Anonymous
10/19/2016 11:29
Subject: APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Can you specify which planning units you recommended so I can see what that would look like?
Thanks.
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.
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).
Anonymous
10/19/2016 11:27
Subject: APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Can you specify which planning units you recommended so I can see what that would look like?
Thanks.
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.
That will add 80 current (so maybe 100? forecasted) FARMS students to Wakefield- taking it from roughly 40% FARMS to roughly 45% FARMs.
That will not add any FARMS to Yorktown- leaving it at 14%. It will take W&L from about 30% FARMS to 25%.
Anonymous
10/19/2016 11:24
Subject: APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Can you specify which planning units you recommended so I can see what that would look like?
Thanks.
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.
I don't understand this either. I tried to do the same thing and the you can't move this message keeps popping up. Anyone understand that message? Someone earlier on this board said "move the western pike to Yorktown and that's what I tried to do, but I can't get it to work.
Anonymous
10/19/2016 11:22
Subject: APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
How can you do this? the western border will go to Wakefield based on the 'rules'. You would have to move 1301/1302/1303/3501/3512. Those all have low FARMS- its not adding diversity to Yorktown.
The eastern pike is high FARMS- that is increasing FARMS at Wakefield.
PP here. Eastern Pike doesn't look to be high FARMs compared to Western Pike. Also, those neighborhoods are already or will start to turn over. They are convenient to DC, Hoffman-Boston is starting to put out pretty good scores, and they're nice quiet streets. I have a lot more questions about the Western Pike area, particularly with the affordable housing builds.
Anonymous
10/19/2016 11:18
Subject: APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Can you specify which planning units you recommended so I can see what that would look like?
Thanks.
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.
Anonymous
10/19/2016 11:11
Subject: APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
Anonymous wrote: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.
How can you do this? the western border will go to Wakefield based on the 'rules'. You would have to move 1301/1302/1303/3501/3512. Those all have low FARMS- its not adding diversity to Yorktown.
The eastern pike is high FARMS- that is increasing FARMS at Wakefield.
Anonymous
10/19/2016 11:05
Subject: APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
Anonymous wrote: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.
Can you specify which planning units you recommended so I can see what that would look like?
Thanks.
Anonymous
10/19/2016 11:04
Subject: APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
Anonymous wrote: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.
This was my approach too. In comments I wrote that my priorities would be to maintain current walk zones (both for convenience of families in those zone and minimizing bus expenses for the county) and avoid adding high-poverty units to Wakefield. This approach puts Wakefield a little below target in 2017 but by 2020 all 3 HS would end up a bit over 2,200 students.
Anonymous
10/19/2016 10:57
Subject: APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
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.
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.
Anonymous
10/19/2016 10:10
Subject: Re:APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Could the county make its own TJ? Make it really rigorous and application-only, and promise to cap it at a 120-seat-per-grade school within a school, and I bet half the county would apply.
That's HB Woodlawn. Obviously not TJ's equivalent in academics but as the County's shining jewel. Very small school in terms of size, paying obscene amounts of money for a new school building for those special few.
And the problem with any lottery or choice school is that it only relieves overcrowding if you draw proportionately from all schools. It's the same challenge with Arlington Tech that just opened - not knowing where in the county the demand will come from.
Arguably TJ's equivalent in academics, just not the singular focus on science and math. It's like the liberal arts counterpart.
At what site would the SB build this new 480 seat school? Part of the county's argument for building new schools has been the lack of land. If it does consent to give up VHC for a new school, it should be a new comprehensive HS that would seat way more students than 480. Does it make sense to divert lots of money to so few seats? Look at the clusterf#ck at the new HB. Someone tried to show me the architectural plans, and I refused. It's already just how much money is wasted aside from building a functional and safe school for students.
Anonymous
10/19/2016 10:06
Subject: Re:APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Could the county make its own TJ? Make it really rigorous and application-only, and promise to cap it at a 120-seat-per-grade school within a school, and I bet half the county would apply.
That's HB Woodlawn. Obviously not TJ's equivalent in academics but as the County's shining jewel. Very small school in terms of size, paying obscene amounts of money for a new school building for those special few.
And the problem with any lottery or choice school is that it only relieves overcrowding if you draw proportionately from all schools. It's the same challenge with Arlington Tech that just opened - not knowing where in the county the demand will come from.
Arguably TJ's equivalent in academics, just not the singular focus on science and math. It's like the liberal arts counterpart.
Anonymous
10/19/2016 10:04
Subject: APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
Anonymous wrote:If they bused the poorest part of the Pike to Yorktown that would solve a lot of problems. I know the tool lets you draw the EASTERN Pike to Yorktown, but that's really bullshit. The EASTERN Pike is the most gentrified part of the pike. That needs to eventually shift to Wakefield. If they shift that part to Yorktown now, it's going to be a mess in 5 years.
+100
Anonymous
10/19/2016 09:55
Subject: APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
If they bused the poorest part of the Pike to Yorktown that would solve a lot of problems. I know the tool lets you draw the EASTERN Pike to Yorktown, but that's really bullshit. The EASTERN Pike is the most gentrified part of the pike. That needs to eventually shift to Wakefield. If they shift that part to Yorktown now, it's going to be a mess in 5 years.
Anonymous
10/19/2016 09:32
Subject: Re:APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Guys, guys, this is the equivalent of shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic. Not too long from now there won't be any seats for over a thousand kids. I have no faith in the SB's CIP that magically promises 1300 seats in 2022. We're all going to be screwed when that happens, so let's try to work together.
+1000. I also agree with the PP who suggested that they should put IB at Wakefield-- that would create socio-economic diversity without these awful boundary fights.
... will it? I think some families have used IB to get out of Wakefield. I agree that a coveted program could be a huge benefit.
A lot of families have used it for that purpose.
They lose their get out of jail free card if it moves to Wakefield.
Not convinced kids from YHS will go to Wakefield just for IB like some do to WL
+1 not sure what would be enticing enough.
Could the county make its own TJ? Make it really rigorous and application-only, and promise to cap it at a 120-seat-per-grade school within a school, and I bet half the county would apply.
How would this help the concentration of poverty at Wakefield?
House it at Wakefield. Kind of like IB at WL, but focused on science and housed at Wakefield.
Another possibility would be Spanish immersion.
Wakefield already has this. We are the Spanish Immersion HS. Not enough of a draw at the HS level.
Anonymous
10/19/2016 09:28
Subject: Re:APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Guys, guys, this is the equivalent of shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic. Not too long from now there won't be any seats for over a thousand kids. I have no faith in the SB's CIP that magically promises 1300 seats in 2022. We're all going to be screwed when that happens, so let's try to work together.
+1000. I also agree with the PP who suggested that they should put IB at Wakefield-- that would create socio-economic diversity without these awful boundary fights.
... will it? I think some families have used IB to get out of Wakefield. I agree that a coveted program could be a huge benefit.
A lot of families have used it for that purpose.
They lose their get out of jail free card if it moves to Wakefield.
Not convinced kids from YHS will go to Wakefield just for IB like some do to WL
+1 not sure what would be enticing enough.
Could the county make its own TJ? Make it really rigorous and application-only, and promise to cap it at a 120-seat-per-grade school within a school, and I bet half the county would apply.
How would this help the concentration of poverty at Wakefield?
House it at Wakefield. Kind of like IB at WL, but focused on science and housed at Wakefield.
Another possibility would be Spanish immersion.