A big thank you to all who attended the community meetings last night. Many opinions were expressed. Your voices were heard - exactly what we have been advocating.
For those who are planning to attend the community meetings at Lake Braddock SS and Falls Church HS on Monday, May 23 from 7-9 p.m., we wish to reiterate that:
1. Although Options 2 and 3 both remove sufficient children from Annandale HS to relieve the overcrowding, we prefer Option 2 because it is easier to implement administratively and does a better job of achieving regional balance.
2. We do not support Options 1 or 4. Option 1 does not move enough children from Annandale HS to relieve the overcrowding, even assuming the county's new capacity number of 2,350 for Annandale HS. If Option 1 is implemented, this area will be revisiting this issue again (for what will be the third time in 10 years). Option 4 does not allow FCPS the flexibility it needs to make boundary adjustments in the long term, will not relieve the overcrowding at AHS in the long term, and is disruptive to all of the children in the pyramid, but especially those at Wakefield Forest ES.
We will post detailed analysis of these options in the coming days.
As far as I'm concerned, it would appear that VOICE does not speak the same language as the rest of the Annandale community! It appears that you are the VOICE of a few parents in the Wakefield Forest neighborhood who do not currently have children at Annandale and/or have children at Woodson.
ReplyDeleteA close examination of the options set forth and a few comments to consider if one was truely speaking for the Annandale community might be in order. Option 3 actually BEST balances the numbers at the high school and middle school level and eliminates the split feeder that is Wakefield Forest while at the same time reduces the need for an addition at Frost (I'm guessing that those who blog here would anticipate a modular or trailers at Frost and that you are OK with that). Additionally, one should consider the following. All capacity numbers considered in the 3 boundary proposals assume 1/2 of the modular stays put and none even get close to the 2150 capacity of the school. Unless we as a community want to go through this time and again, I believe it best that we at least give strong consideration to the proposal which lessens the overcrowding the most, i.e. option 3.
Go ahead and rant all you want, but know this, the school board appears not to give consideration to those that believe that they have entitlement (look at Clifton Elementary). It is a public school system and the school board should make good on whatever solution is best for the whole and not what is best for a select few who feel entitled.
I agree with Keep the Atom Together -- option 3 is the best option for the REGION (as in getting the overcrowding situation best addressed for the LONG TERM) and for eliminating the split feeder at Wakefield Forest AND not increasing the size at Frost overwhelmingly.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your comment. We agree with you that Option 3 removes the most children from AHS. Additionally, we agree that the capacity numbers being used by Facilities staff include a 6-8 room modular. As recently as April 2011, the School Board was informed by Facilities staff that the capacity of Annandale HS was 2,178 (not 2,150 as noted by the commenter). In the data sheets supporting the boundary options, AHS program capacity was increased to 2,350, primarily due to keeping 6-8 rooms of the new modular building.
ReplyDeleteWe believe that Option 2 is preferable to Option 3 because Option 2 does a better job of balancing overcrowding in the region. If you examine the projected program capacity utilization percentages for the 2016-2017 school year in both Option 2 and Option 3, you will see that Option 2 spreads the capacity relatively evenly over the region, such that each high school ranges from 88.5% capacity (Edison HS) to 105.3% (Stuart HS), while Option 3 empties Woodson HS to 83% program capacity while keeping the remainder of local high schools around the 95-100% range. The Stuart HS program capacity utilization percentage under Option 2 is high (due to moving most of Parklawn ES from Poe/Annandale to Glasgow/Stuart). It is possible that some capacity at Falls Church HS could be used to alleviate that percentage. At a minimum, this could be raised with Facilities staff.
Based upon your comments, it appears that you do not believe that Options 1 and 4 are viable alternatives to AHS because they do not remove enough students (in that it appears that you believe that Option 3 is the clear alternative in that it removes the most students). We agree with you. Neither Option 1 nor Option 4 will relieve the overcrowding in the long-term. Even if the 2,350 capacity number is accepted, Annandale HS will be overcrowded in the 2012-2013 school year if the enrollment projections are off by 14 students, and will definitely be overcrowded by the 2016-2017 school year, with a 102.2% program capacity utilization percentage.
The most important issue is that Annandale HS is overcrowded, and we favor long-term solutions to solving that overcrowding. We agree with the commenter's last sentence: "It is a public school system and the school board should make good on whatever solution is best for the whole and not what is best for a select few who feel entitled." Let's work together to resolve the overcrowding.
VOICE,
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure where you get the impression that option 4 is not viable. To the contrary, the reality is option 4 is the ONLY option which actually reduces the number of students in the Annandale attendance area below 2178. Additionally, by reconfiguring the school arrangement (eliminating 9th grade at Annandale), I strongly suspect that future enrollment in the attendance area would decrease (as most who could afford it would NOT want to feed their children into such a system where the schools are 6-7, 8-9 and then 10-12). In other words, I don't advocate option 4, HOWEVER IT IS THE ONLY OPTION WHICH ACTUALLY REDUCES THE ATTENDANCE AT ANNANDALE HIGH TO A LEVEL BELOW THE CAPACITY WITHOUT THE MODULAR IN PLAY AT ALL.
I note that you make mention of reducing the attendance at Woodson to a level of enrollment of 83%. What is the enrollment at Lake Braddock if we do nothing? The reality is that it is lower than this! It is clear that students currently enrolled at Annandale need to be moved to Lake Braddock. The resulting number at Woodson is immaterial at this time, what is important is reductions at Annandale. I suspect that you would be satisfied if the split feeder remains at Wakefield Forest, but if those currently attending Poe/Annandale be moved to Lake Braddock. That would be fine with me, however it does not satisfy one of facilities objectives in eliminating split feeders. Looking at maps can be tiring, however, I would suggest that more than just moving out Bren Mar Park, Parklawn, and Wakefield Forest needs to be done to reduce the attendance area. I think that North Springfield should probably also be pulled out to Lake Braddock.
That said, I would additionally note that the addition to be built at Frost as a result of implementation of option 2, while a result of programming capacity, would nonetheless be needed, unless of course we want to move the AAP center out of Frost (say to Holmes or Lake Braddock). Would you be happy with that instead of building out Frost? I doubt it. I suggest you consider the consequences of demanding a build put of Frost to maintain kids at Woodson. Additionally, between Stuart and Falls Church, I highly suspect that in order to balance this out (assuming option 2 is implemented) that some of Stuart would be shifted to Falls Church and some of Falls Church would be shifted to Woodson. Of course if capacity at Woodson were to increase, I'm certain that they would take Woodson families and send them to Falls Church.
The sad part is that the only option which reduces Annandale to an acceptable level where another study won't have to be done in a few years is option 4. It would be nice if they gave us a better option.
I also lament that the inequity which exists in cluster 3 (the only cluster in the county which has K-5 and not K-6) and that it is NOT being fixed. The only plan which brings us closer to this is option 3. Think about it if you will?
Dear Keep the Atom Together,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your comment. We are opposed to Option 4 for a number of reasons:
(1) Based upon the numbers that Facilities staff has provided, if Option 4 is implemented, by the 2016-2017 school year Holmes MS will be at 133.2% capacity, Poe MS will be at 105.6% capacity, and AHS will be at 76.8% capacity. Just as we are opposed to reducing Woodson HS to 83% capacity under Option 3, we are opposed to reducing AHS to 76.8% capacity. Having too little capacity is not good for any school. As you said, AHS is overcrowded, but underutilization is just as dangerous. The key is to get the appropriate number of students moved out of AHS to reduce the overcrowding while still leaving a robust school.
(2) Option 4 would leave this area's schools in a different format than the rest of FCPS. If Option 4 was implemented, it would be difficult to use this area in other boundary issues, either to relieve additional overcrowding at AHS or to help out other area schools. FCPS is already struggling with this area being structured K-5 while the rest of the county is K-6 in this boundary study. It will be much worse in the future if this area is that different from the rest of the county.
(3) Option 4 is expensive. Based on the latest numbers from Facilities, Option 4 is estimated to cost $3.5 million, and that does not include an addition to Luther Jackson MS, which Facilities notes would be necessary to build if Option 4 is implemented, nor does it include transportation costs. It is true that Facilities has not provided cost estimates of the other options, and that other options may end up costing as much. We just do not know at this time.
(4) Option 4 would require students from WFES to attend four schools in five years: (a) 6th grade at WFES; (b) 7th grade at Holmes MS; (c) 8-9 grades at Poe MS; and (d) 10-12 grades at AHS. This is very disruptive to children at an already difficult time in life.
If no children are sent to Lake Braddock SS during this boundary study, by the 2016-2017 school year, Lake Braddock MS is projected to be at 88.5% capacity, and Lake Braddock HS is projected to be at 89.7% capacity. The enrollment at Lake Braddock SS will not be lower than the projected 83% capacity at Woodson HS if the entire WFES is moved, if a portion of WFES is moved, or if none of WFES is moved. Also, the enrollment at Lake Braddock SS is projected to increase over the next five years, while the enrollments at Frost MS and Woodson HS are projected to decrease.
The ad hoc committee did suggest moving a portion of North Springfield ES to Lake Braddock SS. In the 2012-2013 school year, Lake Braddock HS is projected to have 348 available seats. That number declines to 302 seats by the 2016-2017 school year. Lake Braddock HS does not have enough capacity to accomodate all of North Springfield ES (program capacity of 749; projected enrollment of 579 in 2012-2013). It could accomodate a portion of North Springfield ES, but that would create a split feeder. Facilities staff, however, did not adopt this proposal in the proposed boundary options.
Continued...
ReplyDeletePlans to add an addition to Frost MS have already been approved by FCPS as Frost MS, in its current configuration, does not have sufficient capacity to fill its high school. According to Facilities staff, the renovation will take place in 6-7 years. This will provide long-term capacity. Facilities also plans to add a modular or mobile classrooms to Frost MS next year, which will provide short-term capacity. In this manner, Frost MS will have capacity to fill its high school, and available space in the county can be used to house students.
Option 4 is a short-term move that reshuffles the student populations but does not actually relieve the overcrowding. Option 1 does not move enough students to relieve the overcrowding - once again, a short-term move. Option 3 is a short-term move in that it uses temporary availability of space to relieve overcrowding, but that space will not be available in the long run, plus it does not balance regional enrollment. The one option that provides long-term relief to the area's schools and balances overall student enrollment is Option 2.