APS Free and Reduced Meals - New Report

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS has nothing to do with housing. You don't like the huge FARMS rates at certain schools? Go advocate to the County Board that you want to see affordable housing around Jamestown and Tuckahoe.

Alternatively, go advocate in front of APS that you want forced busing to equalize FARMS rates across schools.

People love to complain about this issue, but they're unwilling to actually do anything about it.

Oh please. There have been many of us advocating on these issues to both the school and county boards for YEARS. and "forced busing" isn't the only way to improve socioeconomic diversity within the schools. Those of use who have been in this conversation WITH the TWO boards over the years have made various arguments and proposed various ways forward. But people have only so much energy, time, and tolerance for the ignorance, politics, and denialism of both boards who find it easier to just point their fingers at each other.

Exactly. Giving back the options schools to the neighborhood isn’t a magical fox either, most of them will reflect the same demographic pattern
Such as?

1. Ranked choice admissions process
2. Incremental steps with every boundary change requiring FRL% to be a primary consideration - implementing options that improve, not worsen, the situation
3. Ways to increase interaction between schools -- it's the social interaction with peers that's most important
4. Locating option programs (if we have to keep them) centrally and in locations easily accessed by transportation (car, bus) to encourage low-income families to opt in
5. Stop telling immigrant communities that boundary changes will "tear their community apart"
6. Stop acquiescing to the white affluent parents crying "walkability" or whining about passing a closer school to get to their assigned school
7.And imagine what impact could be made if people stopped all their crap arguments pushing back against distributing committed affordable housing geographically throughout the county - or at least stopping additional construction/addition of CAFs in the areas where the neighborhood schools already exceed 40% FRL.
8. Electing a school board and hiring administration who don't dismiss or deny the research demonstrating the academic (and future income prospects for generational poor) benefits of socioeconomic diversity, and who prioritize providing the best education for ALL students.

That's a start.

4. Already doing it.
3. Agree.
7. Totally agree. This actually would make the most impact. Unfortunately, there is not a lot of political will to make it happen.
8. I think they already do that.
5. Didn’t see that happening.
1. & 2. This doesn’t work on a large scale for ES because almost everyone wants their young kids close to home. They don’t want super long bus rides for Kindergartners or long treks to pick them up from Extended Day after work. Plus, transportation is already a nightmare.
6. Again, parents across the county value proximity. That’s not unique to white, affluent parents.

#8 -- NO, we do not have a school board or administration that does not dismiss the research or that prioritizes diversity and its academic and social benefits
#1 and #2 -- follows along with not acquiescing (it also ties-in with establishing an effective and more thorough transit system with the County). Incremental steps in each boundary process (#2) does not require busing kids 3/4 of the way across the County. It starts with shifting kids to neighboring schools and, again, #6 and #8 -- not about parent preferences, prioritizing what's best for students' education/providing comparable academic and social experiences at every school (or as many as possible)/etc. You need to let go of the same old pushback "we can't because" arguments and start SOLVING the obstacles.
#6 -- your response is a "no-duh" -- that's why #6 is to stop acquiescing.
#5 -- Do you mean that you've not witnessed or heard of this fear-mongering occurring; or do you mean you don't see that argument stopping? Because I assure you - it. absolutely. happens. Even though it's ludicrous. Yes, maybe Barcroft Apartments don't all go to Randolph or all of the west end affordable housing highrises don't all go to Carlin Springs. But significant groups of children from within would still go to school together. Nobody would be sent onesies-twosies to Jamestown.

Yeah, so the issue is that the neighboring schools that you would use to shift are already at the county average FARMS rate or higher, with the exception of Ashlawn. You'd be taking schools that are diverse and balanced (Long Branch, Fleet, Oakridge, Abingdon) and pushing them up to 50% FARMs while leaving the sub 10% schools untouched.

Right, if we are just shifting kids around the lower income schools while not touching the north, does that really solve the problem? And is it worth the cost?

Balancing SES can’t be done by boundary changes. Could tweak a few schools, but won’t significantly change the schools far from Rt 50.

Anyone who has participated in the many boundary changes would realize this.

The only way to balance SES is busing. And not many ES parents want that.

Yes it can be done with a boundary - draw straight lines vertically north to south.

But the best option? the true equity and inclusion? Lottery. All students. Random assignment with forced FARMS balancing.

That doesn’t help the schools at the far ends of the county. It still only blends in the middle. Go play with the boundary map tool.

[Anonymous]

The FARMS disparities are a housing issue. Solve that and the schools will fall in line. We need to stop trying to make the school board fix this. We need more affordable housing in the North part of the county and I say this as someone with a kid at Tuckahoe. I would welcome more diverse SES in my community and have written the county board to this effect.

And before you claim I moved here to avoid minorities or whatever, we are here because commute purposes. One of us needs the orange line and the other needs 66 to go west. We house hunted from Ballston to the Beltway. There is no way the south part of the county would make sense for us logistically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS has nothing to do with housing. You don't like the huge FARMS rates at certain schools? Go advocate to the County Board that you want to see affordable housing around Jamestown and Tuckahoe.

Alternatively, go advocate in front of APS that you want forced busing to equalize FARMS rates across schools.

People love to complain about this issue, but they're unwilling to actually do anything about it.

Oh please. There have been many of us advocating on these issues to both the school and county boards for YEARS. and "forced busing" isn't the only way to improve socioeconomic diversity within the schools. Those of use who have been in this conversation WITH the TWO boards over the years have made various arguments and proposed various ways forward. But people have only so much energy, time, and tolerance for the ignorance, politics, and denialism of both boards who find it easier to just point their fingers at each other.

Such as?

1. Ranked choice admissions process
2. Incremental steps with every boundary change requiring FRL% to be a primary consideration - implementing options that improve, not worsen, the situation
3. Ways to increase interaction between schools -- it's the social interaction with peers that's most important
4. Locating option programs (if we have to keep them) centrally and in locations easily accessed by transportation (car, bus) to encourage low-income families to opt in
5. Stop telling immigrant communities that boundary changes will "tear their community apart"
6. Stop acquiescing to the white affluent parents crying "walkability" or whining about passing a closer school to get to their assigned school
7.And imagine what impact could be made if people stopped all their crap arguments pushing back against distributing committed affordable housing geographically throughout the county - or at least stopping additional construction/addition of CAFs in the areas where the neighborhood schools already exceed 40% FRL.
8. Electing a school board and hiring administration who don't dismiss or deny the research demonstrating the academic (and future income prospects for generational poor) benefits of socioeconomic diversity, and who prioritize providing the best education for ALL students.

That's a start.

4. Already doing it.
3. Agree.
7. Totally agree. This actually would make the most impact. Unfortunately, there is not a lot of political will to make it happen.
8. I think they already do that.
5. Didn’t see that happening.
1. & 2. This doesn’t work on a large scale for ES because almost everyone wants their young kids close to home. They don’t want super long bus rides for Kindergartners or long treks to pick them up from Extended Day after work. Plus, transportation is already a nightmare.
6. Again, parents across the county value proximity. That’s not unique to white, affluent parents.

#8 -- NO, we do not have a school board or administration that does not dismiss the research or that prioritizes diversity and its academic and social benefits
#1 and #2 -- follows along with not acquiescing (it also ties-in with establishing an effective and more thorough transit system with the County). Incremental steps in each boundary process (#2) does not require busing kids 3/4 of the way across the County. It starts with shifting kids to neighboring schools and, again, #6 and #8 -- not about parent preferences, prioritizing what's best for students' education/providing comparable academic and social experiences at every school (or as many as possible)/etc. You need to let go of the same old pushback "we can't because" arguments and start SOLVING the obstacles.
#6 -- your response is a "no-duh" -- that's why #6 is to stop acquiescing.
#5 -- Do you mean that you've not witnessed or heard of this fear-mongering occurring; or do you mean you don't see that argument stopping? Because I assure you - it. absolutely. happens. Even though it's ludicrous. Yes, maybe Barcroft Apartments don't all go to Randolph or all of the west end affordable housing highrises don't all go to Carlin Springs. But significant groups of children from within would still go to school together. Nobody would be sent onesies-twosies to Jamestown.

Yeah, so the issue is that the neighboring schools that you would use to shift are already at the county average FARMS rate or higher, with the exception of Ashlawn. You'd be taking schools that are diverse and balanced (Long Branch, Fleet, Oakridge, Abingdon) and pushing them up to 50% FARMs while leaving the sub 10% schools untouched.

Keep rotating around the clock. If you move students TO Ashlawn, you need to move students AWAY from Ashlawn. They don't necessarily have to swap between schools. Shift the boundaries around clockwise, or counter-clockwise.

I don't believe it can be done, but you can give it a shot. The data in this thing is out of date, but it's still illustrative: https://www.arlington-analytics.com/modelBuildBoundary.php See if you can get the farms rates above 15% in the North North Arlington schools (the sub 10%ers).

I don't believe all the schools have to have the same FRL% or all have to be at least "x"%. I just believe the disparities should be minimized and we should not have any schools over 60% when there are schools at less than 3%. 40% is the tipping point at which parents are less willing to send their kids, and also the tipping point for academics. 30% is the proportion for Arlington student-body systemwide; so while it that should be an idealistic goal stated to shoot for in our policies, it isn't mandatory for every school to achieve that level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS has nothing to do with housing. You don't like the huge FARMS rates at certain schools? Go advocate to the County Board that you want to see affordable housing around Jamestown and Tuckahoe.

Alternatively, go advocate in front of APS that you want forced busing to equalize FARMS rates across schools.

People love to complain about this issue, but they're unwilling to actually do anything about it.

Yup, and then try to convince the brown FARMS families at Randolph that they will be better off bused to Jamestown. They don't want to leave their neighborhood either.

The people who complain about high FARMS rates are the white UMC families in those schools in SA. They moved to those zip codes to get a bigger house for less $, but then once there they do not want their white UMC kids in a school with lots of brown kids and high FARMS. You don't usually hear the FARMS families complaining.

Of course - what reason do you white folks in extreme low poverty schools have to complain?
However, you are mistaken about the housing purchases. South Arlington has a much fuller range of incomes than the far north of Arlington. It isn't FRL or 1%ers. It's heavy in the middle. So not everyone who isn't FRL in south Arlington could afford a house in north Arlington. There are other reasons to buy a house in south Arlington, too.

As to the PP's comment about "brown FARMS" from Randolph not wanting to bus to Jamestown.....you are a stunning example as to why the conversations about increasing diversity across the system never goes anywhere. That isn't the only solution. Try being at least a little creative.

I would love to hear creative solutions but as to the bussing, I am literally just repeating the preferences that I have heard from low-income families of color in S. Arlington.

Same here, I live in S. Arlington and parents I talk to like it here even if they are "low income" and their kids don't have as many PTA-funded activities or fancy equipment. For many immigrants, it's still far better than what they left behind. It's very convenient to be able to walk to school. My neighborhood is filled with walking trains of kids walking together to school every day. They stop and spontaneously play in the grass on the way, some are watching siblings after school, they go to each others' apartments to hang out after school, etc. It is a nice life and I don't blame them for not wanting to give that up to bus their kids to Jamestown.

Agreed. I enjoyed the middle school years when our kids could just walk, and we could just walk for events.
However, if that weren't the system we had here, we would have managed with whatever school they went to. Transition is the hardest. Once a system has been around, people know that's how it works and it becomes less an obstacle because it's no longer about that fear of change.

How do you know it would be better? How do you know those low poverty schools in the north are "better"? I have heard many times that Title 1 teachers often have to work harder and smarter to reach every kid in their diverse classrooms. If you are looking at test scores, you really can't compare and it's not fair to judge classrooms where many kids are immigrants who are still learning English. But my point is, those schools are still great schools with excellent teachers where kids are getting an amazing education! The teachers at my kids' Title 1 school were so fabulous, warm, and caring. I was so impressed with the instruction and environment. There's no need to uproot kids from their neighborhood and tear apart their social fabric and community.

See previous comments in this thread. "Better" is subjective; but the experiences are clearly different. And I know by being involved at different schools, through knowing others' experiences via friends and my childrens' friends, by being in conversations with others and learning what their PTAs do and don't do and what their perceptions and experiences are - including their experiences at Title I schools and transferring (by lottery or by moving) to other schools.

Title I teachers do have to work hard and smart to reach every kid. That doesn't necessarily optimize the experience for every kid, especially those who don't need as much extra "hard and smart" efforts. Those kids may or may not be challenged as much as they need to be, or like they would be at those other schools with faster classroom pace and more peers on their level to keep moving forward (or more deeply) with more robust learning or more in the curriculum....more reading, more writing, additional opportunities, etc. We had great Title I teachers and specialists (and some crappy ones....just like you can get at any school), and a warm nurturing environment. That doesn't mean we had an equal level of academic experience to what we would have had at other schools that were able to put on plays in elementary school, had better musical instruments available and more students who could afford private lessons (thereby kicking up the musical education a notch), or were expected to read more or give more presentations/reports, had more opportunities and resources and time to pursue more independent projects, or got to do more science experiments, etc.

Overall test scores are not apples to apples. But peer group test scores between schools are more indicative.

And there we go again with the tearing communities apart comment....Why do people insist that kids would be dispersed by handfuls to several different schools rather than half a neighborhood or a quarter of a neighborhood going together? Why don't people see that school is part of the child/family's community even if it isn't all the same people living in their neighborhood? How do you think people at option schools feel? Do they feel torn apart and without community? It could be an extended community, or it could just be a different community. And who says you have to rip kids out of their schools immediately rather than implement new boundaries with a future date....as existing students matriculate out of their current schools, for example?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I don't believe all the schools have to have the same FRL% or all have to be at least "x"%. I just believe the disparities should be minimized and we should not have any schools over 60% when there are schools at less than 3%. 40% is the tipping point at which parents are less willing to send their kids, and also the tipping point for academics. 30% is the proportion for Arlington student-body systemwide; so while it that should be an idealistic goal stated to shoot for in our policies, it isn't mandatory for every school to achieve that level.

NP. Sit down with a boundary tool and find a solution that gets the schools in 22207 upwards of 15%. We'll wait. If not, it's disingenuous to tell the rest of the county to shuffle around while they stay rich, white enclaves. "Hey, families at Glebe or Fleet, it's all good if we bus you further so that more schools are diverse. My snowflakes will stay at their 2% FARMS walkable school but we can all feel better that schools are more diverse".

People have played with this for a decade. Without true full bussing you can't make it happen. Personally, I'm actually opposed to forced bussing, but the point stands that simple redistricting won't work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS has nothing to do with housing. You don't like the huge FARMS rates at certain schools? Go advocate to the County Board that you want to see affordable housing around Jamestown and Tuckahoe.

Alternatively, go advocate in front of APS that you want forced busing to equalize FARMS rates across schools.

People love to complain about this issue, but they're unwilling to actually do anything about it.

Oh please. There have been many of us advocating on these issues to both the school and county boards for YEARS. and "forced busing" isn't the only way to improve socioeconomic diversity within the schools. Those of use who have been in this conversation WITH the TWO boards over the years have made various arguments and proposed various ways forward. But people have only so much energy, time, and tolerance for the ignorance, politics, and denialism of both boards who find it easier to just point their fingers at each other.

Such as?

1. Ranked choice admissions process
2. Incremental steps with every boundary change requiring FRL% to be a primary consideration - implementing options that improve, not worsen, the situation
3. Ways to increase interaction between schools -- it's the social interaction with peers that's most important
4. Locating option programs (if we have to keep them) centrally and in locations easily accessed by transportation (car, bus) to encourage low-income families to opt in
5. Stop telling immigrant communities that boundary changes will "tear their community apart"
6. Stop acquiescing to the white affluent parents crying "walkability" or whining about passing a closer school to get to their assigned school
7.And imagine what impact could be made if people stopped all their crap arguments pushing back against distributing committed affordable housing geographically throughout the county - or at least stopping additional construction/addition of CAFs in the areas where the neighborhood schools already exceed 40% FRL.
8. Electing a school board and hiring administration who don't dismiss or deny the research demonstrating the academic (and future income prospects for generational poor) benefits of socioeconomic diversity, and who prioritize providing the best education for ALL students.

That's a start.

4. Already doing it.
3. Agree.
7. Totally agree. This actually would make the most impact. Unfortunately, there is not a lot of political will to make it happen.
8. I think they already do that.
5. Didn’t see that happening.
1. & 2. This doesn’t work on a large scale for ES because almost everyone wants their young kids close to home. They don’t want super long bus rides for Kindergartners or long treks to pick them up from Extended Day after work. Plus, transportation is already a nightmare.
6. Again, parents across the county value proximity. That’s not unique to white, affluent parents.

Agree that Arlingtonians would never go for ranked choice for elementary but I personally would like to see it for secondary.

Cambridge MA does it - anyone have info on how the community there feels about it?
https://www.cpsd.us/departments/src/making_your_choices/about_controlled_choice

Adding choice to our overcrowded high schools serves no process. Better spent resources adding capacity.

I'm the one suggesting ranked choice as a possible solution to the disparities, and I agree with you.
I believe the diversity is more important at the younger ages and levels and other things can happen with the high schools (like boundaries) to provide more balance. High schoolers are more independent and can deal with transportation issues more, and if Arlington would establish a real, true efficient high-service transportation system, it would be all the better for everyone.

Good news. We have metro, metrobus, and art bus.

Have you looked into how to get to the various high schools from different neighborhoods? The system needs to be much more robust to be effective and get people to use it.
For example, our neighborhood is assigned to Wakefield. There is no bus route that serves the length of George Mason between our neighborhood and the school. Taking public transit requires transferring buses or walking a mile to a direct ART route. That's the first problem. The second problem is the timing and frequency of bus service. These things need to be made conducive to students getting to and from school in reasonable amounts of time, arriving and leaving at reasonable times, and having a way home if they need to leave early or on those stupid early release days or after sports or band practice, etc.

When people live more than 1/2 mile to metro, they are far less likely to use it. WHen their trip requires a transfer or multiple transfers, they are even more unlikely to use it. When the service doesn't get them where they need to go when they need to be there without excessive wait or lag times, they are almost certain not to use it.

That is adding a few more ART routes, not "establishing a real, true efficient high-service transportation system".

Again, have you really looked at the existing routes and schedules? And try figuring out routes, schedules, and time for travel from all the neighborhoods to all their assigned and option schools?

But great! if it's as simple as adding a few ART routes, then why don't we just do it then? Problem solved!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS has nothing to do with housing. You don't like the huge FARMS rates at certain schools? Go advocate to the County Board that you want to see affordable housing around Jamestown and Tuckahoe.

Alternatively, go advocate in front of APS that you want forced busing to equalize FARMS rates across schools.

People love to complain about this issue, but they're unwilling to actually do anything about it.

Oh please. There have been many of us advocating on these issues to both the school and county boards for YEARS. and "forced busing" isn't the only way to improve socioeconomic diversity within the schools. Those of use who have been in this conversation WITH the TWO boards over the years have made various arguments and proposed various ways forward. But people have only so much energy, time, and tolerance for the ignorance, politics, and denialism of both boards who find it easier to just point their fingers at each other.

Such as?

1. Ranked choice admissions process
2. Incremental steps with every boundary change requiring FRL% to be a primary consideration - implementing options that improve, not worsen, the situation
3. Ways to increase interaction between schools -- it's the social interaction with peers that's most important
4. Locating option programs (if we have to keep them) centrally and in locations easily accessed by transportation (car, bus) to encourage low-income families to opt in
5. Stop telling immigrant communities that boundary changes will "tear their community apart"
6. Stop acquiescing to the white affluent parents crying "walkability" or whining about passing a closer school to get to their assigned school
7.And imagine what impact could be made if people stopped all their crap arguments pushing back against distributing committed affordable housing geographically throughout the county - or at least stopping additional construction/addition of CAFs in the areas where the neighborhood schools already exceed 40% FRL.
8. Electing a school board and hiring administration who don't dismiss or deny the research demonstrating the academic (and future income prospects for generational poor) benefits of socioeconomic diversity, and who prioritize providing the best education for ALL students.

That's a start.

4. Already doing it.
3. Agree.
7. Totally agree. This actually would make the most impact. Unfortunately, there is not a lot of political will to make it happen.
8. I think they already do that.
5. Didn’t see that happening.
1. & 2. This doesn’t work on a large scale for ES because almost everyone wants their young kids close to home. They don’t want super long bus rides for Kindergartners or long treks to pick them up from Extended Day after work. Plus, transportation is already a nightmare.
6. Again, parents across the county value proximity. That’s not unique to white, affluent parents.

#8 -- NO, we do not have a school board or administration that does not dismiss the research or that prioritizes diversity and its academic and social benefits
#1 and #2 -- follows along with not acquiescing (it also ties-in with establishing an effective and more thorough transit system with the County). Incremental steps in each boundary process (#2) does not require busing kids 3/4 of the way across the County. It starts with shifting kids to neighboring schools and, again, #6 and #8 -- not about parent preferences, prioritizing what's best for students' education/providing comparable academic and social experiences at every school (or as many as possible)/etc. You need to let go of the same old pushback "we can't because" arguments and start SOLVING the obstacles.
#6 -- your response is a "no-duh" -- that's why #6 is to stop acquiescing.
#5 -- Do you mean that you've not witnessed or heard of this fear-mongering occurring; or do you mean you don't see that argument stopping? Because I assure you - it. absolutely. happens. Even though it's ludicrous. Yes, maybe Barcroft Apartments don't all go to Randolph or all of the west end affordable housing highrises don't all go to Carlin Springs. But significant groups of children from within would still go to school together. Nobody would be sent onesies-twosies to Jamestown.

Yeah, so the issue is that the neighboring schools that you would use to shift are already at the county average FARMS rate or higher, with the exception of Ashlawn. You'd be taking schools that are diverse and balanced (Long Branch, Fleet, Oakridge, Abingdon) and pushing them up to 50% FARMs while leaving the sub 10% schools untouched.

Keep rotating around the clock. If you move students TO Ashlawn, you need to move students AWAY from Ashlawn. They don't necessarily have to swap between schools. Shift the boundaries around clockwise, or counter-clockwise.

I don't believe it can be done, but you can give it a shot. The data in this thing is out of date, but it's still illustrative: https://www.arlington-analytics.com/modelBuildBoundary.php See if you can get the farms rates above 15% in the North North Arlington schools (the sub 10%ers).

+1

We have painfully poured over the PUs. It can't be done without busing.

We "bus" now, for crying out loud. Of course it takes transportation! Just like it takes transportation now!
Stop thinking "the kids from Randolph have to go to Jamestown." The whole system needs to be part of the solution. Everyone has to be part of the solution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS has nothing to do with housing. You don't like the huge FARMS rates at certain schools? Go advocate to the County Board that you want to see affordable housing around Jamestown and Tuckahoe.

Alternatively, go advocate in front of APS that you want forced busing to equalize FARMS rates across schools.

People love to complain about this issue, but they're unwilling to actually do anything about it.

Oh please. There have been many of us advocating on these issues to both the school and county boards for YEARS. and "forced busing" isn't the only way to improve socioeconomic diversity within the schools. Those of use who have been in this conversation WITH the TWO boards over the years have made various arguments and proposed various ways forward. But people have only so much energy, time, and tolerance for the ignorance, politics, and denialism of both boards who find it easier to just point their fingers at each other.

Such as?

1. Ranked choice admissions process
2. Incremental steps with every boundary change requiring FRL% to be a primary consideration - implementing options that improve, not worsen, the situation
3. Ways to increase interaction between schools -- it's the social interaction with peers that's most important
4. Locating option programs (if we have to keep them) centrally and in locations easily accessed by transportation (car, bus) to encourage low-income families to opt in
5. Stop telling immigrant communities that boundary changes will "tear their community apart"
6. Stop acquiescing to the white affluent parents crying "walkability" or whining about passing a closer school to get to their assigned school
7.And imagine what impact could be made if people stopped all their crap arguments pushing back against distributing committed affordable housing geographically throughout the county - or at least stopping additional construction/addition of CAFs in the areas where the neighborhood schools already exceed 40% FRL.
8. Electing a school board and hiring administration who don't dismiss or deny the research demonstrating the academic (and future income prospects for generational poor) benefits of socioeconomic diversity, and who prioritize providing the best education for ALL students.

That's a start.

4. Already doing it.
3. Agree.
7. Totally agree. This actually would make the most impact. Unfortunately, there is not a lot of political will to make it happen.
8. I think they already do that.
5. Didn’t see that happening.
1. & 2. This doesn’t work on a large scale for ES because almost everyone wants their young kids close to home. They don’t want super long bus rides for Kindergartners or long treks to pick them up from Extended Day after work. Plus, transportation is already a nightmare.
6. Again, parents across the county value proximity. That’s not unique to white, affluent parents.

#8 -- NO, we do not have a school board or administration that does not dismiss the research or that prioritizes diversity and its academic and social benefits
#1 and #2 -- follows along with not acquiescing (it also ties-in with establishing an effective and more thorough transit system with the County). Incremental steps in each boundary process (#2) does not require busing kids 3/4 of the way across the County. It starts with shifting kids to neighboring schools and, again, #6 and #8 -- not about parent preferences, prioritizing what's best for students' education/providing comparable academic and social experiences at every school (or as many as possible)/etc. You need to let go of the same old pushback "we can't because" arguments and start SOLVING the obstacles.
#6 -- your response is a "no-duh" -- that's why #6 is to stop acquiescing.
#5 -- Do you mean that you've not witnessed or heard of this fear-mongering occurring; or do you mean you don't see that argument stopping? Because I assure you - it. absolutely. happens. Even though it's ludicrous. Yes, maybe Barcroft Apartments don't all go to Randolph or all of the west end affordable housing highrises don't all go to Carlin Springs. But significant groups of children from within would still go to school together. Nobody would be sent onesies-twosies to Jamestown.

Yeah, so the issue is that the neighboring schools that you would use to shift are already at the county average FARMS rate or higher, with the exception of Ashlawn. You'd be taking schools that are diverse and balanced (Long Branch, Fleet, Oakridge, Abingdon) and pushing them up to 50% FARMs while leaving the sub 10% schools untouched.

Keep rotating around the clock. If you move students TO Ashlawn, you need to move students AWAY from Ashlawn. They don't necessarily have to swap between schools. Shift the boundaries around clockwise, or counter-clockwise.

I don't believe it can be done, but you can give it a shot. The data in this thing is out of date, but it's still illustrative: https://www.arlington-analytics.com/modelBuildBoundary.php See if you can get the farms rates above 15% in the North North Arlington schools (the sub 10%ers).

+1

We have painfully poured over the PUs. It can't be done without busing.

We "bus" now, for crying out loud. Of course it takes transportation! Just like it takes transportation now!
Stop thinking "the kids from Randolph have to go to Jamestown." The whole system needs to be part of the solution. Everyone has to be part of the solution.

What you’re talking about is a massive increase in the amount of transportation dollars and bus drivers. Where does that money come from?

I swear listening to people say things like they’ve never been explored or debated before is surreal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't believe all the schools have to have the same FRL% or all have to be at least "x"%. I just believe the disparities should be minimized and we should not have any schools over 60% when there are schools at less than 3%. 40% is the tipping point at which parents are less willing to send their kids, and also the tipping point for academics. 30% is the proportion for Arlington student-body systemwide; so while it that should be an idealistic goal stated to shoot for in our policies, it isn't mandatory for every school to achieve that level.

NP. Sit down with a boundary tool and find a solution that gets the schools in 22207 upwards of 15%. We'll wait. If not, it's disingenuous to tell the rest of the county to shuffle around while they stay rich, white enclaves. "Hey, families at Glebe or Fleet, it's all good if we bus you further so that more schools are diverse. My snowflakes will stay at their 2% FARMS walkable school but we can all feel better that schools are more diverse".

People have played with this for a decade. Without true full bussing you can't make it happen. Personally, I'm actually opposed to forced bussing, but the point stands that simple redistricting won't work.

Agree. And where are the bus drivers coming from? APS can barely – BARELY – find drivers for existing routes, nevermind any plan that would increase the need for busses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS has nothing to do with housing. You don't like the huge FARMS rates at certain schools? Go advocate to the County Board that you want to see affordable housing around Jamestown and Tuckahoe.

Alternatively, go advocate in front of APS that you want forced busing to equalize FARMS rates across schools.

People love to complain about this issue, but they're unwilling to actually do anything about it.

Oh please. There have been many of us advocating on these issues to both the school and county boards for YEARS. and "forced busing" isn't the only way to improve socioeconomic diversity within the schools. Those of use who have been in this conversation WITH the TWO boards over the years have made various arguments and proposed various ways forward. But people have only so much energy, time, and tolerance for the ignorance, politics, and denialism of both boards who find it easier to just point their fingers at each other.

Such as?

1. Ranked choice admissions process
2. Incremental steps with every boundary change requiring FRL% to be a primary consideration - implementing options that improve, not worsen, the situation
3. Ways to increase interaction between schools -- it's the social interaction with peers that's most important
4. Locating option programs (if we have to keep them) centrally and in locations easily accessed by transportation (car, bus) to encourage low-income families to opt in
5. Stop telling immigrant communities that boundary changes will "tear their community apart"
6. Stop acquiescing to the white affluent parents crying "walkability" or whining about passing a closer school to get to their assigned school
7.And imagine what impact could be made if people stopped all their crap arguments pushing back against distributing committed affordable housing geographically throughout the county - or at least stopping additional construction/addition of CAFs in the areas where the neighborhood schools already exceed 40% FRL.
8. Electing a school board and hiring administration who don't dismiss or deny the research demonstrating the academic (and future income prospects for generational poor) benefits of socioeconomic diversity, and who prioritize providing the best education for ALL students.

That's a start.

4. Already doing it.
3. Agree.
7. Totally agree. This actually would make the most impact. Unfortunately, there is not a lot of political will to make it happen.
8. I think they already do that.
5. Didn’t see that happening.
1. & 2. This doesn’t work on a large scale for ES because almost everyone wants their young kids close to home. They don’t want super long bus rides for Kindergartners or long treks to pick them up from Extended Day after work. Plus, transportation is already a nightmare.
6. Again, parents across the county value proximity. That’s not unique to white, affluent parents.

#8 -- NO, we do not have a school board or administration that does not dismiss the research or that prioritizes diversity and its academic and social benefits
#1 and #2 -- follows along with not acquiescing (it also ties-in with establishing an effective and more thorough transit system with the County). Incremental steps in each boundary process (#2) does not require busing kids 3/4 of the way across the County. It starts with shifting kids to neighboring schools and, again, #6 and #8 -- not about parent preferences, prioritizing what's best for students' education/providing comparable academic and social experiences at every school (or as many as possible)/etc. You need to let go of the same old pushback "we can't because" arguments and start SOLVING the obstacles.
#6 -- your response is a "no-duh" -- that's why #6 is to stop acquiescing.
#5 -- Do you mean that you've not witnessed or heard of this fear-mongering occurring; or do you mean you don't see that argument stopping? Because I assure you - it. absolutely. happens. Even though it's ludicrous. Yes, maybe Barcroft Apartments don't all go to Randolph or all of the west end affordable housing highrises don't all go to Carlin Springs. But significant groups of children from within would still go to school together. Nobody would be sent onesies-twosies to Jamestown.

8. This has been a factor in every single boundary change process.

1. & 2. The only way to balance SES right now is busing. Far across the county. Period. You would know this if you participated in any of the many boundary changes. Try PP's map to learn this for yourself. And - newsflash - most parents won't want that.

6. The "Arlington Way" is to take parent input. If most parents - regardless of SES - value proximity then it's a non-starter. And parents of all SESs have legitimate concerns about proximity. Listen to them. Most will probably just prioritize the school(s) closest to them and not effectively spread the SES.


Has this actually worked in a similarly-sized city/county? Cambridge is 1/4 the size.

8. Mentioned and sometimes discussed. NOT PRIORITIZED and USED AS THE DECIDING FACTOR. If so, the boundary scenario option that resulted in the best distribution/impact on FRL rates would have been accepted and implemented. That has NOT been the case. (I HAVE been involved in these processes for the past 10 years)

1 &2 & 6 AGAIN-- resorting to what parents don't want rather than doing what's right and best for the system. "The Arlington Way" was never about parent or community input. It was about giving those in office the information they needed to make sure they didn't upset their voters so that they would be re-elected. And look where it's gotten us as a school system and as a County.

Your referral to the same arguments merely demonstrates the WALL advocates bang their heads against and the failure to look at incremental progress and different alternatives merely serves to maintain the status quo because you don't want the change. Talking up how they would love to have more diversity across the County makes people feel good while they safely hide behind these arguments knowing nothing will change and they won't have to actually do anything, or sacrifice anything.

I don't give a s--- whether Jamestown ever sees 15% FRL, let alone 30%. I do care that we have a handful of elementary schools above70-freakin'% with SEVERAL under 15 or 10 or 5%. Or 3 middle schools with high FRL and 3 with low. I don't like that YHS and HBW have less than half the % of WL which is 15 or so %points below WHS; but at least it isn't one high school with 70% and all the others less than 20%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't believe all the schools have to have the same FRL% or all have to be at least "x"%. I just believe the disparities should be minimized and we should not have any schools over 60% when there are schools at less than 3%. 40% is the tipping point at which parents are less willing to send their kids, and also the tipping point for academics. 30% is the proportion for Arlington student-body systemwide; so while it that should be an idealistic goal stated to shoot for in our policies, it isn't mandatory for every school to achieve that level.

NP. Sit down with a boundary tool and find a solution that gets the schools in 22207 upwards of 15%. We'll wait. If not, it's disingenuous to tell the rest of the county to shuffle around while they stay rich, white enclaves. "Hey, families at Glebe or Fleet, it's all good if we bus you further so that more schools are diverse. My snowflakes will stay at their 2% FARMS walkable school but we can all feel better that schools are more diverse".

People have played with this for a decade. Without true full bussing you can't make it happen. Personally, I'm actually opposed to forced bussing, but the point stands that simple redistricting won't work.

Let's not let perfect be the enemy of better. There's no reason Barrett should be at >70% while Ashlawn is at 17%. There are parts of the Barrett boundary that are closer to Ashlawn and even walkable.

Yes, it's hard to improve ratios at the far edges of the county without unpopular long distance busing, but every school in the middle that isn't between 30-40% FARMs should be reviewed. Leave walkers alone, as parents have spoken that they want to walk and APS can't afford more buses, but all bus riders should be in play. Don't bus anyone across the county, but proximate schools should be in play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The FARMS disparities are a housing issue. Solve that and the schools will fall in line. We need to stop trying to make the school board fix this. We need more affordable housing in the North part of the county and I say this as someone with a kid at Tuckahoe. I would welcome more diverse SES in my community and have written the county board to this effect.

And before you claim I moved here to avoid minorities or whatever, we are here because commute purposes. One of us needs the orange line and the other needs 66 to go west. We house hunted from Ballston to the Beltway. There is no way the south part of the county would make sense for us logistically.

Thank you for your philosophical support and letter to the CB.

I agree it's a housing issue; but that doesn't mean the school system can't take measures to mitigate the impacts of county housing policies and practices. It's more than a matter of putting more committed affordable housing in the north - that, in and of itself, does nothing to reduce the existing concentrations of poverty elsewhere that result in the high FRM schools.

BTW, the orange line is easily accessible from South Arlington homes. Many homes in SA can easily get to Ballston or Rosslyn. Of course one could also take the blue/yellow line from SA and transfer to orange. Is one train transfer too inconvenient? Or, take a 5-10 minute bus ride down the Pike to the Pentagon and take blue/yellow to the orange --- which is definitely more inconvenient (but doable) and you were able to afford and find a more direct option in NA. 66 is also very easy to access particularly from the SA neighborhoods along the west end of the Pike. I do it all the time in less than 10 minutes, usually 7 max, and can do so from two different major roads.

I hope neither of your job change so you have to move to be accessible to 395 or the blue line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't believe all the schools have to have the same FRL% or all have to be at least "x"%. I just believe the disparities should be minimized and we should not have any schools over 60% when there are schools at less than 3%. 40% is the tipping point at which parents are less willing to send their kids, and also the tipping point for academics. 30% is the proportion for Arlington student-body systemwide; so while it that should be an idealistic goal stated to shoot for in our policies, it isn't mandatory for every school to achieve that level.

NP. Sit down with a boundary tool and find a solution that gets the schools in 22207 upwards of 15%. We'll wait. If not, it's disingenuous to tell the rest of the county to shuffle around while they stay rich, white enclaves. "Hey, families at Glebe or Fleet, it's all good if we bus you further so that more schools are diverse. My snowflakes will stay at their 2% FARMS walkable school but we can all feel better that schools are more diverse".

People have played with this for a decade. Without true full bussing you can't make it happen. Personally, I'm actually opposed to forced bussing, but the point stands that simple redistricting won't work.

That's the compassionate attitude that will lead to success. All or nothing. If they don't have to take more poor kids, I don't have take them either!
I don't think anyone in this thread has really suggested that "simple redistricting" will give every school an equal FRL%. In fact, it wasn't even posited that every school has to achieve the same %; and multiple suggestions were made, including ranked choice admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't believe all the schools have to have the same FRL% or all have to be at least "x"%. I just believe the disparities should be minimized and we should not have any schools over 60% when there are schools at less than 3%. 40% is the tipping point at which parents are less willing to send their kids, and also the tipping point for academics. 30% is the proportion for Arlington student-body systemwide; so while it that should be an idealistic goal stated to shoot for in our policies, it isn't mandatory for every school to achieve that level.

NP. Sit down with a boundary tool and find a solution that gets the schools in 22207 upwards of 15%. We'll wait. If not, it's disingenuous to tell the rest of the county to shuffle around while they stay rich, white enclaves. "Hey, families at Glebe or Fleet, it's all good if we bus you further so that more schools are diverse. My snowflakes will stay at their 2% FARMS walkable school but we can all feel better that schools are more diverse".

People have played with this for a decade. Without true full bussing you can't make it happen. Personally, I'm actually opposed to forced bussing, but the point stands that simple redistricting won't work.

Let's not let perfect be the enemy of better. There's no reason Barrett should be at >70% while Ashlawn is at 17%. There are parts of the Barrett boundary that are closer to Ashlawn and even walkable.

Yes, it's hard to improve ratios at the far edges of the county without unpopular long distance busing, but every school in the middle that isn't between 30-40% FARMs should be reviewed. Leave walkers alone, as parents have spoken that they want to walk and APS can't afford more buses, but all bus riders should be in play. Don't bus anyone across the county, but proximate schools should be in play.

The affordable housing is all in the Barrett walkzone. Same for Randolph, and maybe Drew as well? I think Carlin Springs is the exception where most are on the bus. The low income housing is in the south of the zone there, though. The areas closest to 50 and therefore Ashlawn are SFH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't believe all the schools have to have the same FRL% or all have to be at least "x"%. I just believe the disparities should be minimized and we should not have any schools over 60% when there are schools at less than 3%. 40% is the tipping point at which parents are less willing to send their kids, and also the tipping point for academics. 30% is the proportion for Arlington student-body systemwide; so while it that should be an idealistic goal stated to shoot for in our policies, it isn't mandatory for every school to achieve that level.

NP. Sit down with a boundary tool and find a solution that gets the schools in 22207 upwards of 15%. We'll wait. If not, it's disingenuous to tell the rest of the county to shuffle around while they stay rich, white enclaves. "Hey, families at Glebe or Fleet, it's all good if we bus you further so that more schools are diverse. My snowflakes will stay at their 2% FARMS walkable school but we can all feel better that schools are more diverse".

People have played with this for a decade. Without true full bussing you can't make it happen. Personally, I'm actually opposed to forced bussing, but the point stands that simple redistricting won't work.

But it's ok to keep several schools with high- to extremely high FRL% while the others continue to stay a comfortable 15% and even richer white enclaves. Got it.