Possible new Alexandria City high school boundaries?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure the zone map has been released. TC will be divided into two schools and the boundaries will be set by the school board, but some school board members have talked east-west. The official plan is at - https://www.acps.k12.va.us/cms/lib/VA01918616/Centricity/Domain/1026/facilities-specifications-high-school.pdf

That is not a plan, its set of specs that any new school must meet IF it is built. It does not say where, when, or if any new school is to be built.

That might have been an original intention, but that's not the way the school board voted. The school board voted (unanimously, four times, over almost a year) to adopt the document as "requirements" for "compliance." Of course there's no real estate yet, although the school board looks at things like abandoned office buildings to shunt the west end kids into from time to time. The only final, unanimous decision is, when the new high school goes forward, both the new high school and TC Williams will both be 9-12. No other option was even considered (Minnie Howard as 9-10 and TC Williams as 11-12 was not even raised in the school board's votes).

Link please? Again, requirements for compliance does not say "2 schools going 9 to 12".

And this has nothing to do with the use of a vacant (not abandoned) office building for elementary school capacity, which seems like very good idea in a City that both needs more school capacity, and has a lot of vacant office space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure the zone map has been released. TC will be divided into two schools and the boundaries will be set by the school board, but some school board members have talked east-west. The official plan is at - https://www.acps.k12.va.us/cms/lib/VA01918616/Centricity/Domain/1026/facilities-specifications-high-school.pdf

That is not a plan, its set of specs that any new school must meet IF it is built. It does not say where, when, or if any new school is to be built.

That might have been an original intention, but that's not the way the school board voted. The school board voted (unanimously, four times, over almost a year) to adopt the document as "requirements" for "compliance." Of course there's no real estate yet, although the school board looks at things like abandoned office buildings to shunt the west end kids into from time to time. The only final, unanimous decision is, when the new high school goes forward, both the new high school and TC Williams will both be 9-12. No other option was even considered (Minnie Howard as 9-10 and TC Williams as 11-12 was not even raised in the school board's votes).

Link please? Again, requirements for compliance does not say "2 schools going 9 to 12".

And this has nothing to do with the use of a vacant (not abandoned) office building for elementary school capacity, which seems like very good idea in a City that both needs more school capacity, and has a lot of vacant office space.

The office building proposal is simply insulting to the West End families that will have to live with the decisions for many years to come (and this contributes to the public's view of the school board, whose members never read the specifications in detail, as this thread proves).

The mandatory nature of the specifications is at its most dense and explicit on pp. 8-9; the adoption of school size and geographic distribution, and the explicit declaration that school board's policy is 9-12 high schools is littered throughout the specifications, including pp. 21, 24, and 44 (which contains an efficient signal that school board has already moved away from grade split schools to 9-12 schools); the specifications are replete with references to the fact that the plan is to leave 1/6 of the classrooms vacant at any given point in the school day, and most teachers will not have classrooms - they will travel from room to room on carts (p. 45). Since each school will be 9-12, each school will have its own college office (p. 40), and of course why would a 9-10 school need one? Of course, school board hasn't really thoroughly addressed the actual contents of the document, which was prepared by contractors selling generics - in fact, there is no stated reason for the proposal in its entirety. There's just a rough average of all schools in the region (p. 25) and an assumption that this makes the average size for other systems somehow a good idea for Alexandria. The average was so sloppily done that the contractor included micro-schools (like one-off, single-floor DC alternative programs), so the mathematical average doesn't even reflect actual comparables. The shame is that the school board could simply reject the document and announce its actual intention, if the document doesn't reflect that actual intention, but the school board's repeated refusal to do so makes the conclusion even more obvious than the language itself.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for these posts, p.p.'s. They are appreciated.
-Parent in Alexandria

[Anonymous]

Did anyone watch the joint task force meetings? They are discussing prioritizing (ie cutting) projects. For the next 10 years the only high school piece even up for consideration is Minnie Howard, possibly. ACPS has to compete with all the other capital projects like sewers and fire stations. Will see if they add much of anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone watch the joint task force meetings? They are discussing prioritizing (ie cutting) projects. For the next 10 years the only high school piece even up for consideration is Minnie Howard, possibly. ACPS has to compete with all the other capital projects like sewers and fire stations. Will see if they add much of anything.

Yup. It's taken for granted in the school board's presentations (of which there are many) that there will be a major new high school project, and the only one actually placed before the joint task force is what's described in the educational specifications. There is no other proposal of any kind, at all, before the joint task force - only the creation of two 9-12 high schools.

[Anonymous]

Where would they possibly put a 2nd high school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure the zone map has been released. TC will be divided into two schools and the boundaries will be set by the school board, but some school board members have talked east-west. The official plan is at - https://www.acps.k12.va.us/cms/lib/VA01918616/Centricity/Domain/1026/facilities-specifications-high-school.pdf

That is not a plan, its set of specs that any new school must meet IF it is built. It does not say where, when, or if any new school is to be built.

That might have been an original intention, but that's not the way the school board voted. The school board voted (unanimously, four times, over almost a year) to adopt the document as "requirements" for "compliance." Of course there's no real estate yet, although the school board looks at things like abandoned office buildings to shunt the west end kids into from time to time. The only final, unanimous decision is, when the new high school goes forward, both the new high school and TC Williams will both be 9-12. No other option was even considered (Minnie Howard as 9-10 and TC Williams as 11-12 was not even raised in the school board's votes).

Link please? Again, requirements for compliance does not say "2 schools going 9 to 12".

And this has nothing to do with the use of a vacant (not abandoned) office building for elementary school capacity, which seems like very good idea in a City that both needs more school capacity, and has a lot of vacant office space.

The office building proposal is simply insulting to the West End families that will have to live with the decisions for many years to come (and this contributes to the public's view of the school board, whose members never read the specifications in detail, as this thread proves).

The mandatory nature of the specifications is at its most dense and explicit on pp. 8-9; the adoption of school size and geographic distribution, and the explicit declaration that school board's policy is 9-12 high schools is littered throughout the specifications, including pp. 21, 24, and 44 (which contains an efficient signal that school board has already moved away from grade split schools to 9-12 schools); the specifications are replete with references to the fact that the plan is to leave 1/6 of the classrooms vacant at any given point in the school day, and most teachers will not have classrooms - they will travel from room to room on carts (p. 45). Since each school will be 9-12, each school will have its own college office (p. 40), and of course why would a 9-10 school need one? Of course, school board hasn't really thoroughly addressed the actual contents of the document, which was prepared by contractors selling generics - in fact, there is no stated reason for the proposal in its entirety. There's just a rough average of all schools in the region (p. 25) and an assumption that this makes the average size for other systems somehow a good idea for Alexandria. The average was so sloppily done that the contractor included micro-schools (like one-off, single-floor DC alternative programs), so the mathematical average doesn't even reflect actual comparables. The shame is that the school board could simply reject the document and announce its actual intention, if the document doesn't reflect that actual intention, but the school board's repeated refusal to do so makes the conclusion even more obvious than the language itself.

I read the pages, and at most they give hints toward 9-12.

This
It is desirable that grade levels have separation at core academics to build individual community and focus.
Currently, students in the ninth grade campus have a full year to build community, culture, and relationships
before they transition into the larger high school. The ability to create these connections is an important quality
that any new high school should provide and ACPS wants to maintain.


hints the other way. Again, this is far from a commitment to 9-12.

As for the office building, it still looks like a good solution in the context of urgent need. And does not imply any particular solution to the HS issue.

[Anonymous]

As for the reference to a college office, here is the quote

. Spaces such as the writing center, math center,
tech support, help desk, teen wellness and college and career center should be located in a designated and
accessible space.

This is general guidance for the architects about having space for centers like this, NOT a commitment to a college center in each HS building. This is a good example of how you are stretching items in this document.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where would they possibly put a 2nd high school?

Dp. Two possibilities where there is at least land is a) GWMS lot and b) Eisenhower Ave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As for the reference to a college office, here is the quote

. Spaces such as the writing center, math center,
tech support, help desk, teen wellness and college and career center should be located in a designated and
accessible space.

This is general guidance for the architects about having space for centers like this, NOT a commitment to a college center in each HS building. This is a good example of how you are stretching items in this document.

That interpretation would require ignoring the other multiple provisions, and would also require disregarding the fact that the unanimous, repeated, explicit 9-12 declaration is the only plan presented to the School Board, discussed by them, adopted, or even mentioned in the entire document set.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure the zone map has been released. TC will be divided into two schools and the boundaries will be set by the school board, but some school board members have talked east-west. The official plan is at - https://www.acps.k12.va.us/cms/lib/VA01918616/Centricity/Domain/1026/facilities-specifications-high-school.pdf

That is not a plan, its set of specs that any new school must meet IF it is built. It does not say where, when, or if any new school is to be built.

That might have been an original intention, but that's not the way the school board voted. The school board voted (unanimously, four times, over almost a year) to adopt the document as "requirements" for "compliance." Of course there's no real estate yet, although the school board looks at things like abandoned office buildings to shunt the west end kids into from time to time. The only final, unanimous decision is, when the new high school goes forward, both the new high school and TC Williams will both be 9-12. No other option was even considered (Minnie Howard as 9-10 and TC Williams as 11-12 was not even raised in the school board's votes).

Link please? Again, requirements for compliance does not say "2 schools going 9 to 12".

And this has nothing to do with the use of a vacant (not abandoned) office building for elementary school capacity, which seems like very good idea in a City that both needs more school capacity, and has a lot of vacant office space.

Agree with the use of office building space for schools.

if it was good enough for Fairfax County, it's good enough for Alexandria city

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As for the reference to a college office, here is the quote

. Spaces such as the writing center, math center,
tech support, help desk, teen wellness and college and career center should be located in a designated and
accessible space.

This is general guidance for the architects about having space for centers like this, NOT a commitment to a college center in each HS building. This is a good example of how you are stretching items in this document.

That interpretation would require ignoring the other multiple provisions, and would also require disregarding the fact that the unanimous, repeated, explicit 9-12 declaration is the only plan presented to the School Board, discussed by them, adopted, or even mentioned in the entire document set.

We seem to be going in circles. Everything you claim that points to a 9-12 school being already decided on, seems to me like a stretch. You then support your interpretation by mentioning other points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As for the reference to a college office, here is the quote

. Spaces such as the writing center, math center,
tech support, help desk, teen wellness and college and career center should be located in a designated and
accessible space.

This is general guidance for the architects about having space for centers like this, NOT a commitment to a college center in each HS building. This is a good example of how you are stretching items in this document.

That interpretation would require ignoring the other multiple provisions, and would also require disregarding the fact that the unanimous, repeated, explicit 9-12 declaration is the only plan presented to the School Board, discussed by them, adopted, or even mentioned in the entire document set.

We seem to be going in circles. Everything you claim that points to a 9-12 school being already decided on, seems to me like a stretch. You then support your interpretation by mentioning other points.

So the primary quotes, including "high schools that serve students in grades nine through 12 at a comprehensive campus" as the sole goal, don't mean what they say?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As for the reference to a college office, here is the quote

. Spaces such as the writing center, math center,
tech support, help desk, teen wellness and college and career center should be located in a designated and
accessible space.

This is general guidance for the architects about having space for centers like this, NOT a commitment to a college center in each HS building. This is a good example of how you are stretching items in this document.

That interpretation would require ignoring the other multiple provisions, and would also require disregarding the fact that the unanimous, repeated, explicit 9-12 declaration is the only plan presented to the School Board, discussed by them, adopted, or even mentioned in the entire document set.

We seem to be going in circles. Everything you claim that points to a 9-12 school being already decided on, seems to me like a stretch. You then support your interpretation by mentioning other points.

So the primary quotes, including "high schools that serve students in grades nine through 12 at a comprehensive campus" as the sole goal, don't mean what they say?

it says "desires to provide". That is not a specification, it is background. It does not mean that in the event of constraints - which IMO could include cost, availability of RE, and even issues with equitably zoning two distinct high schools, they might not give up on that desire.

Do you think that, in principle, apart from the above considerations they should desire to seperate 9-10 from 11-12? Do any other school systems around here do that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As for the reference to a college office, here is the quote

. Spaces such as the writing center, math center,
tech support, help desk, teen wellness and college and career center should be located in a designated and
accessible space.

This is general guidance for the architects about having space for centers like this, NOT a commitment to a college center in each HS building. This is a good example of how you are stretching items in this document.

That interpretation would require ignoring the other multiple provisions, and would also require disregarding the fact that the unanimous, repeated, explicit 9-12 declaration is the only plan presented to the School Board, discussed by them, adopted, or even mentioned in the entire document set.

We seem to be going in circles. Everything you claim that points to a 9-12 school being already decided on, seems to me like a stretch. You then support your interpretation by mentioning other points.

So the primary quotes, including "high schools that serve students in grades nine through 12 at a comprehensive campus" as the sole goal, don't mean what they say?

it says "desires to provide". That is not a specification, it is background. It does not mean that in the event of constraints - which IMO could include cost, availability of RE, and even issues with equitably zoning two distinct high schools, they might not give up on that desire.

Do you think that, in principle, apart from the above considerations they should desire to seperate 9-10 from 11-12? Do any other school systems around here do that?

1. That's one of several aligned quotes.
2. There is --NO-- other option even being considered.
3. Alexandria used to be 9/10 and 11/12.
4. Other divisions don't have the same number of high schoolers in concentrated geography that all want to mix-and-match programs and have access to the city. Why shouldn't they?