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]Longtime Arlington parent here who would love to see  Montessori killed. After pre K it is subsidizing alternative ed for UMC parents. Not remotely addressing achievement gap. They dress themselves in Maria Montessori’s halo but spare us. That said, they are a bunch of tiger moms who have entrenched themselves in the AC/DC hypocrisy. They will niever die. [/quote]

Look, if they would take a larger share of students who actually qualify for fr/l, I am fine with them continuing. I have a real problem with any "option" schoool that is not actually an option for the kids who are most disadvantaged and have the most to gain from a quality pre-K experience and an integrated ES. Don't kill it, fight to make it fair and equitable and accessible. [/quote]

What about HB Woodlawn or ATS? They are hardly more diverse than Yorktown HS. Should they be eliminated as well? Both of those schools are option programs with a lower farms rate than the county average. Let's see how montessori compares as a standalone program next year before we get out the ax.[/quote]

Whattaboutism knows no bounds, huh? I have a problem with HB, but they aren't responsible if kids don't apply. I suspect their new location will result in a better sampling of diversity. As for ATS, get with the times. They have 26.3% of students receiving fr/l benefits, which is within 5 percentage points of the countywide average.

It would appear that when Montessori is disaggregated from Drew, it will have fewer than 10% of qualifying students, perhaps fewer. And since the only way to get into ES is to be in the Pre-K program, which requires a fee from ALL, I know the reason. There is a literal economic barrier to the program that does not exist an any of the other option programs. Fix it and I will shut up. [/quote]

You can estimate a FARMs percentage for the Montesorri program at Drew using the 2017 table on the statistics section of the APS website, along with the boundary proposal table that was published on Wednesday, which also references 2017 counts. There's a resident vs enrolled issue, but I don't think it matters much in this particular analysis.

There are about 700 students at Drew (graded and Montessori). That's from the farms table. We know from the boundary proposal that 85% of current graded program kids qualify, and that there are approximately 300 graded students (and therefore about 400 Mont. students.) So there are about 250 farms kids in the graded program, because 250 is about 85%.

We know from the farms table that there are 364 total kids at Drew who qualify for benefits. Since about 250 are in the graded portion, the remaining 110 or so are in the montessori portion. The montessori portion has 400 total students. 110 divided by 400 is 28%.

So in sum, it's likely that the true farms rate for montessori is between 20-30%. A lot better than the 10% that the PP claimed, an very close to the county average of 31%.
 
Curious if I've botched a calculation somewhere. The resident vs enrolled make precise percentages hard, but the estimate and range I've suggested seem fair.

Agree that for the poorest students, even the 200 bucks a year or whatever the fee is on the sliding scale should be eliminated.
[/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