Reply to FCPS Skyview Boundary Revised Scenario 1 / 2

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "FCPS Skyview Boundary Revised Scenario 1 / 2 "

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]The few posts I have seen on Meren’s page point to the Crossfield families going to SLHS as approving of that choice, I think that they might already go there.

The rest of the Crossfield break is 100% because the school is very divided on where they want to go. [/quote]

Right. If they had just made Scenario 1 where all of Crossfield goes to Carson-Skyview, the reaction would be very different. It's almost like someone has a contact in Gatehouse and suggested this as a way to get a united pro-Oakton front!! Hm....[/quote]

Maybe.

Honestly I think there are more pro–Oakton Crossfield families than pro–Carson/Skyview families, but it doesn't matter.  The RIO won.

They were very transparent about moving to Franklin. They created the website and started the petition at the very early stage. Pro–Oakton parents were well represented at every meeting I attended, outnumbering pro–Skyview parents by at least 4 to 1.

All the pro–Skyview parents did was complain on this board.

Well that's probably not entirely true.  I guess they contacted the school board and left comments too.

But from day one they lost the PR battle and never recovered.[/quote]

Not in RIO, but I remember people pooh poohing the fact that parents can be organized when lobbying FCPS.

Parents should absoutely do that to advocate for their kids.[/quote]

What does that even mean?  Whoever doubted that parents and community members can be organized?

[b]That doesn’t mean the School Board shouldn’t be making decisions that are in the best interests of all students, and not just the students whose parents have organized an advocacy group.  [/b]

[/quote]

This!  A great example of those who could use some advocacy are those Chantilly students who live in a high FARMS area along route 50.  1.5 miles from Chantilly High School--yet, they are slated to be moved to Westfield--4 miles away and lots more time.
I've worked in schools with very poor students.  Truancy can be a problem if a bus is missed.  After school activities?  problematic because of transportation.
This is an egregious decision.[/quote]

There’s a separate follow-up boundary study that involves a number of elementary schools in Falls Church, including high-FARMS Graham Road ES.

It’s a little messy because there’s one group of higher-income families who’d previously supported a proposal where they essentially all would have moved to Graham Road, while the low-income families now at Graham Road would have ended up an attendance island bused a longer distance to a different school. That proposal wasn’t adopted because it was so callous on its face, but they are still trying to figure out what to do.

In any event, Reid appointed a staff person to be the point person for that study, and he made a point of telling people that he was going to reach out and make sure he understood what the current Graham Road families prefer, not just assume they’d show up at public meetings or respond to surveys.

Sounds like they need to do something similar with that community along Route 50 now at Chantilly - but will they make the effort?  [/quote]

I remember when they moved Graham Rd out of its community.  The people begged to fix the old site where they could walk and the school was the center of this low income community.

But, FCPS did not listen.  I do realize there may have been other variables, but to move them where they were not walkers was troubling.
If any kids need to be close to a school it is the poor kids.  [/quote]

I’m not trying to hijack a Skyview thread to discuss what should have been or should be done with Graham Road, but you’re right.

My point as that there’s another study taking place where Reid has appointed someone who has said he’s going to engage in affirmative outreach with a community that otherwise might not be heard and doesn’t have the resources of, say, RIO.  That seems relevant for some of the potential Skyview-related changes as well.

Overall, it’s pretty crazy how haphazard these boundary studies have been.  FCPS used one set of consultants for the county-wide review and is now using another set of consultants for the Skyview study.  It doesn’t seem to be using any outside consultants for the five or six studies that are follow-ups to the county-wide review.  People had access to a “Boundary Explorer Tool” for the county-wide review and the Skyview studies to provide comments, but no similar tool has been made available for the follow-up studies.  And then they wonder why people can’t follow everything that’s going on or the different implementation dates.  It’s unfortunate there’s been so little consistency or rigor.  [/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