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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No such thing as a free lunch.

Except free lunch is literally a thing they give out at school.

except it's not

Wut? If your income is low enough, your lunch is free.

But someone (taxpayer) is paying for it.

[Anonymous]

Why do the options send more kids to Yorktown than their slides show there are empty seats for--even after the 300 extra seats are added? I'm confused. I thought there were enough empty seats to relieve WL. If there aren't why are we doing this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do the options send more kids to Yorktown than their slides show there are empty seats for--even after the 300 extra seats are added? I'm confused. I thought there were enough empty seats to relieve WL. If there aren't why are we doing this?

I think the options will add more students to both Wakefield and Yorktown, so we can be equally screwed and we'll all be over capacity. Start your HB applications now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do the options send more kids to Yorktown than their slides show there are empty seats for--even after the 300 extra seats are added? I'm confused. I thought there were enough empty seats to relieve WL. If there aren't why are we doing this?

I think the options will add more students to both Wakefield and Yorktown, so we can be equally screwed and we'll all be over capacity. Start your HB applications now.

This. By 2021 every single one of those schools will be massively over capacity, and the system will be short 1,300 seats. That's why the bigger picture, longer-term issue is just as if not more important if you have little kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do the options send more kids to Yorktown than their slides show there are empty seats for--even after the 300 extra seats are added? I'm confused. I thought there were enough empty seats to relieve WL. If there aren't why are we doing this?

I think the options will add more students to both Wakefield and Yorktown, so we can be equally screwed and we'll all be over capacity. Start your HB applications now.

This. By 2021 every single one of those schools will be massively over capacity, and the system will be short 1,300 seats. That's why the bigger picture, longer-term issue is just as if not more important if you have little kids.

But the answer isn't to start a petition to take fewer students at YOUR high school at the expense of the two other high schools. Nottingham PTA, I am looking at you. Have you no shame? This is a community problem. We rise and fall together.

[Anonymous]

Their website says they'll post more info and a feedback form on 10/31. Still waiting. Are they going to do the equivalent of a Friday news dump and post it while everyone is trick-or-treating?

[Anonymous]

It's up now. Brace yourself Arlington Forest. You are headed to Wakefield. To quote Bruno Mars: Don't believe me? Just watch!

[Anonymous]

But hey, no worries, because as you & your neighbors pointed out in your 554 identical boundary tool entries, ALL of our comprehensive high schools are good. ?

[Anonymous]

http://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Data-by-Option-Revised-10-31-16-PM.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But hey, no worries, because as you & your neighbors pointed out in your 554 identical boundary tool entries, ALL of our comprehensive high schools are good. ?

Ha, ha, ha! If they weren't going to move you before that, pretty sure that sealed the deal.

[Anonymous]

I wonder why they created an additional option for Yorktown but not for Wakefield?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder why they created an additional option for Yorktown but not for Wakefield?

I think the demographics/economics really limit their options for on the Wakefield front. In particular - it is my suspicion that the staff is operating under an implicit mandate to not make Wakefield more minority and/or more FARMs. I think the only way they can meet that goal is to reach north of 50.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder why they created an additional option for Yorktown but not for Wakefield?

I think the demographics/economics really limit their options for on the Wakefield front. In particular - it is my suspicion that the staff is operating under an implicit mandate to not make Wakefield more minority and/or more FARMs. I think the only way they can meet that goal is to reach north of 50.

This.

[Anonymous]

As someone who was at the first meeting and saw the original proposal, they f-ed this up to a pretty stunning degree. Last Thursday's Wakefield options moved 3-4 planning units each. J/K actually we needed 2 to 3 times that many. I wish I found this funnier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder why they created an additional option for Yorktown but not for Wakefield?

I think the demographics/economics really limit their options for on the Wakefield front. In particular - it is my suspicion that the staff is operating under an implicit mandate to not make Wakefield more minority and/or more FARMs. I think the only way they can meet that goal is to reach north of 50.

This.

the other option is move more WF FAMRs to YT. guess they're told not to allow that either.