Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 09:14     Subject: Re:APS middle school boundary process
Anonymous wrote:school board policy is not to make any new islands- it doesn't necessarily mean they have to get rid of an existing island.

I honestly don't think there is a good answer to a tough problem. I hate to see economic disparity increased beyond what it currently is- but the only option that gets Williamsburg to a larger FARMS rate (17%), drops Swanson to 7% (Option B) and I don't see that as a net benefit to anyone.


H is probably about the most balanced- it has Gunston/Jefferson/Kenmore between 40-45% and Stratford Swanson at roughly 25%. Of course it also puts Williamsburg at4% FARMS and only 93% capacity- and that doesn't seem right either.


That's why J plus adding some (bus riders from Kenmore and Jefferson (adjacent) to Swanson, Stratford and the Williamsburg island might help address this.
Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 09:11     Subject: Re:APS middle school boundary process
school board policy is not to make any new islands- it doesn't necessarily mean they have to get rid of an existing island.

I honestly don't think there is a good answer to a tough problem. I hate to see economic disparity increased beyond what it currently is- but the only option that gets Williamsburg to a larger FARMS rate (17%), drops Swanson to 7% (Option B) and I don't see that as a net benefit to anyone.


H is probably about the most balanced- it has Gunston/Jefferson/Kenmore between 40-45% and Stratford Swanson at roughly 25%. Of course it also puts Williamsburg at4% FARMS and only 93% capacity- and that doesn't seem right either.
Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 09:10     Subject: APS middle school boundary process
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:What about...start with J and make and island at the intersection of Kenmore/Gunston/Jefferson that gets shipped up to Williamsburg. If those families would want that. Those kids weren't really walkable anywhere anyway.


Here is J:
https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Scenario-1J-Efficiency-Single-Consideration-updated.pdf



Like this:
Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 09:09     Subject: APS middle school boundary process
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:What about...start with J and make and island at the intersection of Kenmore/Gunston/Jefferson that gets shipped up to Williamsburg. If those families would want that. Those kids weren't really walkable anywhere anyway.


Here is J:
https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Scenario-1J-Efficiency-Single-Consideration-updated.pdf


That does look like it. Only thing is that in option J kenmore has the highest FARMS rate 55% but seems to have the lowest capacity. I guess that means the area is heavily concentrated with poverty. But I do agree something should be done about the huge disparity in FARMS rates.

That's why I thought option F provides a similar approach by taking some Kenmore and Jefferson kids who would be taking the bus anyway to be distributed to the 3 north MS. Gunston is the lowest of the FARMS already in this scenario at 38%. (I just pray the APS admin have rechecked these numbers and haven't made the same mistakes they did like with all the other boundary adjustments).
Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 09:06     Subject: APS middle school boundary process
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I think it is ABSURD to propose an option (1F) that retains the Williamsburg island. I thought they said that they were prioritizing contiguous boundaries. This island was eliminated in the high school boundary change last year. Why, on Earth, would they retain it for middle school? And if we're going to leave that island, why not just create more. What is so special about that area?


Yeah, I thought we couldn't have islands any more? Isn't that what they just said? What is with this option?


If we can have islands let's make one where it can really balance out the demographics better - as I suggested J plus island.
Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 09:03     Subject: APS middle school boundary process
Anonymous wrote:What about...start with J and make and island at the intersection of Kenmore/Gunston/Jefferson that gets shipped up to Williamsburg. If those families would want that. Those kids weren't really walkable anywhere anyway.


Here is J:
https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Scenario-1J-Efficiency-Single-Consideration-updated.pdf
Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 09:03     Subject: APS middle school boundary process
What about...start with J and make and island at the intersection of Kenmore/Gunston/Jefferson that gets shipped up to Williamsburg. If those families would want that. Those kids weren't really walkable anywhere anyway.
Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 09:03     Subject: APS middle school boundary process
Anonymous wrote:I think it is ABSURD to propose an option (1F) that retains the Williamsburg island. I thought they said that they were prioritizing contiguous boundaries. This island was eliminated in the high school boundary change last year. Why, on Earth, would they retain it for middle school? And if we're going to leave that island, why not just create more. What is so special about that area?


Yeah, I thought we couldn't have islands any more? Isn't that what they just said? What is with this option?
Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 09:02     Subject: APS middle school boundary process
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:We need efficiency and relief of overcrowding. I can't deal with the people who whine that "my kids won't be able to go to school with all the same kids from their previous school" - if you pull your kids and go to private, they still won't know anyone. And even in the maps where they break up schools, there will be some kids that travel together. That's not a factor that's worth tying maps up in knots. If you look at the alignment map, you have kids not able to go to the school across the street from their house -- kind of like the stupidity of Science Focus' boundary now.


+1

Except for one in MS, my kids are in college now. We live in a Taylor planning unit but they went to Science Focus (as the PP noted re stupidity of some boundaries, we live two blocks from Science Focus). After Science Focus they went to Swanson and then W-L. At every stage of their schooling they continued with a few friends while others went to different middle schools and high schools, including a few privates. Along the way my kids met classmates they had known from sports, from church, from summer camps, from scouts, etc. By the time they were in HS they had friends all over Arlington. Alignment really is not that important in a county the size of Arlington.


I agree with this.
Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 09:00     Subject: APS middle school boundary process
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Why would APAH housing in Westover get sent to Kenmore. It should stay in N Arlington. Kenmore cannot absorb any more low income kids.


There is no scenario under which this happens.


You're right, I mixed up 11th Rd and 11th St. It's just inside the Swanson boundary in option B.
Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 08:55     Subject: APS middle school boundary process
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Looks like they've added data

https://www.apsva.us/middle-school-boundary-illustrative-draft-maps/



OMG. 1H is insane for Swanson.


Yes, but also insane are the options that raise the fr/l numbers at Kenmore or Jefferson by over 5 percentage points, while lowering them at Swanson or Williamsburg by 5 or more percentage points. These options need changes.


N. Arlington parent here. I've been looking at these updated charts. I agree that having one or more S. Arlington MS at 45% or more FARMS is insane. But I'm also looking at the overcrowding situation.

For example, Option D seems absurd. Only 89% or 86% capacity at Williamsburg for 2 years upon opening Stratford and a FARMS rate of 2%? While the other 5 are over 100 by 2nd year with 2 MSs at 111 and 112%?

If you take option F, couldn't Swanson, the Williamsburg Island and the Stratford MS take some more PUs next to them from Kenmore and Jefferson to distribute the FARMs rate a bit more?
Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 08:54     Subject: Re:APS middle school boundary process
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:God I love you fucking leftists! !!



Shouldn't you be getting into a fistfight with another HS parent over racist graffiti at YHS?



Or maybe it's more likely you're one of the little sh!thead HS students who put up the graffiti. Here's a life lesson: karma is a bitch.


Actually I'm just a member of a completely ignored constituency in Arlington.
Social engineering in housing leads to problems requiring social engineering in school planning. Then you Democrats rip yourself apart because you don't see the natural consequences of your stupid policies. This is combined with your party's underlying racism (the apparent need to separate people into groups and treat them differently) and hypocrisy regarding economic success (it's fine for us to make money but anyone else who does is evil) and you guys rip each other a new one.

As I said before, thank God my youngest kids are in 8th grade.
Thank God for the Dillon Rule and that half of Arlington's tax base is commercial property.. Without those, I can't imagine what kind of shithole you would turn this county into.


What completely ignored demographic are you?


Racist/xenophobic/misogynistic old hags.
Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 08:52     Subject: Re:APS middle school boundary process
In terms of the Dominion Hills Neighborhood and turning walkers into busriders- yes a lot of these scenarios transfer you from Swanson to Kenmore. But guess what- you are still a walker. It is 1.7 miles from Swanson to Kenmore. The schools are just not that far apart. It is actually an extremely pleasant walk along the 4 mile run trail- or Kensington st if you prefer to stick to streets. APS thinks that middle schoolers can walk 1.5 miles. The closest house to Swanson that is being talked about being moved to Kenmore is precisely 1.5 miles- That is the outer edge of the Planning Unit.
Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 08:51     Subject: Re:APS middle school boundary process
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:^^ I think it's very important in elementary school to go to school with your neighbors. The kids make friends a few doors down or a short walk. They can run back and forth to each other's houses. Play dates aren't a major pain in the ass with having to pick a kid up on the other side of town sitting in rush hioir traffic on Lee highway.

Most of our neighborhood goest to the same school, but there is a large portion from all the way across town. I've had to really cut back on play dates with any of those kids because it's just too much of a pain. The kids in the neighborhood will get together a lot and in nights they have practices they can still have short play dates beforehand.


But now we're talking about MS. Shouldn't kids worlds be expanding at this point?


MS --I want the closest school to my house. More sleep. Shorter time getting to and from.

My kids have friends all over the County because of camps and sports.


Agree. Besides, it does expand in middle school because MS is larger with more neighborhoods feeding in than elementary schools. The closest neighborhoods to the schools makes the most sense.
Anonymous
Post 10/04/2017 08:51     Subject: APS middle school boundary process
I think it is ABSURD to propose an option (1F) that retains the Williamsburg island. I thought they said that they were prioritizing contiguous boundaries. This island was eliminated in the high school boundary change last year. Why, on Earth, would they retain it for middle school? And if we're going to leave that island, why not just create more. What is so special about that area?