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

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Having now read most of this thread and submitted my own plan using the tool, shouldn't the most appealing approach be to move to Yorktown some of the contiguous units along the western border of the county both north and south of Route 50, and move to Wakefield the contiguous units along the eastern Pike that are currently Hoffman-Boston and Henry students? This doesn't affect walkability at all and it doesn't move the highest FARMS planning units into Wakefield. Understanding that some people are inevitably going to be somewhat disappointed to move from WL to Wakefield, isn't this the best option? What am I missing?

I'm a future Wakefield parent, FWIW. We are in South Arlington and perfectly fine with the school. Would prefer it remain where it is rather than concentrated with more FARMS though.[/quote]

Can you specify which planning units you recommended so I can see what that would look like?

Thanks.[/quote]

Move to Yorktown: 1302, 1303, 1304
Move to Wakefield: 4611, 4612, 4614, 4828, 4829, 4815, 4818
Leave at W-L: 3506, 3507, 3508, 3509, 3510 - as a Wakefield parent, these are the ones I'd be concerned about moving over to Wakefield

I had the thought that maybe some of these moves might affect the FARMS % at W-L, but roughly I think it should balance out since some of those units going to Wakefield have moderate FARMS rates (though not at the level of 3506-3510). You could also maybe move 2315 to Yorktown, though it is within the walk zone to W-L.

Plus it appears to have the benefit of geographic cohesion, for whatever that's worth. As others have said, I can't read the elem or middle school boundaries that well, so it might involve some splitting up there. I'm not sure how much I really care about that though.

I'm also not sure why it won't let me move 3506-3510 over to Yorktown. Eyeballing it, I can create a continuous unit, but I can't get it to work using the tool.[/quote]

I just tried doing what you suggested but the tool says 4818 can't be moved.  Also, it's hard to justify such low both numbers at both YT and WF when WL (when I can't move 4818) stays about 105% all 4 years and the other two HSs are below 100 for most 4 years (*some in high 80s or low 90s).[/quote]

The enrollment criticism is fair, though frankly pretty low on my priority list given the competing concerns. If the school board says it's within their "green" zone, it's good with me. Plus, you can count me among the people who think there is going to have to be a 4th high school built at some point.

I was able to get 4818 moved by moving others first. It's kind of an absurd little exercise. [/quote]

I agree with you that getting the units moved over is a bit absurd.  I finally did manage to get 4818 to Wakefield.  However, the numbers are still way too low outside of WL.  The number one goal of this exercise is for reallocating more student out of WL into Yorktown and Wakefield b/c of the projected severe overcrowding.  I am in WL, so I am sympathetic to your situation in Wakefield.  I tried getting more units from WL without touching 3506-3510 and the numbers still didn't budge too much (also moved more units up north to Yorktown) to rebalance so WL would not be around 105% etc.  Do we really want to impact so many planning units if we drop the enrollment at WL by such a small percentage?

The other thing is the way that the tool works and the other 5 factors, it comes down to whether the community and the school board decided consciously to promote diversity at the expense of the other 5 factors.  I am not trying to be controversial about it.  I am saying that it's much easier maximize the 5 factors when selecting possible planning units to be moved than it is to do so with demographics (due to the geographic concentration of poverty in the west pike, etc.).

The SB is going to have to (and most likely for the 2020 year when they tackle the entire HS boundary issue) make a deliberate choice about it (maybe get rid of Yorktown island and pick up a Western pike island?  I don't know.).  But it is not easy to achieve a balance for everyone currently with what has been given to us.

I understand that this has to be acutely painful for those families with WL and Wakefield freshmen in the 2017-2021 school years.[/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