Goodbye Barcroft (APS)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they get one immersion program (which I am not entirely opposed to) I pray that they follow the method at Claremont over key. I obviously only have first hand knowledge of Claremont, but from what I heard from key it is a very different program and is not nearly as inclusive to Claremont (my friend describes the population as segregated, which is not my experience at Claremont).

This is the first time I'm hearing this, what is the difference in methods?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The transfers are mostly UMC kids, not the majority of poor kids that live in the neighborhood. It is the poor kids who lose the very walkable school. Almost all would have to bus to Randolph, close in proximity but across two big roads.

I think the SB should think twice about moving a school that will disproportionately affect lower income families.

But then we have to stop complaining about the FARMS rates at those schools. FARMS rates can't change if populations don't move around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The transfers are mostly UMC kids, not the majority of poor kids that live in the neighborhood. It is the poor kids who lose the very walkable school. Almost all would have to bus to Randolph, close in proximity but across two big roads.

I think the SB should think twice about moving a school that will disproportionately affect lower income families.

OMG! Not crossing two big roads!!!!
They’ll survive. Break up the poverty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The transfers are mostly UMC kids, not the majority of poor kids that live in the neighborhood. It is the poor kids who lose the very walkable school. Almost all would have to bus to Randolph, close in proximity but across two big roads.

I think the SB should think twice about moving a school that will disproportionately affect lower income families.

Only, if there would be outreach, that their kids can still walk to the same school, most likely, but they need to apply differently, most families perhaps would not be affected. The large majority of the families you think will be affected are Spanish speaking immigrants, correct?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The transfers are mostly UMC kids, not the majority of poor kids that live in the neighborhood. It is the poor kids who lose the very walkable school. Almost all would have to bus to Randolph, close in proximity but across two big roads.

I think the SB should think twice about moving a school that will disproportionately affect lower income families.

Only, if there would be outreach, that their kids can still walk to the same school, most likely, but they need to apply differently, most families perhaps would not be affected. The large majority of the families you think will be affected are Spanish speaking immigrants, correct?

If they speak Spanish at home, they can apply to the Spanish dominant lottery and will almost surely get spots because there aren't enough current applicants. If they keep VPI classrooms at the school (at least 2) new families can get preference in the lottery, and then siblings have it, too. It will still be a walkable school for families living in Buchanan Gardens. It will just be a walkable Immersion school. And worst case, they take a very short bus ride to a nearby school, just like all the kids living in the Barcrfot Apartments do now to attend Barcroft as their neighborhood school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they get one immersion program (which I am not entirely opposed to) I pray that they follow the method at Claremont over key. I obviously only have first hand knowledge of Claremont, but from what I heard from key it is a very different program and is not nearly as inclusive to Claremont (my friend describes the population as segregated, which is not my experience at Claremont).

This is the first time I'm hearing this, what is the difference in methods?

I don't know if there is an official method vs just the school environment. I have spoken with a few parents that attend key and they indicated that the school was segregated into the Spanish speaking and English speaking populations. I was told that the PTA meetings are always in English and that Spanish speaking families do not appear to attend (although a Spanish translator will be provider). I also heard that with Key the vast majority of after school events are attended by the English speaking families only. I knew some parents that pulled their child from Key because the Spanish portion of the day involved too much English. I have also heard that key has trouble getting fliers and documents translated to Spanish.

This is not the case at Claremont. From what I gather (although I haven't been to every meeting) the PTA meetings switch every month (so one is in Spanish, the next month English). The after school events I have attended are very well attended by the Spanish speaking families are often in Spanish. The events during school that the parents are invited to are all in Spanish. I am not in my son's class all day, but when I am there the teacher speaks in Spanish only. It seems from my experience at Claremont and my second hand knowledge of Key that Claremont makes more of an effort to reach out to Spanish speaking families and is considered the stronger program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The programs at Key and Claremont are identical. If there is segregation going on, then that is a parental/school leadership issue. We were at Claremont and there was nothing segregated about it.

I think it is important to remember that a substantial number of the spanish speakers at the immersion schools are not poor at all. There are many well educated and well to do Spanish speaking families in this area. There is a whole cadre of them at Claremont. They understand the importance of Spanish literacy for their kids and those kids are already fully bilingual in K. The challenge is getting more recent immigrants on board.

APS needs to reach out to the community and make sure they will apply to these schools if they are closer. Transferring a program fills up the school now, but incoming classes will be no different than they are now if APS doesn't seriously step up its efforts to encourage these families to apply and them help them navigate the process.

Claremont and Carlin Springs are two miles apart. If parents value immersion that highly, will 2 miles really be a barrier? I can see if we were talking about Jamestown because that 6-mile drive can take at least 20 minutes even without morning rush hour traffic, but here we're talking about maybe ten minutes during heavy rush while staying around the same commuter routes for people heading to/from work.

You're assuming all ED people have a car.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The programs at Key and Claremont are identical. If there is segregation going on, then that is a parental/school leadership issue. We were at Claremont and there was nothing segregated about it.

I think it is important to remember that a substantial number of the spanish speakers at the immersion schools are not poor at all. There are many well educated and well to do Spanish speaking families in this area. There is a whole cadre of them at Claremont. They understand the importance of Spanish literacy for their kids and those kids are already fully bilingual in K. The challenge is getting more recent immigrants on board.

APS needs to reach out to the community and make sure they will apply to these schools if they are closer. Transferring a program fills up the school now, but incoming classes will be no different than they are now if APS doesn't seriously step up its efforts to encourage these families to apply and them help them navigate the process.

Claremont and Carlin Springs are two miles apart. If parents value immersion that highly, will 2 miles really be a barrier? I can see if we were talking about Jamestown because that 6-mile drive can take at least 20 minutes even without morning rush hour traffic, but here we're talking about maybe ten minutes during heavy rush while staying around the same commuter routes for people heading to/from work.

You're assuming all ED people have a car.

No, I'm not. I'm responding to pp who said the Spanish speakers at Claremont tend to be more affluent and the ED families as less likely to be on board with it. If it's predominantly more affluent families, two miles difference shouldn't be much of a barrier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ashlawn will not sweep into Barcroft. Why would it when Barrett is just across 50? Some families in Barcroft are closer to Barrett than Barcroft elementary.

If Barrett isn't going to be an option site (which it's not), they're not going to break it up just to bus kids across 50. Barrett is highly walkable (80%), and high FARMS (62%). Why would you put so many walkers on buses just to move Barcroft kids from one high-FARMS school to another? Ashlawn, at 37% walkers and 19% FARMS, doesn't have this issue so it makes more sense as the school to stretch across 50. The reason for the dog-leg is to avoid only taking the most affluent areas of Glen Carlyn across 50 to Ashlawn but instead to pick up more of the lower-income stretches east of there that are driving up FARMS rates and create better FARMS balance across the SW zone.

Shifting Southside Arlington Forest or the northern part of Barcroft to Barrett would help lower the FARMS rate at Barrett. For many years Barcroft students who wanted to opt out of the year round program were sent to Barrett unless they were accepted at an option program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they get one immersion program (which I am not entirely opposed to) I pray that they follow the method at Claremont over key. I obviously only have first hand knowledge of Claremont, but from what I heard from key it is a very different program and is not nearly as inclusive to Claremont (my friend describes the population as segregated, which is not my experience at Claremont).

This is the first time I'm hearing this, what is the difference in methods?

Is it really necessary for you to be putting down Key like this? I think “what you’ve heard” shouldn’t be enough to declare your program and school leadership superior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The transfers are mostly UMC kids, not the majority of poor kids that live in the neighborhood. It is the poor kids who lose the very walkable school. Almost all would have to bus to Randolph, close in proximity but across two big roads.

I think the SB should think twice about moving a school that will disproportionately affect lower income families.

Many of these families may love having a bus. Bus leaves earlier and gets home later. No need to walk to/from school to drop off or pick up kids - which is a total nuisance if you are trying to get to with!

[Anonymous]

If Barrett takes the north part of Barcroft, then Barrett will need to shed some students, who would be from UMC families on the Ashlawn side of the neighborhood. There would be no change in Barrett's demographics. And, Barrett is going to get an influx of more low income students once the red cross site is built.

[Anonymous]

Barcroft will likely become an option school. If it hadn't had its previous dud of a principal for the last few years, fewer MC families hadn't opted out, and the year-round calendar had been changed to a regular schedule, it might have had a chance. But coulda, shoulda, woulda. It's a shame, because with a bit more time (coupled with a regular calendar), the new principal could have really turned things around; more MC families would have stayed, Barcroft could have had a balanced FARMs rate (comparable to HB or Abingdon), etc.

But it looks like time has run out. With Fleet opening, the SB must feel the lure of rezoning Alcova Heights away from Barcroft and to Fleet. George Mason is deemed uncrossable for walkers now; moving Alcova (which is walkable to Fleet) reduces buses. But rezoning Alcova, which is mostly all MC families, away from Barcroft would shoot Barcroft's 60% FARMs rate to the stratosphere. And there simply aren't enough (any?) MC zones that could be moved to Barcroft to make up for it. That neighborhood is basically hemmed in by low-income housing and ED. So the SB will almost certainly want to do SOMETHING to avoid another potential Carlin Springs situation at Barcroft IF they rezone Alcova Heights. That something is likely an option school.

Hopefully this "doing something" doesn't make what is currently a tenable (but far from ideal) situation even worse.

If they make Barcroft option, they need to give very careful consideration to how that neighborhood is divided. It's almost a given that not all of the ED will choose an option school, so how are they going to "better" disperse the poverty at Barcroft among the already-poor schools in the area? Carlin Springs and Campbell are off the table since they will be option. Randolph and Barret both have HIGHER poverty rates than Barcroft does, at 74% and 62% FARMs.

By choosing to do "something" (with noble intent) the situation could actually end up much, much worse. I'm not worried about the MC kids. They will be fine; they'll option, move, or go private. But the ED students will be screwed.

Alternatively, the SB could keep Barcroft as a neighborhood, keep Alcova Heights zoned for Barcroft, scrap the modified school year calendar, and give Barcroft a fighting chance. It's FARMs rate is now already lower than Barrett's, and with the new principal/VP, more MC families are giving it a chance. Barring a very good plan/strategy to improve (vice tank) the nearby schools, perhaps the SB should give Barcroft a chance too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, if Barcroft and Carlin Springs are gone as a neighborhood schools, Randolph and Barrett (maybe) rises even further in FARMS. Ashlawn gets some more FARMS. If all Barcroft is sent to Randolph, APS can claim it only has one high FARMs elementary school.

I see that as a win win!

Sending Barcroft to Randolph isn't realistic in the least. Forcing Randolph, a high-poverty school (at 74% FARMs) to be even higher poverty AND overcapacity is not just mean-spirited, its downright cruel. It's also pretty good grounds (rightly so) for litigation. I sincerely hope you're joking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Barrett takes the north part of Barcroft, then Barrett will need to shed some students, who would be from UMC families on the Ashlawn side of the neighborhood. There would be no change in Barrett's demographics. And, Barrett is going to get an influx of more low income students once the red cross site is built.

That's going to Long Branch, because they're losing all their diversity when their South Arlington PU's get moved to Fleet.