Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Walkability is too important in a lot of Arlington. That is why demographics came in last.

Also, families want neighborhood schools. One of the problems cited with Drew is that it is only a 1/3 neighborhood school and a lot of families that have resources to invest chose to transfer out. Making schools part of the neighborhood is a good thing.

I think this actually makes the opposite point. People don't value walkability or neighborhood schools -- they value (and I hate to use this shorthand) "high quality" schools. In north Arlington, where most of the families are high income and well educated, a neighborhood school will be full of the kind of kids other people want their kids to go to school with, so neighborhood=high quality and people support that model. Where there are high concentrations of low-income, non-English speaking kids and a lot of rentals where kids move in and out of the class all year, many families want to send their kids to better performing schools--walkability and being in the neighborhood is NOT the priority, compared to having a stronger peer group.

Tons of Nauck families have their kids in the Montessori program, and if it moves, there is no reason to think they wouldn't move with it -- they aren't going to send their kids to the regular program at Drew, because they are already making the choice not to do that. And there are lots of Nauck families who chose Hoffman-Boston (busing) over Drew (walkable). And all the people sending their kids to Claremont and ATS will of course continue to do so. Look at Abindgon--tons of people send their kids to Claremont and ATS. And so on and so forth.

If APS is going to set boundaries for neighborhood schools in a way that allows high concentrations of poor and ELL students, it has to give families choice school options. The alternative is forced busing, which no one seems to want.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The school board or APS staff will never publish where low income residents live or where affluent residents live, and how boundaries for a new school will affect demographics. It would be too controversial.

I would want to know if demographics were taken into consideration for Discovery. If they weren't, would it be for a new school? I'm not sure the county is out to carve new affluent enclaves via school zones in the South, over delivering better education to all there. At least, that's what I hope.

If you were at the boundary process meetings, demographics (or diversity) was not one of the issues deemed important. At one of the first community outreach events, parents from the affected N Arlington Schools (Ashlawn, Glebe, McKinley, Taylor, Tuckahoe, Barrett, Jamestown, Nottingham) ranked priorities, and diversity came dead last. So demographics were not a factor at all.

And appropriately so. Diversity is not exactly an important criterion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conversely, diversity issues were deemed one of the most important factors by the SAWG. And I don't think that the SB deliberately is seeking to create a less diverse school, but when they talk about walkability, and stress the importance of neighborhood schools, it's not a stretch to imagine they might rezone the kids living in SF homes in Alcova Heights to the new school, because they are physically closer to TJ, leaving very few SF homes feeding Barcroft. In theory, this move would alleviate overcrowding at Barcroft also, but I hope they have information about where the overcrowding in each particular school is coming from. Is it the SF homes in Alcova Heights (where many transfer out)? The ones in Barcroft (where many transfer out)? Or multi-family housing? And then I hope they take that info into consideration. Lastly, thinking about this in terms of only seats doesn't work in the South the same way it might in the North, where contiguous neighborhoods and housing types are homogeneous. Ultimately, intent matters less than outcome, and segregated neighborhoods mean segregated neighborhood schools. And the SB should be very careful not to further any such segregation, even if it means really creative boundaries and kids riding buses vs. being able to walk to school.

I can't help but think this is wistful thinking on the part of an AH resident or someone's frustration from Barcroft...

Is the idea of a choice school for the South, like a science focus off the table?

It'll be a neighborhood school designed to relieve crowding at Barcroft. The closest Barcroft zoned neighborhood is right across the street, Alcova Heights. So it is only logical that that neighborhood would move from Barcroft to the new elementary school at TJ.

Anonymous wrote:Conversely, diversity issues were deemed one of the most important factors by the SAWG. And I don't think that the SB deliberately is seeking to create a less diverse school, but when they talk about walkability, and stress the importance of neighborhood schools, it's not a stretch to imagine they might rezone the kids living in SF homes in Alcova Heights to the new school, because they are physically closer to TJ, leaving very few SF homes feeding Barcroft. In theory, this move would alleviate overcrowding at Barcroft also, but I hope they have information about where the overcrowding in each particular school is coming from. Is it the SF homes in Alcova Heights (where many transfer out)? The ones in Barcroft (where many transfer out)? Or multi-family housing? And then I hope they take that info into consideration. Lastly, thinking about this in terms of only seats doesn't work in the South the same way it might in the North, where contiguous neighborhoods and housing types are homogeneous. Ultimately, intent matters less than outcome, and segregated neighborhoods mean segregated neighborhood schools. And the SB should be very careful not to further any such segregation, even if it means really creative boundaries and kids riding buses vs. being able to walk to school.

I can't help but think this is wistful thinking on the part of an AH resident or someone's frustration from Barcroft...

Is the idea of a choice school for the South, like a science focus off the table?

Anonymous wrote:Walkability is too important in a lot of Arlington. That is why demographics came in last.

Exactly. Walkability will always win. What's more important is to get the housing policy right. Housing affects schools as is clearly obvious despite arguments to the contrary or denials by elected officials.

Anonymous wrote:Walkability is too important in a lot of Arlington. That is why demographics came in last.

Also, families want neighborhood schools. One of the problems cited with Drew is that it is only a 1/3 neighborhood school and a lot of families that have resources to invest chose to transfer out. Making schools part of the neighborhood is a good thing.

Walkability is too important in a lot of Arlington. That is why demographics came in last.

Anonymous wrote:Conversely, diversity issues were deemed one of the most important factors by the SAWG. And I don't think that the SB deliberately is seeking to create a less diverse school, but when they talk about walkability, and stress the importance of neighborhood schools, it's not a stretch to imagine they might rezone the kids living in SF homes in Alcova Heights to the new school, because they are physically closer to TJ, leaving very few SF homes feeding Barcroft. In theory, this move would alleviate overcrowding at Barcroft also, but I hope they have information about where the overcrowding in each particular school is coming from. Is it the SF homes in Alcova Heights (where many transfer out)? The ones in Barcroft (where many transfer out)? Or multi-family housing? And then I hope they take that info into consideration. Lastly, thinking about this in terms of only seats doesn't work in the South the same way it might in the North, where contiguous neighborhoods and housing types are homogeneous. Ultimately, intent matters less than outcome, and segregated neighborhoods mean segregated neighborhood schools. And the SB should be very careful not to further any such segregation, even if it means really creative boundaries and kids riding buses vs. being able to walk to school.

It would be really important to involve the Latino community in these discussions. Was that group represented in SAWG? Right now they are opposed to busing and/or gerrymandered boundaries in order to integrate schools, despite the fact that busing of Latino neighborhoods and gerrymandered boundaries have worked fine for the two N Arlington high schools. But what if the various affected communities work together to find a solution that could result in more demographically balanced schools? That's the hope, but the past 30 years in APS has proved otherwise. I tend to think that proximity and walkability will trump concerns about diversity and integration. And the school board will likely steer the discussion away from the "potential" demographic makeup of the schools. It has always been too controversial and divisive of an issue in Arlington.

Conversely, diversity issues were deemed one of the most important factors by the SAWG. And I don't think that the SB deliberately is seeking to create a less diverse school, but when they talk about walkability, and stress the importance of neighborhood schools, it's not a stretch to imagine they might rezone the kids living in SF homes in Alcova Heights to the new school, because they are physically closer to TJ, leaving very few SF homes feeding Barcroft. In theory, this move would alleviate overcrowding at Barcroft also, but I hope they have information about where the overcrowding in each particular school is coming from. Is it the SF homes in Alcova Heights (where many transfer out)? The ones in Barcroft (where many transfer out)? Or multi-family housing? And then I hope they take that info into consideration. Lastly, thinking about this in terms of only seats doesn't work in the South the same way it might in the North, where contiguous neighborhoods and housing types are homogeneous. Ultimately, intent matters less than outcome, and segregated neighborhoods mean segregated neighborhood schools. And the SB should be very careful not to further any such segregation, even if it means really creative boundaries and kids riding buses vs. being able to walk to school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The school board or APS staff will never publish where low income residents live or where affluent residents live, and how boundaries for a new school will affect demographics. It would be too controversial.

I would want to know if demographics were taken into consideration for Discovery. If they weren't, would it be for a new school? I'm not sure the county is out to carve new affluent enclaves via school zones in the South, over delivering better education to all there. At least, that's what I hope.

If you were at the boundary process meetings, demographics (or diversity) was not one of the issues deemed important. At one of the first community outreach events, parents from the affected N Arlington Schools (Ashlawn, Glebe, McKinley, Taylor, Tuckahoe, Barrett, Jamestown, Nottingham) ranked priorities, and diversity came dead last. So demographics were not a factor at all.

Of course not. They are perfectly happy with the lack of it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The school board or APS staff will never publish where low income residents live or where affluent residents live, and how boundaries for a new school will affect demographics. It would be too controversial.

I would want to know if demographics were taken into consideration for Discovery. If they weren't, would it be for a new school? I'm not sure the county is out to carve new affluent enclaves via school zones in the South, over delivering better education to all there. At least, that's what I hope.

If you were at the boundary process meetings, demographics (or diversity) was not one of the issues deemed important. At one of the first community outreach events, parents from the affected N Arlington Schools (Ashlawn, Glebe, McKinley, Taylor, Tuckahoe, Barrett, Jamestown, Nottingham) ranked priorities, and diversity came dead last. So demographics were not a factor at all.

Anonymous wrote:The school board or APS staff will never publish where low income residents live or where affluent residents live, and how boundaries for a new school will affect demographics. It would be too controversial.

I would want to know if demographics were taken into consideration for Discovery. If they weren't, would it be for a new school? I'm not sure the county is out to carve new affluent enclaves via school zones in the South, over delivering better education to all there. At least, that's what I hope.

Anonymous wrote:South arlington is the zone for arlington low Income . Get used to it or move on

Or vote for McMenamin.

South arlington is the zone for arlington low Income . Get used to it or move on

The school board or APS staff will never publish where low income residents live or where affluent residents live, and how boundaries for a new school will affect demographics. It would be too controversial.