8/27 APS Work Session—Elementary Boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well people are right that ATS is not magic. It’s just a self selected student body. That’s true. It’s also why it can’t be replicated in a non lottery program. So basically it takes kids destined to succeed then claims credit for their scores. Keep it or don’t. But don’t kid yourself that it has some secret sauce.

Blind lottery = "self selected"

My God this message board...

Parents choose to... enter the lottery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well people are right that ATS is not magic. It’s just a self selected student body. That’s true. It’s also why it can’t be replicated in a non lottery program. So basically it takes kids destined to succeed then claims credit for their scores. Keep it or don’t. But don’t kid yourself that it has some secret sauce.

Blind lottery = "self selected"

My God this message board...

Parents choose to... enter the lottery.

I'm not quite sure you are using self selected properly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well people are right that ATS is not magic. It’s just a self selected student body. That’s true. It’s also why it can’t be replicated in a non lottery program. So basically it takes kids destined to succeed then claims credit for their scores. Keep it or don’t. But don’t kid yourself that it has some secret sauce.

Blind lottery = "self selected"

My God this message board...

Parents choose to... enter the lottery.

I'm not quite sure you are using self selected properly.

You’re talking to different people. No one is randomly selecting students to attend ATS. They (their families) choose to enter the lottery. Therefore, it is a self selected population. PP used the term correctly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well people are right that ATS is not magic. It’s just a self selected student body. That’s true. It’s also why it can’t be replicated in a non lottery program. So basically it takes kids destined to succeed then claims credit for their scores. Keep it or don’t. But don’t kid yourself that it has some secret sauce.

Blind lottery = "self selected"

My God this message board...

Parents choose to... enter the lottery.

I'm not quite sure you are using self selected properly.

DP, are you being deliberately obtuse? The applicant pool is self-selecting. No matter how the lottery goes, every single child offered a seat got that seat because their parents specifically chose to apply. No one defaults in.

[Anonymous]

Final answer:

1) McKinely -> Reed some wiggle around borders for walk zone but mostly same students, admins, teachers

2) move ATS/IB to McKinely. Supersize it to 725 students since it works so well and is a high demand program.

3) Default ATS/IB lottery to include ALL APS students, offer them spots if they are selected. Parents no longer have to sign up lottery, they just decide when it matters.

4) move Key Immersion -> ATS site. Drop 50/50 requirement; it’s going to be the anchor that strangles them if they aren’t careful

[Anonymous]

All APS option schools have “self-selecting” parents, but no option school has managed to close the socioeconomic achievement gap like ATS has. That, if nothing else, is ATS’s best feature. All students are high achieving there, not just the ones who would be anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Final answer:

1) McKinely -> Reed some wiggle around borders for walk zone but mostly same students, admins, teachers

2) move ATS/IB to McKinely. Supersize it to 725 students since it works so well and is a high demand program.

3) Default ATS/IB lottery to include ALL APS students, offer them spots if they are selected. Parents no longer have to sign up lottery, they just decide when it matters.

4) move Key Immersion -> ATS site. Drop 50/50 requirement; it’s going to be the anchor that strangles them if they aren’t careful

I had hoped that you would at least learn how to spell McKinley before your final post, but I welcome it regardless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Final answer:

1) McKinely -> Reed some wiggle around borders for walk zone but mostly same students, admins, teachers

2) move ATS/IB to McKinely. Supersize it to 725 students since it works so well and is a high demand program.

3) Default ATS/IB lottery to include ALL APS students, offer them spots if they are selected. Parents no longer have to sign up lottery, they just decide when it matters.

4) move Key Immersion -> ATS site. Drop 50/50 requirement; it’s going to be the anchor that strangles them if they aren’t careful

I will co-sign this, though #3 probably won’t do what you want it to do because the kids you are trying to reach aren’t registered until the last minute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All APS option schools have “self-selecting” parents, but no option school has managed to close the socioeconomic achievement gap like ATS has. That, if nothing else, is ATS’s best feature. All students are high achieving there, not just the ones who would be anyway.

It’s not a fair comparison because the other option schools had neighborhood preference until a year or two ago. Basically they were partially neighborhood schools and not all option like ATS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All APS option schools have “self-selecting” parents, but no option school has managed to close the socioeconomic achievement gap like ATS has. That, if nothing else, is ATS’s best feature. All students are high achieving there, not just the ones who would be anyway.

It’s not a fair comparison because the other option schools had neighborhood preference until a year or two ago. Basically they were partially neighborhood schools and not all option like ATS.

Right, but if the argument is there’s nothing special about ATS because it owes its success to the lottery, why wouldn’t any option school where parents have to apply be different? Genuine question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Final answer:

1) McKinely -> Reed some wiggle around borders for walk zone but mostly same students, admins, teachers

2) move ATS/IB to McKinely. Supersize it to 725 students since it works so well and is a high demand program.

3) Default ATS/IB lottery to include ALL APS students, offer them spots if they are selected. Parents no longer have to sign up lottery, they just decide when it matters.

4) move Key Immersion -> ATS site. Drop 50/50 requirement; it’s going to be the anchor that strangles them if they aren’t careful

#3 is nice in theory, but would be a logistical nightmare because of how much time would be spent notifying selected families who have no interest in seats, and then moving through the waitlist as they turn it down. If you give people even 72 hours to make a decision, the process couple drag out over a month or more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All APS option schools have “self-selecting” parents, but no option school has managed to close the socioeconomic achievement gap like ATS has. That, if nothing else, is ATS’s best feature. All students are high achieving there, not just the ones who would be anyway.

I take it you’re not familiar with the demographics (particularly FARMS rates) for the various option schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All APS option schools have “self-selecting” parents, but no option school has managed to close the socioeconomic achievement gap like ATS has. That, if nothing else, is ATS’s best feature. All students are high achieving there, not just the ones who would be anyway.

It’s not a fair comparison because the other option schools had neighborhood preference until a year or two ago. Basically they were partially neighborhood schools and not all option like ATS.

Right, but if the argument is there’s nothing special about ATS because it owes its success to the lottery, why wouldn’t any option school where parents have to apply be different? Genuine question.

Because until last year the parents didn’t have to apply to Key, Claremont, Campbell, and maybe Montessori. If you lived in the zone you could just walk in and register like a neighborhood school. They were not full lottery so it’s not the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I, for one, am so hopeful that the deal Westover got from the SB 5 years ago gets blown up over this. It should. Conditions have changed drastically and that “promise” needs to be revisited. I agree that the second best option is to “Fleet” McKinley. Essentially give Reed to McKinley (still 100% walkable school) with a crossing guard at Washington Blvd) and make McKinley immersion. Reed draws from the East and south and fills with almost all walkers.

There is a high risk of not being able to fill 725 immersion seats at McKinley. Now, If APS was willing to change its foreign language approach it could be done. You do not need a 50/50 split for a language school. Have lots of friends whose kids are in French immersion without any other kids who are native French speakers.

Cintia Johnson herself said last week that the integrity of the immersion program hinges on a 50/50 mix, putting those schools/classrooms where the Spanish speakers are as necessary. So our interim superintendent thinks immersion should move south and said as much in the same meeting where staff said to forget about the key/ASFS swap.

And what I’m saying is other school systems have language schools that aren’t predicated on any students being native in the language taught. If we can’t get native speakers in a language and there is enough demand from those who don’t speak a language, there are other models to follow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I, for one, am so hopeful that the deal Westover got from the SB 5 years ago gets blown up over this. It should. Conditions have changed drastically and that “promise” needs to be revisited. I agree that the second best option is to “Fleet” McKinley. Essentially give Reed to McKinley (still 100% walkable school) with a crossing guard at Washington Blvd) and make McKinley immersion. Reed draws from the East and south and fills with almost all walkers.

There is a high risk of not being able to fill 725 immersion seats at McKinley. Now, If APS was willing to change its foreign language approach it could be done. You do not need a 50/50 split for a language school. Have lots of friends whose kids are in French immersion without any other kids who are native French speakers.

Cintia Johnson herself said last week that the integrity of the immersion program hinges on a 50/50 mix, putting those schools/classrooms where the Spanish speakers are as necessary. So our interim superintendent thinks immersion should move south and said as much in the same meeting where staff said to forget about the key/ASFS swap.

And what I’m saying is other school systems have language schools that aren’t predicated on any students being native in the language taught. If we can’t get native speakers in a language and there is enough demand from those who don’t speak a language, there are other models to follow.

DP. The point is, APS has been very explicit that they are not changing immersion models at this time. You can keep talking about other models until you are blue in the face, and it won’t matter.