may be weak but the root cause is the incompetence of the current School Board and how little they respect parents. They had ample feedback that families did not want major boundary changes and they ignored it. They also failed to address grandfathering up-front, which was a huge mistake.

Now you see members like Anderson and Dunne breaking ranks and saying they’ll oppose specific boundary changes, even when those changes have been described as “easy fixes” aligned with Policy 8130. The acquisition of the KAA in the middle of all this just creates more uncertainty. The entire review is in shambles at this point

Yes and based on how this process was to go, school board members are speaking out of turn when publicly saying these things to their constituents.

I really wonder how much of the Thru process was just a ruse to be back where we started- with FCPS created maps that are what Reid really wants out of this process.

In reading the comments, how could this Superintendent and School Board let this mess at Coates continue? Pay special attention to the remarks about bathrooms for the trailers.
And, to those objecting to the purchase of KAA--maybe this illustrates the need for another high school.

Not really. They can send Coates kids to Herndon ES and/or McNair ES. The only reason they aren’t already doing do is that Coates got folded into the broader review.

One reason why some of these schools have trailers is their class sizes are so small. If they had as many kids in class as other schools, they’d have fewer trailers.

If it's a Title I school, the smaller class sizes are required by law. Are you the same jealous person that was posting earlier about KAA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did they get what everyone is trying to say? Will it work in people’s favor or not?

https://www.fcps.edu/about-fcps/maps/2024-2026-boundary-review/boundary-review-community-feedback-results

The feedback is a broad repudiation of the Thru proposals but more fundamentally of the priorities the School Board identified in amended Policy 8130. The consultants may be weak but the root cause is the incompetence of the current School Board and how little they respect parents. They had ample feedback that families did not want major boundary changes and they ignored it. They also failed to address grandfathering up-front, which was a huge mistake.

Now you see members like Anderson and Dunne breaking ranks and saying they’ll oppose specific boundary changes, even when those changes have been described as “easy fixes” aligned with Policy 8130. The acquisition of the KAA in the middle of all this just creates more uncertainty. The entire review is in shambles at this point

Yes and based on how this process was to go, school board members are speaking out of turn when publicly saying these things to their constituents.

I really wonder how much of the Thru process was just a ruse to be back where we started- with FCPS created maps that are what Reid really wants out of this process.

In reading the comments, how could this Superintendent and School Board let this mess at Coates continue? Pay special attention to the remarks about bathrooms for the trailers.
And, to those objecting to the purchase of KAA--maybe this illustrates the need for another high school.

Not really. They can send Coates kids to Herndon ES and/or McNair ES. The only reason they aren’t already doing do is that Coates got folded into the broader review.

One reason why some of these schools have trailers is their class sizes are so small. If they had as many kids in class as other schools, they’d have fewer trailers.

If it's a Title I school, the smaller class sizes are required by law. Are you the same jealous person that was posting earlier about KAA?

Source?

[Anonymous]

https://www.fcps.edu/about-fcps/maps/2024-2026-boundary-review/boundary-review-community-feedback-results

I found it interesting to see the two different sets of feedback on Timber Lane here - one set saying "keep us at Mclean" and another set saying "it makes sense to move us to Marshall, which is closer"

Also this comment was funny - my kids are zoned to Oakton and we play in CYA sports. I didn't realize our high school means that we should be playing sports in Oakton/Vienna: “Emerald Chase is zoned for Chantilly Youth Association sports. Our children have deep connections to Chantilly. They are not even allowed to play Reston sports. Why would they be rezoned to South Lakes? They should be at Chantilly HS where they belong.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did they get what everyone is trying to say? Will it work in people’s favor or not?

https://www.fcps.edu/about-fcps/maps/2024-2026-boundary-review/boundary-review-community-feedback-results

The feedback is a broad repudiation of the Thru proposals but more fundamentally of the priorities the School Board identified in amended Policy 8130. The consultants may be weak but the root cause is the incompetence of the current School Board and how little they respect parents. They had ample feedback that families did not want major boundary changes and they ignored it. They also failed to address grandfathering up-front, which was a huge mistake.

Now you see members like Anderson and Dunne breaking ranks and saying they’ll oppose specific boundary changes, even when those changes have been described as “easy fixes” aligned with Policy 8130. The acquisition of the KAA in the middle of all this just creates more uncertainty. The entire review is in shambles at this point

Yes and based on how this process was to go, school board members are speaking out of turn when publicly saying these things to their constituents.

I really wonder how much of the Thru process was just a ruse to be back where we started- with FCPS created maps that are what Reid really wants out of this process.

In reading the comments, how could this Superintendent and School Board let this mess at Coates continue? Pay special attention to the remarks about bathrooms for the trailers.
And, to those objecting to the purchase of KAA--maybe this illustrates the need for another high school.

Not really. They can send Coates kids to Herndon ES and/or McNair ES. The only reason they aren’t already doing do is that Coates got folded into the broader review.

One reason why some of these schools have trailers is their class sizes are so small. If they had as many kids in class as other schools, they’d have fewer trailers.

If it's a Title I school, the smaller class sizes are required by law. Are you the same jealous person that was posting earlier about KAA?

While certainly advisable, it is not required by law. I was a Title I teacher MANY years ago, I had an exceptionally large class. However, I did have a half time aide and we had a reading teacher and a math teacher who took half of my class for thirty minutes every day (I took the other half and then we switched. So it did result in a smaller group for two hours a day.)
Title I grant money can be used in many different ways. My first year teaching in this school was awful. The money could only be used for equipment. Then, one of our brilliant and creative teachers decided we needed to have a plan and she wrote up a grant for us. She had no help from the powers that be at the system level, but I do think our principal was supportive. It was a very effective program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.fcps.edu/about-fcps/maps/2024-2026-boundary-review/boundary-review-community-feedback-results

I found it interesting to see the two different sets of feedback on Timber Lane here - one set saying "keep us at Mclean" and another set saying "it makes sense to move us to Marshall, which is closer"

Also this comment was funny - my kids are zoned to Oakton and we play in CYA sports. I didn't realize our high school means that we should be playing sports in Oakton/Vienna: “Emerald Chase is zoned for Chantilly Youth Association sports. Our children have deep connections to Chantilly. They are not even allowed to play Reston sports. Why would they be rezoned to South Lakes? They should be at Chantilly HS where they belong.”

Also the comment maps are interesting - I had no idea the Timber Lane and Shrevewood families were posting more comments than everyone else!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.fcps.edu/about-fcps/maps/2024-2026-boundary-review/boundary-review-community-feedback-results

I found it interesting to see the two different sets of feedback on Timber Lane here - one set saying "keep us at Mclean" and another set saying "it makes sense to move us to Marshall, which is closer"

Also this comment was funny - my kids are zoned to Oakton and we play in CYA sports. I didn't realize our high school means that we should be playing sports in Oakton/Vienna: “Emerald Chase is zoned for Chantilly Youth Association sports. Our children have deep connections to Chantilly. They are not even allowed to play Reston sports. Why would they be rezoned to South Lakes? They should be at Chantilly HS where they belong.”

I think the comments were “keep Timber Lane north of 29 at McLean but if you’re going to move us Marshall makes more sense than Falls Church.”