FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line to all of these discussions seems to be: If I bought in WSHS pyramid, I'm against boundary changes and if I bought in Lewis pyramid, I'm for and can think of all the justifications for/against in either scenario. Honestly though, the boundaries haven't changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change.

Maybe in some parts of the county, but in West Springfield, they changed in 2004 when South County HS opened. (See this collection of Letters to the Editor sent by unhappy residents at that time: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/2004/12/09/drawing-south-county-lines/b39f8591-b68b-4db3-855a-1aefacdc14ec/).

They changed again more recently when the Daventry neighborhood was switched to WSHS from Lewis HS.

I don't know why Daventry Mom keeps turning this thread to focus on WSHS when there are a lot of areas of the county that make more sense for this boundary study to focus on. But here we are.

I went back and researched old Washington post articles from when South County was opened. The school board has been hurting Lewis high school for close to 20 years. South Hunt Valley was redistributed to West Springfield from Lee as part of the South County boundary adjustment when the school was opened. Then Daventry was moved to West Springfield. Why did that happen?

Hunt Valley was redistriced to WSHS 20 years ago because kids south of the parkway went from Hunt Valley to Irving to Lee(Lewis) while their friends went on to WSHS. The neighborhoods asked the SB to send their kids to WSHS instead so they wouldn’t lose all their friends.

+1 they fixed a split feeder, which is one of the stated goals of the current boundary changes as well.

There wouldn’t be a split feeder if all of Hunt Valley or another WS feeder were reassigned to Key and Lewis.

Exactly. Hunt Valley going to Lewis.

Take a moment to do this geography experiment (especially Thru consultants and SB staffers): go on google maps and draw a line from HVES to Lewis. The line distance is 4.15 miles, but let's go ahead and round down to 4.

Trace that line starting at HVES (Community #1) and move east/northeast crossing over Pohick Creek. At .75 miles off to your left is lovely Rolling Valley ES as you cross through the Rolling Valley neighborhood (Community #2) Continue across Rolling Rd to the 1.40 mile mark where the line intersects the southern edge of the WSES building and the Greeley neighborhood (Community #3). Continue another .6 miles and you are at the 2 mile halfway mark, where it intersects with the entry to Daventry at Hunter Village Drive (Community #4).

You can argue about how the line is drawn and start and end points, but no matter the case your line is crossing through two elementary schools and 3 distinct neighborhood communities on its way to Lewis. So for the Saratoga mom and Daventry folks who continue to spout "HVES to Lewis," give us all a break. What you are posting is not rational.

I agree with you that HVES should not move to Lewis, but your line is completely nonsensical because you can't drive across Pohick creek, or barely walk across it (though we swam in it during covid - I still can't believe I let my kids do that). It's a natural barrier. And though Rolling Valley, WSES, and Keene Mill are probably closer to Lewis they also all have students that are closer to West Springfield High School than anyone at Hunt Valley. All three of those schools have walkers for either Irving or WSHS.

I actually do agree with you about Hunt Valley staying at WSHS, but that's not your best argument.

This. It’s the only school that doesn’t walk. HV folks need to find another argument, but there really isn’t one.

They can tell the truth of why they don't want to be moved to Lewis!

HV doesn't need to explain anything. The SB would need to explain why moving HV to Lewis makes sense compared to other less disruptive options. Also what problem are they trying to solve? "Overcrowding" at WSHS? Or Lewis under-enrollment? If the latter, there are other options to look at on the other side of the Mixing Bowl that could help with that which doesn't require bussing kids so far. There will be new development near Edison in the next few years if redevelopment plans for Top Golf and the old gov center go thru and that school is already pretty full given the academy classes.

There are a lot of moving parts here and honestly, these transparent efforts by Daventry and Saratoga Mom to make this about HV are weird and unproductive.

What if the problem that they want to solve is a disparity in FARMS rates?

That wasn’t one of the justifications provided when the SB kicked off this process, if memory serves. Is that one of the inputs being used to create the new boundaries by this consulting firm?

Equalizing or mitigating disparities in FARMS rates among schools is not a specified priority or consideration, but “equitable access to programming” is. So if disparities in FARMS rates are determined to preclude equitable access to programming, the consultants can propose changes to address those disparities under the guise of promoting more equitable access to programming. Whether the consultants would do so would presumably depend on the steer provided by the staff and SB members interacting with the consultants.

Who even talks like this?

Are you too intellectually challenged to follow it?

The point with a lot of this boundary stuff is that they can do whatever they want to do, while avoiding buzzwords that automatically set some people off.

No I followed, but brevity and clarity is better than what you wrote.

Or maybe you’re just a putz. The first post identified the specific language in revised Policy 8130 that could be relevant if they want to focus on FARMS disparities. The second post gave the bottom line.

Indubitably. Notwithstanding the imperial bifurcated modalities of the temporal synergies.

Definitely a putz.

[Anonymous]

Here’s a gift article about San Francisco’s mayoral race. I certainly hope the FCPS school board is paying attention - lots of parallels here.

Whether democrats care to admit it, this is where Fairfax County is headed with One Fairfax and its boundary changes based on equity.

https://wapo.st/3NVv95X

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a gift article about San Francisco’s mayoral race. I certainly hope the FCPS school board is paying attention - lots of parallels here.

Whether democrats care to admit it, this is where Fairfax County is headed with One Fairfax and its boundary changes based on equity.

https://wapo.st/3NVv95X

The public doesn't know what proposed boundary changes will have any considerations for disadvantaged or ESL. These are the search terms on the VDOE website. 2017 One Fairfax went by the wayside when the SB put the West Potomac addition on the proposed bond referendum presented to the Board of Supervisors. Inequitablle and known by the BOS to be not needed since there was open capacity at Mount Vernon. Bottom line is it was inequitable to use public resources and was not needed. That fact was acknowledged by the Board of Supervisors.

Now we have Reid in charge of a county wide comprehensive boundary review. Instances of incompetency:
1. Hayfield football- VHSL apparently could check rosters etc whereas Reid blundered. Note the puplic can also view rosters, team records etc. If you can't audit one HS football team exactly how can you do boundaries for a large school division?
2. In the midst of a potential system wide boundary review , applied for a grant to further complicate the endeavor for a magnet Montessori school
3. In the midst of a county wide boundary review is even considering MS 6-8 where possible. Making that a fact for any additional pyramids completely complicates the process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a gift article about San Francisco’s mayoral race. I certainly hope the FCPS school board is paying attention - lots of parallels here.

Whether democrats care to admit it, this is where Fairfax County is headed with One Fairfax and its boundary changes based on equity.

https://wapo.st/3NVv95X

The public doesn't know what proposed boundary changes will have any considerations for disadvantaged or ESL. These are the search terms on the VDOE website. 2017 One Fairfax went by the wayside when the SB put the West Potomac addition on the proposed bond referendum presented to the Board of Supervisors. Inequitablle and known by the BOS to be not needed since there was open capacity at Mount Vernon. Bottom line is it was inequitable to use public resources and was not needed. That fact was acknowledged by the Board of Supervisors.

Now we have Reid in charge of a county wide comprehensive boundary review. Instances of incompetency:
1. Hayfield football- VHSL apparently could check rosters etc whereas Reid blundered. Note the puplic can also view rosters, team records etc. If you can't audit one HS football team exactly how can you do boundaries for a large school division?
2. In the midst of a potential system wide boundary review , applied for a grant to further complicate the endeavor for a magnet Montessori school
3. In the midst of a county wide boundary review is even considering MS 6-8 where possible. Making that a fact for any additional pyramids completely complicates the process.

6-8 middle schools are unnecessary when the grade 7-8 intermediate model has served FCPS well since the 60s. Why spend money and upset communities on an intitiative that’s not deeded.

Who the heck is asking for a montessori program? In nearby APS parents are up in arms over spending money on the montessori school there. It is a very niche program that serves a privileged few.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a gift article about San Francisco’s mayoral race. I certainly hope the FCPS school board is paying attention - lots of parallels here.

Whether democrats care to admit it, this is where Fairfax County is headed with One Fairfax and its boundary changes based on equity.

https://wapo.st/3NVv95X

The difference is in S.F. the residents were fed up after the proposed renaming of schools named after George Washington, Diane Feinstein, Paul Revere, Clarendon, etc.

The final straw was when the renaming committee and school board accused Paul Revere of oppression against Native Americans, a claim that turned out to be completely false. A scathing NPR interview with the school board members who defended renaming Revere ES revealed that those facts (of oppression) were in fact made up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a gift article about San Francisco’s mayoral race. I certainly hope the FCPS school board is paying attention - lots of parallels here.

Whether democrats care to admit it, this is where Fairfax County is headed with One Fairfax and its boundary changes based on equity.

https://wapo.st/3NVv95X

The public doesn't know what proposed boundary changes will have any considerations for disadvantaged or ESL. These are the search terms on the VDOE website. 2017 One Fairfax went by the wayside when the SB put the West Potomac addition on the proposed bond referendum presented to the Board of Supervisors. Inequitablle and known by the BOS to be not needed since there was open capacity at Mount Vernon. Bottom line is it was inequitable to use public resources and was not needed. That fact was acknowledged by the Board of Supervisors.

Now we have Reid in charge of a county wide comprehensive boundary review. Instances of incompetency:
1. Hayfield football- VHSL apparently could check rosters etc whereas Reid blundered. Note the puplic can also view rosters, team records etc. If you can't audit one HS football team exactly how can you do boundaries for a large school division?
2. In the midst of a potential system wide boundary review , applied for a grant to further complicate the endeavor for a magnet Montessori school
3. In the midst of a county wide boundary review is even considering MS 6-8 where possible. Making that a fact for any additional pyramids completely complicates the process.

6-8 middle schools are unnecessary when the grade 7-8 intermediate model has served FCPS well since the 60s. Why spend money and upset communities on an intitiative that’s not deeded.

Who the heck is asking for a montessori program? In nearby APS parents are up in arms over spending money on the montessori school there. It is a very niche program that serves a privileged few.

I want it. Montessori is awesome. It absolutely has a reputation for what you say, but when you see it in action, it is amazing. The academic piece for reading and math is light years ahead of any other curriculum. She had the science of reading down PAT over 100 years ago. Her math is so well thought out and paced, kids would not have the deficits in understanding place value, decimal system, or operations they currently exhibit. Eventually schools MAY catch on to that as they did with science of reading.

In APS it is a 2/3 low income 2/3 paying program (on a sliding scale) no it is not serving mostly privileged children.

I complete agree with the rest of the PPs points. I would add that:

1. She said she never redid boundaries without allowing grandfathering and said NOTHING about the board not guaranteeing it.

2. She hammers teachers about closing SES/racial achievement gaps, but has done NOTHING but endorse moving kids to make it look like schools are better. She has not come up with any other options.

[Anonymous]

Sorry 2/3 low income 1/3. Paying

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a gift article about San Francisco’s mayoral race. I certainly hope the FCPS school board is paying attention - lots of parallels here.

Whether democrats care to admit it, this is where Fairfax County is headed with One Fairfax and its boundary changes based on equity.

https://wapo.st/3NVv95X

The difference is in S.F. the residents were fed up after the proposed renaming of schools named after George Washington, Diane Feinstein, Paul Revere, Clarendon, etc.

The final straw was when the renaming committee and school board accused Paul Revere of oppression against Native Americans, a claim that turned out to be completely false. A scathing NPR interview with the school board members who defended renaming Revere ES revealed that those facts (of oppression) were in fact made up.

It should be added to the above that the school board members in the NPR interview defended themselves by saying that school names should represent the student population and not honor “dead white men.” Perhaps a fair point, but the board member could not defend against the methods of using false claims of oppression in the renaming process. It was a huge mess, and that added fuel to the fire to reinstate merit based admissions to Lowell High School, SF’s equivalent to TJHSST or Stuyvesant, Bronx Science, etc.

[Anonymous]

Michelle Reid clearly bungled the investigation of the Hayfield coach, leading to the VHSL to intervene and propose multi-year sanctions.

One investigation. One school. Bungled.

But somehow she and her Gatehouse staff can properly oversee county-wide boundary changes that will affect, according to Matt Dunne, every pyramid in the county?

They need to back off before they completely destroy any confidence in FCPS.

[Anonymous]

Meeting schedule is out, check your emails. I’ll be at one of the later ones, either Annandale or MVHS, so I’m curious to know how the earlier meetings are going 👀

November 4, 2024

Hello FCPS Families,

As a reminder, Fairfax County Public Schools is beginning a comprehensive review of school boundaries for the first time in almost four decades. This long overdue project will assess boundaries across our district to better support student population growth, changes in school capacity, and evolving community needs.

Community engagement is a critical part of this work as noted in FCPS Boundary Policy 8130 and the Code of Virginia. Our first set of boundary review meetings will begin in a few weeks, with a meeting scheduled in each of our six regions. Families, staff, and community members will be able to share their thoughts, ask questions, and learn more about the boundary review process.

We encourage you to attend a meeting in your region. However, you may choose another date, if that works better for your schedule:

Monday, November 18, 6:30 - 8 p.m. Register
Glasgow Middle School Cafeteria - (Region 2)


Monday, December 2, 6:30 - 8 p.m. Register
Westfield High School Cafeteria - (Region 5)


Tuesday, December 3, 6:30 - 8 p.m. Register
Lake Braddock Secondary School Cafeteria - (Region 4)


Monday, December 9, 6:30 - 8 p.m. Register
Mount Vernon High School Cafeteria - (Region 3)


Thursday, December 12, 6:45 - 8:15 p.m. Register
Annandale High School Cafeteria - (Region 6)
​​​​

Wednesday, December 18, 6:30 - 8 p.m. Register
Madison High School Cafeteria - (Region 1)

All meetings will be in person and follow the same format. Childcare and interpretation services will be available, as needed. Registration is not required, but it helps with planning.

Thank you in advance for your time, as we work together to develop a boundary plan that reflects the needs of our students and community. Visit our Boundary Review webpage for more information.

Warmest regards,


Dr. Michelle Reid
Superintendent

[Anonymous]

Here we go….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here we go….

I’m so done with the school board and this boundary change crap. Time to let them know that instability is not the answer they think it is.

[Anonymous]

It seems like they’re starting with probably the least contentious region of Falls Church, Justice, McLean (unless there’s some credible moves to be made out of McLean and to either of those schools that I’m not aware of?) and saving Langley/Herndon for last LOL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like they’re starting with probably the least contentious region of Falls Church, Justice, McLean (unless there’s some credible moves to be made out of McLean and to either of those schools that I’m not aware of?) and saving Langley/Herndon for last LOL.

There is a decent chance that the current split feeder to McLean and Falls Church (Timber Lane) will be assigned entirely to Falls Church.

McLean has been the most overcrowded of these three schools for over a decade, so of course they have invested next to nothing in McLean and are expanding Falls Church and Justice.

If they do this, however, it makes it less likely they’ll also move McLean kids to Langley and Langley kids to Herndon. So it may not happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like they’re starting with probably the least contentious region of Falls Church, Justice, McLean (unless there’s some credible moves to be made out of McLean and to either of those schools that I’m not aware of?) and saving Langley/Herndon for last LOL.

FCPS has 6 regions and each region serves a widely disparate number of schools and 9-12 student count. Some tighter geographically and others cover massive territory where somebody in boundary at 1 site might have never even seen or driven to a meeting site. Marshall : Region 5 is in Tysons yet the meeting is at Westfield over 18 miles away. Region 1 meeting is at Madison. That likely will get normal relatively local like Marshall so what's that cafeteria capacity?

Massive U of region 5 with 5 schools + over 12,500 HS students https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1tRgfj95rca7hbV99nkqRye2c16g&ll=38.88628340934821%2C-77.34031354999999&z=11

Compact Region 6 [relatively newly created] with 3 schools + less than 1/2 the students - Hayfield participants drive past Lewis to Annandale. https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?hl=en&mid=10ykuMR9q5NAxgFbu0oRNBfJkM0Fo5Qs&ll=38.76702482645069%2C-77.13606012525878&z=11

So doing 6 meetings by FCPS administrative areas skews the opportunity to participate.