APS - redistricting middle schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed, but the only way to do it likely involves moving kids who might technically be in walk zones for Swanson or Hamm.

APS staff and board need to withstand the screaming and pressure from parents to do what’s best for the county overall.

So what.
1000% agree with your comment about staff and board!!!!

We know a number of Swanson-zoned families who are applying to neighborhood transfers to Williamsburg. Now that more Tuckahoe kids go to Williamsburg instead of Swanson, folks who are “walkers” but too far to walk are looking to transfer.

They see the writing on the wall and don’t want their kid to start at Swanson and have to move. I live on the edge of the Swanson walk zone and it’s not too far too walk (my kid did it for 3 years) but also think it’s no big deal to go to Williamsburg.

I've also heard lots of complaints about Swanson and know several families who are desperate to avoid it.

I don't think APS should ignore all public comments, as I do think APS often puts out stupid, half-assed plans. A few years ago they had one where they wanted to move boundaries to up Glebe to 135% capacity (from 110%) to drop Nottingham to 50-60% capacity. At Glebe, they were going to have to add a fleet of trailers (covering the much-loved basketball court) and turn hallways into classrooms. Meanwhile Jamestown and Discovery were under capacity too. It was idiotic.

Fortunately the community objected and it was fixed, but it made zero sense. APS does need to consider public comments, especially given their own ineptitude, but should ultimately do what's best for the kids and not a narrow subset of parents.

I'm the PP of this post. My kid had a good experience at Swanson. Wonderful music and arts program. YMMV. What I meant about Williamsburg is I'm sure that school is fine too and I don't think taking a bus is that big of a deal personally. And before people say sure you're willing to let other kids be bused when yours walked, I have a final kid that will be impacted by all this and genuinely don't care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed, but the only way to do it likely involves moving kids who might technically be in walk zones for Swanson or Hamm.

APS staff and board need to withstand the screaming and pressure from parents to do what’s best for the county overall.

So what.
1000% agree with your comment about staff and board!!!!

We know a number of Swanson-zoned families who are applying to neighborhood transfers to Williamsburg. Now that more Tuckahoe kids go to Williamsburg instead of Swanson, folks who are “walkers” but too far to walk are looking to transfer.

They see the writing on the wall and don’t want their kid to start at Swanson and have to move. I live on the edge of the Swanson walk zone and it’s not too far too walk (my kid did it for 3 years) but also think it’s no big deal to go to Williamsburg.

I've also heard lots of complaints about Swanson and know several families who are desperate to avoid it.

I don't think APS should ignore all public comments, as I do think APS often puts out stupid, half-assed plans. A few years ago they had one where they wanted to move boundaries to up Glebe to 135% capacity (from 110%) to drop Nottingham to 50-60% capacity. At Glebe, they were going to have to add a fleet of trailers (covering the much-loved basketball court) and turn hallways into classrooms. Meanwhile Jamestown and Discovery were under capacity too. It was idiotic.

Fortunately the community objected and it was fixed, but it made zero sense. APS does need to consider public comments, especially given their own ineptitude, but should ultimately do what's best for the kids and not a narrow subset of parents.

The Swanson principal is fantastic. Desperate to avoid it sounds a bit hysterical but ok.

You're describing the original proposal to fill Cardinal and you're not accurately portraying the situation or the variables involved.

I feel for APS staff. What a thankless task dealing with APS parents. And no I don't work for them.

I’ll second this. The current Swanson principal
is excellent. She had been the principal for many years there and was asked by APS to return recently. The culture there has definitely changed and bullying is not tolerated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed, but the only way to do it likely involves moving kids who might technically be in walk zones for Swanson or Hamm.

APS staff and board need to withstand the screaming and pressure from parents to do what’s best for the county overall.

So what.
1000% agree with your comment about staff and board!!!!

We know a number of Swanson-zoned families who are applying to neighborhood transfers to Williamsburg. Now that more Tuckahoe kids go to Williamsburg instead of Swanson, folks who are “walkers” but too far to walk are looking to transfer.

They see the writing on the wall and don’t want their kid to start at Swanson and have to move. I live on the edge of the Swanson walk zone and it’s not too far too walk (my kid did it for 3 years) but also think it’s no big deal to go to Williamsburg.

I've also heard lots of complaints about Swanson and know several families who are desperate to avoid it.

I don't think APS should ignore all public comments, as I do think APS often puts out stupid, half-assed plans. A few years ago they had one where they wanted to move boundaries to up Glebe to 135% capacity (from 110%) to drop Nottingham to 50-60% capacity. At Glebe, they were going to have to add a fleet of trailers (covering the much-loved basketball court) and turn hallways into classrooms. Meanwhile Jamestown and Discovery were under capacity too. It was idiotic.

Fortunately the community objected and it was fixed, but it made zero sense. APS does need to consider public comments, especially given their own ineptitude, but should ultimately do what's best for the kids and not a narrow subset of parents.

The Swanson principal is fantastic. Desperate to avoid it sounds a bit hysterical but ok.

You're describing the original proposal to fill Cardinal and you're not accurately portraying the situation or the variables involved.

I feel for APS staff. What a thankless task dealing with APS parents. And no I don't work for them.

We're not zoned for Swanson, so I don't have a dog in this fight, but I do have a 5th grader and know families who are considering selling their house and moving or renting a house elsewhere just to avoid Swanson. Are they right in their views? I have no idea, but I'd call that desperate.

I absolutely am correctly portraying the original APS plan for Glebe, which was utter nonsense and dropped on that basis early in the process. Some may have missed that proposal because it was so short lived, but it is what APS originally put out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed, but the only way to do it likely involves moving kids who might technically be in walk zones for Swanson or Hamm.

APS staff and board need to withstand the screaming and pressure from parents to do what’s best for the county overall.

So what.
1000% agree with your comment about staff and board!!!!

We know a number of Swanson-zoned families who are applying to neighborhood transfers to Williamsburg. Now that more Tuckahoe kids go to Williamsburg instead of Swanson, folks who are “walkers” but too far to walk are looking to transfer.

They see the writing on the wall and don’t want their kid to start at Swanson and have to move. I live on the edge of the Swanson walk zone and it’s not too far too walk (my kid did it for 3 years) but also think it’s no big deal to go to Williamsburg.

I've also heard lots of complaints about Swanson and know several families who are desperate to avoid it.

I don't think APS should ignore all public comments, as I do think APS often puts out stupid, half-assed plans. A few years ago they had one where they wanted to move boundaries to up Glebe to 135% capacity (from 110%) to drop Nottingham to 50-60% capacity. At Glebe, they were going to have to add a fleet of trailers (covering the much-loved basketball court) and turn hallways into classrooms. Meanwhile Jamestown and Discovery were under capacity too. It was idiotic.

Fortunately the community objected and it was fixed, but it made zero sense. APS does need to consider public comments, especially given their own ineptitude, but should ultimately do what's best for the kids and not a narrow subset of parents.

The Swanson principal is fantastic. Desperate to avoid it sounds a bit hysterical but ok.

You're describing the original proposal to fill Cardinal and you're not accurately portraying the situation or the variables involved.

I feel for APS staff. What a thankless task dealing with APS parents. And no I don't work for them.

We're not zoned for Swanson, so I don't have a dog in this fight, but I do have a 5th grader and know families who are considering selling their house and moving or renting a house elsewhere just to avoid Swanson. Are they right in their views? I have no idea, but I'd call that desperate.

I absolutely am correctly portraying the original APS plan for Glebe, which was utter nonsense and dropped on that basis early in the process. Some may have missed that proposal because it was so short lived, but it is what APS originally put out.

Since you are persisting, I will post this from the APS archives. I did not miss anything I paid close attention at the time.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/sites/57/2023/03/2020-10-17-ES-Boundaries-Summary-2-DONE.pdf

Look at the Glebe section. You are both misrepresenting the capacity numbers and not fully representing the conversations about these proposals. (And yes APS included relocatables in their utilization rates, which they do at a lot of APS schools.) They were talking about moving a walkable Glebe planning unit to Cardinal to offset some of the kids being added to Glebe. The conversation at the beginning centered around trying to prioritize walkers and walk zones, which is what many APS parents are so keen on until they are not when it doesn't work for them and something else is now more important.

Instead we ended up with Cardinal where a bunch of kids could walk to this school and don't and Westover is a flood of traffic in the morning.

What APS put forward was a starting point of a discussion of trying to figure it out, which is their job. They got shouted down nearly immediately and McKinley just got sent to Cardinal minus 3 planning units to Ashlawn.

[Anonymous]

Swanson has a new principal? We were glad they built Hamm so our kids didn't have to go there. It sounded horrible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed, but the only way to do it likely involves moving kids who might technically be in walk zones for Swanson or Hamm.

APS staff and board need to withstand the screaming and pressure from parents to do what’s best for the county overall.

So what.
1000% agree with your comment about staff and board!!!!

We know a number of Swanson-zoned families who are applying to neighborhood transfers to Williamsburg. Now that more Tuckahoe kids go to Williamsburg instead of Swanson, folks who are “walkers” but too far to walk are looking to transfer.

They see the writing on the wall and don’t want their kid to start at Swanson and have to move. I live on the edge of the Swanson walk zone and it’s not too far too walk (my kid did it for 3 years) but also think it’s no big deal to go to Williamsburg.

I've also heard lots of complaints about Swanson and know several families who are desperate to avoid it.

I don't think APS should ignore all public comments, as I do think APS often puts out stupid, half-assed plans. A few years ago they had one where they wanted to move boundaries to up Glebe to 135% capacity (from 110%) to drop Nottingham to 50-60% capacity. At Glebe, they were going to have to add a fleet of trailers (covering the much-loved basketball court) and turn hallways into classrooms. Meanwhile Jamestown and Discovery were under capacity too. It was idiotic.

Fortunately the community objected and it was fixed, but it made zero sense. APS does need to consider public comments, especially given their own ineptitude, but should ultimately do what's best for the kids and not a narrow subset of parents.

The Swanson principal is fantastic. Desperate to avoid it sounds a bit hysterical but ok.

You're describing the original proposal to fill Cardinal and you're not accurately portraying the situation or the variables involved.

I feel for APS staff. What a thankless task dealing with APS parents. And no I don't work for them.

We're not zoned for Swanson, so I don't have a dog in this fight, but I do have a 5th grader and know families who are considering selling their house and moving or renting a house elsewhere just to avoid Swanson. Are they right in their views? I have no idea, but I'd call that desperate.

I absolutely am correctly portraying the original APS plan for Glebe, which was utter nonsense and dropped on that basis early in the process. Some may have missed that proposal because it was so short lived, but it is what APS originally put out.

Since you are persisting, I will post this from the APS archives. I did not miss anything I paid close attention at the time.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/sites/57/2023/03/2020-10-17-ES-Boundaries-Summary-2-DONE.pdf

Look at the Glebe section. You are both misrepresenting the capacity numbers and not fully representing the conversations about these proposals. (And yes APS included relocatables in their utilization rates, which they do at a lot of APS schools.) They were talking about moving a walkable Glebe planning unit to Cardinal to offset some of the kids being added to Glebe. The conversation at the beginning centered around trying to prioritize walkers and walk zones, which is what many APS parents are so keen on until they are not when it doesn't work for them and something else is now more important.

Instead we ended up with Cardinal where a bunch of kids could walk to this school and don't and Westover is a flood of traffic in the morning.

What APS put forward was a starting point of a discussion of trying to figure it out, which is their job. They got shouted down nearly immediately and McKinley just got sent to Cardinal minus 3 planning units to Ashlawn.

So you are saying that APS wasn't proposing to increase the number of students at Glebe when it is already overcapacity and surrounding schools are under capacity? Trailers increase classroom space, but core facilities like the already overcrowded lunchroom don't get bigger with more trailers. The students they were moving to Glebe also weren't walkable. If you read, they would have been busing the students to Glebe to bring it to 128% capacity, while several surrounding schools were well below 100%. It was dropped very early because it was a stupid, poorly thought out plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Swanson has a new principal? We were glad they built Hamm so our kids didn't have to go there. It sounded horrible.

Bridget Loft has been the principal since spring 2022. The 2021-2022 school year was a bit of a tumultuous year for Swanson as they didn't have a consistent principal and it was the year the kids were back full-time after covid. I actually had a child in the school at this time, unlike probably the people posting and it wasn't ideal but not a disaster either. That school year was just hard all over for a lot of reasons.

Loft is a fantastic principal. Not going to spend a bunch of time countering the highly fact-based it sounds "horrible" too much as why bother.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Swanson has a new principal? We were glad they built Hamm so our kids didn't have to go there. It sounded horrible.

Bridget Loft has been the principal since spring 2022. The 2021-2022 school year was a bit of a tumultuous year for Swanson as they didn't have a consistent principal and it was the year the kids were back full-time after covid. I actually had a child in the school at this time, unlike probably the people posting and it wasn't ideal but not a disaster either. That school year was just hard all over for a lot of reasons.

Loft is a fantastic principal. Not going to spend a bunch of time countering the highly fact-based it sounds "horrible" too much as why bother.

We heard it was horrible from multiple neighbors who had kids attending - this was pre-Hamm so several years ago.

Glad to hear they have a new principal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Swanson has a new principal? We were glad they built Hamm so our kids didn't have to go there. It sounded horrible.

Bridget Loft has been the principal since spring 2022. The 2021-2022 school year was a bit of a tumultuous year for Swanson as they didn't have a consistent principal and it was the year the kids were back full-time after covid. I actually had a child in the school at this time, unlike probably the people posting and it wasn't ideal but not a disaster either. That school year was just hard all over for a lot of reasons.

Loft is a fantastic principal. Not going to spend a bunch of time countering the highly fact-based it sounds "horrible" too much as why bother.

We heard it was horrible from multiple neighbors who had kids attending - this was pre-Hamm so several years ago.

Glad to hear they have a new principal.

It was very very over crowded pre-Hamm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed, but the only way to do it likely involves moving kids who might technically be in walk zones for Swanson or Hamm.

APS staff and board need to withstand the screaming and pressure from parents to do what’s best for the county overall.

So what.
1000% agree with your comment about staff and board!!!!

We know a number of Swanson-zoned families who are applying to neighborhood transfers to Williamsburg. Now that more Tuckahoe kids go to Williamsburg instead of Swanson, folks who are “walkers” but too far to walk are looking to transfer.

They see the writing on the wall and don’t want their kid to start at Swanson and have to move. I live on the edge of the Swanson walk zone and it’s not too far too walk (my kid did it for 3 years) but also think it’s no big deal to go to Williamsburg.

I've also heard lots of complaints about Swanson and know several families who are desperate to avoid it.

I don't think APS should ignore all public comments, as I do think APS often puts out stupid, half-assed plans. A few years ago they had one where they wanted to move boundaries to up Glebe to 135% capacity (from 110%) to drop Nottingham to 50-60% capacity. At Glebe, they were going to have to add a fleet of trailers (covering the much-loved basketball court) and turn hallways into classrooms. Meanwhile Jamestown and Discovery were under capacity too. It was idiotic.

Fortunately the community objected and it was fixed, but it made zero sense. APS does need to consider public comments, especially given their own ineptitude, but should ultimately do what's best for the kids and not a narrow subset of parents.

The Swanson principal is fantastic. Desperate to avoid it sounds a bit hysterical but ok.

You're describing the original proposal to fill Cardinal and you're not accurately portraying the situation or the variables involved.

I feel for APS staff. What a thankless task dealing with APS parents. And no I don't work for them.

We're not zoned for Swanson, so I don't have a dog in this fight, but I do have a 5th grader and know families who are considering selling their house and moving or renting a house elsewhere just to avoid Swanson. Are they right in their views? I have no idea, but I'd call that desperate.

I absolutely am correctly portraying the original APS plan for Glebe, which was utter nonsense and dropped on that basis early in the process. Some may have missed that proposal because it was so short lived, but it is what APS originally put out.

Since you are persisting, I will post this from the APS archives. I did not miss anything I paid close attention at the time.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/sites/57/2023/03/2020-10-17-ES-Boundaries-Summary-2-DONE.pdf

Look at the Glebe section. You are both misrepresenting the capacity numbers and not fully representing the conversations about these proposals. (And yes APS included relocatables in their utilization rates, which they do at a lot of APS schools.) They were talking about moving a walkable Glebe planning unit to Cardinal to offset some of the kids being added to Glebe. The conversation at the beginning centered around trying to prioritize walkers and walk zones, which is what many APS parents are so keen on until they are not when it doesn't work for them and something else is now more important.

Instead we ended up with Cardinal where a bunch of kids could walk to this school and don't and Westover is a flood of traffic in the morning.

What APS put forward was a starting point of a discussion of trying to figure it out, which is their job. They got shouted down nearly immediately and McKinley just got sent to Cardinal minus 3 planning units to Ashlawn.

So you are saying that APS wasn't proposing to increase the number of students at Glebe when it is already overcapacity and surrounding schools are under capacity? Trailers increase classroom space, but core facilities like the already overcrowded lunchroom don't get bigger with more trailers. The students they were moving to Glebe also weren't walkable. If you read, they would have been busing the students to Glebe to bring it to 128% capacity, while several surrounding schools were well below 100%. It was dropped very early because it was a stupid, poorly thought out plan.

What I am saying is APS was attempting to start a broad conversation at the time about a bunch of issues and boundaries. Look past your own nose! Meanwhile if you'd been in a Glebe planning unit they'd proposed to send to any of the under enrolled schools you would have flipped your lid about that at the time.

Keep my status quo and not in my yard and piss off to any larger context or greater good is not exactly an easy starting point for these conversations for APS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Swanson has a new principal? We were glad they built Hamm so our kids didn't have to go there. It sounded horrible.

Bridget Loft has been the principal since spring 2022. The 2021-2022 school year was a bit of a tumultuous year for Swanson as they didn't have a consistent principal and it was the year the kids were back full-time after covid. I actually had a child in the school at this time, unlike probably the people posting and it wasn't ideal but not a disaster either. That school year was just hard all over for a lot of reasons.

Loft is a fantastic principal. Not going to spend a bunch of time countering the highly fact-based it sounds "horrible" too much as why bother.

We heard it was horrible from multiple neighbors who had kids attending - this was pre-Hamm so several years ago.

Glad to hear they have a new principal.

It was very very over crowded pre-Hamm.

And lots of bullying, bad teachers, etc. from what we heard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed, but the only way to do it likely involves moving kids who might technically be in walk zones for Swanson or Hamm.

APS staff and board need to withstand the screaming and pressure from parents to do what’s best for the county overall.

So what.
1000% agree with your comment about staff and board!!!!

We know a number of Swanson-zoned families who are applying to neighborhood transfers to Williamsburg. Now that more Tuckahoe kids go to Williamsburg instead of Swanson, folks who are “walkers” but too far to walk are looking to transfer.

They see the writing on the wall and don’t want their kid to start at Swanson and have to move. I live on the edge of the Swanson walk zone and it’s not too far too walk (my kid did it for 3 years) but also think it’s no big deal to go to Williamsburg.

I've also heard lots of complaints about Swanson and know several families who are desperate to avoid it.

I don't think APS should ignore all public comments, as I do think APS often puts out stupid, half-assed plans. A few years ago they had one where they wanted to move boundaries to up Glebe to 135% capacity (from 110%) to drop Nottingham to 50-60% capacity. At Glebe, they were going to have to add a fleet of trailers (covering the much-loved basketball court) and turn hallways into classrooms. Meanwhile Jamestown and Discovery were under capacity too. It was idiotic.

Fortunately the community objected and it was fixed, but it made zero sense. APS does need to consider public comments, especially given their own ineptitude, but should ultimately do what's best for the kids and not a narrow subset of parents.

The Swanson principal is fantastic. Desperate to avoid it sounds a bit hysterical but ok.

You're describing the original proposal to fill Cardinal and you're not accurately portraying the situation or the variables involved.

I feel for APS staff. What a thankless task dealing with APS parents. And no I don't work for them.

We're not zoned for Swanson, so I don't have a dog in this fight, but I do have a 5th grader and know families who are considering selling their house and moving or renting a house elsewhere just to avoid Swanson. Are they right in their views? I have no idea, but I'd call that desperate.

I absolutely am correctly portraying the original APS plan for Glebe, which was utter nonsense and dropped on that basis early in the process. Some may have missed that proposal because it was so short lived, but it is what APS originally put out.

Since you are persisting, I will post this from the APS archives. I did not miss anything I paid close attention at the time.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/sites/57/2023/03/2020-10-17-ES-Boundaries-Summary-2-DONE.pdf

Look at the Glebe section. You are both misrepresenting the capacity numbers and not fully representing the conversations about these proposals. (And yes APS included relocatables in their utilization rates, which they do at a lot of APS schools.) They were talking about moving a walkable Glebe planning unit to Cardinal to offset some of the kids being added to Glebe. The conversation at the beginning centered around trying to prioritize walkers and walk zones, which is what many APS parents are so keen on until they are not when it doesn't work for them and something else is now more important.

Instead we ended up with Cardinal where a bunch of kids could walk to this school and don't and Westover is a flood of traffic in the morning.

What APS put forward was a starting point of a discussion of trying to figure it out, which is their job. They got shouted down nearly immediately and McKinley just got sent to Cardinal minus 3 planning units to Ashlawn.

So you are saying that APS wasn't proposing to increase the number of students at Glebe when it is already overcapacity and surrounding schools are under capacity? Trailers increase classroom space, but core facilities like the already overcrowded lunchroom don't get bigger with more trailers. The students they were moving to Glebe also weren't walkable. If you read, they would have been busing the students to Glebe to bring it to 128% capacity, while several surrounding schools were well below 100%. It was dropped very early because it was a stupid, poorly thought out plan.

What I am saying is APS was attempting to start a broad conversation at the time about a bunch of issues and boundaries. Look past your own nose! Meanwhile if you'd been in a Glebe planning unit they'd proposed to send to any of the under enrolled schools you would have flipped your lid about that at the time.

Keep my status quo and not in my yard and piss off to any larger context or greater good is not exactly an easy starting point for these conversations for APS.

Such nonsense. APS shouldn't be putting out ridiculous proposals to "start a conversation." All that does is create drama and reduce confidence in APS.

And it makes zero sense for APS to open a new elementary school to reduce overcrowding and in that proposal move students in a way that increases overcrowding while leaving adjacent schools well under capacity. It's like they lost track of the whole point of opening a new school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Process started last year and put on pause until next fall. Look on APS engage website.

There was a lot of fighting about where the middle school immersion program should go and the Hamm people had a meltdown over having to take a bus so the county stopped the process.

But yes the likelihood is some Swanson and Hamm kids will be sent to Williamsburg.

this would start 2026?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Process started last year and put on pause until next fall. Look on APS engage website.

There was a lot of fighting about where the middle school immersion program should go and the Hamm people had a meltdown over having to take a bus so the county stopped the process.

But yes the likelihood is some Swanson and Hamm kids will be sent to Williamsburg.

this would start 2026?

It depends what “next fall” means. I’m not sure if it is this coming fall. Or the fall of 2025.

[Anonymous]

Just seeing this thread as I started to wonder what happened to moving MS immersion to Kenmore (please!). Such interesting comments and observations. I chose a few to highlight below:

On MS boundaries: "Agreed, but the only way to do it likely involves moving kids who might technically be in walk zones for Swanson or Hamm.

APS staff and board need to withstand the screaming and pressure from parents to do what’s best for the county overall."

I still don't see how it's okay to have some middle schools right at capacity (which I can tell you as a Swanson parent operating right at capacity still feels very crowded and involves trailers and barely any room at lunch and all those impacts) ***while Williamsburg sits half empty.***

We have to be able to have hard conversations as a school system to do the right things sometimes.
__________________
On Gunston: I went and looked. You have to go back two years but enrollment dropped by about 80 from 2 years ago and now. I don't think the entire reason to redraw the borders evaporated but I guess they felt they could get away with pausing when the numbers dropped and re-evaluate doing a more subtle push northward on boundaries and just leave immersion where it is. (BOO! See above comment again)
_____________
Are they no longer talking about turning Nottingham into swing space?

No, off the table. for now...

APS conceded that the swing space plan didn't make sense. **They haven't said that they have enough enrollment to keep Nottingham open.**