Aps fall boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me guess, you don’t want you kids moved to Drew. 🙄

Heck no I don't and you don't either

I’m not afraid of Black people so I don’t have a problem with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They’re doing now what they should have done in the last boundary change. Abingdon’s growth isn’t going to slow, and Drew has space. They are adjacent. It’s not rocket surgery.

They won’t move Fairlington, they’ll find some other solution with fringe planning units

Their proposal makes clear they are not moving Fairlington. They are moving the planning units that aren't even contiguous and contain affordable housing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They’re doing now what they should have done in the last boundary change. Abingdon’s growth isn’t going to slow, and Drew has space. They are adjacent. It’s not rocket surgery.

They won’t move Fairlington, they’ll find some other solution with fringe planning units

Their proposal makes clear they are not moving Fairlington. They are moving the planning units that aren't even contiguous and contain affordable housing.

There are no more contiguous PUs to pull in. Anything would be non-contiguous. The justification for the units they are planning to move is they already take a bus to Abingdon, now they will just take a bus to Drew.

But yeah, most of the people I know who live in the SFH/townhome/duplexes in those PUs already go to an option school- mostly Claremont and Campbell. Drew will remain a high poverty school. Not much can be done about it.

[Anonymous]

Drew and Abingdon's test scores last year were almost identical for math and reading (both were very low). I Don't know that the schools are that different academically now that Drew is a neighborhood school. Drew is significantly less crowded than Abingdon and the facilities themselves are nice.

[Anonymous]

There are solutions. The residents of Green Valley will not consider it. They condemn their own children to a subpar school because of their obstinance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They’re doing now what they should have done in the last boundary change. Abingdon’s growth isn’t going to slow, and Drew has space. They are adjacent. It’s not rocket surgery.

They won’t move Fairlington, they’ll find some other solution with fringe planning units

Their proposal makes clear they are not moving Fairlington. They are moving the planning units that aren't even contiguous and contain affordable housing.

There are no more contiguous PUs to pull in. Anything would be non-contiguous. The justification for the units they are planning to move is they already take a bus to Abingdon, now they will just take a bus to Drew.

But yeah, most of the people I know who live in the SFH/townhome/duplexes in those PUs already go to an option school- mostly Claremont and Campbell. Drew will remain a high poverty school. Not much can be done about it.

Fairlington is also NOT in the walk zone to Abingdon. So, why not move it? Oh wait. Because APS doesn't want the fight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Drew and Abingdon's test scores last year were almost identical for math and reading (both were very low). I Don't know that the schools are that different academically now that Drew is a neighborhood school. Drew is significantly less crowded than Abingdon and the facilities themselves are nice.

Pretty much everyone's test scores last year were pretty low.

Also, they are pulling the lowest scoring kids out of Abingdon and sending them to Drew...what do you think that will do to each school and their scores? Hmmmmm...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are solutions. The residents of Green Valley will not consider it. They condemn their own children to a subpar school because of their obstinance.

What solutions are those?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me guess, you don’t want you kids moved to Drew. 🙄

Heck no I don't and you don't either

I’m not afraid of Black people so I don’t have a problem with it.

How do you feel about the general shooty-ness of the area directly adjacent to the school? There have been multiple incidents in the past few months as well as historically from that block. Some have happened during school hours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are solutions. The residents of Green Valley will not consider it. They condemn their own children to a subpar school because of their obstinance.

What solutions are those?

GV residents will not accept Drew as anything other than a neighborhood school. The people complaining about it don't even have kids and like the idea of a neighborhood school but have no skin in the game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are solutions. The residents of Green Valley will not consider it. They condemn their own children to a subpar school because of their obstinance.

What solutions are those?

GV residents will not accept Drew as anything other than a neighborhood school. The people complaining about it don't even have kids and like the idea of a neighborhood school but have no skin in the game.

Why shouldn’t it be a neighborhood school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They’re doing now what they should have done in the last boundary change. Abingdon’s growth isn’t going to slow, and Drew has space. They are adjacent. It’s not rocket surgery.

They won’t move Fairlington, they’ll find some other solution with fringe planning units

Their proposal makes clear they are not moving Fairlington. They are moving the planning units that aren't even contiguous and contain affordable housing.

There are no more contiguous PUs to pull in. Anything would be non-contiguous. The justification for the units they are planning to move is they already take a bus to Abingdon, now they will just take a bus to Drew.

But yeah, most of the people I know who live in the SFH/townhome/duplexes in those PUs already go to an option school- mostly Claremont and Campbell. Drew will remain a high poverty school. Not much can be done about it.

Fairlington is also NOT in the walk zone to Abingdon. So, why not move it? Oh wait. Because APS doesn't want the fight.

I know there’s posters on these threads that would like nothing more than to stick it to Fairlington… they may want to bow out. If the proposal goes through, not only does south Fairlington remain at Abingdon, but it will become a lower FRL school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They’re doing now what they should have done in the last boundary change. Abingdon’s growth isn’t going to slow, and Drew has space. They are adjacent. It’s not rocket surgery.

They won’t move Fairlington, they’ll find some other solution with fringe planning units

Their proposal makes clear they are not moving Fairlington. They are moving the planning units that aren't even contiguous and contain affordable housing.

There are no more contiguous PUs to pull in. Anything would be non-contiguous. The justification for the units they are planning to move is they already take a bus to Abingdon, now they will just take a bus to Drew.

But yeah, most of the people I know who live in the SFH/townhome/duplexes in those PUs already go to an option school- mostly Claremont and Campbell. Drew will remain a high poverty school. Not much can be done about it.

Fairlington is also NOT in the walk zone to Abingdon. So, why not move it? Oh wait. Because APS doesn't want the fight.

I know there’s posters on these threads that would like nothing more than to stick it to Fairlington… they may want to bow out. If the proposal goes through, not only does south Fairlington remain at Abingdon, but it will become a lower FRL school.

DP. Which proposal is that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are solutions. The residents of Green Valley will not consider it. They condemn their own children to a subpar school because of their obstinance.

What solutions are those?

GV residents will not accept Drew as anything other than a neighborhood school. The people complaining about it don't even have kids and like the idea of a neighborhood school but have no skin in the game.

GV resident here. Please don't categorize us in one lump. The neighborhood is gentrifying. It is not one single homogenous opinion. If you have concerns I would strongly suggest you reach out to the Green Valley Civic Association and County Board.

Our child goes to Claremont--we speak Spanish and prioritized that, but, we were prepared to go to Drew if we did not win the lottery. Met with Principal Graves before she transitioned, etc.

I fully believe that if the GV community insisted on having a neighborhood school, the neighborhood school can absolutely insist on a safe neighborhood. And should push on the civic association and county board to take any steps necessary to ensure that outcome. This is not rocket science, but, a matter of stepping up enforcement and actions to deter problematic behaviors. Just my two cents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are solutions. The residents of Green Valley will not consider it. They condemn their own children to a subpar school because of their obstinance.

What solutions are those?

GV residents will not accept Drew as anything other than a neighborhood school. The people complaining about it don't even have kids and like the idea of a neighborhood school but have no skin in the game.

GV resident here. Please don't categorize us in one lump. The neighborhood is gentrifying. It is not one single homogenous opinion. If you have concerns I would strongly suggest you reach out to the Green Valley Civic Association and County Board.

Our child goes to Claremont--we speak Spanish and prioritized that, but, we were prepared to go to Drew if we did not win the lottery. Met with Principal Graves before she transitioned, etc.

I fully believe that if the GV community insisted on having a neighborhood school, the neighborhood school can absolutely insist on a safe neighborhood. And should push on the civic association and county board to take any steps necessary to ensure that outcome. This is not rocket science, but, a matter of stepping up enforcement and actions to deter problematic behaviors. Just my two cents.

This is kind of hilariously naive. Sure the scope of Arlington's issue is much smaller, but these are clearly not easy issues to solve. Never have been and never will be.