Reply to Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program

Forum Index » Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)

Reply to "Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It makes sense for some movement based on current numbers.[/quote]

No question that there are current capacity issues, and to the extent that adjustments can be made to alleviate them, those conversations should occur. But it is pretty clear if you look at enrollment projections in the CIPs that FCPS has literally no ability to forecast enrollment increases in any competent fashion. To make recommendations based upon a 5-year projection that has no track record of reliability is irresponsible.[/quote]

I agree with you.  The McLean HS five-year projections keep skyrocketing.  While I'd love to think it's because people are moving into a pyramid with a good reputation, it seems like maybe FCPS wants an excuse to move kids to Langley to justify the addition it plans to add as part of Langley's renovation.  I'd rather see FCPS adding ES capacity that's needed now closer to Tysons and then build an addition to McLean later if it's really needed.  [/quote]

This is PRECISELY what they do.[/quote]

The problem is that with the expected growth of Tyson's, ALL the High Schools will have to be expanded.  I tis more of a matter of which one first.  Since Langley needs a renovation and McLean + Marshall have had ones recently, it makes sense to build capacity during Langley's planned renovation.   I can imagine the uproar if McLean or Marshall got another renovation/addition before Langley even had a recent update.  [/quote]

It definitely makes sense to renovate Langley now, as it's up for a renovation.  It's less clear that it makes sense to expand Langley's capacity when (1) all the recent projections have shown Langley's enrollment declining, (2) renovating Langley doesn't foreclose the School Board from building an addition at McLean and Marshall, which are closer to the expected growth, and (3) moving kids to Langley means that we'll end up spending more money on transportation costs over the long run and potentially doing so based on expected enrollment growth that may not occur.  It is not a foregone conclusion that every project contemplated for Tysons will happen as planned.

The risk is that capital projects take place so slowly that there's no ability to adjust to changing conditions, so that FCPS Staff has an incentive to play with the numbers to justify projects that were approved years earlier under different circumstances.

There was actually a pretty good discussion at the FCPS School Board Work Session on April 23rd.   The School Board members made it clear to the FCPS Staff that future CIPs needed to be more transparent when it came to explaining, for example, why the recent projections have been so erratic (with some of the latest five-year projections varying widely from the projections in the latest CIP approved just a few months ago).   Ted Velkoff also made a good suggestion that, if FCPS expects a boat load of boundary changes in future years, it should provide more information as to the expected timing and sequence, rather than just float a bunch of potential changes with no dates attached.      [/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