Anonymous wrote:.Anonymous wrote:APS doesn’t care why UMC families choice out. They know why, and they simply don’t care.
So just let them choice into a school like Tuckahoe, McKinley, Reed, Nottingham or where ever there will be space....
.Anonymous wrote:APS doesn’t care why UMC families choice out. They know why, and they simply don’t care.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ATS to Barcroft. Barcroft loses almost as many kids to choice school transfers as it has in the neighborhood. Alcova to Fleet. Divide Bacroft between Randolph and Barrett. Recapture the choice kids you are losing to those schools anyway! Also, encourages S Arl students (and disadvantaged families) to take advantage of ATS.
No room at Randolph for all the low income kids at Barcroft - they're not going to enter the lottery for ATS. And would prob give Randolph a farms rate higher than carlin springs.
Can't send half of Barcroft to Barrett either - you will upset the balance that exists at Barrett and keeps UMC families at the school. Don't want to undo 15 years of community buy-in and send Barrett parents scrambling for option schools as they did in the past before visionary former principal convinced Arlington Forest families that their kids would turn out fine. Barrett is one of the few high-FARMS schools that UMC families are happy with. It has a huge number of walkers and fairly balanced ethnic/racial/SES demographics. Not something to upset by playing the "where should we move ATS" game.
Tell me more about Barrett. It's got nearly identical farms rate as Barcroft (60%). Does it really have buy in from SFH, Morris than Barcroft? What's different there, apart from the calendar?
I’m not the previous poster, but Barrett is not diverse. It’s all Hispanic, plus a minority of Arlington Forest families.
And yes, that a good question to ask, because there is a lot of lamenting about Barcroft, but Barrett is no better in its demographics.
PTA participation and parent participation is limited, and I don’t see SES (or ethnic) diversity.
I'd really like to see what percentage of students in each elementary school boundary go to an option school. By planning unit would be even better. We all know what it would show: north Arlington students option at lower rates than south, and are attracted by perceived prestige and less crowded schools. South Arlington students option to avoid going to a segregated school whose resources are organized around serving a disadvantaged majority. But showing these patterns of demand for option schools would underscore that every school should get some sort of distinctive identity like an option school. No, we can't replace the biggest option school advantage - self selected, motivated and engaged parents- but giving Barrett, Barcroft, Carlin Springs and Randolph a focus or identity would help. The UMC has basically decided that those schools are organized around immigrant ELL and social services and they're not wrong. Giving those schools an additional identity that speaks to their aspirations would help. Why send you kid to a school specializing in what he/she has no need for? Something - more immersion programs, cultural exchange, a common denominator between two very different populations. That's where the key immersion came from. Can we not do that again? Are we just bereft of ideas?
I think APS should solicit reasons for each transfer request. Many people won't volunteer it's because of dissatisfaction with the neighborhood school; but if APS listed a range of reasons on the transfer application form to include "low performing neighborhood school" and asked the applicants to rank their reasons, it would be a start. Applications can be given an ID # so that responses are not linked to names to make people a little more comfortable being honest.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ATS to Barcroft. Barcroft loses almost as many kids to choice school transfers as it has in the neighborhood. Alcova to Fleet. Divide Bacroft between Randolph and Barrett. Recapture the choice kids you are losing to those schools anyway! Also, encourages S Arl students (and disadvantaged families) to take advantage of ATS.
APS wants more walkers, not less. I went to the meeting last night. Columbia Pike ant Rt 50 are not crossable roads for elem kids. You'd have to bus them. You might get that to work if all of Alcova walks to Fleet.
Columbia Pike is not crossable, but Glebe is? That’s odd.
Columbia Pike has a lot of pedestrians all day, but Glebe doesn’t really.
Also 50 is crossable over pedestrian bridges without ever exposing yourself to any traffic.
How does APS not know this?
Is it the same reason that some planning units are actually cemeteries?!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ATS to Barcroft. Barcroft loses almost as many kids to choice school transfers as it has in the neighborhood. Alcova to Fleet. Divide Bacroft between Randolph and Barrett. Recapture the choice kids you are losing to those schools anyway! Also, encourages S Arl students (and disadvantaged families) to take advantage of ATS.
No room at Randolph for all the low income kids at Barcroft - they're not going to enter the lottery for ATS. And would prob give Randolph a farms rate higher than carlin springs.
Can't send half of Barcroft to Barrett either - you will upset the balance that exists at Barrett and keeps UMC families at the school. Don't want to undo 15 years of community buy-in and send Barrett parents scrambling for option schools as they did in the past before visionary former principal convinced Arlington Forest families that their kids would turn out fine. Barrett is one of the few high-FARMS schools that UMC families are happy with. It has a huge number of walkers and fairly balanced ethnic/racial/SES demographics. Not something to upset by playing the "where should we move ATS" game.
Tell me more about Barrett. It's got nearly identical farms rate as Barcroft (60%). Does it really have buy in from SFH, Morris than Barcroft? What's different there, apart from the calendar?
I’m not the previous poster, but Barrett is not diverse. It’s all Hispanic, plus a minority of Arlington Forest families.
And yes, that a good question to ask, because there is a lot of lamenting about Barcroft, but Barrett is no better in its demographics.
PTA participation and parent participation is limited, and I don’t see SES (or ethnic) diversity.
I'd really like to see what percentage of students in each elementary school boundary go to an option school. By planning unit would be even better. We all know what it would show: north Arlington students option at lower rates than south, and are attracted by perceived prestige and less crowded schools. South Arlington students option to avoid going to a segregated school whose resources are organized around serving a disadvantaged majority. But showing these patterns of demand for option schools would underscore that every school should get some sort of distinctive identity like an option school. No, we can't replace the biggest option school advantage - self selected, motivated and engaged parents- but giving Barrett, Barcroft, Carlin Springs and Randolph a focus or identity would help. The UMC has basically decided that those schools are organized around immigrant ELL and social services and they're not wrong. Giving those schools an additional identity that speaks to their aspirations would help. Why send you kid to a school specializing in what he/she has no need for? Something - more immersion programs, cultural exchange, a common denominator between two very different populations. That's where the key immersion came from. Can we not do that again? Are we just bereft of ideas?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ATS to Barcroft. Barcroft loses almost as many kids to choice school transfers as it has in the neighborhood. Alcova to Fleet. Divide Bacroft between Randolph and Barrett. Recapture the choice kids you are losing to those schools anyway! Also, encourages S Arl students (and disadvantaged families) to take advantage of ATS.
No room at Randolph for all the low income kids at Barcroft - they're not going to enter the lottery for ATS. And would prob give Randolph a farms rate higher than carlin springs.
Can't send half of Barcroft to Barrett either - you will upset the balance that exists at Barrett and keeps UMC families at the school. Don't want to undo 15 years of community buy-in and send Barrett parents scrambling for option schools as they did in the past before visionary former principal convinced Arlington Forest families that their kids would turn out fine. Barrett is one of the few high-FARMS schools that UMC families are happy with. It has a huge number of walkers and fairly balanced ethnic/racial/SES demographics. Not something to upset by playing the "where should we move ATS" game.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I'd really like to see what percentage of students in each elementary school boundary go to an option school. By planning unit would be even better. We all know what it would show: north Arlington students option at lower rates than south, and are attracted by perceived prestige and less crowded schools. South Arlington students option to avoid going to a segregated school whose resources are organized around serving a disadvantaged majority. But showing these patterns of demand for option schools would underscore that every school should get some sort of distinctive identity like an option school. No, we can't replace the biggest option school advantage - self selected, motivated and engaged parents- but giving Barrett, Barcroft, Carlin Springs and Randolph a focus or identity would help. The UMC has basically decided that those schools are organized around immigrant ELL and social services and they're not wrong. Giving those schools an additional identity that speaks to their aspirations would help. Why send you kid to a school specializing in what he/she has no need for? Something - more immersion programs, cultural exchange, a common denominator between two very different populations. That's where the key immersion came from. Can we not do that again? Are we just bereft of ideas?
This data is available by school on the APS website- look for the transfer report. What the data actually shows is that the largest number of kids who attend a choice school are those kids in the neighborhood (sometimes by design, other times not). ATS's enrollment-- which is totally lottery-- ends up with 25% of the kids drawing from the surrounding Ashlawn and Glebe zones. Statistically to get that result, it means that significantly more kids from those zones are entering the ATS lottery.
Anonymous wrote:
I'd really like to see what percentage of students in each elementary school boundary go to an option school. By planning unit would be even better. We all know what it would show: north Arlington students option at lower rates than south, and are attracted by perceived prestige and less crowded schools. South Arlington students option to avoid going to a segregated school whose resources are organized around serving a disadvantaged majority. But showing these patterns of demand for option schools would underscore that every school should get some sort of distinctive identity like an option school. No, we can't replace the biggest option school advantage - self selected, motivated and engaged parents- but giving Barrett, Barcroft, Carlin Springs and Randolph a focus or identity would help. The UMC has basically decided that those schools are organized around immigrant ELL and social services and they're not wrong. Giving those schools an additional identity that speaks to their aspirations would help. Why send you kid to a school specializing in what he/she has no need for? Something - more immersion programs, cultural exchange, a common denominator between two very different populations. That's where the key immersion came from. Can we not do that again? Are we just bereft of ideas?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ATS to Barcroft. Barcroft loses almost as many kids to choice school transfers as it has in the neighborhood. Alcova to Fleet. Divide Bacroft between Randolph and Barrett. Recapture the choice kids you are losing to those schools anyway! Also, encourages S Arl students (and disadvantaged families) to take advantage of ATS.
No room at Randolph for all the low income kids at Barcroft - they're not going to enter the lottery for ATS. And would prob give Randolph a farms rate higher than carlin springs.
Can't send half of Barcroft to Barrett either - you will upset the balance that exists at Barrett and keeps UMC families at the school. Don't want to undo 15 years of community buy-in and send Barrett parents scrambling for option schools as they did in the past before visionary former principal convinced Arlington Forest families that their kids would turn out fine. Barrett is one of the few high-FARMS schools that UMC families are happy with. It has a huge number of walkers and fairly balanced ethnic/racial/SES demographics. Not something to upset by playing the "where should we move ATS" game.
Tell me more about Barrett. It's got nearly identical farms rate as Barcroft (60%). Does it really have buy in from SFH, Morris than Barcroft? What's different there, apart from the calendar?
I’m not the previous poster, but Barrett is not diverse. It’s all Hispanic, plus a minority of Arlington Forest families.
And yes, that a good question to ask, because there is a lot of lamenting about Barcroft, but Barrett is no better in its demographics.
PTA participation and parent participation is limited, and I don’t see SES (or ethnic) diversity.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ATS to Barcroft. Barcroft loses almost as many kids to choice school transfers as it has in the neighborhood. Alcova to Fleet. Divide Bacroft between Randolph and Barrett. Recapture the choice kids you are losing to those schools anyway! Also, encourages S Arl students (and disadvantaged families) to take advantage of ATS.
No room at Randolph for all the low income kids at Barcroft - they're not going to enter the lottery for ATS. And would prob give Randolph a farms rate higher than carlin springs.
Can't send half of Barcroft to Barrett either - you will upset the balance that exists at Barrett and keeps UMC families at the school. Don't want to undo 15 years of community buy-in and send Barrett parents scrambling for option schools as they did in the past before visionary former principal convinced Arlington Forest families that their kids would turn out fine. Barrett is one of the few high-FARMS schools that UMC families are happy with. It has a huge number of walkers and fairly balanced ethnic/racial/SES demographics. Not something to upset by playing the "where should we move ATS" game.
Tell me more about Barrett. It's got nearly identical farms rate as Barcroft (60%). Does it really have buy in from SFH, Morris than Barcroft? What's different there, apart from the calendar?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ATS to Barcroft. Barcroft loses almost as many kids to choice school transfers as it has in the neighborhood. Alcova to Fleet. Divide Bacroft between Randolph and Barrett. Recapture the choice kids you are losing to those schools anyway! Also, encourages S Arl students (and disadvantaged families) to take advantage of ATS.
APS wants more walkers, not less. I went to the meeting last night. Columbia Pike ant Rt 50 are not crossable roads for elem kids. You'd have to bus them. You might get that to work if all of Alcova walks to Fleet.
Anonymous wrote:Barcroft can’t catch a break.
I’m sorry for homeowners in that neighborhood. They are screwed with high density low income housing no matter which way you slice it.
No wonder it’s the only neighborhood that saw their property values go down for a couple of years there.