APS: Think the "no move" campaign is going to work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
...I can’t believe how nasty they have been. It’s quite disappointing to see adults treat each other like that over something relatively benign (in the end all kids will go to a great APS school).

Pot, meet kettle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let the record reflect that Key went down swinging. Fought the good fight.

But was that really wise? They could have accepted the swap and gotten a comparably sized building that was close enough that most of their current Spanish speakers would have stayed. Now they are spreading all these rumors trying to rile up asfs parents, saying that aps won’t say if the administration is going to move to key with the students. I can answer that one for you— no way will mb touch keys building with a ten ft pole, she will retire first. But why spread the rumor? So bizarre!

Total rumors. Monique O’Grady went to ASFS last week and described the process by which the new Key principal will be hired and how s/he will interview and put together their administration and staff at the new neighborhood school at Key. Anyone— current employees and non-employees — will have to apply for the positions available and they will (or will not) be hired by the new principal, who should be selected by July 1. As far as excess teachers at a school (like ASFS, which will have too many teachers once the boundaries are adjusted), the teachers hired most recently will be displaced first but APS will try to relocate them. MB announced she is not leaving ASFS. The poster on AEM who is trying to rile everyone up is just sour grapes.

Definitely sour grapes. She was probably cranky after someone pointed out that her maps were NOT better than the proposal 1 map. Her maps actually JUSTIFY the move.

And omg - the racism and tone-policing accusations are getting ridiculous and outright hostile. Exactly what Maura was trying to describe. Too bad her comments fell on deaf ears.

My favorite comment was the poster who wanted to be grandfathered in at the Key building. So you clearly don’t live near Key (since you can’t stay as a neighborhood student) but went to Key (presumably for immersion), but don’t want to move with immersion . . . or go back to your neighborhood school? So you really just went to Key for the location? As in, it must be close to your job or commute. That’s the real motivation behind a lot of the Key no-move folks, including the one who is trying to rile up ASFS on AEM. Even though ATS is equal distant or closer than Key, it’s in the wrong direction from their commute for Extended Day.

I think they meant staying with their cohort in redrawing they catchment zones for Claremont and FKA Key. I hope. I agree the whole fight was actually about commute - a rich people temper tantrum with a thin veneer of social justice.

You are correct, pp misunderstood that poster. They were talking about how the new boundaries would affect whether families were assigned to Key or Claremont, and whether families might have to change schools if their zoned neighborhood school changed, or if they reassign which neighborhood elementary schools feed to Key and which to Claremont (since the ATS site sits in the Claremont zone).

They will certainly grandfather. Besides, Key's going to "lose" so many of their current students, there should be plenty of room at ATS for anyone who wants to stay!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
...I can’t believe how nasty they have been. It’s quite disappointing to see adults treat each other like that over something relatively benign (in the end all kids will go to a great APS school).

Pot, meet kettle.

NOPE. The only poorly-behaved people here are the verbally abusive Key and McKinley crowd. I think all of the ATS parents have been civil.

[Anonymous]

They will certainly grandfather. Besides, Key's going to "lose" so many of their current students, there should be plenty of room at ATS for anyone who wants to stay!

I actually don't think there will be grandfathering. The scope of the changes are going to be so high that allowing grandfathering will really gum up the works and make planning extremely difficult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh - and I like how they tried to shut down the dad who supported the move because his kids were too young.

I can’t believe how nasty they have been. It’s quite disappointing to see adults treat each other like that over something relatively benign (in the end all kids will go to a great APS school).

McKrazy even made an appearance to give him a beat down. Apparently she’s sick of seeing him on NextDoor

I was scanning through the comments quickly and missed that it was her who made that nasty comment.

He stuck with it and has repeatedly responded respectfully and with actual facts/data. Good for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

They will certainly grandfather. Besides, Key's going to "lose" so many of their current students, there should be plenty of room at ATS for anyone who wants to stay!

I actually don't think there will be grandfathering. The scope of the changes are going to be so high that allowing grandfathering will really gum up the works and make planning extremely difficult.

I don’t believe that they would force kids to change programs and leave all their friends behind after the outcry caused by the recent move proposal, or even before it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh - and I like how they tried to shut down the dad who supported the move because his kids were too young.

I can’t believe how nasty they have been. It’s quite disappointing to see adults treat each other like that over something relatively benign (in the end all kids will go to a great APS school).

McKrazy even made an appearance to give him a beat down. Apparently she’s sick of seeing him on NextDoor

I was scanning through the comments quickly and missed that it was her who made that nasty comment.

He stuck with it and has repeatedly responded respectfully and with actual facts/data. Good for him.

I found myself thinking “this guy should run for school board.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh - and I like how they tried to shut down the dad who supported the move because his kids were too young.

I can’t believe how nasty they have been. It’s quite disappointing to see adults treat each other like that over something relatively benign (in the end all kids will go to a great APS school).

McKrazy even made an appearance to give him a beat down. Apparently she’s sick of seeing him on NextDoor

I was scanning through the comments quickly and missed that it was her who made that nasty comment.

He stuck with it and has repeatedly responded respectfully and with actual facts/data. Good for him.

I found myself thinking “this guy should run for school board.”

Me too! If he and Maura would run, we'd be all set.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They will certainly grandfather. Besides, Key's going to "lose" so many of their current students, there should be plenty of room at ATS for anyone who wants to stay!

I actually don't think there will be grandfathering. The scope of the changes are going to be so high that allowing grandfathering will really gum up the works and make planning extremely difficult.

I don’t believe that they would force kids to change programs and leave all their friends behind after the outcry caused by the recent move proposal, or even before it.

Well, a kid who's currently attending Key would either need to stay with the program and move to ATS, or return to their neighborhood school. If they were from another part of Arlington and stayed at Key after it was a neighborhood, then THEY would be the ones leaving their friends behind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They will certainly grandfather. Besides, Key's going to "lose" so many of their current students, there should be plenty of room at ATS for anyone who wants to stay!

I actually don't think there will be grandfathering. The scope of the changes are going to be so high that allowing grandfathering will really gum up the works and make planning extremely difficult.

I don’t believe that they would force kids to change programs and leave all their friends behind after the outcry caused by the recent move proposal, or even before it.

Well, a kid who's currently attending Key would either need to stay with the program and move to ATS, or return to their neighborhood school. If they were from another part of Arlington and stayed at Key after it was a neighborhood, then THEY would be the ones leaving their friends behind.

I think the original question was about immersion assignments -- can they stay at Key or move to Claremont if the immersion boundaries change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They will certainly grandfather. Besides, Key's going to "lose" so many of their current students, there should be plenty of room at ATS for anyone who wants to stay!

I actually don't think there will be grandfathering. The scope of the changes are going to be so high that allowing grandfathering will really gum up the works and make planning extremely difficult.

I don’t believe that they would force kids to change programs and leave all their friends behind after the outcry caused by the recent move proposal, or even before it.

Well, a kid who's currently attending Key would either need to stay with the program and move to ATS, or return to their neighborhood school. If they were from another part of Arlington and stayed at Key after it was a neighborhood, then THEY would be the ones leaving their friends behind.

FFS, please pay attention before shooting your mouth off. No one is talking about a kid in Key immersion who doesn’t live in the eventual Key neighborhood zone staying at the Key building after the program moves to the ATS building. They are talking about their kids being allowed to stay in the Key program at the ATS site even if their neighborhood school ends up Claremont-zoned after the boundaries (and possibly immersion zones) are redrawn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They will certainly grandfather. Besides, Key's going to "lose" so many of their current students, there should be plenty of room at ATS for anyone who wants to stay!

I actually don't think there will be grandfathering. The scope of the changes are going to be so high that allowing grandfathering will really gum up the works and make planning extremely difficult.

I don’t believe that they would force kids to change programs and leave all their friends behind after the outcry caused by the recent move proposal, or even before it.

Well, a kid who's currently attending Key would either need to stay with the program and move to ATS, or return to their neighborhood school. If they were from another part of Arlington and stayed at Key after it was a neighborhood, then THEY would be the ones leaving their friends behind.

You are talking about two different things. The 'grandfathering' being referred to here is whether kids whose immersion choice is currently Key, but with the realignment the immersion choice becomes Claremont, will have to move to Claremont or will stick with Key- and vice versa. Right now kids who live next door to ATS, and choose immersion are going to Claremont. There are also more kids overall and many many more Spanish speakers who are zoned to Claremont for immersion than are zoned to Key. APS has been talking about doing a realignment of the immersion feeder schools for at least 4 years, but keeps on putting it off b/c they also knew that a program move might be necessary.
When Discovery opened it became a Key feeder school, but some kids who had previously had Nottingham as their neighborhood school (which is a Claremont feeder school) were already at Claremont. APS agreed to grandfather those kids to Claremont, but not their younger siblings. It remains to be seen what will happen here, and it may partly depend on how large scale a realignment it is.

[Anonymous]

So how many of these vocal anti-move parents will stick around and actually support these communities that they "care" so much about? Or will they do what they can to sabotage the move out of spite - and hurt the kids and at-risk families and kids in the process?

I saw a few posts on AEM implying that the responsibility for successful moves falls to the parents who supported the moves. Uh....no. That's not how this works.

It will be very telling how they handle the moves - it will reveal their true motivations for opposing the moves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So how many of these vocal anti-move parents will stick around and actually support these communities that they "care" so much about? Or will they do what they can to sabotage the move out of spite - and hurt the kids and at-risk families and kids in the process?

I saw a few posts on AEM implying that the responsibility for successful moves falls to the parents who supported the moves. Uh....no. That's not how this works.

It will be very telling how they handle the moves - it will reveal their true motivations for opposing the moves.

True. A lot of the "concerns" are things that can be accommodated.

Too far to walk from the bus on Wilson to McKinley? Work with ART to add a bus route that stops right in front of the school.

Parents who live in Courthouse can't pick up kids from extended day? Advocate to bus kids from ATS building back to Key building for extended day.

ATS building is too small to fit Key? Advocate for expansion.

Parents without transportation can't get to PTA meetings or school events? PTA at Key is well resourced and could set aside funds for Uber or set up rides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how many of these vocal anti-move parents will stick around and actually support these communities that they "care" so much about? Or will they do what they can to sabotage the move out of spite - and hurt the kids and at-risk families and kids in the process?

I saw a few posts on AEM implying that the responsibility for successful moves falls to the parents who supported the moves. Uh....no. That's not how this works.

It will be very telling how they handle the moves - it will reveal their true motivations for opposing the moves.

True. A lot of the "concerns" are things that can be accommodated.

Too far to walk from the bus on Wilson to McKinley? Work with ART to add a bus route that stops right in front of the school.

Parents who live in Courthouse can't pick up kids from extended day? Advocate to bus kids from ATS building back to Key building for extended day.

ATS building is too small to fit Key? Advocate for expansion.

Parents without transportation can't get to PTA meetings or school events? PTA at Key is well resourced and could set aside funds for Uber or set up rides.

Yes, it will be interesting to see if these parents can act as constructive members of the community.