Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SB and FCPS should be ashamed of themselves for presenting two plans where only low income buildings are rezoned to Westfield.

Those kids are the ones who should be kept closest to their high schools. They have attendance and transportation issues.

+1

Somebody asked during the morning meeting about socioeconomics.

That data was not given to consultants, and therefore was not a factor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of Oak Hill should be at Skyview.

But the complaints from pretty much everyone about who is moving and the like pretty much makes the case for a magnate (sp) school.

The school was purchased to reduce overcrowding but the ES at the schools with the overcrowding don’t want to move, they want other people to move. They are fine with it being crowded if it means they don’t move.

A magnet will serve no purpose other than to have achieving students leave schools they do not like.

It will not resolve any of the overcrowding.

Skyview will:
help overcrowding at Chantilly
keep Westfield kids in a much closer school
appears that it will allow the Fox Mill families an escape from IB --which they never wanted

Gee. Doesn't it seem like if the School Board is making boundary decisions based on screaming parents, that they would listen to those who do not want IB? This is not exclusive to South Lakes.

This has gone on for far too long:
1. Overwhelmingly, the community prefers AP to IB
2. IB is more expensive. It used to be clear, but they are now hiding the specifics. As I recall, the total was close to twice as much with all the etra requirements.

It is time to address this. Where is the SB member who will step forward with this?

IB is a tougher issue for the School Board.

With boundary changes, they can claim they are addressing a problem created largely by factors beyond their control (residential growth or lack thereof, etc.) and listening to parents about how to address the problem.

With IB, it's a problem of their own making. They don't have the equivalent of a "Boundary Explorer Tool" to assess the degree of opposition to IB, or preference for AP, and they certainly don't want to put out surveys that would give them feedback they don't want.

IB also aligns philosophically with the politics of most of the School Board members. I've heard several of them say money is the main reason why they aren't replacing AP with IB at other schools. They think the IB curriculum aligns more closely with the FCPS "Portrait of a Graduate" than AP. They cheer on administrators who encourage kids at AP schools to take fewer AP classes, but love it when kids get IB diplomas.

So it would take a huge lift, and one championed by parents, to replace IB at any of the current IB schools. And that's unlikely because parents can (1) avoid IB schools entirely or (2) use IB as a grounds to pupil place their kids to an AP school, which more likely than not will be higher rated and wealthier than their IB school. That's not a bad deal if you can arrange for your kid's transportation.

With Skyview, they can clearly see that there's more enthusiasm among Fox Mill parents to leave South Lakes (IB) for Skyview (AP) than there is among Crossfield parents to leave Oakton (AP) for Skyview, but they have no incentive to explore why that might the case. Unless some School Board member surprises people and decides to make a big deal about the savings that could realized if Crossfield kids had a shorter commute to Skyview vs. Oakton, they'll just go with the flow and pat themselves on the back for "listening" to (noisy) parents. South Lakes will be left with both IB and fewer IB diploma candidates.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of Oak Hill should be at Skyview.

But the complaints from pretty much everyone about who is moving and the like pretty much makes the case for a magnate (sp) school.

The school was purchased to reduce overcrowding but the ES at the schools with the overcrowding don’t want to move, they want other people to move. They are fine with it being crowded if it means they don’t move.

A magnet will serve no purpose other than to have achieving students leave schools they do not like.

It will not resolve any of the overcrowding.

Skyview will:
help overcrowding at Chantilly
keep Westfield kids in a much closer school
appears that it will allow the Fox Mill families an escape from IB --which they never wanted

Gee. Doesn't it seem like if the School Board is making boundary decisions based on screaming parents, that they would listen to those who do not want IB? This is not exclusive to South Lakes.

This has gone on for far too long:
1. Overwhelmingly, the community prefers AP to IB
2. IB is more expensive. It used to be clear, but they are now hiding the specifics. As I recall, the total was close to twice as much with all the etra requirements.

It is time to address this. Where is the SB member who will step forward with this?

Anonymous wrote:Anything come out of this morning's meeting that was different from Thursday's?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SB and FCPS should be ashamed of themselves for presenting two plans where only low income buildings are rezoned to Westfield.

Those kids are the ones who should be kept closest to their high schools. They have attendance and transportation issues.

+1

Anonymous wrote:If I were oak Hill families, I would be leaving comments that you all want to move to Carson and Skyview. The people I know from Oak Hill who are going to Franklin and Chantilly are walkers to Franklin. I suspect that the walkers stay walkers outcry from the first three scenarios, caused this split. And then you had the outcry about Lee’s Corner and walking distance to Chantilly. There was a large enough out cry about walking that they probably interpreted the request as keeping all walkers as walkers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would think that Oak Hill has to give up on walkers to Franklin if they want to stay together. They are trying to reduce split feeders so they are not going to send the Franklin walkers to Skyview.

+1
Walking was most critical only for Oak Hill ES kids. Conversations with my neighbors in Western/South Franklin Farms, being sliced apart in the new scenario 2, say there is less concern about MS/HS walking distance and OK with Skyview.

The challenge here is that splitting up Western Franklin Farm sets the future precedence (rezoning in 2030) to then transfer those kids from Oak Hill to Lees Corner ES. (Eliminating walking/biking for the ES kids)

Anonymous wrote:I would think that Oak Hill has to give up on walkers to Franklin if they want to stay together. They are trying to reduce split feeders so they are not going to send the Franklin walkers to Skyview.

Anonymous wrote:I would think that Oak Hill has to give up on walkers to Franklin if they want to stay together. They are trying to reduce split feeders so they are not going to send the Franklin walkers to Skyview.

Anonymous wrote:The SB and FCPS should be ashamed of themselves for presenting two plans where only low income buildings are rezoned to Westfield.

Those kids are the ones who should be kept closest to their high schools. They have attendance and transportation issues.

Anonymous wrote:The SB and FCPS should be ashamed of themselves for presenting two plans where only low income buildings are rezoned to Westfield.

Those kids are the ones who should be kept closest to their high schools. They have attendance and transportation issues.