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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An interesting perspective is offered here. I encourage everyone to read it. And think about. And then do something about it.

http://lithub.com/marlon-james-why-im-done-talking-about-diversity/

This is more of a talk about the perils of tokenism, rather than an excuse to allow the segregation of schools. In fact, the argument would more be that the action taken would be to desegregate schools and try to create more equal institutions so that elite spaces become more diverse as a result, rather than forcing the diversity when its arguably too late.

In other words, because a black person wrote a piece saying that diversity in panels hasn't produced any results, doesn't mean we are all excused from any effort. Rather that white people didn't get the point in the first place.

Maybe I didn't get enough sleep last night, but I am arguing that the time for talk is over. Let's act. This boundary process is the first step. Is that not how I am to interpret the article and put its message into practice? My child attends a diverse ES. If the most geographically logical units are moved around, it's entirely possible that the HS my child is bound for will become less diverse and I don't want that. The words that I think are applicable here are, "Maybe we will stop failing so badly at true diversity when we stop thinking that all we need to do is talk about it." How does that not apply to Arlington, when we throw around the words "diverse and inclusive" in pretty much every guiding principle and planning document, and then passively accept segregation in the public schools, because it's a result of a segregated geography?

I think that was her point. to draw the boundaries to counter these trends.

Don't kid yourself. People aren't passively buying houses in segregated neighborhoods. People are paying enormous premiums to buy houses in zip codes that feed into majority white elementary, middle and high schools. They are actively seeking segregation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To 12:00, you can keep your status quo. It affects me not at all if you prefer lily-white schools with low poverty, or if you are enamored of the nice balance W-L has achieved. I chose differently for my children and I'm comfortable with my decision. However, I'd like to keep MY status quo as a Wakefield parent, which means not undercutting naturally occurring improvement by continually cramming all the FARMS kids into the same district, so that other kids can have the option to walk 30 min to and from school.

And yes, if we had a better socioeconomic balance across the county, these problems would go away. Some of us are actively trying to encourage that by living where we live. Current certain policies and proposals seem to be at odds with that would-be solution. Also, if I had wings I'd be a fucking bird.

This x1000.

Status quo is a concept that applies to everyone, not just the person doing the talking. Preserving status quo means no one gets moved, not just that *you* don't get moved.

Thank you Pp's!

Lots of snide little remarks on this thread, " you knew what you bought when you moved to south Arlington" etc etc...
Yes, we did know. We bought in a school that was 45% poverty ( not majority), not 65%. What about our status quo? If the SB engages in poor practices, we will be selling and moving inbounds to WL or Yorktown. I'm not here to play games with my kid's education.
I'm not certain we will even wait if it creeps up to 50%.

I posted earlier about trying to fit the numbers across the three schools. When I tried to do what others suggested it didn't work. I wanted to ask how you guys even reach 65% I clicked on the 4 western pike planning units not 3508 (that's up for consideration) but not directly on the boundary. If you start at something like 2060 students at Wakefield (according to the tool) and assume 42% are FARMS it's about 865 FARMS students. when you click on the 4 units that are right on the border it's takes you up to 2347 students total. Adding 287 +865 = 1152/2347= 49%. How is everyone reaching 65% (this of course only includes the current HS population) not the claims about future FARMS kids.

So taking this into account, it would be more like 49% FARMS and incorporating some of the other 5 factors. Also, when you say it's about not allowing others to walk to their school v. jamming all the FARMS kids into one school, it's not. It's about more bussing costs since the nearest planning units to Wakefield could walk. It's about less time for the others having less time during the evening with their families. It's also asking those kids to bus further and come to a school which may not be as good as the one their parents moved to. As I said above and before in earlier posts, I tried clicking on only the units pushed by some others on this board and I could not achieve good numbers across all 3 schools. Who knows how this will all play out. All I am saying is that it's not necessarily 65% v. 42%. It could be 49% and achieving some of the other stuff. I was able to do this and not move too many other units that were walking distance to all of the schools.

[Anonymous]

It's funny that anytime someone writes something that contradicts a post by a S. arlington family, they automatically accuse that person of being from yorktown. most of the yorktown parents i've spoken to don't even seem to care b/c they know their kids will still be going to yorktown.

[Anonymous]

I am late chiming in here but one thing they did say at the Arlington information meeting is that the scores of Wakefield students are equivalent to W&L students by demographic group. That is true - at least on the state SOL's - so the notion that kids are getting a worse education at Wakefield seems to be a misperceptions, not a reality. Plus Wakefield is a beautiful school with a gorgeous campus and all the offerings if not more than WL. If you have not seen it, you should - it.definitely changed my view about the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's funny that anytime someone writes something that contradicts a post by a S. arlington family, they automatically accuse that person of being from yorktown. most of the yorktown parents i've spoken to don't even seem to care b/c they know their kids will still be going to yorktown.

And Yorktown = racist, naturally. Who needs to know people before accusing them of sins based on geography?

So many predjudices here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am late chiming in here but one thing they did say at the Arlington information meeting is that the scores of Wakefield students are equivalent to W&L students by demographic group. That is true - at least on the state SOL's - so the notion that kids are getting a worse education at Wakefield seems to be a misperceptions, not a reality. Plus Wakefield is a beautiful school with a gorgeous campus and all the offerings if not more than WL. If you have not seen it, you should - it.definitely changed my view about the school.

I don't think anyone who lives in south Arlington thinks the building and campus aren't fabulous. They are. I agree about misperceptions, too. But I think moving the PU's from the west pike to Wakefield would just increase the likelihood that more will be afraid to give Wakefield a chance.

[Anonymous]

what would be an acceptable FARM % at YT to most?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am late chiming in here but one thing they did say at the Arlington information meeting is that the scores of Wakefield students are equivalent to W&L students by demographic group. That is true - at least on the state SOL's - so the notion that kids are getting a worse education at Wakefield seems to be a misperceptions, not a reality. Plus Wakefield is a beautiful school with a gorgeous campus and all the offerings if not more than WL. If you have not seen it, you should - it.definitely changed my view about the school.

This is why I don't trust APS. It is so easy to manipulate data and use it to your advantage. They obviously know how to do it well.
The SOL is a comprehensive exam at the end of a class. All teachers know the standards that will be on the test and they teach them. APS has some good teachers - that is not in question. Oh, and i could be wrong, but aren't students allowed (required?) to take it again if they fail?

But if you look at a test like the SAT, a national standardized test, you'll notice the numbers look a little different.

Here is the average SAT score for each school:
W-L: 1702
Yorktown:1752
Wakefield :1431

For Hispanics at each school:
W-L:1441
Yorktown:1610
Wakefield:1370

For Blacks:
W-L:1523
Yorktown:1506
Wakefield:1310

For Whites:
W-L: 1856
Yorktown:1788
Wakefield: 1729

Data looks a little different, doesn't it? The scores are not equivalent, or anywhere near equivalent. The national average score for 2016 was 1484. Wakefield scored below the national average by 53 points and below the average of Yorktown by 321 points.

But, demographics and data aren't that important...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's funny that anytime someone writes something that contradicts a post by a S. arlington family, they automatically accuse that person of being from yorktown. most of the yorktown parents i've spoken to don't even seem to care b/c they know their kids will still be going to yorktown.

Well I guess you weren't at the meeting where the prevailing sentiment from Yorktown parents was that they shouldn't have to take ANY students from W-L or anywhere because their campus is so much smaller than the other two. So forgive me if I'm skeptical of the motives of the community at large because, with one exception, that's all I have heard. No wait, I guess it's two exceptions. I think Peter Rousselot lives in YHS boundary:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To 12:00, you can keep your status quo. It affects me not at all if you prefer lily-white schools with low poverty, or if you are enamored of the nice balance W-L has achieved. I chose differently for my children and I'm comfortable with my decision. However, I'd like to keep MY status quo as a Wakefield parent, which means not undercutting naturally occurring improvement by continually cramming all the FARMS kids into the same district, so that other kids can have the option to walk 30 min to and from school.

And yes, if we had a better socioeconomic balance across the county, these problems would go away. Some of us are actively trying to encourage that by living where we live. Current certain policies and proposals seem to be at odds with that would-be solution. Also, if I had wings I'd be a fucking bird.

This x1000.

Status quo is a concept that applies to everyone, not just the person doing the talking. Preserving status quo means no one gets moved, not just that *you* don't get moved.

Thank you Pp's!

Lots of snide little remarks on this thread, " you knew what you bought when you moved to south Arlington" etc etc...
Yes, we did know. We bought in a school that was 45% poverty ( not majority), not 65%. What about our status quo? If the SB engages in poor practices, we will be selling and moving inbounds to WL or Yorktown. I'm not here to play games with my kid's education.
I'm not certain we will even wait if it creeps up to 50%.

I posted earlier about trying to fit the numbers across the three schools. When I tried to do what others suggested it didn't work. I wanted to ask how you guys even reach 65% I clicked on the 4 western pike planning units not 3508 (that's up for consideration) but not directly on the boundary. If you start at something like 2060 students at Wakefield (according to the tool) and assume 42% are FARMS it's about 865 FARMS students. when you click on the 4 units that are right on the border it's takes you up to 2347 students total. Adding 287 +865 = 1152/2347= 49%. How is everyone reaching 65% (this of course only includes the current HS population) not the claims about future FARMS kids.

So taking this into account, it would be more like 49% FARMS and incorporating some of the other 5 factors. Also, when you say it's about not allowing others to walk to their school v. jamming all the FARMS kids into one school, it's not. It's about more bussing costs since the nearest planning units to Wakefield could walk. It's about less time for the others having less time during the evening with their families. It's also asking those kids to bus further and come to a school which may not be as good as the one their parents moved to. As I said above and before in earlier posts, I tried clicking on only the units pushed by some others on this board and I could not achieve good numbers across all 3 schools. Who knows how this will all play out. All I am saying is that it's not necessarily 65% v. 42%. It could be 49% and achieving some of the other stuff. I was able to do this and not move too many other units that were walking distance to all of the schools.

I think the point many of us are trying to make is that Wakefield is already at the edge. In this county, success stories have hovered around 1/3 FARMS, for example, Henry and W-L itself. Wakefield is already over that, whether at your 42% or 46% (which I thought was the current figure). If I move 3506, 3507, 3509, and 3510, the % by my math becomes 52%. If I add 3508 (which would push the # of students at Wakefield into the red, so it's not allowed), the % is 61%. Either way, these are big numbers on top of already elevated rates. And, as you point out, it doesn't take into account the acknowledged AH boom that is coming down the pike (literally).

To address your other points, busing costs would not increase since these units are already at W-L. I suppose other busing costs might increase in theory to bus kids in substitute planning units who can no longer walk to school, though I don't think so because there are ways to adjust the units without affecting the current walk zones. I flat out do not understand the point about families having less evening time. This county is 26 square miles. Any kid on a bus, or within a walk zone, will get home well before any reasonable definition of "evening" sets in. And regarding your last point, it's about asking those kids to "come to a school which may not be as good as the one their parents moved to." Though I assume you are referring to non-Wakefield zones, that is in fact EXACTLY what we are talking about. Our percentage of FARMS kids increase and boom, this is not a school that is as good as the one us parents moved into. This theory does not only apply to upper-middle class families who really stretched to afford an address with an N. at the end.

It is highly frustrating that we are assumed to have mortgaged our children's educations deliberately in order to live in South Arlington, as if it's Cabrini Greens and we just don't give a shit because, oooh, shiny teardown. We have values. They include, at least in my case and among others, not striving exclusively for the highest test scores at the expense of either socioeconomic or racial/ethnic diversity. Maybe those values are pie in the sky, wrong, or not aligned with yours. But if there is consideration of the education situation that a parent buys into, then then we get that too.

[Anonymous]

We need to start bussing to Yorktown and the other schools in its cluster. we have a movement going to fix the inequality in Arlington.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An interesting perspective is offered here. I encourage everyone to read it. And think about. And then do something about it.

http://lithub.com/marlon-james-why-im-done-talking-about-diversity/

This is more of a talk about the perils of tokenism, rather than an excuse to allow the segregation of schools. In fact, the argument would more be that the action taken would be to desegregate schools and try to create more equal institutions so that elite spaces become more diverse as a result, rather than forcing the diversity when its arguably too late.

In other words, because a black person wrote a piece saying that diversity in panels hasn't produced any results, doesn't mean we are all excused from any effort. Rather that white people didn't get the point in the first place.

Maybe I didn't get enough sleep last night, but I am arguing that the time for talk is over. Let's act. This boundary process is the first step. Is that not how I am to interpret the article and put its message into practice? My child attends a diverse ES. If the most geographically logical units are moved around, it's entirely possible that the HS my child is bound for will become less diverse and I don't want that. The words that I think are applicable here are, "Maybe we will stop failing so badly at true diversity when we stop thinking that all we need to do is talk about it." How does that not apply to Arlington, when we throw around the words "diverse and inclusive" in pretty much every guiding principle and planning document, and then passively accept segregation in the public schools, because it's a result of a segregated geography?

I agree with you, but I also think that the FIRST priority needs to be better diversification of Wakefield, because we know that concentrating low-income students in a school adversely affects students' education. If we can do that while also increasing diversity at Yorktown, fine. But if another priority is proximity to school, then I suspect the most viable option may be to balance diversity at W-L and Wakefield, and Yorktown just has to deal with where the chips fall.

--W-L parent

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An interesting perspective is offered here. I encourage everyone to read it. And think about. And then do something about it.

http://lithub.com/marlon-james-why-im-done-talking-about-diversity/

This is more of a talk about the perils of tokenism, rather than an excuse to allow the segregation of schools. In fact, the argument would more be that the action taken would be to desegregate schools and try to create more equal institutions so that elite spaces become more diverse as a result, rather than forcing the diversity when its arguably too late.

In other words, because a black person wrote a piece saying that diversity in panels hasn't produced any results, doesn't mean we are all excused from any effort. Rather that white people didn't get the point in the first place.

Maybe I didn't get enough sleep last night, but I am arguing that the time for talk is over. Let's act. This boundary process is the first step. Is that not how I am to interpret the article and put its message into practice? My child attends a diverse ES. If the most geographically logical units are moved around, it's entirely possible that the HS my child is bound for will become less diverse and I don't want that. The words that I think are applicable here are, "Maybe we will stop failing so badly at true diversity when we stop thinking that all we need to do is talk about it." How does that not apply to Arlington, when we throw around the words "diverse and inclusive" in pretty much every guiding principle and planning document, and then passively accept segregation in the public schools, because it's a result of a segregated geography?

Don't kid yourself. People aren't passively buying houses in segregated neighborhoods. People are paying enormous premiums to buy houses in zip codes that feed into majority white elementary, middle and high schools. They are actively seeking segregation.

What about those of us who deliberately bought 12 years ago in a neighborhood that feeds into the most diverse high school in the county (and at that time one of the more diverse elementary schools) because that's the kind of environment we wanted for ourselves and our kids, but who have been disappointed to find their schools whitening around them? Do we get painted with this same broad brush?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny that anytime someone writes something that contradicts a post by a S. arlington family, they automatically accuse that person of being from yorktown. most of the yorktown parents i've spoken to don't even seem to care b/c they know their kids will still be going to yorktown.

Well I guess you weren't at the meeting where the prevailing sentiment from Yorktown parents was that they shouldn't have to take ANY students from W-L or anywhere because their campus is so much smaller than the other two. So forgive me if I'm skeptical of the motives of the community at large because, with one exception, that's all I have heard. No wait, I guess it's two exceptions. I think Peter Rousselot lives in YHS boundary:

What about the crazy woman who came to the 10/6 sb meeting and bemoaned the lack of diversity. Plus you said they didnt want any kids. This would apply to even the rich white kids. We are .2 miles from a yorktown planning unit. We don't want to be switched there but will deal if it happens eventually.

[Anonymous]

I know. Yorktown parents have no right to want to improve demographics where they live. They should definitely keep quiet & endure the ire & racism accusations from the rest of you. Or they should move to Wakefield and get 50% poverty because advocating for balance in this County with folks like you around PP is truly the definition of CRAZY. ?