APS Duran School Performance Email - Is Long Branch a Failing School?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

I’m perfectly okay with that. One of my children is in a sheltered class, and it’s the only class they have an A in. And you know why? These classes go at their pace, not the school systems.

I don’t even care anymore if they don’t pass the SoLs. APS accreditation is their problem, not mine.

Is your kid young, PP? You do know that passing SOLs is required to graduate, right? So it does become your problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

PP suggested increased funding and resources for higher-need classrooms. Smaller class sizes, more tutoring, summer school, etc.

But the fact remains, slow forward progress is better than no progress at all. It certainly beats sitting in a classroom and having to move on to the next topic despite not understanding the material that’s already been presented.

Increased funding and resources from where?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

PP suggested increased funding and resources for higher-need classrooms. Smaller class sizes, more tutoring, summer school, etc.

But the fact remains, slow forward progress is better than no progress at all. It certainly beats sitting in a classroom and having to move on to the next topic despite not understanding the material that’s already been presented.

Increased funding and resources from where?

You’re very combative for someone who has no ideas of their own!


I know you think I’m MAGA, but you’re wrong. I’ve always supported fully funded schools. In addition to increased government funding, we can shift things around in our budget. Slash certain central office positions to start. I’d also — gasp — get rid of option programs if I could. Completely eliminate Montessori, Spanish immersion, HB, and whatever Campbell is. Keep Arlington Tech for the trade school route (because there is no shame in trade work!), but eliminate the fluff programs they’ve added (Vet, PT… these aren’t real programs unless you go to an actual college). Get rid of ATS but use their model at all of our elementary schools.

We would find a ton of money just by shifting things around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

I’m perfectly okay with that. One of my children is in a sheltered class, and it’s the only class they have an A in. And you know why? These classes go at their pace, not the school systems.

I don’t even care anymore if they don’t pass the SoLs. APS accreditation is their problem, not mine.

Is your kid young, PP? You do know that passing SOLs is required to graduate, right? So it does become your problem.

Do current sped students have to pass SOLs to graduate? Honest question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

I’m perfectly okay with that. One of my children is in a sheltered class, and it’s the only class they have an A in. And you know why? These classes go at their pace, not the school systems.

I don’t even care anymore if they don’t pass the SoLs. APS accreditation is their problem, not mine.

Is your kid young, PP? You do know that passing SOLs is required to graduate, right? So it does become your problem.

Do current sped students have to pass SOLs to graduate? Honest question.

It depends. First there are different types of diplomas. Also there are some credit accommodations but they have to be approved by the IEP team.

There’s a new law that the SOL will be the final and part of the course grade so IDK how that will work for sped kids. Maybe it won’t be good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

PP suggested increased funding and resources for higher-need classrooms. Smaller class sizes, more tutoring, summer school, etc.

But the fact remains, slow forward progress is better than no progress at all. It certainly beats sitting in a classroom and having to move on to the next topic despite not understanding the material that’s already been presented.

Increased funding and resources from where?

You’re very combative for someone who has no ideas of their own!


I know you think I’m MAGA, but you’re wrong. I’ve always supported fully funded schools. In addition to increased government funding, we can shift things around in our budget. Slash certain central office positions to start. I’d also — gasp — get rid of option programs if I could. Completely eliminate Montessori, Spanish immersion, HB, and whatever Campbell is. Keep Arlington Tech for the trade school route (because there is no shame in trade work!), but eliminate the fluff programs they’ve added (Vet, PT… these aren’t real programs unless you go to an actual college). Get rid of ATS but use their model at all of our elementary schools.

We would find a ton of money just by shifting things around.

Take a breath PP.
How is it combative to ask a question?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

PP suggested increased funding and resources for higher-need classrooms. Smaller class sizes, more tutoring, summer school, etc.

But the fact remains, slow forward progress is better than no progress at all. It certainly beats sitting in a classroom and having to move on to the next topic despite not understanding the material that’s already been presented.

Increased funding and resources from where?

You’re very combative for someone who has no ideas of their own!


I know you think I’m MAGA, but you’re wrong. I’ve always supported fully funded schools. In addition to increased government funding, we can shift things around in our budget. Slash certain central office positions to start. I’d also — gasp — get rid of option programs if I could. Completely eliminate Montessori, Spanish immersion, HB, and whatever Campbell is. Keep Arlington Tech for the trade school route (because there is no shame in trade work!), but eliminate the fluff programs they’ve added (Vet, PT… these aren’t real programs unless you go to an actual college). Get rid of ATS but use their model at all of our elementary schools.

We would find a ton of money just by shifting things around.

Take a breath PP.
How is it combative to ask a question?

That’s all you do. Criticize others and ask pointless questions. Do you actually have any ideas of your own?

If not, why not crawl back in that hole you came out of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

PP suggested increased funding and resources for higher-need classrooms. Smaller class sizes, more tutoring, summer school, etc.

But the fact remains, slow forward progress is better than no progress at all. It certainly beats sitting in a classroom and having to move on to the next topic despite not understanding the material that’s already been presented.

Increased funding and resources from where?

You’re very combative for someone who has no ideas of their own!


I know you think I’m MAGA, but you’re wrong. I’ve always supported fully funded schools. In addition to increased government funding, we can shift things around in our budget. Slash certain central office positions to start. I’d also — gasp — get rid of option programs if I could. Completely eliminate Montessori, Spanish immersion, HB, and whatever Campbell is. Keep Arlington Tech for the trade school route (because there is no shame in trade work!), but eliminate the fluff programs they’ve added (Vet, PT… these aren’t real programs unless you go to an actual college). Get rid of ATS but use their model at all of our elementary schools.

We would find a ton of money just by shifting things around.

Take a breath PP.
How is it combative to ask a question?

Outside of bussing eliminating option schools doesn’t save money. Dropping IB would likely save more money

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

PP suggested increased funding and resources for higher-need classrooms. Smaller class sizes, more tutoring, summer school, etc.

But the fact remains, slow forward progress is better than no progress at all. It certainly beats sitting in a classroom and having to move on to the next topic despite not understanding the material that’s already been presented.

Increased funding and resources from where?

You’re very combative for someone who has no ideas of their own!


I know you think I’m MAGA, but you’re wrong. I’ve always supported fully funded schools. In addition to increased government funding, we can shift things around in our budget. Slash certain central office positions to start. I’d also — gasp — get rid of option programs if I could. Completely eliminate Montessori, Spanish immersion, HB, and whatever Campbell is. Keep Arlington Tech for the trade school route (because there is no shame in trade work!), but eliminate the fluff programs they’ve added (Vet, PT… these aren’t real programs unless you go to an actual college). Get rid of ATS but use their model at all of our elementary schools.

We would find a ton of money just by shifting things around.

Take a breath PP.
How is it combative to ask a question?

Outside of bussing eliminating option schools doesn’t save money. Dropping IB would likely save more money

Drop them all, including IB. Families that want niche programs can go private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

PP suggested increased funding and resources for higher-need classrooms. Smaller class sizes, more tutoring, summer school, etc.

But the fact remains, slow forward progress is better than no progress at all. It certainly beats sitting in a classroom and having to move on to the next topic despite not understanding the material that’s already been presented.

Increased funding and resources from where?

You’re very combative for someone who has no ideas of their own!


I know you think I’m MAGA, but you’re wrong. I’ve always supported fully funded schools. In addition to increased government funding, we can shift things around in our budget. Slash certain central office positions to start. I’d also — gasp — get rid of option programs if I could. Completely eliminate Montessori, Spanish immersion, HB, and whatever Campbell is. Keep Arlington Tech for the trade school route (because there is no shame in trade work!), but eliminate the fluff programs they’ve added (Vet, PT… these aren’t real programs unless you go to an actual college). Get rid of ATS but use their model at all of our elementary schools.

We would find a ton of money just by shifting things around.

Take a breath PP.
How is it combative to ask a question?

That’s all you do. Criticize others and ask pointless questions. Do you actually have any ideas of your own?

If not, why not crawl back in that hole you came out of.

Who’s combative?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

PP suggested increased funding and resources for higher-need classrooms. Smaller class sizes, more tutoring, summer school, etc.

But the fact remains, slow forward progress is better than no progress at all. It certainly beats sitting in a classroom and having to move on to the next topic despite not understanding the material that’s already been presented.

Increased funding and resources from where?

You’re very combative for someone who has no ideas of their own!


I know you think I’m MAGA, but you’re wrong. I’ve always supported fully funded schools. In addition to increased government funding, we can shift things around in our budget. Slash certain central office positions to start. I’d also — gasp — get rid of option programs if I could. Completely eliminate Montessori, Spanish immersion, HB, and whatever Campbell is. Keep Arlington Tech for the trade school route (because there is no shame in trade work!), but eliminate the fluff programs they’ve added (Vet, PT… these aren’t real programs unless you go to an actual college). Get rid of ATS but use their model at all of our elementary schools.

We would find a ton of money just by shifting things around.

Take a breath PP.
How is it combative to ask a question?

Outside of bussing eliminating option schools doesn’t save money. Dropping IB would likely save more money

Options are actually more efficient because every seat in every classroom is used. Unlike neighborhood schools where capacity utilization is much harder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

PP suggested increased funding and resources for higher-need classrooms. Smaller class sizes, more tutoring, summer school, etc.

But the fact remains, slow forward progress is better than no progress at all. It certainly beats sitting in a classroom and having to move on to the next topic despite not understanding the material that’s already been presented.

Increased funding and resources from where?

You’re very combative for someone who has no ideas of their own!


I know you think I’m MAGA, but you’re wrong. I’ve always supported fully funded schools. In addition to increased government funding, we can shift things around in our budget. Slash certain central office positions to start. I’d also — gasp — get rid of option programs if I could. Completely eliminate Montessori, Spanish immersion, HB, and whatever Campbell is. Keep Arlington Tech for the trade school route (because there is no shame in trade work!), but eliminate the fluff programs they’ve added (Vet, PT… these aren’t real programs unless you go to an actual college). Get rid of ATS but use their model at all of our elementary schools.

We would find a ton of money just by shifting things around.

Take a breath PP.
How is it combative to ask a question?

Outside of bussing eliminating option schools doesn’t save money. Dropping IB would likely save more money

Options are actually more efficient because every seat in every classroom is used. Unlike neighborhood schools where capacity utilization is much harder.

No

Especially for elementary, every school should follow the ATS model. It’s the only one that produces good results regardless of income level.

And doing it everywhere minimizes bussing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

PP suggested increased funding and resources for higher-need classrooms. Smaller class sizes, more tutoring, summer school, etc.

But the fact remains, slow forward progress is better than no progress at all. It certainly beats sitting in a classroom and having to move on to the next topic despite not understanding the material that’s already been presented.

Increased funding and resources from where?

You’re very combative for someone who has no ideas of their own!


I know you think I’m MAGA, but you’re wrong. I’ve always supported fully funded schools. In addition to increased government funding, we can shift things around in our budget. Slash certain central office positions to start. I’d also — gasp — get rid of option programs if I could. Completely eliminate Montessori, Spanish immersion, HB, and whatever Campbell is. Keep Arlington Tech for the trade school route (because there is no shame in trade work!), but eliminate the fluff programs they’ve added (Vet, PT… these aren’t real programs unless you go to an actual college). Get rid of ATS but use their model at all of our elementary schools.

We would find a ton of money just by shifting things around.

Take a breath PP.
How is it combative to ask a question?

Outside of bussing eliminating option schools doesn’t save money. Dropping IB would likely save more money

Options are actually more efficient because every seat in every classroom is used. Unlike neighborhood schools where capacity utilization is much harder.

No

Especially for elementary, every school should follow the ATS model. It’s the only one that produces good results regardless of income level.

And doing it everywhere minimizes bussing.

You missed the point or maybe don’t understand it. We could achieve a lot in facilities efficiency with more options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

PP suggested increased funding and resources for higher-need classrooms. Smaller class sizes, more tutoring, summer school, etc.

But the fact remains, slow forward progress is better than no progress at all. It certainly beats sitting in a classroom and having to move on to the next topic despite not understanding the material that’s already been presented.

Increased funding and resources from where?

You’re very combative for someone who has no ideas of their own!


I know you think I’m MAGA, but you’re wrong. I’ve always supported fully funded schools. In addition to increased government funding, we can shift things around in our budget. Slash certain central office positions to start. I’d also — gasp — get rid of option programs if I could. Completely eliminate Montessori, Spanish immersion, HB, and whatever Campbell is. Keep Arlington Tech for the trade school route (because there is no shame in trade work!), but eliminate the fluff programs they’ve added (Vet, PT… these aren’t real programs unless you go to an actual college). Get rid of ATS but use their model at all of our elementary schools.

We would find a ton of money just by shifting things around.

Take a breath PP.
How is it combative to ask a question?

Outside of bussing eliminating option schools doesn’t save money. Dropping IB would likely save more money

Options are actually more efficient because every seat in every classroom is used. Unlike neighborhood schools where capacity utilization is much harder.

No

Especially for elementary, every school should follow the ATS model. It’s the only one that produces good results regardless of income level.

And doing it everywhere minimizes bussing.

They can’t, because parental participation is necessary for the ATS model and not all parents want that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then what happens when your student is put in special ed setting but starts to fall behind due to slower pacing. Are you okay with that? When is that time going to be made up?

PP suggested increased funding and resources for higher-need classrooms. Smaller class sizes, more tutoring, summer school, etc.

But the fact remains, slow forward progress is better than no progress at all. It certainly beats sitting in a classroom and having to move on to the next topic despite not understanding the material that’s already been presented.

Increased funding and resources from where?

You’re very combative for someone who has no ideas of their own!


I know you think I’m MAGA, but you’re wrong. I’ve always supported fully funded schools. In addition to increased government funding, we can shift things around in our budget. Slash certain central office positions to start. I’d also — gasp — get rid of option programs if I could. Completely eliminate Montessori, Spanish immersion, HB, and whatever Campbell is. Keep Arlington Tech for the trade school route (because there is no shame in trade work!), but eliminate the fluff programs they’ve added (Vet, PT… these aren’t real programs unless you go to an actual college). Get rid of ATS but use their model at all of our elementary schools.

We would find a ton of money just by shifting things around.

Take a breath PP.
How is it combative to ask a question?

Outside of bussing eliminating option schools doesn’t save money. Dropping IB would likely save more money

Options are actually more efficient because every seat in every classroom is used. Unlike neighborhood schools where capacity utilization is much harder.

Would rather close Nottingham and redraw boundaries elsewhere if needed. No need to keep options open.