Drew Model Elementary: proposed boundaries (s/o from APS/SA thread specific to Drew)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drew you can’t have it both ways. Either it’s your school or not. How is Montessori’s PTA shameful? Drew needs it’s own PTA. Drew needs to do some of the hard work. It’s starting to sound like a victim .

Not Drew, but if it used to be one common PTA, I can see hoping for a transition year where they start moving in their own directions but don't completely divorce from each other yet. That's effectively what happened when Discovery opened. Parents who knew they'd be going there started a Discovery PTA the year before it opened, but most of them who had been involved in the Nottingham PTA previously stayed involved in the Nottingham PTA as well that year, especially where an abrupt departure would have left a gap (e.g., a committee without a chair).

This. There was no need to rush to establish an independent PTA before boundaries for Drew were even drawn. "Divorcing" early did not help bridge neighborhood program Drew to a school-wide neighborhood Drew with the incoming communities from other schools. It did not give Drew PTA a chance to draw volunteers and leadership from the new parents who would be coming, which would help get those families invested in Drew as their new school and start building community from the beginning. Because obviously community needs to be built there since noone is coming willingly.

That's a really good point about Drew not even having its new boundaries yet for the transition. They basically have to fill a full school's worth of PTA positions with only half a school, is it any shock they're struggling to do that?

Not a Drew montessori parent. But it's pretty clear to me that some individual on here has an axe to grind with them, whether it's claiming they have a 10 percent farms rate (which was easily refuted in the other thread) or that they "abandoned" the graded program. As far as I can tell, it's just rumor and mudslinging and probably mostly BS. The bigger problem is that very poor schools have a very hard time fielding a PTA. Ask someone at Randolph. They have a PTA and my guess it is 4 people doing everything with no help at all.

Fortunately, I believe Drew did get all of its PTA leadership positions filled - disputing many peoples' claims that low-income parents don't get involved. But it isn't unusual at other schools for the same handful of people to be doing everything, too.

It's not just one person grinding the axe. I'm one of the commenters regarding the "PTA abandonment" issue (there was a second person, too). But it was not me asserting anything about the Montessori FRL stats. I don't know why you think it's just rumor and mudslinging.

Are you a parent in the graded program? Do you actually know or is this just what you've heard? If the answers are no and yes, well, that's why someone suggested this tale is probably a lot of bs and rumor.

I "know" and have spoken with officers of each PTA. It is indeed possible to "no," not be a parent in the graded program and "yes," actually know. It's even possible to be "no," not a parent in the Montessori program and "yes," actually know. And I did say "I believe" because initially not all the PTA officer positions were filled; but I since heard in a meeting (sorry, don't recall the date, time, and location) that someone has filled the remaining position since the original meeting when the new president was elected. I even "actually know" that there were two candidates vying for the President position.

Potential Drew parent here. Since you're in the know, I have a few questions that maybe you know the answers to.

Did the PTA for the entire school, before it split, have any graded program volunteers or officers? Or was the whole thing basically the montessori parents? if the latter, any sense of why that was?

Does either PTA have a web presence? The site linked to from the Drew aps page is possibly the worst I have seen, even by c. 1998 geocities standards.

There is a Drew Parents FB page. It is called "Drew Parent Community" you should be able to search for it. It is not that active, but if you want to join and invite other parents who go to Drew or who are interested in Drew that would be great.

[Anonymous]

https://www.arlnow.com/2018/10/03/new-elementary-school-boundaries-advancing-prompting-some-concerns-at-drew/

Here we have a parent who doesn’t even send her kids to the Drew neighborhood program, but to the Montessori program, drumming up hysteria on its behalf. Hypocrite much? Practice what you preach and send your kid to the neighborhood program and maybe I will too.

[Anonymous]

https://www.arlnow.com/2018/10/03/new-elementary-s...ompting-some-concerns-at-drew/

From the article: APS planner Robert Ruiz isn’t sure that such a comparison is wholly appropriate, however. The figures APS staff are using in the boundary process represent the possible universe of students who are eligible to attend Drew by dint of living within its boundaries, but they could end up heading elsewhere. Meanwhile, the 51 percent figure Turner is pointing to is indicative of the students who actually attend Drew in practice, so it’s no guarantee that the change will be as drastic as the one Turner describes.


Of course they don't mention that two of the options for school choice are being shut down (no shared zone with Hoffman-Boston next year) or access reduced (no preferential admission to Montessori for Nauck.) Now the options are lottery for choice schools, with the same chances as everyone else, or private for those that can afford it. There will be a much higher percentage of boundary students attending Drew next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/10/03/new-elementary-s...ompting-some-concerns-at-drew/

From the article: APS planner Robert Ruiz isn’t sure that such a comparison is wholly appropriate, however. The figures APS staff are using in the boundary process represent the possible universe of students who are eligible to attend Drew by dint of living within its boundaries, but they could end up heading elsewhere. Meanwhile, the 51 percent figure Turner is pointing to is indicative of the students who actually attend Drew in practice, so it’s no guarantee that the change will be as drastic as the one Turner describes.


Of course they don't mention that two of the options for school choice are being shut down (no shared zone with Hoffman-Boston next year) or access reduced (no preferential admission to Montessori for Nauck.) Now the options are lottery for choice schools, with the same chances as everyone else, or private for those that can afford it. There will be a much higher percentage of boundary students attending Drew next year.

I'm not sure what your point is but the APS analysis is based on resident students. The figures published last Wednesday do not reflect Nauck residents who attend option schools, but it does include Nauck residents who currently attend Hoffman Boston; H-B is not an option school. And even with those students, the resident student farms rate is 83%. There will be no wave of MC students coming over from H-B to lower the Drew's FARMs rate. They've already been accounted for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/10/03/new-elementary-school-boundaries-advancing-prompting-some-concerns-at-drew/

Here we have a parent who doesn’t even send her kids to the Drew neighborhood program, but to the Montessori program, drumming up hysteria on its behalf. Hypocrite much? Practice what you preach and send your kid to the neighborhood program and maybe I will too.

Read again. She has two in montessori and a third kid who is preschool aged. Montessori's "lottery" is one in name only, no one but the preschool montessori kids who are guaranteed admission anyway have been admitted to Drew for the last two years. It's a lottery for like, two or three empty seats a year, if that. She's a likely Drew graded parent and l has every right to advocate for the school as such, and as a resident. No one questions the Nauck Civic associations right to speak on school matters and the most active members' children are all adults now. Crawl back to where you came from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/10/03/new-elementary-school-boundaries-advancing-prompting-some-concerns-at-drew/

Here we have a parent who doesn’t even send her kids to the Drew neighborhood program, but to the Montessori program, drumming up hysteria on its behalf. Hypocrite much? Practice what you preach and send your kid to the neighborhood program and maybe I will too.

It does seem to be really difficult for people like you to believe that someone would advocate for the benefit of someone else. People just can't win with folks like you - if they advocate for their own school, they're narcissistic; if they advocate for what's good and right for another school, they're hypocrites. Do you have any direct connection to any part of Drew? If not, why are you even bothering to read this thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[guardian]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Focusing on the PUs with no walkers, I think you take the Abingdon-Kenmore units and send them to Barcroft or Randolph, put more of eastern Barcroft to Fleet, and put the south-of-pike Fleet units to Drew. It's not great for Barcroft but my math suggests doing it that way would have both Barcroft and Drew in the 60s for fr/l rate, vs. in the 40s for Barcroft and over 80 for Drew under the current proposal.

I don't think that works. I only see 1 Eastern Barcroft planning unit that is not in the walkzone (37050) It has about 50 kids- 18 of which are FARMS.
So under that theory Barcroft could pick up about 1/3 of Columbia Heights. In terms of putting Columbia Heights at Randolph- randolph currently only has 2 non walkking PU's. 38050 and 38100. Its a total of about 33 kids- of which 31 are FARMS? (I think there is a DATA problem with 38050 b/c it reflects a higher number of FARMS students than total students). Either way if you figure out a way to move out those two units from Randoph- which would probably mean sending them to Drew, you still don't have any seats for Columbia Heights even split between Randolph and Barcroft.
Drew is getting Columbia Heights b/c of the walkzone issue. You are going to have to move at least one PU that is in a walkzone in order to send Columbia Heights anywhere other than Drew.

Are you guys confusing Columbia Heights and Columbia Forest? Unless I’m reading the proposed map incorrectly, Columbia Heights is staying Henry/Fleet and not going to Drew.

The "Columbia" with homes in the $800-900k range gets its way, and goes to Fleet. The "other Columbia" with much lower-income students gets bused two miles away - even though there are THREE other elementary schools closer to their homes. And they say there's no gerrymandering... What APS is doing here is just shameful

.

What 3 schools?

Since I don't see that anyone answered your question: Carlin Springs, Barcroft, and Randolph.

Drew is 1.3 miles away, Barcroft is 1.2 and CS is 1.8
And Randolph can’t handle buses so unless someone can figure that part out it’s a non issue.
I get that the boundaries are hard and nobody wants to go to Drew but it’s not like people are being busses 7 miles away

Drew is actually 2.3 miles from the corner of Columbia pike and Frederick across from Columbia Mill.

Abingdon, Randolph, and Barcroft are all a full mile closer to the Columbia Forest island in the staff map.

The south of the pike Henry zones are 1.1 miles from Drew, and adjacent to its current zone. Columbia Forest is a mile farther away and is an island. Not even debatable. Just use google. It's just plain, naked favoritism.

Not really Abingdon still has the issue of being super crowded so they have to split it up somehow. Remember that’s why this is all happening to begin with.

You keep saying that but it doesn't make it true. Abingdon just got an addition. The purpose of the boundary process is largely to fill Drew. Pretty sure this is just a Henry parent diversion tactic. Abingdon was at 90 percent capacity in 2016. It has 725 seats. Last fall it had 668.

In addition to the oft-cited Henry PUs south of the Pike, why not send the Claremont neighborhood to Drew? It's resident school facility is an option program to which Claremont residents are no longer guaranteed; it's a straight shot up Walter Reed to where Drew is; it's not really that walkable to Abingdon and is separated from Fairlington by Walter Reed anyway; and even if it isn't the wealthiest neighborhood in the County it is single-family homes owned by a number of MC folks who specifically bought in the neighborhood to get the former guaranteed admission to immersion; it reduces enrollment at Abingdon; it keeps the Columbia Forest PUs from being an island.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/10/03/new-elementary-school-boundaries-advancing-prompting-some-concerns-at-drew/

Here we have a parent who doesn’t even send her kids to the Drew neighborhood program, but to the Montessori program, drumming up hysteria on its behalf. Hypocrite much? Practice what you preach and send your kid to the neighborhood program and maybe I will too.

It does seem to be really difficult for people like you to believe that someone would advocate for the benefit of someone else. People just can't win with folks like you - if they advocate for their own school, they're narcissistic; if they advocate for what's good and right for another school, they're hypocrites. Do you have any direct connection to any part of Drew? If not, why are you even bothering to read this thread?

Not other than being in the group of much-maligned PUs everyone thinks should go to Drew. Frankly, I’ve stopped caring because we plan to move anyway. However, it’s ridiculous that this particular parent chose not to attend the graded program (and probably has her other kid on the way to avoid it) but yet other people and the county are the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/10/03/new-elementary-school-boundaries-advancing-prompting-some-concerns-at-drew/

Here we have a parent who doesn’t even send her kids to the Drew neighborhood program, but to the Montessori program, drumming up hysteria on its behalf. Hypocrite much? Practice what you preach and send your kid to the neighborhood program and maybe I will too.

It does seem to be really difficult for people like you to believe that someone would advocate for the benefit of someone else. People just can't win with folks like you - if they advocate for their own school, they're narcissistic; if they advocate for what's good and right for another school, they're hypocrites. Do you have any direct connection to any part of Drew? If not, why are you even bothering to read this thread?

Not other than being in the group of much-maligned PUs everyone thinks should go to Drew. Frankly, I’ve stopped caring because we plan to move anyway. However, it’s ridiculous that this particular parent chose not to attend the graded program (and probably has her other kid on the way to avoid it) but yet other people and the county are the problem.

I think what makes this a hard topic is the history. No one was here 60, 70 years ago when racial covenants were in place , brown v board was still in the offing. But that history is with us, it shapes the housing market more strongly than any other factor and the schools by extension. No, the Henry parents are not racist at all. I don't think they are. Im not one of them. But I think that when we argue for "neighborhood schools," for proximity, for things that seem not at all racist, we have to acknowledge that our entire county was built out during a time of open racism, exclusion and segregation and it had lasting effects on things like school geography. It's everyone's choice what role they want to play in that ongoing narrative but just because we all moved here from somewhere else doesn't mean we've started with a blank slate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/10/03/new-elementary-school-boundaries-advancing-prompting-some-concerns-at-drew/

Here we have a parent who doesn’t even send her kids to the Drew neighborhood program, but to the Montessori program, drumming up hysteria on its behalf. Hypocrite much? Practice what you preach and send your kid to the neighborhood program and maybe I will too.

It does seem to be really difficult for people like you to believe that someone would advocate for the benefit of someone else. People just can't win with folks like you - if they advocate for their own school, they're narcissistic; if they advocate for what's good and right for another school, they're hypocrites. Do you have any direct connection to any part of Drew? If not, why are you even bothering to read this thread?

Not other than being in the group of much-maligned PUs everyone thinks should go to Drew. Frankly, I’ve stopped caring because we plan to move anyway. However, it’s ridiculous that this particular parent chose not to attend the graded program (and probably has her other kid on the way to avoid it) but yet other people and the county are the problem.

I think what makes this a hard topic is the history. No one was here 60, 70 years ago when racial covenants were in place , brown v board was still in the offing. But that history is with us, it shapes the housing market more strongly than any other factor and the schools by extension. No, the Henry parents are not racist at all. I don't think they are. Im not one of them. But I think that when we argue for "neighborhood schools," for proximity, for things that seem not at all racist, we have to acknowledge that our entire county was built out during a time of open racism, exclusion and segregation and it had lasting effects on things like school geography. It's everyone's choice what role they want to play in that ongoing narrative but just because we all moved here from somewhere else doesn't mean we've started with a blank slate.

Not any of the PPs but well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[guardian]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Drew is 1.3 miles away, Barcroft is 1.2 and CS is 1.8
And Randolph can’t handle buses so unless someone can figure that part out it’s a non issue.
I get that the boundaries are hard and nobody wants to go to Drew but it’s not like people are being busses 7 miles away

Drew is actually 2.3 miles from the corner of Columbia pike and Frederick across from Columbia Mill.

Abingdon, Randolph, and Barcroft are all a full mile closer to the Columbia Forest island in the staff map.

The south of the pike Henry zones are 1.1 miles from Drew, and adjacent to its current zone. Columbia Forest is a mile farther away and is an island. Not even debatable. Just use google. It's just plain, naked favoritism.

Not really Abingdon still has the issue of being super crowded so they have to split it up somehow. Remember that’s why this is all happening to begin with.

You keep saying that but it doesn't make it true. Abingdon just got an addition. The purpose of the boundary process is largely to fill Drew. Pretty sure this is just a Henry parent diversion tactic. Abingdon was at 90 percent capacity in 2016. It has 725 seats. Last fall it had 668.

In addition to the oft-cited Henry PUs south of the Pike, why not send the Claremont neighborhood to Drew? It's resident school facility is an option program to which Claremont residents are no longer guaranteed; it's a straight shot up Walter Reed to where Drew is; it's not really that walkable to Abingdon and is separated from Fairlington by Walter Reed anyway; and even if it isn't the wealthiest neighborhood in the County it is single-family homes owned by a number of MC folks who specifically bought in the neighborhood to get the former guaranteed admission to immersion; it reduces enrollment at Abingdon; it keeps the Columbia Forest PUs from being an island.

I had this thought last night too, looking at the data. I don't think you can take the whole neighborhood because it would create an island out of Columbia Forest (since there isn't room for it all to go to Barcroft) but maybe another unit or so would work. I don't have a sense of whether that would split up the neighborhood or create other issues though. It also helps with alignment since those units are Jefferson and would add to the otherwise small # of proposed Drew-Jefferson kids.

[Anonymous]

Just a friendly reminder to all concerned.... repeat after me (this time, with feeling!)

Abingdon is not overcrowded.... Abingdon is not overcrowded....

Abingdon is not even at capacity! Abingdon is not even at capacity!

It's 100% true, per Abingdon's rock star team.... let's all take a deep breath and question this notion that we need to shed kids from Abingdon this year....

now back to the refrain.... Abingdon is not overcrowded.... it's not even at capacity!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just a friendly reminder to all concerned.... repeat after me (this time, with feeling!)

Abingdon is not overcrowded.... Abingdon is not overcrowded....

Abingdon is not even at capacity! Abingdon is not even at capacity!

It's 100% true, per Abingdon's rock star team.... let's all take a deep breath and question this notion that we need to shed kids from Abingdon this year....

now back to the refrain.... Abingdon is not overcrowded.... it's not even at capacity!

Abingdon is about to be crushed by Columbia Hills. And they can't send that PU to Carlin Springs or Barcroft either, because crowding and higher poverty. So who gets moved out and to where? I think Columbia Forest should go to Barcroft, Alcova to Fleet, Columbia Heights to Drew.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think what makes this a hard topic is the history. No one was here 60, 70 years ago when racial covenants were in place , brown v board was still in the offing. But that history is with us, it shapes the housing market more strongly than any other factor and the schools by extension. No, the Henry parents are not racist at all. I don't think they are. Im not one of them. But I think that when we argue for "neighborhood schools," for proximity, for things that seem not at all racist, we have to acknowledge that our entire county was built out during a time of open racism, exclusion and segregation and it had lasting effects on things like school geography. It's everyone's choice what role they want to play in that ongoing narrative but just because we all moved here from somewhere else doesn't mean we've started with a blank slate.

You again? Neighborhood segregation by SES occurs throughout the country, even in places without racial covenants. Why can't we just treat people as individuals and not as members of particular groups? Quit trying to minimize the opinions of those who disagree with you by implying insensitivity to the racist history of the county. Even without racial covenants, Arlington neighborhoods would be just as stratified by SES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just a friendly reminder to all concerned.... repeat after me (this time, with feeling!)

Abingdon is not overcrowded.... Abingdon is not overcrowded....

Abingdon is not even at capacity! Abingdon is not even at capacity!

It's 100% true, per Abingdon's rock star team.... let's all take a deep breath and question this notion that we need to shed kids from Abingdon this year....

now back to the refrain.... Abingdon is not overcrowded.... it's not even at capacity!

Abingdon is about to be crushed by Columbia Hills. And they can't send that PU to Carlin Springs or Barcroft either, because crowding and higher poverty. So who gets moved out and to where? I think Columbia Forest should go to Barcroft, Alcova to Fleet, Columbia Heights to Drew.

Claremont needs to become a neighborhood school. Alcova isn't going to make enough room for CF.