What do you expect from APS staff (option/neighborhood) on 4/30?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP barcroft poster. Neither neighborhood should be split up like a pie.

It will be happening all over the county.

Yeah, neighborhoods aren't all going to stay together, because of walk zones. I honestly am just guessing about how they'd split Barcroft. The neighborhood itself won't be split like a pie. Worst case, it would be divided in half. It would be the current attendance zone that really changes, but that's going to happen in any case because of Fleet opening and Drew becoming 100% neighborhood and cascading changes resulting from a boundary being drawn around ASFS for the first time in decades. There is no way that those changes alone don't result in the Barcroft boundary being blown apart.

As for seats, making both Drew and Claremont neighborhood schools gets you a net gain of neighborhood seats. And Fleet is a much bigger building than Henry was, so more real seats gained there, too. Plus the likely scenario is that Arlington Forest south side kids will be shifted N of 50 and Glencarlyn to Ashlawn results in fewer seats occupied in South Arlington. The next new ES is supposed to be in South Arlington.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Barcroft to fleet, not going to happen. Too far and no available seats. The current Henry families would have a fit. Alcova will go to fleet and that makes sense.

There are not enough seats in south Arlington schools to eliminate two neighborhood schools.

This is really all about more seats for north Arlington schools. No one cares about seats in south Arlington.

You'd only be eliminating one neighborhood school. Claremont would become a neighborhood school with 600 seats, which is more seats than the 460 you'd lose at Barcroft.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Claremont parent here, I really do not want to move to Carlin Springs and would be much happier with a move to Barcroft (but this is for selfish proximity locations). I really don't want to lose the outdoor classroom space at Claremont, but I really know nothing about the Carlin Springs campus.

It's big and it's next to 30 acres of open Kenmore space. Others have gone the distance to come to you at Claremont. Your turn.

And what are you doing?

Attending my neighborhood schools -- wherever they get moved to.

[Anonymous]

I'm staring at the elementary boundary map and really torn on this.
The Staff was interested in moving option schools out of walk zones. Now they are thinking of clustering Carlin Springs, Campbell, and Barcroft-- which are all adjacent to each other- as option schools.
That has the most concentrated poverty in all of Arlington. Its also a very transient population- which makes option schools tough. (It's hard to apply to a school in April, when you don't expect to still be in the same apartment come August.)
I am fairly uncomfortable with the optics. It reminds me of closing historically black schools and busing those kids for desegregation.
(Yes- they can apply to the option schools if they are with it enough...)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to paraphrase/cross-post what I just posted on the ATS to IB thread, because I think it's very relevant to this discuss as well but I realize most of the people here aren't looking at that thread. All of the sniping going on is just noise and details, but there is a really big core decision that needs to be made regarding our priorities as a community. There's no point in sniping about whether Nottingham should be the option site in NW until the bigger decision was made.

Leaving aside the exact details of where, the choice presented in the second draft analysis is essentially this: Is it more important that we maintain/improve neighborhood school proximity and reduce crowding in South Arlington, or that we maintain/improve access to choice programs while also improving the diversity balance across elementary schools?

Moving immersion to ATS and ATS to another school in NW (Nottingham or otherwise) will reduce access to ATS from South Arlington and make it less diverse overall. This will for a few reasons, namely that the new location will make VPI less accessible to ED families, it would increase applications to ATS from that corner of the community, and it would reduce applications from South Arlington. The transfer report on ATS makes it pretty clear that proximity to the program is a big part of who attends. On the plus side, keeping both of these option programs in North Arlington means more neighborhood seats in South Arlington, so more families there can be in close proximity to less crowded neighborhood schools.

On the other hand, keeping ATS where it is and moving immersion to Barcroft means maintaining greater access to ATS for South Arlington, making immersion even more accessible, and potentially breaking up the poverty clusters around Carlin Springs and Barcroft (and possibly cascading to Randolph as well) if APS were to start busing kids across 50 (Ashlawn will have tons of excess capacity after Reed, and busing across 50 means no crazy boundaries there anymore). The resulting shift in boundaries could do a lot to improve socioeconomic diversity generally in the elementary schools. The downside to all of this increased access to option schools and improvements in diversity is that South Arlington would have fewer neighborhood seats (how many fewer would depend on how the moves affected applications to choice programs from North Arlington), and many families may lose proximity to their neighborhood schools. Since ED families generally face the greatest challenges from losing proximity to neighborhood schools and from overcrowding, this is no small consideration.

That's a really big decision to make on policy/priorities, and it's not an easy one. Until we decide where we fall on that, the rest of this debate is just a waste of our time.

It is more important to make effective choice programs more accessible to ED communities and to break-up the concentrations of high poverty in our schools. There may be fewer neighborhood seats in the south with this proposal; but keep in mind that there are a lot of schools in close proximity to each other as well. Barcroft is within 1 mile of 5 elementary schools. And, I suspect a great many "walkers" (of which there are really few) to Carlin Springs will apply to the immersion program. It will all take years to work itself out as current students make their way through 5th grade and the new policies eliminating geographical preference settle in. But it all depends on how the boundaries are redrawn - are all those ED students just shoved into already high-FRL schools like Abingdon, Randolph, Barrett?

ATS will lose its diversity if it is relocated farther north. But if 2 or 3 of the highest-poverty concentrations are broken-up, that more than makes-up for the loss of "eh" economic diversity of 20% or so at ATS. Claremont becoming a neighborhood school and the new boundaries needed for Drew would create tremendous opportunities here, especially if boundary-makers can start thinking up and down instead of just south. No reason some boundaries can't start crossing the great divide of route 50 in this reorganization.

Why not Barrett for the immersion program instead of Barcroft? Still close proximity for collaboration and sharing resources with Carlin Springs - and still close to a lot of native S panish-speaking families.

If ATS doesn’t move south, everything you discuss is a feel good band aid that is going to result in the less diverse parts of n Arlington becoming even less diverse.

Too many walkers to Barrett. Won’t be an option program.

Barcroft is one of the more walkable schools, too. And the FRL % is actually less than Barrett this year - so they are very similar. And Barrett doesn't make three geographically consecutive option schools on the west end of the Pike. What happened to the importance of walkable neighborhood school options? Barrett is also more accessible for all those buses and parents driving their kids to their option schools. FWIW, I think ATS is a better location for immersion if there's another immersion program at Carlin Springs anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm staring at the elementary boundary map and really torn on this.
The Staff was interested in moving option schools out of walk zones. Now they are thinking of clustering Carlin Springs, Campbell, and Barcroft-- which are all adjacent to each other- as option schools.
That has the most concentrated poverty in all of Arlington. Its also a very transient population- which makes option schools tough. (It's hard to apply to a school in April, when you don't expect to still be in the same apartment come August.)
I am fairly uncomfortable with the optics. It reminds me of closing historically black schools and busing those kids for desegregation.
(Yes- they can apply to the option schools if they are with it enough...)

I hear you, but... is there another feasible plan to integrate those very high poverty schools? Is it better to just let Carlin Springs, Randolph, and Barcroft continue as they are?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm staring at the elementary boundary map and really torn on this.
The Staff was interested in moving option schools out of walk zones. Now they are thinking of clustering Carlin Springs, Campbell, and Barcroft-- which are all adjacent to each other- as option schools.
That has the most concentrated poverty in all of Arlington. Its also a very transient population- which makes option schools tough. (It's hard to apply to a school in April, when you don't expect to still be in the same apartment come August.)
I am fairly uncomfortable with the optics. It reminds me of closing historically black schools and busing those kids for desegregation.
(Yes- they can apply to the option schools if they are with it enough...)

I hear you, but... is there another feasible plan to integrate those very high poverty schools? Is it better to just let Carlin Springs, Randolph, and Barcroft continue as they are?

As someone pointed out earlier, the demographics of Barrett and Barcroft are similar. So why focus on breaking up Barcroft's poverty instead of Barrett's? Especially given the tightness of the Barcroft site in the midst of a pretty dense residential neighborhood? It's the perfect excuse to eliminate the alternative calendar without any opportunity for opposition. If you eliminate the school, the calendar goes with it. If you just want to eliminate the calendar, there may be division within the existing school community. That would look really bad, too - taking away a calendar that a lot of low-income people may actually like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP barcroft poster. Neither neighborhood should be split up like a pie.

It will be happening all over the county.

Yeah, neighborhoods aren't all going to stay together, because of walk zones. I honestly am just guessing about how they'd split Barcroft. The neighborhood itself won't be split like a pie. Worst case, it would be divided in half. It would be the current attendance zone that really changes, but that's going to happen in any case because of Fleet opening and Drew becoming 100% neighborhood and cascading changes resulting from a boundary being drawn around ASFS for the first time in decades. There is no way that those changes alone don't result in the Barcroft boundary being blown apart.

As for seats, making both Drew and Claremont neighborhood schools gets you a net gain of neighborhood seats. And Fleet is a much bigger building than Henry was, so more real seats gained there, too. Plus the likely scenario is that Arlington Forest south side kids will be shifted N of 50 and Glencarlyn to Ashlawn results in fewer seats occupied in South Arlington. The next new ES is supposed to be in South Arlington.

S. Arlington parent here. Glencarlyn and Arlington Forest south are among the few middle class pockets in this area of the county. Pulling those families north would effectively increase the FARMs rates at the remaining S. Arlington neighborhood schools. No Bueno.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm staring at the elementary boundary map and really torn on this.
The Staff was interested in moving option schools out of walk zones. Now they are thinking of clustering Carlin Springs, Campbell, and Barcroft-- which are all adjacent to each other- as option schools.
That has the most concentrated poverty in all of Arlington. Its also a very transient population- which makes option schools tough. (It's hard to apply to a school in April, when you don't expect to still be in the same apartment come August.)
I am fairly uncomfortable with the optics. It reminds me of closing historically black schools and busing those kids for desegregation.
(Yes- they can apply to the option schools if they are with it enough...)

I’m going to ask a really blunt question right now. If the community up there is so transient, doesn’t that argue in favor of putting option schools there rather than neighborhood schools? After all, you can only develop so much of a community when so many people are moving in and out. Even though the schools might not be quite as close, if those areas could be spread out to schools with less transient populations, wouldn’t that provide a greater opportunities for long-term residents to be a part of more stable school communities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Barcroft to fleet, not going to happen. Too far and no available seats. The current Henry families would have a fit. Alcova will go to fleet and that makes sense.

There are not enough seats in south Arlington schools to eliminate two neighborhood schools.

This is really all about more seats for north Arlington schools. No one cares about seats in south Arlington.

No, seats are seats. If they move more option schools into or around South Arlington, South Arlington kids will fill them up, as they do now. Option schools have not had a problem attracting students. The same cannot be said for all neighborhood schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP barcroft poster. Neither neighborhood should be split up like a pie.

It will be happening all over the county.

Yeah, neighborhoods aren't all going to stay together, because of walk zones. I honestly am just guessing about how they'd split Barcroft. The neighborhood itself won't be split like a pie. Worst case, it would be divided in half. It would be the current attendance zone that really changes, but that's going to happen in any case because of Fleet opening and Drew becoming 100% neighborhood and cascading changes resulting from a boundary being drawn around ASFS for the first time in decades. There is no way that those changes alone don't result in the Barcroft boundary being blown apart.

As for seats, making both Drew and Claremont neighborhood schools gets you a net gain of neighborhood seats. And Fleet is a much bigger building than Henry was, so more real seats gained there, too. Plus the likely scenario is that Arlington Forest south side kids will be shifted N of 50 and Glencarlyn to Ashlawn results in fewer seats occupied in South Arlington. The next new ES is supposed to be in South Arlington.

S. Arlington parent here. Glencarlyn and Arlington Forest south are among the few middle class pockets in this area of the county. Pulling those families north would effectively increase the FARMs rates at the remaining S. Arlington neighborhood schools. No Bueno.

Right, which is why they don't intend to leave neighborhood schools behind in those locations. THEY CANNOT CHANGE HOUSING OR GEOGRAPHY. This is the best they can do with what they have. If the community says no, then it's going to mean even more highly concentrated poverty in South Arlington schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP barcroft poster. Neither neighborhood should be split up like a pie.

It will be happening all over the county.

Yeah, neighborhoods aren't all going to stay together, because of walk zones. I honestly am just guessing about how they'd split Barcroft. The neighborhood itself won't be split like a pie. Worst case, it would be divided in half. It would be the current attendance zone that really changes, but that's going to happen in any case because of Fleet opening and Drew becoming 100% neighborhood and cascading changes resulting from a boundary being drawn around ASFS for the first time in decades. There is no way that those changes alone don't result in the Barcroft boundary being blown apart.

As for seats, making both Drew and Claremont neighborhood schools gets you a net gain of neighborhood seats. And Fleet is a much bigger building than Henry was, so more real seats gained there, too. Plus the likely scenario is that Arlington Forest south side kids will be shifted N of 50 and Glencarlyn to Ashlawn results in fewer seats occupied in South Arlington. The next new ES is supposed to be in South Arlington.

S. Arlington parent here. Glencarlyn and Arlington Forest south are among the few middle class pockets in this area of the county. Pulling those families north would effectively increase the FARMs rates at the remaining S. Arlington neighborhood schools. No Bueno.

Is most of Glencarlyn going to Campbell right now? They obviously aren’t going to Carlin Springs en masse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm staring at the elementary boundary map and really torn on this.
The Staff was interested in moving option schools out of walk zones. Now they are thinking of clustering Carlin Springs, Campbell, and Barcroft-- which are all adjacent to each other- as option schools.
That has the most concentrated poverty in all of Arlington. Its also a very transient population- which makes option schools tough. (It's hard to apply to a school in April, when you don't expect to still be in the same apartment come August.)
I am fairly uncomfortable with the optics. It reminds me of closing historically black schools and busing those kids for desegregation.
(Yes- they can apply to the option schools if they are with it enough...)

I’m going to ask a really blunt question right now. If the community up there is so transient, doesn’t that argue in favor of putting option schools there rather than neighborhood schools? After all, you can only develop so much of a community when so many people are moving in and out. Even though the schools might not be quite as close, if those areas could be spread out to schools with less transient populations, wouldn’t that provide a greater opportunities for long-term residents to be a part of more stable school communities?

PP isn't correct, though. Now that many of the Market Rate affordable housing has been replaced with CAFs, the populations as these schools is far less transient. That's supposed to be the benefit of CAFs over Market Affordable--less transience, more stability. It seems to be working. From what I understand, Randolph remains a fairly transient school, because it's boundary is almost exclusively Market Rate apartments.

[Anonymous]

There are plenty of market rate apts still
Zoned Barcroft.
Barcroft parent you need to get a grip.
Getting rid of neighborhood schools on the west end is the staff’s only play. This is it.
Many of the neighborhood kids will take advantage of those choice programs due to proximity, and the rest will go not too much further away to a hopefully better integrated school.
It’s this or we keep getting what we’ ve Always got.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hmm, considering that Nottingham is still in running, was the re-work by staff actually to take ASFS out of option pool, b/c those CD parents were up in arms that their plans were backfiring?

I’m also wondering this. Didn’t the initial analysis show ASFS as a good location for an option program?
And didn’t staff admit that Nottingham’s designation as a good option site was based on two typos?
Didn’t the initial analysis show that Barcroft was good as a neighborhood school?