SLVerity Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually, the all-powerful SL PTSA is in cahoots
> with the school board to lower the capacity at
> each school so that pupil placements can't happen.

Yup. They do hope to find a way to prevent students from leaving South Lakes. How pathetic is that?

I thought liberals LIKED choice. I guess not. I guess they like their ideology and their agendas more than the desires of parents or the education of children.

Fox Mill Estates Parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SL Verity I am sorry to read what you have
> written. If this is true, then it reads as if the
> childern from neighboring school districts will be
> exploited by adults working in the SL PTA and
> School Board to achieve a particular agenda.
> Could you point me to a source? Thanks

Dear Fox Mill Estates parent. Please know that I was being entirely facetious, despite what Neen thinks.

Neen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SLVerity Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Actually, the all-powerful SL PTSA is in
> cahoots
> > with the school board to lower the capacity at
> > each school so that pupil placements can't
> happen.
>
> Yup. They do hope to find a way to prevent
> students from leaving South Lakes. How pathetic
> is that?
>
> I thought liberals LIKED choice. I guess not. I
> guess they like their ideology and their agendas
> more than the desires of parents or the education
> of children.

Neen, that's sad and pathetic. You know that I was kidding, but I guess you just like being an agitator, especially when you can exploit those who may not grasp the nuances of language. I thought you were at least honest, but....

As to your prior negative post, I would say that SL not fighting the exclusion of Madison (except for the Island) from the study is compromise enough, wouldn't you?

I suppose you are incapable of reading the myriad posts from SL parents supporting the addition of AP courses at South Lakes. I suppose you are incapable of reading the myriad posts from South Lakes parents welcoming new students and their families to South Lakes. I suppose your anti-Reston, anti-Stu, anti-South Lakes, anti-liberal perspective has clouded your ability to be objective.

Oh. Glad to hear that you support parental choice. Me too.

Only one conclusion I can draw from reading pages after pages of posts. SL has poor scores and ever poorer acadamics(no AP), and their PTA and Stu Gibson are saying - If SL cannot have good scores and courses we wont let you guys from Fox Mill, Floris and Madison have good education too...
Instead of improving SL they are trying to bring down the standards of the communities adjacent to them. Look at Loudoun - Every single HS there have serveral AP courses. Not a single one is offered at SL. Zero - Period. Without AP courses SL will remain a second grade school. Stu knows that and so he wants to force some high performing students there, so that the scores appear higher. Why in the world would any parent interested in a good education for their kids willingly choose to go to a school that offers no AP courses at all?

Neen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Any thoughts on why they would change it now?

Yes, because I see a scenario which only affects Madison island, Chantilly and Westfield high schools - leaving Herndon and Oakton entirely alone:

The SB could decide to move most of Floris (the entire part which is east of Centreville Rd.) and all of McNair to South Lakes. Then move Oak Hill from Chantilly to Westfield. According to the SB's criteria, this would work. South Lakes FRM and ESOL would drop marginally compared with option #5, but it would satisfy the desire to reduce the amount of schools affected. Granted, it looks silly on a map for those Floris students to have to cross Oakton territory (Fox Mill) to get to South Lakes, but when did silliness prevent the SB....

> Any idea when will the staff post the final scenario that goes to the SB next week?

Nope.

Ditto!!
I work there...please check out the tables comparing IB vs. AP and what credits you get if you want to go to GU


WestfieldDad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Most people in my chair will say that IB is
> wonderful. I am not one of those," said Charles
> Deacon, Georgetown's dean of undergraduate
> admissions. "The AP program has been in effect for
> a very long time. It's got a very rigorous
> curriculum design, and it covers the subject
> matter we want to see, and it's scored on a
> rigorous basis, whereas in IB, it's not quite as
> rigorous."
>
> From By Ian Shapira
> Washington Post Staff Writer
> Thursday, January 25, 2007; A01

But what about the fact that most people in his chair would say IB is wonderful? Sounds like the majority would like IB, then. So you quote the one who doesn't?

Not that I am Pro-IB or Pro-AP. But you should be careful the quotes you use to support your arguments.

For the good folks of South Lakes and the School Board - what do you think of this scenario:

1. Move most of Floris (the entire part which is east of Centreville Rd.) and all of McNair to South Lakes.

2. Move Oak Hill from Chantilly to Westfield.

3. Move Madison island to South Lakes.

According to the SB's criteria, this would work best. South Lakes FRM and ESOL would drop, student populations at Chantilly and Westfield would drop, and it would avoid changing those schools with no enrollment issues - Herndon and Oakton would be left entirely alone.

This is more efficient than Option #5, and is validated. Call it Option #7

Hi Berdhius,

It is nice to see someone thinking outside the box, but the problem I see with this scenario is that it still requires the Floris area to be relocated to a 3rd High School in 8 years. Is it not reasonable that we should enjoy the same continuity as most of the other communities in Western fairfax?

South Lakes Pyramid parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But what about the fact that most people in his
> chair would say IB is wonderful? Sounds like the
> majority would like IB, then. So you quote the
> one who doesn't?
>
> Not that I am Pro-IB or Pro-AP. But you should be
> careful the quotes you use to support your
> arguments.

The AP v IB issue should be done on a cost v benefit basis. In a small school district or division [different states call them different nouns] IB serves multiple purposes since there is not the big central staff for instructional services and curriculum development as we PAY FOR IN FCPS.

Are we paying for the same students same course to take IB [subscription fees, staff training, exam fees] plus an AP exam? If it is more expensive for a student to take a comparable IB course v an AP course should I have to pay for it? NO. Should I have to pay exam fees for ALL students? NO [the family living in the 250k townhouse is paying taxes for the kid with the new beamer and no job or if a female a job to earn $ for a Chanel purse].

IB was initially put into Mount vernon to jump start a school that needed to focus on academics. Administrators were doing a crappy job so they brought in an outside vendor to turn around the place. How's it any different than Edison schools for the majority of the students? Is it worse?

http://www.edisonschools.com/edison-schools/faqs

hughes IBMY is an extra expnse not found at our standard middle schools because admins couldn't do vertical articulation across a parking lot.

Option 8 could be all of you assholes stop trying to throw the Madison Island under the bus to South Lakes as it is mostly located within Vienna not Reston say for example like North Point. If the so called Madison Island consisted of townhouses and apartments filled with lower income families would all the hipocrites in Reston still be standing on thier soapbox crying to eliminate Islands? I think not. Thats what makes the process so unfair. Nobody within the so called Island wants anything to do with the IB program that I have talked to. So please find another neighborhood to try to rip apart. I recommend next time you buy a house do your homework and not buy one in a shitty school pyramid then you will not need other people to bail you out.

Floris Parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Berdhius,
>
> It is nice to see someone thinking outside the
> box, but the problem I see with this scenario is
> that it still requires the Floris area to be
> relocated to a 3rd High School in 8 years. Is it
> not reasonable that we should enjoy the same
> continuity as most of the other communities in
> Western fairfax?

I agree with you of course, and really don't want to see Floris moved around like a chess piece, or anyone else for that matter. That would be cruel.

I do lament that the SB's criteria are coldly restrictive, and that we are asked to play a cutthroat game. But in an effort at selflessness and strict adherence to the School Board's criteria, I brainstormed this Option #7 this morning.

Any comments on it from School Board supporters, members of South Lakes, and anyone else would be interesting.

Burdhuis,
Redistricting is not the only way to solve the proble.

I think what the county and SLH should really consider is how to improve SLH, not only the numbers on paper, but what can really help the communities. To do that, we need to do some research and find out what is the root cause of the
issue.

Let me try to summary the issue w/ SHL:
1) While there's wealthy/advantage/high performing family/kids in and around SLH boundary, SLH's enrollment and (conceived) performance are declining.
2) At least from the discussion of this board and the numbers, there's a large population of 'disadvantaged' kids in SLH.
The pro-SHL folks wants, in short, equal access to "advantaged kids".

Why there are no significant number of family w/ high school kids moving to SLH's comparable neighbouthood, while you cross the street, school age children are common in even the older communities in Fox Mill? Why does high end condos in McNair area cause the enrollment to explode, while similar type of development in Reston "is not built for families"?

What are the other options explored by the school board? Redistricting can be one solution, but considering its large impacts, it should not be the first choice, and forced redistricting should be one of the last choices. And if one is needed, it should be really well planned, so that there won't be a redistricting to the same communities again and again.

I also raised the question, if the perception of SLH outside of it is flipped, people will come, due to its location and the development with Metro. -- One doesn't need to look further, just check the Reston communities not going to SLH, and you'll get an idea.

Redistricting should not be the single solution for SLH. And like I said earlier, past mistakes should not be the excuse for a future ill-planning.






Berdhuis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For the good folks of South Lakes and the School
> Board - what do you think of this scenario:
>
> 1. Move most of Floris (the entire part which is
> east of Centreville Rd.) and all of McNair to
> South Lakes.
>
> 2. Move Oak Hill from Chantilly to Westfield.
>
> 3. Move Madison island to South Lakes.
>
> According to the SB's criteria, this would work
> best. South Lakes FRM and ESOL would drop, student
> populations at Chantilly and Westfield would drop,
> and it would avoid changing those schools with no
> enrollment issues - Herndon and Oakton would be
> left entirely alone.
>
> This is more efficient than Option #5, and is
> validated. Call it Option #7

I believe if part of Floris ES goes to South Lake, later McNair Farm ES will be soon either goes to South Lake or Herndon, McNair is not going to be safe for long. As I recall the first 4 option all split McNair ES, McNair ES will not be safe for long. check the the map and forget about the airport area. Nobody like to become an island, that will be the next target. just my thoughs, correct me if I am wrong.

Berdhuis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For the good folks of South Lakes and the School
> Board - what do you think of this scenario:
>
> 1. Move most of Floris (the entire part which is
> east of Centreville Rd.) and all of McNair to
> South Lakes.
>
> 2. Move Oak Hill from Chantilly to Westfield.
>
> 3. Move Madison island to South Lakes.
>
> According to the SB's criteria, this would work
> best. South Lakes FRM and ESOL would drop, student
> populations at Chantilly and Westfield would drop,
> and it would avoid changing those schools with no
> enrollment issues - Herndon and Oakton would be
> left entirely alone.
>
> This is more efficient than Option #5, and is
> validated. Call it Option #7


What was option #6? Option #5 should be thrown out entirely. I did not support that one not even close.

You know, if this process were fair, the thing that would make the most sense is to move the Reston/Langley folks into South Lakes (Reston kids at Reston's school, solving the demographic issues, and those who don't like it could more than likely afford other options). Take the $60 million for the no-longer-necessary Langley expansion and put that toward building an Oak Hill High School, since kids in most of 20171 have to travel pretty far to get to ANY high school. Send Floris, McNair, Oak Hill and Fox Mill to Oak Hill High, and leave everything else alone, relieving overcrowding at all surrounding schools. Yes, it would take more time, but I don't hear anyone but the School Board claiming that we are in an emergency situation that needs to be solved NOW.

Just my thoughts on the issue. Most likely a pipe dream thanks to the money and influence of the Langley crowd, but I still think it's a better idea than the ridiculous school board proposal. Much as I wouldn't mind my kids going to Oakton, it is REALLY far from my house compared to Chantilly -- it doesn't make much sense, when you look at the map. The proposal is flawed.

A Baffled Citizen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What was option #6? Option #5 should be thrown
> out entirely. I did not support that one not even
> close.

I skipped #6 to signify the disorder of this process to begin with. #7 is the name, and it was borne of angst.

Oh, and by the way -- I totally agree with Floris that redistricting shouldn't be the only option we're looking at here. Truly improve South Lakes (and Dogwood and Terraset and the rest of the ESs) and people will come, because single family housing in that area is a steal. The biggest thing that's kept up from buying in Stratton Woods or similar (we're in a townhouse and would like to move up) is the schools.

navy area parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You know, if this process were fair, the thing
> that would make the most sense is to move the
> Reston/Langley folks into South Lakes (Reston kids
> at Reston's school, solving the demographic
> issues, and those who don't like it could more
> than likely afford other options). Take the $60
> million for the no-longer-necessary Langley
> expansion and put that toward building an Oak Hill
> High School, since kids in most of 20171 have to
> travel pretty far to get to ANY high school. Send
> Floris, McNair, Oak Hill and Fox Mill to Oak Hill
> High, and leave everything else alone, relieving
> overcrowding at all surrounding schools. Yes, it
> would take more time, but I don't hear anyone but
> the School Board claiming that we are in an
> emergency situation that needs to be solved NOW.
>
> Just my thoughts on the issue. Most likely a pipe
> dream thanks to the money and influence of the
> Langley crowd, but I still think it's a better
> idea than the ridiculous school board proposal.
> Much as I wouldn't mind my kids going to Oakton,
> it is REALLY far from my house compared to
> Chantilly -- it doesn't make much sense, when you
> look at the map. The proposal is flawed.


I agree with your thoughts about a new high school that could be created for the 20171 folks. That would solve most of the issues concerning the redistricting. I feel this current study should be postponed or even better, to cancel it. I mean why NOW? Why these meetings took place in Dec and one right after the election? Were these meetings in Dec intentionally planned so that the SB would hope of a lesser crowd due to the holidays? I would like to know what the urgency is for with the redistricting because this is a serious issue for many many families around here. Lastly, I agree with you about the Navy area being closer to Chantilly than Oakton. This is ridiculous.

MI Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Option 8 could be all of you assholes stop trying
> to throw the Madison Island under the bus to South
> Lakes as it is mostly located within Vienna not
> Reston say for example like North Point. If the
> so called Madison Island consisted of townhouses
> and apartments filled with lower income families
> would all the hipocrites in Reston still be
> standing on thier soapbox crying to eliminate
> Islands? I think not. Thats what makes the
> process so unfair. Nobody within the so called
> Island wants anything to do with the IB program
> that I have talked to. So please find another
> neighborhood to try to rip apart. I recommend
> next time you buy a house do your homework and not
> buy one in a shitty school pyramid then you will
> not need other people to bail you out.

MI

I reccomend the next time you do your homework - look at the boundary map and know something about the area. There is no way you could have thought that your island would remain that way forever. It was only a matter of time before it would be added to either SL or Marshall.

curiousGeorge Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ditto!!
> I work there...please check out the tables
> comparing IB vs. AP and what credits you get if
> you want to go to GU
>
>
> WestfieldDad Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "Most people in my chair will say that IB is
> > wonderful. I am not one of those," said Charles
> > Deacon, Georgetown's dean of undergraduate
> > admissions. "The AP program has been in effect
> for
> > a very long time. It's got a very rigorous
> > curriculum design, and it covers the subject
> > matter we want to see, and it's scored on a
> > rigorous basis, whereas in IB, it's not quite
> as
> > rigorous."
> >
> > From By Ian Shapira
> > Washington Post Staff Writer
> > Thursday, January 25, 2007; A01



Isn't he also the guy who said he only looks at TJ students in NoVA? No offense but he isn't the only admissions director out there. How many other kids got into to Georgetown besides those from TJ?

Not many from the area....it is very expensive to go to GU....and it is true that most of the time are the kids from TJ that attend other than UVA.

Get it right Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> curiousGeorge Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Ditto!!
> > I work there...please check out the tables
> > comparing IB vs. AP and what credits you get if
> > you want to go to GU
> >
> >
> > WestfieldDad Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > "Most people in my chair will say that IB is
> > > wonderful. I am not one of those," said
> Charles
> > > Deacon, Georgetown's dean of undergraduate
> > > admissions. "The AP program has been in
> effect
> > for
> > > a very long time. It's got a very rigorous
> > > curriculum design, and it covers the subject
> > > matter we want to see, and it's scored on a
> > > rigorous basis, whereas in IB, it's not quite
> > as
> > > rigorous."
> > >
> > > From By Ian Shapira
> > > Washington Post Staff Writer
> > > Thursday, January 25, 2007; A01
>
>
>
> Isn't he also the guy who said he only looks at TJ
> students in NoVA? No offense but he isn't the
> only admissions director out there. How many
> other kids got into to Georgetown besides those
> from TJ?

Berdhuis: Your scenario would add more than 800 kids to South Lakes; not feasible. (Remember that almost of all of the Floris area south of Fox Mill Road is airport.) McNair would be a second Title I school at South Lakes, on top of the others who are near that designation but for GT centers. Those kids are succeeding at Carson and Westfield now. Why would you compromise that? Westfield's ESOL and FRM numbers would drop -- adding to the current socioeconomic imbalance. Also, Fox Mill is one of the closest neighborhoods to South Lakes and there is support for a move there (despite what a few posters here say). My daughter has a dozen 8th-grade friends in that neighborhood and they ALL want to go to South Lakes, just as an empirical example.

truthbetold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Berdhuis: Your scenario would add more than 800
> kids to South Lakes; not feasible.

It is feasible; not all 800 children would wind up attending South Lakes.

> McNair would be a second Title I
> school at South Lakes, on top of the others who
> are near that designation but for GT centers.

Can you quantify what another Title I feeder school would do for South Lakes HS? I asked you (and anyone else) that yesterday, and no one has commented or answered the question. Why is that?

Bear in mind that along with McNair, most of Floris would attend, thus mitigating much of the negative aspects you are looking at.

> Those kids are succeeding at Carson and Westfield
> now. Why would you compromise that?

Are you saying that their fate would be less impressive at South Lakes? I find South Lakes to be an excellent school.

> Westfield's ESOL and FRM numbers would drop -- adding to the
> current socioeconomic imbalance.

South Lakes's ESOL and FRM percentages would drop, too. Are you jealous that Westfield's would drop a bit more?

> Also, Fox Mill is
> one of the closest neighborhoods to South Lakes

There are others even closer, but the School Board ignored them. So this is not a serious consideration.

> and there is support for a move there (despite
> what a few posters here say).

Is that relevant according to the School Board's criteria?

> My daughter has a
> dozen 8th-grade friends in that neighborhood and
> they ALL want to go to South Lakes, just as an
> empirical example.

Many children in the study area want one thing or another, does that mean the School Board will honor them?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/2008 11:35AM by Berdhuis.

Get it right Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Isn't he also the guy who said he only looks at TJ
> students in NoVA? No offense but he isn't the
> only admissions director out there. How many
> other kids got into to Georgetown besides those
> from TJ?

Well, a wonderful South Lakes kid got into Georgetown on a full 4-year scholarship.

Berdhuis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> truthbetold Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Berdhuis: Your scenario would add more than 800
> > kids to South Lakes; not feasible.
>
> It is feasible; not all 800 children would wind up
> attending South Lakes.
>
> > McNair would be a second Title I
> > school at South Lakes, on top of the others who
> > are near that designation but for GT centers.
>
> Can you quantify what another Title I feeder
> school would for South Lakes HS? I asked you (and
> anyone else) that yesterday, and no one has
> commented or answered the question. Why is that?
>
> Bear in mind that along with McNair, most of
> Floris would attend, thus mitigating much of the
> negative aspects you are looking at.
>
> > Those kids are succeeding at Carson and
> Westfield
> > now. Why would you compromise that?
>
> Are you saying that their fate would be less
> impressive at South Lakes? I find South Lakes to
> be an excellent school.
>
> > Westfield's ESOL and FRM numbers would drop --
> adding to the
> > current socioeconomic imbalance.
>
> South Lakes's ESOL and FRM percentages would drop,
> too. Are you jealous that Westfield's would drop a
> bit more?
>
> > Also, Fox Mill is
> > one of the closest neighborhoods to South Lakes
>
> There are others even closer, but the School Board
> ignored them. So this is not a serious
> consideration.
>
> > and there is support for a move there (despite
> > what a few posters here say).
>
> Is that relevant according to the School Board's
> criteria?
>
> > My daughter has a
> > dozen 8th-grade friends in that neighborhood
> and
> > they ALL want to go to South Lakes, just as an
> > empirical example.
>
> Many children in the study area want one thing or
> another, does that mean the School Board will
> honor them?



This is what I am seeing or hearing all along, this redistricting issue is affecting most of the families around the West county..everybody wants this or that, but what is the most fairest process to solve all of this?..please think about this, look at the events that transpired with the boundary study that started from the beginning. Issues with overcrowing at some high schools and the underenrollment at SLHS whereas the REAL issue is just SLHS? Is that right? I find this politically appalling and the real issues being masked by using the idea Westfield and Chantilly are overcrowded so to help SLHS whereas for example option #5 did not really solve the overcrowding of Chantilly. Please give me a break..why pick a neighborhood over this neighborhood or that neighborhood? I am still baffled the North Reston schools are in the Herndon district. Why won't the SL support that? Is it because Reston was politically divided? Didn't the founder of Reston design a community where all can be live with peace and harmony instead of stupidly pitting neighbors to neighbors over who MUST go to that high school or this high school, etc? Again, this is ridiculous.

truthbetold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Berdhuis: Your scenario would add more than 800
> kids to South Lakes; not feasible. (Remember that
> almost of all of the Floris area south of Fox Mill
> Road is airport.) McNair would be a second Title I
> school at South Lakes, on top of the others who
> are near that designation but for GT centers.
> McNair would be a second Title I school at South Lakes,
> on top of the others who are near that designation but for GT centers. Those > kids are succeeding at Carson and Westfield now. Why would you compromise
> that?
>

All High Schools in this study have their fair share of borderline schools that are like "the others who are near that designation but for GT centers." Chantilly carries its own load and so does Westfield. The South Lakes community/pyramid has done a miserable job serving their borderline schools and so now everybody has to hear their sad, sad songs.

truthbetold even admits South Lakes failure as a school above when asking "Why would you compromise that?" speaking of McNairs's student success at Carson and Westfield. I guess switching from Westfield to South Lakes is a compromise. So there you go folks, we finally have the truth. If South Lakes cannot offer the same success for McNair students as Westfield does than they can't offer success to anyone. South Lakes only wants canned success delivered to their doorstep.

Berduis,
Instead of picking which communites should be thrown under the bus, why not consider some other options. I would love to see an Oak Hill HS.

Floris Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Berduis,
> Instead of picking which communites should be
> thrown under the bus, why not consider some other
> options. I would love to see an Oak Hill HS.

Hi Floris,

I actually advocate other options apart from redistricting. I oppose this redistricting plan. I'm just making an attempt to find a viable solution, given the constraints the School Board gave us - just trying to be a team player, I guess.

Anyway, Floris, I can assure you that I favor a Humanities Program at South Lakes HS, and planning for another high school to be built at or near Rachel Carson MS. Some call it Oak Hill HS (I would prefer to call it something not so close to Oakton, say "Sully" or "Rachel Carson").

Does this help?

Joesophine Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> All High Schools in this study have their fair
> share of borderline schools that are like "the
> others who are near that designation but for GT
> centers." Chantilly carries its own load and so
> does Westfield.

Since when does 10-12% FRM students vs. 33% FRM students equate to fair share? South lakes has 3 times as many disadvantaged students (percentage-wise) in a student body that is half the size of Westfield and Chantilly. Please tell me how Chantilly and Westfield would guarantee the success of disadvantaged students if they carried as many FRM students as South Lakes does.

As a rule, disadvantaged students do much better when they comprise a smaller percentage of the total population of a school.

You guys love to twist things, don't you! (I'm not talking to any particular one of you; you know who you are.)

Why should I bother educating you AGAIN about why kids who are disadvantaged are not served when they make up a large percentage AND large raw numbers of a school population? Westfield, Chantilly, and Oakton all have less than 10% FRM percentages. South Lakes has 33%. We do VERY WELL by our kids. But why add more and compromise (look the word up!! It doesn't mean what you twisted it to mean) the successes happening with these kids now? And why shouldn't Westfield carry it's "load?" And you can believe that the FRM families now going to Westfield DO NOT want to be a GREATER percent or raw numbers at a school than they are now. Who of of you is speaking for them? I know more than 15 of these families personally because I work with underprivileged kids in our area.

This has NOTHING to do with how well South Lakes does by its current population of FRM and ESOL kids, nor with how much it values them!! You are ignoring proven facts related to achievement.

> Since when does 10-12% FRM students vs. 33% FRM
> students equate to fair share? South lakes has 3
> times as many disadvantaged students
> (percentage-wise) in a student body that is half
> the size of Westfield and Chantilly.

Can anyone quantify the direct relationship of FRM to academic disadvantage? I recall the first night of meetings at Chantilly when a woman in the auditorium from South Lakes pointedly asked, "why is FRM even relevant?"

No one answered.

Not once has a South Lakes advocate said anything nasty or patently untrue about Oakton, Chantilly, or Westfield, but I can tell you that there is an arsenal of ammo if they ever choose to use it!

They could start with suicide and depression rates, and cocaine use, and dysfunctional families and divorce rates, and bigotry, and valuing property before people, and kids who are clueless about the wider world, and vehicle deaths in 16th-birthday SUVs, and the list goes on. Not to mention an array of underachievers that populate AP classes beginning in 9th grade that dumb themselves down so the kids can get the As their parents crave. True? Untrue? Who cares, right? Because who cares if what people say about South Lakes has any truth to it?

As one poster said earlier -- you had better be darn sure your glass house is shatter-proof before you start swinging around with your bats.

Berdhuis: Start here:

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1b/e1/e3.pdf

Then go to the ERIC database and plug in some keywords like "achievement, socioeconomic, status, disadvantage), and you'll have some reading material for the next few months.

I caution anyone exploring this that they should have some background in science and in study methodology. Otherwise, we're going to see a bunch of posters here twisting and turning things and we'll have another 135 pages of setting things straight.

I've seen consistent posts from South Lakes folks expressing not wanting to accept McNair ES as a feeder school, due to its Title I status. No one, after several queries, has explained quantitatively HOW former McNair students would affect South Lakes HS.

This topic has come up repeatedly, and no one has ventured past the same line "we think McNair children are better served at Westfield". Please explain to the public why South Lakes HS is unwilling to accept these children. Include details such as: number of additional classrooms, teachers, and anything else you can think of. This would help.

Thanks

Berdhuis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've seen consistent posts from South Lakes folks
> expressing not wanting to accept McNair ES as a
> feeder school, due to its Title I status. No one,
> after several queries, has explained
> quantitatively HOW former McNair students would
> affect South Lakes HS.
>
> This topic has come up repeatedly, and no one has
> ventured past the same line "we think McNair
> children are better served at Westfield". Please
> explain to the public why South Lakes HS is
> unwilling to accept these children. Include
> details such as: number of additional classrooms,
> teachers, and anything else you can think of. This
> would help.
>
> Thanks


Berdhuis,
I thought truthbetold just gave you a link to a ton of research addressing this. If you don't want to read it, fine, but don't tell other posters it is their job to educate you.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/2008 12:48PM by South Lakes Pyramid parent.

South Lake High School doesn't want McNair ES students, they only want advantaged students. They hand picked who they want. They think they will get what they want. Not sure if they will success on that. Sorry, McNair ES, South Lake High School doesn't want your kids.

Agreed. All options presented reduced the FRM/ESOL w/o big margin of difference. No one from SLH can really answer Berduis questions.


FES MOM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> South Lake High School doesn't want McNair ES
> students, they only want advantaged students. They
> hand picked who they want. They think they will
> get what they want. Not sure if they will success
> on that. Sorry, McNair ES, South Lake High School
> doesn't want your kids.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/2008 01:05PM by Floris.

SLverity - I am not conclusive as to deeming SLHS a failure - in fact, as I state, I don't share in a fatalistic approach towards the school, particularly as I ardently believe that schools (and good ones, at that) play a vital role in any community. Such is the experience of one who attended school in a small school district, with lots of local input, and with a stark absence of the shenanigans currently manifested by Fairfax School Board.

But the reality is that South Lakes is significantly underutilized - and I just don't buy it this circumstance as an historical accident - its numbers are low because reasonably large numbers of parents and students have engaged in avoiding the school. And it might thus be deemed a relative (although clearly not an absolute) failure. And I am not certain, unless the re-districting is handled extremely well (and there are scant few signs of that), that even redistricting will bring anywhere near the numbers that South Lakes seeks. Experience tells me never to underestimate instincts of middle to upper middle class parents, who can be quite emotional and stubborn when it comes to schooling. This kind of fearful (fearful, but rational) thinking should not drive to any automatic conclusions, but it is important to keep these thoughts in mind in terms of just how vital and crucial it is to handle redistricting correctly. If it is not done correctly, and some do not have confidence that it can be, I can see how some could conclude it would be cheaper and efficient (from a pure economic standpoint) to close the school and redistribute students (and in particular the so-called FRM students who purportedly according to theory do better when dispersed in low concentrations). I raise this not to cause alarm, but rather to point out the stakes behind effecting any redistricting in a market oriented, flexible way. Put another way, SLHS will not obtain 600 "advantaged" students by administrative fiat - they will have to compete for them - a hard proposition for some to stomach.

FES MOM

The objectives of this boundary change are two fold - One filling the capacity of SLH and Two improving the social economic imbalances among the high schools. South Lake High has more than its fair share of the disadvantaged students. Even if all the new students coming to South Lake are advantaged it still leave South Lake with 20% plus of disadvantaged students which is more than doubling of its neighboring schools. We all live in the same county and every community has a responsibility to make sure we have the best efficient education model for all our kids.

South Lakes Pyramid parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Berdhuis,
> I thought truthbetold just gave you a link to a
> ton of research addressing this. If you don't
> want to read it, fine, but don't tell other
> posters it is their job to educate you.

Has the School Board and some of the participants in this forum provided data to support various aspects of this redistricting plan? As a shareholder in this project, shouldn't the public get an adequate explanation as to the support or denial of any aspect of this plan? Shouldn't the proponents of this plan be the first to adequately explain any of the aspects?

The goal is improving, not redistribute equally. There are no big difference among all the options. So how do you explain McNair is left out, other than hand picking communities?

Reston Parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> FES MOM
>
> The objectives of this boundary change are two
> fold - One filling the capacity of SLH and Two
> improving the social economic imbalances among the
> high schools. South Lake High has more than its
> fair share of the disadvantaged students. Even if
> all the new students coming to South Lake are
> advantaged it still leave South Lake with 20% plus
> of disadvantaged students which is more than
> doubling of its neighboring schools. We all live
> in the same county and every community has a
> responsibility to make sure we have the best
> efficient education model for all our kids.

A major part of the problem, in my opinion, is that socio-economics is even part of the boundary criteria. You can cite all the studies you want, but the fact is is that socio-economics is a highly controversial area that will polarize large groups of people. The School Board shouldn't be involved in trying to achieve "socio-economic balance" whatever that is. As long as they are, you can guarantee there will be controversy.

McNair is left out because it doesn't meet the second goal of this bounday change. McNair has been doing well in Rachel Carson and Westfield. The goal of improving social economic condition of a school is not about redistributing but improving the efficiency of the education system. It is much easier to allocate resources and lift up a small percentage of disadvantaged students than facing a much larger group.

That is precisely why the SB is authorized by law to adjust boundary for improving schools.

WestfieldDad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>>
> The above sounds really impressive until you look
> at the overall statistics over the last several
> years -
>
> _________________________Takers_____Read/Math__Rea
> d/Math/Write___Read/Math___All
> __________________________#_______#_______%ov50___
> _#_______%ov50____#________#
> Total Population
> 6/7_____241_____150_____62.2_____150____62.2____10
> 92_____1625
> Total Population
> 5/6_____255_____151_____59.2______________________
> 1066
> Total Population
> 4/5_____222_____139_____62.6______________________
> 1076
>
> Turns out the "spectacular" average increase is
> relative to the previous 1 year which was actually
> down 10 from the prior year. In addition, looking
> at 2 years back, last year's % at the school
> scoring over the national average (%ov50 above) is
> actually slightly lower.
>
> In other words, it looks like what appears to be a
> spectacular increase is probably noise.
>
> On the otherhand, perhaps the difference isn't
> noise, perhaps it's in the following -
>
> 6/7_____16
> 5/6_____22
> 4/5_____22
>
> Guess what those numbers are - The Outliers. Any
> guess as to which Outliers? Students with
> Disabilities. I'm not going to make any guesses
> as to why fewer of those kids happened to take the
> test in 6/7, but it'd obviously skew the averages
> higher without making much difference in the
> median.
>

Westfield Dad:

That's a lot of info to make what point? That I was misleading when I rebutted Samgee, who said "Imagine pouring 60 million USD into a high school and you
still cannot raise standardized test scores."

I don't think so. Using either 05/06 scores or 04/05 scores as comparison, Samgee's assertion is wrong. Prior to the renovation, SLHS has been able to "raise standardized test scores". "Spectacular" or not, that's a fact.

While you didn't specifically assert that SLHS's scores are significantly lower than neighboring schools, those who do might infer your post supports their side. I wanted to make sure you weren't misunderstood.

So, your suggestion that it is noise may possibly be correct, but a comparison with Westfield's numbers hardly suggests what others have called "significantly lower" test scores at SLHS, for example.

I also wasn't sure - re: your point on "Outliers" - if you suggest that SLHS might have limited the number of "Outliers" in 06/07 to improve the scores. I'll inquire further, but the fact is that the Westfield/SLHS numbers are pretty close, even with a higher percentage (in all three years compared) of "Outliers" taking the tests at SLHS.

Westfield South Lakes
06/07
SAT Reading/Math 1111 (1652) 1092 (1625)

% above 50% avg. 68.% 62.2%

"Outliers" 30/596,5% 16/241,6.6%

05/06
SAT 1109 1066

% above 50% avg. 66.6% 59.2%

Outliers 32/545,5.8% 22/255, 8.6%

04/05
SAT 1109 1076

% above 50% avg. 69% 62.6%

Outliers 31/546, 5.6% 22/222, 9.9%

quantum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SLverity - I am not conclusive as to deeming SLHS
> a failure - in fact, as I state, I don't share in
> a fatalistic approach towards the school,
> particularly as I ardently believe that schools
> (and good ones, at that) play a vital role in any
> community. Such is the experience of one who
> attended school in a small school district, with
> lots of local input, and with a stark absence of
> the shenanigans currently manifested by Fairfax
> School Board.
>
> But the reality is that South Lakes is
> significantly underutilized - and I just don't buy
> it this circumstance as an historical accident -
> its numbers are low because reasonably large
> numbers of parents and students have engaged in
> avoiding the school. And it might thus be deemed
> a relative (although clearly not an absolute)
> failure. And I am not certain, unless the
> re-districting is handled extremely well (and
> there are scant few signs of that), that even
> redistricting will bring anywhere near the numbers
> that South Lakes seeks. Experience tells me never
> to underestimate instincts of middle to upper
> middle class parents, who can be quite emotional
> and stubborn when it comes to schooling. This
> kind of fearful (fearful, but rational) thinking
> should not drive to any automatic conclusions, but
> it is important to keep these thoughts in mind in
> terms of just how vital and crucial it is to
> handle redistricting correctly. If it is not
> done correctly, and some do not have confidence
> that it can be, I can see how some could conclude
> it would be cheaper and efficient (from a pure
> economic standpoint) to close the school and
> redistribute students (and in particular the
> so-called FRM students who purportedly according
> to theory do better when dispersed in low
> concentrations). I raise this not to cause alarm,
> but rather to point out the stakes behind
> effecting any redistricting in a market oriented,
> flexible way. Put another way, SLHS will not
> obtain 600 "advantaged" students by administrative
> fiat - they will have to compete for them - a hard
> proposition for some to stomach.


One of the motives of the redistrict process is to justify the Langley expansion. Even South Lake does not get the students in reality, it will get them on paper. That should be enough to support the Langley expansion. That's why the redistrict process has to be done now. It has to be done in 2008.

Reston Parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It is much
> easier to allocate resources and lift up a small
> percentage of disadvantaged students than facing a
> much larger group.

Would the $48 million renovation work at South Lakes HS help equip it to handle a numerically larger, yet percentage-wise lesser amount of FRM children? I'm genuinely curious.

Reston Parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> McNair is left out because it doesn't meet the
> second goal of this bounday change. McNair has
> been doing well in Rachel Carson and Westfield.
> The goal of improving social economic condition of
> a school is not about redistributing but improving
> the efficiency of the education system. It is much
> easier to allocate resources and lift up a small
> percentage of disadvantaged students than facing a
> much larger group.
>
> That is precisely why the SB is authorized by law
> to adjust boundary for improving schools.


How is that going to help immprove schools--meaning elementary, middle and high schools? Again, I say the entire process is unfair because of the way the study was carried out. Period. There has to be a solution to each issue with the controversy going on. I mean if after a redistrict is done and a few years down the road, a handful of community members complain to the SB about the whatever the issues arise with their schools (which in this case has been happening with SLHS), the SB says oops we have to redistrict again. Then the process goes back in cycle. How effective is that? Can anyone name a successful boundary study with results achieved from the past with any area in the Fairfax County--say particularly high school redistricting?

Reston Parent,

Why do you insist on bring up the socio-economic card as grounds for this boundary study? If you and the School Board were truly interested in balancing the socio-economic disparities between schools, then clearly Langley and more of the Madison HS would have been included in this study. We do not live in in a socio-economically balanced society or County.

I am quite sure that you and the rest of the parents who have children attending South Lakes were well aware of all aspects of the school when you decided to send your children there. It is clear that many people in the Reston area have decided to make other choices when it comes to where their children will attend HS.

I do not belive that it is fair or reasonable to expect other parents, who have made investments in their existing homes, communities and current high schools to become part of a band aid for a school that the School Board has allowed to become what it is today. I believe that you like any of us, has the choice of staying where you are, or moving to a different area if you feel that the move would provide a better education for your children.

So this is nothing more than old-fashioned "busing" based on socioeconomic factors rather than race. Nice. Private school is looking better and better.

The failure of this boundary study to look beyond a few schools will make it more difficult to fill about 700 empty seats at Falls Church HS. To rationally allocate students who live west of Rt. 395, the county needs to look at all school boundaries at the same time. Langley and Madison should be part of that equation. So should Falls Church HS, McLean HS, Marshall HS, and all the others.

I don't understand why people here are arguing with each other. We all know that SB didn't get it right from the very beginning. And we are all victims of some selfish SB members' personal gains. Why don't we just work together to push SB to fix its basis and get it right?

Floris Parent,
I suggest you go to the fairfax county public school web site and see for yourself the goals set out by the SB for this boundary change. You can disagree with those objectives but that's what the framework is. Quite frankly I can't see any resonable person would challenge those goals. We are living in the same county that has the responsibility to educate every kid.

As far as the housing choice we made is irrelevant. We live in a transient area that sees its schools boundary change at times. Fairfax county is not central Pennsylvania. It has to do the necessary change.

Let's get one thing straight. Reston is not a town. It is a big neighborhood association without much clout in the county structure. Not much different than "Oak Hill" (a madeup name people began using so they wouldn't be tied to "Herndon," god forbid -- and the post office came years later after people started arbitrarily putting "Oak Hill" next to "20171") or "Fox Mill" or "Bradbury Farms."

As for the assertions here that people flew out of Reston because South Lakes sucked, I'd like to see some factual evidence of that! You won't find it. I do know that people moved INTO Reston because it offers terrific work-life balance opportunities, the town center, a huge array of housing and activity options, wonderful neighborhoods, beautiful green spaces and amenities, a terrific school (top 3% in the country), and a robust community spirit.

And I challenge anyone to come up with property value (sold house prices) information that demonstrates comparable houses in Reston sell for less! Just try it.

As for socioeconomics, I have a solution -- Since Westfield has the space and the hot scores, let's send Hutchinson and Dogwood there, plus the communities of Stonegate and Cedar Ridge. That's one way to ruin South Lakes by decimating it (which so many seem to delight in hoping will happen) while allowing the incredible, amazing, fantastic success Westfield (or Oakton or Chantilly if they care to participate) has had with Title I students to be further proven. Socioeconomics don't matter, you see, but scores and national rankings do, so let's let Westfield be the "experiment." It makes perfect sense -- it does so very well with everyone, let's see it put its money where its mouth is, and put all those kids where they obviously would be better served. (Those literalists who seem to abound -- I am being facetious, while calling the privileged anti-South Lakes community on its contention that socioeconomics don't matter.)

A MOM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't understand why people here are arguing
> with each other. We all know that SB didn't get it
> right from the very beginning. And we are all
> victims of some selfish SB members' personal
> gains. Why don't we just work together to push SB
> to fix its basis and get it right?


That is something we could do, but how? Seems like the SB already received their personal gains at the expense of hardworking taxpayers and their families. It just reeks of political sneaking around and aimed to help ONE high schcool with a community of magnitude outside of Reston saying what is the heck is going on? whereas there are many other high schools around the county that may or may not be in "balance" with the SB's so called criteria.

Another thing: If South Lakes had 1% FRM and 0% ESOL, and less than 10% blacks or hispanics, I bet a million bucks quite a few anti-South Lakers would change their tunes. Just look at the Franklin Farm "talking points" and a survey done this summer where they found unequivocally that people would be willing to go to Chantilly or Westfield from Oakton, but not South Lakes. So "moving" students from one high school to another was not even a concern when the school in question was white and privileged. And yes, I'm calling some of you racist. Your words speak for themselves.

Switch those kids with Langley kids, problem solved. Easy fix!

truthbetold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As for socioeconomics, I have a solution -- Since
> Westfield has the space and the hot scores, let's
> send Hutchinson and Dogwood there, plus the
> communities of Stonegate and Cedar Ridge. That's
> one way to ruin South Lakes by decimating it
> (which so many seem to delight in hoping will
> happen) while allowing the incredible, amazing,
> fantastic success Westfield (or Oakton or
> Chantilly if they care to participate) has had
> with Title I students to be further proven.
> Socioeconomics don't matter, you see, but scores
> and national rankings do, so let's let Westfield
> be the "experiment." It makes perfect sense -- it
> does so very well with everyone, let's see it put
> its money where its mouth is, and put all those
> kids where they obviously would be better served.
> (Those literalists who seem to abound -- I am
> being facetious, while calling the privileged
> anti-South Lakes community on its contention that
> socioeconomics don't matter.)

A MOM: Funny that you should suggest NIMBYing them to Langley. A lot of people are in NIMBY mode and want Langley or Madison to "take the fall." Well - the fact is we want to keep those current kids snug in our own little school, where they are thriving.

truthbetold,
you are talking out of your ass. IF south lakes was on par with chantilly, oakton, or westfield, few would have an issue with being moved. the fact that south lakes is underperforming, has no ap program, and the sb is forcing people to go there, is what has everyones shorts in a bunch.

if south lakes was such a great school people would be standing in line hoping to be redistricted. ain't happening, is it? it's more like people are willing to do ANYTHING to not go there. in fact, anyone that wants to pupil place IN to south lakes can, but they don't.

and you, like everyone else at south lakes, really like to pull the racist card. that was old about 130 pages ago.

truthbetold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A MOM: Funny that you should suggest NIMBYing them
> to Langley. A lot of people are in NIMBY mode and
> want Langley or Madison to "take the fall." Well -
> the fact is we want to keep those current kids
> snug in our own little school, where they are
> thriving.



Yes, I am curious how Langley would react if a new study included Langley. See, this is not all about who gets to handpick this community or that community, we all make choices to move to communities for reasons we have, not to be uprooted by a potential redistricting to help, again ONE high school, please. This arguing back and forth is not helping. Nobody is winning. Nobody is "right" 100 percent. Even the SB is not right 100 percent. Nothing is effective with the redistricting anyway. I really like the idea of having a new high school built in the Oak Hill area. It makes more sense to do this, but will that happen? Not with the SB redistricting too often.

Let's drop the socio-economic code word for a moment and get to the real issue with SL parents...

Would a black student prefer to go to a school with 8% blacks or 25% blacks? My guess would be probably the latter. Same for any race. Why does the white population at SL want to water down their numbers? Is there a racial motivation for excluding McNair? I think so.

If "SL" is in the top 3% nationwide, then why people ARE avoiding at all cost? You can say whatever your heart desire, but we the "insiders" know better....by the way, I live in Reston too. Perhaps SL looks "GOOD" on paper, statistically speaking, but the reality is that it is not. Sorry to burst your bubble...you have been defending it left and right, well, good for you: to each its own. Unfortunately, it has been falling in deaf ears. It will take MANY, MANY years to become a competitive school--it will not happen overnight, not even with the "selected, priviledge kids", if we get any. The ones that will come either cannot pay for private schools nor can be pupil placed. You are living in UTOPIA....you are very idealistic...must be a liberal.


truthbetold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let's get one thing straight. Reston is not a
> town. It is a big neighborhood association without
> much clout in the county structure. Not much
> different than "Oak Hill" (a madeup name people
> began using so they wouldn't be tied to "Herndon,"
> god forbid -- and the post office came years later
> after people started arbitrarily putting "Oak
> Hill" next to "20171") or "Fox Mill" or "Bradbury
> Farms."
>
> As for the assertions here that people flew out of
> Reston because South Lakes sucked, I'd like to see
> some factual evidence of that! You won't find it.
> I do know that people moved INTO Reston because it
> offers terrific work-life balance opportunities,
> the town center, a huge array of housing and
> activity options, wonderful neighborhoods,
> beautiful green spaces and amenities, a terrific
> school (top 3% in the country), and a robust
> community spirit.
>
> And I challenge anyone to come up with property
> value (sold house prices) information that
> demonstrates comparable houses in Reston sell for
> less! Just try it.

Race is not an issue at South Lakes. Get that straight. It sure is an issue for privileged white people, though, who want to use it as an excuse not to go there.

Socioeconomics is about economic status, not race. Helping poor kids is something South Lakes does very well. But too many of them, and you can't do a good job any more. That's why having more, in terms of raw numbers, from McNair would not be good for THEM or for the current population of poor kids that South Lakes is succeeding with. Did I use small enough words for y'all to get it?

Race certainly is an issue at SL.
- SL parents have expressed they only want whites and asians.
- The sole reason SL enrollment has declined is due to the drop in white students.

truthbetold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Race is not an issue at South Lakes. Get that
> straight. It sure is an issue for privileged white
> people, though, who want to use it as an excuse
> not to go there.
>
> Socioeconomics is about economic status, not race.
> Helping poor kids is something South Lakes does
> very well. But too many of them, and you can't do
> a good job any more. That's why having more, in
> terms of raw numbers, from McNair would not be
> good for THEM or for the current population of
> poor kids that South Lakes is succeeding with. Did
> I use small enough words for y'all to get it?



It's interesting you know the race and income of those posting here.

I don't understand that you want keep your kids in your own school, but you want other kids leave their current school and go to your school. Why?

We all should stop fighting here, South Lake HS parents, put yourself in others's position, think about it with your heart, the thing you don't want happen to your kids, it shouldn't happen to other kids, otherwise, you are just been selfish here. Show us your heart. what comes around and will go around soon.

I don't have a problem with SLHS, Everybody loves their own high School. We don't have a problem with it. I will decide what's best for my kids, Nobody can force me do that, I perfer to stay as is. No Change Please!

Let's be nice to each other.


=============================
truthbetold Wrote:

<A MOM: Funny that you should suggest NIMBYing them to Langley. A lot of people <are in NIMBY mode and want Langley or Madison to "take the fall." Well - the <fact is we want to keep those current kids snug in our own little school, <where they are thriving.

truthbetold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Socioeconomics is about economic status, not race.
> Helping poor kids is something South Lakes does
> very well. But too many of them, and you can't do
> a good job any more. That's why having more, in
> terms of raw numbers, from McNair would not be
> good for THEM or for the current population of
> poor kids that South Lakes is succeeding with.

But the percentage of poor children at SL will drop from its current level with Option #7; that will make it easier to give them the additional attention you predict they will need. Remember, the raw increase of such students will occur with an increase of an even greater percentage of advantaged students. Commensurately, there is a similar increase percentage of classrooms, teachers, admin, etc to handle this increase in overall population. Isn't the $48 million renovation designed for this purpose?

Raw numbers are also a concern. Not just percentages. Ask any teacher what that means, and you'll understand. It takes a great deal more time, resources, physical energy to bring along underprivileged kids. The percentage may go down -- some -- but the raw numbers go UP, and Westfield is in a position to address their needs now both in terms of numbers and percentages. I'm sorry -- the burden should not have to be borne by South Lakes like this when there is an immediate opportunity to help rectify it, plus gain the benefit of a larger population to provide equal programming in core courses and substantive electives.

FES MOM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't understand that you want keep your kids in
> your own school, but you want other kids leave
> their current school and go to your school. Why?
>
> We all should stop fighting here, South Lake HS
> parents, put yourself in others's position, think
> about it with your heart, the thing you don't want
> happen to your kids, it shouldn't happen to other
> kids, otherwise, you are just been selfish here.
> Show us your heart. what comes around and will go
> around soon.
>
> I don't have a problem with SLHS, Everybody loves
> their own high School. We don't have a problem
> with it. I will decide what's best for my kids,
> Nobody can force me do that, I perfer to stay as
> is. No Change Please!
>
> Let's be nice to each other.
>
>

FES MOM,

OK, let's try to be nice ..

I understand you don't want your kids to move. Change is always difficult, which is only compounded when you feel like you aren't getting anything in return.

Now can you understand that I want full programs offered at my kids' future high school? South Lakes can not offer more programs without more students - that is the way the SB funds the schools.

I would have been fine with students from Langley or Madison. But they won't inlcude them. I would have been fine with a great magnet program. But they aren't offering it. To simply say "no" to any redistrictng is to do nothing about the lack of programs at SL. I don't trust the SB to do the right thing anymore than you. So why would I trust them to do a county wide study that will eventually do something for SL?

So, the question is, after looking into your own heart: would you have us do nothing? All I am asking for is as a resident of Fairfax County, equal access to education for my kids. They will take it from there, whichever school they go to.

RE Langley -

Not that I think anyone on the south side of Route 7 west of Baron Cameron should go to Langley, especially those close to STERLING, BUT those Langley kids that everyone so desperately wants to be in this study aren't close to South Lakes.

They would go to Herndon.

Maybe a neighborhood like Bishopsgate or others MIGHT go to South Lakes, it's doubtful. That would give SL, what, 5 kids?

They are much further away then Fox Mill, Crossfield, or Floris to South Lakes. Plus there really aren't that many of them to make a difference.

I know that it's not what people want to hear or believe, sorry...

truthbetold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Raw numbers are also a concern. Not just
> percentages. Ask any teacher what that means, and
> you'll understand. It takes a great deal more
> time, resources, physical energy to bring along
> underprivileged kids.

Yes, the raw numbers will go up, but so will the raw number of teachers. No one presumes that South Lakes will accept several hundred new students without a commensurate increase in new teachers.

truthbetold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Berdhuis: Your scenario would add more than 800
> kids to South Lakes; not feasible. (Remember that
> almost of all of the Floris area south of Fox Mill
> Road is airport.) McNair would be a second Title I
> school at South Lakes, on top of the others who
> are near that designation but for GT centers.
> Those kids are succeeding at Carson and Westfield
> now. Why would you compromise that? Westfield's
> ESOL and FRM numbers would drop -- adding to the
> current socioeconomic imbalance. Also, Fox Mill is
> one of the closest neighborhoods to South Lakes
> and there is support for a move there (despite
> what a few posters here say). My daughter has a
> dozen 8th-grade friends in that neighborhood and
> they ALL want to go to South Lakes, just as an
> empirical example.


Welcome back, Clarifier. Well, my 8th grade son has friends in this neighborhood, and they don't ALL want to go to SL. Actually, I don't know any kids that do want to. Prior to option #5, some FME parents were looking at the pros and cons, but after FME parents realized that it would be be only Fox Mill and a few Floris kids, the already meager support withered. Those parents, always a small minority, thought that maybe if a horde of Fox Mill/Floris/Crossfield-type kids moved to SL, then that would magically change the school. Sadly, those folks didn't do their math I guess because it was never going to be the case that all those elementary schools would go.

I know we've told you this before, but just to repeat: the reason you know so many people who "support" going to SL is that anyone spending more than 2 minutes with you can tell where you stand on this issue and most people probably don't want to get into it with you. I admire your commitment, but if you blast anyone who feels differently, it tends to alter how people choose to interact with you.

hootribe,
if you were so concerned about your kids education, you wouldn't be living in the south lakes pyramid. instead, you would rather drag everyone else down to your level.

and which is it? is south lakes a great school, or doesn't it provide equal access to education opportunities? from all the blather about ap vs ib, i was almost convinced they were one in the same. apparently not.

you, like truthbetold, are talking out of both sides of your ass.

HooTribe Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Now can you understand that I want full programs
> offered at my kids' future high school? South
> Lakes can not offer more programs without more
> students - that is the way the SB funds the
> schools.

I can agree with that desire. How it gets fulfilled we may not agree on. I would prefer to see alleged problems such as these be more fully documented and, if resolution is called for, that all options for resolving them be explored, before any discussion of redistricting is initiated.

HooTribe Wrote:
> ... Change is always difficult, which is only
> compounded when you feel like you aren't getting
> anything in return.
>
> Now can you understand that I want full programs
> offered at my kids' future high school? South
> Lakes can not offer more programs without more
> students - that is the way the SB funds the
> schools. ...
>
> So, the question is, after looking into your own
> heart: would you have us do nothing? All I am
> asking for is as a resident of Fairfax County,
> equal access to education for my kids. ...

--------
Not only are the students being moved into South Lakes losing their old schools, they are also losing their old educational programs.

So DO something! For the umpteenth time, if you want equal access, if you want the programs offered at AP schools, get rid of IB.

Berdhuis,

I am confused about your position. You are probably the only one of the McNair parents proposing moving to South Lake. One of the main goal of this change is to improve the imbalance of social economics. As of now the raw number of the disadvantaged students is already way too high. 33% of 1500 is 495 students. We need all the extra teachers we can get to devote attention to this already large group. Any more increase would defeat the purpose of this change. Even without a single disadvantaged student added south Lake would still have close to 25% of disadvantaged students after the boundary change.

It is NOT that SL parents don't want McNair but what's best and efficient for all kids to get a good education in Fairfax county.

Just because SB didn't do things right doesn't make it right to have many other families sacrifice their kids and their family lifes. If you support this, you actually indirectly help some SB members' personal gains.

There got to be a better solution if those SB can put kids' education on top of everything.


HooTribe Wrote:

> OK, let's try to be nice ..
>
> I understand you don't want your kids to move.
> Change is always difficult, which is only
> compounded when you feel like you aren't getting
> anything in return.
>
> Now can you understand that I want full programs
> offered at my kids' future high school? South
> Lakes can not offer more programs without more
> students - that is the way the SB funds the
> schools.
>
> I would have been fine with students from Langley
> or Madison. But they won't inlcude them. I would
> have been fine with a great magnet program. But
> they aren't offering it. To simply say "no" to
> any redistrictng is to do nothing about the lack
> of programs at SL. I don't trust the SB to do the
> right thing anymore than you. So why would I
> trust them to do a county wide study that will
> eventually do something for SL?
>
> So, the question is, after looking into your own
> heart: would you have us do nothing? All I am
> asking for is as a resident of Fairfax County,
> equal access to education for my kids. They will
> take it from there, whichever school they go to.

A Baffled Citizen Wrote:
> ... I really like the idea of
> having a new high school built in the Oak Hill
> area. It makes more sense to do this, but will
> that happen?

Baffled, take a look at the just-released CIP, available online from the FCPS website. From page 9: "Middle school capacity will exceed enrollment by 2,014 student spaces in the 2008-2009 school year. This capacity surplus will increase to approximately 2,146 middle school student spaces in the 2012-13 school year. High school capacity will exceed enrollment by approximately 3,107 student spaces in the 2008-09 school year. Projections indicate high school capacity will exceed membership by 4,058 student spaces in the 2012-13 school year."

No, it makes absolutely NO sense to build ANY more high or middle school space, not when FCPS is projected to have the equivalent of two EMPTY middle schools and two EMPTY high schools in September of 2012.

If I Was a South Lakes parent-

What would I think about this issue -

1. If I were happy with the school and the education my children were getting, I don't think I would worry about it one way or the other.

2. If I were unhappy with it, I could see myself lobbying the School Board, supervisors, etc. for more reseources, funding, classes, etc.

However, I do not think that I could ever bring it upon myself to insist that someone from another school attend my school instead. I might hope that others would willingly attend and offer to support them, but would feel I was seriously overstepping to overtly campaign and argue for this to occur. I would take it upon myself to move before I would do that.

Truthbetold,

http://www.bestplaces.net/zip-code/Reston_VA-72019000031.aspx

http://www.bestplaces.net/zip-code/Reston_VA-72019100031.aspx

http://www.bestplaces.net/zip-code/Herndon_VA-72017100031.aspx

I am try to locate the information you asked as far as housing values in Reston VS. 20171 Oak Hill homes. I assumed 20191 and 20190 for Reston, but not sure if there are others that feed to SL currently. I also cannot determine how accurate this web site is, but it does seem to be pretty up to date.

As far as all of the folks moving into Reston, I believe it. There are great jobs, shopping etc in Reston.

What is difficult to determine, is where all of the high school aged kids are going, since it looks like one the kids reach about 14 and up, the percentages drop pretty signifiacntly.

Here is a link to age and populations stats on Reston

http://www.bestplaces.net/city/Reston_VA-55166672011.aspx

People Reston, VA United States

Population 59,774 293,655,400
Pop. Density 3479. 4 80
Pop. Change 5.97% 5.88%
Median Age 39.3 37.6
Households 24,809 108,954,329
Household Size 2.39 2.6
Male Population 49.30% 48.65%
Female Population 50.70% 51.35%
Married Population 58.51% 58.89%
Single Population 41.49% 41.11%
ESTIMATED TOTAL POPULATION BY AGE
Age 0 to 4 6.88% 6.74%
Age 5 to 9 6.82% 6.73%
Age 10 to 14 6.08% 7 .10%
Age 15 to 17 3.75% 4.32%
Age 18 to 20 2.40% 4.37%
Age 21 to 24 3.56% 5.53%
Age 25 to 34 13.74% 13.47%
Age 35 to 44 17.71% 14.86%
Age 45 to 49 8.01% 7.51%
Age 50 to 54 8.26% 6.73%
Age 55 to 59 8.10% 5.66%
Age 60 to 64 5.69% 4.44%
Age 65 to 74 5.49% 6.45%
Age 75 to 84 2.42% 4.41%
Age 85 and over 1.09% 1.70%

Forum Reader Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A Baffled Citizen Wrote:
> > ... I really like the idea of
> > having a new high school built in the Oak Hill
> > area. It makes more sense to do this, but will
> > that happen?
>
> Baffled, take a look at the just-released CIP,
> available online from the FCPS website. From page
> 9: "Middle school capacity will exceed enrollment
> by 2,014 student spaces in the 2008-2009 school
> year. This capacity surplus will increase to
> approximately 2,146 middle school student spaces
> in the 2012-13 school year. High school capacity
> will exceed enrollment by approximately 3,107
> student spaces in the 2008-09 school year.
> Projections indicate high school capacity will
> exceed membership by 4,058 student spaces in the
> 2012-13 school year."
>
> No, it makes absolutely NO sense to build ANY more
> high or middle school space, not when FCPS is
> projected to have the equivalent of two EMPTY
> middle schools and two EMPTY high schools in
> September of 2012.

Those very same projections have Westfield and Chantilly operating under capacity by 2012, do they not? So why does it make sense to push for redistricting kids out of those schools?

FCO Parent: I pretty sure I know who Clarifier is and our kids are friends. So I guess I'm guilty by association.

Mike Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> HooTribe Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > Now can you understand that I want full
> programs
> > offered at my kids' future high school? South
> > Lakes can not offer more programs without more
> > students - that is the way the SB funds the
> > schools.

So you are saying the only way your school gets more programs is by SB funding you guys if you get more students? So you want more "advantaged" kids to your school and let them especially the brightest sit in the classrooms waiting for these new programs to be added, let's say the AP courses (that cannot be done over night, right?). It is like what kind of right is that to yank other students from other communities and them losing their educational needs from other communities and come to your school and wait for these programs to be added? Again, this is ridiculous. Obviously, the SB wasn't bright enough to analyze all the elements of the problems before they decided to do the redistricting study. This is like quoting some other members saying it is a band aid solution and it does not work that way! Why are we still talking about SLHS and nothing more about the overcrowing issues of Chantilly and Westfield as proposed in the boundary study? Just as I suspected it has been SLHS all along. That is why this boundary study is so flawed.
>
> I can agree with that desire. How it gets
> fulfilled we may not agree on. I would prefer to
> see alleged problems such as these be more fully
> documented and, if resolution is called for, that
> all options for resolving them be explored, before
> any discussion of redistricting is initiated.

Floris Parent: One probable reason families move out is because once you get a teenager, you don't have any more room for their enormous shoes all over the townhouse. So you look for a SFH -- and there are precious few in Reston, especially affordable ones. So you have to move out -- in fact, a lot of those folks are moving to Loudoun. And townhomes and the smaller homes in Reston are worth a lot, so moving out is a good cash-in on an investment. Many of my friends did this when they wanted to "move up" in house size. Housing was limited in Reston, and it was too expensive anyway.

Because that's the only excuse SB can use to fill up SLHS very quickly this year without touch Langley. Then they will have excuse next year to use taxpayer's money to expand Langley because it's over capacity.

These are all political games. We are all victims.

navy area parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Those very same projections have Westfield and
> Chantilly operating under capacity by 2012, do
> they not? So why does it make sense to push for
> redistricting kids out of those schools?

It's funny how people think all this is a big conspiracy by SLHS in cahoots with the school board. SLHS families must be pretty darn smart and cunning, don't you think? "The hidden smarts behind the awful stats." Maybe if everyone else had lived up to those amazing SAT scores they post, the school board would have been in cahoots with those who never want to see a boundary study again in their entire taxpayer lives.

fox mill/carson/oakton parent wrote:
----------------------------------------

"Prior to option #5, some FME parents were looking at the pros and cons, but after FME parents realized that it would be be only Fox Mill and a few Floris kids, the already meager support withered. Those parents, always a small minority, thought that maybe if a horde of Fox Mill/Floris/Crossfield-type kids moved to SL, then that would magically change the school."


I don't know of anyone in FME who realistically ever expected Crossfield to be included in any SL redistricting, it's just too big a school. Most I know expected fox mill & floris to be included, the biggest shock coming from those scenarios that didn't have both but one of them included w/McNair. The most resistance I've heard in FME comes from parents with kids in middle or high school, I can't say I'd feel any different if I was in that group.

Regarding housing prices .... check Stratton Woods vs. Folkstone, or Polo Fields vs. Franklin Farm. Similar housing, dissimilar pricing. We've been looking to buy a SFH for a while now and anything in South Lakes pyramid is at least $50K and in some cases up to $100K less than its counterpart in Oakton or Chantilly. At the very height of the bubble, Stratton Woods was well under $600K for a remodeled 4 bedroom house with a half-acre yard. More like $500-550K. Good luck finding that anywhere else back in 2005.

Floris: Interesting numbers. One particular one is the new housing built. Reston new housing 1999-2005 is significantly lower than the 20171 zip. It's nearly built-out. The median house price isn't much help because it doesn't use comparables and 20171 has a bunch of enormous new houses that Reston never had.

Regarding population of 14 yo -- the 8th-grade class of '08 is the "bubble" class of the whole county, and is the highest population of all classes, county-wide. That might explain the drop in age as well -- it is county-wide (and I think nationwide -- the progeny of the baby boomers).

truthbetold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Another thing: If South Lakes had 1% FRM and 0%
> ESOL, and less than 10% blacks or hispanics, I bet
> a million bucks quite a few anti-South Lakers
> would change their tunes. Just look at the
> Franklin Farm "talking points" and a survey done
> this summer where they found unequivocally that
> people would be willing to go to Chantilly or
> Westfield from Oakton, but not South Lakes. So
> "moving" students from one high school to another
> was not even a concern when the school in question
> was white and privileged. And yes, I'm calling
> some of you racist. Your words speak for
> themselves.


Argh, seriously, you can't think of another reason why people MIGHT be more willing to have their kids go to Chantilly/Westfield/Oakton? The only answer is racism? What about AP? What about the fact that those schools seem to be healthier, thriving? Also, a full look at the talking points you refer to makes it clear that the preference is not to switch schools. Maybe it's racist to assume that if SL had fewer black or Hispanic kids, we'd all be in hurry to get there.

I really think you alienate more people than you "educate." Even your name is arrogant.

A Baffled Citizen Wrote:
Why are
> we still talking about SLHS and nothing more about
> the overcrowing issues of Chantilly and Westfield
> as proposed in the boundary study? Just as I
> suspected it has been SLHS all along


This was admitted during the televised portion of the Dec 19 meeting.

Navy: Well, we look forward to having you in Reston, then. You can afford to live in a fabulous community with a terrific school, comparable houses (really?), and half acres. See you next year.

Reston Parent,

I came up with Option #7, which includes McNair and most of Floris being moved to South Lakes, and Oak Hill moving from Chantilly to Westfield as a good faith effort to find another solution according to the SB's criteria. Just trying to be creative and constructive given the current constraints. Additionally, and astutely, some of the participants of this forum have been asking us to provide another scenario to replace Option #5, as many were complaining about it.

Under any option, South Lakes will wind up accepting some poor children. Obviously this will get additional attention, the degree to which will be dictated by how many new, poor children. But I pose the question - will all of the new, poor children be academically challenged? I say no. I know that many will be academically superior or normal to those already attending.

I think it is inadequate to brush McNair with such a broad stroke, without first exploring the projected details of how accepting McNair would affect South Lakes. Doesn't the public deserve a more complete answer to that question?


Reston Parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Berdhuis,
>
> I am confused about your position. You are
> probably the only one of the McNair parents
> proposing moving to South Lake. One of the main
> goal of this change is to improve the imbalance of
> social economics. As of now the raw number of the
> disadvantaged students is already way too high.
> 33% of 1500 is 495 students. We need all the extra
> teachers we can get to devote attention to this
> already large group. Any more increase would
> defeat the purpose of this change. Even without a
> single disadvantaged student added south Lake
> would still have close to 25% of disadvantaged
> students after the boundary change.
>
> It is NOT that SL parents don't want McNair but
> what's best and efficient for all kids to get a
> good education in Fairfax county.

Reston Parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Berdhuis,
>
> I am confused about your position. You are
> probably the only one of the McNair parents
> proposing moving to South Lake. One of the main
> goal of this change is to improve the imbalance of
> social economics. As of now the raw number of the
> disadvantaged students is already way too high.
> 33% of 1500 is 495 students. We need all the extra
> teachers we can get to devote attention to this
> already large group. Any more increase would
> defeat the purpose of this change. Even without a
> single disadvantaged student added south Lake
> would still have close to 25% of disadvantaged
> students after the boundary change.
>
> It is NOT that SL parents don't want McNair but
> what's best and efficient for all kids to get a
> good education in Fairfax county.



I do believe that many moons ago, Thomas More had many McNair friends who had students interested in attending South Lakes. So I don't think that Berdhius is really alone.

These McNair friends even had petitions circulating at the bus stop. I guess all that stopped when they found out they weren't advantaged enough to meet the SL criteria.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/2008 05:01PM by Cricket.

"seem to be healthier, thriving?" Exactly. "Seem to be."

So what your saying Truthbetold is that all of your "smart" friends cashed in the chips, and moved out of Reston? I can understand this, but why should those of us who have chosen to stay in this high cost area, be asked to change our lives and the lives of our children in order to support a HS that we have no associations with?

I will also try to dig up stats on the total number of SF homes vs. TH/Condo. It seems to me that the drop in school student body population is another example of poor planning by the SB and the Board of Supervisors. If the area in which a public shcool is located, is not viable due to lack of families to support it, the perhaps it is something that should be looked at for another use. Everyone keeps down playing the impact of future residential housing in Reston (all high density, no kids etc), so if seems that South Lakes is destined to be an under populated school in the future.

If there are not enough SF homes in Reston now for families with HS aged children, and there will be no future housing for families with HS aged children, and the existing population of families with HS aged children are leaving for larger or lower cost homes, it seems like utilizing our $60,000,000 building for another use may be a better option. Perhaps a magnet school, admin building etc.

truthbetold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Navy: Well, we look forward to having you in
> Reston, then. You can afford to live in a fabulous
> community with a terrific school, comparable
> houses (really?), and half acres. See you next
> year.

Actually, this whole mess has really encouraged us to give Loudoun a closer look.

Berdhuis: I do appreciate the good-faith effort to find an alternative. A Floris-McNair scenario was definitely considered by South Lakes supporters. So was an Aldrin-Crossfield(portion), and an Aldrin-Armstrong, and a Fox Mill-Crossfield(portion), etc. Many, many hours were spent by many people poring over many numbers, with independent research, and a lot of info obtained from FCPS sites. There were too many dominoes and one or another criteria (of the first four, then of the eight) were not met or inadequately met. This group cared about what happened to ALL schools, otherwise they probably would have pushed hard for something that included Aldrin, for example. That option would have really impacted Herndon and would have created a big domino effect on Westfield and Chantilly. It was going for what made sense and what the school administration could support.

I agree with SLV that there is no trusting this board or any board to do what's right by South Lakes in the future, so we have to proceed with what we have now. The scenario presented is excellent, but not ideal. It moves kids who aren't even in high school yet and will, in fact, remain with their neighborhood friends through the whole process. The disruption is far less than if a new school was built and kids had to populate it immediately, as happened with Westfield. We are talking about kids who are going to a "different" school next year anyway, no matter how you slice it.