Let's put it straight and simple - all urinals need dividers. 

This problem is not just limited to McLean High School, however, but a vast majority of schools that FCPS has been reluctant to put any significant investment have had a poor history of bathroom conditions, especially those of boy's bathrooms, irregardless of age.

A overwhelming amount of our high school school's bathrooms have no dividers, and if they do, they usually have the bare minimum of one mere divider ensuring that those in the school hallways cannot see those using the urinals. 

No one ever uses these urinals, usually resorting to using either the stalls, or if forced to, the urinals on the very ends of the subsections of urinals, relying on solely the wall or the aforementioned sole divider to ensure their privacy. NO ONE EVER TOUCHES THE MIDDLE URINALS. Thus, the lack of urinal dividers creates an inefficiency that creates lines in the boys bathrooms where students would rather wait in line then potentially expose themselves to classmates and fellow students. 

Having that a majority of students urinate standing up into toilets, splash damage, alongside poor aim, results in a public health hazard with regards to the floor affected and the toilet seat for anyone potentially trying to relieve themselves. Consequently, our janitors, whom are so dearly beloved by our students, teachers, and staff are forced to clean up the disgusting mess left behind. 

FCPS seems to even understand the importance of bathroom health and privacy, but selectively choose to ignore the issue that plagues  For instance, FCPS has enforced a policy that requires all women's bathrooms have tampons, and have specially made bathrooms for staff that are segregated from student bathrooms specifically for hygienic and privacy purposes. In fact, middle schools (to my knowledge, ex: Longfellow Middle School,) all have dividers between urinals. 

Why should we value middle schooler's privacy over those of high schoolers? Is it because their schools were renovated later because of our "renovation lottery" policy?