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]BRAC meeting notes are up. They don't include anything involving maps:

https://www.fcps.edu/september-24-2025-superintendents-boundary-review-advisory-committee-meeting[/quote]

So they want to increase the commuting time and distance for the McLean students who’d be moved (over 200 students)?  So much for transportation efficiency.

[/quote]
If it helps, the analysis is for the unseen “scenario 4”, so this must be for the Spring Hill kids going to Langley. If Timber Lane were still on the chopping block, McLean would also appear in the biggest transportation decrease section because Timber Lane to FCHS is much shorter than it is to McLean. So a speculative congrats to them![/quote]

I’m not sure I read it that way.  Weren’t they just parsing discrete boundary changes out of all those previously proposed back in June and flagging the ones with the most impact?  Timber Lane to FC vs. McLean might not have made that cut.

It’s confusing because they used the term “Scenario 4,” but they left in the change that would move Chantilly kids to Oakton, and there’s been a lot of feedback to rescind that proposal.  [/quote]

Where are you seeing specific schools?

There is a chart that lists a spattering of high schools with miles, and one map showing the distance of a single Sangster street not slater for rezoning and its driving path to Sangster.

But I am not seeing anything about the schools you mention.[/quote]
Slide 12[/quote]

So the schools listed on those slides are schools that students are being moved from?[/quote]

Yes. [/quote]

Are they?

Because WSHS had neighborhoods marked to move more than 3 miles away, and WSHS is not included on slide 12.

[/quote]

They are looking at the "delta" - the [i]change[/i] in commuting length and distance - not the absolute distance or length.  And then they are apparently using their judgment as to which combinations of decreased or increased distance [i]and[/i] time are the most significant.

They could have just screwed up and omitted WSHS when it should have been included, but were the WS areas that they were proposing to move to Lake Braddock or South County more than 3 miles closer to WS than to LBSS or SC?  [/quote]

How does it reflect their judgment of what is most significant when slide 12 lists each delta in ranked order? Seems like it’s straight up numbers not judgments.[/quote]

It appears to be ranked order in terms of distance, but the "delta" in terms of travel times varies and is not in ranked order.  So it's possible, since they say that it's "Largest Decreases by Distance & Time" and "Largest Increases by Distance & Time" that they are leaving out some changes with larger deltas in terms of distance if they are offset by the deltas in terms of time.

[/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