8/27 APS Work Session—Elementary Boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school is the easy money for where they will move Spanish immersion? Carlin Springs? ATS? Barcroft?

I don’t k ow, but Goldstein was pretty clear he wants an option program in NW Arlington, but centrally located NW Arlington. $5 says he’s privately pushing (again) for it to be Nottingham.

Nottingham is not centrally located within NW. For a countywide option program, it is too far north NW. And Reid never pushed for an option program at Nottingham. He's the only one with the guts to suggest that the new school in Westover perhaps would better serve the system as an option school rather than a neighborhood school. THAT's centrally located IN northwest, not WITHin northwest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school is the easy money for where they will move Spanish immersion? Carlin Springs? ATS? Barcroft?

I don’t k ow, but Goldstein was pretty clear he wants an option program in NW Arlington, but centrally located NW Arlington. $5 says he’s privately pushing (again) for it to be Nottingham.

Nottingham is not centrally located within NW. For a countywide option program, it is too far north NW. And Reid never pushed for an option program at Nottingham. He's the only one with the guts to suggest that the new school in Westover perhaps would better serve the system as an option school rather than a neighborhood school. THAT's centrally located IN northwest, not WITHin northwest.

SP - I would also add that ATS is centrally located and in NW -- it also has been identified as a good location for an option program and Reid (as well as others) have peristently been questioning the wisdom and value of continuing with ATS as a choice program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school is the easy money for where they will move Spanish immersion? Carlin Springs? ATS? Barcroft?

I don’t k ow, but Goldstein was pretty clear he wants an option program in NW Arlington, but centrally located NW Arlington. $5 says he’s privately pushing (again) for it to be Nottingham.

An option program in NW makes little sense unless you want to make it inaccessible to South Arlington residents.

If there are too many seats in NW, the new school — Reed — should be an option school. Then you don’t have to disrupt everyone around it in re-drawing boundaries. It is certainly a better location for an option school than Nottingham.

Not sure where you’ve been the last few years, but Reed has been promised as a neighborhood school.

And the Henry parents will be quick to tell you that promises can be broken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school is the easy money for where they will move Spanish immersion? Carlin Springs? ATS? Barcroft?

I don’t k ow, but Goldstein was pretty clear he wants an option program in NW Arlington, but centrally located NW Arlington. $5 says he’s privately pushing (again) for it to be Nottingham.

An option program in NW makes little sense unless you want to make it inaccessible to South Arlington residents.

If there are too many seats in NW, the new school — Reed — should be an option school. Then you don’t have to disrupt everyone around it in re-drawing boundaries. It is certainly a better location for an option school than Nottingham.

I agree, but wash “they promised” reed wouldn’t be an option School. So much better not to move everyone around.

+1

APS and the School Board have promised many things over the last two years that never happened. Not sure why Reed-- which is the obvious, least disruptive location for an option school-- should be untouchable.

There was a formal board resolution that Reed would be neighborhood. They can’t just change course on a dime, they’d have to pass another formal board resolution with community participation, etc.

Where is the rule that community participation has to be part of a Board resolution? And what community? Who's to say that THE greater community would not support a new resolution?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school is the easy money for where they will move Spanish immersion? Carlin Springs? ATS? Barcroft?

I don’t k ow, but Goldstein was pretty clear he wants an option program in NW Arlington, but centrally located NW Arlington. $5 says he’s privately pushing (again) for it to be Nottingham.

Nottingham is not centrally located within NW. For a countywide option program, it is too far north NW. And Reid never pushed for an option program at Nottingham. He's the only one with the guts to suggest that the new school in Westover perhaps would better serve the system as an option school rather than a neighborhood school. THAT's centrally located IN northwest, not WITHin northwest.

The contrast they were setting up on “centrally located” was with Jamestown, and they specifically mentioned looking at areas where schools are more closely clustered. They are absolutely looking to move something to Tuckahoe/Nottingham/Discovery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school is the easy money for where they will move Spanish immersion? Carlin Springs? ATS? Barcroft?

I don’t k ow, but Goldstein was pretty clear he wants an option program in NW Arlington, but centrally located NW Arlington. $5 says he’s privately pushing (again) for it to be Nottingham.

An option program in NW makes little sense unless you want to make it inaccessible to South Arlington residents.

If there are too many seats in NW, the new school — Reed — should be an option school. Then you don’t have to disrupt everyone around it in re-drawing boundaries. It is certainly a better location for an option school than Nottingham.

I agree, but wash “they promised” reed wouldn’t be an option School. So much better not to move everyone around.

+1

APS and the School Board have promised many things over the last two years that never happened. Not sure why Reed-- which is the obvious, least disruptive location for an option school-- should be untouchable.

There was a formal board resolution that Reed would be neighborhood. They can’t just change course on a dime, they’d have to pass another formal board resolution with community participation, etc.

Where is the rule that community participation has to be part of a Board resolution? And what community? Who's to say that THE greater community would not support a new resolution?

Yeah, where was the "formal Board" resolution when APS announced that it was moving immersion to an already-established neighborhood school? That all went down at last year's August work-session meeting and APS, with the Board's tacit approval, said moving programs to different buildings did NOT require School Board action. So fine, Reed can open as a "neighborhood" school and then APS can move whatever it wants in there.

FYI, I don't really believe that APS has that kind of authority, i.e., as we've seen, APS has had to walk back its silly "swap" decision but I don't recall at any point the School Board or APS stating that APS was just wrong when it announced that Murphy had the unilateral power to move schools. So there shouldn't be any reason to assume Reed is safe. APS and the School Board will try to get away with whatever they can, however they can.

[Anonymous]

I’m already hearing rumors about members of the SB saying Reed might have to be an option school. My preference is they do away with ATS and out immersion there.

Or what about McKinley? Move those kids to Reed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school is the easy money for where they will move Spanish immersion? Carlin Springs? ATS? Barcroft?

I don’t k ow, but Goldstein was pretty clear he wants an option program in NW Arlington, but centrally located NW Arlington. $5 says he’s privately pushing (again) for it to be Nottingham.

An option program in NW makes little sense unless you want to make it inaccessible to South Arlington residents.

If there are too many seats in NW, the new school — Reed — should be an option school. Then you don’t have to disrupt everyone around it in re-drawing boundaries. It is certainly a better location for an option school than Nottingham.

I agree, but wash “they promised” reed wouldn’t be an option School. So much better not to move everyone around.

+1

APS and the School Board have promised many things over the last two years that never happened. Not sure why Reed-- which is the obvious, least disruptive location for an option school-- should be untouchable.

There was a formal board resolution that Reed would be neighborhood. They can’t just change course on a dime, they’d have to pass another formal board resolution with community participation, etc.

Where is the rule that community participation has to be part of a Board resolution? And what community? Who's to say that THE greater community would not support a new resolution?

DP, and I don’t think it’s true that there has to be a community process. But they would have to vote and have public comment.

I think the only reason they’re talking about an option program anywhere in the NW is that they will have built too many seats too close together. They can’t fill Reed without emptying another school and there just isn’t the density of housing, and there won’t be in the near future despite talk of development along Lee Hwy or at EFC (yeah right), that can support so many neighborhood seats. And once they spend all this money to build another school, they won’t have it to build one anywhere else for quite a few more years, but the kids keep coming. So, I’m not sure what other choice they have really, except very odd boundaries that would make a lot of kids bus riders. To me, an option school, at the least walkable site, would be better planning. Putting the program into Reed would be least disruptive to current boundaries, but it would also be using up a very large number of permanent neighborhood seats that are highly walkable. I don’t think options schools should be getting the newest, largest buildings in areas where there could be a lot of walkers. I don’t think that should be the only consideration, like maybe they don’t have to move option schools for that reason alone, but if they’re starting from scratch, they need to make a sound decision. Also, it should not be Spanish immersion given the demographics.

[Anonymous]

So no swap with ASFS, but Key as immersion is done, it sounds like.

[Anonymous]

I'm not ready to have to start caring about APS garbage again. Can it please go back to summer?

[Anonymous]

If they are having trouble filling Key now, why would it make sense to move it to the new Reed site that will be able to accommodate > 700 kids? Seems like the existing ATS makes the most sense for an immersion school and may make it easier to fill with the 50% native Spanish speakers. Just kill the ATS option school. If they are doing something particularly well at ATS, they should roll out that approach to all the neighborhood schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not ready to have to start caring about APS garbage again. Can it please go back to summer?

Then why are you posting/reading here?

[Anonymous]

I definitely got the sense watching the session that ASFS was staying a neighborhood school but they were looking where to put Key immersion.

But what was all the talk about the upper and lower elementary schools? Where are there two buildings close enough together where that could practically work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not ready to have to start caring about APS garbage again. Can it please go back to summer?

Then why are you posting/reading here?

I'm just waiting for all the crazy ASF/Key to start fighting about boundaries now that the swap was called off-- isn't this the time where everyone starts complaining about the longest bus ride ever and the Cherrosslyn war (or whatever it was called)? As a neighborhood school, ASF is going to have to have a walk zone and let the actual neighborhood kids attend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school is the easy money for where they will move Spanish immersion? Carlin Springs? ATS? Barcroft?

I don’t k ow, but Goldstein was pretty clear he wants an option program in NW Arlington, but centrally located NW Arlington. $5 says he’s privately pushing (again) for it to be Nottingham.

An option program in NW makes little sense unless you want to make it inaccessible to South Arlington residents.

If there are too many seats in NW, the new school — Reed — should be an option school. Then you don’t have to disrupt everyone around it in re-drawing boundaries. It is certainly a better location for an option school than Nottingham.

I agree, but wash “they promised” reed wouldn’t be an option School. So much better not to move everyone around.

+1

APS and the School Board have promised many things over the last two years that never happened. Not sure why Reed-- which is the obvious, least disruptive location for an option school-- should be untouchable.

There was a formal board resolution that Reed would be neighborhood. They can’t just change course on a dime, they’d have to pass another formal board resolution with community participation, etc.

Where is the rule that community participation has to be part of a Board resolution? And what community? Who's to say that THE greater community would not support a new resolution?

DP, and I don’t think it’s true that there has to be a community process. But they would have to vote and have public comment.

I think the only reason they’re talking about an option program anywhere in the NW is that they will have built too many seats too close together. They can’t fill Reed without emptying another school and there just isn’t the density of housing, and there won’t be in the near future despite talk of development along Lee Hwy or at EFC (yeah right), that can support so many neighborhood seats. And once they spend all this money to build another school, they won’t have it to build one anywhere else for quite a few more years, but the kids keep coming. So, I’m not sure what other choice they have really, except very odd boundaries that would make a lot of kids bus riders. To me, an option school, at the least walkable site, would be better planning. Putting the program into Reed would be least disruptive to current boundaries, but it would also be using up a very large number of permanent neighborhood seats that are highly walkable. I don’t think options schools should be getting the newest, largest buildings in areas where there could be a lot of walkers. I don’t think that should be the only consideration, like maybe they don’t have to move option schools for that reason alone, but if they’re starting from scratch, they need to make a sound decision. Also, it should not be Spanish immersion given the demographics.

One could also argue that they can't fill McKinley or Tuckahoe or Nottingham after Reed opens if they make the boundaries sensible to density and to reduce bus traffic. Those pushing for Reed as option just don't want to move their current location. I don't have a dog in this fight, but I don't want to see another shiny new building go to an option school while others around it still sit in trailers.