South Arlington elementary school boundary adjustments 2019

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the walk zone maps, it appears Barcroft ES will be losing some sfh’s from Alcova and gaining Caf’s From the new apt building. I’m skeptical changing the calendar one way or another will make a difference to the demographics.

Alcova being re-districted elsewhere would be fewer SFHs to Barcroft; but what apartment building is adding CAF's in that attendance zone? Food Star redevelopment is market rate - not affordable housing/CAFs. There's a small condominium building under construction on Columbia Pike; but that's supposed to be ownership units, not affordable housing. But I agree, the boundary changes in south Arlington are not going to help Carlin Springs, Randolph, or Barcroft.

Gilliam place right on that pike.
Commited affordable
Supposedly mostly seniors
Will actually produce at least 2 classrooms worth of kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the walk zone maps, it appears Barcroft ES will be losing some sfh’s from Alcova and gaining Caf’s From the new apt building. I’m skeptical changing the calendar one way or another will make a difference to the demographics.

Alcova being re-districted elsewhere would be fewer SFHs to Barcroft; but what apartment building is adding CAF's in that attendance zone? Food Star redevelopment is market rate - not affordable housing/CAFs. There's a small condominium building under construction on Columbia Pike; but that's supposed to be ownership units, not affordable housing. But I agree, the boundary changes in south Arlington are not going to help Carlin Springs, Randolph, or Barcroft.

Gilliam place right on that pike.
Commited affordable
Supposedly mostly seniors
Will actually produce at least 2 classrooms worth of kids.

But if they take Alcova out of Barcroft, that building would go with it. I don't think they'd split the neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

My middle class kids go to Barcroft.

The calendar is great - saves us about $2,000 per kid every year because we have 4 less weeks of summer camp to pay for. Barcroft offers optional intersession classes during the fall and spring off weeks for $100, which most kids with two working parents take.

I understand why workers tied to the congressional schedule don’t like Barcroft’s calendar, but I don’t understand why it is a problem for others (I am assuming they are unaware of the intersession class option).

Also, most families with multiple kids have to manage kids with different calendars at various times anyway when some are in school and some in daycare. So, I don’t see that as a major deal breaker either.

Maybe people transfer their kids out due to not understanding the calendar, demographics, and/or test scores?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don’t see much diffence between Barcroft and Randolph...
Other than Randolph posters don’t like the idea of their school excluding higher needs children in their neighborhood. Barcroft posters seem to not consider the farms kids currently attending Barcroft as part of their neighborhood.
Intersting dynamics at play.

Well, many of them are not residents of our neighborhood. Either you are unfamiliar with the Civic Association or you are being deliberately obtuse. The students residing in Buchanan Gardens are residents of our neighborhood. The students in the Barcroft Apartments are in the Douglas Park neighborhood and those from Arlington Mill do not reside in our neighborhood, but rather live in the Arlington Mill neighborhood. And the students who will eventually reside in Gilliam Place will be residents of Alcova Heights. These areas are part of the current school community because of current boundaries, boundaries that are about to change, and who knows whether any or all of those students will continue to be zoned to Barcroft. I was making the point that within the known walk zone, the area that will never be zoned to any school other than Barcroft, there are many children whose families do not like the year-round calendar. If what APS is doing is trying to encourage more walking and fewer bus routes, they should be trying to determine how to keep the kids living within the Barcroft walk zone at their neighborhood school. And they dynamics are quite "interesting" when you look at the transfer report and note that the majority of families are transferring their children to other diverse schools: 44 to Campbell, 16 to Barrett, 2 to Carlin Springs, 78 to Claremont, 10 to Drew, 9 to Key, 15 to Long Branch, 49 to Randolph. It's not like they're all transferring to Discovery (1), or even ATS (39).

Clearly the calendar has had driven out more families than it has attracted. It's not a good use of limited resources.

How many of those transfers out are families living within the BArcroft neighborhood and your "known walk zone"? How does that compare to the percentage of students in each of the other neighborhoods you cite? Cause, relative to the Barcroft neighborhood, there really aren't that many "outsiders" from Alcova Heights, and a lot of them have opted out of Barcroft for Immersion, Montessori, Campbell, and the handful or less of ATS-ers and private schoolers.

I only have "anecdata" for that, but I personally live in the walk zone in the neighborhood itself and there are a lot of kids living here. Not very many go to Barcroft, and the most often cited reason is the calendar. Are they all lying? I don't know. Why give them an excuse? And as another PP has pointed out, many families who move in already have their kids in a private or option school before moving here, so that suggests to me that there isn't some huge demand for this calendar from outside the neighborhood.

For myself, I can say that at the time we moved in we didn't have kids, and we didn't know whether we would live here until we did. Then when we did and the oldest was about to start K, we tried to keep an open mind as we toured schools. But the calendar was a real negative. I think that if we had stuck with it, we might've "gotten used to it" or "dealt with it" but we decided it was easier to accept the spot at an option school instead.

Other posters have pointed out that school performance is a consideration. I won't deny that's true for many. But that also suggests to me that this unique calendar isn't a positive in that regard. In other localities there are "magnet" schools with different calendars, and families opt into those schools, usually from a lower performing neighborhood school. Not because they love the calendar, but because they prefer a "better" school. But Barcroft isn't even an option school, it's just a neighborhood school that could maybe accommodate a handful of transfers.

So I've been told that this unique calendar isn't meant to be a draw, isn't meant to improve educational outcomes (as measured by test scores), and isn't meant to provide free summer care. So, what is it for? I need a real reason, and some data to support that reason. I think I understand why it was started, but I'm asking does it really make sense to continue it? When there are streets that are walkable to Barcroft that have multiple ES kids taking buses to three or maybe even more different ES outside the neighborhood?

It was meant to improve educational outcomes.

While test scores may not reflect success in that regard, there are many factors contributing to that. First, the calendar has never had 100% support from Superintendent Murphy or APS. As another poster suggests,[/b] it would have been stronger if other schools in the system also adopted the calendar. But teacher contract issues based on the traditional calendar and district-wide teacher training conducted in August means a lot of substitute teachers at the very beginning of the year when students are trying to get used to their new teachers, classrooms, and rules; and very much takes away from some of the main benefits of a modified calendar. [b]

I would also suggest that anticipated test score increases may be based on data from schools with different demographics. There is a very high %age of ELL students at Barcroft. So, it might have been worthwhile for APS to do some long-term analysis (something APS never bothers to do) to see any impacts on longer-term ELL students' performance by reducing summer learning and language proficiency losses over time, for instance. Also, the calendar could be more effective if all the students actually come to school when the school year starts. Many students still don't show up until september. People new to the school aren't always aware of the different calendar. There are various little things like these that all contribute to the situation.

Regardless, anyone who expects the calendar change to magically make test scores on par with our top test-scoring schools is naive and is dismissing all the other potential benefits of such a calendar.

They are never going to do it the "right way" if they haven't managed to do it in 15 years, and there is no way the whole system is moving to this calendar. The neighborhood deserves a neighborhood school with a calendar that mirrors all of APS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the walk zone maps, it appears Barcroft ES will be losing some sfh’s from Alcova and gaining Caf’s From the new apt building. I’m skeptical changing the calendar one way or another will make a difference to the demographics.

Alcova being re-districted elsewhere would be fewer SFHs to Barcroft; but what apartment building is adding CAF's in that attendance zone? Food Star redevelopment is market rate - not affordable housing/CAFs. There's a small condominium building under construction on Columbia Pike; but that's supposed to be ownership units, not affordable housing. But I agree, the boundary changes in south Arlington are not going to help Carlin Springs, Randolph, or Barcroft.

Gilliam place right on that pike.
Commited affordable
Supposedly mostly seniors
Will actually produce at least 2 classrooms worth of kids.

But if they take Alcova out of Barcroft, that building would go with it. I don't think they'd split the neighborhood.

Ha!
They literally have 1-2 units currently zoned Barcroft that they are looking to shift to Fleet.
Yes, Barcroft will keep the projects.
Fleet will get the 850k homes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the walk zone maps, it appears Barcroft ES will be losing some sfh’s from Alcova and gaining Caf’s From the new apt building. I’m skeptical changing the calendar one way or another will make a difference to the demographics.

Alcova being re-districted elsewhere would be fewer SFHs to Barcroft; but what apartment building is adding CAF's in that attendance zone? Food Star redevelopment is market rate - not affordable housing/CAFs. There's a small condominium building under construction on Columbia Pike; but that's supposed to be ownership units, not affordable housing. But I agree, the boundary changes in south Arlington are not going to help Carlin Springs, Randolph, or Barcroft.

Gilliam place right on that pike.
Commited affordable
Supposedly mostly seniors
Will actually produce at least 2 classrooms worth of kids.

But if they take Alcova out of Barcroft, that building would go with it. I don't think they'd split the neighborhood.

Ha!
They literally have 1-2 units currently zoned Barcroft that they are looking to shift to Fleet.
Yes, Barcroft will keep the projects.
Fleet will get the 850k homes.

How do you see that? Alcova Heights is split into 4 units on the survey.
The one nearest to the Pike contains the new development (CAF), but also many of the new million dollar homes.
The two small northern PUs - they are directly on Glebe and not the nicest/most expensive.
The large middle section, the biggest PU is the pretty part of Alcova Heights. Beautiful houses and streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the walk zone maps, it appears Barcroft ES will be losing some sfh’s from Alcova and gaining Caf’s From the new apt building. I’m skeptical changing the calendar one way or another will make a difference to the demographics.

Alcova being re-districted elsewhere would be fewer SFHs to Barcroft; but what apartment building is adding CAF's in that attendance zone? Food Star redevelopment is market rate - not affordable housing/CAFs. There's a small condominium building under construction on Columbia Pike; but that's supposed to be ownership units, not affordable housing. But I agree, the boundary changes in south Arlington are not going to help Carlin Springs, Randolph, or Barcroft.

Gilliam place right on that pike.
Commited affordable
Supposedly mostly seniors
Will actually produce at least 2 classrooms worth of kids.

I think you and the PP are talking about two different developments. The old church property near Glebe is slated for AH. But there is another, smaller new condo building going up further down the Pike near Four Mile Run. It's market rate condos, starting in the $200s

http://trafalgarflats.com/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here who lives in one of the SFH neighborhoods zoned for Barcroft (but has a child at a choice school). Does it still seem likely that the Barcroft year-round calendar will be changed in the near future? I know that some of my neighbors with kids at Barcroft (yes, some neighbors do send their kids to Barcroft) more or less assumed that the year-round calendar would be abandoned soon. They got the sense that the new principal was not fully committed to the modified calendar. But it was a while ago that I had those conversations, and I haven't heard much about the calendar - one way or the other - since then. Is doing away with the modified calendar still on the table?

For what it's worth, I like the calendar. It's much more like the school calendar I grew up with (in Europe) than the traditional American school calendar is. I think it's a superior calendar (and would be even better if adopted across the board in APS). When DC was nearing kindergarten and we were considering schools, I viewed the Barcroft calendar as a plus for that school. But it wasn't a big enough draw to make up for the fact that our choice options were higher performing schools.

This. I also like the sound of the calendar. It's a lot more like the private school I went to, that followed a particular schooling style - can't remember the name. We had shorter summers, but longer fall and spring breaks. We had seminars, much like the intercessions. For me, it's the test scores - a school like this should be doing great, but the test scores give me pause. I think the high level of English learners is part of it, though when you look at their scores, I think they are doing a good job getting caught up, but it seems like the rest of the students suffer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the walk zone maps, it appears Barcroft ES will be losing some sfh’s from Alcova and gaining Caf’s From the new apt building. I’m skeptical changing the calendar one way or another will make a difference to the demographics.

Alcova being re-districted elsewhere would be fewer SFHs to Barcroft; but what apartment building is adding CAF's in that attendance zone? Food Star redevelopment is market rate - not affordable housing/CAFs. There's a small condominium building under construction on Columbia Pike; but that's supposed to be ownership units, not affordable housing. But I agree, the boundary changes in south Arlington are not going to help Carlin Springs, Randolph, or Barcroft.

As someone else pointed out, Alcova is 4 planning units. Two are multi-family buildings, two predominately the increasingly expensive SFHs. I would think the Civic association would try to work as a monolith and have the whole area be zoned to the same school. However, I could see a scenario where the smallest PUs with the multi-family buildings go to Fleet, but keep the SFHs at Barcroft. You'd keep UMC families in Barcroft and reduce the number of ELL and FARMs at Barcroft too. It would look better than all of Alcova fighting to go to Fleet, which is a virtual unknown, except that it will include the other majority SFH civic associations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here who lives in one of the SFH neighborhoods zoned for Barcroft (but has a child at a choice school). Does it still seem likely that the Barcroft year-round calendar will be changed in the near future? I know that some of my neighbors with kids at Barcroft (yes, some neighbors do send their kids to Barcroft) more or less assumed that the year-round calendar would be abandoned soon. They got the sense that the new principal was not fully committed to the modified calendar. But it was a while ago that I had those conversations, and I haven't heard much about the calendar - one way or the other - since then. Is doing away with the modified calendar still on the table?

For what it's worth, I like the calendar. It's much more like the school calendar I grew up with (in Europe) than the traditional American school calendar is. I think it's a superior calendar (and would be even better if adopted across the board in APS). When DC was nearing kindergarten and we were considering schools, I viewed the Barcroft calendar as a plus for that school. But it wasn't a big enough draw to make up for the fact that our choice options were higher performing schools.

This. I also like the sound of the calendar. It's a lot more like the private school I went to, that followed a particular schooling style - can't remember the name. We had shorter summers, but longer fall and spring breaks. We had seminars, much like the intercessions. For me, it's the test scores - a school like this should be doing great, but the test scores give me pause. I think the high level of English learners is part of it, though when you look at their scores, I think they are doing a good job getting caught up, but it seems like the rest of the students suffer.

There's no tracking. The most able students are running on 3 cylinders instead of being challenged every day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here who lives in one of the SFH neighborhoods zoned for Barcroft (but has a child at a choice school). Does it still seem likely that the Barcroft year-round calendar will be changed in the near future? I know that some of my neighbors with kids at Barcroft (yes, some neighbors do send their kids to Barcroft) more or less assumed that the year-round calendar would be abandoned soon. They got the sense that the new principal was not fully committed to the modified calendar. But it was a while ago that I had those conversations, and I haven't heard much about the calendar - one way or the other - since then. Is doing away with the modified calendar still on the table?

For what it's worth, I like the calendar. It's much more like the school calendar I grew up with (in Europe) than the traditional American school calendar is. I think it's a superior calendar (and would be even better if adopted across the board in APS). When DC was nearing kindergarten and we were considering schools, I viewed the Barcroft calendar as a plus for that school. But it wasn't a big enough draw to make up for the fact that our choice options were higher performing schools.

This. I also like the sound of the calendar. It's a lot more like the private school I went to, that followed a particular schooling style - can't remember the name. We had shorter summers, but longer fall and spring breaks. We had seminars, much like the intercessions. For me, it's the test scores - a school like this should be doing great, but the test scores give me pause. I think the high level of English learners is part of it, though when you look at their scores, I think they are doing a good job getting caught up, but it seems like the rest of the students suffer.

There's no tracking. The most able students are running on 3 cylinders instead of being challenged every day.

And that would make me send my special little snowflakes to a choice school, or if I had to, one of the parochial ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here who lives in one of the SFH neighborhoods zoned for Barcroft (but has a child at a choice school). Does it still seem likely that the Barcroft year-round calendar will be changed in the near future? I know that some of my neighbors with kids at Barcroft (yes, some neighbors do send their kids to Barcroft) more or less assumed that the year-round calendar would be abandoned soon. They got the sense that the new principal was not fully committed to the modified calendar. But it was a while ago that I had those conversations, and I haven't heard much about the calendar - one way or the other - since then. Is doing away with the modified calendar still on the table?

For what it's worth, I like the calendar. It's much more like the school calendar I grew up with (in Europe) than the traditional American school calendar is. I think it's a superior calendar (and would be even better if adopted across the board in APS). When DC was nearing kindergarten and we were considering schools, I viewed the Barcroft calendar as a plus for that school. But it wasn't a big enough draw to make up for the fact that our choice options were higher performing schools.

This. I also like the sound of the calendar. It's a lot more like the private school I went to, that followed a particular schooling style - can't remember the name. We had shorter summers, but longer fall and spring breaks. We had seminars, much like the intercessions. For me, it's the test scores - a school like this should be doing great, but the test scores give me pause. I think the high level of English learners is part of it, though when you look at their scores, I think they are doing a good job getting caught up, but it seems like the rest of the students suffer.

There's no tracking. The most able students are running on 3 cylinders instead of being challenged every day.

This is true across APS, no tracking. I don't know what happens in the classroom at Barcroft, but at other schools they are finding ways to keep the "quicker" students interested without tracking them. If that isn't happening at Barcroft, and I am not saying that it isn't (I only have outdated information about the school at this point), they need to tap into schools with similar demographics that are getting better results and figure out how/why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here who lives in one of the SFH neighborhoods zoned for Barcroft (but has a child at a choice school). Does it still seem likely that the Barcroft year-round calendar will be changed in the near future? I know that some of my neighbors with kids at Barcroft (yes, some neighbors do send their kids to Barcroft) more or less assumed that the year-round calendar would be abandoned soon. They got the sense that the new principal was not fully committed to the modified calendar. But it was a while ago that I had those conversations, and I haven't heard much about the calendar - one way or the other - since then. Is doing away with the modified calendar still on the table?

For what it's worth, I like the calendar. It's much more like the school calendar I grew up with (in Europe) than the traditional American school calendar is. I think it's a superior calendar (and would be even better if adopted across the board in APS). When DC was nearing kindergarten and we were considering schools, I viewed the Barcroft calendar as a plus for that school. But it wasn't a big enough draw to make up for the fact that our choice options were higher performing schools.

This. I also like the sound of the calendar. It's a lot more like the private school I went to, that followed a particular schooling style - can't remember the name. We had shorter summers, but longer fall and spring breaks. We had seminars, much like the intercessions. For me, it's the test scores - a school like this should be doing great, but the test scores give me pause. I think the high level of English learners is part of it, though when you look at their scores, I think they are doing a good job getting caught up, but it seems like the rest of the students suffer.

There's no tracking. The most able students are running on 3 cylinders instead of being challenged every day.

My experience, in a title 1 school with many ESL students, is that my child actually gets more support. There are nearly always extra adults in the class room and the class works in small groups. Sometimes break-outs are done among an entire grade, sometimes just in the classroom. My child interacts with numerous staff throughout the day in addition to her teacher and reports a lot of one-on-one attention. They also have a "young scholars" program for enrichment that starts pretty young. This is lower elementary. Both of her classes so far have had only 19 or 20 kids. She is definitely challenged and learning. To me a supportive environment is one of the most important keys to academic success.

This is true across APS, no tracking. I don't know what happens in the classroom at Barcroft, but at other schools they are finding ways to keep the "quicker" students interested without tracking them. If that isn't happening at Barcroft, and I am not saying that it isn't (I only have outdated information about the school at this point), they need to tap into schools with similar demographics that are getting better results and figure out how/why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the walk zone maps, it appears Barcroft ES will be losing some sfh’s from Alcova and gaining Caf’s From the new apt building. I’m skeptical changing the calendar one way or another will make a difference to the demographics.

Alcova being re-districted elsewhere would be fewer SFHs to Barcroft; but what apartment building is adding CAF's in that attendance zone? Food Star redevelopment is market rate - not affordable housing/CAFs. There's a small condominium building under construction on Columbia Pike; but that's supposed to be ownership units, not affordable housing. But I agree, the boundary changes in south Arlington are not going to help Carlin Springs, Randolph, or Barcroft.

Gilliam place right on that pike.
Commited affordable
Supposedly mostly seniors
Will actually produce at least 2 classrooms worth of kids.

I think you and the PP are talking about two different developments. The old church property near Glebe is slated for AH. But there is another, smaller new condo building going up further down the Pike near Four Mile Run. It's market rate condos, starting in the $200s

http://trafalgarflats.com/

Those new condos at Four Mile Run may be geared towards singles & couples w/o kids. But I totally forgot about the Food Star development. Not sure if that's apartments or condos or a mix of both, but that is sure to add some new families to the mix.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the walk zone maps, it appears Barcroft ES will be losing some sfh’s from Alcova and gaining Caf’s From the new apt building. I’m skeptical changing the calendar one way or another will make a difference to the demographics.

Alcova being re-districted elsewhere would be fewer SFHs to Barcroft; but what apartment building is adding CAF's in that attendance zone? Food Star redevelopment is market rate - not affordable housing/CAFs. There's a small condominium building under construction on Columbia Pike; but that's supposed to be ownership units, not affordable housing. But I agree, the boundary changes in south Arlington are not going to help Carlin Springs, Randolph, or Barcroft.

Gilliam place right on that pike.
Commited affordable
Supposedly mostly seniors
Will actually produce at least 2 classrooms worth of kids.

I think you and the PP are talking about two different developments. The old church property near Glebe is slated for AH. But there is another, smaller new condo building going up further down the Pike near Four Mile Run. It's market rate condos, starting in the $200s

http://trafalgarflats.com/

Those new condos at Four Mile Run may be geared towards singles & couples w/o kids. But I totally forgot about the Food Star development. Not sure if that's apartments or condos or a mix of both, but that is sure to add some new families to the mix.

If I remember correctly Food Star was going to be apartments, and was mostly one bedroom units. Those tend not to bring very many children.