APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This process is total overkill for a move that will affect 100 kids. Save your powder for the real redistricting in a couple of years.

It is 100 each year for a total of 400 students. So by 2020 there would ideally be 400 spread out from 9-12 coming from those affected units.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I connected the Yorktown island and changed the units closest to Wakefield over to Wakefield. Didn't think through ES/MS boundaries though - that would have been helpful.

This is pretty much what I did, and then I used the free response portion to say that I think we need a 4th comprehensive high school to keep up with the population growth.

Also a good point to add. Can we submit more than once?

I did the same thing. Moved units such that in my scenario all of Taylor would now feed to Yorktown, and only 4 units would move to Wakefield, unfortunately they are the four southwestern ones along the Pike that are part of the Carlin Springs zone but are also geographically closest to Wakefield. My rationale having played with the tool a lot this afternoon was that any other set of moves to W'field meant onesy-twosy groups of students from multiple schools to make the math work. I didn't want to send just one planning unit of kids from Patrick Henry or Long Branch or Hoffman Boston. I was hoping to try and unite groups of kids to stay together through their entire HS experience.

That being said, it's all changing again in four years, but it will impact these particular kids now so I do think it's worth the effort to think about these real seats for these real kids. I'm in a neighborhood where the elementary could end up dispersing kids to two middle schools and three high schools and it's really upsetting to the community, and I'm using that as a factor.

PP, I watched the community meeting online. There is nothing to stop you from submitting more than once. They can track if multiple entries come from the same computer so if you are trying to game it out by submitting the same solution 50 times it won't help you. This isn't a voting exercise where the scenario with the most votes wins. However, they did say that if you have more than one unique solution, or set of rationales that you want to submit, then go for it. They are seeking community input and that's helpful to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This process is total overkill for a move that will affect 100 kids. Save your powder for the real redistricting in a couple of years.

Except that it matters to those 400 kids and their friends that they will leave behind. They aren't just numbers on a piece of paper, they are real students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I expanded the Yorktown Island.
To Yorktown: 2315, 4815, 4818, 4828, 4829, 4899
To Wakefield: 1202, 4604, 4606, 4612, 4695.

This plan reduces the income disparity between the schools.

I am not in any of these planning units above so no skin in this game but why add more to yorktown from units further away. Just watched a man who lives in the island saying they are do close to wl yet bc of historical reasons which no longer exist his kids who don't participate in sports after school come home and are separated from all their other classmates further north.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I connected the Yorktown island and changed the units closest to Wakefield over to Wakefield. Didn't think through ES/MS boundaries though - that would have been helpful.

This is pretty much what I did, and then I used the free response portion to say that I think we need a 4th comprehensive high school to keep up with the population growth.

Also a good point to add. Can we submit more than once?

I did the same thing. Moved units such that in my scenario all of Taylor would now feed to Yorktown, and only 4 units would move to Wakefield, unfortunately they are the four southwestern ones along the Pike that are part of the Carlin Springs zone but are also geographically closest to Wakefield. My rationale having played with the tool a lot this afternoon was that any other set of moves to W'field meant onesy-twosy groups of students from multiple schools to make the math work. I didn't want to send just one planning unit of kids from Patrick Henry or Long Branch or Hoffman Boston. I was hoping to try and unite groups of kids to stay together through their entire HS experience.

That being said, it's all changing again in four years, but it will impact these particular kids now so I do think it's worth the effort to think about these real seats for these real kids. I'm in a neighborhood where the elementary could end up dispersing kids to two middle schools and three high schools and it's really upsetting to the community, and I'm using that as a factor.

PP, I watched the community meeting online. There is nothing to stop you from submitting more than once. They can track if multiple entries come from the same computer so if you are trying to game it out by submitting the same solution 50 times it won't help you. This isn't a voting exercise where the scenario with the most votes wins. However, they did say that if you have more than one unique solution, or set of rationales that you want to submit, then go for it. They are seeking community input and that's helpful to them.

Thanks for posting this. You raise good points. I had not taken the lower school boundaries into account yet. Has anyone looked at the MS ones? Of course they have to deal with MS again in 2019 once Stafford is done.

[Anonymous]

I bridged the Yorktown island and gave Yorktown a few additional units along the west county border but stopped at Route 50. I gave Wakefield Ft Myer and some units around the east end of Columbia Pike.

I moved 1302, 1303, 1304, 2312, 2313, 2314, and 2401 to Yorktown.

And I moved 3706, 4611, 4612, 4614, 4691, 4815, 4816, 4818, 4828, 4829, and 4899 to Wakefield.

I ended up with most year capacities under or close to 102 with only a couple years at 104 but that was my highest in any school. My goal was to end up with sustainable numbers and with my boundaries they all looked pretty good (104 or less) four years out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I bridged the Yorktown island and gave Yorktown a few additional units along the west county border but stopped at Route 50. I gave Wakefield Ft Myer and some units around the east end of Columbia Pike.

I moved 1302, 1303, 1304, 2312, 2313, 2314, and 2401 to Yorktown.

And I moved 3706, 4611, 4612, 4614, 4691, 4815, 4816, 4818, 4828, 4829, and 4899 to Wakefield.

I ended up with most year capacities under or close to 102 with only a couple years at 104 but that was my highest in any school. My goal was to end up with sustainable numbers and with my boundaries they all looked pretty good (104 or less) four years out.

I know you got the capacities close to 102 but isn't it farther for the planning units you selected to get to Wakefield? Or were you looking at other criteria as well and not just the capacity issue?

[Anonymous]

Does anyone else feel like this is a complete waste of time? I watched the video of tonight's SB meeting, and it seems like a pretty impossible task to figure all of this out w/n the next month or so. Why don't they tell us their proposals and let the community comment on them? The part at the end where they said you should grab a sticky note and put it next to the board with 1 of the 6 criteria seemed so pointless. They really have time to collect all of the physical notes and some how incorporate that into the decision making process?

It is so infuriating to hear that APS has projected above average growth (they mentioned something tonight about gaining 900 plus students in recent years which is the equivalent of an entire ES) and yet some how the CB is deliberately ignoring this issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I bridged the Yorktown island and gave Yorktown a few additional units along the west county border but stopped at Route 50. I gave Wakefield Ft Myer and some units around the east end of Columbia Pike.

I moved 1302, 1303, 1304, 2312, 2313, 2314, and 2401 to Yorktown.

And I moved 3706, 4611, 4612, 4614, 4691, 4815, 4816, 4818, 4828, 4829, and 4899 to Wakefield.

I ended up with most year capacities under or close to 102 with only a couple years at 104 but that was my highest in any school. My goal was to end up with sustainable numbers and with my boundaries they all looked pretty good (104 or less) four years out.

I know you got the capacities close to 102 but isn't it farther for the planning units you selected to get to Wakefield? Or were you looking at other criteria as well and not just the capacity issue?

Maybe, just maybe the PP had the thought not to send the 386 economically disadvantaged students in planning units 3506, 3507, 3508, 3509, and 3510 to the school that already has 49% of its students qualifying for FARMs. Or maybe, just maybe, the PP thought it might be poor form to send 318 Hispanic students to the school that is 44.3% Hispanic.

Did none of you read the recent Washington Post article written when Loudoun tried to do the same thing and was publicly shamed into backtracking? Are we trying to make front page news as the most overtly racist/classist Virginian county? Maybe the DOJ doesn't have anything better to do with their time this year, because I have a feeling they will be hearing about this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This process is total overkill for a move that will affect 100 kids. Save your powder for the real redistricting in a couple of years.

Except that it matters to those 400 kids and their friends that they will leave behind. They aren't just numbers on a piece of paper, they are real students.

But there is a limited set of options, so they should just come up with some options, list the pros and cons, have some way to get some feedback, and make a decision. All these giant meetings, the tool, the process....its just a lot for what is actually a fairly small change. It tires everyone out and we have a hard time getting engagement on the many, many issues facing the school system. People use their energy on things like this, that seem like a big deal, and then other things get ignored until they blow up. Minor boundary adjustments should be something we are treating as routine and administrative, not "all hands on deck" massive public input processes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This process is total overkill for a move that will affect 100 kids. Save your powder for the real redistricting in a couple of years.

Except that it matters to those 400 kids and their friends that they will leave behind. They aren't just numbers on a piece of paper, they are real students.

But there is a limited set of options, so they should just come up with some options, list the pros and cons, have some way to get some feedback, and make a decision. All these giant meetings, the tool, the process....its just a lot for what is actually a fairly small change. It tires everyone out and we have a hard time getting engagement on the many, many issues facing the school system. People use their energy on things like this, that seem like a big deal, and then other things get ignored until they blow up. Minor boundary adjustments should be something we are treating as routine and administrative, not "all hands on deck" massive public input processes.

I agree. Leaders should lead and make the unpopular decisions, instead of leaving it to a community that thinks nothing of segregation when little Johnny may not get to go all the way through ES, MS, and HS with all of the same kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I did the same thing. Moved units such that in my scenario all of Taylor would now feed to Yorktown

All of Taylor? Including the units in Lyon Village and Cherrydale that are zoned for Taylor and walking distance to W-L?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I agree. Leaders should lead and make the unpopular decisions, instead of leaving it to a community that thinks nothing of segregation when little Johnny may not get to go all the way through ES, MS, and HS with all of the same kids.

Oh please don't sound so holier than thou. It's not wrong that many people don't put demographic diversity at the top of their list when balancing multiple competing factors. To me it's a nice-to-have, for my own child I have other factors that are more important. In this case, many families zoned for W-L worry about losing IB access, which was a prime reason they bought in a W-L zone. For some, they do want community continuity for their children and families. For some, they see no reason to attend a school 50% further away when there is at least one and possibly two HS closer. And yes, some people do look at a school's performance or FARMS rate and want to send their kid to a school that is already high-performing rather than having their kid be one of those there to help improve it.

FWIW, My planning unit is not in play this go-around but I'm watching the issue closely.

[Anonymous]

Also, for those who haven't used the tool yet, there is a comment section at the end before you submit. If you have other input, or suggestions that aren't in the tool you can offer them. Whether it's feedback about future high schools like needing a fourth comprehensive school, or whether it's proposing other units to move that aren't on the table, take advantage of the write-in opportunity to provide feedback.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I agree. Leaders should lead and make the unpopular decisions, instead of leaving it to a community that thinks nothing of segregation when little Johnny may not get to go all the way through ES, MS, and HS with all of the same kids.

Oh please don't sound so holier than thou. It's not wrong that many people don't put demographic diversity at the top of their list when balancing multiple competing factors. To me it's a nice-to-have, for my own child I have other factors that are more important. In this case, many families zoned for W-L worry about losing IB access, which was a prime reason they bought in a W-L zone. For some, they do want community continuity for their children and families. For some, they see no reason to attend a school 50% further away when there is at least one and possibly two HS closer. And yes, some people do look at a school's performance or FARMS rate and want to send their kid to a school that is already high-performing rather than having their kid be one of those there to help improve it.

FWIW, My planning unit is not in play this go-around but I'm watching the issue closely.

Sorry, but it is an issue of social justice, not something that is "nice to have" when it is convenient for YOU. Also, your deed did not confer access to any school or any program in perpetuity.