Reply to 8/27 APS Work Session—Elementary Boundaries

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "8/27 APS Work Session—Elementary Boundaries"

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]The upper and lower idea, while possibly good for demographics, is a logistical nightmare for parents of more than one kid in elementary school. It won’t happen. [/quote]

How is it different than having a kid in middle school and elementary, or preschool and elementary, or daycare and any of the above? It’s not, and plenty of people do it. Probably anyone with 2+ kids? Upper and lower elem tart is an idea worth exploring. Of course it’ll get attacked by parents in wealthy neighborhoods adjacent to poor ones, but that right there tells you it’s worthy of consideration.[/quote]

So was the idea a KeyZone + LV + Va Sq/Cherrydale boundary with lower elem grades going to key and upper elem to ASFS (or something like that?)[/quote]
Yes this was the idea.  That way you don’t have all affordable housing in ne concentrated at neighborhood school at key.  Schools are only about a mile apart.[/quote]

No that was not the idea. They floated upper and lower for this neighborhood school when they thought the Buck property was on the table. That’s never happening and this conversation ended. There was never discussion about upper and lower at the two existing school locations. That’s a horrible idea that limits parent involvement with children split between school locations.  As PP mentioned this concept was only brought up in context of option schools.[/quote]

These are all excuses for the real dealbreaker: a lot of parents will fight tooth and nail to avoid integration with the less fortunate, which is what an upper and lower plan is all about.[/quote]

It’s already integrated.

[/quote]

The upper and lower idea is not limited to or even really feasible for an option program. My comment was in reference to the earlier poster who observed that it was an idea floated at the meeting: “5. They are considering pairing some schools upper and lower to better balance demographics- e.g. pair Abindgon and Drew.“

That pairing could improve Drew’s demographic balance but real progress via adjacent pairings would involve Fleet and Barcroft, Randolph and Abingdon, Drew and Oakridge, CS and Ashlawn. And I think you’d probably see a lot of pushback from fleet, Oakridge, and abingdon and Ashlawn. The specter of ‘busing’ would emerge, despite all the die hard liberal mommies who prefer Kamala Harris to Joe Biden.
[/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