Boundaries assessment update 2023

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they take a fresh look at how they are spending the capital budget and whether a 3% FARMS high school with a boundary adjacent to a 50% FARMS high school is even remotely consistent with their commitment to equity, it will be an improvement.

Also, they would gain instant credibility if they dealt with the "plan" for a "new western HS" once and for all. Kill it if it's not happening and take it out of the next Capital Improvement Program entirely; set up a dedicated web page that tracks the steps being taken to make it happen if it's not a joke.

No one has yet shown how this could be done.

Agree on the rest of your comment. But, I think the big cog in the wheel was when they gave away the Carson site for the Western High school.
And, then came up with Hutchison site which is absolutely a terrible, terrible idea on so many levels.

Maybe that's part of the issue. They didn't want to admit they screwed the pooch by transferring the site near Carson to the Saudis so they've engaged in the fiction for years they'll be able to find some other suitable site. Meanwhile they continue to expand schools, which makes it less likely a new school is needed, and it only becomes harder over time to identify an appropriate alternative site. And by the time they deal with reality those responsible for the transfer will be drawing a pension and/or enjoying life on a beach.

I suspect there was GREAT pressure to release the Carson site to the Saudis from way above the School Board. It was supposed to be built in Burke and the community reacted. When they gave the Carson site to the Saudis there was NO community involvement for those living near Carson. NONE! I suspect the BOS made the decision--not the SB. And, I wouldn't be surprised if the State Dept did not play a hand in this.

Well any BOS and SB from Mount Vernon and Lee wanted the Saudis out of the Old Mount Vernon HS so it could be turned into a community center. Corbett Sanders worked on that pre running the school board. Gross-D-Mason BOS was the only one to say where's the special tax district? Chantilly- based on location people are stuck politically since the school is in Springfield and mst students are from Sully. Forestville Elementary and the Langley feed? Forestville has many feeder streets with Herndon addresses as well as Reston and maybe still some Vienna. It's not just those with Great Falls addresses especially the west of Georgetown Pike intersection with 7 access roads.

Funny thng happened years ago- new developement with Vienna P.O. Sent to a South Lakes pyramid school. Snow plowing necessitated removiing the concrete barricade in the street tthat was extended for the new homes- after that could drive in older dev to new dev. Older ended up at Colvin Run from Forestville.

So, you are suggesting that they make Forestville a split feeder?

That is not what I suggested. Look at maps of boundaries and school locations. Pre construction Aldrin sending area went to Forestville. Colvin Run had dominoes and it's location can also serve more from stuff closer to Tysons. East to west dominoes. It all starts with elementary boundaries. Weird FCPS fact that happened under Tholen is the Covance Toll Bros at 7 and Towlston going to SH and not Colvin Run. Tholen did not assign the new Herndon PO address to Forestville-Langley. Commenters on the Mclean boundary change wanted it assigned to Langley to fit the prior pattern of non town Herndon stuff.

DP. I can't make heads or tails out of the above word salad, but re: the bolded, that side of Towlston all goes to Spring Hill. This development fits into that pattern. Nothing weird about it.

[Anonymous]

Not PP but the way in which the Langley poster(s) gaslights and harasses anyone who questions the current boundaries is NOT a good look.

Boundaries probably will be revisited eventually, and if there’s a proposal to adjust the Langley boundary the School Board can count on a lot of opposition but also plenty of support.

[Anonymous]

Glasgow was not built for 1700+ students (and in past years, it's had even more, e.g. 1800+ as recently as SY22). It was actually rebuilt for 1500-1600 at most, which to my recollection (I worked there for several years), it was over capacity the minute the new building was finished.

Unless and until neighborhoods are economically diverse, schools will never truly be. The board, the county supervisors, the leaders of the district can social engineer all they like, but the fact remains that Fairfax County has concentrated pockets of poverty that no social engineering can ameliorate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not PP but the way in which the Langley poster(s) gaslights and harasses anyone who questions the current boundaries is NOT a good look.

Boundaries probably will be revisited eventually, and if there’s a proposal to adjust the Langley boundary the School Board can count on a lot of opposition but also plenty of support.

I'm curious why you feel the need to keep repeating this? It's almost as if you feel the more you repeat it, the more likely it is? If this is so important to you, why don't you take it to the SB instead of constantly obsessing on an anonymous forum?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Glasgow was not built for 1700+ students (and in past years, it's had even more, e.g. 1800+ as recently as SY22). It was actually rebuilt for 1500-1600 at most, which to my recollection (I worked there for several years), it was over capacity the minute the new building was finished.

Unless and until neighborhoods are economically diverse, schools will never truly be. The board, the county supervisors, the leaders of the district can social engineer all they like, but the fact remains that Fairfax County has concentrated pockets of poverty that no social engineering can ameliorate.

We need new social engineering to undo the previous social engineering that led to segregated, concentrated pockets in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Glasgow was not built for 1700+ students (and in past years, it's had even more, e.g. 1800+ as recently as SY22). It was actually rebuilt for 1500-1600 at most, which to my recollection (I worked there for several years), it was over capacity the minute the new building was finished.

Unless and until neighborhoods are economically diverse, schools will never truly be. The board, the county supervisors, the leaders of the district can social engineer all they like, but the fact remains that Fairfax County has concentrated pockets of poverty that no social engineering can ameliorate.

We need new social engineering to undo the previous social engineering that led to segregated, concentrated pockets in the first place.

Ah, but the horrible Langley mom (and has there ever been a nastier poster on this forum than her) thinks it's the natural order of the universe to concentrate poverty elsewhere and keep her precious Saxons far, far away from poor kids.

[Anonymous]

The school Board is currently looking at the Kent Garden boundaries. It would be an easy fix to also look at shifting more Longfellow/Mclean kids to Cooper/Langley as well but of course they won’t do it…makes too much sense 🙄🙄