Anonymous wrote:The western parts of Langley and McLean could be shifted to Herndon. Why are there these strange islands in the McLean high school boundary?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not sure I agree, PP. The Cooper kids at Kilmer are higher SES than the base population, so I don't see the Kilmer parents making a move to get them out because they are probably increasing the test scores, etc. At Haycock, the Cluster 2 parents were lower SES. I think that was part of the reason the base parents were happy to see them go.
Wrong. The low SES kids at Haycock AAP/Longfellow/McLean are from Timber Lane (which will likely end up redistricted to Luther Jackson/Falls Church in the coming years.)
I haven't seen any suggestion from FCPS that it plans to move the 1/2 of Timber Lane at Haycock AAP/Longfellow/McLean to Jackson/Falls Church. The latest Capital Improvement Plan is full of hints as to future redistrictings that FCPS might decide to undertake, including:
- moving kids from Marshall/Kilmer and/or McLean/Longfellow (at Westbriar, Colvin Run and/or Spring Hill ES) to Cooper/Langley,
- moving kids from Jackson and/or Kilmer to Thoreau, and
- moving kids from Stuart to Falls Church.
But there's nothing about moving the Longfellow/McLean part of Timber Lane to Jackson/Falls Church. Jackson is projected to be seriously overcrowded like Kilmer, and Falls Church may end up with a bunch of kids from Stuart if the enrollment in the Bailey's Crossroads area continues to grow at its current rate. Not to mention that, if you take the 1/2 of Timber Lane out of Longfellow/McLean, there's not much SES diversity left. The current boundaries, while odd-looking, are aligned with what many educators suggest works best - sending lower SES students to schools that are otherwise high SES (and, to be clear, it's just the apartment complexes off Lee Highway that are low SES; the rest of the Timber Lane area assigned to McLean consists of nice SFH homes in the $550-850K range). I'm not sure why FCPS would mess with that.
Anonymous wrote:Agree with PP. Who in their right mind would want a school that was all high SES?
Anonymous wrote:Agree with PP. Who in their right mind would want a school that was all high SES?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not sure I agree, PP. The Cooper kids at Kilmer are higher SES than the base population, so I don't see the Kilmer parents making a move to get them out because they are probably increasing the test scores, etc. At Haycock, the Cluster 2 parents were lower SES. I think that was part of the reason the base parents were happy to see them go.
Wrong. The low SES kids at Haycock AAP/Longfellow/McLean are from Timber Lane (which will likely end up redistricted to Luther Jackson/Falls Church in the coming years.)
Anonymous wrote:Not sure I agree, PP. The Cooper kids at Kilmer are higher SES than the base population, so I don't see the Kilmer parents making a move to get them out because they are probably increasing the test scores, etc. At Haycock, the Cluster 2 parents were lower SES. I think that was part of the reason the base parents were happy to see them go.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not sure I agree, PP. The Cooper kids at Kilmer are higher SES than the base population, so I don't see the Kilmer parents making a move to get them out because they are probably increasing the test scores, etc. At Haycock, the Cluster 2 parents were lower SES. I think that was part of the reason the base parents were happy to see them go.
Huh? The Cluster 2 kids were AAP students, so they also probably increased the test scores at Haycock. The base parents favored moving them to Lemon Road because Haycock was overcrowded and Lemon Road had room. The same thing will happen at Kilmer if the FCPS projections tutn out to be accurate, which admittedly is a big assumption. Base parents at Kilmer don't go around thanking their lucky stars that kids from Great Falls get bussed there now, and they certainly won't do so in the future if Kilmer ends up 35% above capacity, which is what FCPS is projecting by 2017.
Anonymous wrote:Not sure I agree, PP. The Cooper kids at Kilmer are higher SES than the base population, so I don't see the Kilmer parents making a move to get them out because they are probably increasing the test scores, etc. At Haycock, the Cluster 2 parents were lower SES. I think that was part of the reason the base parents were happy to see them go.
Anonymous wrote:Third, adding AAP centers at Cooper and Thoreau will underscore that there are more AAP-eligible kids in the wealthy parts of the county, which is an inconvenient truth for FCPS.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We both work in DC and some time take metro/car.
I don't know how to move this topic on the AAP![]()
About MS school: both Haycock and Churchill students go to Longfellow and as of today it has rating of 10 on great school. I don't see much difference in the rating between Mclean HS and Langley. Both are at 9. Who knows it will stay the same in the future. But I guess we should think on that side as well... parenthood is funPlease share your experience about both HS. It would be helpful to most of the parents.
The school board almost moved the Langley AAP student to Cooper, from Longfellow, for the 2013-2014 year. It was tabled for more information/time. It is highly likely to happen for the 2014-2015 or 2015-2016 school year. Longfellow is slated to be over crowded and Cooper is slated to be under-enrolled- so it is a no brainer. There are enough AAP students for both Longfellow and Cooper to have viable AAP programs.
Anonymous wrote:We both work in DC and some time take metro/car.
I don't know how to move this topic on the AAP![]()
About MS school: both Haycock and Churchill students go to Longfellow and as of today it has rating of 10 on great school. I don't see much difference in the rating between Mclean HS and Langley. Both are at 9. Who knows it will stay the same in the future. But I guess we should think on that side as well... parenthood is funPlease share your experience about both HS. It would be helpful to most of the parents.