APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually I live in S Arlington but ATS, Key, ASF are more accessible than Carlin Springs... mind blown

That's why the second immersion school would stay over at ASFS and they'd maintain the east/west divide. Immersion at Carlin Springs wouldn't be one of your options. With two immersion schools, it makes zero sense to put one at ATS because neither school needs to be centrally located. ATS needs to house a program that's open to the entire county, so it's either going to stay ATS or they'll move the expeditionary program there.

Why on earth would they move EL there? So they can do expeditions to McDonald's?

That’s essentially my point, there’s no good argument for why a different option program would be a better fit for the ATS site than ATS, so it’s not going to move.

But the option program at ATS can technically go anywhere. They need a neighborhood scjool closer to Ballston as that area is just going to continue to grow.

The ATS site isn’t going to be a neighborhood school. It has almost walk zone, the estimate was that they’d still need something like 10 or 13 buses. And it has three other elementary schools within a one-mile radius, making it difficult to draw boundaries that don’t pull another school’s walk zone into ATS’s bus zone.

I would strongly recommended at least looking at the staff presentation to the board on this, even if you don’t read the analysis or watch henwork session. All of this as covered in detail. ATS was only site identified by the staff as one that truly needs to be an option site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So when is this going to be decided???

https://www.apsva.us/elementary-school-boundary-change/

Scroll down the page to the schedule. We are still several steps from a final decision, which is scheduled for June 21.

[Anonymous]

Doesn’t Campbell usually not have a waiting list? All of the schools the staff identified as their top five have building capacities (nevermind relocatables) at least a hundred seats larger than the current Campbell program so I don’t see how they can relocate it to another site without wasting seats that we really need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually I live in S Arlington but ATS, Key, ASF are more accessible than Carlin Springs... mind blown

That's why the second immersion school would stay over at ASFS and they'd maintain the east/west divide. Immersion at Carlin Springs wouldn't be one of your options. With two immersion schools, it makes zero sense to put one at ATS because neither school needs to be centrally located. ATS needs to house a program that's open to the entire county, so it's either going to stay ATS or they'll move the expeditionary program there.

Why on earth would they move EL there? So they can do expeditions to McDonald's?

That’s essentially my point, there’s no good argument for why a different option program would be a better fit for the ATS site than ATS, so it’s not going to move.

But the option program at ATS can technically go anywhere. They need a neighborhood scjool closer to Ballston as that area is just going to continue to grow.

The ATS site isn’t going to be a neighborhood school. It has almost walk zone, the estimate was that they’d still need something like 10 or 13 buses. And it has three other elementary schools within a one-mile radius, making it difficult to draw boundaries that don’t pull another school’s walk zone into ATS’s bus zone.

I would strongly recommended at least looking at the staff presentation to the board on this, even if you don’t read the analysis or watch henwork session. All of this as covered in detail. ATS was only site identified by the staff as one that truly needs to be an option site.

You do realize they could put another option program there? Just because it is an option site doesn’t mean it stays Arlington Traditional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually I live in S Arlington but ATS, Key, ASF are more accessible than Carlin Springs... mind blown

That's why the second immersion school would stay over at ASFS and they'd maintain the east/west divide. Immersion at Carlin Springs wouldn't be one of your options. With two immersion schools, it makes zero sense to put one at ATS because neither school needs to be centrally located. ATS needs to house a program that's open to the entire county, so it's either going to stay ATS or they'll move the expeditionary program there.

Why on earth would they move EL there? So they can do expeditions to McDonald's?

That’s essentially my point, there’s no good argument for why a different option program would be a better fit for the ATS site than ATS, so it’s not going to move.

But the option program at ATS can technically go anywhere. They need a neighborhood scjool closer to Ballston as that area is just going to continue to grow.

The ATS site isn’t going to be a neighborhood school. It has almost walk zone, the estimate was that they’d still need something like 10 or 13 buses. And it has three other elementary schools within a one-mile radius, making it difficult to draw boundaries that don’t pull another school’s walk zone into ATS’s bus zone.

I would strongly recommended at least looking at the staff presentation to the board on this, even if you don’t read the analysis or watch henwork session. All of this as covered in detail. ATS was only site identified by the staff as one that truly needs to be an option site.

You do realize they could put another option program there? Just because it is an option site doesn’t mean it stays Arlington Traditional.

Which one has a sufficiently compelling argument for placement at that site to override the costs of moving the ATS program? Silly to waste a central location on an immersion school when those will still be divided geographically. What does the ATS site give Expeditionary?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually I live in S Arlington but ATS, Key, ASF are more accessible than Carlin Springs... mind blown

That's why the second immersion school would stay over at ASFS and they'd maintain the east/west divide. Immersion at Carlin Springs wouldn't be one of your options. With two immersion schools, it makes zero sense to put one at ATS because neither school needs to be centrally located. ATS needs to house a program that's open to the entire county, so it's either going to stay ATS or they'll move the expeditionary program there.

Why on earth would they move EL there? So they can do expeditions to McDonald's?

That’s essentially my point, there’s no good argument for why a different option program would be a better fit for the ATS site than ATS, so it’s not going to move.

But the option program at ATS can technically go anywhere. They need a neighborhood scjool closer to Ballston as that area is just going to continue to grow.

The ATS site isn’t going to be a neighborhood school. It has almost walk zone, the estimate was that they’d still need something like 10 or 13 buses. And it has three other elementary schools within a one-mile radius, making it difficult to draw boundaries that don’t pull another school’s walk zone into ATS’s bus zone.

I would strongly recommended at least looking at the staff presentation to the board on this, even if you don’t read the analysis or watch henwork session. All of this as covered in detail. ATS was only site identified by the staff as one that truly needs to be an option site.

You do realize they could put another option program there? Just because it is an option site doesn’t mean it stays Arlington Traditional.

Which one has a sufficiently compelling argument for placement at that site to override the costs of moving the ATS program? Silly to waste a central location on an immersion school when those will still be divided geographically. What does the ATS site give Expeditionary?

The assumption is that people should go to option schools for the program, not the location. Moving immersion to ATS would allow both ASF and Key to take neighborhood kids and fix some of the weird lines in the middle of the county. If you can draw a border around ASF without having to take the bulk of Key, you can fix the Ashlawn boundary and pull kids from Taylor, Western Key zone, and Long Branch. It’s about optimizing neighborhood schools since they are the default educational experience and fitting option schools where you can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually I live in S Arlington but ATS, Key, ASF are more accessible than Carlin Springs... mind blown

That's why the second immersion school would stay over at ASFS and they'd maintain the east/west divide. Immersion at Carlin Springs wouldn't be one of your options. With two immersion schools, it makes zero sense to put one at ATS because neither school needs to be centrally located. ATS needs to house a program that's open to the entire county, so it's either going to stay ATS or they'll move the expeditionary program there.

Why on earth would they move EL there? So they can do expeditions to McDonald's?

That’s essentially my point, there’s no good argument for why a different option program would be a better fit for the ATS site than ATS, so it’s not going to move.

But the option program at ATS can technically go anywhere. They need a neighborhood scjool closer to Ballston as that area is just going to continue to grow.

The ATS site isn’t going to be a neighborhood school. It has almost walk zone, the estimate was that they’d still need something like 10 or 13 buses. And it has three other elementary schools within a one-mile radius, making it difficult to draw boundaries that don’t pull another school’s walk zone into ATS’s bus zone.

I would strongly recommended at least looking at the staff presentation to the board on this, even if you don’t read the analysis or watch henwork session. All of this as covered in detail. ATS was only site identified by the staff as one that truly needs to be an option site.

You do realize they could put another option program there? Just because it is an option site doesn’t mean it stays Arlington Traditional.

Which one has a sufficiently compelling argument for placement at that site to override the costs of moving the ATS program? Silly to waste a central location on an immersion school when those will still be divided geographically. What does the ATS site give Expeditionary?

The assumption is that people should go to option schools for the program, not the location. Moving immersion to ATS would allow both ASF and Key to take neighborhood kids and fix some of the weird lines in the middle of the county. If you can draw a border around ASF without having to take the bulk of Key, you can fix the Ashlawn boundary and pull kids from Taylor, Western Key zone, and Long Branch. It’s about optimizing neighborhood schools since they are the default educational experience and fitting option schools where you can.

But they have to consider the transit implications. The further buses have to go from their pick-up zone to the school, the less time they can spend actually picking up kids without making bus routes inappropriately long. If you move a program that serves the entire county to a remote part of it, you end up having to run more buses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually I live in S Arlington but ATS, Key, ASF are more accessible than Carlin Springs... mind blown

That's why the second immersion school would stay over at ASFS and they'd maintain the east/west divide. Immersion at Carlin Springs wouldn't be one of your options. With two immersion schools, it makes zero sense to put one at ATS because neither school needs to be centrally located. ATS needs to house a program that's open to the entire county, so it's either going to stay ATS or they'll move the expeditionary program there.

Why on earth would they move EL there? So they can do expeditions to McDonald's?

That’s essentially my point, there’s no good argument for why a different option program would be a better fit for the ATS site than ATS, so it’s not going to move.

But the option program at ATS can technically go anywhere. They need a neighborhood scjool closer to Ballston as that area is just going to continue to grow.

The ATS site isn’t going to be a neighborhood school. It has almost walk zone, the estimate was that they’d still need something like 10 or 13 buses. And it has three other elementary schools within a one-mile radius, making it difficult to draw boundaries that don’t pull another school’s walk zone into ATS’s bus zone.

I would strongly recommended at least looking at the staff presentation to the board on this, even if you don’t read the analysis or watch henwork session. All of this as covered in detail. ATS was only site identified by the staff as one that truly needs to be an option site.

You do realize they could put another option program there? Just because it is an option site doesn’t mean it stays Arlington Traditional.

Which one has a sufficiently compelling argument for placement at that site to override the costs of moving the ATS program? Silly to waste a central location on an immersion school when those will still be divided geographically. What does the ATS site give Expeditionary?

The assumption is that people should go to option schools for the program, not the location. Moving immersion to ATS would allow both ASF and Key to take neighborhood kids and fix some of the weird lines in the middle of the county. If you can draw a border around ASF without having to take the bulk of Key, you can fix the Ashlawn boundary and pull kids from Taylor, Western Key zone, and Long Branch. It’s about optimizing neighborhood schools since they are the default educational experience and fitting option schools where you can.

But they have to consider the transit implications. The further buses have to go from their pick-up zone to the school, the less time they can spend actually picking up kids without making bus routes inappropriately long. If you move a program that serves the entire county to a remote part of it, you end up having to run more buses.

At least those would be riders who chose to be there instead of kids from rosslyn riding up to Taylor and kids from Ballston riding out to Ashlawn plus whatever else the status quo and draw weird boundaries choice requires. It’s either find a way to get a school of kids to bus west voluntarily or bus everyone west involuntarily.

[Anonymous]

I’d sure like to see draft boundary maps in all of these scenarios. And transportation cost estimates.

And a survey asking current option parents if they would stay with the program if it moved and all parents about optional transfers to underenrolled schools. Just remember, Jamestown has been underenrolled and no one acted like it was the apocalypse. In these new boundaries it better be at capacity like the rest of us

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’d sure like to see draft boundary maps in all of these scenarios. And transportation cost estimates.

And a survey asking current option parents if they would stay with the program if it moved and all parents about optional transfers to underenrolled schools. Just remember, Jamestown has been underenrolled and no one acted like it was the apocalypse. In these new boundaries it better be at capacity like the rest of us

None of that is going to happen, if for no other reason than that they don’t have the time before they have to make a decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d sure like to see draft boundary maps in all of these scenarios. And transportation cost estimates.

And a survey asking current option parents if they would stay with the program if it moved and all parents about optional transfers to underenrolled schools. Just remember, Jamestown has been underenrolled and no one acted like it was the apocalypse. In these new boundaries it better be at capacity like the rest of us

None of that is going to happen, if for no other reason than that they don’t have the time before they have to make a decision.

Should they make a decision if they know so little about what effect it may have? Couldn’t this go horribly wrong?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d sure like to see draft boundary maps in all of these scenarios. And transportation cost estimates.

And a survey asking current option parents if they would stay with the program if it moved and all parents about optional transfers to underenrolled schools. Just remember, Jamestown has been underenrolled and no one acted like it was the apocalypse. In these new boundaries it better be at capacity like the rest of us

None of that is going to happen, if for no other reason than that they don’t have the time before they have to make a decision.

Should they make a decision if they know so little about what effect it may have? Couldn’t this go horribly wrong?

I think that will be part of the debate, devil you know vs devil you don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually I live in S Arlington but ATS, Key, ASF are more accessible than Carlin Springs... mind blown

That's why the second immersion school would stay over at ASFS and they'd maintain the east/west divide. Immersion at Carlin Springs wouldn't be one of your options. With two immersion schools, it makes zero sense to put one at ATS because neither school needs to be centrally located. ATS needs to house a program that's open to the entire county, so it's either going to stay ATS or they'll move the expeditionary program there.

Why on earth would they move EL there? So they can do expeditions to McDonald's?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Barcroft for an option school? ATS to Nottingham, Immersion yo Barcroft

ATS is going to stay where it is. They're not going to incur the cost and effort of relocating a school if they don't have to.

But they think they need Spanish immersion near native speakers. And if you move Key, the ATS building is close to Ballston and many native speakers. Could easily see them moving Spanish immersion to ATS.

If that is the main issue, they should move it to Barrett. Then it's a walkable option school for the native speakers.

Barrett is already Spanish “immersion”; Hispanic population is over 50%.
And they all walk across the street, super short walk. They do not want to walk or bus to ATS, “proximity is key”, they say.
Most really do NOT care about your immersion program!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t see the point of switching Carlin springs and Campbell. Both are small schools. Carlin springs is not much bigger than Campbell

Carlin Springs if 585 capacity v. Campbell's 436. I'd consider 150 students significant. Plus, there is a lot of open green space on the Kenmore site.........

The thing is, all schools are choice schools. If Randolph, Barcroft, Drew, etc aren't at capacity now, what makes the staff think they ever will be? People vote with their feet. Shifting things around to take advantage of space at schools UMC families will avoid is foolish. It's why Henry and Oakridge are so overcrowded.

All Arlington schools are good. Haven’t you heard?

So what’s the solution? Move immersion 2 south as well? Move ATS south?

I’ve been saying make Barcroft and Randolph and Carlin Springs immersion schools for years. Cater to the immigrants and give the middle class a reason to want to be there. Make those neighborhood schools immersion schools.

Why don't we just make them Spanish schools where everything is taught in Spanish and complete the segregation of Latinos and Hispanics from everyone else? geez.

What a stupid remark. I’m sorry you are so uncomfortable with our immigrant communities.