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

[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.

Thank god. I had hoped that would be the case and am really heartened to see this. Of course all of this handwringing about FARMS kids would go away, if they would bus 10% of Wakefield's current impoverished population to Yorktown. It would put all three schools much more closely aligned demographically and be much more reflective of the county as a whole.

[Anonymous]

So the net result will be Yorktown gets richer and whiter and the other two schools even out a bit at around 35-40% FARMS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the net result will be Yorktown gets richer and whiter and the other two schools even out a bit at around 35-40% FARMS?

Actually if you do the math nothing really changes assuming you fo theowest number of farms to wakefield which I believe was the 36 percent option. It seems like the least impact to wakefiled in the next 4 years. Of course the sb doesn't know about ant new kids moving into any of those pus in the next 4 yrs.

[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.

Thank god. I had hoped that would be the case and am really heartened to see this. Of course all of this handwringing about FARMS kids would go away, if they would bus 10% of Wakefield's current impoverished population to Yorktown. It would put all three schools much more closely aligned demographically and be much more reflective of the county as a whole.

I appreciate the sentiment and tend to agree with it, but I do think when you start talking about busing some kids who are currently WL/Wakefield, esp WL, to Yorktown, you do get the kind of resistance from parents that people often cite as a reason to oppose busing. I've heard it myself, as recently as the meeting last week. While I think it's unfortunate for Yorktown that it is the way it is, my concern currently lies with making sure Wakefield and WL have balance as among each other. I'm heartened the proposals seem to take that into account as well.

[Anonymous]

I appreciate that they are now showing us the ES and MS assignments of each planning unit. That helps people better understand the impact of moving each unit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the net result will be Yorktown gets richer and whiter and the other two schools even out a bit at around 35-40% FARMS?

If any consideration is given at all to proximity (and clearly this is getting at least some consideration), then this is the natural result. I don't know why we would expect otherwise.

And frankly, I am fine with that. Diversifying Yorktown is way down on my list of priorities for APS.

--Not a Yorktown parent

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Thank god. I had hoped that would be the case and am really heartened to see this. Of course all of this handwringing about FARMS kids would go away, if they would bus 10% of Wakefield's current impoverished population to Yorktown. It would put all three schools much more closely aligned demographically and be much more reflective of the county as a whole.

I appreciate the sentiment and tend to agree with it, but I do think when you start talking about busing some kids who are currently WL/Wakefield, esp WL, to Yorktown, you do get the kind of resistance from parents that people often cite as a reason to oppose busing. I've heard it myself, as recently as the meeting last week. While I think it's unfortunate for Yorktown that it is the way it is, my concern currently lies with making sure Wakefield and WL have balance as among each other. I'm heartened the proposals seem to take that into account as well.

therefore bussing PUs who are currently being bussed to WF or WL to YT makes most sense.

easiest is move YT Island PUs to WL/WF and then bus as many west side PUs as needed to YT to balance things out.

[Anonymous]

As a future Yorktown parent, I'm fine with people being bused to our school, whoever they are. I suspect there are plenty of lower-income Wakefield parents on the Western boundary of Wakefield who'd be ok with having their kids bused up George Mason to attend a school with higher scores. Then we'd get Yorktown closer to the other schools demographically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a future Yorktown parent, I'm fine with people being bused to our school, whoever they are. I suspect there are plenty of lower-income Wakefield parents on the Western boundary of Wakefield who'd be ok with having their kids bused up George Mason to attend a school with higher scores. Then we'd get Yorktown closer to the other schools demographically.

Not by busing my kids from Lyon Village where they can currently walk to W-L.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a future Yorktown parent, I'm fine with people being bused to our school, whoever they are. I suspect there are plenty of lower-income Wakefield parents on the Western boundary of Wakefield who'd be ok with having their kids bused up George Mason to attend a school with higher scores. Then we'd get Yorktown closer to the other schools demographically.

though few months back i was chatting with another minority parent with a rising 9th gr daughter who's not happy about having to go to YT. I think at that age kids opinions matter to a certain degree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a future Yorktown parent, I'm fine with people being bused to our school, whoever they are. I suspect there are plenty of lower-income Wakefield parents on the Western boundary of Wakefield who'd be ok with having their kids bused up George Mason to attend a school with higher scores. Then we'd get Yorktown closer to the other schools demographically.

Not by busing my kids from Lyon Village where they can currently walk to W-L.

??? Am I missing something? I don't see LV on any of the proposed options. Maybe LV isn't where I thought it was?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a future Yorktown parent, I'm fine with people being bused to our school, whoever they are. I suspect there are plenty of lower-income Wakefield parents on the Western boundary of Wakefield who'd be ok with having their kids bused up George Mason to attend a school with higher scores. Then we'd get Yorktown closer to the other schools demographically.

Not by busing my kids from Lyon Village where they can currently walk to W-L.

??? Am I missing something? I don't see LV on any of the proposed options. Maybe LV isn't where I thought it was?

One of the LV planning units is technically up for being moved, but it isn't mentioned in any of the scenarios APS is proposing, I assume because it's walking distance to W-L. Technically it could be moved to Yorktown, but that doesn't help demographically.

[Anonymous]

Redistricting areas (LV, Arlington Forest, etc.) that are within the walk zone would have the effect of preventing these students from walking home after school activities, require more buses, and incur costs for the County among other things. It is interesting that Arlington issued a news release this summer titled "Arlington Highlighted as Example of Walkability for the Nation" - in which, Arlington leadership said to create walkability, you have to create pockets of walking zones between people's homes and .... schools. It seems that the school staff's potential solutions to the school overcapacity issue should be in line with the County's overall goals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a future Yorktown parent, I'm fine with people being bused to our school, whoever they are. I suspect there are plenty of lower-income Wakefield parents on the Western boundary of Wakefield who'd be ok with having their kids bused up George Mason to attend a school with higher scores. Then we'd get Yorktown closer to the other schools demographically.

Not by busing my kids from Lyon Village where they can currently walk to W-L.

I don't think anyone wants to bus wealthy, white Lyon Village children to Yorktown in the name of diversification.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Redistricting areas (LV, Arlington Forest, etc.) that are within the walk zone would have the effect of preventing these students from walking home after school activities, require more buses, and incur costs for the County among other things. It is interesting that Arlington issued a news release this summer titled "Arlington Highlighted as Example of Walkability for the Nation" - in which, Arlington leadership said to create walkability, you have to create pockets of walking zones between people's homes and .... schools. It seems that the school staff's potential solutions to the school overcapacity issue should be in line with the County's overall goals.

Lyon Village is not included in any of the current scenarios, so I have no idea why this remains under discussion.

Arlington Forest is included, because a large section of the PU's are located outside the 1.5 mile walk zone to W-L, and some parts of your PU's are even in the Wakefield walk zone if I remember correctly. Just because one can walk does not mean they are considered "walkers." Stop trying to move the goal posts. You meet all other objective criteria: stability, contiguity, alignment, demographic diversity.