Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If FCPS decides tomorrow that anyone living in Fairfax County can attend Langley, McLean, or Oakton HS but no transportation will be provided, I wonder how many families who are currently living outside the Langley, McLean, or Oakton pyramid would be willing to send their kids to these schools?

I'd venture to say not that many. The realities of commuting around here and middle class America working 9-5s likely wouldn't make it that easy...unless you just happen to work at CIA or some other corporate office in tysons.

I say many would, especially Asian/Hispanic parents who live in seven corners with kids in Justice HS, would definitely get large vans to transport multiple kids who live there to Langley/McLean HS if given that choice. It is less than a twenty-minute drive from seven corners to McLean HS, and probably twenty-five minutes to Langley HS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If FCPS decides tomorrow that anyone living in Fairfax County can attend Langley, McLean, or Oakton HS but no transportation will be provided, I wonder how many families who are currently living outside the Langley, McLean, or Oakton pyramid would be willing to send their kids to these schools?

I'd venture to say not that many. The realities of commuting around here and middle class America working 9-5s likely wouldn't make it that easy...unless you just happen to work at CIA or some other corporate office in tysons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Langley parents are now arguing on the FairFACTS page that they can’t be moved to Herndon because Herndon is in the “off track” category.

In fact, the opposite will happen because redistricting some Langley kids there will push Herndon into the “on track” category (above 80).

When that happens they can think Youngkin for further incentivizing the School Board to game the numbers with these new ratings.

Those Langley parents are elitists and no better than the MAGA they complain about when it comes to schools. Their kids are no different than the UMC and MC kids at Herndon except the Langley kids aren’t allowed out of their bubbles.

DP. Good grief, you sound charming. Why should kids be moved from an excellent to an underperforming school?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If FCPS decides tomorrow that anyone living in Fairfax County can attend Langley, McLean, or Oakton HS but no transportation will be provided, I wonder how many families who are currently living outside the Langley, McLean, or Oakton pyramid would be willing to send their kids to these schools?

I'd venture to say not that many. The realities of commuting around here and middle class America working 9-5s likely wouldn't make it that easy...unless you just happen to work at CIA or some other corporate office in tysons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If FCPS decides tomorrow that anyone living in Fairfax County can attend Langley, McLean, or Oakton HS but no transportation will be provided, I wonder how many families who are currently living outside the Langley, McLean, or Oakton pyramid would be willing to send their kids to these schools?

I'd venture to say not that many. The realities of commuting around here and middle class America working 9-5s likely wouldn't make it that easy...unless you just happen to work at CIA or some other corporate office in tysons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Langley parents are now arguing on the FairFACTS page that they can’t be moved to Herndon because Herndon is in the “off track” category.

In fact, the opposite will happen because redistricting some Langley kids there will push Herndon into the “on track” category (above 80).

When that happens they can think Youngkin for further incentivizing the School Board to game the numbers with these new ratings.

Those Langley parents are elitists and no better than the MAGA they complain about when it comes to schools. Their kids are no different than the UMC and MC kids at Herndon except the Langley kids aren’t allowed out of their bubbles.

DP. Good grief, you sound charming. Why should kids be moved from an excellent to an underperforming school?

What difference does it make what other kids who attend the school's average test scores are? Because that's the only thing deciding those labels. As long as a school has a large enough cohort of peers (as both Langley and Herndon do) to offer 99% the same Honors/AP classes, the outcomes for a given student are going to be remarkably similar no matter which school they attend or what the kids are doing in the other classrooms. Like, if I'm taking AP US History, it doesn't matter if I'm in the only AP US History class at my school or if there are 3 other AP US History classes being taught concurrently at my school... nor how many of the other classrooms at my school are filled with kids struggling to meet grade level. Can 99.9% of kids reach their full academic potential at Herndon just as well as at Langley? Sure, and the "underperforming" label doesn't speak to that question... because it's not about the overall quality of school / instruction.

It matters because if AP US History is scheduled at the time of an elective or other core class that a student wants to take there is no alternate time slot to make the schedule work. Schools with multiple sections of a class offer more scheduling options for students but that is only possible if the number of kids taking a class is large enough to offer multiple sections. I suspect that HHS has enough kids taking AP classes that there ar multiple sessions of the more popular classes but maybe only one of things like Calc BC and Physics C where the number of kids taking them is likely to be smaller, even at schools like Langley and McLean.

The reason I dislike IB is that it limits the class options for the kids at the school and prevents them from having access to a wider array of electives that can be taken at a higher level. I don’t dislike the program, per se, but I think it should be optional and that kids wanting to take AP can without having to leave their base school. The IB programs do not have enough interest to sustain the program and the idea that they can be taken ala cart defeats the purpose of the program, which is earning the IB diploma.

Agree re: IB.

I don't think the objection people have to a school they label as "underperforming" is that they're concerned there won't be a sufficient number of sections offered of a particular class to enable their student to optimize their schedule. Even if that's a valid concern, it's not what people using that label perceive or are fixated on about those schools.

I agree and disagree.

The people posting about MS13 and Gangs and Drugs and all of that are not worried about the lack of additional AP sections for kids. They think that the HS is unsafe and have an exaggerated fear of poor schools. It is true that there are more behavior issues at the schools with a higher percentage of poor kids but not all of that is gun fights and gang attacks and seriously dangerous behavior. But, in all honesty, I would prefer my child attend a school with fewer fights and fewer reported issues. That said, I suspect that better off schools are less likely to report incidents of shoving and general fighting than poor schools and that the difference, while there, is less wide then most people think.

There are people who are legitimately worried that moving from a wealthier school to a poor school will harm class choices for their kids. The Oakton to SLHS move caused issues, and still causes issues, for kids in the IB program. There are fewer sections of the advanced classes because fewer kids take those classes. It makes scheduling harder. I would bet that the vast majority of pupil placement out of SLHS is from the Fox Mill and Floris kids to Oakton and Langley to take AP/Japanese (Oakton) or Russian (Langley). Parents want more options for their kids and parents with the time to do research and drive their kids to a different school will take advantage of those options. I can easily see parents at a wealthier school not wanting to move their kids to Lewis or Herndon or SL or Justice because there will be fewer class options at those schools.

We are at SLHS. One neighbor complained about some of the kids at SLHS because of an issue with their child. Everyone else we know of who attended or attends SLHS enjoys the school. There are very few complaints about rigor and I have not heard any concerns from my neighbors about violence or behavior at the school. The kids are active in different sports and clubs. And there are plenty of people who will openly say that they wish that we were still at Oakton. I know others who moved to attend Chantilly or Oakton. There is a strong preference for AP and for those school communities. So I understand the WSHS and the McLean families not wanting to move. I don’t think they are bad people and I don’t think they are inherently racist. They want what is best for their kids and the schools that they are at are arguably better schools then the ones they might be moved to.

Anonymous wrote:If FCPS decides tomorrow that anyone living in Fairfax County can attend Langley, McLean, or Oakton HS but no transportation will be provided, I wonder how many families who are currently living outside the Langley, McLean, or Oakton pyramid would be willing to send their kids to these schools?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Langley parents are now arguing on the FairFACTS page that they can’t be moved to Herndon because Herndon is in the “off track” category.

In fact, the opposite will happen because redistricting some Langley kids there will push Herndon into the “on track” category (above 80).

When that happens they can think Youngkin for further incentivizing the School Board to game the numbers with these new ratings.

Those Langley parents are elitists and no better than the MAGA they complain about when it comes to schools. Their kids are no different than the UMC and MC kids at Herndon except the Langley kids aren’t allowed out of their bubbles.

DP. Good grief, you sound charming. Why should kids be moved from an excellent to an underperforming school?

What difference does it make what other kids who attend the school's average test scores are? Because that's the only thing deciding those labels. As long as a school has a large enough cohort of peers (as both Langley and Herndon do) to offer 99% the same Honors/AP classes, the outcomes for a given student are going to be remarkably similar no matter which school they attend or what the kids are doing in the other classrooms. Like, if I'm taking AP US History, it doesn't matter if I'm in the only AP US History class at my school or if there are 3 other AP US History classes being taught concurrently at my school... nor how many of the other classrooms at my school are filled with kids struggling to meet grade level. Can 99.9% of kids reach their full academic potential at Herndon just as well as at Langley? Sure, and the "underperforming" label doesn't speak to that question... because it's not about the overall quality of school / instruction.

It matters because if AP US History is scheduled at the time of an elective or other core class that a student wants to take there is no alternate time slot to make the schedule work. Schools with multiple sections of a class offer more scheduling options for students but that is only possible if the number of kids taking a class is large enough to offer multiple sections. I suspect that HHS has enough kids taking AP classes that there ar multiple sessions of the more popular classes but maybe only one of things like Calc BC and Physics C where the number of kids taking them is likely to be smaller, even at schools like Langley and McLean.

The reason I dislike IB is that it limits the class options for the kids at the school and prevents them from having access to a wider array of electives that can be taken at a higher level. I don’t dislike the program, per se, but I think it should be optional and that kids wanting to take AP can without having to leave their base school. The IB programs do not have enough interest to sustain the program and the idea that they can be taken ala cart defeats the purpose of the program, which is earning the IB diploma.

Agree re: IB.

I don't think the objection people have to a school they label as "underperforming" is that they're concerned there won't be a sufficient number of sections offered of a particular class to enable their student to optimize their schedule. Even if that's a valid concern, it's not what people using that label perceive or are fixated on about those schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Langley parents are now arguing on the FairFACTS page that they can’t be moved to Herndon because Herndon is in the “off track” category.

In fact, the opposite will happen because redistricting some Langley kids there will push Herndon into the “on track” category (above 80).

When that happens they can think Youngkin for further incentivizing the School Board to game the numbers with these new ratings.

Those Langley parents are elitists and no better than the MAGA they complain about when it comes to schools. Their kids are no different than the UMC and MC kids at Herndon except the Langley kids aren’t allowed out of their bubbles.

DP. Good grief, you sound charming. Why should kids be moved from an excellent to an underperforming school?

What difference does it make what other kids who attend the school's average test scores are? Because that's the only thing deciding those labels. As long as a school has a large enough cohort of peers (as both Langley and Herndon do) to offer 99% the same Honors/AP classes, the outcomes for a given student are going to be remarkably similar no matter which school they attend or what the kids are doing in the other classrooms. Like, if I'm taking AP US History, it doesn't matter if I'm in the only AP US History class at my school or if there are 3 other AP US History classes being taught concurrently at my school... nor how many of the other classrooms at my school are filled with kids struggling to meet grade level. Can 99.9% of kids reach their full academic potential at Herndon just as well as at Langley? Sure, and the "underperforming" label doesn't speak to that question... because it's not about the overall quality of school / instruction.

It matters because if AP US History is scheduled at the time of an elective or other core class that a student wants to take there is no alternate time slot to make the schedule work. Schools with multiple sections of a class offer more scheduling options for students but that is only possible if the number of kids taking a class is large enough to offer multiple sections. I suspect that HHS has enough kids taking AP classes that there ar multiple sessions of the more popular classes but maybe only one of things like Calc BC and Physics C where the number of kids taking them is likely to be smaller, even at schools like Langley and McLean.

The reason I dislike IB is that it limits the class options for the kids at the school and prevents them from having access to a wider array of electives that can be taken at a higher level. I don’t dislike the program, per se, but I think it should be optional and that kids wanting to take AP can without having to leave their base school. The IB programs do not have enough interest to sustain the program and the idea that they can be taken ala cart defeats the purpose of the program, which is earning the IB diploma.

Agree re: IB.

I don't think the objection people have to a school they label as "underperforming" is that they're concerned there won't be a sufficient number of sections offered of a particular class to enable their student to optimize their schedule. Even if that's a valid concern, it's not what people using that label perceive or are fixated on about those schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Langley parents are now arguing on the FairFACTS page that they can’t be moved to Herndon because Herndon is in the “off track” category.

In fact, the opposite will happen because redistricting some Langley kids there will push Herndon into the “on track” category (above 80).

When that happens they can think Youngkin for further incentivizing the School Board to game the numbers with these new ratings.

Those Langley parents are elitists and no better than the MAGA they complain about when it comes to schools. Their kids are no different than the UMC and MC kids at Herndon except the Langley kids aren’t allowed out of their bubbles.

DP. Good grief, you sound charming. Why should kids be moved from an excellent to an underperforming school?

What difference does it make what other kids who attend the school's average test scores are? Because that's the only thing deciding those labels. As long as a school has a large enough cohort of peers (as both Langley and Herndon do) to offer 99% the same Honors/AP classes, the outcomes for a given student are going to be remarkably similar no matter which school they attend or what the kids are doing in the other classrooms. Like, if I'm taking AP US History, it doesn't matter if I'm in the only AP US History class at my school or if there are 3 other AP US History classes being taught concurrently at my school... nor how many of the other classrooms at my school are filled with kids struggling to meet grade level. Can 99.9% of kids reach their full academic potential at Herndon just as well as at Langley? Sure, and the "underperforming" label doesn't speak to that question... because it's not about the overall quality of school / instruction.

It matters because if AP US History is scheduled at the time of an elective or other core class that a student wants to take there is no alternate time slot to make the schedule work. Schools with multiple sections of a class offer more scheduling options for students but that is only possible if the number of kids taking a class is large enough to offer multiple sections. I suspect that HHS has enough kids taking AP classes that there ar multiple sessions of the more popular classes but maybe only one of things like Calc BC and Physics C where the number of kids taking them is likely to be smaller, even at schools like Langley and McLean.

The reason I dislike IB is that it limits the class options for the kids at the school and prevents them from having access to a wider array of electives that can be taken at a higher level. I don’t dislike the program, per se, but I think it should be optional and that kids wanting to take AP can without having to leave their base school. The IB programs do not have enough interest to sustain the program and the idea that they can be taken ala cart defeats the purpose of the program, which is earning the IB diploma.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not surprised that Justice is dead last on the list. It's just not a good school. Many factors contribute to the low score: poverty, bad teachers and staff, and a history of horrible leadership. Hopefully, things for the school will change for the better soon.

But Justice HS has newer buildings than McLean HS

So schools that excel and where kids aren’t assaulting each other should be denied funding? You’d fit right in on this School Board.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Langley parents are now arguing on the FairFACTS page that they can’t be moved to Herndon because Herndon is in the “off track” category.

In fact, the opposite will happen because redistricting some Langley kids there will push Herndon into the “on track” category (above 80).

When that happens they can think Youngkin for further incentivizing the School Board to game the numbers with these new ratings.

Those Langley parents are elitists and no better than the MAGA they complain about when it comes to schools. Their kids are no different than the UMC and MC kids at Herndon except the Langley kids aren’t allowed out of their bubbles.

DP. Good grief, you sound charming. Why should kids be moved from an excellent to an underperforming school?

What difference does it make what other kids who attend the school's average test scores are? Because that's the only thing deciding those labels. As long as a school has a large enough cohort of peers (as both Langley and Herndon do) to offer 99% the same Honors/AP classes, the outcomes for a given student are going to be remarkably similar no matter which school they attend or what the kids are doing in the other classrooms. Like, if I'm taking AP US History, it doesn't matter if I'm in the only AP US History class at my school or if there are 3 other AP US History classes being taught concurrently at my school... nor how many of the other classrooms at my school are filled with kids struggling to meet grade level. Can 99.9% of kids reach their full academic potential at Herndon just as well as at Langley? Sure, and the "underperforming" label doesn't speak to that question... because it's not about the overall quality of school / instruction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Langley parents are now arguing on the FairFACTS page that they can’t be moved to Herndon because Herndon is in the “off track” category.

In fact, the opposite will happen because redistricting some Langley kids there will push Herndon into the “on track” category (above 80).

When that happens they can think Youngkin for further incentivizing the School Board to game the numbers with these new ratings.

Those Langley parents are elitists and no better than the MAGA they complain about when it comes to schools. Their kids are no different than the UMC and MC kids at Herndon except the Langley kids aren’t allowed out of their bubbles.

Sorry you can’t afford it. I know that upsets you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Langley parents are now arguing on the FairFACTS page that they can’t be moved to Herndon because Herndon is in the “off track” category.

In fact, the opposite will happen because redistricting some Langley kids there will push Herndon into the “on track” category (above 80).

When that happens they can think Youngkin for further incentivizing the School Board to game the numbers with these new ratings.

Those Langley parents are elitists and no better than the MAGA they complain about when it comes to schools. Their kids are no different than the UMC and MC kids at Herndon except the Langley kids aren’t allowed out of their bubbles.

Many of them are MAGA.