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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
We are in the new Yorktown option. I am not very pleased. W-L is more than a mile closer than Yorktown.

So your kid used to walk but now has to take a bus? I thought APS wasn't going to do that. Granted, I'm basing that on the video of the meeting at which they had the information wrong, so . . .

Not the PP, but my planning unit, 2311, would move from W-L to Yorktown in the new Yorktown option D. We are walking distance to W-L, but would have to bus to Yorktown. I am quite upset by this. We much prefer W-L. I don't understand the point of Yorktown D -- it would do absolutely nothing to increase diversity at Yorktown. It relies almost entirely on 2311 to make its numbers, and we are just as wealthy/non-diverse as most of the rest of Yorktown.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
We are in the new Yorktown option. I am not very pleased. W-L is more than a mile closer than Yorktown.

So your kid used to walk but now has to take a bus? I thought APS wasn't going to do that. Granted, I'm basing that on the video of the meeting at which they had the information wrong, so . . .

Not the PP, but my planning unit, 2311, would move from W-L to Yorktown in the new Yorktown option D. We are walking distance to W-L, but would have to bus to Yorktown. I am quite upset by this. We much prefer W-L. I don't understand the point of Yorktown D -- it would do absolutely nothing to increase diversity at Yorktown. It relies almost entirely on 2311 to make its numbers, and we are just as wealthy/non-diverse as most of the rest of Yorktown.

So vote for option "A."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They can take one or two IB classes, which might be easier than the closest AP classes.

That is not how IB works.

You can actually take just one IB class, you don't have to be pursuing the diploma to take an IB class.

My kid took both AP and IB classes, and he did not find that IB classes were easier than AP.

If the only option for advanced classes at W-L were IB, a lot more students would be signing up for IB classes, and W-L doesn't have enough IB teachers to accommodate that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
We are in the new Yorktown option. I am not very pleased. W-L is more than a mile closer than Yorktown.

So your kid used to walk but now has to take a bus? I thought APS wasn't going to do that. Granted, I'm basing that on the video of the meeting at which they had the information wrong, so . . .

Not the PP, but my planning unit, 2311, would move from W-L to Yorktown in the new Yorktown option D. We are walking distance to W-L, but would have to bus to Yorktown. I am quite upset by this. We much prefer W-L. I don't understand the point of Yorktown D -- it would do absolutely nothing to increase diversity at Yorktown. It relies almost entirely on 2311 to make its numbers, and we are just as wealthy/non-diverse as most of the rest of Yorktown.

So vote for option "A."

I did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
We are in the new Yorktown option. I am not very pleased. W-L is more than a mile closer than Yorktown.

So your kid used to walk but now has to take a bus? I thought APS wasn't going to do that. Granted, I'm basing that on the video of the meeting at which they had the information wrong, so . . .

Not the PP, but my planning unit, 2311, would move from W-L to Yorktown in the new Yorktown option D. We are walking distance to W-L, but would have to bus to Yorktown. I am quite upset by this. We much prefer W-L. I don't understand the point of Yorktown D -- it would do absolutely nothing to increase diversity at Yorktown. It relies almost entirely on 2311 to make its numbers, and we are just as wealthy/non-diverse as most of the rest of Yorktown.

I think it is pretty clear that APS is punting on increasing diversity at Yorktown. There is no way they can make it happen without busing kids a significant distance (much farther than any kid in 2311 would have to go). I personally find the notion of busing only poor kids (of color) really troubling, and I suspect the school board does, too.

I think it would be great if the demographics of all three schools were relatively balanced, but that's not the way the county is constructed. Given that educational outcomes aren't compromised when schools are composed of many wealthy kids, I think diversity at Yorktown can take a back seat to other, more important priorities. I think it's pretty clear that one of the most important priorities for families is proximity. (I'll note here that this is true for poor families as well as wealthy families; see busing troubles above.) If we set aside the diversity priority at Yorktown, we should go with proximity. To me, that argues for Option A. Few of those kids are walking to school, no matter where you send them.

I feel differently about increasing diversity at Wakefield. Here we are dealing with the opposite problem--a concentration of kids from poor families. At some point, too many poor kids in a school can have a detrimental effect on educational outcomes. I don't know where the tipping point is, but it seems reasonable to me to say we shouldn't try to test it. I think educational outcomes have to be the highest priority here, higher than proximity. That likely means moving some higher-income planning units to Wakefield, even if they are closer to W-L. That's why Option B (or C, but for demographic reasons I prefer B) makes the most sense. The fact that Arlington Forest is located reasonably close to Wakefield--and much closer than many Wakefield planning units--and isn't really *that* close to W-L makes it even easier to support these options IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
We are in the new Yorktown option. I am not very pleased. W-L is more than a mile closer than Yorktown.

So your kid used to walk but now has to take a bus? I thought APS wasn't going to do that. Granted, I'm basing that on the video of the meeting at which they had the information wrong, so . . .

DS is not in HS yet. Also it was more like a 10 min bike ride or a long walk. But regardless Yorktown is farther. Since it is only one of 7 options I am hoping it is not the approved one.

[Anonymous]

Busing impacts poor families more than wealthy families b/c they don't necessarily have the means to get their kids to school if they miss the bus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Busing impacts poor families more than wealthy families b/c they don't necessarily have the means to get their kids to school if they miss the bus.

While this absolutely true, busing also increases the school day for kids of all SECs. Busing requires an earlier start than walking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
We are in the new Yorktown option. I am not very pleased. W-L is more than a mile closer than Yorktown.

So your kid used to walk but now has to take a bus? I thought APS wasn't going to do that. Granted, I'm basing that on the video of the meeting at which they had the information wrong, so . . .

DS is not in HS yet. Also it was more like a 10 min bike ride or a long walk. But regardless Yorktown is farther. Since it is only one of 7 options I am hoping it is not the approved one.

Well, it's really one of four. The other three options are for what happens at Wakefield.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1502 is moving.

People are upset bc they think they will lose priority admission to IB, but the SB is planning on revisiting transfer policies. It should not be a surprise if they even the playing field for IB admission.

Well, there's still option C. Nothing wrong with that one that I'm aware of.

We are in 1502 and Yorktown is not walkable. I thought not busing kids who used to be able to walk was supposed to be a major consideration, since it had a financial effect on the district? Or will they just say we're walkable so we don't have to pay for busing us even though it's too far for us?

[Anonymous]

well i hope SB finds the SAT 400+ point gap within the system most troubling than anything else

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
We are in the new Yorktown option. I am not very pleased. W-L is more than a mile closer than Yorktown.

So your kid used to walk but now has to take a bus? I thought APS wasn't going to do that. Granted, I'm basing that on the video of the meeting at which they had the information wrong, so . . .

Not the PP, but my planning unit, 2311, would move from W-L to Yorktown in the new Yorktown option D. We are walking distance to W-L, but would have to bus to Yorktown. I am quite upset by this. We much prefer W-L. I don't understand the point of Yorktown D -- it would do absolutely nothing to increase diversity at Yorktown. It relies almost entirely on 2311 to make its numbers, and we are just as wealthy/non-diverse as most of the rest of Yorktown.

I think it is pretty clear that APS is punting on increasing diversity at Yorktown. There is no way they can make it happen without busing kids a significant distance (much farther than any kid in 2311 would have to go). I personally find the notion of busing only poor kids (of color) really troubling, and I suspect the school board does, too.

I think it would be great if the demographics of all three schools were relatively balanced, but that's not the way the county is constructed. Given that educational outcomes aren't compromised when schools are composed of many wealthy kids, I think diversity at Yorktown can take a back seat to other, more important priorities. I think it's pretty clear that one of the most important priorities for families is proximity. (I'll note here that this is true for poor families as well as wealthy families; see busing troubles above.) If we set aside the diversity priority at Yorktown, we should go with proximity. To me, that argues for Option A. Few of those kids are walking to school, no matter where you send them.

I feel differently about increasing diversity at Wakefield. Here we are dealing with the opposite problem--a concentration of kids from poor families. At some point, too many poor kids in a school can have a detrimental effect on educational outcomes. I don't know where the tipping point is, but it seems reasonable to me to say we shouldn't try to test it. I think educational outcomes have to be the highest priority here, higher than proximity. That likely means moving some higher-income planning units to Wakefield, even if they are closer to W-L. That's why Option B (or C, but for demographic reasons I prefer B) makes the most sense. The fact that Arlington Forest is located reasonably close to Wakefield--and much closer than many Wakefield planning units--and isn't really *that* close to W-L makes it even easier to support these options IMO.

+100

[Anonymous]

Arlington Forest is not close to Wakefield. Not by a longshot. Arlington Forest kids can and do walk to W-L

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Arlington Forest is not close to Wakefield. Not by a longshot. Arlington Forest kids can and do walk to W-L

Not buying that. Get ready for Wakefield and maybe think about what you might have to contribute (besides excuses as to why you shouldn't go there).

[Anonymous]

Any idiot can look at a map and see that. The boundary changes don't affect me. But moving AF turns walkers into long haul bus riders.