APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?

#2 is the compromise. Satisfies Emma & the AF parents afraid to send kids to Wakefield. Where are the Hoffman Boston parents? They don't care that their kids are being ejected from WL to appease AF?

report

11/12/2016 21:20

Subject: APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?

quote

Anonymous

Our PU is in all three options so I guess we are off to Yorktown. Funny since we weren't in any of the original options.

report

11/12/2016 21:35

Subject: APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?

quote

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the estimated impact table on page 4 saying about W-L? Is it saying that under Option 1, F/RL percentage at W-L rises to 45%? That defies logic, so perhaps I am misunderstanding the table.

Okay, I think I am misreading it. I think it is saying that under Option 1, 45% of the students moving out of W-L are F/RL.

I actually think it is saying that if that particular option is taken, then the FARMS rate at W-L will become 45%. There is another column that shows the percentage of FARMS kids in each option -- that column includes that 62% number for one of the Wakefield options people were getting bent out of shape about. I think the new column is to show the overall impact on FARMS which will result from the options. Interesting thing is that Yorktown really doesn't change - 13-14% regardless of which option. And Wakefield doesn't change much - only a point or two up and down, which is the point the AF parents were making. It looks like W-L will have a higher percentage of FARMS with any option because they will be taking rich kids from W-L and sending them to Yorktown.

Mathematically, I don't see how this can be true, and looking at the chart on page 5 it seems to me they've made a mistake. Can somebody help me out here?

Regardless of these concerns regarding FARMS rates, let's be honest, they won't be sitting in the classroom with the new Students fron AF. The benefits claimed here are theoretically linked to being in the classroom together, not the halls of the school. Wakefield will be a tale of two high schools, just like the County is. The stats don't lie.

On page 5, the second to last column says that there will be 873 F/RL students at W-L if option 1 is implemented. That's how they've calculated the 45% F/RL rate for W-L under option 1 (873/1941=0.45).

But where does the 873 number come from? It looks to me like it is the sum of the current number of F/RL students at W-L (727) and the number of F/RL students who are moving out of W-L (146) under option 1. 727+146=873.

But those 146 students ARE MOVING OUT OF W-L. Shouldn't the number of F/RL kids in W-L under option 1 be 727 MINUS 146? That is, 581. So the percentage of F/RL students remaining at W-L under option 1 would be 581/1941=30%.

Happy to be corrected.

Me again. Looking at this more, I am sure I am right about the error. In the upper rows of this chart, it is correct to add the current number of F/RL students at Yorktown or Wakefield with the number of F/RL students who will be moving INTO those schools. So it's correct to say that, under option 1, there will be 1013 F/RL students at Wakefield--the current 881 plus the 132 who will be moving in (881+132=1013). But when you calculate the numbers for W-L, you need to SUBTRACT, not add.

I know people make mistakes all the time, but this isn't a computation error. This is a complete lack of numbers sense. Anyone with any numbers sense at all should have said, upon seeing W-L's F/RL rate go from 31% to 45%, "wait, how can that be true?" SMH.

And in case you are wondering, the correct F/RL percentages for W-L under the proposed options are:

Option 1: 30%
Option 2: 31%
Option 3: 34%

Thank goodness there are others out there who can do math. It was driving me crazy how wrong these numbers are but my spouse told me to leave it alone.

Let's be honest, the FARMS students won't be in class with the AF students. The benefits you all are seeking theoretically come from being in the same classroom. At this point in their lives, it isn't likely as the AF students will be taking more challenging courses (for the most part). Just walking the halls together gives no benefit to them. The test scores don't lie. If WF gets some AF students, it will be a tale of two schools, just like the Makeup of the County.

Please stop with this self-serving nonsense. Yes, it's true that students from lower-income families might be less likely to take advanced courses, but many here in Arlington do.

And your stats behind the "many"? In Spanish? Please, according to the theories behind the research, the benefits you FARM fans are so concerned with would be best if focused in elementary school. By high school, the gap is too great. But, hey, maybe this nonsense makes you feel all warm inside knowing they share the same facility. I'll mind the test scores down the road, and see if facts or nonsense rings true.

report

11/13/2016 08:59

Subject: Re:APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?

quote

Anonymous

Option #3 still turns walkers into bus riders. Although all of the units are listed as "bus," that only means that a bus goes to that unit. For some of those units, a portion of the kids are in the walk area and do not get bus service. It also creates a weird boundary with the Arlington Forest chunk carved out.

report

11/13/2016 10:27

Subject: Re:APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?

quote

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote:Option #3 still turns walkers into bus riders. Although all of the units are listed as "bus," that only means that a bus goes to that unit. For some of those units, a portion of the kids are in the walk area and do not get bus service. It also creates a weird boundary with the Arlington Forest chunk carved out.

A weird boundary with a chunk carved out? Can you say that with a straight face? A "non-weird" boundary is not a priority here, nor should it be. Who cares what the boundary line looks like? Have you looked at what the elementary school boundaries?

report

11/13/2016 13:12

Subject: Re:APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?

quote

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Option #3 still turns walkers into bus riders. Although all of the units are listed as "bus," that only means that a bus goes to that unit. For some of those units, a portion of the kids are in the walk area and do not get bus service. It also creates a weird boundary with the Arlington Forest chunk carved out.

A weird boundary with a chunk carved out? Can you say that with a straight face? A "non-weird" boundary is not a priority here, nor should it be. Who cares what the boundary line looks like? Have you looked at what the elementary school boundaries?

Yep. I can say that with a straight face. Just like the island looks weird. It's okay to say that but not that some of the suggested boundaries look weird? I'm sure the elementary boundaries are wacky too. I'm not allowed to say that or express that opinion?

report

11/13/2016 13:32

Subject: Re:APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?

quote

Anonymous

I think Option #3 is best to more closely align the demographics at W-L and Wakefield.

report

11/13/2016 15:37

Subject: Re:APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?

quote

Anonymous

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Option #3 still turns walkers into bus riders. Although all of the units are listed as "bus," that only means that a bus goes to that unit. For some of those units, a portion of the kids are in the walk area and do not get bus service. It also creates a weird boundary with the Arlington Forest chunk carved out.

A weird boundary with a chunk carved out? Can you say that with a straight face? A "non-weird" boundary is not a priority here, nor should it be. Who cares what the boundary line looks like? Have you looked at what the elementary school boundaries?

Yep. I can say that with a straight face. Just like the island looks weird. It's okay to say that but not that some of the suggested boundaries look weird? I'm sure the elementary boundaries are wacky too. I'm not allowed to say that or express that opinion?