Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was talk of ending the year-round calendar at Barcroft. Is that happening?

Does anyone know the answer to this?

As of now, there is no official word that it will be eliminated. There's a lot of chatter and speculation from outside the school community and the principal has apparently been asking people what they hear about it in the community when new families come to visit the school. But the possibility has not been brought to the school community itself, yet. But boundary change process begins this fall. Don't be surprised if it comes up with that - and listen carefully and ask if you don't hear anything, rather than letting them slip it in unannounced.

Anonymous wrote:There was talk of ending the year-round calendar at Barcroft. Is that happening?

Does anyone know the answer to this?

Anonymous wrote:They should just bus to Randolph
Problem solved

Except then it's not a 100% walkable school. That's the issue. They have no buses and don't want to add any. Barrett already has buses, and has an existing route in Barcroft. Just change it back to what it was before. Problem solved.

They should just bus to Randolph
Problem solved

Anonymous wrote:OK, back to Barcroft?

Yes, back to it. Unless they can guarantee spots, with transportation, to an alternate ES, this calendar really shouldn't be deployed in a neighborhood school. People didn't complain nearly as much when they could just go to Barrett if they didn't want the calendar. They should explore returning to that if they are going to keep the calendar.

Anonymous wrote:OK, back to Barcroft?

What about it?
Asked and answered.

OK, back to Barcroft?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like Sibling preference will eventually come to an end. That will absolutely put downward pressure on hosiebroices Barcroft, and Douglas Park.
That’s not necessarily a bad thing. Keeping some “affordable” sfh’s is a good thing.

I don't think sibling preference will come to an end. They can't do sibling preference for HB because the seats are already allocated by neighborhood elementary school, and that's a whole different system. For the other schools (especially at the elementary level), the argument that families have a strong interest in concurrently enrolled siblings being at the same school is too compelling. This is especially the case when we're talking about less affluent families, for whom the burdens of transportation to two different elementary schools might bar them from participating at all, but I think at all income levels you'd see a meaningful drop-off in option school applications if people couldn't be assured that siblings would be kept together.

Agree. The sibling preference issue seems mostly a montesorri issue. For whatever reason, aps montesorri preschoolers get priority for Drew/Henry elementary slots. That's as it was in the past, but now that they basically fill all the available seats I'm not sure why they should get preference over the younger sibling of a currently enrolled student, especially if that kid has montesorri experience. Perhaps the reason it's because natrass and others want the elementary program to be more economically diverse -- 2/3rds of the preschool montesorri is set aside for familieis who are of more modest income (at least at the time of application). That's a laudable reason, but I'm not aware of the other option schools having such income guidelines or rationales built into their admissions.

anyone know how many open seats there were in the Drew lottery this year, that were left after the aps montessori preschool guarantees? Was it even 5 or 10?

Anonymous wrote:Seems like Sibling preference will eventually come to an end. That will absolutely put downward pressure on hosiebroices Barcroft, and Douglas Park.
That’s not necessarily a bad thing. Keeping some “affordable” sfh’s is a good thing.

I don't think sibling preference will come to an end. They can't do sibling preference for HB because the seats are already allocated by neighborhood elementary school, and that's a whole different system. For the other schools (especially at the elementary level), the argument that families have a strong interest in concurrently enrolled siblings being at the same school is too compelling. This is especially the case when we're talking about less affluent families, for whom the burdens of transportation to two different elementary schools might bar them from participating at all, but I think at all income levels you'd see a meaningful drop-off in option school applications if people couldn't be assured that siblings would be kept together.

Seems like Sibling preference will eventually come to an end. That will absolutely put downward pressure on hosiebroices Barcroft, and Douglas Park.
That’s not necessarily a bad thing. Keeping some “affordable” sfh’s is a good thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the PP who said it is hurting property values. I agree that the primary thing hurting property values is the low test scores. However, I have talked to too many realtors in this area with clients who back out of even seeing a home in Barcroft's zone because they have multiple children and they don't want the calendar. And, these are home buyers who have already gotten past the idea of a title I school with low test scores. I also know several people with rentals in the zone and when they have vacancies, there are always a considerable number of families who decide not to rent once they find out about the calendar.

I imagine it is worse now that they have dismantled sibling preference.

This is not true. They have done no such thing at the option schools.

Oh wait. Was it just HB? Not choice elementary schools?
Now I’m getting confused. Wasn’t the Montessori community upset about losing sibling preference?

That's not what actually happened to the Montessori community. There is still sibling preference, just not a guarantee. There were fewer slots available than there were siblings this year because currently enrolled Pre-K Montessori students have preference above siblings in the lottery.

And yes, HB has never had sibling preference.

Well, sort of. There is still a preference for siblings of currently enrolled students at Drew/Henry. But it only kicks in after every APS preschool montesorri student who wants a seat gets one. There pretty much are no leftover seats so functionally there is barely a sibling preference and the lottery is for a handful of seats. How many I'm not sure, but if the whole reason for "clarifying" the sibling preference was because some siblings weren't going to or didn't get in. That tells me there are very few available seats not already claimed by incoming APS preschool montesorri students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the PP who said it is hurting property values. I agree that the primary thing hurting property values is the low test scores. However, I have talked to too many realtors in this area with clients who back out of even seeing a home in Barcroft's zone because they have multiple children and they don't want the calendar. And, these are home buyers who have already gotten past the idea of a title I school with low test scores. I also know several people with rentals in the zone and when they have vacancies, there are always a considerable number of families who decide not to rent once they find out about the calendar.

I imagine it is worse now that they have dismantled sibling preference.

This is not true. They have done no such thing at the option schools.

Oh wait. Was it just HB? Not choice elementary schools?
Now I’m getting confused. Wasn’t the Montessori community upset about losing sibling preference?

That's not what actually happened to the Montessori community. There is still sibling preference, just not a guarantee. There were fewer slots available than there were siblings this year because currently enrolled Pre-K Montessori students have preference above siblings in the lottery.

And yes, HB has never had sibling preference.