Barcroft in APS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think the calendar will change? That is a big selling point for us.

Too many people in the neighborhood who do NOT send their children to the school CLAIMING it is because of the calendar.
The principal asking people coming to enroll their new kindergartners whether they've heard people complaining about the calendar.
New boundaries to be determined for 2019 which could then put people not currently in the attendance zone in the Barcroft district and therefore its calendar.
Claims that the current under-enrollment is because so many transfer out because of the calendar.
The calendar costs more - though that argument doesn't seem to threaten Montessori which has a very strong lobby group.
The current principal not being enthusiastically committed to it - it doesn't jive with her kids' schedules.
Superintendent's historical lack of support for it.

If it's a big selling point to you, then you need to make that known loudly and widely.

Enrollment won't change a whit if and when the calendar is changed. UMC avoid it for the obvious reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your kid is in the middle academically, your kid may get lost in the shuffle. I live in the neighborhood and decided on a choice school. I have several families tell me that they did everything they could to get their kid into the gifted program to ensure a good education. The PP with good things to say has a kid in the gifted program.... Perhaps the new principal will improve things, the prior one did a lot of damage to the school's reputation, which was on an upswing prior to the departure of a long-time principal.

Be aware that there are no buses to Randolph so you have to take your kid. I did not want to send my kid to Randolph and the Barrett option is still there, but you have to work directly with the super's office and have a non-racist reason for not wanting to go to Randolph. For me, it was the bus, I need a bus because my kid's grandma watches her after school and she does not drive.

That said, I have met some really nice kids who go there. Good cohort of local kids and their parents are really nice too.

I'm the poster and I do have kids who were identified for gifted services. But I did not have to request that. The school came to us and said they wanted to test for gifted identification. The Young Scholars program is also intended to help identify kids earlier, particularly disadvantaged kids who have been less likely to be identified traditionally. This is a proactive effort. Kids in the middle are often lost in the shuffle no matter where they are.

While I may have had a lot of good things to say, I also have expressed my share of negatives. But I think it's important to highlight the academic improvements I've seen during my family's time there because so many people who have not sent their kids to Barcroft continue to slam the school's academic performance. I still believe a child's academic experience in a high FRL school is not equal to a child's academic experience in a very affluent school. But that doesn't make the experience bad or insufficient. It's just harder for most people to accept because they see/hear/know what's available elsewhere in the system and feel they have to have it all or the most they can or whatever. If the other schools didn't have fancier stuff, it wouldn't be viewed so negatively.

Yes, it's a tough pill to swallow, that being able to buy a more expensive house gives you access to a PUBLIC school with more resources, amenities, and opportunities than a PUBLIC school in a less affluent neighborhood. APS, by prioritizing "walkability" only reinforces that. It's a hard fact and no amount of bs "your kid will be FINE" or "all schools are good schools" blathering can paper that over. People with money buy the best that can afford. When the superintendent of instruction moves to a house north of lee highway served by an elementary with an indoor slide, well, that's all I need to know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think the calendar will change? That is a big selling point for us.

Too many people in the neighborhood who do NOT send their children to the school CLAIMING it is because of the calendar.
The principal asking people coming to enroll their new kindergartners whether they've heard people complaining about the calendar.
New boundaries to be determined for 2019 which could then put people not currently in the attendance zone in the Barcroft district and therefore its calendar.
Claims that the current under-enrollment is because so many transfer out because of the calendar.
The calendar costs more - though that argument doesn't seem to threaten Montessori which has a very strong lobby group.
The current principal not being enthusiastically committed to it - it doesn't jive with her kids' schedules.
Superintendent's historical lack of support for it.

If it's a big selling point to you, then you need to make that known loudly and widely.

Just a quick note - Barcrofts calendar isn't any more pricey than immersion once the inter-sessions are factored in. My understanding is both those and montesorri are about the same.

The difference is Barcroft is a neighborhood school and the other two schools are sought-after option programs. Makes no sense to spend that kind of money on an unpopular under-enrolled school that has little to show for increased academic performance to boot (the people have voted with their feet).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think the calendar will change? That is a big selling point for us.

Too many people in the neighborhood who do NOT send their children to the school CLAIMING it is because of the calendar.
The principal asking people coming to enroll their new kindergartners whether they've heard people complaining about the calendar.
New boundaries to be determined for 2019 which could then put people not currently in the attendance zone in the Barcroft district and therefore its calendar.
Claims that the current under-enrollment is because so many transfer out because of the calendar.
The calendar costs more - though that argument doesn't seem to threaten Montessori which has a very strong lobby group.
The current principal not being enthusiastically committed to it - it doesn't jive with her kids' schedules.
Superintendent's historical lack of support for it.

If it's a big selling point to you, then you need to make that known loudly and widely.

Uh, this is a totally legitimate reaction to being the only school in the whole district on a different calendar. It doesn't jive with anyone else's schedule and not everyone can, or wants to try to make the hassle work.

[Anonymous]

I guess I don’t understand the hassle. No family vacation in August? We are white but poor by DCUM standards so a year round school helps with the cost of having to find care for the summer.

[Anonymous]

The issue with the calendar is that it prevents many people from even considering moving to the area. It is only a property values question for those who already live here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess I don’t understand the hassle. No family vacation in August? We are white but poor by DCUM standards so a year round school helps with the cost of having to find care for the summer.

For us, the idea of juggling calendars in later years when kids are on different ones (when oldest is in MS younger still in ES) was unappealing. That and for us, summer means giving the kids other opportunities, both for camps and extended travel with out-of-state family who aren't on year-round calendars. The calendar was a barrier. I really don't want my kids in school for all of that extra time. We can afford to "summer" and don't need or want the year-round calendar. It wasn't the only reason we wound up at another school, but it was part of the reason. I realize not everyone is in this same boat, probably more people are not in this boat than are, so I don't understand why they didn't make this an option school when they gave it a different calendar. Surely you (PP) are not the only parent who would find this calendar a plus. It just doesn't make sense in a neighborhood school.

[Anonymous]

We're zoned for the school as of right now. By the time our kids start, we might be zoned somewhere else. That said, all of our neighbors will younger children love the school. We toured and it seems nice - the new principal seems on the ball. We'll still try for the choice schools, but I am not so worried if we attend there anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess I don’t understand the hassle. No family vacation in August? We are white but poor by DCUM standards so a year round school helps with the cost of having to find care for the summer.

For us, the idea of juggling calendars in later years when kids are on different ones (when oldest is in MS younger still in ES) was unappealing. That and for us, summer means giving the kids other opportunities, both for camps and extended travel with out-of-state family who aren't on year-round calendars. The calendar was a barrier. I really don't want my kids in school for all of that extra time. We can afford to "summer" and don't need or want the year-round calendar. It wasn't the only reason we wound up at another school, but it was part of the reason. I realize not everyone is in this same boat, probably more people are not in this boat than are, so I don't understand why they didn't make this an option school when they gave it a different calendar. Surely you (PP) are not the only parent who would find this calendar a plus. It just doesn't make sense in a neighborhood school.

They would have to make it a neighborhood school otherwise all the “poor” families (like me, I’m the PP) would flock there. I’m thrilled your children have additional summer opportunities; I wish my children could as well. I like my kids being in school with those of a higher SES since it shows them a variety of lifestyles.

Is the 6 weeks of summer not enough?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The issue with the calendar is that it prevents many people from even considering moving to the area. It is only a property values question for those who already live here.

That's a bunch of BS. The calendar hasn't impacted property values. A lot of people aren't even aware of the calendar, including a lot of students who show up for the first day a month after school has started. FRL% and test scores - that's the cause. People opted out before the calendar, during the calendar, and they'll opt out after the calendar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think the calendar will change? That is a big selling point for us.

Too many people in the neighborhood who do NOT send their children to the school CLAIMING it is because of the calendar.
The principal asking people coming to enroll their new kindergartners whether they've heard people complaining about the calendar.
New boundaries to be determined for 2019 which could then put people not currently in the attendance zone in the Barcroft district and therefore its calendar.
Claims that the current under-enrollment is because so many transfer out because of the calendar.
The calendar costs more - though that argument doesn't seem to threaten Montessori which has a very strong lobby group.
The current principal not being enthusiastically committed to it - it doesn't jive with her kids' schedules.
Superintendent's historical lack of support for it.

If it's a big selling point to you, then you need to make that known loudly and widely.

Uh, this is a totally legitimate reaction to being the only school in the whole district on a different calendar. It doesn't jive with anyone else's schedule and not everyone can, or wants to try to make the hassle work.

The previous two principals were committed to the calendar. A lot of professional educators also value the benefits of a year-round calendar. Not everyone does; but a school with one ideally would have leadership that is committed to it. Once her kids are out of her non-Arlington schools, what difference would it make?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess I don’t understand the hassle. No family vacation in August? We are white but poor by DCUM standards so a year round school helps with the cost of having to find care for the summer.

Agreed. This is one of the advantages of the calendar that most of those who opt out of it don't care about, because they don't need to care about it so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess I don’t understand the hassle. No family vacation in August? We are white but poor by DCUM standards so a year round school helps with the cost of having to find care for the summer.

For us, the idea of juggling calendars in later years when kids are on different ones (when oldest is in MS younger still in ES) was unappealing. That and for us, summer means giving the kids other opportunities, both for camps and extended travel with out-of-state family who aren't on year-round calendars. The calendar was a barrier. I really don't want my kids in school for all of that extra time. We can afford to "summer" and don't need or want the year-round calendar. It wasn't the only reason we wound up at another school, but it was part of the reason. I realize not everyone is in this same boat, probably more people are not in this boat than are, so I don't understand why they didn't make this an option school when they gave it a different calendar. Surely you (PP) are not the only parent who would find this calendar a plus. It just doesn't make sense in a neighborhood school.

They would have to make it a neighborhood school otherwise all the “poor” families (like me, I’m the PP) would flock there. I’m thrilled your children have additional summer opportunities; I wish my children could as well. I like my kids being in school with those of a higher SES since it shows them a variety of lifestyles.

Is the 6 weeks of summer not enough?

Many people don't realize that the kids don't have a longer school year. It just takes longer to complete. the ten-week summer is split into a 6-week summer break and two 2-week intersessions that provide a very affordable opportunity for enrichment/extra academic support that many of these kids would not have if they had a 10-week summer. The intersessions are more accessible than summer camps.

It continues to amaze me that everyone has to vacation in August, yet everyone also seems to leave town immediately upon the last day of school if not before. I really find it difficult to believe that EVERYone's family can only vacation in August and can't shift to the end of July or Labor Day weekend or some other time.

I do understand how the different schedules once the older kids enter middle school can be annoying and sometimes inconvenient -- I understand because I've experienced it firsthand, not because I've speculated. Another option would be a middle school with the same schedule. But that's another discussion. Nevertheless, it still has advantages. One kid likes being off when another isn't, sometimes enjoys coming home early on an early release day when the others don't, getting to spend one-on-one time (if you're in position to do so). It is overall quite manageable, even if it may be less than ideal. If it were so utterly unmanageable and so devastatingly inconvenient, the calendar would not have lasted as long as it has through full generations of families.

[Anonymous]

It seems like a “first world problem” to say the school calendar should be changed since it doesn’t allow for enough vacation days. For parents this schools seems great. It would cut down on the summer camp rat race and prevent summer regression.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issue with the calendar is that it prevents many people from even considering moving to the area. It is only a property values question for those who already live here.

That's a bunch of BS. The calendar hasn't impacted property values. A lot of people aren't even aware of the calendar, including a lot of students who show up for the first day a month after school has started. FRL% and test scores - that's the cause. People opted out before the calendar, during the calendar, and they'll opt out after the calendar.

This. If the test scores didn't blow, we'd all be talking about how the year round model should be more widely adopted. Instead they suck, the intersessions make he school cost more. My guess is the original motivation for the calendar was ESL andto attract UMC to the school by giving it a special identity (like immersion in 1986 and steam in 2019). Time to admit the UMC is going to choice out or move.