Reply to Specifically on-topic contributors to the Drew boundary issue only please -

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "Specifically on-topic contributors to the Drew boundary issue only please -"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I'm the OP of the other Drew thread. Perhaps you'll have better luck than me keeping this one on topic!

I posted on the other one before I noticed this one, but I was thinking moving part of Claremont could be part of the solution too.

What I have gotten to work best so far is: the rest of Alcova to Fleet; the south-of-pike Henry units to Drew; Drew keeps the Abingdon-Jefferson units currently proposed to move to Drew and also Drew picks up 36050; Abingdon and Barcroft keep most of their existing Columbia Forest/Four Mile units.

The drawback to this is that Barcroft remains overcrowded (I've gotten it to 116%, down from its current 135%), though Abingdon's utilization rate is not so bad. For Barcroft, I figure Gilliam Place opening will be a huge influx for it which would be mitigated by sending that PU to Fleet, so maybe 116% with no Gilliam Place isn't so bad. It's hard though. [/quote]

What does this do to the fr/l rate at Barcroft? I don't think they will entertain anything that will raise the percentage at any school. Given the Columbia Hills project, the best thing really would've been to move Claremont Immersion up to CS, because CS really only makes sense as an option school due to its highly limited walk zone. And due to the highly segregated neighborhood, having two nearby option schools (Immersion and Campbell), plus a neighborhood school not all that far would have been a good thing: three non-segregated schools from which to choose. [/quote]

I think you're right about Claremont. Unfortunately, it seems to be too late. To answer your question, the proposal above would make Barcroft's fr/l rate 68%, up from its current 62%. As the Staff has pointed out, fr/l projections may wind up being lower in practice because the #s are based on kids who live there, with no attempt to estimate how many will opt in to other schools. I imagine given the Barcroft calendar thing, a higher # of kids than usual opt out of Barcroft specifically. But, there's no denying that doing the above would make Barcroft more fr/l. I think the question really is, better to have Drew at 83% and Barcroft at 57% or Drew at 60% and Barcroft at 68%? It is not an easy call. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics