Who said there isn't a North-South divide?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which schools have $200k PTA budgets?

Nottingham. At least I know it has in the past. Jamestown?
The less willing a PTA is to share their budget, the more likely that budget approaches $200K

I can't seem to find how much Title 1 funding schools get. Anyone have a link?

I can't find anywhere that breaks it down by school, but the 2019 budget included a projected $2.3 million in Title I funds, which will be shared by Abingdon, Barcroft, Barrett, Cambell, Carlin Springs, Drew, Hoffman-Boston and Randolph. You can calculate per-pupil expenditures for funds that go directly to the school (so exclude system-wide administration/overhead) for all of the schools based on the budget numbers. I looked at Randolph and Discovery as two comparison points, the 2019 projections work out to $10,435 per student at Discovery and $15,872 per student at Randolph, so Randolph students will, on average, get over 50% more funding from APS next school year than Discovery students. Discovery will have a budget of about $6.3 million for a projected 599 students. Randolph will have a budget of about $7.7 million for a projected 485 students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which schools have $200k PTA budgets?

Nottingham. At least I know it has in the past. Jamestown?
The less willing a PTA is to share their budget, the more likely that budget approaches $200K

I can't seem to find how much Title 1 funding schools get. Anyone have a link?

I can't find anywhere that breaks it down by school, but the 2019 budget included a projected $2.3 million in Title I funds, which will be shared by Abingdon, Barcroft, Barrett, Cambell, Carlin Springs, Drew, Hoffman-Boston and Randolph. You can calculate per-pupil expenditures for funds that go directly to the school (so exclude system-wide administration/overhead) for all of the schools based on the budget numbers. I looked at Randolph and Discovery as two comparison points, the 2019 projections work out to $10,435 per student at Discovery and $15,872 per student at Randolph, so Randolph students will, on average, get over 50% more funding from APS next school year than Discovery students. Discovery will have a budget of about $6.3 million for a projected 599 students. Randolph will have a budget of about $7.7 million for a projected 485 students.

So you mean even if Discovery did have a $200k pta budget, Randolph would still have over a million dollars more funding than Discovery while having over a hundred fewer students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which schools have $200k PTA budgets?

Nottingham. At least I know it has in the past. Jamestown?
The less willing a PTA is to share their budget, the more likely that budget approaches $200K

I can't seem to find how much Title 1 funding schools get. Anyone have a link?

I can't find anywhere that breaks it down by school, but the 2019 budget included a projected $2.3 million in Title I funds, which will be shared by Abingdon, Barcroft, Barrett, Cambell, Carlin Springs, Drew, Hoffman-Boston and Randolph. You can calculate per-pupil expenditures for funds that go directly to the school (so exclude system-wide administration/overhead) for all of the schools based on the budget numbers. I looked at Randolph and Discovery as two comparison points, the 2019 projections work out to $10,435 per student at Discovery and $15,872 per student at Randolph, so Randolph students will, on average, get over 50% more funding from APS next school year than Discovery students. Discovery will have a budget of about $6.3 million for a projected 599 students. Randolph will have a budget of about $7.7 million for a projected 485 students.

So you mean even if Discovery did have a $200k pta budget, Randolph would still have over a million dollars more funding than Discovery while having over a hundred fewer students?

Great! How many parents of Discovery students want to sell their homes and move to the Randolph zoned areas?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP's above nailed it all right. It is a whole different world in S.A schools.

I challenge any N.A. parent who disagrees to come to a S.A. school and check out the activities and PTA expenses. We are at a title I S.A. school. We have a little money to spend, but not much. And, we spend money on things like coat drives and basics for some of the families. Rather than after school enrichment, kids are taking extra SOL preps. Those who don't need it don't get access to enrichment those days because the school won't do anything unless ALL kids can do it.

Our classrooms are filled with old furniture. Our yard is weeds. All of our equipment in the class is old. We don't do plays or independent projects. Things are really basic here.

What would you like to see happen? Bus some of the poor kids from your neighborhood to schools in the north? Force some of the kids in the north to come south? Move option programs around? Share PTA money? Give an opportunity to transfer your kids to Jamestown?

Serious question.

Not the poster you're responding to; but I'd like to see:

an end to planning units hiding behind "walkability" and crying that we can't have weirdly shaped attendance zones;
an end to neighborhoods objecting to any and all proposals that move the needle in the right direction toward more SED across the system;
an end to SB members capitulating to advocacy from the above;
yes, relocating choice programs in ways that can break-up the highest concentrations of FRL students, even if it doesn't increase SED at the northernmost schools;
yes, sharing PTA money and resources - CCPTA has a very easy resource to do just that through donations to its CPCI grant fund; but schools can partner-up or better yet team-up and conduct PTA activities together and share proceeds and other resources;
teachers who receive training funded by PTAs to conduct presentations and subsequent training to teachers at other schools whose PTAs can't afford to send them to special training;
implement seat set-asides for ED students in all choice programs;
strong public awareness and public education efforts to recruit students from communities less likely to take advantage of choice programs;
sure, bus kids beyond route 50;
implement and coordinate ART bus routes that facilitate students' and families' abilities to get to schools farther from their home, especially high school kids who would then be even more able to participate in a choice system;
teachers conduct P-T conferences in neighborhood community centers or individual homes so there's no issue about them not having transportation and therefore not able to attend; and
acknowledgement from the SB and CB that, even though all schools may be good, they are not equally good and do not afford equal levels of opportunities or academic experiences.

Is that a start?

There are already set-asides for ED students in all of the elementary choice programs via VPI. Most of the rest of that seems to amount to busing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

LOL! This is the best. Some Northies really don't understand how good they've got it. It's like mitt Romney making that 100k bet.

Do you really expect people to take you seriously when you use the word “northies?”

It’s also hard to take them seriously when you know they’re people who could afford to buy into better schools further out but would prefer to stay in South Arlington and have everyone else cortort around them to give their children “ideal” educations. The parents in South Arlington who really don’t have better options, with the kids who enter school barely speaking English and parents who can’t engage with the school because they’re working two jobs to afford their “affordable” housing, aren’t coming here to post in perfect English about how their high school might not have a pool. And when they express their views on what they want for their kids, it’s often not the same as what the UMC whites would prefer, so when the latter come on here claiming to advocate for the former, be very skeptical because they’re really just using the former as props for their own ends.

Of course if they all did that the schools in Arlington would be even more segregated, and the neighborhoods too. Plenty of reason to think that is not a great thing. I mean unless you have house further out you are trying to sell, I guess.

Totally, f those people for wanting the same thing as north Arlington people but not being so rich or having such wealthy parents.

I want a pony. Doesn't mean I'm getting one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

LOL! This is the best. Some Northies really don't understand how good they've got it. It's like mitt Romney making that 100k bet.

Do you really expect people to take you seriously when you use the word “northies?”

It’s also hard to take them seriously when you know they’re people who could afford to buy into better schools further out but would prefer to stay in South Arlington and have everyone else cortort around them to give their children “ideal” educations. The parents in South Arlington who really don’t have better options, with the kids who enter school barely speaking English and parents who can’t engage with the school because they’re working two jobs to afford their “affordable” housing, aren’t coming here to post in perfect English about how their high school might not have a pool. And when they express their views on what they want for their kids, it’s often not the same as what the UMC whites would prefer, so when the latter come on here claiming to advocate for the former, be very skeptical because they’re really just using the former as props for their own ends.

Of course if they all did that the schools in Arlington would be even more segregated, and the neighborhoods too. Plenty of reason to think that is not a great thing. I mean unless you have house further out you are trying to sell, I guess.

Totally, f those people for wanting the same thing as north Arlington people but not being so rich or having such wealthy parents.

I want a pony. Doesn't mean I'm getting one.

I feel my children would learn a lot if we owned a nice big yacht and could sail to all kinds of new destinations. I hear there are a couple of folks in Country Club Hills who have them, so APS needs to buy me a yacht.

[Anonymous]

Solution: More apartments in North Arlington. More single family housing in South Arlington.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP's above nailed it all right. It is a whole different world in S.A schools.

I challenge any N.A. parent who disagrees to come to a S.A. school and check out the activities and PTA expenses. We are at a title I S.A. school. We have a little money to spend, but not much. And, we spend money on things like coat drives and basics for some of the families. Rather than after school enrichment, kids are taking extra SOL preps. Those who don't need it don't get access to enrichment those days because the school won't do anything unless ALL kids can do it.

Our classrooms are filled with old furniture. Our yard is weeds. All of our equipment in the class is old. We don't do plays or independent projects. Things are really basic here.

What would you like to see happen? Bus some of the poor kids from your neighborhood to schools in the north? Force some of the kids in the north to come south? Move option programs around? Share PTA money? Give an opportunity to transfer your kids to Jamestown?

Serious question.

Not the poster you're responding to; but I'd like to see:

an end to planning units hiding behind "walkability" and crying that we can't have weirdly shaped attendance zones;
an end to neighborhoods objecting to any and all proposals that move the needle in the right direction toward more SED across the system;
an end to SB members capitulating to advocacy from the above;
yes, relocating choice programs in ways that can break-up the highest concentrations of FRL students, even if it doesn't increase SED at the northernmost schools;
yes, sharing PTA money and resources - CCPTA has a very easy resource to do just that through donations to its CPCI grant fund; but schools can partner-up or better yet team-up and conduct PTA activities together and share proceeds and other resources;
teachers who receive training funded by PTAs to conduct presentations and subsequent training to teachers at other schools whose PTAs can't afford to send them to special training;
implement seat set-asides for ED students in all choice programs;
strong public awareness and public education efforts to recruit students from communities less likely to take advantage of choice programs;
sure, bus kids beyond route 50;
implement and coordinate ART bus routes that facilitate students' and families' abilities to get to schools farther from their home, especially high school kids who would then be even more able to participate in a choice system;
teachers conduct P-T conferences in neighborhood community centers or individual homes so there's no issue about them not having transportation and therefore not able to attend; and
acknowledgement from the SB and CB that, even though all schools may be good, they are not equally good and do not afford equal levels of opportunities or academic experiences.

Is that a start?

There are already set-asides for ED students in all of the elementary choice programs via VPI. Most of the rest of that seems to amount to busing.

So it would seem busing is the ultimate solution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Solution: More apartments in North Arlington. More single family housing in South Arlington.

Cool, go find me a site in the Discovery zone where you could put an apartment building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP's above nailed it all right. It is a whole different world in S.A schools.

I challenge any N.A. parent who disagrees to come to a S.A. school and check out the activities and PTA expenses. We are at a title I S.A. school. We have a little money to spend, but not much. And, we spend money on things like coat drives and basics for some of the families. Rather than after school enrichment, kids are taking extra SOL preps. Those who don't need it don't get access to enrichment those days because the school won't do anything unless ALL kids can do it.

Our classrooms are filled with old furniture. Our yard is weeds. All of our equipment in the class is old. We don't do plays or independent projects. Things are really basic here.

What would you like to see happen? Bus some of the poor kids from your neighborhood to schools in the north? Force some of the kids in the north to come south? Move option programs around? Share PTA money? Give an opportunity to transfer your kids to Jamestown?

Serious question.

Not the poster you're responding to; but I'd like to see:

an end to planning units hiding behind "walkability" and crying that we can't have weirdly shaped attendance zones;
an end to neighborhoods objecting to any and all proposals that move the needle in the right direction toward more SED across the system;
an end to SB members capitulating to advocacy from the above;
yes, relocating choice programs in ways that can break-up the highest concentrations of FRL students, even if it doesn't increase SED at the northernmost schools;
yes, sharing PTA money and resources - CCPTA has a very easy resource to do just that through donations to its CPCI grant fund; but schools can partner-up or better yet team-up and conduct PTA activities together and share proceeds and other resources;
teachers who receive training funded by PTAs to conduct presentations and subsequent training to teachers at other schools whose PTAs can't afford to send them to special training;
implement seat set-asides for ED students in all choice programs;
strong public awareness and public education efforts to recruit students from communities less likely to take advantage of choice programs;
sure, bus kids beyond route 50;
implement and coordinate ART bus routes that facilitate students' and families' abilities to get to schools farther from their home, especially high school kids who would then be even more able to participate in a choice system;
teachers conduct P-T conferences in neighborhood community centers or individual homes so there's no issue about them not having transportation and therefore not able to attend; and
acknowledgement from the SB and CB that, even though all schools may be good, they are not equally good and do not afford equal levels of opportunities or academic experiences.

Is that a start?

There are already set-asides for ED students in all of the elementary choice programs via VPI. Most of the rest of that seems to amount to busing.

So it would seem busing is the ultimate solution.

Sure, if you’re a white UMC South Arlington resident. No one else supports it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP's above nailed it all right. It is a whole different world in S.A schools.

I challenge any N.A. parent who disagrees to come to a S.A. school and check out the activities and PTA expenses. We are at a title I S.A. school. We have a little money to spend, but not much. And, we spend money on things like coat drives and basics for some of the families. Rather than after school enrichment, kids are taking extra SOL preps. Those who don't need it don't get access to enrichment those days because the school won't do anything unless ALL kids can do it.

Our classrooms are filled with old furniture. Our yard is weeds. All of our equipment in the class is old. We don't do plays or independent projects. Things are really basic here.

What would you like to see happen? Bus some of the poor kids from your neighborhood to schools in the north? Force some of the kids in the north to come south? Move option programs around? Share PTA money? Give an opportunity to transfer your kids to Jamestown?

Serious question.

Not the poster you're responding to; but I'd like to see:

an end to planning units hiding behind "walkability" and crying that we can't have weirdly shaped attendance zones;
an end to neighborhoods objecting to any and all proposals that move the needle in the right direction toward more SED across the system;
an end to SB members capitulating to advocacy from the above;
yes, relocating choice programs in ways that can break-up the highest concentrations of FRL students, even if it doesn't increase SED at the northernmost schools;
yes, sharing PTA money and resources - CCPTA has a very easy resource to do just that through donations to its CPCI grant fund; but schools can partner-up or better yet team-up and conduct PTA activities together and share proceeds and other resources;
teachers who receive training funded by PTAs to conduct presentations and subsequent training to teachers at other schools whose PTAs can't afford to send them to special training;
implement seat set-asides for ED students in all choice programs;
strong public awareness and public education efforts to recruit students from communities less likely to take advantage of choice programs;
sure, bus kids beyond route 50;
implement and coordinate ART bus routes that facilitate students' and families' abilities to get to schools farther from their home, especially high school kids who would then be even more able to participate in a choice system;
teachers conduct P-T conferences in neighborhood community centers or individual homes so there's no issue about them not having transportation and therefore not able to attend; and
acknowledgement from the SB and CB that, even though all schools may be good, they are not equally good and do not afford equal levels of opportunities or academic experiences.

Is that a start?

There are already set-asides for ED students in all of the elementary choice programs via VPI. Most of the rest of that seems to amount to busing.

So it would seem busing is the ultimate solution.

Cool, so we’re going to set elementary class caps at 30-35 and lay off teachers to make that happen? The Title I schools will have to give up their under-20 class sizes, there won’t be anymore Title I funds to pay for that.

[Anonymous]

Adorable that you think class caps aren’t out the window in your non title 1 schools in another couple of years. I hope you don’t mind even smaller slices of the shrinking pie. The overwhelming poverty some of these south Arlington to schools are faced with will need those resources. You understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Adorable that you think class caps aren’t out the window in your non title 1 schools in another couple of years. I hope you don’t mind even smaller slices of the shrinking pie. The overwhelming poverty some of these south Arlington to schools are faced with will need those resources. You understand.

In that case, I imagine all of those families currently in Title I schools wouldn’t want to leave for an even worse situation in a N.A. school. But good on you for trying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adorable that you think class caps aren’t out the window in your non title 1 schools in another couple of years. I hope you don’t mind even smaller slices of the shrinking pie. The overwhelming poverty some of these south Arlington to schools are faced with will need those resources. You understand.

In that case, I imagine all of those families currently in Title I schools wouldn’t want to leave for an even worse situation in a N.A. school. But good on you for trying.

Oh I don’t imagine integration will ever happen, so I will enjoy bleeding the north side.

[Anonymous]

The selective responding in this discussion is hilarious.