APS: Use NES as Immersion Middle School

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

I agree this makes the most sense.

But APS ruled out Williamsburg for Immersion because of lack of centrality and lack of public transportation. Yet ignores these same considerations for Nottingham as a swing space.

APS has no idea what they are doing.

So what you're advocating for is Nottingham to be used as a swing space to meet needs. Sounds a lot like what APS is talking about....

How am I doing that? I’m saying that APS decided it was not ok to use Williamsburg for a county wide program because it wasn’t central enough nor was it close enough to mass transit.

But they don’t even consider that Nottingham may not be central enough for a countywide program or have enough mass transit. They completely ignore these issues - issues which they themselves thought were significant hurdles to stop consideration of Williamsburg for immersion. Somehow what was not OK for WMS is ok for Nottingham.

They aren't proposing a countywide program for NES.

Yes they are - it’ll be swing space for the entire county, one school at a time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

I agree this makes the most sense.

But APS ruled out Williamsburg for Immersion because of lack of centrality and lack of public transportation. Yet ignores these same considerations for Nottingham as a swing space.

APS has no idea what they are doing.

So what you're advocating for is Nottingham to be used as a swing space to meet needs. Sounds a lot like what APS is talking about....

How am I doing that? I’m saying that APS decided it was not ok to use Williamsburg for a county wide program because it wasn’t central enough nor was it close enough to mass transit.

But they don’t even consider that Nottingham may not be central enough for a countywide program or have enough mass transit. They completely ignore these issues - issues which they themselves thought were significant hurdles to stop consideration of Williamsburg for immersion. Somehow what was not OK for WMS is ok for Nottingham.

They aren't proposing a countywide program for NES.

Yes they are - it’ll be swing space for the entire county, one school at a time.

That is not the same as a countywide option program and you know it.
If these are the types of arguments you make, don't expect the SB to be sympathetic to your cause.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

I agree this makes the most sense.

But APS ruled out Williamsburg for Immersion because of lack of centrality and lack of public transportation. Yet ignores these same considerations for Nottingham as a swing space.

APS has no idea what they are doing.

So what you're advocating for is Nottingham to be used as a swing space to meet needs. Sounds a lot like what APS is talking about....

How am I doing that? I’m saying that APS decided it was not ok to use Williamsburg for a county wide program because it wasn’t central enough nor was it close enough to mass transit.

But they don’t even consider that Nottingham may not be central enough for a countywide program or have enough mass transit. They completely ignore these issues - issues which they themselves thought were significant hurdles to stop consideration of Williamsburg for immersion. Somehow what was not OK for WMS is ok for Nottingham.

They aren't proposing a countywide program for NES.

Yes they are - it’ll be swing space for the entire county, one school at a time.

That is not the same as a countywide option program and you know it.
If these are the types of arguments you make, don't expect the SB to be sympathetic to your cause.

The difference in traffic for a 100 pct driving (or close to) Immersion school and a 100 pct driving swing space is negligible and you know it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

I agree this makes the most sense.

But APS ruled out Williamsburg for Immersion because of lack of centrality and lack of public transportation. Yet ignores these same considerations for Nottingham as a swing space.

APS has no idea what they are doing.

So what you're advocating for is Nottingham to be used as a swing space to meet needs. Sounds a lot like what APS is talking about....

How am I doing that? I’m saying that APS decided it was not ok to use Williamsburg for a county wide program because it wasn’t central enough nor was it close enough to mass transit.

But they don’t even consider that Nottingham may not be central enough for a countywide program or have enough mass transit. They completely ignore these issues - issues which they themselves thought were significant hurdles to stop consideration of Williamsburg for immersion. Somehow what was not OK for WMS is ok for Nottingham.

They aren't proposing a countywide program for NES.

Yes they are - it’ll be swing space for the entire county, one school at a time.

No one thinks moving kids out of a home school for a renovation is ideal, but APS has decided that it's necessary to modernize schools. Would you rather they rent office space? That would be expensive and likely more disruptive to student learning. Nottingham is undersubscribed. APS needs to renovate schools. Neither of those things have anything to do with Immersion MS and moving Immersion to Nottingham doesn't solve either of those problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

I agree this makes the most sense.

But APS ruled out Williamsburg for Immersion because of lack of centrality and lack of public transportation. Yet ignores these same considerations for Nottingham as a swing space.

APS has no idea what they are doing.

So what you're advocating for is Nottingham to be used as a swing space to meet needs. Sounds a lot like what APS is talking about....

How am I doing that? I’m saying that APS decided it was not ok to use Williamsburg for a county wide program because it wasn’t central enough nor was it close enough to mass transit.

But they don’t even consider that Nottingham may not be central enough for a countywide program or have enough mass transit. They completely ignore these issues - issues which they themselves thought were significant hurdles to stop consideration of Williamsburg for immersion. Somehow what was not OK for WMS is ok for Nottingham.

They aren't proposing a countywide program for NES.

Yes they are - it’ll be swing space for the entire county, one school at a time.

No one thinks moving kids out of a home school for a renovation is ideal, but APS has decided that it's necessary to modernize schools. Would you rather they rent office space? That would be expensive and likely more disruptive to student learning. Nottingham is undersubscribed. APS needs to renovate schools. Neither of those things have anything to do with Immersion MS and moving Immersion to Nottingham doesn't solve either of those problems.

Yes I agree moving Immersion to Nottingham is an incredibly stupid idea and nobody has suggested it other than the OP. Solves zero problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

I agree this makes the most sense.

But APS ruled out Williamsburg for Immersion because of lack of centrality and lack of public transportation. Yet ignores these same considerations for Nottingham as a swing space.

APS has no idea what they are doing.

So what you're advocating for is Nottingham to be used as a swing space to meet needs. Sounds a lot like what APS is talking about....

How am I doing that? I’m saying that APS decided it was not ok to use Williamsburg for a county wide program because it wasn’t central enough nor was it close enough to mass transit.

But they don’t even consider that Nottingham may not be central enough for a countywide program or have enough mass transit. They completely ignore these issues - issues which they themselves thought were significant hurdles to stop consideration of Williamsburg for immersion. Somehow what was not OK for WMS is ok for Nottingham.

They aren't proposing a countywide program for NES.

Yes they are - it’ll be swing space for the entire county, one school at a time.

That is not the same as a countywide option program and you know it.
If these are the types of arguments you make, don't expect the SB to be sympathetic to your cause.

The difference in traffic for a 100 pct driving (or close to) Immersion school and a 100 pct driving swing space is negligible and you know it.

The swing space community will NOT be 100% driving and you know it. The students will be bused, for cryin' out loud!
A countywide option program, however, despite busing availability, tends to have a lot of independent drivers despite bus availability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we get rid of all these stupid option programs that make it impossible to plan for neighborhood needs and waste transportation money year after year? Sensible neighborhood boundaries with ability to request administrative transfers to underenrolled schools. Done - all problems solved.

This only works if enough SA parents are willing to bus their kids to NA. I’m sure some would but I doubt it would be enough.

APS needs to do a better job of forecasting where students will live. Close schools that are underutilized. Sell that land, and buy and build schools where they are needed.

Are you at all familiar with Arlington???
Do you have any idea how long it takes to build a new school?
And do we just keep selling and re-building elsewhere every time the populations shift?
Transportation costs a heckuva lot less than your proposal. There's no good reason Arlington can't just balance its enrollment and bus/otherwise transport (ie, public transit for secondary students) to wherever their schools are. You bring kids to the schools; not schools to the kids. Kids are mobile; schools are not.

Yes I'm familiar with arlington. I've been through several boundary changes. Its ridiculous.
It takes about a year to build a new school.
Maybe if better forecasting were done APS wouldn't need to sell and re-build schools every time the population shifts. Is Arlington really so unique that this is the only place the school district has to do so many boundary shifts as a result of population shifts? We're not that special here.

Arlington keeps planning for 95-100% capacity. They leave no fudge factor, which is especially unfortunate because they keep fudging up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

I agree this makes the most sense.

But APS ruled out Williamsburg for Immersion because of lack of centrality and lack of public transportation. Yet ignores these same considerations for Nottingham as a swing space.

APS has no idea what they are doing.

So what you're advocating for is Nottingham to be used as a swing space to meet needs. Sounds a lot like what APS is talking about....

How am I doing that? I’m saying that APS decided it was not ok to use Williamsburg for a county wide program because it wasn’t central enough nor was it close enough to mass transit.

But they don’t even consider that Nottingham may not be central enough for a countywide program or have enough mass transit. They completely ignore these issues - issues which they themselves thought were significant hurdles to stop consideration of Williamsburg for immersion. Somehow what was not OK for WMS is ok for Nottingham.

They aren't proposing a countywide program for NES.

Yes they are - it’ll be swing space for the entire county, one school at a time.

That is not the same as a countywide option program and you know it.
If these are the types of arguments you make, don't expect the SB to be sympathetic to your cause.

The difference in traffic for a 100 pct driving (or close to) Immersion school and a 100 pct driving swing space is negligible and you know it.

The swing space community will NOT be 100% driving and you know it. The students will be bused, for cryin' out loud!
A countywide option program, however, despite busing availability, tends to have a lot of independent drivers despite bus availability.

Of course there will be drivers - before school, after school. Parents that don’t want their kids on a bus for an hour a day.

Even if it was just busses - where will they park? What route will they take to the school? How many? Nottingham has two busses right now - the site isn’t designed for more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

I agree this makes the most sense.

But APS ruled out Williamsburg for Immersion because of lack of centrality and lack of public transportation. Yet ignores these same considerations for Nottingham as a swing space.

APS has no idea what they are doing.

So what you're advocating for is Nottingham to be used as a swing space to meet needs. Sounds a lot like what APS is talking about....

How am I doing that? I’m saying that APS decided it was not ok to use Williamsburg for a county wide program because it wasn’t central enough nor was it close enough to mass transit.

But they don’t even consider that Nottingham may not be central enough for a countywide program or have enough mass transit. They completely ignore these issues - issues which they themselves thought were significant hurdles to stop consideration of Williamsburg for immersion. Somehow what was not OK for WMS is ok for Nottingham.

They aren't proposing a countywide program for NES.

Yes they are - it’ll be swing space for the entire county, one school at a time.

That is not the same as a countywide option program and you know it.
If these are the types of arguments you make, don't expect the SB to be sympathetic to your cause.

The difference in traffic for a 100 pct driving (or close to) Immersion school and a 100 pct driving swing space is negligible and you know it.

The swing space community will NOT be 100% driving and you know it. The students will be bused, for cryin' out loud!
A countywide option program, however, despite busing availability, tends to have a lot of independent drivers despite bus availability.

Of course there will be drivers - before school, after school. Parents that don’t want their kids on a bus for an hour a day.

Even if it was just busses - where will they park? What route will they take to the school? How many? Nottingham has two busses right now - the site isn’t designed for more.

Brick wall. You're the smart little piggy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we get rid of all these stupid option programs that make it impossible to plan for neighborhood needs and waste transportation money year after year? Sensible neighborhood boundaries with ability to request administrative transfers to underenrolled schools. Done - all problems solved.

This only works if enough SA parents are willing to bus their kids to NA. I’m sure some would but I doubt it would be enough.

APS needs to do a better job of forecasting where students will live. Close schools that are underutilized. Sell that land, and buy and build schools where they are needed.

Are you at all familiar with Arlington???
Do you have any idea how long it takes to build a new school?
And do we just keep selling and re-building elsewhere every time the populations shift?
Transportation costs a heckuva lot less than your proposal. There's no good reason Arlington can't just balance its enrollment and bus/otherwise transport (ie, public transit for secondary students) to wherever their schools are. You bring kids to the schools; not schools to the kids. Kids are mobile; schools are not.

Yes I'm familiar with arlington. I've been through several boundary changes. Its ridiculous.
It takes about a year to build a new school.
Maybe if better forecasting were done APS wouldn't need to sell and re-build schools every time the population shifts. Is Arlington really so unique that this is the only place the school district has to do so many boundary shifts as a result of population shifts? We're not that special here.

Arlington keeps planning for 95-100% capacity. They leave no fudge factor, which is especially unfortunate because they keep fudging up.

Arlington is very small and its schools are not efficiently spaced. So, yes, in that respect Arlington is unique and ends up needing boundary shifts when populations shift. Now, if people were willing to give up the geographical districting and implement a rank-choice admissions approach, boundary changes wouldn't be necessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about we get rid of all these stupid option programs that make it impossible to plan for neighborhood needs and waste transportation money year after year? Sensible neighborhood boundaries with ability to request administrative transfers to underenrolled schools. Done - all problems solved.

+1. Children are indistinguishable widgets, with exactly the same learning needs. What works for one child, works for them all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we get rid of all these stupid option programs that make it impossible to plan for neighborhood needs and waste transportation money year after year? Sensible neighborhood boundaries with ability to request administrative transfers to underenrolled schools. Done - all problems solved.

+1. Children are indistinguishable widgets, with exactly the same learning needs. What works for one child, works for them all.

APS already offers the ability to request administrative transfers to underenrolled schools. Clearly that doesn't work.
All problems NOT solved.