Where should the county move the Kent Gardens kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am hoping that mention of middle and high schools means that they will send the FS and Springhill kids to Langley to fix the issue at McLean…win for everyone

+1

The one way to make sure Kent Gardens stays overcrowded for years to come is to turn this into a second Langley/McLean boundary study, where the Great Falls Citizens Association and other groups would jump in to try and limit the number of kids moved, just as they did in 2021.

The issues at Kent Gardens can be addressed more quickly by moving kids to other elementary schools that are in the same pyramid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should also get rid of immersion, move that to a lower ses school that has capacity. Too many people are using it as a reason to attend a McLean school when they are zoned for a bad school

Most immersion kids come from other elementary schools in the Langley, McLean, and Marshall pyramids. They are there for the immersion program, not to avoid a “bad school.”

You could move the French program to a low SES school and then the program would just die or get turned into yet another Spanish immersion program in a few years.

Also, how many drop out of immersion for AAP?

At KG, you can do both French immersion and AAP. You don’t have to choose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am hoping that mention of middle and high schools means that they will send the FS and Springhill kids to Langley to fix the issue at McLean…win for everyone

Don’t even start. This is a Kent Gardens boundary study, not another Langley/McLean boundary study.

It sounds like it could be both

[Anonymous]

Maybe not a boundary study but a let’s do this too as a final decision

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am hoping that mention of middle and high schools means that they will send the FS and Springhill kids to Langley to fix the issue at McLean…win for everyone

Don’t even start. This is a Kent Gardens boundary study, not another Langley/McLean boundary study.

It sounds like it could be both

Not really, especially when you consider how the community meeting later this month is being advertised.

There’s nothing about addressing the overcrowding at KG that requires another MS/HS boundary change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not a boundary study but a let’s do this too as a final decision

What does that even mean? “We’ll follow a process except when we don’t?”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is Spring Hill part of the study?

What is the status of the new Tysons Elementary school?

There’s a weird little Churchill Road attendance area largely within the Spring Hill boundaries.

It’s possible they could try to clean this up even though it doesn’t appear to have much to do with Kent Gardens. But if part of KG got moved to Franklin Sherman, they could move part of FS to Churchill Road, and move that CR area to Spring Hill.

A new Tysons ES won’t get built for decades. Frisch and Tholen made a hash of things by getting money allocated to build a new ES at Dunn Loring, where it isn’t needed, instead. So as Tysons gets built up, it still won’t get its own school, which is a shame because it would help make Tysons a more attractive place to live. I think FCPS still has a site off Jones Branch Road - FCPS just doesn’t have a vision that aligns with what the Board of Supervisors claims to want for Tysons.

Yeah, that weird island that looks like it should be with Spring Hill, but is zoned for Churchhill is "The Reserve". (There is likely a very shady story of how this developer got the school board to zone his development to Churchhill instead of Springhill, but I digress.) In any case, there are only 168 homes and very (VERY!) few residents send their children to public school. If you rezoned the entire area to Spring Hill, it would be less than a rounding error.

[Anonymous]

I think they should move French Immersion to Dunn Loring when it opens. It's close enough that it won't add much commuting time for families.


It looks like 4 of the 16 language immersion programs are school based placement already, so it is something that can be done.

Or close it to non-Kent Gardens families. It makes sense if the school is at capacity or over capacity to change the placement. I know that at least 1/3 of the kids in my sons language immersion program are from outside the boundary. If the school were at capacity I can see the benefit to limiting outside placement into the program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I think they should move French Immersion to Dunn Loring when it opens. It's close enough that it won't add much commuting time for families.


It looks like 4 of the 16 language immersion programs are school based placement already, so it is something that can be done.

Or close it to non-Kent Gardens families. It makes sense if the school is at capacity or over capacity to change the placement. I know that at least 1/3 of the kids in my sons language immersion program are from outside the boundary. If the school were at capacity I can see the benefit to limiting outside placement into the program.

Maybe they could keep French immersion at KG for in-boundary families and open a second program at Dunn Loring for families elsewhere in the county.

There are virtually no special programs in the McLean pyramid and FCPS shortchanges the pyramid at every opportunity. They should not eliminate the KG program.

[Anonymous]

They need to phase out French immersion. The priority should be basic education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They need to phase out French immersion. The priority should be basic education.

Just because you don’t like a program doesn’t mean it should be eliminated. Many people think the immersion programs are great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They should also get rid of immersion, move that to a lower ses school that has capacity. Too many people are using it as a reason to attend a McLean school when they are zoned for a bad school

Why is the school board not working to make all schools good?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is Spring Hill part of the study?

What is the status of the new Tysons Elementary school?

There’s a weird little Churchill Road attendance area largely within the Spring Hill boundaries.

It’s possible they could try to clean this up even though it doesn’t appear to have much to do with Kent Gardens. But if part of KG got moved to Franklin Sherman, they could move part of FS to Churchill Road, and move that CR area to Spring Hill.

A new Tysons ES won’t get built for decades. Frisch and Tholen made a hash of things by getting money allocated to build a new ES at Dunn Loring, where it isn’t needed, instead. So as Tysons gets built up, it still won’t get its own school, which is a shame because it would help make Tysons a more attractive place to live. I think FCPS still has a site off Jones Branch Road - FCPS just doesn’t have a vision that aligns with what the Board of Supervisors claims to want for Tysons.

Yeah, that weird island that looks like it should be with Spring Hill, but is zoned for Churchhill is "The Reserve". (There is likely a very shady story of how this developer got the school board to zone his development to Churchhill instead of Springhill, but I digress.) In any case, there are only 168 homes and very (VERY!) few residents send their children to public school. If you rezoned the entire area to Spring Hill, it would be less than a rounding error.

Well, maybe they just reassign it to Spring Hill as part of this study to clean up the boundaries - like they did when they moved the Woodson island that was in the middle of the Robinson district to Robinson. It might have less of an impact on the school enrollments but it would still make for cleaner boundary maps.

[Anonymous]

Have they posted the presentation online?

[Anonymous]

I checked this morning - not available yet. Can someone tell the folks at McLean PTSA that they shouldn’t schedule meetings during community boundary meetings? I am super annoyed and I am not the only one.