APS Free and Reduced Meals - New Report

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So, what do you expect APS to do when population increases and more schools are needed and they need more buses then? Same problem, yes? The County needs to step it up with ART.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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:I'm really surprised Williamsburg is so low. I know it draws from a very wealthy area, but 2.43% is so low - especially compared to Hamm and Swanson. Did Hamm take all the "poor" people from Williamsburg when it opened?

Also, my kids went to Glebe - they are in HS now. Their numbers are much lower than they used to be, too.

Very surprised about Williamsburg too. I taught there in the 90’s and the population in poverty was much higher then, mostly from busing students from the Clarendon area near Key elementary. I wonder if this is due to boundary change ir due to the fact that Clarendon has gotten so gentrified?

[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:

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.

Yes, I have. From my house to our high school, it's more than 45 minutes and requires a transfer and additional walking. Lining up with start and end times/ early release days/ after school activity schedules is even worse. Technically, between Metro and ART, the County is pretty well covered. But the frequency and times and # of transfers necessary for most people is not practical. There's more to it than just having N/S and E/W routes.

[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.

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?

We have made very reasonable requests in boundary changes and have offered alternative ideas that increase the opportunity for kids of different economic backgrounds to interact with each other meaningfully. Those in charge have not been interested. The fact that leadership hasn't implemented any efforts does not mean that realistic solutions (including partial solutions and mitigating efforts) have not been "figured out" and proffered.

[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"?

Missing middle housing will do NOTHING for SED in the already wealthy schools. Middle missing housing will be affordable only by people who can afford $500K and up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It has only happened on the Pike east of Glebe. West End is too saturated with CAF developments.
They SHOULD upzone Langston Blvd and stick it with the same affordable housing goals they stuck the Pike with, and not allow anymore "transfer" rights to put the affordable units elsewhere (ie, where it already is).
People argue that they are upzoning Langston and that Plan Langston calls for a lot of affordable housing. The amount is not comparable to the goals or density of the Pike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

My kid was at one of the low farms 22207 schools and I said the same exact thing. That’s not said to excuse the extreme imbalance, but across the board, bright kids are being underserved by APS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most embarrassing is HB Woodlawn at 12%. There’s no reason for that to be lower than the county average.

Yeah that seems like the easiest thing to fix. They could easily allocate more HB seats to the high FARMS schools and earmark those seats for FARMS kids

Someone once told me that the HB hours are a problem, because it gets out much later. If you're relying on older kids to look after younger kids after school, it's not an option.

[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.

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?

We have made very reasonable requests in boundary changes and have offered alternative ideas that increase the opportunity for kids of different economic backgrounds to interact with each other meaningfully. Those in charge have not been interested. The fact that leadership hasn't implemented any efforts does not mean that realistic solutions (including partial solutions and mitigating efforts) have not been "figured out" and proffered.

Such as?

Were you able to better balance the #s? Did it require significant busing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most embarrassing is HB Woodlawn at 12%. There’s no reason for that to be lower than the county average.

Yeah that seems like the easiest thing to fix. They could easily allocate more HB seats to the high FARMS schools and earmark those seats for FARMS kids

Someone once told me that the HB hours are a problem, because it gets out much later. If you're relying on older kids to look after younger kids after school, it's not an option.

I’m 100% sure that’s intentional, another moat around their public funded private scchool.

How does that work? They start later than ALL middle and high schools? After all the research how beneficial a later start is for older kids, it just adds to the disparity of the program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It has only happened on the Pike east of Glebe. West End is too saturated with CAF developments.
They SHOULD upzone Langston Blvd and stick it with the same affordable housing goals they stuck the Pike with, and not allow anymore "transfer" rights to put the affordable units elsewhere (ie, where it already is).
People argue that they are upzoning Langston and that Plan Langston calls for a lot of affordable housing. The amount is not comparable to the goals or density of the Pike.

Don’t be daft. The county is at capacity. We need to stop all high density development, as our infrastructure and tax base can’t afford any more of that growth. The schools have no capacity and no place to build.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

I am the pp you are responding to. I would like my kids to have after school activities that are varied and through the school, I would like for them to be challenged, and honestly i would like more trips, more class activities, and more … at grade teaching?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So, what do you expect APS to do when population increases and more schools are needed and they need more buses then? Same problem, yes? The County needs to step it up with ART.

Increase the walk zones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

I am the pp you are responding to. I would like my kids to have after school activities that are varied and through the school, I would like for them to be challenged, and honestly i would like more trips, more class activities, and more … at grade teaching?

another absolutely agree!
Our kids went all the way through our high FRL/high ELL elementary school. Our oldest child probably had a smoother experience, as admin changed multiple times during our second child's time there. Had some absolutely outstanding teachers and, in many ways, it was good for both kids. But some things absolutely could have been better, particularly under the later/mid- admins; and overall the students clearly were not having the same level of challenge as their peers in other schools (even mid-FRL level schools, not just the very low and dominantly wealthy ones).