Anonymous wrote:40% is the sweet spot IMO. If I had my way we would bus kids as far as it took, to make sure no school had above 40% FARMS.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Pp who asks if people care about spreading out the poverty in achools vs just insulating their kid ... Ha ha ha! It is obviously the latter.
It was actually a rhetorical question. Sadly, I think we all knew the answer.
I agree with one of the other PPs - Fairfax should do more to spread the low income housing throughout the county. I think that areas within a school boundary with higher than average FARMs should not be permitted to have any new affordable rate units set aside for new construction. Moreover, I think that areas with lower than average FARMs elementary schools should be required to have a higher percentage of units set aside as affordable units for new construction than what is currently required. I think it's a better alternative to busing and/or boundary adjustments. For example, there are some new developments planned in Mason District (Stuart, Annandale and Edison pyramids) and according to county requirements, a certain percentage will have to be set aside as affordable units - why? The area already has more than its fair share of affordable units.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Pp who asks if people care about spreading out the poverty in achools vs just insulating their kid ... Ha ha ha! It is obviously the latter.
It was actually a rhetorical question. Sadly, I think we all knew the answer.
I agree with one of the other PPs - Fairfax should do more to spread the low income housing throughout the county. I think that areas within a school boundary with higher than average FARMs should not be permitted to have any new affordable rate units set aside for new construction. Moreover, I think that areas with lower than average FARMs elementary schools should be required to have a higher percentage of units set aside as affordable units for new construction than what is currently required. I think it's a better alternative to busing and/or boundary adjustments. For example, there are some new developments planned in Mason District (Stuart, Annandale and Edison pyramids) and according to county requirements, a certain percentage will have to be set aside as affordable units - why? The area already has more than its fair share of affordable units.
Anonymous wrote:Pp who asks if people care about spreading out the poverty in achools vs just insulating their kid ... Ha ha ha! It is obviously the latter.
Anonymous wrote:Pp who asks if people care about spreading out the poverty in achools vs just insulating their kid ... Ha ha ha! It is obviously the latter.
We live in md now and that school board occasionally has busing debates (busing FARMS kids to wealthier schools not requiring wealthy school kids to be bused necessarily). You should see the howls from the Betheada and CC folks who know their home values are tied up in keeping low income kids to a very limited number in their schools and leaving most in east county.
Cannot imagine the dynamic is much different here.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'd pull your kid and put him or her in private. It's just too risky at a Title I school or any school with a FARMs rate north of 20 percent - really, even a school north of 10 percent makes me nervous. Sure, your child COULD hypothetically succeed despite the poverty that surrounds him, but he will stand a much, much better chance at a school without the FARMs kids soaking up all the oxygen.
You do know that the average FARMS rate in FCPS is about 27% for this school year, right?
You also do know that a lot of McLean area schools have FARMS rates of about 5%, right?
What this means is that FCPS average FARMS rates, when you remove McLean schools, are like 35% or so.
So in your mind, no one should attend FCPS schools unless they are the McLean schools? OK...
Anonymous wrote:To OP: Anecdotally speaking, my kids attended high FARMs elementary and middle schools (>60%). They did very well, are taking all honors classes, and will stick with their IB schools. The greatest indicator of success is parental involvement. You sound like an involved parent, so it's likely your kid(s) will be just fine at any FCPS school. Don't listen to the pearl clutchers. You've said the teachers have been great. Your experience has been great. if others are leaving because they haven't had a great experience, then you already disagree with their perception, so why would you follow their lead now?
To everyone else: If you're so concerned about tipping points, do you support changing boundaries to spread FARMs students more equitably across schools or is your thought that as long as you can get your kids out of the supposedly-horrible schools, that's all that matters to you?