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:

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.

They do this because they've been repeatedly dismissed and rejected, not because they haven't been debated.
Cost of transportation is one of the main excuses for APS giving up on even talking about balancing FRL. Doesn't keep them from wasting money elsewhere. And the County should be helping out with transit options. It doesn't all have to be yellow buses with "Arlington County Public Schools" printed on the sides. Get MS and HS off yellow buses onto green or white/blue/red ones, and you have more yellow ones for the elementary kids.

[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.

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.

and APS has said many times that they don’t have room to park additional busses

[Anonymous]

The county could also shift to fewer bus stops (something between current system and hub system).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

and APS has said many times that they don’t have room to park additional busses

To that end, the COUNTY doesn't have the space to park more buses. See the huge outcry over county bus parking on the Buck property across from W&L.

[Anonymous]

My DD is at one of the top four highest FARMS rate schools. It's great for her socially. We supplement heavily with enrichment and activities outside of school because the students get very little of that in school. She is bright and bored. We are moving before third grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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!

Yes, I have. Back when we were looking at some of the boundary options that pushed kids up above Langston Blvd. Have you looked it? We already have many E-W routes, Ballston is a hub. Need more N-S routes and getting into outer edges.

This is to get kids to the 5 HSs, not MS or ES.

[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.

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.

DP. Go play with the tool and tell us what you come up with. Some of us have already done that many times. There are just some physical constraints you can't change (unless you change housing).

You need extensive busing to make it happen.

[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.

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.

Any solution to level out the extremes would require extensive busing. Unfortunately, the lowest and highest SES populations are at opposite ends of the county. Ranked choice probably wouldn't help for ES because most people will just choose the closest schools to them. If people did choose all over the county then you have significantly fewer walkers and much longer bus rides.

[Anonymous]

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.

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%.

8. They didn't "dismiss or deny the research" - it's just not the #1 criteria.

1. 2. 6. I have worked those maps many times. There is just only so much you can do for ES without extensive busing. Why is busing kids all over the county the "best" solution for the kids? What about the families? You're going to ignore their drop off/pick up requirements? You're going to completely ignore the budget/resources?

Propose a realistic solution and then push for it. If you have been involved for 10 years then why haven't you figured out this magical solution yet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1

[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.

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.

Exactly, and the really wealthy areas in North Arlington will be unaffected because there are no high FARMS boundaries to play with, so even better

[Anonymous]

Why don't you all read about how well it went in San Francisco.

https://www.sfusd.edu/schools/enroll/student-assignment-policy/student-assignment-changes.

All people want neighborhood schools. The low-income parents and the high-income parents. All people want some predictability and a sense of community.

The answer is changed zoning and housing policies and it's possible to change things but it will take decades to see real results. If some of you believe so passionately about all this, get out and support the missing middle initiative. Are you the same people arguing against that because "overcrowding"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why don't you all read about how well it went in San Francisco.

https://www.sfusd.edu/schools/enroll/student-assignment-policy/student-assignment-changes.

All people want neighborhood schools. The low-income parents and the high-income parents. All people want some predictability and a sense of community.

The answer is changed zoning and housing policies and it's possible to change things but it will take decades to see real results. If some of you believe so passionately about all this, get out and support the missing middle initiative. Are you the same people arguing against that because "overcrowding"?

People in single family neighborhoods by houses because they like the neighborhood. Dot North Arlington with low rise affordable apartments in enough quantity to balance FARMS numbers with south Arlington and the problem will disappear as wealthy people just move

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why don't you all read about how well it went in San Francisco.

https://www.sfusd.edu/schools/enroll/student-assignment-policy/student-assignment-changes.

All people want neighborhood schools. The low-income parents and the high-income parents. All people want some predictability and a sense of community.

The answer is changed zoning and housing policies and it's possible to change things but it will take decades to see real results. If some of you believe so passionately about all this, get out and support the missing middle initiative. Are you the same people arguing against that because "overcrowding"?

If we build affordable housing in the north can we turn some of the affordable housing in the south to market rate? Otherwise we are adding to the north without doing anything to address the 70% plus in the south.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don't you all read about how well it went in San Francisco.

https://www.sfusd.edu/schools/enroll/student-assignment-policy/student-assignment-changes.

All people want neighborhood schools. The low-income parents and the high-income parents. All people want some predictability and a sense of community.

The answer is changed zoning and housing policies and it's possible to change things but it will take decades to see real results. If some of you believe so passionately about all this, get out and support the missing middle initiative. Are you the same people arguing against that because "overcrowding"?

People in single family neighborhoods by houses because they like the neighborhood. Dot North Arlington with low rise affordable apartments in enough quantity to balance FARMS numbers with south Arlington and the problem will disappear as wealthy people just move

Not really. Arlington doesn't have a public housing authority or anyplace to "dot North Arlington with low rise affordable apartments". They'd need to upzone Langston Blvd and the County would continue to finance/fund mixed use affordable housing (that is the County's affordable housing model). S Arlington would redevelop over time and have higher percentage of market rate apartments. That has already started to happen on Columbia Pike, as one example.

It just takes a long time.