APS Closing Nottingham

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Serious question— Nottingham is about the same size as Randolph, Long Branch, Drew, MPSA, and Campbell. I know that list includes option schools, but why does this board talk about Nottingham like it’s some kind of wild outlier?

Are you talking about capacity or enrollment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe because Cardinal didn't exist 7 years ago but go off.

It was planned and could have been option location, but it was not because the school board promised Westover a neighborhood school. I guess that was Nottingham’s fault, too.

That seems to be the root of the problem. Once they made Cardinal neighborhood, there are too many neighborhood seats in this one part of the county.

Yes, absolutely. Surely that is the problem with underenrollment in 22207 as opposed to Discovery and Nottingham being right on top of one another.

m

Surely the problem is APS is putting new seats where they apparently aren’t needed. But we can’t talk about that because APS only builds where they face no resistance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe because Cardinal didn't exist 7 years ago but go off.

It was planned and could have been option location, but it was not because the school board promised Westover a neighborhood school. I guess that was Nottingham’s fault, too.

That seems to be the root of the problem. Once they made Cardinal neighborhood, there are too many neighborhood seats in this one part of the county.

Yes, absolutely. Surely that is the problem with underenrollment in 22207 as opposed to Discovery and Nottingham being right on top of one another.

Ok if you want to go back further then yes, it would have made more sense to put another school on the Westover library site instead of at Williamsburg. But Westover would not hear of it, so they built Discovery.

Once Discovery was built, then it really did not make sense to put yet another neighborhood school at the Westover site. They needed to use the site for something - can't just let land go unused - but it should have been an option program. But Westover would not hear of it, so they put another neighborhood school there.

I would really like to know how Westover calls the shots each time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe because Cardinal didn't exist 7 years ago but go off.

Stop being dense. You know I'm asking about the location where Cardinal is now. Why could that not have been the location of a choice school?

So you think all 3 of the schools located in that area -- old McKinley, old ATS, and new Cardinal -- should have been option schools? Because that's the only way the numbers really change -- old McKinley was about 700 kids, same as Cardinal, so unless you're making both of them into option schools along with old ATS, it seems unlikely shifting Cardinal to an option school but keeping old McKinley as a local would have that much of an affect on Nottingham's numbers. Note that Ashlawn isn't oversubscribed anymore.

I don't understand why you would think that, but also think that Nottingham -- which is so so close to 3 other local elementary schools -- should be preserved as a local school rather than an option. Why have all the elementary schools anywhere near Westover be option schools but Nottingham needs to be a local?

And if you DON'T think that, but are just complaining that if either McKinley or Cardinal was going to get turned into an option school, you think it should have been the school YOU preferred rather than the one the board chose ... after you complained and complained and complained so that the board would aim it's option school hat in the direction of McKinley/Westover in the first place ... yeah, have no sympathy for you there. You can't escape the hangman's noose by implicating someone else and then get mad when they pick some other poor fool to hang instead. Nice try though.

What are you so worked up about? Seems to me McKinley families got a pretty good deal. The school moved nearly intact to a brand new building, and gave their crumbling old mess to ATS.

McKinley had just gone through 2 years of building an addition and trailers, having recess in the parking lot, and taking extra planning units that Nottingham just couldn't find a way to fit somehow WHILE THEY WERE DEALING WITH RENOVATIONS and trailers hahaha but yeah sure the renovated building was a "crumbling old mess."

I'm not mad about the way things turned out for old McKinley, but I'm worked up at the total hypocrisy of Nottingham trying to squirm out of this by pointing at McKinley and Cardinal again. They made their bed, and their school has fewer than 400 kids. Deal with your neighborhood school problem instead of pointing fingers elsewhere time and time again please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe because Cardinal didn't exist 7 years ago but go off.

Stop being dense. You know I'm asking about the location where Cardinal is now. Why could that not have been the location of a choice school?

So you think all 3 of the schools located in that area -- old McKinley, old ATS, and new Cardinal -- should have been option schools? Because that's the only way the numbers really change -- old McKinley was about 700 kids, same as Cardinal, so unless you're making both of them into option schools along with old ATS, it seems unlikely shifting Cardinal to an option school but keeping old McKinley as a local would have that much of an affect on Nottingham's numbers. Note that Ashlawn isn't oversubscribed anymore.

I don't understand why you would think that, but also think that Nottingham -- which is so so close to 3 other local elementary schools -- should be preserved as a local school rather than an option. Why have all the elementary schools anywhere near Westover be option schools but Nottingham needs to be a local?

And if you DON'T think that, but are just complaining that if either McKinley or Cardinal was going to get turned into an option school, you think it should have been the school YOU preferred rather than the one the board chose ... after you complained and complained and complained so that the board would aim it's option school hat in the direction of McKinley/Westover in the first place ... yeah, have no sympathy for you there. You can't escape the hangman's noose by implicating someone else and then get mad when they pick some other poor fool to hang instead. Nice try though.

What are you so worked up about? Seems to me McKinley families got a pretty good deal. The school moved nearly intact to a brand new building, and gave their crumbling old mess to ATS.

McKinley had just gone through 2 years of building an addition and trailers, having recess in the parking lot, and taking extra planning units that Nottingham just couldn't find a way to fit somehow WHILE THEY WERE DEALING WITH RENOVATIONS and trailers hahaha but yeah sure the renovated building was a "crumbling old mess."

I'm not mad about the way things turned out for old McKinley, but I'm worked up at the total hypocrisy of Nottingham trying to squirm out of this by pointing at McKinley and Cardinal again. They made their bed, and their school has fewer than 400 kids. Deal with your neighborhood school problem instead of pointing fingers elsewhere time and time again please.

Goodness. You sound very worked up. Maybe take a deep breath and try to get out of the victim mentality.

Many schools have been in the situation that McKinley was in dealing with renovations and trailers. I always wondered why APS didn't put an addition on Nottingham. But given that someone made the decision not to expand Nottingham, and to expand McKinley, then yes McKinley did have more capacity to absorb more students than Nottingham did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe because Cardinal didn't exist 7 years ago but go off.

Stop being dense. You know I'm asking about the location where Cardinal is now. Why could that not have been the location of a choice school?

So you think all 3 of the schools located in that area -- old McKinley, old ATS, and new Cardinal -- should have been option schools? Because that's the only way the numbers really change -- old McKinley was about 700 kids, same as Cardinal, so unless you're making both of them into option schools along with old ATS, it seems unlikely shifting Cardinal to an option school but keeping old McKinley as a local would have that much of an affect on Nottingham's numbers. Note that Ashlawn isn't oversubscribed anymore.

I don't understand why you would think that, but also think that Nottingham -- which is so so close to 3 other local elementary schools -- should be preserved as a local school rather than an option. Why have all the elementary schools anywhere near Westover be option schools but Nottingham needs to be a local?

And if you DON'T think that, but are just complaining that if either McKinley or Cardinal was going to get turned into an option school, you think it should have been the school YOU preferred rather than the one the board chose ... after you complained and complained and complained so that the board would aim it's option school hat in the direction of McKinley/Westover in the first place ... yeah, have no sympathy for you there. You can't escape the hangman's noose by implicating someone else and then get mad when they pick some other poor fool to hang instead. Nice try though.

What are you so worked up about? Seems to me McKinley families got a pretty good deal. The school moved nearly intact to a brand new building, and gave their crumbling old mess to ATS.

McKinley had just gone through 2 years of building an addition and trailers, having recess in the parking lot, and taking extra planning units that Nottingham just couldn't find a way to fit somehow WHILE THEY WERE DEALING WITH RENOVATIONS and trailers hahaha but yeah sure the renovated building was a "crumbling old mess."

I'm not mad about the way things turned out for old McKinley, but I'm worked up at the total hypocrisy of Nottingham trying to squirm out of this by pointing at McKinley and Cardinal again. They made their bed, and their school has fewer than 400 kids. Deal with your neighborhood school problem instead of pointing fingers elsewhere time and time again please.

Goodness. You sound very worked up. Maybe take a deep breath and try to get out of the victim mentality.

Many schools have been in the situation that McKinley was in dealing with renovations and trailers. I always wondered why APS didn't put an addition on Nottingham. But given that someone made the decision not to expand Nottingham, and to expand McKinley, then yes McKinley did have more capacity to absorb more students than Nottingham did.

Goodness. If it makes sense to you that McKinley should have taken on Nottingham's overflow when McKinley was under construction, having a large portion of its classes in trailers while many of its classrooms were closed off, and kids were having recess in the parking lot, then I suggest that you also may want to take some more deep breaths, as it gets more oxygen to the brain.

[Anonymous]

McCrazy vs. McCrazy 2.0

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe because Cardinal didn't exist 7 years ago but go off.

Stop being dense. You know I'm asking about the location where Cardinal is now. Why could that not have been the location of a choice school?

So you think all 3 of the schools located in that area -- old McKinley, old ATS, and new Cardinal -- should have been option schools? Because that's the only way the numbers really change -- old McKinley was about 700 kids, same as Cardinal, so unless you're making both of them into option schools along with old ATS, it seems unlikely shifting Cardinal to an option school but keeping old McKinley as a local would have that much of an affect on Nottingham's numbers. Note that Ashlawn isn't oversubscribed anymore.

I don't understand why you would think that, but also think that Nottingham -- which is so so close to 3 other local elementary schools -- should be preserved as a local school rather than an option. Why have all the elementary schools anywhere near Westover be option schools but Nottingham needs to be a local?

And if you DON'T think that, but are just complaining that if either McKinley or Cardinal was going to get turned into an option school, you think it should have been the school YOU preferred rather than the one the board chose ... after you complained and complained and complained so that the board would aim it's option school hat in the direction of McKinley/Westover in the first place ... yeah, have no sympathy for you there. You can't escape the hangman's noose by implicating someone else and then get mad when they pick some other poor fool to hang instead. Nice try though.

What are you so worked up about? Seems to me McKinley families got a pretty good deal. The school moved nearly intact to a brand new building, and gave their crumbling old mess to ATS.

McKinley had just gone through 2 years of building an addition and trailers, having recess in the parking lot, and taking extra planning units that Nottingham just couldn't find a way to fit somehow WHILE THEY WERE DEALING WITH RENOVATIONS and trailers hahaha but yeah sure the renovated building was a "crumbling old mess."

I'm not mad about the way things turned out for old McKinley, but I'm worked up at the total hypocrisy of Nottingham trying to squirm out of this by pointing at McKinley and Cardinal again. They made their bed, and their school has fewer than 400 kids. Deal with your neighborhood school problem instead of pointing fingers elsewhere time and time again please.

Goodness. You sound very worked up. Maybe take a deep breath and try to get out of the victim mentality.

Many schools have been in the situation that McKinley was in dealing with renovations and trailers. I always wondered why APS didn't put an addition on Nottingham. But given that someone made the decision not to expand Nottingham, and to expand McKinley, then yes McKinley did have more capacity to absorb more students than Nottingham did.

Goodness. If it makes sense to you that McKinley should have taken on Nottingham's overflow when McKinley was under construction, having a large portion of its classes in trailers while many of its classrooms were closed off, and kids were having recess in the parking lot, then I suggest that you also may want to take some more deep breaths, as it gets more oxygen to the brain.

When did McKinley ever take on Nottingham's overflow? I think that's made up.

McKinley took overflow students from Tuckahoe and so did Nottingham. Nottingham took students from Tuckahoe both before and after Discovery opened.

Did you think McK should have gotten an addition and then not taken on any more students from a nearby overcrowded school? That's not how this works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe because Cardinal didn't exist 7 years ago but go off.

Stop being dense. You know I'm asking about the location where Cardinal is now. Why could that not have been the location of a choice school?

So you think all 3 of the schools located in that area -- old McKinley, old ATS, and new Cardinal -- should have been option schools? Because that's the only way the numbers really change -- old McKinley was about 700 kids, same as Cardinal, so unless you're making both of them into option schools along with old ATS, it seems unlikely shifting Cardinal to an option school but keeping old McKinley as a local would have that much of an affect on Nottingham's numbers. Note that Ashlawn isn't oversubscribed anymore.

I don't understand why you would think that, but also think that Nottingham -- which is so so close to 3 other local elementary schools -- should be preserved as a local school rather than an option. Why have all the elementary schools anywhere near Westover be option schools but Nottingham needs to be a local?

And if you DON'T think that, but are just complaining that if either McKinley or Cardinal was going to get turned into an option school, you think it should have been the school YOU preferred rather than the one the board chose ... after you complained and complained and complained so that the board would aim it's option school hat in the direction of McKinley/Westover in the first place ... yeah, have no sympathy for you there. You can't escape the hangman's noose by implicating someone else and then get mad when they pick some other poor fool to hang instead. Nice try though.

What are you so worked up about? Seems to me McKinley families got a pretty good deal. The school moved nearly intact to a brand new building, and gave their crumbling old mess to ATS.

McKinley had just gone through 2 years of building an addition and trailers, having recess in the parking lot, and taking extra planning units that Nottingham just couldn't find a way to fit somehow WHILE THEY WERE DEALING WITH RENOVATIONS and trailers hahaha but yeah sure the renovated building was a "crumbling old mess."

I'm not mad about the way things turned out for old McKinley, but I'm worked up at the total hypocrisy of Nottingham trying to squirm out of this by pointing at McKinley and Cardinal again. They made their bed, and their school has fewer than 400 kids. Deal with your neighborhood school problem instead of pointing fingers elsewhere time and time again please.

Goodness. You sound very worked up. Maybe take a deep breath and try to get out of the victim mentality.

Many schools have been in the situation that McKinley was in dealing with renovations and trailers. I always wondered why APS didn't put an addition on Nottingham. But given that someone made the decision not to expand Nottingham, and to expand McKinley, then yes McKinley did have more capacity to absorb more students than Nottingham did.

Goodness. If it makes sense to you that McKinley should have taken on Nottingham's overflow when McKinley was under construction, having a large portion of its classes in trailers while many of its classrooms were closed off, and kids were having recess in the parking lot, then I suggest that you also may want to take some more deep breaths, as it gets more oxygen to the brain.

When did McKinley ever take on Nottingham's overflow? I think that's made up.

McKinley took overflow students from Tuckahoe and so did Nottingham. Nottingham took students from Tuckahoe both before and after Discovery opened.

Did you think McK should have gotten an addition and then not taken on any more students from a nearby overcrowded school? That's not how this works.

Nottingham and Tuckahoe were both overcrowded and lobbied heavily to dump PUs in McKinley which they did which solved their problems and made McKinley one of the largest schools in the entire County at the time. Second only to Oakridge probably. 800+ kids. Well over capacity and it tuned into a mega school. This was scheduled to occur when the school was supposed to be done with the renovation but then of course the renovation dragged on and all the kids showed up anyway.

My kid is going into 8th and this happened when he was in K-1st.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe because Cardinal didn't exist 7 years ago but go off.

Stop being dense. You know I'm asking about the location where Cardinal is now. Why could that not have been the location of a choice school?

So you think all 3 of the schools located in that area -- old McKinley, old ATS, and new Cardinal -- should have been option schools? Because that's the only way the numbers really change -- old McKinley was about 700 kids, same as Cardinal, so unless you're making both of them into option schools along with old ATS, it seems unlikely shifting Cardinal to an option school but keeping old McKinley as a local would have that much of an affect on Nottingham's numbers. Note that Ashlawn isn't oversubscribed anymore.

I don't understand why you would think that, but also think that Nottingham -- which is so so close to 3 other local elementary schools -- should be preserved as a local school rather than an option. Why have all the elementary schools anywhere near Westover be option schools but Nottingham needs to be a local?

And if you DON'T think that, but are just complaining that if either McKinley or Cardinal was going to get turned into an option school, you think it should have been the school YOU preferred rather than the one the board chose ... after you complained and complained and complained so that the board would aim it's option school hat in the direction of McKinley/Westover in the first place ... yeah, have no sympathy for you there. You can't escape the hangman's noose by implicating someone else and then get mad when they pick some other poor fool to hang instead. Nice try though.

What are you so worked up about? Seems to me McKinley families got a pretty good deal. The school moved nearly intact to a brand new building, and gave their crumbling old mess to ATS.

McKinley had just gone through 2 years of building an addition and trailers, having recess in the parking lot, and taking extra planning units that Nottingham just couldn't find a way to fit somehow WHILE THEY WERE DEALING WITH RENOVATIONS and trailers hahaha but yeah sure the renovated building was a "crumbling old mess."

I'm not mad about the way things turned out for old McKinley, but I'm worked up at the total hypocrisy of Nottingham trying to squirm out of this by pointing at McKinley and Cardinal again. They made their bed, and their school has fewer than 400 kids. Deal with your neighborhood school problem instead of pointing fingers elsewhere time and time again please.

Goodness. You sound very worked up. Maybe take a deep breath and try to get out of the victim mentality.

Many schools have been in the situation that McKinley was in dealing with renovations and trailers. I always wondered why APS didn't put an addition on Nottingham. But given that someone made the decision not to expand Nottingham, and to expand McKinley, then yes McKinley did have more capacity to absorb more students than Nottingham did.

Goodness. If it makes sense to you that McKinley should have taken on Nottingham's overflow when McKinley was under construction, having a large portion of its classes in trailers while many of its classrooms were closed off, and kids were having recess in the parking lot, then I suggest that you also may want to take some more deep breaths, as it gets more oxygen to the brain.

When did McKinley ever take on Nottingham's overflow? I think that's made up.

McKinley took overflow students from Tuckahoe and so did Nottingham. Nottingham took students from Tuckahoe both before and after Discovery opened.

Did you think McK should have gotten an addition and then not taken on any more students from a nearby overcrowded school? That's not how this works.

Nottingham and Tuckahoe were both overcrowded and lobbied heavily to dump PUs in McKinley which they did which solved their problems and made McKinley one of the largest schools in the entire County at the time. Second only to Oakridge probably. 800+ kids. Well over capacity and it tuned into a mega school. This was scheduled to occur when the school was supposed to be done with the renovation but then of course the renovation dragged on and all the kids showed up anyway.

My kid is going into 8th and this happened when he was in K-1st.

The school took Glebe kids too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe because Cardinal didn't exist 7 years ago but go off.

Stop being dense. You know I'm asking about the location where Cardinal is now. Why could that not have been the location of a choice school?

So you think all 3 of the schools located in that area -- old McKinley, old ATS, and new Cardinal -- should have been option schools? Because that's the only way the numbers really change -- old McKinley was about 700 kids, same as Cardinal, so unless you're making both of them into option schools along with old ATS, it seems unlikely shifting Cardinal to an option school but keeping old McKinley as a local would have that much of an affect on Nottingham's numbers. Note that Ashlawn isn't oversubscribed anymore.

I don't understand why you would think that, but also think that Nottingham -- which is so so close to 3 other local elementary schools -- should be preserved as a local school rather than an option. Why have all the elementary schools anywhere near Westover be option schools but Nottingham needs to be a local?

And if you DON'T think that, but are just complaining that if either McKinley or Cardinal was going to get turned into an option school, you think it should have been the school YOU preferred rather than the one the board chose ... after you complained and complained and complained so that the board would aim it's option school hat in the direction of McKinley/Westover in the first place ... yeah, have no sympathy for you there. You can't escape the hangman's noose by implicating someone else and then get mad when they pick some other poor fool to hang instead. Nice try though.

What are you so worked up about? Seems to me McKinley families got a pretty good deal. The school moved nearly intact to a brand new building, and gave their crumbling old mess to ATS.

McKinley had just gone through 2 years of building an addition and trailers, having recess in the parking lot, and taking extra planning units that Nottingham just couldn't find a way to fit somehow WHILE THEY WERE DEALING WITH RENOVATIONS and trailers hahaha but yeah sure the renovated building was a "crumbling old mess."

I'm not mad about the way things turned out for old McKinley, but I'm worked up at the total hypocrisy of Nottingham trying to squirm out of this by pointing at McKinley and Cardinal again. They made their bed, and their school has fewer than 400 kids. Deal with your neighborhood school problem instead of pointing fingers elsewhere time and time again please.

Goodness. You sound very worked up. Maybe take a deep breath and try to get out of the victim mentality.

Many schools have been in the situation that McKinley was in dealing with renovations and trailers. I always wondered why APS didn't put an addition on Nottingham. But given that someone made the decision not to expand Nottingham, and to expand McKinley, then yes McKinley did have more capacity to absorb more students than Nottingham did.

Goodness. If it makes sense to you that McKinley should have taken on Nottingham's overflow when McKinley was under construction, having a large portion of its classes in trailers while many of its classrooms were closed off, and kids were having recess in the parking lot, then I suggest that you also may want to take some more deep breaths, as it gets more oxygen to the brain.

When did McKinley ever take on Nottingham's overflow? I think that's made up.

McKinley took overflow students from Tuckahoe and so did Nottingham. Nottingham took students from Tuckahoe both before and after Discovery opened.

Did you think McK should have gotten an addition and then not taken on any more students from a nearby overcrowded school? That's not how this works.

Nottingham and Tuckahoe were both overcrowded and lobbied heavily to dump PUs in McKinley which they did which solved their problems and made McKinley one of the largest schools in the entire County at the time. Second only to Oakridge probably. 800+ kids. Well over capacity and it tuned into a mega school. This was scheduled to occur when the school was supposed to be done with the renovation but then of course the renovation dragged on and all the kids showed up anyway.

My kid is going into 8th and this happened when he was in K-1st.

No, we are a longtime Nottingham family who had kids in the school at that time. No Nottingham kids were sent to McKinley. That never happened. McKinley got kids from Tuckahoe and so did Nottingham. Nottingham sent kids to Discovery.

And how exactly is the Nottingham community to blame because the renovation of McKinley took longer than expected?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe because Cardinal didn't exist 7 years ago but go off.

Stop being dense. You know I'm asking about the location where Cardinal is now. Why could that not have been the location of a choice school?

So you think all 3 of the schools located in that area -- old McKinley, old ATS, and new Cardinal -- should have been option schools? Because that's the only way the numbers really change -- old McKinley was about 700 kids, same as Cardinal, so unless you're making both of them into option schools along with old ATS, it seems unlikely shifting Cardinal to an option school but keeping old McKinley as a local would have that much of an affect on Nottingham's numbers. Note that Ashlawn isn't oversubscribed anymore.

I don't understand why you would think that, but also think that Nottingham -- which is so so close to 3 other local elementary schools -- should be preserved as a local school rather than an option. Why have all the elementary schools anywhere near Westover be option schools but Nottingham needs to be a local?

And if you DON'T think that, but are just complaining that if either McKinley or Cardinal was going to get turned into an option school, you think it should have been the school YOU preferred rather than the one the board chose ... after you complained and complained and complained so that the board would aim it's option school hat in the direction of McKinley/Westover in the first place ... yeah, have no sympathy for you there. You can't escape the hangman's noose by implicating someone else and then get mad when they pick some other poor fool to hang instead. Nice try though.

What are you so worked up about? Seems to me McKinley families got a pretty good deal. The school moved nearly intact to a brand new building, and gave their crumbling old mess to ATS.

McKinley had just gone through 2 years of building an addition and trailers, having recess in the parking lot, and taking extra planning units that Nottingham just couldn't find a way to fit somehow WHILE THEY WERE DEALING WITH RENOVATIONS and trailers hahaha but yeah sure the renovated building was a "crumbling old mess."

I'm not mad about the way things turned out for old McKinley, but I'm worked up at the total hypocrisy of Nottingham trying to squirm out of this by pointing at McKinley and Cardinal again. They made their bed, and their school has fewer than 400 kids. Deal with your neighborhood school problem instead of pointing fingers elsewhere time and time again please.

Goodness. You sound very worked up. Maybe take a deep breath and try to get out of the victim mentality.

Many schools have been in the situation that McKinley was in dealing with renovations and trailers. I always wondered why APS didn't put an addition on Nottingham. But given that someone made the decision not to expand Nottingham, and to expand McKinley, then yes McKinley did have more capacity to absorb more students than Nottingham did.

Goodness. If it makes sense to you that McKinley should have taken on Nottingham's overflow when McKinley was under construction, having a large portion of its classes in trailers while many of its classrooms were closed off, and kids were having recess in the parking lot, then I suggest that you also may want to take some more deep breaths, as it gets more oxygen to the brain.

When did McKinley ever take on Nottingham's overflow? I think that's made up.

McKinley took overflow students from Tuckahoe and so did Nottingham. Nottingham took students from Tuckahoe both before and after Discovery opened.

Did you think McK should have gotten an addition and then not taken on any more students from a nearby overcrowded school? That's not how this works.

Nottingham and Tuckahoe were both overcrowded and lobbied heavily to dump PUs in McKinley which they did which solved their problems and made McKinley one of the largest schools in the entire County at the time. Second only to Oakridge probably. 800+ kids. Well over capacity and it tuned into a mega school. This was scheduled to occur when the school was supposed to be done with the renovation but then of course the renovation dragged on and all the kids showed up anyway.

My kid is going into 8th and this happened when he was in K-1st.

No, we are a longtime Nottingham family who had kids in the school at that time. No Nottingham kids were sent to McKinley. That never happened. McKinley got kids from Tuckahoe and so did Nottingham. Nottingham sent kids to Discovery.

And how exactly is the Nottingham community to blame because the renovation of McKinley took longer than expected?

This is not true I personally know Nottingham families who were moved to McKinley as part of that process. There used to be more PUs south of Langston at Nottingham. Those moved to McKinley. Now there is just the one weird PU at Nottingham that’s out of alignment with the rest for middle school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"But WHHYYYYYYY couldn't the bad thing happen to anyone else except us here at Nottingham???"

I know you think you’re being witty, but it’s tiresome, it really is.

Oh well. That’s sad for you. DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe because Cardinal didn't exist 7 years ago but go off.

It was planned and could have been option location, but it was not because the school board promised Westover a neighborhood school. I guess that was Nottingham’s fault, too.

That seems to be the root of the problem. Once they made Cardinal neighborhood, there are too many neighborhood seats in this one part of the county.

Yes, absolutely. Surely that is the problem with underenrollment in 22207 as opposed to Discovery and Nottingham being right on top of one another.

Ok if you want to go back further then yes, it would have made more sense to put another school on the Westover library site instead of at Williamsburg. But Westover would not hear of it, so they built Discovery.

Once Discovery was built, then it really did not make sense to put yet another neighborhood school at the Westover site. They needed to use the site for something - can't just let land go unused - but it should have been an option program. But Westover would not hear of it, so they put another neighborhood school there.

I would really like to know how Westover calls the shots each time.

Wouldn’t we all like to know. They are the OG whining N Arlington. Nottingham are the wannabes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe because Cardinal didn't exist 7 years ago but go off.

It was planned and could have been option location, but it was not because the school board promised Westover a neighborhood school. I guess that was Nottingham’s fault, too.

That seems to be the root of the problem. Once they made Cardinal neighborhood, there are too many neighborhood seats in this one part of the county.

Yes, absolutely. Surely that is the problem with underenrollment in 22207 as opposed to Discovery and Nottingham being right on top of one another.

Ok if you want to go back further then yes, it would have made more sense to put another school on the Westover library site instead of at Williamsburg. But Westover would not hear of it, so they built Discovery.

Once Discovery was built, then it really did not make sense to put yet another neighborhood school at the Westover site. They needed to use the site for something - can't just let land go unused - but it should have been an option program. But Westover would not hear of it, so they put another neighborhood school there.

I would really like to know how Westover calls the shots each time.

Wouldn’t we all like to know. They are the OG whining N Arlington. Nottingham are the wannabes.

It's because it's more than just whiny parents. Businesses and other residents who don't have kids in APS pushed on the issue of the use of the Westover library site. It's the difference between an issue no one is paying attention to but whiny parents and something that actually gains the attention of a wider community.