Any update on the McKinley mess?

[Anonymous]

We are in the McK district, but on the border of another district, so I called the bordering school to inquire about a transfer. I was told "transfers are rare.. by exception" and that I would have to RE-APPLY FOR A TRANSFER EVERY YEAR (school board policy)!

So, year-by-year we won't know if the non-neighborhood school will reject our transfer apps therefore we risk getting our kids settled happily into a school only to be forced out a few (?) years down the line. I don't want to risk this scenario once my son settles in and makes friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are in the McK district, but on the border of another district, so I called the bordering school to inquire about a transfer. I was told "transfers are rare.. by exception" and that I would have to RE-APPLY FOR A TRANSFER EVERY YEAR (school board policy)!

So, year-by-year we won't know if the non-neighborhood school will reject our transfer apps therefore we risk getting our kids settled happily into a school only to be forced out a few (?) years down the line. I don't want to risk this scenario once my son settles in and makes friends.

They are changing that policy per the work session last night. I don't think it will be in place for next year, but possibly for the year after. Once you're in, you get to stay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are in the McK district, but on the border of another district, so I called the bordering school to inquire about a transfer. I was told "transfers are rare.. by exception" and that I would have to RE-APPLY FOR A TRANSFER EVERY YEAR (school board policy)!

So, year-by-year we won't know if the non-neighborhood school will reject our transfer apps therefore we risk getting our kids settled happily into a school only to be forced out a few (?) years down the line. I don't want to risk this scenario once my son settles in and makes friends.

They are changing that policy per the work session last night. I don't think it will be in place for next year, but possibly for the year after. Once you're in, you get to stay.

I really think that's true now. What's a little weird now is that to get a neighborhood transfer per policy, the school must be projected to be more than 5% under capacity- since no school falls into that category you can't get neighborhood transfers per policy. You can however petition for a waiver. Since there are no rules for petitioning for a waiver, I guess they could do it as a time limited thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need to elect Maura whatever her name. She is 100% for a 4th high school.

Maura McMahon lives in my neighborhood. She's running for School Board because she is as frustrated as us with the current School Board. She is in favor of a fourth comprehensive high school, and long-term planning generally. I don't honestly know much about her other positions - I need to do some research - but she already seems like a better option that what we have now.

Agree - she's a friend-of-a-friend and I like per personally based on the few interactions we've had. She's smart and thoughtful and seems to have good instincts. That said, at this point she gets my vote purely on the basis of me being disgusted with every current SB member.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are in the McK district, but on the border of another district, so I called the bordering school to inquire about a transfer. I was told "transfers are rare.. by exception" and that I would have to RE-APPLY FOR A TRANSFER EVERY YEAR (school board policy)!

So, year-by-year we won't know if the non-neighborhood school will reject our transfer apps therefore we risk getting our kids settled happily into a school only to be forced out a few (?) years down the line. I don't want to risk this scenario once my son settles in and makes friends.

They are changing that policy per the work session last night. I don't think it will be in place for next year, but possibly for the year after. Once you're in, you get to stay.

I really think that's true now. What's a little weird now is that [/b]to get a neighborhood transfer per policy, the school must be projected to be more than 5% under capacity[b]- since no school falls into that category you can't get neighborhood transfers per policy. You can however petition for a waiver. Since there are no rules for petitioning for a waiver, I guess they could do it as a time limited thing.

They're looking at revising that part of the policy, too, since none of the schools meet that criteria and probably won't again in our lifetimes. Not sure how soon the revision will take effect.

[Anonymous]

I've spoken to a SB member and brought up that exact concern (having to reapply) and he said it was absolutely not the case.

Also, Discovery is projected less than 95%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've spoken to a SB member and brought up that exact concern (having to reapply) and he said it was absolutely not the case.

Also, Discovery is projected less than 95%.

Either he doesn't know or he's not being honest. It is the case now. And they make sure to tell you that, too, to make it less attractive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are in the McK district, but on the border of another district, so I called the bordering school to inquire about a transfer. I was told "transfers are rare.. by exception" and that I would have to RE-APPLY FOR A TRANSFER EVERY YEAR (school board policy)!

So, year-by-year we won't know if the non-neighborhood school will reject our transfer apps therefore we risk getting our kids settled happily into a school only to be forced out a few (?) years down the line. I don't want to risk this scenario once my son settles in and makes friends.

They are changing that policy per the work session last night. I don't think it will be in place for next year, but possibly for the year after. Once you're in, you get to stay.

Just as point of clarification, it's not up to an individual school to make the decision on a transfer, it comes from the central office. Point is it doesn't help to inundate a school principal with requests, as he or she doesn't make the actual decision.

[Anonymous]

B Kan.... recently said that overcrowding is just part of APS and some schools have to bear the weight. She said this in a public forum in response to a request to fix the McKnley debacle.

[Anonymous]

You spent how much to buy in Westover?
Should've looked in South Arlington.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:B Kan.... recently said that overcrowding is just part of APS and some schools have to bear the weight. She said this in a public forum in response to a request to fix the McKnley debacle.

Murphy has also said the expect trailers to be a permanent part of schools, although with a goal of not having them concentrated at just a few schools like now but that most schools would have some and moved around as needed to deal with capacity. They do not plan to build permanent seats for all kids ever.

[Anonymous]

Wait - is this the elementary school that they just rebuilt or added on to in north arlington? Hahahahaha!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've spoken to a SB member and brought up that exact concern (having to reapply) and he said it was absolutely not the case.

Also, Discovery is projected less than 95%.

Either he doesn't know or he's not being honest. It is the case now. And they make sure to tell you that, too, to make it less attractive.

I would direct anyone who is telling you that you have to reapply every year to the APS website- that clearly states you don't. It's the first sentence-
https://www.apsva.us/school-options/elementary-school-choices/area-and-countywide-elementary/how-to-apply/

[Anonymous]

Trailers are one thing. Refusing to make simple changes so the school doesn't have to be the only one without a field is something entirely different. The SB members are disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:B Kan.... recently said that overcrowding is just part of APS and some schools have to bear the weight. She said this in a public forum in response to a request to fix the McKnley debacle.

This was in response to a request to fix the planning factors to reflect actual numbers (for example, Sp.Ed, gifted teachers, etc). She doesn't care if kids at an 800 student school get access to specialists b/c they don't have 2 on staff, even though other schools have 200 fewer students and have the same number of specialists for their population. It's really disturbing.