Another choice school in N Arlington?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When did the shift from capitalism to socialism happen? It's not just Arlington.

We're not talking about socialism.
Educating our children is part of the social contract. Making sure they grow up in stable homes with food on the table is better for everyone.
But the streetcar got cancelled and all of the promised gentrification went down the tubes with it.
People are starting to look at this Pike neighborhood plan, and ask some important questions. Those neighborhood schools aren't doing so great. What happens if you add more poverty to them? They were supposedly going to be propped up by more middle class density. That hasn't materialized.
How are people living in these areas supposed to be well served if businesses won't invest in the area, because it's super poor?

North Arlington parents aren't divorced from this problem. They helped these policies along. It's time for them to pitch in. Time for them to be part of the solution.

I think it's socialism to expect high-performing kids to be reassigned to shitty schools to prop the other kids up. And that's what's happening everywhere. The problem is that the smart kid has value (high test scores, involved parents), and you're crapping all over them. Public colleges offer incentives to attract motivated students: they get financial assistance or the promise of an outstanding education. With all these choice plans popping up, they get the pleasure of being assigned to a shitty, low-performing school. What's in it for them? Nothing. So they choose private or charters, and everybody loses. Republicans and democrats are both backing this model. Democrats like it for the perceived equity and republicans like it because it encourages the privatization of schools.

Sounds like Arlington is laying the groundwork for a full I controlled choice model.

That is not what we are talking about. We are talking about making room at wealthy schools for disadvantaged kids, no one is shipping the little Larla's and Larlo's of north Arlington anywhere.
Please take your medication.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When did the shift from capitalism to socialism happen? It's not just Arlington.

We're not talking about socialism.
Educating our children is part of the social contract. Making sure they grow up in stable homes with food on the table is better for everyone.
But the streetcar got cancelled and all of the promised gentrification went down the tubes with it.
People are starting to look at this Pike neighborhood plan, and ask some important questions. Those neighborhood schools aren't doing so great. What happens if you add more poverty to them? They were supposedly going to be propped up by more middle class density. That hasn't materialized.
How are people living in these areas supposed to be well served if businesses won't invest in the area, because it's super poor?

North Arlington parents aren't divorced from this problem. They helped these policies along. It's time for them to pitch in. Time for them to be part of the solution.

I think it's socialism to expect high-performing kids to be reassigned to shitty schools to prop the other kids up. And that's what's happening everywhere. The problem is that the smart kid has value (high test scores, involved parents), and you're crapping all over them. Public colleges offer incentives to attract motivated students: they get financial assistance or the promise of an outstanding education. With all these choice plans popping up, they get the pleasure of being assigned to a shitty, low-performing school. What's in it for them? Nothing. So they choose private or charters, and everybody loses. Republicans and democrats are both backing this model. Democrats like it for the perceived equity and republicans like it because it encourages the privatization of schools.

Sounds like Arlington is laying the groundwork for a full I controlled choice model.

Arlington is the 8th wealthiest county in the United States and 70 percent Democrat. Why does it have ANY shitty public schools? Seriously. If a county this small AND this liberal AND this wealthy can't pull off an integrated school system, how is there any hope for public education?

We should just go the route of Mississippi and Louisiana, and go to two track educational system, where the white kids all go to "private academies" and the poor kids all go to crummy public schools that are minimally publicly funded. The net cost to all the wealthy people would be the same, the net educational outcomes to the wealthy people would be the same, and we could drop the fiction that we're living in some liberal utopia that actually cares about education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When did the shift from capitalism to socialism happen? It's not just Arlington.

We're not talking about socialism.
Educating our children is part of the social contract. Making sure they grow up in stable homes with food on the table is better for everyone.
But the streetcar got cancelled and all of the promised gentrification went down the tubes with it.
People are starting to look at this Pike neighborhood plan, and ask some important questions. Those neighborhood schools aren't doing so great. What happens if you add more poverty to them? They were supposedly going to be propped up by more middle class density. That hasn't materialized.
How are people living in these areas supposed to be well served if businesses won't invest in the area, because it's super poor?

North Arlington parents aren't divorced from this problem. They helped these policies along. It's time for them to pitch in. Time for them to be part of the solution.

I think it's socialism to expect high-performing kids to be reassigned to shitty schools to prop the other kids up. And that's what's happening everywhere. The problem is that the smart kid has value (high test scores, involved parents), and you're crapping all over them. Public colleges offer incentives to attract motivated students: they get financial assistance or the promise of an outstanding education. With all these choice plans popping up, they get the pleasure of being assigned to a shitty, low-performing school. What's in it for them? Nothing. So they choose private or charters, and everybody loses. Republicans and democrats are both backing this model. Democrats like it for the perceived equity and republicans like it because it encourages the privatization of schools.

Sounds like Arlington is laying the groundwork for a full I controlled choice model.

That is not what we are talking about. We are talking about making room at wealthy schools for disadvantaged kids, no one is shipping the little Larla's and Larlo's of north Arlington anywhere.
Please take your medication.

For now. Look around you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When did the shift from capitalism to socialism happen? It's not just Arlington.

We're not talking about socialism.
Educating our children is part of the social contract. Making sure they grow up in stable homes with food on the table is better for everyone.
But the streetcar got cancelled and all of the promised gentrification went down the tubes with it.
People are starting to look at this Pike neighborhood plan, and ask some important questions. Those neighborhood schools aren't doing so great. What happens if you add more poverty to them? They were supposedly going to be propped up by more middle class density. That hasn't materialized.
How are people living in these areas supposed to be well served if businesses won't invest in the area, because it's super poor?

North Arlington parents aren't divorced from this problem. They helped these policies along. It's time for them to pitch in. Time for them to be part of the solution.

I think it's socialism to expect high-performing kids to be reassigned to shitty schools to prop the other kids up. And that's what's happening everywhere. The problem is that the smart kid has value (high test scores, involved parents), and you're crapping all over them. Public colleges offer incentives to attract motivated students: they get financial assistance or the promise of an outstanding education. With all these choice plans popping up, they get the pleasure of being assigned to a shitty, low-performing school. What's in it for them? Nothing. So they choose private or charters, and everybody loses. Republicans and democrats are both backing this model. Democrats like it for the perceived equity and republicans like it because it encourages the privatization of schools.

Sounds like Arlington is laying the groundwork for a full I controlled choice model.

Arlington is the 8th wealthiest county in the United States and 70 percent Democrat. Why does it have ANY shitty public schools? Seriously. If a county this small AND this liberal AND this wealthy can't pull off an integrated school system, how is there any hope for public education?

We should just go the route of Mississippi and Louisiana, and go to two track educational system, where the white kids all go to "private academies" and the poor kids all go to crummy public schools that are minimally publicly funded. The net cost to all the wealthy people would be the same, the net educational outcomes to the wealthy people would be the same, and we could drop the fiction that we're living in some liberal utopia that actually cares about education.

Yes, this is a lovely vision. But you take all the 10 and 2 schools and merge them to make 6 schools, then all of the sudden people think APS schools aren't so great anymore. So APS isn't the super desired close in spot anymore. Them 6 schools become 5 schools, etcetc. There's a reason socialism is great on paper but doesn't work great in practice. People will always seek out excellent schools for their kids. But by all means play into the republicans hands and help them privatize schools by supporting more and more choice schools and gutting neighborhood schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When did the shift from capitalism to socialism happen? It's not just Arlington.

We're not talking about socialism.
Educating our children is part of the social contract. Making sure they grow up in stable homes with food on the table is better for everyone.
But the streetcar got cancelled and all of the promised gentrification went down the tubes with it.
People are starting to look at this Pike neighborhood plan, and ask some important questions. Those neighborhood schools aren't doing so great. What happens if you add more poverty to them? They were supposedly going to be propped up by more middle class density. That hasn't materialized.
How are people living in these areas supposed to be well served if businesses won't invest in the area, because it's super poor?

North Arlington parents aren't divorced from this problem. They helped these policies along. It's time for them to pitch in. Time for them to be part of the solution.

I think it's socialism to expect high-performing kids to be reassigned to shitty schools to prop the other kids up. And that's what's happening everywhere. The problem is that the smart kid has value (high test scores, involved parents), and you're crapping all over them. Public colleges offer incentives to attract motivated students: they get financial assistance or the promise of an outstanding education. With all these choice plans popping up, they get the pleasure of being assigned to a shitty, low-performing school. What's in it for them? Nothing. So they choose private or charters, and everybody loses. Republicans and democrats are both backing this model. Democrats like it for the perceived equity and republicans like it because it encourages the privatization of schools.

Sounds like Arlington is laying the groundwork for a full I controlled choice model.

Arlington is the 8th wealthiest county in the United States and 70 percent Democrat. Why does it have ANY shitty public schools? Seriously. If a county this small AND this liberal AND this wealthy can't pull off an integrated school system, how is there any hope for public education?

We should just go the route of Mississippi and Louisiana, and go to two track educational system, where the white kids all go to "private academies" and the poor kids all go to crummy public schools that are minimally publicly funded. The net cost to all the wealthy people would be the same, the net educational outcomes to the wealthy people would be the same, and we could drop the fiction that we're living in some liberal utopia that actually cares about education.

Yes, this is a lovely vision. But you take all the 10 and 2 schools and merge them to make 6 schools, then all of the sudden people think APS schools aren't so great anymore. So APS isn't the super desired close in spot anymore. Them 6 schools become 5 schools, etcetc. There's a reason socialism is great on paper but doesn't work great in practice. People will always seek out excellent schools for their kids. But by all means play into the republicans hands and help them privatize schools by supporting more and more choice schools and gutting neighborhood schools.

Arlington does a fine job with schools that reflect the overall makeup of the county--schools where neither poverty nor English language learners are concentrated. At some point, the only difference between a Patrick Henry and a Jamestown is the fact that Jamestown is whiter and richer. I won't feel bad if public dollars no longer support segregated (and I mean white segregated) schools.

[Anonymous]

I think there is an assumption by some that schools in S. Arlington (possibly with the exception of Patrick Henry) are bad, and schools in N. Arlington are good.
It is not clear what data is being used to support these claims.
Similarly- when you look at test scores, etc- are the test scores the result of poor teaching, a poor school, or a difficult home background.
Take, e.g. a child who has significant learning disabilities, and a parent who also has those learning disabilities. Say the parent doesn't really see this as a problem, doesn't value homework, doesn't ensure the child gets enough sleep, etc. That child's test scores are going to be poor. The mark of a good school, in my mind, is one that can reach that disadvantaged child, while not allowing that child's deficits to impact other children.
I actually think that all Arlington schools do this rather well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well then even one more choice school. He school board is already committed to building 2 more elementary schools.

No they haven't. The CIP up for SB approval on June 16 contains money to turn Reed into an ES and put additions on two existing ES. (The new ES that they are building in S. Arlington now is coming from the last round of CIP funds.) If you want to build another choice school, I am fine with it. I think we could use another immersion school in the County. But why put it at Reed, which is about as far west in the county as you can get? That isn't even close to where the worst overcrowding in Arlington is predicted. Go look at the APS utilization spreadsheet for 2020/21-- for Reed to work as a 725 student choice school that year, you have to assume that the majority of students are coming from the ASF/Key, Long Branch, and overcrowded South Arlington districts-- that they will be willing to backtrack all the way to Westover every day for school. Otherwise you have not made a dent in the overcrowding. That is a huge assumption, with no data behind it. Our best proxy is the ATS experience-- and I think the low South Arlington enrollment at ATS shows that people just aren't willing to travel that far for a choice school in west Arlington. Remember, Ashlawn and Glebe transfers alone make up 25% of the ATS student body-- which makes sense b/c most of these kids are in the ATS neighborhood. Build another choice school- but do it in a more sensible location that solves the problem of overcrowding- which is why we are building a new ES in the first place. APS is just picking Reed because it is the cheapest option and they already own the building, not because it is in any way an ideal geographic location to solve overcrowding or best serve our kids in either N or S Arlington.

I agree. If we really need seats in Rosslyn or Ballston, Reed doesn't make any sense. If it were a neighborhood school, it would pull from McKinley, Glebe and Ashlawn. Those schools can add Ballston seats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well then even one more choice school. He school board is already committed to building 2 more elementary schools.

No they haven't. The CIP up for SB approval on June 16 contains money to turn Reed into an ES and put additions on two existing ES. (The new ES that they are building in S. Arlington now is coming from the last round of CIP funds.) If you want to build another choice school, I am fine with it. I think we could use another immersion school in the County. But why put it at Reed, which is about as far west in the county as you can get? That isn't even close to where the worst overcrowding in Arlington is predicted. Go look at the APS utilization spreadsheet for 2020/21-- for Reed to work as a 725 student choice school that year, you have to assume that the majority of students are coming from the ASF/Key, Long Branch, and overcrowded South Arlington districts-- that they will be willing to backtrack all the way to Westover every day for school. Otherwise you have not made a dent in the overcrowding. That is a huge assumption, with no data behind it. Our best proxy is the ATS experience-- and I think the low South Arlington enrollment at ATS shows that people just aren't willing to travel that far for a choice school in west Arlington. Remember, Ashlawn and Glebe transfers alone make up 25% of the ATS student body-- which makes sense b/c most of these kids are in the ATS neighborhood. Build another choice school- but do it in a more sensible location that solves the problem of overcrowding- which is why we are building a new ES in the first place. APS is just picking Reed because it is the cheapest option and they already own the building, not because it is in any way an ideal geographic location to solve overcrowding or best serve our kids in either N or S Arlington.

Everyone I know in south Arlington tries for ATS. They don't care how far it is. They just don't get the slots. Luck of the draw.

Everyone in South Arlington isn't trying for ATS. The point of a double blind lottery is that the results, statistically speaking, should reflect the applicant pool. So the only way that you get 64% of ATS drawing from North Arlington schools is if roughly 64% of the applicant pool is coming from North Arlington. If you had a flood of people applying to ATS from South Arlington, then the student body would be closer to 50/50. I would really like to see the County issue a report on the number of kids who applied to ATS by school zone vs. the number who got accepted. If the applicant pool is already lopsided to North Arlington due to the ATS location (or whatever other reason), then there is absolutly no point to putting another choice school at the Reed site-- which is even more out of the way for anyone coming from the NE or S parts of the County. Even those of you supporting a choice school should be asking why they are putting it at Reed. For example, they could build it at the Buck site across from W-L, except that the County Board wants to store ART buses there instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When did the shift from capitalism to socialism happen? It's not just Arlington.

We're not talking about socialism.
Educating our children is part of the social contract. Making sure they grow up in stable homes with food on the table is better for everyone.
But the streetcar got cancelled and all of the promised gentrification went down the tubes with it.
People are starting to look at this Pike neighborhood plan, and ask some important questions. Those neighborhood schools aren't doing so great. What happens if you add more poverty to them? They were supposedly going to be propped up by more middle class density. That hasn't materialized.
How are people living in these areas supposed to be well served if businesses won't invest in the area, because it's super poor?

North Arlington parents aren't divorced from this problem. They helped these policies along. It's time for them to pitch in. Time for them to be part of the solution.

I think it's socialism to expect high-performing kids to be reassigned to shitty schools to prop the other kids up. And that's what's happening everywhere. The problem is that the smart kid has value (high test scores, involved parents), and you're crapping all over them. Public colleges offer incentives to attract motivated students: they get financial assistance or the promise of an outstanding education. With all these choice plans popping up, they get the pleasure of being assigned to a shitty, low-performing school. What's in it for them? Nothing. So they choose private or charters, and everybody loses. Republicans and democrats are both backing this model. Democrats like it for the perceived equity and republicans like it because it encourages the privatization of schools.

Sounds like Arlington is laying the groundwork for a full I controlled choice model.

Socialism
?s?SH??liz?m/ noun: a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Public education in the United States: Historically, the community as a whole (a county or city or town) owns and regulates the public schools. The community governs the production, distribution, and exchange of education.

As you can see, public education in the United States is absolutely socialistic in nature. It has been almost from the very beginning.

Expecting high-performing kids to be reassigned to "shitty" schools is a decision about how to produce, distribute, and exchange education. There's nothing "socialistic" about busing or choice schools or neighborhood schools. Those are simply decisions about how to regulate the school system. What IS socialism is the fact that the schools are owned by the community as a whole and that the community has a right to regulate them as it sees fit.

Do you think Arlington as a county/community should provide education? Do you think it should build schools and hire teachers and "produce" education for its citizens? Do you think the costs of production should be borne by the community via taxes? Then you support socialism, at least in the educational system.

If you don't support socialism in our educational system, you should be arguing that the county should not be providing education at all, but rather that individuals should provide or purchase education for their children as they see fit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well then even one more choice school. He school board is already committed to building 2 more elementary schools.

No they haven't. The CIP up for SB approval on June 16 contains money to turn Reed into an ES and put additions on two existing ES. (The new ES that they are building in S. Arlington now is coming from the last round of CIP funds.) If you want to build another choice school, I am fine with it. I think we could use another immersion school in the County. But why put it at Reed, which is about as far west in the county as you can get? That isn't even close to where the worst overcrowding in Arlington is predicted. Go look at the APS utilization spreadsheet for 2020/21-- for Reed to work as a 725 student choice school that year, you have to assume that the majority of students are coming from the ASF/Key, Long Branch, and overcrowded South Arlington districts-- that they will be willing to backtrack all the way to Westover every day for school. Otherwise you have not made a dent in the overcrowding. That is a huge assumption, with no data behind it. Our best proxy is the ATS experience-- and I think the low South Arlington enrollment at ATS shows that people just aren't willing to travel that far for a choice school in west Arlington. Remember, Ashlawn and Glebe transfers alone make up 25% of the ATS student body-- which makes sense b/c most of these kids are in the ATS neighborhood. Build another choice school- but do it in a more sensible location that solves the problem of overcrowding- which is why we are building a new ES in the first place. APS is just picking Reed because it is the cheapest option and they already own the building, not because it is in any way an ideal geographic location to solve overcrowding or best serve our kids in either N or S Arlington.

Everyone I know in south Arlington tries for ATS. They don't care how far it is. They just don't get the slots. Luck of the draw.

Everyone in South Arlington isn't trying for ATS. The point of a double blind lottery is that the results, statistically speaking, should reflect the applicant pool. So the only way that you get 64% of ATS drawing from North Arlington schools is if roughly 64% of the applicant pool is coming from North Arlington. If you had a flood of people applying to ATS from South Arlington, then the student body would be closer to 50/50. I would really like to see the County issue a report on the number of kids who applied to ATS by school zone vs. the number who got accepted. If the applicant pool is already lopsided to North Arlington due to the ATS location (or whatever other reason), then there is absolutly no point to putting another choice school at the Reed site-- which is even more out of the way for anyone coming from the NE or S parts of the County. Even those of you supporting a choice school should be asking why they are putting it at Reed. For example, they could build it at the Buck site across from W-L, except that the County Board wants to store ART buses there instead.

Let me rephrase. Almost All of the white middle class families are applying to ATS. I agree we need to see the specifics on applicants. Is the Buck site a lost cause?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well then even one more choice school. He school board is already committed to building 2 more elementary schools.

No they haven't. The CIP up for SB approval on June 16 contains money to turn Reed into an ES and put additions on two existing ES. (The new ES that they are building in S. Arlington now is coming from the last round of CIP funds.) If you want to build another choice school, I am fine with it. I think we could use another immersion school in the County. But why put it at Reed, which is about as far west in the county as you can get? That isn't even close to where the worst overcrowding in Arlington is predicted. Go look at the APS utilization spreadsheet for 2020/21-- for Reed to work as a 725 student choice school that year, you have to assume that the majority of students are coming from the ASF/Key, Long Branch, and overcrowded South Arlington districts-- that they will be willing to backtrack all the way to Westover every day for school. Otherwise you have not made a dent in the overcrowding. That is a huge assumption, with no data behind it. Our best proxy is the ATS experience-- and I think the low South Arlington enrollment at ATS shows that people just aren't willing to travel that far for a choice school in west Arlington. Remember, Ashlawn and Glebe transfers alone make up 25% of the ATS student body-- which makes sense b/c most of these kids are in the ATS neighborhood. Build another choice school- but do it in a more sensible location that solves the problem of overcrowding- which is why we are building a new ES in the first place. APS is just picking Reed because it is the cheapest option and they already own the building, not because it is in any way an ideal geographic location to solve overcrowding or best serve our kids in either N or S Arlington.

Everyone I know in south Arlington tries for ATS. They don't care how far it is. They just don't get the slots. Luck of the draw.

Everyone in South Arlington isn't trying for ATS. The point of a double blind lottery is that the results, statistically speaking, should reflect the applicant pool. So the only way that you get 64% of ATS drawing from North Arlington schools is if roughly 64% of the applicant pool is coming from North Arlington. If you had a flood of people applying to ATS from South Arlington, then the student body would be closer to 50/50. I would really like to see the County issue a report on the number of kids who applied to ATS by school zone vs. the number who got accepted. If the applicant pool is already lopsided to North Arlington due to the ATS location (or whatever other reason), then there is absolutly no point to putting another choice school at the Reed site-- which is even more out of the way for anyone coming from the NE or S parts of the County. Even those of you supporting a choice school should be asking why they are putting it at Reed. For example, they could build it at the Buck site across from W-L, except that the County Board wants to store ART buses there instead.

Let me rephrase. Almost All of the white middle class families are applying to ATS. I agree we need to see the specifics on applicants. Is the Buck site a lost cause?

Yes, lost cause. Unless you want them to turn Reed into the Bus Storage facility, which would make even less sense than the Buck site. Schools aren't the only need in the county, and we're pretty much out of land that isn't right in the middle of where people are living. So take your pick; which thing that nobody wants is going to be located in your neighborhood? Still think a school is a terrible idea? We all have to accept that the ideal location, size, whatever, for schools, that ship has sailed. Reed is going to be a school because it's the only way APS can afford to do it and do it within the next 10 years. Is it going to be ideal? Nope, but at least it is better than the trailer farms that never go away and eat up more green space every year. Now, back to the really terrible problem looming: HS capacity. Why isn't everyone freaking out about this? Is it because HS seems so far away? Or you plan to go private anyway? Or you think your school isn't going to be as overcrowded as W-L so your kids won't be affected? Or you're cool with kids going to HS in shifts? I think we're making perfect the enemy of good with all this back and forth about one ES in north Arlington, all the while all three HS programs are about to explode.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well then even one more choice school. He school board is already committed to building 2 more elementary schools.

No they haven't. The CIP up for SB approval on June 16 contains money to turn Reed into an ES and put additions on two existing ES. (The new ES that they are building in S. Arlington now is coming from the last round of CIP funds.) If you want to build another choice school, I am fine with it. I think we could use another immersion school in the County. But why put it at Reed, which is about as far west in the county as you can get? That isn't even close to where the worst overcrowding in Arlington is predicted. Go look at the APS utilization spreadsheet for 2020/21-- for Reed to work as a 725 student choice school that year, you have to assume that the majority of students are coming from the ASF/Key, Long Branch, and overcrowded South Arlington districts-- that they will be willing to backtrack all the way to Westover every day for school. Otherwise you have not made a dent in the overcrowding. That is a huge assumption, with no data behind it. Our best proxy is the ATS experience-- and I think the low South Arlington enrollment at ATS shows that people just aren't willing to travel that far for a choice school in west Arlington. Remember, Ashlawn and Glebe transfers alone make up 25% of the ATS student body-- which makes sense b/c most of these kids are in the ATS neighborhood. Build another choice school- but do it in a more sensible location that solves the problem of overcrowding- which is why we are building a new ES in the first place. APS is just picking Reed because it is the cheapest option and they already own the building, not because it is in any way an ideal geographic location to solve overcrowding or best serve our kids in either N or S Arlington.

Everyone I know in south Arlington tries for ATS. They don't care how far it is. They just don't get the slots. Luck of the draw.

Everyone in South Arlington isn't trying for ATS. The point of a double blind lottery is that the results, statistically speaking, should reflect the applicant pool. So the only way that you get 64% of ATS drawing from North Arlington schools is if roughly 64% of the applicant pool is coming from North Arlington. If you had a flood of people applying to ATS from South Arlington, then the student body would be closer to 50/50. I would really like to see the County issue a report on the number of kids who applied to ATS by school zone vs. the number who got accepted. If the applicant pool is already lopsided to North Arlington due to the ATS location (or whatever other reason), then there is absolutly no point to putting another choice school at the Reed site-- which is even more out of the way for anyone coming from the NE or S parts of the County. Even those of you supporting a choice school should be asking why they are putting it at Reed. For example, they could build it at the Buck site across from W-L, except that the County Board wants to store ART buses there instead.

Let me rephrase. Almost All of the white middle class families are applying to ATS. I agree we need to see the specifics on applicants. Is the Buck site a lost cause?

Yes, lost cause. Unless you want them to turn Reed into the Bus Storage facility, which would make even less sense than the Buck site. Schools aren't the only need in the county, and we're pretty much out of land that isn't right in the middle of where people are living. So take your pick; which thing that nobody wants is going to be located in your neighborhood? Still think a school is a terrible idea? We all have to accept that the ideal location, size, whatever, for schools, that ship has sailed. Reed is going to be a school because it's the only way APS can afford to do it and do it within the next 10 years. Is it going to be ideal? Nope, but at least it is better than the trailer farms that never go away and eat up more green space every year. Now, back to the really terrible problem looming: HS capacity. Why isn't everyone freaking out about this? Is it because HS seems so far away? Or you plan to go private anyway? Or you think your school isn't going to be as overcrowded as W-L so your kids won't be affected? Or you're cool with kids going to HS in shifts? I think we're making perfect the enemy of good with all this back and forth about one ES in north Arlington, all the while all three HS programs are about to explode.

I hear what you are saying on the high school issue and think there is some good discussion about that going on the other thread too. But I still think this Reed solution is short-sighted as an ES solution and worthy of discussion. Do you really think ASF/Key parents who bought into that district so they could go to ASF are going to be willing to truck their kids to Westover to be in a new 725 student choice school (which would be the biggest elementary school in the county)? Look, my point is just that this could be a disaster if they spend all this money to renovate Reed and nobody wants to go to the school-- that is the downside to a choice school. And right now, even the N. Arl parents who apply to ATS do so because they like the smaller school enviornment. That's not what a 725 student school looks like. And I get that Arlington is short on land, but the real issue is that all these various County functions (transporation, parks and rec, schools, etc.) operate in such silos that nobody ever dumps it all on the table and looks at the best use of land holistically for all these various functions. And so we have space wasting (like the big plot of land for the aquatics center) or expensive real estate in the heart of Ballston dedicated to bus storage.

[Anonymous]

newflash--it won't be the biggest school in the county. The new S. Arlington school is slated for 725 opening in 2019. Also--Oakridge already has more than 725.

[Anonymous]

Does every forum have to turn into a N vs. S debate? Jeez. I want to start a new one about whether Reed should be a neighborhood school or not (and as someone whose kid would literally pass Reed to get to McKinley next year, I think it should).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well then even one more choice school. He school board is already committed to building 2 more elementary schools.

No they haven't. The CIP up for SB approval on June 16 contains money to turn Reed into an ES and put additions on two existing ES. (The new ES that they are building in S. Arlington now is coming from the last round of CIP funds.) If you want to build another choice school, I am fine with it. I think we could use another immersion school in the County. But why put it at Reed, which is about as far west in the county as you can get? That isn't even close to where the worst overcrowding in Arlington is predicted. Go look at the APS utilization spreadsheet for 2020/21-- for Reed to work as a 725 student choice school that year, you have to assume that the majority of students are coming from the ASF/Key, Long Branch, and overcrowded South Arlington districts-- that they will be willing to backtrack all the way to Westover every day for school. Otherwise you have not made a dent in the overcrowding. That is a huge assumption, with no data behind it. Our best proxy is the ATS experience-- and I think the low South Arlington enrollment at ATS shows that people just aren't willing to travel that far for a choice school in west Arlington. Remember, Ashlawn and Glebe transfers alone make up 25% of the ATS student body-- which makes sense b/c most of these kids are in the ATS neighborhood. Build another choice school- but do it in a more sensible location that solves the problem of overcrowding- which is why we are building a new ES in the first place. APS is just picking Reed because it is the cheapest option and they already own the building, not because it is in any way an ideal geographic location to solve overcrowding or best serve our kids in either N or S Arlington.

Everyone I know in south Arlington tries for ATS. They don't care how far it is. They just don't get the slots. Luck of the draw.

Everyone in South Arlington isn't trying for ATS. The point of a double blind lottery is that the results, statistically speaking, should reflect the applicant pool. So the only way that you get 64% of ATS drawing from North Arlington schools is if roughly 64% of the applicant pool is coming from North Arlington. If you had a flood of people applying to ATS from South Arlington, then the student body would be closer to 50/50. I would really like to see the County issue a report on the number of kids who applied to ATS by school zone vs. the number who got accepted. If the applicant pool is already lopsided to North Arlington due to the ATS location (or whatever other reason), then there is absolutly no point to putting another choice school at the Reed site-- which is even more out of the way for anyone coming from the NE or S parts of the County. Even those of you supporting a choice school should be asking why they are putting it at Reed. For example, they could build it at the Buck site across from W-L, except that the County Board wants to store ART buses there instead.

Let me rephrase. Almost All of the white middle class families are applying to ATS. I agree we need to see the specifics on applicants. Is the Buck site a lost cause?

Yes, lost cause. Unless you want them to turn Reed into the Bus Storage facility, which would make even less sense than the Buck site. Schools aren't the only need in the county, and we're pretty much out of land that isn't right in the middle of where people are living. So take your pick; which thing that nobody wants is going to be located in your neighborhood? Still think a school is a terrible idea? We all have to accept that the ideal location, size, whatever, for schools, that ship has sailed. Reed is going to be a school because it's the only way APS can afford to do it and do it within the next 10 years. Is it going to be ideal? Nope, but at least it is better than the trailer farms that never go away and eat up more green space every year. Now, back to the really terrible problem looming: HS capacity. Why isn't everyone freaking out about this? Is it because HS seems so far away? Or you plan to go private anyway? Or you think your school isn't going to be as overcrowded as W-L so your kids won't be affected? Or you're cool with kids going to HS in shifts? I think we're making perfect the enemy of good with all this back and forth about one ES in north Arlington, all the while all three HS programs are about to explode.

I hear what you are saying on the high school issue and think there is some good discussion about that going on the other thread too. But I still think this Reed solution is short-sighted as an ES solution and worthy of discussion. Do you really think ASF/Key parents who bought into that district so they could go to ASF are going to be willing to truck their kids to Westover to be in a new 725 student choice school (which would be the biggest elementary school in the county)? Look, my point is just that this could be a disaster if they spend all this money to renovate Reed and nobody wants to go to the school-- that is the downside to a choice school. And right now, even the N. Arl parents who apply to ATS do so because they like the smaller school enviornment. That's not what a 725 student school looks like. And I get that Arlington is short on land, but the real issue is that all these various County functions (transporation, parks and rec, schools, etc.) operate in such silos that nobody ever dumps it all on the table and looks at the best use of land holistically for all these various functions. And so we have space wasting (like the big plot of land for the aquatics center) or expensive real estate in the heart of Ballston dedicated to bus storage.

Well, I guess I do think that. If either Key or ASF is turned back into a neighborhood school, then I think there are enough parents willing to let their kids get on a bus to Reed to keep a program there enrolled to max capacity. And if they open the "extra" seats to other areas of the county, there will definitely be enough parents willing to bus their kids to a desirable program like immersion, ATS, or STEM. Not everyone has the same priority. Some families want to be close and walk to their elementary school. And some families would rather have their kids at schools with a program focus, for whatever reason (which is not mine to judge).