50%+ FARMS schools in Arlington

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are plenty of parents who can afford therapy who chose to ignore that their child needs help too so what is your point?

My point is obvious - being in a classroom with kids who have special needs and are from socio economic disadvantaged backgrounds is difficult for a child is normal functioning and devleoping and can easily lead to the "normal" child receiving a lot less education than they could have being in a school without those issues. Why as a parent with means would you purposefully choose a poor educational environment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If in two years you still have doubts, there are excellent private schools in the area: GDS, Beauvoir, St Stephen's St. Agnes, Potomac School, etc... One of the benefits of living in close-in Arlington is that there are excellent public and private school options.

These schools are in DC, Alexandria and McLean, not Arlington. I guess you mean they aren't a long drive from Arlington? I'm surprised you didn't mention O'Connell, which is in Arlington.

O'Connell is a parochial high school, which does not have a lower school, and so it is not relevant to this discussion.

So there are no private schools with lower schools in Arlington that provide an alternative to the public schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So there are no private schools with lower schools in Arlington that provide an alternative to the public schools?

Other than Catholic parish schools, that's correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are plenty of parents who can afford therapy who chose to ignore that their child needs help too so what is your point?

My point is obvious - being in a classroom with kids who have special needs and are from socio economic disadvantaged backgrounds is difficult for a child is normal functioning and devleoping and can easily lead to the "normal" child receiving a lot less education than they could have being in a school without those issues. Why as a parent with means would you purposefully choose a poor educational environment?

I'm still shocked that people in this thread are referring to Barrett as having a poor educational environment. It's like we're back in the 90s, when most Arlington Forest families chose private school. Barrett today is a completely different environment with very proactive, supportive, and highly educated middle class families. The school has also worked hard to involve the low income families who have high expectations for their kids' academic success. For North Arlington families who want a truly diverse elementary school, Barrett really is the only option, and if one looks at past threads on Arlington schools, it is a very popular school with a good reputation. Its success is measured in rising test scores and awards like the 1st place finish by 5th graders in the NASA Spaced Out Sports Challenge. Barrett 5th graders designed a game that will be played aboard the International Space Station.

The classes are full of kids from middle class backgrounds, and Barrett is growing because of that burgeoning demographic. Trust me, your child will receive roughly the same attention at Barrett as he/she would receive at more uniformly upper middle class schools like Long Branch, etc. And if you're afraid your blonde-haired kid will stick out, don't worry, as roughly half the school will look just like him/her. Seriously, if you haven't made up your mind, and since you have two years to figure things out, I suggest you visit the school and talk candidly with neighbors and school staff. If you have already ruled out sending your children to Barrett, then this discussion is fairly pointless and would only serve as a platform for you to further justify your decision.

Anonymous wrote:
My point is obvious - being in a classroom with kids who have special needs and are from socio economic disadvantaged backgrounds is difficult for a child is normal functioning and devleoping and can easily lead to the "normal" child receiving a lot less education than they could have being in a school without those issues.

These are concerns I hear from parents who are considering overwhelmingly poor, but otherwise good schools in South Arlington like Randolph, Abingdon, and Barcroft. Roughly half of the students at Barrett come from Arlington Forest and other well-off North Arlington neighborhoods outside the schools' boundary, and Barrett's demographics are of little concern to most area parents today. If you are ruling out Barrett because of its demographics, you are definitely in the minority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are plenty of parents who can afford therapy who chose to ignore that their child needs help too so what is your point?

My point is obvious - being in a classroom with kids who have special needs and are from socio economic disadvantaged backgrounds is difficult for a child is normal functioning and devleoping and can easily lead to the "normal" child receiving a lot less education than they could have being in a school without those issues. Why as a parent with means would you purposefully choose a poor educational environment?

I'm still shocked that people in this thread are referring to Barrett as having a poor educational environment. It's like we're back in the 90s, when most Arlington Forest families chose private school. Barrett today is a completely different environment with very proactive, supportive, and highly educated middle class families. The school has also worked hard to involve the low income families who have high expectations for their kids' academic success. For North Arlington families who want a truly diverse elementary school, Barrett really is the only option, and if one looks at past threads on Arlington schools, it is a very popular school with a good reputation. Its success is measured in rising test scores and awards like the 1st place finish by 5th graders in the NASA Spaced Out Sports Challenge. Barrett 5th graders designed a game that will be played aboard the International Space Station.

The classes are full of kids from middle class backgrounds, and Barrett is growing because of that burgeoning demographic. Trust me, your child will receive roughly the same attention at Barrett as he/she would receive at more uniformly upper middle class schools like Long Branch, etc. And if you're afraid your blonde-haired kid will stick out, don't worry, as roughly half the school will look just like him/her. Seriously, if you haven't made up your mind, and since you have two years to figure things out, I suggest you visit the school and talk candidly with neighbors and school staff. If you have already ruled out sending your children to Barrett, then this discussion is fairly pointless and would only serve as a platform for you to further justify your decision.

Anonymous wrote:
My point is obvious - being in a classroom with kids who have special needs and are from socio economic disadvantaged backgrounds is difficult for a child is normal functioning and devleoping and can easily lead to the "normal" child receiving a lot less education than they could have being in a school without those issues.

These are concerns I hear from parents who are considering overwhelmingly poor, but otherwise good schools in South Arlington like Randolph, Abingdon, and Barcroft. Roughly half of the students at Barrett come from Arlington Forest and other well-off North Arlington neighborhoods outside the schools' boundary, and Barrett's demographics are of little concern to most area parents today. If you are ruling out Barrett because of its demographics, you are definitely in the minority.

If Barrett is as flawless as you describe despite still being Title I and still having over 50% of its students from low-income HHs, then it really should be a case study in national educational reform- so perhaps Barrett can demonstrate how middle/upper income kids are actually not set back in a school environment that is still over 50% low income.

Has there been an major studies done on the school as a case study? If you know of any, please post, because it would be great to see the data.

[Anonymous]

Interesting Flickr page with lots of Barrett photos:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/kwbarrett/

Looks pretty normal to me, like many of the diverse schools in NoVa. Suggesting that it's a "poor educational environment" seems gratuitously snarky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interesting Flickr page with lots of Barrett photos:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/kwbarrett/

Looks pretty normal to me, like many of the diverse schools in NoVa. Suggesting that it's a "poor educational environment" seems gratuitously snarky.

And basing the fact that is it offers a good educational environment based on snapshots is just plain dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
And basing the fact that is it offers a good educational environment based on snapshots is just plain dumb.

Pictures tell a story, if not the whole story.

As do words, although in your case it's pretty clear from your posts that you're a complete asshole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If Barrett is as flawless as you describe despite still being Title I and still having over 50% of its students from low-income HHs, then it really should be a case study in national educational reform- so perhaps Barrett can demonstrate how middle/upper income kids are actually not set back in a school environment that is still over 50% low income.

Has there been an major studies done on the school as a case study? If you know of any, please post, because it would be great to see the data.

For the most part it's simply a case of demographics, in some ways fairly unique to Arlington. The middle and upper-middle class students at Barrett and throughout Arlington come from highly educated families. Data has been published on the very high numbers of adults in Arlington with advanced degrees. So Arlington's middle class is more educated than a more typical middle-icome community like Aurora, IL or Rancho Cucamonga, CA. The academic results from the more well-to-do kids more than offsets the lower scores, and as has been stated, highly motivated kids from families who have attained a high level of education help to create an environment where kids from all backgrounds can succeed. At Barrett the current breakdown of poor to well-to-do and middle class kids is close to 50/50, and concerning overall academic performance, the school provides good results with the current demographic makeup. If Barrett were 80% low income, the results would not look so appealing. As the school's middle class population continues to grow (as one can deduce from the APS demographic data on its website and recent real estate trends) scores will continue to go up. For some more serious research, compare Barrett to certain elementary schools in Takoma Park, MD which has a similar number of wealthy, highly educated families who enthusiastically support the neighborhood public schools, as well as families who live well below the poverty line. Also, you might want to look into the numbers of G/T kids at Barrett and similar schools in DC, Takoma Park, etc...

[Anonymous]

I've been a PP (I think the less snarky one) that is somewhat skepitcal that my DC could receive an education equivalent to a majority middle/upper income school as in a majority low-income school, even if it has a substantial representation of upper/middle income and is experiencing rapidly shifting demographics.

The boosters of Barrett here make a passioned case, but really I imagine every learning environment (even the most elite prep schools) is going to have drawbacks, and what I'm hearing from those currently in these schools and posting in defense, is what the OP asked for, an honest assessment of the drawbacks...I'd really welcome one of the Barrett defenders here to balance their case, by also talking about some of the drawbacks they've experienced given the somewhat unique demographic mix in the school....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I recently moved to N Arlington. I'm zoned to a school that is 50%+ FARMS. Frankly, no matter what the boosters say, I'm just not comfortable with schools with demographics that skewed- I hesitate to believe that stats like that won't affect both socialization and education for my DC. So I will not even consider the elementary school literally a block from my new home in a couple years when DC starts school.

Didn't you know about the school before you moved into the neighborhood? It seems a bit strange to make a big deal about it now, unless you always planned to go private.

PP here- yes I knew and make ample income to go private, so we focussed more on the house and area we liked best rather than the school. It still does annoy me though that the country protects so much low-income housing in some areas of N Arlington resulting in such distortions. It doesn't seem sensible to me that with so many professionals with good incomes priced out of N Arlington that so many tracts of low-income housing remain here- I would much rather have Arlington's low-income protected housing turned into middle-income housing so that the subsidies go to those that really need to stay in the area for their livelihood (municipal works, police, teachers etc.). For the rest, really let the market take its course...if people making $100k/year can't afford to buy here, I don't see why it should be an entitlement for those making $25k.

Interesting, I didn't think this was as big of a problem in true North Arlington anymore but in those areas that bordered close to south Arlington. We have similar problem in Alexandria City. I agree with your argument and don't think low income individuals are entitled to cheap or free housing in prime real estate areas.

Nice of you to decide who should/shouldn't benefit from low-income housing and location thereof. The diversity of Arlington is what makes it such a great place to live. The schools in Arlington are great across the board. Had DC not gone to immersion school (also socio-economically diverse), we'd have chosen Barrett (which is not our neighborhood school). Snooty, Type-A white parents who're scared of non-white people are going to ruin Arlington.

16:52 Here: Guess what- not white and I'm not scared of myself, but scared of what decades of informed research has said about educational environments that are low-income dominant- I'm sorry the research is pretty decisive that it ends up affecting educational outcomes for everyone.

On the Barrett comment, yes Barrett is what I was referring to. The Buckingham THs though will number under 150, so they want make up for the demographics resulting from the protected garden apartment complexes. The school is likely to remain majority low-income for some time, and I believe it is also Title I. I don't buy the anecdotes, given that I know so many people convincing themselves that a medicore learning environment is "good" for their own personal justification.

If you don't "buy" the anecdotes, then I guess you're going to signing your child(ren) up for ATS (should you be so lucky) or Key (but wait, I think they have a decent number of "FARMS" students too) or maybe private school...

Barrett IS a Title I school - there's no hiding that fact. But I just don't know how you can say it is a "mediocre" learning environment if you haven't even had a child there. Our child is a student there and has had wonderful teachers and has thrived in a very positive environment that is absolutely meeting his needs.

I also had concerns about Barrett as a school when we first bought in the neighborhood before our kids were born. We assumed we'd move once we had kids and they became school-age. In the years before my first started kindergarten, though, the majority of my neighbors not only chose to send their kids to Barrett over other alternatives, but spoke very highly about their experiences with it. I don't think any of our friends and neighbors are trying to "justify" their choices - I think they, as we, are genuinely happy with the school.

PP here- fair enough, people are happy. But are you telling me the school or your child's learning environment has none of the adverse effects associated with majority low-income schools? There is nearly unanimous consensus in the academic and policy literature on education that majority low-income schools produce lower outcomes for students of all socioeconomic backgrounds (I've included an example of a typical excerpt from these types of studies) this on the basis of both quantitative and qualitative assessments of outcomes by highly regarding specialists in the field.

I heartily support the socioeconomic integration of schools, but for me that does not mean a majority low-income school. I understand the demographics in the Barrett area are shifting and this takes time...I just don't have the risk appetite to be at the vanguard.

"2007 National Assessment of Educational Progress suggests:
Low-income students attending more affluent schools scored almost two years ahead of low-income students in high-poverty schools. Indeed, low-income students given a chance to attend more affluent schools performed more than half a year better, on average, than middle-income students who attend high-poverty schools (Kahlenberg, 2009a, p. 1).
Summarizing these results suggests that high-poverty schools produce worse outcomes for both low and middle-income students. Moreover, when low-income students attend middle-income schools their performance, relative to their low-income peers in high-poverty schools, improves dramatically. More than forty years of research has resulted in the same conclusion that the overall socioeconomic status of a school affects the achievement of all its students."

Apparently my experience (or that of other posters) is not going to change your opinion. That's fine; Barrett is getting crowded now anyway (another sign that people are happy with their educational choice). Not sure why, since you've done your "research," you even bother to ask what other people think. All I know is that my child has learned to read, to do math, and learned all kinds of other things that I certainly didn't learn (or even get exposed to) as a kindergartner or first-grader and her test scores have proved she is highly-competent in these areas. I cannot imagine that she would be reading or doing math any "better" if she were in a school with more rich white kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've been a PP (I think the less snarky one) that is somewhat skepitcal that my DC could receive an education equivalent to a majority middle/upper income school as in a majority low-income school, even if it has a substantial representation of upper/middle income and is experiencing rapidly shifting demographics.

The boosters of Barrett here make a passioned case, but really I imagine every learning environment (even the most elite prep schools) is going to have drawbacks, and what I'm hearing from those currently in these schools and posting in defense, is what the OP asked for, an honest assessment of the drawbacks...I'd really welcome one of the Barrett defenders here to balance their case, by also talking about some of the drawbacks they've experienced given the somewhat unique demographic mix in the school....

I attempted to address this earlier when I talked about the "guilt" about spending extra money on school activities and the fact that the kids getting free-lunch become unintentionally segregated from the others by having to wait in line to get their lunch, but I guess everyone was too busy piling on about how you're damaging your kid by sending them to Barrett.

My DH attended a public school when he was growing up that was so unbalanced economically that it was uncomfortable for him as the child of an upper-middle class family. I don't feel like that's the case at Barrett. I think there is a good enough split (basically 50/50) that everyone feels like they fit in.

What I can't say (because I don't believe it is true) is to say that the quality of education suffers because of the linguistic and economic diversity. They assess all the kids before they start kindergarten and put the higher-functioning ESL kids into mixed classrooms and the lower-functioning ones in a full ESL class. The teachers provide opportunities for all kids to work at their level of achievement, and they are grouped accordingly. Yes, there are some disruptions but from what I've noticed, they don't have anything to do with economic background. Kids get sent to the principal regardless (and we know plenty from the upper-socioeconomic strata who are troublemakers).

If I truly thought my child would get a higher quality of education from a different school in Arlington, we would have moved. Instead, we stayed in Arlington Forest and built on to our house and plan to send our younger child there as well. It's not about justification - we have the means to make a change but I don't know what we'd be changing for. I know there are people who feel like if their school isn't the "Blue Ribbon School" then they are compromising their child's education. I don't feel that way and even though some kids at the school may not score as well as their wealthy, English-speaking counterparts, my child tests just fine compared to children from her demographic.

[Anonymous]

One issue no one else seems to have touched on is what if you are a family with an IEP kid. We have 3 kids and were originally in private. One of our kids has an IEP and started off in FFX child find program b/c of a speech delay. We held him back from K so he was being evaluated at our local Title I school (as he was K age) but he was attending pre K at a private. The Title I school, with a 65% + ESL K class, decided our DS no longer needed special ed services. The private denied our kid a K contract b/c they said he didn't have enough self confidence to succeed in K and didn't consistently work independently (and this was not an exclusive or competitive private).

Compared to the significant number kids with limited English and few economic resources at our zoned Title I school, our DS may have seemed just fine, but we knew that if we enrolled our DS in the Title I public he would flounder. So we bought a house in a stellar elementary school district in McLean. We appealed the Title I school's determination that our kid didn't need special ed services and won. The new elementary school - which in no way would qualify as a Title I school - agreed with our appeal and provided the services our DS needed to have a successful K year. I LOVE my kids' new school.

If you have an intelligent, confident, self motivated kid (and I have one of those in the AAP program), then they will succeed anywhere, including at a Title I school. But if you have an average kid, or a kid with special needs, then being at a Title I school may not be a great idea.

[Anonymous]

Just a note on profoundly gifted students (different from general AAP program students, believe me) --- they are rarely given the help they need at private or public schools. AND the system isn't opened up enough yet to allow them to have the customized programs that they need (IEP-like). Many profoundly gifted students need accommodations (such as use of computers instead of handwritten assignments, longer time for assignments because of the tendency to enlarge and a deepen projects, etc.... ).

The Davidson Institute and the PEG program with Mary Baldwin are the only places I know that have it right.

[Anonymous]

As I read through all of these responses, I don't know whether to laugh or cry. First, in response to the OP, we've just started school this year, so I don't have a lot of experience yet with APS.

We live in S. Arlington. Not even south of Rte 50, we live (gasp!), south of Columbia Pike. Our schools is 70%+ low income. We are white, upper middle class.

We sent our child to our neighborhood school on the assumption that, since APS is, overall, an outstanding school system, whether we went to one particular school versus another would not make a huge difference.

Perhaps we are just woefully naive. Or perhaps others are just over-concerned with differences that really are fairly small?