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]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]

Why were both reps from the same elementary school? Of course they were going to do something like this. [/quote]

I’d like to think it was random and not purposeful. Unfortunately it wasn’t due to lack of volunteers from other elem schools. I think it’s a testament to how flawed the process has been. [/quote]

It was all on video.  Fairfacts has it and posted it

When did your neighborhood dial in to the rezoning fight?

In the WSHS pyramid, Hunt Valley and West Springfield Elementary were involved from before 8130 was revised, in very large numbers, because they felt the most threat from the potential changes

The other elementary schools felt that rezoning wouldn't affect them, so they weren't as motivated to get involved so early.

They didn't start getting involved until after maps started happening.[/quote]

I think we are saying the same thing- that the reps were chosen at random. From the outside looking in, that seems fair. What’s being stated by so many is that the priorities can become flawed when reps are only representative of one elementary school. This is not on the reps, but on the process as a whole. [/quote]

How is it flawed?

Happy with the changes or not, the Map 4 recommendations for WSHS follow ths BRAC guidelines to the letter.

Eliminate split feeders/islands and minimize transportation expenses:

Sangster to Lake Braddock checks both of these boxes.  It also checks the equitable access to programs box since LB and WSHS are both AP schools and equally ranked, with one or the other higher depending on the year.

Keene Mill island to White Oaks checks all 3 of those boxes as well.

Rolling Valley to WSHS is a little messier.  It checks split feeder and transportation boxes, but is a dramatic upgrade to program equity, by switching from an unwanted IB program to a coveted AP program, and into a much higher ranked school.  It also breaks up the Rolling Valley community, by moving a small portion of Rolling Valley to a new elementary school.  And it moves more students into an overcrowded school, also against BRAC guidelines and against the whole justification behind rezoning WSHS.

The Rolling Valley move wasn't from the Springfield BRAC reps though.  That came from the Springfield school board rep who has been fixated since this process started on miving families out of WSHS so she can move Rolling Valley into WSHS.

The only WSHS change that does not follow BRAC recommendations to the letter is the Rolling Valley move.   That did not come from the BRAC committee though.  Their changes followed the mandate they were given.

You can't blame those WSHS for other pyramid reps ignoring the requirements, or for the Springfield school board rep's pet project (RV).   The WSHS BRAC reps followed the instructions rhey were given as closely as they could.[/quote]

You could have had any other school represented on the BRAC committee for WSHS, with no Hunt Valley representation, and of they followed the mandates that the BRAC committee was given, the outcome for Sangster and the Keene Mill island would have been exactly the same as it is now.

You could have picked 2 BRAC members from the other side of the county, and they would have come up with the same recommendations for Sangster and the Keene Mill Island.

Anyone who followed the instructions would have recommended Sangster split feeder and the Keene Mill island sent to Lake Braddock.

Neither of those are surprising changes.

Neither of them are changes that randomly target a neighborhood.

Both of those changes would have been recommended by anyone looking at that map who had been given the mandates that the BRAC committee was given.[/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