Reply to APS/SA boundary redrawing

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "APS/SA boundary redrawing - meeting tonight"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Please stop blaming Henry for the concentration of poverty in S Arlington. This is exactly what N Arlington wants.  Fleet is not going to take N Arlington PUs and the PUs south of the Pike are not all expensive homes. Some are apartments, some are condos, some are duplexes, and many of the single family homes are rentals.  Yes there are some MC homes with kids but let’s not pretend it’s all lily white and UMC SFHs with kids. The area is very diverse economically and it has its share of FARMS and homelessness. Henry did not pull the ladder up. It just wants to keep its school.

It’s the entire counties job to balance diversity that is where the blame lies. A handful of MC kids will not balance a 90% plus poverty rate at Drew. [/quote]

I tried to point some of this out earlier also, as someone who actually lives in that neighborhood. It’s strange that we are suddenly THE thing that is going to take Drew out of high FARMs. I don’t get it, to be honest.[/quote]

I tried to do some rough, back of the envelope calculations, and making assumptions in favor of the Drew parents on this Board (e.g., that all ED kids would be replaced by non-ED kids), it seems like moving those south-of-Columbia Pike Henry PUs to Drew would decrease Drew's poverty rate by about 10-15 percent.

I agree with the Drew parents that pulling in Columbia Heights is wrong on many levels, but I agree with Henry parents that tearing apart a school community is not the way to "improve" Drew.  For example, when Montessori made its own PTA, they were assuming that Oakridge parents were coming to "save" Drew.  But, it's my understanding that Nauck CA has worked hard over the past 2 years to prevent that from happening.  [/quote]

Let's not assume Montessori assumed anything.  Montessori was going to establish its PTA regardless of who came or didn't come.  That's just a stupid remark.  It's not like Montessori was ever going to say, "oh, wait a minute!  since Oakridge isn't taking our place, we'll stay."

And "tearing apart a school community" is just exaggerated drama and hysteria.  Boundaries have to change.  When boundaries change, some people actually get moved from one school to another school.  What's APS supposed to do?  Leave Drew sitting with 450 empty seats?  Just wait for more students to come into the neighborhood and fill those seats when they do?  Let Fleet, the largest elementary school in the system, be overcapacity in a year and leaving no room for enrollment growth from its zoned boundary?

Did anyone see the Washington Post article yesterday about Montgomery County schools making diversity its primary factor in new boundaries?  Why?  because the SCHOOL SYSTEM is actually trying to DO SOMETHING to mitigate the impacts of the COUNTY'S housing patterns and REDUCE SEGREGATION in its schools.  THAT's progressive policy.  THAT's political courage.  THAT's elected leaders (the majority who voted for it) making decisions and doing their jobs.[/quote]

[b]Um, it's not an assumption because I'm a Montessori parent involved in the previous PTA.  Montessori said, let's do our own PTA this year because Oakridge will be coming in and we don't have to worry about leaving the rest of the PTA (which, honestly, there was none) in the lurch.[/b] [/quote]

Bingo. Poor schools don't have PTAs. Yet another reason not to intentionally create them.[/quote]

But you left without knowing who would be coming to Drew.  Before anyone else knew they would be coming and therefore could get involved to start building the new Drew community.  You left Drew without experienced leadership in place, while it was still a majority FRL 200-student community with limited parental engagement.  Why the big rush?  Why couldn't you slowly transition and start-up your new PTA in January after the boundary decision was made, after guiding new leadership from the Drew side into their new roles, and after the new families knew who they were and could start getting involved?  You left Drew PTA "in the lurch" merely by prematurely draining it of its experienced leadership.  Montessori could have been doing more last year to recruit and engage and motivate Drew parents to get involved, shadow them in their roles, etc.  Or even done so this fall.  But you didn't.

And you will not convince me that Montessori was not going to establish its own PTA even if they had been expecting carlin Springs to backfill their seats.[/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