Reply to Boundary Review Meetings

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "Boundary Review Meetings"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Sangster should stop fighting rezoning and just focus on guaranteeing garndfathering for current Irving enrolled students to continue to WSHS.

6th and younger from that neighborhood should just attend LB with all of their friends and classmates from Sangster.[/quote]

Agreed. Other WSHS neighborhoods are looking at moving to lower performing schools. These are champagne problems for Sangster neighborhoods who could move from one great HS to another great HS. They’d be wise to focus on grandfathering. [/quote]

Moving this pocket causes Lake Braddock to be overcapacity 102-103%, and does nothing to help Lewis.  It also won't do anything to help WS overcrowding in the long run if you move them out and Rolling Valley kids in.  Region 4 Scenerio 4 does little to solve any long term problems, and ticks off a neighborhood who doesn't believe the split is an issue for their families and feels very connected to the WS community (because they are).  BRAC and Thru let region 4 down. [/quote]

I disagree.

The Springfield BRAC members did a great job following the BRAC instructions on focusing eliminating split feeders.

The Sangster neighborhood is getting moved to an equal or better school if you look at SAT scores, within their community and which they have equal or closer ties to than WSHS.

Of all the possible rezoning scenarios, the Springfield BRAC did the best possible outcome for WSHS and the Sangster neighborhood.

The Rolling Valley rezoning is Sandy Anderson's pet project, so you cannot blame the BRAC committee members for that one.

Even so, it did eliminate a split feeder.   Every change in map 4 for WSHS eliminated the WSHS split feeders.

You can't get mad at the BRAC committee members for following their instructions to a T.  You can't get mad at them for following instructions, just because other pyramid BRAC reps ignored the instructions.  You can't get mad at them for Rolling Valley, that is Sandy Anderson's thing and one of the main reasons why this rezoning process started.

Be mad at the process and the school board.  Don't be mad at the volunteer BRAC reps for following the process they were told to follow using the criteria they were given.[/quote]

Uggg...there's that faulty split feeder argument again.  The majority of split feeders in every other pyramid were not closed and parents across the county overwhelming did not see split feeders as an issue (including the families at Sangster). 'Fixing' Split feeders was ranked towards the bottom of the boundary survey and other region representatives actually represented their communities.  Both the West Springfield reps were Hunter Valley parents and kept Hunt Valley at WS instead of moving it to an unpopulated school.  This is less about Sangster and more about how mismanaged this whole process has been.  I actual appreciate all the work the BRAC put into this, but they were always set up to fail.  Region 4 Scenerio 4 is not the right one for WS or for the greater FCPS community. [/quote]

If you surveyed all thr WSHS parents, you would most likely find that the vast majority view Sangster to Lake Braddock as the best possible option for WSHS, since Lake Braddock is such a fantastic school with so much overlap with the WSHS community.  Sangster is also Lake Braddock's biggest feeder school, with those Sangster island 7th graders knowing far more Lake Braddock kids than Irving kids, just from their neighbors and classmates.

Of all of the rezoning options of moving kids out of WSHS, Sangster island to Lake Braddock make the most sense and provides the most continuity, best neighborhood and community connection, and the most consistent school experience.   Any other rezoning out option, including the Keene Mill island off Huntsman to White Oaks and Lake Braddock, is far more disruptive to the students. [/quote]

Sorry, complete hearsay.  I have actually surveyed almost all the parents at Sangster zoned for WS and the vast, vast majority want to stay within their West Springfield Community.  We explained and pleaded with our BRAC reps and the board that we preferred the split...its our community and neighbors.  We were told that they were advocating for us.  We had board members tell us to our faces that they agreed with us. 
We've attended almost every meeting, followed all feedback channels. Again, this move will make Lake Braddock overpopulated, does not help Lewis, is unwelcomed from the neighborhood, and will do little to 'fix' overpopulation at WS in the long run. Many of my LB parent friends feel it's over crowded enough.  If you don't live here, if this isn't your neighborhood...kindly don't speak for others. [/quote]

Sounds like you’re happy to throw other WS neighborhoods under the bus. [/quote]

What a strange and narrow-minded comment to make.  These are simple facts.  Scenerio 4 for Region 4 1.) Will make LB over capacity 2.) Moving RV children is taking children from underpopulated Lewis 3.) Split feeders are not an FCPS community priority  4.) The Sangster/Irving/West Springfield parents and families feel strongly tied to the WS community.  None of this is 'throwing anyone else under a bus'.  If anything, it feels like the Sangster WS neighborhood is being used as a bandaid that will not fix any larger problems.  And it is making many feel uncomfortable because the move does not fit into a neat box so that other 'neighborhoods' can feel safe from being moved.  We are all one FCPS together, and the moves in region four are not going to help the majority of students in the long run.  I'm sorry if that makes you feel uncomfortable. [/quote]

Lake Braddock will actually not be over capacity, because coupled with the boundary change, the Irving students will no longer attend Lake Braddock for AAP.[/quote]

The boundary map tool has it at 102% with changes. I'd send you the link but I'm sure you can figure it out. [/quote]

The boundary map does not have the AAP kids losing the ability to attend Lake Braddock.

That ends in fall 2026.

Lake Braddock will not be over capacity when the Irving AAP kids all return from Lake Braddock.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics