ACPS redistricting June 12 Vote

[Anonymous]

Who's paying attention to redistricting at ACPS?

If you're not you should be. The new maps look like they're going for maximum disruption of students and neighborhoods! Some consultants drew up new "shape" maps last month that the school board will be voting on June 12! This is barely time for people to review. Plans also don't include any way to increase middle school capacity.

[Anonymous]

The new maps are excellent at evening out capacity across zones, which was the point of the exercise. I fully support them. I hope the policies being changed are similarly implemented with a mind toward keeping utilization balanced across schools.

The most vocal opponents are the ones who don’t want to lose their ingrained advantages of having schools at 75% capacity while others are bursting. And these same people are the ones you can thank for there being no middle school fixes. Looking at you, J-H parents, who killed the conversion to a middle school, killed the proposed policy in this process to restrict transfers out of K-8s for middle school, and are resistant to new middle school boundary maps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The new maps are excellent at evening out capacity across zones, which was the point of the exercise. I fully support them. I hope the policies being changed are similarly implemented with a mind toward keeping utilization balanced across schools.

The most vocal opponents are the ones who don’t want to lose their ingrained advantages of having schools at 75% capacity while others are bursting. And these same people are the ones you can thank for there being no middle school fixes. Looking at you, J-H parents, who killed the conversion to a middle school, killed the proposed policy in this process to restrict transfers out of K-8s for middle school, and are resistant to new middle school boundary maps.

Oh, and look, right on cue the MacArthur parents are now lobbying to avoid having MacArthur kids go to different middle schools depending on where they live since the MacArthur district is huge. So GWMS will never see any relief, because god forbid kids go to a middle school that’s closer to them. And these will be the same parents complaining in a few years about overcrowding and wondering why it has never been fixed.

[Anonymous]

Why can’t all of MacArthur go to Hammond?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why can’t all of MacArthur go to Hammond?

Maybe the SB should call these parents’ bluff and propose that in response.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can’t all of MacArthur go to Hammond?

Maybe the SB should call these parents’ bluff and propose that in response.

That would be too amazing. True colors of these "progressive" MacArthur families are being shown.

[Anonymous]

I don't think MacArthur parents would would oppose that suggestion. It's not like George Washington Middle has a reputation any better than Hammond's or Jefferson Houston! They all sound like they have major issues. Jefferson Houston's at least is under capacity and has an IB program.

MacArthur families are simply asking for more options to be discussed to reduce the disruptions on their children's lives. All NEW redistricting maps have wildly fluctuating elementary borders for MacArthur and Patrick Henry that don't stay consistent through middle schools redistricting. The very least the school board could offer is having a well thought out redistricting maps that don't require current students at these two schools to make new friends every two years as school borders fluctuate.

[Anonymous]

Instead of blaming parents all of whom want to see what's best for their children why can't everyone advocate for more middle school and elementary school buildings to help the entire city?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new maps are excellent at evening out capacity across zones, which was the point of the exercise. I fully support them. I hope the policies being changed are similarly implemented with a mind toward keeping utilization balanced across schools.

The most vocal opponents are the ones who don’t want to lose their ingrained advantages of having schools at 75% capacity while others are bursting. And these same people are the ones you can thank for there being no middle school fixes. Looking at you, J-H parents, who killed the conversion to a middle school, killed the proposed policy in this process to restrict transfers out of K-8s for middle school, and are resistant to new middle school boundary maps.

Oh, and look, right on cue the MacArthur parents are now lobbying to avoid having MacArthur kids go to different middle schools depending on where they live since the MacArthur district is huge. So GWMS will never see any relief, because god forbid kids go to a middle school that’s closer to them. And these will be the same parents complaining in a few years about overcrowding and wondering why it has never been fixed.

[Anonymous]

Well if you ask a pissed off DM parent, they think the City can just willynilly build schools wherever they want. There are non-serious people suggesting that ACPS builds a new middle school on the INOVA site. A site NOT owned by the city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Instead of blaming parents all of whom want to see what's best for their children why can't everyone advocate for more middle school and elementary school buildings to help the entire city?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new maps are excellent at evening out capacity across zones, which was the point of the exercise. I fully support them. I hope the policies being changed are similarly implemented with a mind toward keeping utilization balanced across schools.

The most vocal opponents are the ones who don’t want to lose their ingrained advantages of having schools at 75% capacity while others are bursting. And these same people are the ones you can thank for there being no middle school fixes. Looking at you, J-H parents, who killed the conversion to a middle school, killed the proposed policy in this process to restrict transfers out of K-8s for middle school, and are resistant to new middle school boundary maps.

Oh, and look, right on cue the MacArthur parents are now lobbying to avoid having MacArthur kids go to different middle schools depending on where they live since the MacArthur district is huge. So GWMS will never see any relief, because god forbid kids go to a middle school that’s closer to them. And these will be the same parents complaining in a few years about overcrowding and wondering why it has never been fixed.

Because we don’t need more elementary schools. We have the capacity, just need to space kids out correctly. Especially once the new Mason building is built.

Middle school is a different story but that’s why converting JH or PH to a middle school makes sense. But now, thanks to the JH parents (who also once got transfers into JH limited in the past which is part of why GWMS is overcrowded while JH is under) have likely succeeded in shelving that idea. Instead we will sit around thinking about building a new school, which will take years to even start to figure out, and even more years to execute, and there will be no progress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think MacArthur parents would would oppose that suggestion. It's not like George Washington Middle has a reputation any better than Hammond's or Jefferson Houston! They all sound like they have major issues. Jefferson Houston's at least is under capacity and has an IB program.

MacArthur families are simply asking for more options to be discussed to reduce the disruptions on their children's lives. All NEW redistricting maps have wildly fluctuating elementary borders for MacArthur and Patrick Henry that don't stay consistent through middle schools redistricting. The very least the school board could offer is having a well thought out redistricting maps that don't require current students at these two schools to make new friends every two years as school borders fluctuate.

This isn’t true, sorry. There are barely any differences between the different shape maps for MacArthur. Only 2 of 22 study areas change, while 20 of them stay the same. And the Circle and Square maps are the same, while all of the Triangle maps are the same. There is barely any difference - basically two similar options.

What MacArthur parents don’t want is to have to send their kids to the less white middle school, or to lose the whiter, wealthier areas on the eastern side of the boundary. We get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think MacArthur parents would would oppose that suggestion. It's not like George Washington Middle has a reputation any better than Hammond's or Jefferson Houston! They all sound like they have major issues. Jefferson Houston's at least is under capacity and has an IB program.

MacArthur families are simply asking for more options to be discussed to reduce the disruptions on their children's lives. All NEW redistricting maps have wildly fluctuating elementary borders for MacArthur and Patrick Henry that don't stay consistent through middle schools redistricting. The very least the school board could offer is having a well thought out redistricting maps that don't require current students at these two schools to make new friends every two years as school borders fluctuate.

This isn’t true, sorry. There are barely any differences between the different shape maps for MacArthur. Only 2 of 22 study areas change, while 20 of them stay the same. And the Circle and Square maps are the same, while all of the Triangle maps are the same. There is barely any difference - basically two similar options.

What MacArthur parents don’t want is to have to send their kids to the less white middle school, or to lose the whiter, wealthier areas on the eastern side of the boundary. We get it.

PP, you sadly don't know how to read a map or you are unfamiliar with MacArthur's current borders. The triangle plans have 11 plots of land shifted. The square and circle maps have 8 plots of land shifted. Sorry to burst your poorly conceived ideas, but as a MacArthur parent my biggest concerns are keeping MacArthur a neighborhood school and keeping my child at the same school with their friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Instead of blaming parents all of whom want to see what's best for their children why can't everyone advocate for more middle school and elementary school buildings to help the entire city?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new maps are excellent at evening out capacity across zones, which was the point of the exercise. I fully support them. I hope the policies being changed are similarly implemented with a mind toward keeping utilization balanced across schools.

The most vocal opponents are the ones who don’t want to lose their ingrained advantages of having schools at 75% capacity while others are bursting. And these same people are the ones you can thank for there being no middle school fixes. Looking at you, J-H parents, who killed the conversion to a middle school, killed the proposed policy in this process to restrict transfers out of K-8s for middle school, and are resistant to new middle school boundary maps.

Oh, and look, right on cue the MacArthur parents are now lobbying to avoid having MacArthur kids go to different middle schools depending on where they live since the MacArthur district is huge. So GWMS will never see any relief, because god forbid kids go to a middle school that’s closer to them. And these will be the same parents complaining in a few years about overcrowding and wondering why it has never been fixed.

Because we don’t need more elementary schools. We have the capacity, just need to space kids out correctly. Especially once the new Mason building is built.

Middle school is a different story but that’s why converting JH or PH to a middle school makes sense. But now, thanks to the JH parents (who also once got transfers into JH limited in the past which is part of why GWMS is overcrowded while JH is under) have likely succeeded in shelving that idea. Instead we will sit around thinking about building a new school, which will take years to even start to figure out, and even more years to execute, and there will be no progress.

Expanding George Mason makes no sense. The elementary school children who need classrooms live in the West End! Why should they be bussed across the city instead of attending their neighborhood schools. What happened to the plans to make George Mason a middle school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think MacArthur parents would would oppose that suggestion. It's not like George Washington Middle has a reputation any better than Hammond's or Jefferson Houston! They all sound like they have major issues. Jefferson Houston's at least is under capacity and has an IB program.

MacArthur families are simply asking for more options to be discussed to reduce the disruptions on their children's lives. All NEW redistricting maps have wildly fluctuating elementary borders for MacArthur and Patrick Henry that don't stay consistent through middle schools redistricting. The very least the school board could offer is having a well thought out redistricting maps that don't require current students at these two schools to make new friends every two years as school borders fluctuate.

This isn’t true, sorry. There are barely any differences between the different shape maps for MacArthur. Only 2 of 22 study areas change, while 20 of them stay the same. And the Circle and Square maps are the same, while all of the Triangle maps are the same. There is barely any difference - basically two similar options.

What MacArthur parents don’t want is to have to send their kids to the less white middle school, or to lose the whiter, wealthier areas on the eastern side of the boundary. We get it.

PP, you sadly don't know how to read a map or you are unfamiliar with MacArthur's current borders. The triangle plans have 11 plots of land shifted. The square and circle maps have 8 plots of land shifted. Sorry to burst your poorly conceived ideas, but as a MacArthur parent my biggest concerns are keeping MacArthur a neighborhood school and keeping my child at the same school with their friends.

That’s not what you said previously though. You said the new maps have “wildly fluctuating elementary borders.” They don’t. They have stable borders. Different ones from the current ones, yes, but not fluctuating, and it’s very clear what they will end up looking like. Sadly you don’t know what “wildly fluctuating” means.

And no, they don’t shift 8 or 11 of the current MacArthur “plots.” The triangle plans shift 5 of the current MacArthur study areas, leaving 14 as they are. The circle and square plans shift 4 of the current study areas, leaving 15 as they are. Most of the existing school doesn’t go anywhere.

Sorry to burst your poorly conceived ideas, but MacArthur remains a neighborhood school with these maps. It’s just not the neighbors you want, clearly, because it’s not lost on me that you got to your 8 or 11 by adding in the new study areas from the west end that will now be zoned for MacArthur. God forbid your kid has to socialize with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Instead of blaming parents all of whom want to see what's best for their children why can't everyone advocate for more middle school and elementary school buildings to help the entire city?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new maps are excellent at evening out capacity across zones, which was the point of the exercise. I fully support them. I hope the policies being changed are similarly implemented with a mind toward keeping utilization balanced across schools.

The most vocal opponents are the ones who don’t want to lose their ingrained advantages of having schools at 75% capacity while others are bursting. And these same people are the ones you can thank for there being no middle school fixes. Looking at you, J-H parents, who killed the conversion to a middle school, killed the proposed policy in this process to restrict transfers out of K-8s for middle school, and are resistant to new middle school boundary maps.

Oh, and look, right on cue the MacArthur parents are now lobbying to avoid having MacArthur kids go to different middle schools depending on where they live since the MacArthur district is huge. So GWMS will never see any relief, because god forbid kids go to a middle school that’s closer to them. And these will be the same parents complaining in a few years about overcrowding and wondering why it has never been fixed.

Because we don’t need more elementary schools. We have the capacity, just need to space kids out correctly. Especially once the new Mason building is built.

Middle school is a different story but that’s why converting JH or PH to a middle school makes sense. But now, thanks to the JH parents (who also once got transfers into JH limited in the past which is part of why GWMS is overcrowded while JH is under) have likely succeeded in shelving that idea. Instead we will sit around thinking about building a new school, which will take years to even start to figure out, and even more years to execute, and there will be no progress.

Expanding George Mason makes no sense. The elementary school children who need classrooms live in the West End! Why should they be bussed across the city instead of attending their neighborhood schools. What happened to the plans to make George Mason a middle school?

Those schools’ capacity issues are fixed, though, under the redistricting proposals. In part by shifting some of the MacArthur boundary westward with Mason picking up some additional eastern areas. Ya know, the thing that current MacArthur parents are all up in arms about.

I agree that Mason not becoming a middle or at least a K-8 is a missed opportunity though. But that ship seems to have sailed, particularly for a standalone middle.