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

Forum Index » VA Public Schools other than FCPS

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]So whats the solution -- should we move to an all lottery model?  You rank your top 4 choices and you get what you get?[/quote]

Eliminate all choice school options in SA.  Make everyone go to their neighborhood school.[/quote]

No, we've got enough equity to move, and plenty of income to afford private, as do all of our neighbors. Force is not likely to help. People who wouldn't send their kids to the neighborhood schools by choice won't go to the neighborhood schools by force. Some that are better integrated and trending in the right direction with test scores might stand a chance, but the ones that have only one SFH neighborhood and then hundreds of units of AH within the walk zone, where over 70% of the students within the physical zone are living below the poverty line, won't ever change unless the neighborhoods themselves change or the boundaries change significantly. The vast majority of UMC professionals will not accept sending their kids to schools without adequate capital, both financial and social. Do I like that this is the truth? No. But it is the truth. It's a fantasy to believe differently. I think most people living in SA want truly diverse schools, and that is why the option schools are so popular. Until they perceive high poverty schools as being just as able to address the needs and abilities of their more affluent children, they will find alternatives. They will because they can. Simple as that. [/quote]

Agreed. People aren’t understanding that a school like Randolph would not be significantly impacted if every UMC kid suddenly enrolled next year. Maybe it drops from 77 % low income to 69%. That’s not going to be acceptable to most educated parents. As well it shouldn’t. [/quote]

Then perhaps they shouldn't have bought houses there in the first place. [/quote]

Or, perhaps they should have moved there, and should advocate for an integrated school that isn't just an SOL cram facility. A high poverty school is a problem, period. We shouldn't, as a county, accept them whether our kids are zoned for them or not. They are not good for anyone, especially poor kids.
[/quote]

If they moved there and then advocated for things to reduce the FARMS rate (e.g., no more AH in the area, relocating option programs to break up poverty clusters), I would respect that. But when you buy in a 70% FARMS school hoping you'll back-door into a "good" school via the option lottery or neighborhood transfer, don't throw a temper tantrum about the unfairness when it doesn't pan out and then demand that the county give you additional options for getting out of your own neighborhood. I have zero sympathy for that.[/quote]

But having the UMC moving to high poverty neighborhoods/school zones and advocating for better boundaries or more choices is how integration happens, and is the only way. No one else will advocate for such arrangements. Certainly not NA parents.

[/quote]

Add reasonable boundary adjustments to the list of things I have no problem with them advocating for, because that's something that would actually help the neighborhood school. I am not opposed to integration, I'm opposed to putting resources into creating more avenues for UMC families to flee higher-FARMs schools, which only makes the inequality between neighborhood schools even worse.[/quote]

That’s all well and good, but you have to have earned the trust of those parents. UMC South Arlington parents have seen from the last few go arounds, that their kids aren’t considered. So, why should they roll up their sleeves if both the ACB  and SB are ultimately conspiring to undermine their neighborhood schools. [/quote]

"Conspiring to undermine their neighborhood schools?" Seriously? If there's one thing we should be able to take from the CIP process, it's that the CB and SB aren't "conspiring" on anything except turf fields.

But that aside, it sounds like you're looking for excuses to be lazy and not do the work. The CC high school folks didn't get everything they wanted, but the final CIP was significantly better than the original version and that was due in substantial part to their lobbying efforts. So don't sit there and claim there's no point to trying, they just proved you wrong.[/quote]
If anything that just proved it truly is futile. We have different definitions of success.[/quote]

You don't think there's any difference between a plan that would build just the base 800-seats with only vague assurances that at some point in the future they'd look at giving it a field, parking, and performing arts space but probably not until after they expand a middle school and build another new elementary school after Reed first, and a plan that includes all of those things on the day the high school opens at the expense of delaying the middle school expansion and the additional elementary school? Because if there truly is no difference, let's go back to the original proposed CIP and get those other seats open sooner.[/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