Reply to FCPS is turning the new high school purchased to fix crowding into an Aviation magnet school instead of a high school??

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "FCPS is turning the new high school purchased to fix crowding into an Aviation magnet school instead of a high school??"

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][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]My guess is that they will start it as a regular high school, but add an Aviation or Aerospace-focused Academy as part of the school. They will spend 2-3 years renovating one of the extra buildings to bring in specialized equipment/labs for the academy. That will also give them time to hire the right people.[/quote]

Here's the academic sequence for students at Raisbeck Aviation HS near Seattle.  The school has slightly over 400 students, so it is feasible to have such a program in a building that's built for fewer students than a typical FCPS high school.

https://rahs.highlineschools.org/academics/course-offerings

[img]https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5e5d2de082e3c20bed5c2a9d/1612828993694-ZJ5Q29TF6QGNTDL4WEQ1/09819_00_N42_large.jpg[/img][/quote]

No.

Not possible.

They didn't follow the proper processes to do this.

The money they spent was money allocated for a new general high school to ease overcrowding through the normal bond process.

It was NOT allocated for a magnet school available to only a few students.

FCPS is cutting money right and left from other students.  Most teachers are teaching classes of 30-35 students per year.  Many high school teachers have a student load well in excess of 150-180 students per teacher.

If they want a magnet school, then go through the normal bond process.

Do not steal money from the rest of the county meant to relieve overcrowding to fund a vanity project with possible kickbacks or benefits to school board members working in that industry.[/quote]

I don’t feel strongly about this school, but you mislead when you say they bought it with money allocated to overcrowding. They haven’t disclosed anything about where the money came from.

You can argue why you think the school should be a traditional one, but you hurt your credibility with the argument above.[/quote]

The money came from a bond that was passed by the voters to build a new high school to relieve overcrowding.

Never in the bond process did FCPS present to voters of Fairfax County that the bond money would be repurposed from a necessary high school to relieve overcrowding to a frivolous vanity project magnet that is only available to a handful of students and does not do anything to relieve overcrowding. [/quote]

Can you link to the bond material because a quick search of the 2023 referendum material doesn’t support your claim. What am I missing?[/quote]

Not either PP here, but it really does not matter.  If you make it a magnet it does not resolve the overcrowding problem in the area.  They honestly do need the school to relieve the overcrowding.  If it has to be a smaller school, so be it.  There is room for expansion if budgets change.  And, certainly, those two additional buildings could support classrooms easily and cheaply.  I did a google search, they should be able to get a minimum of twenty classrooms in each of those buildings.  Likely more.  Anyone who says this would not work has not driven over there.  It is basically a private drive.[/quote]

I’m sorry, but you’re trying to move the goalposts. The point made regarding bonds by the original poster, and made multiple times before that, is that the bond disallows the school to be used as a magnet. That doesn’t comport with my reading of the bond referendum materials, but I’m offering that poster a chance to point out the materials and explain why I’m wrong.

Otherwise, your side loses a lot of credibility here, trying to argue the law/rules don’t allow for the magnet school. It’s never a good look to lie.[/quote]
The argument isn't that the law/rules don't allow a magnet. The argument is that nowhere in any bond or plan was a magnet ever mentioned.  No one ever voted on adding a magnet school.  It is as much a misappropriation of funds as the diversion of funds to Dunn Loring that should have been used to build the Blake Lane school.[/quote]

Exactly this.

If they want to spend tens of millions on a magnet for less than 1% of the high school population, put it up for a county bond referendum and include the miniscule number of students that will benefit.[/quote]

DP, but you’re a hypocrite.  If it turns out they conclude they need to spend $100 million more for KAA to operate as a typical HS, you’ll more than happily let them put other renovation projects on hold for years to make sure that happens, whether or not those projects were referenced in prior bond documents or CIPs. [/quote]

You ignore the need. You also ignore the fact that the property was sold to Saudis with NO discussion or input.

The bottom line is that there is a need.[/quote]

No, South Lakes is the only school in the area projected to be at even full capacity within five years.  Don’t conflate your preferences with actual need.  [/quote]

Centreville and Chantilly are over capacity now. Westfield has 2700+ students, which is excessively large for a HS. [/quote]

Says who?  What is Westfield’s design capacity?

And both Chantilly and Centreville were projected to be under capacity within the next five years.[/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