APS 2021-2022 boundary-adjustments

[Anonymous]

So is Barcroft/Alcova going to WL or Penrose/Arl. Heights? Those seem to be pretty much the only options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love the combine Drew and Abingdon idea. Make it an upper and lower school.

I agree! You have two FRL schools fighting over a handful of higher income kids, this boundary process is going to be a disaster an no matter how the lines are drawn you are going to still have two low-income schools with one just being higher than the the other.

I don’t know why this idea hasn’t gained traction. It addresses Abingdon numbers, puts more kids in empty seats at Drew, and it eliminates the squabbling over what neighborhoods go to Drew. Both schools win.

[Anonymous]

The truth is no one wants to be zoned for Drew.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The truth is no one wants to be zoned for Drew.

Which is why the proposal is to move poor areas instead of Fairlington.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love the combine Drew and Abingdon idea. Make it an upper and lower school.

I agree! You have two FRL schools fighting over a handful of higher income kids, this boundary process is going to be a disaster an no matter how the lines are drawn you are going to still have two low-income schools with one just being higher than the the other.

I don’t know why this idea hasn’t gained traction. It addresses Abingdon numbers, puts more kids in empty seats at Drew, and it eliminates the squabbling over what neighborhoods go to Drew. Both schools win.

Because if you said this out loud you will be branded a racist. That’s why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So is Barcroft/Alcova going to WL or Penrose/Arl. Heights? Those seem to be pretty much the only options.

It will probably be Penrose and Arlington View—the two neighborhoods that were rezoned from WL to WF in 2017 (not sure the exact year).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The truth is no one wants to be zoned for Drew.

Which is why the proposal is to move poor areas instead of Fairlington.

They don't march across bridges and have their media friends air it on TV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The truth is no one wants to be zoned for Drew.

Which is why the proposal is to move poor areas instead of Fairlington.

They don't march across bridges and have their media friends air it on TV.

With no dog in the fight, I'm just going to watch with some popcorn.

Once enrollment does stabilize a few years from now, APS really needs to focus on long-term boundary issues. These fights are way too divisive and take everyone's eye off of the ball of making education better here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is Barcroft/Alcova going to WL or Penrose/Arl. Heights? Those seem to be pretty much the only options.

It will probably be Penrose and Arlington View—the two neighborhoods that were rezoned from WL to WF in 2017 (not sure the exact year).

Disagree. I think it will be Barcroft-Alcova, given stability, ES and MS feeder patterns, and also diversity, since you’d be moving more white and high SES students out of Wakefield if the former were moved again. Moving those Penrose/AV PUs back doesn’t align with the factors considered. But it may be a numbers game. How many do they need to move and how many kids live in specific PUs may be the deciding factor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is Barcroft/Alcova going to WL or Penrose/Arl. Heights? Those seem to be pretty much the only options.

It will probably be Penrose and Arlington View—the two neighborhoods that were rezoned from WL to WF in 2017 (not sure the exact year).

Disagree. I think it will be Barcroft-Alcova, given stability, ES and MS feeder patterns, and also diversity, since you’d be moving more white and high SES students out of Wakefield if the former were moved again. Moving those Penrose/AV PUs back doesn’t align with the factors considered. But it may be a numbers game. How many do they need to move and how many kids live in specific PUs may be the deciding factor.

Well, that would be totally fine with me, but I thought the presentation said that APS was “focusing” on the PUs it moved before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They constantly kick the can and listen too much to the small group of current and heavily invested vocal families. They need to limit the role the PTAs play.

What are you talking about? APS Planning shoved the idiotic school moves (Key to ATS to McKinley to Cardinal) down our throats; protests, opposing data, and higher expenses be darned.

That was one of the few sensible moves they made and then they undid the potential benefits by caving to McKinley and putting them all at Cardinal. So now we all have to go through the wretched boundary arguing AGAIN in 2 years.

The “opposing data” was self-serving garbage and kind of embarrassing.

+1

another +1
And now the self-serving leader will be self-serving on the school board

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Article also said moving some kids from Wakefield to W-L. All I hear from parents of kids at W-L is how packed it is there already. Is the former admin building they are converting to classrooms open yet?

W-L is just going to be so huge.

The chickens are coming home to roost when it comes to failing to plan for the day needed fourth high school. And, yes, W-L is already crowded.

I’m looking forward to my tween having lunch at 9am and the having DL classes in the afternoon because the campus is full.

Please don't give APS any ideas!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way parents behaved regarding those school moves is why we can’t have nice things. APS fought through it and did the right thing but how many times are you going to find staff and a super and a School Board lined up and willing to do it. (Apparently not often.) The shrieking and keening and wailing from self-interested parties is out of control.

This right thing would be to do whatever minimizes operating expenses. Instead they bus walkers from schools to other schools (happened with both new boundaries for innovation and cardinal). The planning department has no idea what it is doing.

Reducing cost should not be the only factor in these decisions. Equity is important too.

Equity meaning what exactly here?

We need busing to break up white walkzones. That’s the undertone

DP. I think the undertone solution involves breaking up both wealthy white and low-income non-white walk zones. God forbid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So is Barcroft/Alcova going to WL or Penrose/Arl. Heights? Those seem to be pretty much the only options.

Interesting. I didn't consider the neighborhoods linked in pairs. I just thought Alcova would be on the table because it would fall with alignment from TJ to WL. Alcova currently goes to TJ; but Barcroft goes to Kenmore. It would be even more isolating for the Alcova kids if Arl Hts and Penrose moved to WL without them. Alcova already breaks from Barcroft to go to TJ; then they'd lose all their new classmates and friends again heading to WHS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is Barcroft/Alcova going to WL or Penrose/Arl. Heights? Those seem to be pretty much the only options.

It will probably be Penrose and Arlington View—the two neighborhoods that were rezoned from WL to WF in 2017 (not sure the exact year).

Disagree. I think it will be Barcroft-Alcova, given stability, ES and MS feeder patterns, and also diversity, since you’d be moving more white and high SES students out of Wakefield if the former were moved again. Moving those Penrose/AV PUs back doesn’t align with the factors considered. But it may be a numbers game. How many do they need to move and how many kids live in specific PUs may be the deciding factor.

Barcroft/Alcova doesn't align at the MS level. Alcova goes to TJ while Barcroft goes to Kenmore. If stability is a real factor in their proposals, Barcroft shouldn't even be under consideration. Besides, there are probably too many kids in the Barcroft neighborhood, especially if Barcroft Apartments is considered part of that, to move to WL.