South Arlington elementary school boundary adjustments 2019

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is it assumed S Srlington kids at Long Branch will be reckoned to Henry/ Fleet. How about we remind ourselves we all live in Arlington, one county. If there are so many extra seats at Reef or Discovey or wherever then boundaries need to shift in the direction that balances all schools you know now that all boundaries are on the table! Stop allowing N Arlington to call the shots!

That opens the door to SB members announcing that all Arlington schools are good, so it doesn't matter where the boundaries are drawn. (And then gee, look at that! The boundaries are drawn to suit North Arlington voters! Who could have foreseen that?!)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it assumed S Srlington kids at Long Branch will be reckoned to Henry/ Fleet. How about we remind ourselves we all live in Arlington, one county. If there are so many extra seats at Reef or Discovey or wherever then boundaries need to shift in the direction that balances all schools you know now that all boundaries are on the table! Stop allowing N Arlington to call the shots!

That opens the door to SB members announcing that all Arlington schools are good, so it doesn't matter where the boundaries are drawn. (And then gee, look at that! The boundaries are drawn to suit North Arlington voters! Who could have foreseen that?!)

Long Branch is very close to Fleet, those kids are currently zoned for TJ middle school (and are within the walk zone for Fleet). Why wouldn't they be zoned for it? I guess I don't understand the anger here -- we do live in one arlington, and honestly the demographics of the kids right north of 50 aren't that different from the people immediately below it. I live in north arlington and have no issue with the boundaries shifting south, or making more of the north arlington schools option schools (so that the schools in the south can be less crowded -- not because I have some nefarious desire to see option schools only be available for kids in north arlington).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it assumed S Srlington kids at Long Branch will be reckoned to Henry/ Fleet. How about we remind ourselves we all live in Arlington, one county. If there are so many extra seats at Reef or Discovey or wherever then boundaries need to shift in the direction that balances all schools you know now that all boundaries are on the table! Stop allowing N Arlington to call the shots!

That opens the door to SB members announcing that all Arlington schools are good, so it doesn't matter where the boundaries are drawn. (And then gee, look at that! The boundaries are drawn to suit North Arlington voters! Who could have foreseen that?!)

Long Branch is very close to Fleet, those kids are currently zoned for TJ middle school (and are within the walk zone for Fleet). Why wouldn't they be zoned for it? I guess I don't understand the anger here -- we do live in one arlington, and honestly the demographics of the kids right north of 50 aren't that different from the people immediately below it. I live in north arlington and have no issue with the boundaries shifting south, or making more of the north arlington schools option schools (so that the schools in the south can be less crowded -- not because I have some nefarious desire to see option schools only be available for kids in north arlington).

I have to agree with you. If you look at walkers AND continuity it would be crazy not to let kids walk across the pedestrian bridge from Ashton Heights.

[Anonymous]

If you do that then it’s also not crazy to allow students to cross Columbia Pike at S Barton Street or Wilson Boulevard. See what I did there?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you do that then it’s also not crazy to allow students to cross Columbia Pike at S Barton Street or Wilson Boulevard. See what I did there?

The Long Branch students who will most certainly be rezoned to Fleet are the ones in PU's SOUTH of rt. 50. I don't think there will be kids N of 50 zoned to Fleet, but I could be wrong. Having a pedestrian bridge there does allow the effective walk zone to extend over 50, because no children are actually crossing traffic. This is not the case for Columbia Pike or Walter Reed or other main roads and you know that. I KNOW you don't want to be rezoned, but stop with these nonsensical rants. You look foolish.

[Anonymous]

I agree that's the likely outcome (more economic segregation). But I think APS's "walkability" criteria it will actually put it under pressure to do some gerrymandering with the Drew/Oakridge boudaries, the optics of which would be pretty bad: bussing in lower-income students to school with an already high FARMs rate.

All of the Oakridge boundary closest to Drew (Arna Valley, Long Branch Creek) is within Oakridge's walk zone, and is not walkable to Drew because 395 is in the way. It seems to me that if walkability is the actual priority, under no circumstances would Arna Valley or Long Branch Creek be under consideration for being moved to Drew.

That means to relieve overcrowding at Oakridge and help fill Drew one of two things, or maybe both needs to happen:

1. Dip into the well-to-do parts of Aurora Highlands and Crystal City that are not in Oakridge's walk zone. I think these neighborhoods would raise a fuss and it would potentially create an "island" of students, which is a lower priority no-no.
2. Extend Drew's boundary in a long narrow strip along South Glebe Rd, out to the water treatment plant, which is predominantly low income and rentals, like the Berkeley apartments across from the Giant.

My money is on #2.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The south Arlington working group said that economic diversity was going to be a top priority for redrawing boundaries.
I don’t see how Henry ends up pulling their weight. It seems their Farm’s numbers will go down, but they should be taking in more.

Look, the current Henry families, even those who live outside the new walk zone, are going to fight to stay there just like what happened with MS and HS boundaries. Except that this isn't just a small boundary adjustment. South Arlington has a school that needs to be filled entirely. Some PU's have to be pulled in to make that happen. We already know they're moving the South Arlington PU's at Long Branch to Fleet. The question is how many kids that is and who has to be moved out of Fleet to make space? Based on feedback from the last few adjustments, Staff is going to recommend that neighborhood cohesion, walk zone, and alignment be the prevailing considerations. Not diversity. If you're the odd PU in your neighborhood assigned to a more desirable school, prepare to be rezoned.

Again.
The south Arlington working group has stated that economic diversity will be a top priority. This isn’t about north Arlington priorities. This is about south Arlington. The last 2 go arounds we’re not about south Arlington.

Except they were. Neighborhood Middle and Hish schools with higher poverty levels got higher; those with lower poverty levels got even lower. You think this time will be different? No. The working group is disbanded. They were only tasked with siting the school. It doesn't matter what they put in their report that APS buried. Short of some complete reversal of priorities, APS staff will be recommending boundaries that reinforce housing segregation in the name of proximity, efficiency, alignment, whatever and the SB will vote to approve. The ES boundaries are now countywide and not just about S Arlington. Are you surprised? You haven't lived here long enough. They're probably going to move the options programs further from poor families, too. They can ride the Streetcar to them if they really want. Oh, wait.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that's the likely outcome (more economic segregation). But I think APS's "walkability" criteria it will actually put it under pressure to do some gerrymandering with the Drew/Oakridge boudaries, the optics of which would be pretty bad: bussing in lower-income students to school with an already high FARMs rate.

All of the Oakridge boundary closest to Drew (Arna Valley, Long Branch Creek) is within Oakridge's walk zone, and is not walkable to Drew because 395 is in the way. It seems to me that if walkability is the actual priority, under no circumstances would Arna Valley or Long Branch Creek be under consideration for being moved to Drew.

That means to relieve overcrowding at Oakridge and help fill Drew one of two things, or maybe both needs to happen:

1. Dip into the well-to-do parts of Aurora Highlands and Crystal City that are not in Oakridge's walk zone. I think these neighborhoods would raise a fuss and it would potentially create an "island" of students, which is a lower priority no-no.
2. Extend Drew's boundary in a long narrow strip along South Glebe Rd, out to the water treatment plant, which is predominantly low income and rentals, like the Berkeley apartments across from the Giant.

My money is on #2.

I think we see #2, plus Arna Valley View at Drew. I would also bet on Long Branch Creek, except it literally borders the school property. The Avalon will somehow stay at Oakridge.

They will remove the option for Nauck to attend Hoffman-Boston, so that some of Pentagon City can be bussed to Hoffman-Boston.

If the Henry neighborhoods south of Columbia Pike are loud enough, they might be able to split between Randolph (for the Douglas Park triangle) and Hoffman-Boston (for the Arlington Village/area behind RiteAid and East). Dominion Plaza and 2200 should go to H-B for sure- the apartments across the parking lot do.

But that will leave Drew with mostly low income apartments (market rate and AH) and a small number of SFH in Nauck. It will look like Carlin Springs 2.0. I think Carlin Springs is doing a lot of good things for their students, but it takes extra staff and funding- I hope that's on the table for Drew.

Even if the added support at Carlin Springs is on the table for Drew, it still leaves the question of will middle class families be willing to stay for "teaching to the test" and how a school of 50-60-70-80% low income kids that need academic and other support can differentiate for kids who are ahead academically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honest question -- is it only MC families in South Arlington who think South Arlington elementary schools need improvement? MC students are the minority at schools like Randolph and Carlin Springs, both of which have free/reduced meal rate near or above 80%. Unless the parents of the 80% think their children are getting a substandard education, I'm not sure I see anything other than losing accreditation really motivating elected officials to do things differently.

You have to see this from the 80% viewpoint, I think: APS is doing so much for the students - they really have support on all aspects (the whole child) from therapists to behavioral to high intensity language to special needs to free extended care, free enrichment, free summer school, free translators, community support with Thanksgiving dinners, winter coats, Christmas gifts, .. it’s way more (!!) than other school districts offer as support - why should these parents cbe unhappy? They aren’t!

It’s the MC/ UMC Kids that don’t qualify for any of these services that may find the environment lacking in some way, (minor behavioral or academic issues that go unnoticed longer, kid is not challenged enough, no money/time/parent involvement to make desirable things happen in addition to what’s offered, lack of a peer group of sorts).

[Anonymous]

Yes, I'd like to hear more first hand experiences from MC families at these schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honest question -- is it only MC families in South Arlington who think South Arlington elementary schools need improvement? MC students are the minority at schools like Randolph and Carlin Springs, both of which have free/reduced meal rate near or above 80%. Unless the parents of the 80% think their children are getting a substandard education, I'm not sure I see anything other than losing accreditation really motivating elected officials to do things differently.

You have to see this from the 80% viewpoint, I think: APS is doing so much for the students - they really have support on all aspects (the whole child) from therapists to behavioral to high intensity language to special needs to free extended care, free enrichment, free summer school, free translators, community support with Thanksgiving dinners, winter coats, Christmas gifts, .. it’s way more (!!) than other school districts offer as support - why should these parents cbe unhappy? They aren’t!

It’s the MC/ UMC Kids that don’t qualify for any of these services that may find the environment lacking in some way, (minor behavioral or academic issues that go unnoticed longer, kid is not challenged enough, no money/time/parent involvement to make desirable things happen in addition to what’s offered, lack of a peer group of sorts).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that's the likely outcome (more economic segregation). But I think APS's "walkability" criteria it will actually put it under pressure to do some gerrymandering with the Drew/Oakridge boudaries, the optics of which would be pretty bad: bussing in lower-income students to school with an already high FARMs rate.

All of the Oakridge boundary closest to Drew (Arna Valley, Long Branch Creek) is within Oakridge's walk zone, and is not walkable to Drew because 395 is in the way. It seems to me that if walkability is the actual priority, under no circumstances would Arna Valley or Long Branch Creek be under consideration for being moved to Drew.

That means to relieve overcrowding at Oakridge and help fill Drew one of two things, or maybe both needs to happen:

1. Dip into the well-to-do parts of Aurora Highlands and Crystal City that are not in Oakridge's walk zone. I think these neighborhoods would raise a fuss and it would potentially create an "island" of students, which is a lower priority no-no.
2. Extend Drew's boundary in a long narrow strip along South Glebe Rd, out to the water treatment plant, which is predominantly low income and rentals, like the Berkeley apartments across from the Giant.

My money is on #2.

I think we see #2, plus Arna Valley View at Drew. I would also bet on Long Branch Creek, except it literally borders the school property. The Avalon will somehow stay at Oakridge.

They will remove the option for Nauck to attend Hoffman-Boston, so that some of Pentagon City can be bussed to Hoffman-Boston.

If the Henry neighborhoods south of Columbia Pike are loud enough, they might be able to split between Randolph (for the Douglas Park triangle) and Hoffman-Boston (for the Arlington Village/area behind RiteAid and East). Dominion Plaza and 2200 should go to H-B for sure- the apartments across the parking lot do.

But that will leave Drew with mostly low income apartments (market rate and AH) and a small number of SFH in Nauck. It will look like Carlin Springs 2.0. I think Carlin Springs is doing a lot of good things for their students, but it takes extra staff and funding- I hope that's on the table for Drew.

Even if the added support at Carlin Springs is on the table for Drew, it still leaves the question of will middle class families be willing to stay for "teaching to the test" and how a school of 50-60-70-80% low income kids that need academic and other support can differentiate for kids who are ahead academically.

Yes, somehow, despite the fact that all the affordable housing currently zoned to oakridge is in that schools walk zone (the Berkeley is in the expanded walk zone) the school board will find some way to move all of it to Drew. Walkability will be a "priority" until it isn't.

[Anonymous]

I can see their view, and now that you mention services, I can see the incentive for the school board to purposely concentrate poor students to deliver services more efficiently and keep lawyer parents from hassling them. Everyone wins, except middle class families who aren't wealthy enough to move to north Arlington.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honest question -- is it only MC families in South Arlington who think South Arlington elementary schools need improvement? MC students are the minority at schools like Randolph and Carlin Springs, both of which have free/reduced meal rate near or above 80%. Unless the parents of the 80% think their children are getting a substandard education, I'm not sure I see anything other than losing accreditation really motivating elected officials to do things differently.

You have to see this from the 80% viewpoint, I think: APS is doing so much for the students - they really have support on all aspects (the whole child) from therapists to behavioral to high intensity language to special needs to free extended care, free enrichment, free summer school, free translators, community support with Thanksgiving dinners, winter coats, Christmas gifts, .. it’s way more (!!) than other school districts offer as support - why should these parents cbe unhappy? They aren’t!

It’s the MC/ UMC Kids that don’t qualify for any of these services that may find the environment lacking in some way, (minor behavioral or academic issues that go unnoticed longer, kid is not challenged enough, no money/time/parent involvement to make desirable things happen in addition to what’s offered, lack of a peer group of sorts).

[Anonymous]

South Arlington parent here - PP is right. It is really only the UMC south arlington parents like me that are complaining. And yes, I could not afford the house I wanted in north arlington otherwise I would have moved there because of the schools. I care deeply about the education of the lower income kids because my family was there once, but they are doing the best they can. I think the scores and research show that those schools with the right demographic balance give them a better shot at academic success, but considering the circumstances these kids are coming from where everything in the American dream seems so unattainable, they are doing pretty darn good.

My kid and others like him are doing fine. That isn't the question, are they doing as well as they could be in north arlington? My kid is probably doing better where he is because he has ADHD and the title I school he goes to has a lot of resources to help him that would not be available north of 50. There is nothing cut-throat in his school, the teacher challenges him based on his level, and frankly the poorer kids are not the ones with behavior issues generally.

So, the next question is whether his "experience" is the same or as good as it would be north of 50. As far as being completely colorblind, that is a good thing. However, he does not have a pretty school, it is run down. Yards are a mess because there is no PTA paying for gardening. After school enrichment is much more limited than other schools. Fewer perks in the classroom and fancy festivals and things that I see at other schools. He doesn't know the difference. I do.

I am more concerned about the behaviors he will see in middle school. I will likely move by then because that is when the worst poverty-based behaviors tend to emerge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:South Arlington parent here - PP is right. It is really only the UMC south arlington parents like me that are complaining. And yes, I could not afford the house I wanted in north arlington otherwise I would have moved there because of the schools. I care deeply about the education of the lower income kids because my family was there once, but they are doing the best they can. I think the scores and research show that those schools with the right demographic balance give them a better shot at academic success, but considering the circumstances these kids are coming from where everything in the American dream seems so unattainable, they are doing pretty darn good.

My kid and others like him are doing fine. That isn't the question, are they doing as well as they could be in north arlington? My kid is probably doing better where he is because he has ADHD and the title I school he goes to has a lot of resources to help him that would not be available north of 50. There is nothing cut-throat in his school, the teacher challenges him based on his level, and frankly the poorer kids are not the ones with behavior issues generally.

So, the next question is whether his "experience" is the same or as good as it would be north of 50. As far as being completely colorblind, that is a good thing. However, he does not have a pretty school, it is run down. Yards are a mess because there is no PTA paying for gardening. After school enrichment is much more limited than other schools. Fewer perks in the classroom and fancy festivals and things that I see at other schools. He doesn't know the difference. I do.

I am more concerned about the behaviors he will see in middle school. I will likely move by then because that is when the worst poverty-based behaviors tend to emerge.

Thanks for writing. Where would you move, if North Arlington is off the table?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:South Arlington parent here - PP is right. It is really only the UMC south arlington parents like me that are complaining. And yes, I could not afford the house I wanted in north arlington otherwise I would have moved there because of the schools. I care deeply about the education of the lower income kids because my family was there once, but they are doing the best they can. I think the scores and research show that those schools with the right demographic balance give them a better shot at academic success, but considering the circumstances these kids are coming from where everything in the American dream seems so unattainable, they are doing pretty darn good.

My kid and others like him are doing fine. That isn't the question, are they doing as well as they could be in north arlington? My kid is probably doing better where he is because he has ADHD and the title I school he goes to has a lot of resources to help him that would not be available north of 50. There is nothing cut-throat in his school, the teacher challenges him based on his level, and frankly the poorer kids are not the ones with behavior issues generally.

So, the next question is whether his "experience" is the same or as good as it would be north of 50. As far as being completely colorblind, that is a good thing. However, he does not have a pretty school, it is run down. Yards are a mess because there is no PTA paying for gardening. After school enrichment is much more limited than other schools. Fewer perks in the classroom and fancy festivals and things that I see at other schools. He doesn't know the difference. I do.

I am more concerned about the behaviors he will see in middle school. I will likely move by then because that is when the worst poverty-based behaviors tend to emerge.

Thanks for writing. Where do you think you might move, if North Arlington is off the table?

[Anonymous]

I don’t know where I will move, probably north Arlington. I just won’t have as nice a place as I have now.