Will Mclean High School ever be able to upsize

[Anonymous]

Oh man the early posts in this thread highlight how wrong some people can be while confidently posting things they wish to be true as if they were facts. The thread isn't even that old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh man the early posts in this thread highlight how wrong some people can be while confidently posting things they wish to be true as if they were facts. The thread isn't even that old.

People may have assumed FCPS would make more rational decisions than it ended up making.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh man the early posts in this thread highlight how wrong some people can be while confidently posting things they wish to be true as if they were facts. The thread isn't even that old.

People may have assumed FCPS would make more rational decisions than it ended up making.

Found one of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the MHS update? There was a “State of the School” presentation from the new principal… any important highlights?

Raven Jones is quite dynamic and enthusiastic. With respect to facilities she made a "don't hold me to it comment" that the school might get renovated started in 2034 or 2036. No idea where she got those dates or whether they'd been vetted by others. She talked about some other smaller building repairs in process, such as the replacement of two chillers that she said should result in a more consistent temperature throughout the building.

She said the presentation (it was about 30 minutes) would get posted on the school's web page at some point. It was about what you'd expect - she loves being the principal, the kids are great, etc. The only other things she said that I specifically recall are that among the county's 25 high schools McLean's economically disadvantaged students had the second-best improvement in academic performance last year, and that the biggest number of disciplinary infractions are for kids skipping class. And she urged parents not to let their kids take 6 AP classes in a single year because she said it's unnecessary to get into great schools and will lead to burnout.

NP. Five years ago, the heater in the McLean band room broke down. It has not been repaired or replaced.

There is still no heat in that room.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the redistricting isn't a top priority in that case, like Kent Gardens was. You could easily move kids into Marshall or Langley from the outer boundaries of Mclean and that could bring down the number of students to closer to the capacity threshold at Mclean and bring up the numbers at Marshall and Langley, which both had expansive extensions. Langley looks like a private school campus now. So, what is taking the Board so damn long to do the redistricting for Mclean. I'm sure tons of kids would opt into Langley, if given the choice.

Marshall is basically at capacity. Langley is the option.

And regarding a PP with the Timber Lane split, I just can't see that happening given the demographics.

If I was in-bounds for Timber Lane - Longfellow - McLean, I would raise absolute hell if redistricted to Timber Lane - Luther Jackson - Falls Church. That would shave at least $100k off the value of every SFH in that area and get rid of most of the diversity that feeds into McLean. Moving some of McLean to Langley is much more "like to like."

Nah. Those families will just go private.

Or move out of FCPS entirely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the redistricting isn't a top priority in that case, like Kent Gardens was. You could easily move kids into Marshall or Langley from the outer boundaries of Mclean and that could bring down the number of students to closer to the capacity threshold at Mclean and bring up the numbers at Marshall and Langley, which both had expansive extensions. Langley looks like a private school campus now. So, what is taking the Board so damn long to do the redistricting for Mclean. I'm sure tons of kids would opt into Langley, if given the choice.

Marshall is basically at capacity. Langley is the option.

And regarding a PP with the Timber Lane split, I just can't see that happening given the demographics.

If I was in-bounds for Timber Lane - Longfellow - McLean, I would raise absolute hell if redistricted to Timber Lane - Luther Jackson - Falls Church. That would shave at least $100k off the value of every SFH in that area and get rid of most of the diversity that feeds into McLean. Moving some of McLean to Langley is much more "like to like."

Nah. Those families will just go private.

Or move out of FCPS entirely.

Timber Lane north of 29 is staying at McLean, so it’s moot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the redistricting isn't a top priority in that case, like Kent Gardens was. You could easily move kids into Marshall or Langley from the outer boundaries of Mclean and that could bring down the number of students to closer to the capacity threshold at Mclean and bring up the numbers at Marshall and Langley, which both had expansive extensions. Langley looks like a private school campus now. So, what is taking the Board so damn long to do the redistricting for Mclean. I'm sure tons of kids would opt into Langley, if given the choice.

Marshall is full. The answer is to move some McLean kids to Langley. But great falls won’t allow it because they are worried about the other side of Langley getting rezoned to Herndon (and no board member has had the spine to stand up to great falls).

And, odd though it sounds, the very small number of McLean kids that Elaine tholen moved to Langley raised such a stink about it! They were not in favor. I wish the board would have gone bigger and done the right change then instead of a tiny one that didn’t even offset the increase in kids to McLean from their TJ admissions changes.

People typically don't like being redistricted. If you listened to the testimony at the time, there were quite a few families who asked to be moved. Typically, they had younger kids who wanted to stay with their elementary school peers at Colvin Run or Spring Hill or thought it would be good for their real estate values. In comparison, families with older kids, including kids already at Longfellow or McLean, tended to oppose getting redistricted.

Totally agree with this. That’s why the screw Great Falls argument is really misguided to me. It is a push for this monumental change negatively impacting thousands of kids (Not even just the “rich” ones) in the name of this theoretical equity. It’s the same argument for Boston busing in the 70s.

The advocate on this board who argues for broad redistricting to soak the western Great Falls “rich” is very fringe, even for Fairfax County, and I say that as a staunch democrat. The Board understands that too.

DP. I 100% agree with you. It's always the same fringe poster, parroting the same words and phrases. Very transparent.

No, it’s not one poster suggesting the most logical boundary change. And why are you calling this change a “screw Great Falls” approach? What’s the problem with shifting some kids to the newly renovated Herndon HS IF Langley were to get too crowded after adding McLean kids? And that’s a big IF because renovated Langley is way under capacity.

The latest projections have Langley at about 99% capacity within the next five years.

moving spring hill into langley in this round of boundary changes pushes langley and cooper to like 102%. people keep talking about all this space at langley but they are at capacity

Cool story. You got five years. Maybe give it a rest for a week or two?

Capacity numbers are just pieces in a game that are manipulated for political games - looked at Kilmer MS as an example.