Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you've followed these threads, these boundary changes have been described at times as the "Great Reset."

I think that is what Reid and the School Board want. They want to make so many changes that anyone who objects will just be part of the noise (thereby canceling each other out); they want to change the demographics at some schools so much that the historic reputations of some schools will be rendered meaningless; and they want to make grandfathering impossible, so that kids will be shell-shocked and families will be sent the clear message that their preferences count for nothing and that Reid and the School Board are in charge. "If you don't like it, you can leave (see PP today), but don't expect us to let you get in our way."

What is the meaning of "historic reputation" in the context of FCPS's public schools? It's not like there is any selectivity for students to be allowed attend. Only TJHSST and private schools have a claim to a reputation of selective standards that makes any real sense. The rest only amounts to chitchat amongst neighbors.

DP. we get it, you don’t like the USNews or great schools rankings.

Does anyone actually pay attention to those rankings except new parents looking for houses who don't know better? You're an idiot if you think those actually reflect anything other than wealth in an area.

DP. Which schools do your children attend? Serious question.

Shrevewood, which is rated 3 because of a high low-income population. High achieving kids from high achieving families are all doing great. I'm happy with the education my children are receiving.

DP. I’d read some Shrevewood parents aren’t crazy about the recent proposals, which would move more low-income kids from Timber Lane to Shrevewood and also reassign some Shrevewood kids from the Falls Hill area from Marshall to McLean, turning Shrevewood into a split feeder. The ratings for Kilmer may also take a hit if, as proposed, all the Madison-zoned kids at Kilmer are reassigned to Thoreau.

Putting the validity of GS ratings aside, do you welcome all these changes? I assume the Shrevewood boundaries will change yet again after Dunn Loring gets built.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you've followed these threads, these boundary changes have been described at times as the "Great Reset."

I think that is what Reid and the School Board want. They want to make so many changes that anyone who objects will just be part of the noise (thereby canceling each other out); they want to change the demographics at some schools so much that the historic reputations of some schools will be rendered meaningless; and they want to make grandfathering impossible, so that kids will be shell-shocked and families will be sent the clear message that their preferences count for nothing and that Reid and the School Board are in charge. "If you don't like it, you can leave (see PP today), but don't expect us to let you get in our way."

What is the meaning of "historic reputation" in the context of FCPS's public schools? It's not like there is any selectivity for students to be allowed attend. Only TJHSST and private schools have a claim to a reputation of selective standards that makes any real sense. The rest only amounts to chitchat amongst neighbors.

DP. we get it, you don’t like the USNews or great schools rankings.

Does anyone actually pay attention to those rankings except new parents looking for houses who don't know better? You're an idiot if you think those actually reflect anything other than wealth in an area.

DP. Which schools do your children attend? Serious question.

Shrevewood, which is rated 3 because of a high low-income population. High achieving kids from high achieving families are all doing great. I'm happy with the education my children are receiving.

DP. I’d read some Shrevewood parents aren’t crazy about the recent proposals, which would move more low-income kids from Timber Lane to Shrevewood and also reassign some Shrevewood kids from the Falls Hill area from Marshall to McLean, turning Shrevewood into a split feeder. The ratings for Kilmer may also take a hit if, as proposed, all the Madison-zoned kids at Kilmer are reassigned to Thoreau.

Putting the validity of GS ratings aside, do you welcome all these changes? I assume the Shrevewood boundaries will change yet again after Dunn Loring gets built.

I'm not familiar at all with these schools. But, since they are not finished with proposals, how do you know it will be a split feeder.

In looking my area, there is one "island" move that makes no sense. I cannot help but wonder if they intend to do a lot more switching of schools when they eliminate split feeders.

This really is a game of musical chairs. I'm afraid that there are going to be far fewer chairs left to choose from.

What a mess!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you've followed these threads, these boundary changes have been described at times as the "Great Reset."

I think that is what Reid and the School Board want. They want to make so many changes that anyone who objects will just be part of the noise (thereby canceling each other out); they want to change the demographics at some schools so much that the historic reputations of some schools will be rendered meaningless; and they want to make grandfathering impossible, so that kids will be shell-shocked and families will be sent the clear message that their preferences count for nothing and that Reid and the School Board are in charge. "If you don't like it, you can leave (see PP today), but don't expect us to let you get in our way."

What is the meaning of "historic reputation" in the context of FCPS's public schools? It's not like there is any selectivity for students to be allowed attend. Only TJHSST and private schools have a claim to a reputation of selective standards that makes any real sense. The rest only amounts to chitchat amongst neighbors.

DP. we get it, you don’t like the USNews or great schools rankings.

Does anyone actually pay attention to those rankings except new parents looking for houses who don't know better? You're an idiot if you think those actually reflect anything other than wealth in an area.

I love how you frequently call people idiots and then state your opinion as fact. 🤡

I love how you think Great Schools is an accurate rating of a school, You're the clown. Really, really dumb.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you've followed these threads, these boundary changes have been described at times as the "Great Reset."

I think that is what Reid and the School Board want. They want to make so many changes that anyone who objects will just be part of the noise (thereby canceling each other out); they want to change the demographics at some schools so much that the historic reputations of some schools will be rendered meaningless; and they want to make grandfathering impossible, so that kids will be shell-shocked and families will be sent the clear message that their preferences count for nothing and that Reid and the School Board are in charge. "If you don't like it, you can leave (see PP today), but don't expect us to let you get in our way."

What is the meaning of "historic reputation" in the context of FCPS's public schools? It's not like there is any selectivity for students to be allowed attend. Only TJHSST and private schools have a claim to a reputation of selective standards that makes any real sense. The rest only amounts to chitchat amongst neighbors.

DP. we get it, you don’t like the USNews or great schools rankings.

Does anyone actually pay attention to those rankings except new parents looking for houses who don't know better? You're an idiot if you think those actually reflect anything other than wealth in an area.

DP. Which schools do your children attend? Serious question.

Shrevewood, which is rated 3 because of a high low-income population. High achieving kids from high achieving families are all doing great. I'm happy with the education my children are receiving.

DP. I’d read some Shrevewood parents aren’t crazy about the recent proposals, which would move more low-income kids from Timber Lane to Shrevewood and also reassign some Shrevewood kids from the Falls Hill area from Marshall to McLean, turning Shrevewood into a split feeder. The ratings for Kilmer may also take a hit if, as proposed, all the Madison-zoned kids at Kilmer are reassigned to Thoreau.

Putting the validity of GS ratings aside, do you welcome all these changes? I assume the Shrevewood boundaries will change yet again after Dunn Loring gets built.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you've followed these threads, these boundary changes have been described at times as the "Great Reset."

I think that is what Reid and the School Board want. They want to make so many changes that anyone who objects will just be part of the noise (thereby canceling each other out); they want to change the demographics at some schools so much that the historic reputations of some schools will be rendered meaningless; and they want to make grandfathering impossible, so that kids will be shell-shocked and families will be sent the clear message that their preferences count for nothing and that Reid and the School Board are in charge. "If you don't like it, you can leave (see PP today), but don't expect us to let you get in our way."

What is the meaning of "historic reputation" in the context of FCPS's public schools? It's not like there is any selectivity for students to be allowed attend. Only TJHSST and private schools have a claim to a reputation of selective standards that makes any real sense. The rest only amounts to chitchat amongst neighbors.

DP. we get it, you don’t like the USNews or great schools rankings.

Does anyone actually pay attention to those rankings except new parents looking for houses who don't know better? You're an idiot if you think those actually reflect anything other than wealth in an area.

DP. Which schools do your children attend? Serious question.

Shrevewood, which is rated 3 because of a high low-income population. High achieving kids from high achieving families are all doing great. I'm happy with the education my children are receiving.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you've followed these threads, these boundary changes have been described at times as the "Great Reset."

I think that is what Reid and the School Board want. They want to make so many changes that anyone who objects will just be part of the noise (thereby canceling each other out); they want to change the demographics at some schools so much that the historic reputations of some schools will be rendered meaningless; and they want to make grandfathering impossible, so that kids will be shell-shocked and families will be sent the clear message that their preferences count for nothing and that Reid and the School Board are in charge. "If you don't like it, you can leave (see PP today), but don't expect us to let you get in our way."

What is the meaning of "historic reputation" in the context of FCPS's public schools? It's not like there is any selectivity for students to be allowed attend. Only TJHSST and private schools have a claim to a reputation of selective standards that makes any real sense. The rest only amounts to chitchat amongst neighbors.

DP. we get it, you don’t like the USNews or great schools rankings.

Does anyone actually pay attention to those rankings except new parents looking for houses who don't know better? You're an idiot if you think those actually reflect anything other than wealth in an area.

I love how you frequently call people idiots and then state your opinion as fact. 🤡

I love how you think Great Schools is an accurate rating of a school, You're the clown. Really, really dumb.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you've followed these threads, these boundary changes have been described at times as the "Great Reset."

I think that is what Reid and the School Board want. They want to make so many changes that anyone who objects will just be part of the noise (thereby canceling each other out); they want to change the demographics at some schools so much that the historic reputations of some schools will be rendered meaningless; and they want to make grandfathering impossible, so that kids will be shell-shocked and families will be sent the clear message that their preferences count for nothing and that Reid and the School Board are in charge. "If you don't like it, you can leave (see PP today), but don't expect us to let you get in our way."

What is the meaning of "historic reputation" in the context of FCPS's public schools? It's not like there is any selectivity for students to be allowed attend. Only TJHSST and private schools have a claim to a reputation of selective standards that makes any real sense. The rest only amounts to chitchat amongst neighbors.

DP. we get it, you don’t like the USNews or great schools rankings.

Does anyone actually pay attention to those rankings except new parents looking for houses who don't know better? You're an idiot if you think those actually reflect anything other than wealth in an area.

I love how you frequently call people idiots and then state your opinion as fact. 🤡

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you've followed these threads, these boundary changes have been described at times as the "Great Reset."

I think that is what Reid and the School Board want. They want to make so many changes that anyone who objects will just be part of the noise (thereby canceling each other out); they want to change the demographics at some schools so much that the historic reputations of some schools will be rendered meaningless; and they want to make grandfathering impossible, so that kids will be shell-shocked and families will be sent the clear message that their preferences count for nothing and that Reid and the School Board are in charge. "If you don't like it, you can leave (see PP today), but don't expect us to let you get in our way."

What is the meaning of "historic reputation" in the context of FCPS's public schools? It's not like there is any selectivity for students to be allowed attend. Only TJHSST and private schools have a claim to a reputation of selective standards that makes any real sense. The rest only amounts to chitchat amongst neighbors.

DP. we get it, you don’t like the USNews or great schools rankings.

Does anyone actually pay attention to those rankings except new parents looking for houses who don't know better? You're an idiot if you think those actually reflect anything other than wealth in an area.

DP. Which schools do your children attend? Serious question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you've followed these threads, these boundary changes have been described at times as the "Great Reset."

I think that is what Reid and the School Board want. They want to make so many changes that anyone who objects will just be part of the noise (thereby canceling each other out); they want to change the demographics at some schools so much that the historic reputations of some schools will be rendered meaningless; and they want to make grandfathering impossible, so that kids will be shell-shocked and families will be sent the clear message that their preferences count for nothing and that Reid and the School Board are in charge. "If you don't like it, you can leave (see PP today), but don't expect us to let you get in our way."

What is the meaning of "historic reputation" in the context of FCPS's public schools? It's not like there is any selectivity for students to be allowed attend. Only TJHSST and private schools have a claim to a reputation of selective standards that makes any real sense. The rest only amounts to chitchat amongst neighbors.

DP. we get it, you don’t like the USNews or great schools rankings.

Does anyone actually pay attention to those rankings except new parents looking for houses who don't know better? You're an idiot if you think those actually reflect anything other than wealth in an area.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you've followed these threads, these boundary changes have been described at times as the "Great Reset."

I think that is what Reid and the School Board want. They want to make so many changes that anyone who objects will just be part of the noise (thereby canceling each other out); they want to change the demographics at some schools so much that the historic reputations of some schools will be rendered meaningless; and they want to make grandfathering impossible, so that kids will be shell-shocked and families will be sent the clear message that their preferences count for nothing and that Reid and the School Board are in charge. "If you don't like it, you can leave (see PP today), but don't expect us to let you get in our way."

What is the meaning of "historic reputation" in the context of FCPS's public schools? It's not like there is any selectivity for students to be allowed attend. Only TJHSST and private schools have a claim to a reputation of selective standards that makes any real sense. The rest only amounts to chitchat amongst neighbors.

DP. we get it, you don’t like the USNews or great schools rankings.

Does anyone actually pay attention to those rankings except new parents looking for houses who don't know better? You're an idiot if you think those actually reflect anything other than wealth in an area.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone chime in and play devil’s advocate, from the school board’s perspective, how is this boundary shift supposed to benefit the students?

They believe that by reducing split feeders and attendance islands, that school attendance will improve. Especially in lower income areas. If a kid in a low income apartment complex misses the bus, they might not have another way to get to school. But if they lived close enough, they could at least walk. And that parent participation/involvement/sense of community will increase if all the kids are attending their closest schools. Again, this is more an issue in the lower SES areas.

Agree that is important. Please tell me which low income areas do not go to the closest schools. I've seen equity supporters on here suggest busing low income areas to schools that are further away in the name of "equity."

It’s more an issue in the eastern part of the county. There are two attendance islands in low income areas that I can think of off the top of my head - Hagel Cir. In Lorton is currently bused across 95 to attend Halley and another complex on Rt. 1 is currently bussed past numerous other schools and across Rt. 1 to attend Fort Hunt. The initial round of proposals fixed both of these islands. There may be others, I don’t know off hand.

I see the value of kids attending their closest schools, but I don’t think these moves are going to be as impactful as the board was thinking/hoping. It does remove a transportation barrier but ultimately, cultural barriers are also at play.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you've followed these threads, these boundary changes have been described at times as the "Great Reset."

I think that is what Reid and the School Board want. They want to make so many changes that anyone who objects will just be part of the noise (thereby canceling each other out); they want to change the demographics at some schools so much that the historic reputations of some schools will be rendered meaningless; and they want to make grandfathering impossible, so that kids will be shell-shocked and families will be sent the clear message that their preferences count for nothing and that Reid and the School Board are in charge. "If you don't like it, you can leave (see PP today), but don't expect us to let you get in our way."

What is the meaning of "historic reputation" in the context of FCPS's public schools? It's not like there is any selectivity for students to be allowed attend. Only TJHSST and private schools have a claim to a reputation of selective standards that makes any real sense. The rest only amounts to chitchat amongst neighbors.

DP. we get it, you don’t like the USNews or great schools rankings.

Anonymous wrote:UPDATED: The 4/11 presentation alone contemplates at least 52 shifts:

Kings Park/Kings Glen ES to Ravensworth ES
Halley ES to Lorton Station ES
Hayfield SS to South County MS
Groveton ES to Hollin Meadows ES
Fort Hunt ES to Hybla Valley ES
Bull Run ES to Centre Ridge ES
Deer Park ES to London Towne ES
Navy ES to Oak Hill ES
Olde Creek ES to Laurel Ridge ES
Daniels Run ES to Providence ES
Sangster ES to Newington Forest ES
Lake Braddock SS to South County MS
Westbriar ES to Wolftrap ES
Willow Springs ES to Fairfax Villa ES
Willow Springs ES to Eagle View ES
Johnson MS to Frost MS
Keene Mill ES to White Oaks ES
Keene Mill ES to Cardinal Forest ES
Cardinal Forest ES to Keene Mill ES
Flint Hill ES to Oakton ES
Oakton ES to Flint Hill ES
Pine Spring ES to Westlawn ES
Johnson MS to Frost MS
Frost MS to Johnson MS
Fairfax HS to Woodson HS
Woodson HS to Frost MS
Lake Braddock SS to South County HS
Longfellow MS to Cooper MS
Longellow MS to Kilmer MS
Kilmer MS to Longfellow MS
McLean HS to Langley HS
Marshall HS to McLean HS
Graham Road ES to Timber Lane ES
Pine Spring ES to Timber Lane ES
Timber Lane ES to Graham Road ES
Timber Lane ES to Shrevewood ES
Jackson MS to Longfellow MS
Kilmer MS to Thoreau MS
Sleepy Hollow ES to Bailey's/Bailey's Upper ES
Sleepy Hollow ES to Glen Forest ES
Sleepy Hollow ES to Beech Tree ES
Glen Forest ES to Parklawn ES
Mason Crest ES to Sleepy Hollow ES
Bailey's/Bailey's Upper ES to Sleepy Hollow ES
Columbia ES to Annandale Terrace ES
Columbia ES to Weyanoke ES
Weyanoke ES to Bren Mar Park ES
Parklawn ES to Columbia ES
Parklawn ES to Weyanoke ES
Bren Mar Park ES to North Springfield ES
Sandburg MS to Whitman MS
West Potomac HS to Mount Vernon HS

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone chime in and play devil’s advocate, from the school board’s perspective, how is this boundary shift supposed to benefit the students?

They believe that by reducing split feeders and attendance islands, that school attendance will improve. Especially in lower income areas. If a kid in a low income apartment complex misses the bus, they might not have another way to get to school. But if they lived close enough, they could at least walk. And that parent participation/involvement/sense of community will increase if all the kids are attending their closest schools. Again, this is more an issue in the lower SES areas.

Agree that is important. Please tell me which low income areas do not go to the closest schools. I've seen equity supporters on here suggest busing low income areas to schools that are further away in the name of "equity."

It’s more an issue in the eastern part of the county. There are two attendance islands in low income areas that I can think of off the top of my head - Hagel Cir. In Lorton is currently bused across 95 to attend Halley and another complex on Rt. 1 is currently bussed past numerous other schools and across Rt. 1 to attend Fort Hunt. The initial round of proposals fixed both of these islands. There may be others, I don’t know off hand.

I see the value of kids attending their closest schools, but I don’t think these moves are going to be as impactful as the board was thinking/hoping. It does remove a transportation barrier but ultimately, cultural barriers are also at play.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you've followed these threads, these boundary changes have been described at times as the "Great Reset."

I think that is what Reid and the School Board want. They want to make so many changes that anyone who objects will just be part of the noise (thereby canceling each other out); they want to change the demographics at some schools so much that the historic reputations of some schools will be rendered meaningless; and they want to make grandfathering impossible, so that kids will be shell-shocked and families will be sent the clear message that their preferences count for nothing and that Reid and the School Board are in charge. "If you don't like it, you can leave (see PP today), but don't expect us to let you get in our way."

What is the meaning of "historic reputation" in the context of FCPS's public schools? It's not like there is any selectivity for students to be allowed attend. Only TJHSST and private schools have a claim to a reputation of selective standards that makes any real sense. The rest only amounts to chitchat amongst neighbors.