8/27 APS Work Session—Elementary Boundaries

[Anonymous]

I really want to know what was said about boundaries at the SB meeting this week— anyone watch yet/can provide a summary!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait to see the FRL numbers for Montessori. ESPECIALLY 1-5. Finally it will be public how few disadvantaged kids are getting any benefit from this program. It's publicly subsidized specialty education. At least they FINALLY got rid of the "prior experience" requirement that was limiting any additional elementary enrollment to rich families who could afford private montessori preK. That was the best thing Tara Nattrass did.

The Montessori preschool is part time so requires a SAHM, so it was subsides for single earner households. If that second parent worked they likely would be over the 80%.

It wasn’t a requirement, it was a preference and it was never practiced because up until a couple years ago there was no waitlist at elementary Montessori. So bitter.

Duh. If it was a full day preschool the waitlist would be endless. That’s why it’s a subsidy.

You’re confused. Montessori public preschool charges fees on sliding scale at at the top of the range are comparable to private preschool. The only kids being subsidized are those who by definition are not “rich”.

Then Arlington doesn't need to keep providing Montessori - parents can pay the same in private Montessori. But I don't believe that. How does the post-kindergarten tuition compare?

t

Wow you are confusing. What don't you believe, that preK tuition is a sliding scale? That 2/3 slots got 80% local household median or below? Or The fact that the rich actually have to pay full freight at public Montessori is for real? All true, look it up.
I look forward to the FRLs. I look forward to Montessori showing excellent results with a population that is economically and otherwise diverse. I look forward to the program expanding because of demand, and county taxpayers realizing it provides great bang for the in closing achievement gap, in part because it brings in tuition.

I don't believe APS Montessori is paying the same as private Montessori. I know there's a sliding scale and I've seen it. I know there's supposed to be a 2/3 seat set-aside for 80% median below; but I don't know that those seats are completely filled by such. I'd like to see how many are actually FRL-eligible, which is much farther below 80% median income - and that's a significant difference. Montessori keeps touting that it serves so many low-income students; but that doesn't automatically mean its FRL% is the 50% and up you see at other APS schools. And I would like to see the academic performance measures for those students. If the FRL% is lower and test scores are higher, I'd like to see that as potential support for the impacts of socioeconomic diversity to help bolster that argument systemwide.

People criticize Montessori as a subsidy for the rich because nobody in K-5 pays any tuition. So don't try to convince people that the program should expand because it brings in tuition. Preschool tuition is not paying for the costs of higher level Montessori. and Montessori does cost more.

It costs the same as immersion. Do you think immersion and Montessori families don’t pay taxes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really want to know what was said about boundaries at the SB meeting this week— anyone watch yet/can provide a summary!

It wasn’t on the agenda, so probably nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait to see the FRL numbers for Montessori. ESPECIALLY 1-5. Finally it will be public how few disadvantaged kids are getting any benefit from this program. It's publicly subsidized specialty education. At least they FINALLY got rid of the "prior experience" requirement that was limiting any additional elementary enrollment to rich families who could afford private montessori preK. That was the best thing Tara Nattrass did.

The Montessori preschool is part time so requires a SAHM, so it was subsides for single earner households. If that second parent worked they likely would be over the 80%.

It wasn’t a requirement, it was a preference and it was never practiced because up until a couple years ago there was no waitlist at elementary Montessori. So bitter.

Duh. If it was a full day preschool the waitlist would be endless. That’s why it’s a subsidy.

You’re confused. Montessori public preschool charges fees on sliding scale at at the top of the range are comparable to private preschool. The only kids being subsidized are those who by definition are not “rich”.

Then Arlington doesn't need to keep providing Montessori - parents can pay the same in private Montessori. But I don't believe that. How does the post-kindergarten tuition compare?

t

Wow you are confusing. What don't you believe, that preK tuition is a sliding scale? That 2/3 slots got 80% local household median or below? Or The fact that the rich actually have to pay full freight at public Montessori is for real? All true, look it up.
I look forward to the FRLs. I look forward to Montessori showing excellent results with a population that is economically and otherwise diverse. I look forward to the program expanding because of demand, and county taxpayers realizing it provides great bang for the in closing achievement gap, in part because it brings in tuition.

I don't believe APS Montessori is paying the same as private Montessori. I know there's a sliding scale and I've seen it. I know there's supposed to be a 2/3 seat set-aside for 80% median below; but I don't know that those seats are completely filled by such. I'd like to see how many are actually FRL-eligible, which is much farther below 80% median income - and that's a significant difference. Montessori keeps touting that it serves so many low-income students; but that doesn't automatically mean its FRL% is the 50% and up you see at other APS schools. And I would like to see the academic performance measures for those students. If the FRL% is lower and test scores are higher, I'd like to see that as potential support for the impacts of socioeconomic diversity to help bolster that argument systemwide.

People criticize Montessori as a subsidy for the rich because nobody in K-5 pays any tuition. So don't try to convince people that the program should expand because it brings in tuition. Preschool tuition is not paying for the costs of higher level Montessori. and Montessori does cost more.

It costs the same as immersion. Do you think immersion and Montessori families don’t pay taxes?

Oh please. People sending kids to private schools pay taxes. That's not the point and you know it.
I guess my sentence should have been longer: People criticize Montessori a a subsidy or the rich because nobody in K-5 (actually K-8) pays any tuition AND Montessori is traditionally a PRIVATE SCHOOL for which people pay tuition. APS is offering a private school program for free, but it costs more than the regular ol' neighborhood program. So to argue it should expand because it brings in tuition is disingenuous. VPI provides state funding - and it serves ONLY the LOWEST income kids and doesn't cost low-income families ANY money. Let's expand THAT!

Give us the actual relevant statistics and THEN argue for expansion. Insist APS posts those statistics to the community separately, because they will be reporting them as part of the students' assigned neighborhood school to the state and we will never see Montessori's actual results unless they make the extra effort to report them separately. You can already see them for immersion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait to see the FRL numbers for Montessori. ESPECIALLY 1-5. Finally it will be public how few disadvantaged kids are getting any benefit from this program. It's publicly subsidized specialty education. At least they FINALLY got rid of the "prior experience" requirement that was limiting any additional elementary enrollment to rich families who could afford private montessori preK. That was the best thing Tara Nattrass did.

The Montessori preschool is part time so requires a SAHM, so it was subsides for single earner households. If that second parent worked they likely would be over the 80%.

It wasn’t a requirement, it was a preference and it was never practiced because up until a couple years ago there was no waitlist at elementary Montessori. So bitter.

Duh. If it was a full day preschool the waitlist would be endless. That’s why it’s a subsidy.

You’re confused. Montessori public preschool charges fees on sliding scale at at the top of the range are comparable to private preschool. The only kids being subsidized are those who by definition are not “rich”.

Then Arlington doesn't need to keep providing Montessori - parents can pay the same in private Montessori. But I don't believe that. How does the post-kindergarten tuition compare?

t

Wow you are confusing. What don't you believe, that preK tuition is a sliding scale? That 2/3 slots got 80% local household median or below? Or The fact that the rich actually have to pay full freight at public Montessori is for real? All true, look it up.
I look forward to the FRLs. I look forward to Montessori showing excellent results with a population that is economically and otherwise diverse. I look forward to the program expanding because of demand, and county taxpayers realizing it provides great bang for the in closing achievement gap, in part because it brings in tuition.

I don't believe APS Montessori is paying the same as private Montessori. I know there's a sliding scale and I've seen it. I know there's supposed to be a 2/3 seat set-aside for 80% median below; but I don't know that those seats are completely filled by such. I'd like to see how many are actually FRL-eligible, which is much farther below 80% median income - and that's a significant difference. Montessori keeps touting that it serves so many low-income students; but that doesn't automatically mean its FRL% is the 50% and up you see at other APS schools. And I would like to see the academic performance measures for those students. If the FRL% is lower and test scores are higher, I'd like to see that as potential support for the impacts of socioeconomic diversity to help bolster that argument systemwide.

People criticize Montessori as a subsidy for the rich because nobody in K-5 pays any tuition. So don't try to convince people that the program should expand because it brings in tuition. Preschool tuition is not paying for the costs of higher level Montessori. and Montessori does cost more.

What exactly are you so amped up about? Did a gang of Montessori kids toilet paper your yard?

Not amped up. Merely countering a message I don't fully believe is accurate or as transparent as it tries to seem. I was asked what I didn't believe - because I was apparently confusing. So I responded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait to see the FRL numbers for Montessori. ESPECIALLY 1-5. Finally it will be public how few disadvantaged kids are getting any benefit from this program. It's publicly subsidized specialty education. At least they FINALLY got rid of the "prior experience" requirement that was limiting any additional elementary enrollment to rich families who could afford private montessori preK. That was the best thing Tara Nattrass did.

The Montessori preschool is part time so requires a SAHM, so it was subsides for single earner households. If that second parent worked they likely would be over the 80%.

It wasn’t a requirement, it was a preference and it was never practiced because up until a couple years ago there was no waitlist at elementary Montessori. So bitter.

Duh. If it was a full day preschool the waitlist would be endless. That’s why it’s a subsidy.

You’re confused. Montessori public preschool charges fees on sliding scale at at the top of the range are comparable to private preschool. The only kids being subsidized are those who by definition are not “rich”.

Then Arlington doesn't need to keep providing Montessori - parents can pay the same in private Montessori. But I don't believe that. How does the post-kindergarten tuition compare?

t

Wow you are confusing. What don't you believe, that preK tuition is a sliding scale? That 2/3 slots got 80% local household median or below? Or The fact that the rich actually have to pay full freight at public Montessori is for real? All true, look it up.
I look forward to the FRLs. I look forward to Montessori showing excellent results with a population that is economically and otherwise diverse. I look forward to the program expanding because of demand, and county taxpayers realizing it provides great bang for the in closing achievement gap, in part because it brings in tuition.

I don't believe APS Montessori is paying the same as private Montessori. I know there's a sliding scale and I've seen it. I know there's supposed to be a 2/3 seat set-aside for 80% median below; but I don't know that those seats are completely filled by such. I'd like to see how many are actually FRL-eligible, which is much farther below 80% median income - and that's a significant difference. Montessori keeps touting that it serves so many low-income students; but that doesn't automatically mean its FRL% is the 50% and up you see at other APS schools. And I would like to see the academic performance measures for those students. If the FRL% is lower and test scores are higher, I'd like to see that as potential support for the impacts of socioeconomic diversity to help bolster that argument systemwide.

People criticize Montessori as a subsidy for the rich because nobody in K-5 pays any tuition. So don't try to convince people that the program should expand because it brings in tuition. Preschool tuition is not paying for the costs of higher level Montessori. and Montessori does cost more.

It costs the same as immersion. Do you think immersion and Montessori families don’t pay taxes?

That's the only thing you have to support your assertions? Immersion and Montessori families pay taxes and the programs cost the same?

[Anonymous]

APS is offering a private school program for free, but it costs more than the regular ol' neighborhood program.

What makes you think that Montessori costs more than a "regular neighborhood program?" Other than buses, I suppose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait to see the FRL numbers for Montessori. ESPECIALLY 1-5. Finally it will be public how few disadvantaged kids are getting any benefit from this program. It's publicly subsidized specialty education. At least they FINALLY got rid of the "prior experience" requirement that was limiting any additional elementary enrollment to rich families who could afford private montessori preK. That was the best thing Tara Nattrass did.

The Montessori preschool is part time so requires a SAHM, so it was subsides for single earner households. If that second parent worked they likely would be over the 80%.

It wasn’t a requirement, it was a preference and it was never practiced because up until a couple years ago there was no waitlist at elementary Montessori. So bitter.

Duh. If it was a full day preschool the waitlist would be endless. That’s why it’s a subsidy.

You’re confused. Montessori public preschool charges fees on sliding scale at at the top of the range are comparable to private preschool. The only kids being subsidized are those who by definition are not “rich”.

Then Arlington doesn't need to keep providing Montessori - parents can pay the same in private Montessori. But I don't believe that. How does the post-kindergarten tuition compare?

t

Wow you are confusing. What don't you believe, that preK tuition is a sliding scale? That 2/3 slots got 80% local household median or below? Or The fact that the rich actually have to pay full freight at public Montessori is for real? All true, look it up.
I look forward to the FRLs. I look forward to Montessori showing excellent results with a population that is economically and otherwise diverse. I look forward to the program expanding because of demand, and county taxpayers realizing it provides great bang for the in closing achievement gap, in part because it brings in tuition.

I don't believe APS Montessori is paying the same as private Montessori. I know there's a sliding scale and I've seen it. I know there's supposed to be a 2/3 seat set-aside for 80% median below; but I don't know that those seats are completely filled by such. I'd like to see how many are actually FRL-eligible, which is much farther below 80% median income - and that's a significant difference. Montessori keeps touting that it serves so many low-income students; but that doesn't automatically mean its FRL% is the 50% and up you see at other APS schools. And I would like to see the academic performance measures for those students. If the FRL% is lower and test scores are higher, I'd like to see that as potential support for the impacts of socioeconomic diversity to help bolster that argument systemwide.

People criticize Montessori as a subsidy for the rich because nobody in K-5 pays any tuition. So don't try to convince people that the program should expand because it brings in tuition. Preschool tuition is not paying for the costs of higher level Montessori. and Montessori does cost more.

It costs the same as immersion. Do you think immersion and Montessori families don’t pay taxes?

Oh please. People sending kids to private schools pay taxes. That's not the point and you know it.
I guess my sentence should have been longer: People criticize Montessori a a subsidy or the rich because nobody in K-5 (actually K-8) pays any tuition AND Montessori is traditionally a PRIVATE SCHOOL for which people pay tuition. APS is offering a private school program for free, but it costs more than the regular ol' neighborhood program. So to argue it should expand because it brings in tuition is disingenuous. VPI provides state funding - and it serves ONLY the LOWEST income kids and doesn't cost low-income families ANY money. Let's expand THAT!

Give us the actual relevant statistics and THEN argue for expansion. Insist APS posts those statistics to the community separately, because they will be reporting them as part of the students' assigned neighborhood school to the state and we will never see Montessori's actual results unless they make the extra effort to report them separately. You can already see them for immersion.

This part is not true. They will be reporting Montessori 3-5 SOL scores separately, now that they are a standalone school. I believe the MS years are a program within a school, so those are the only scores that will still be bundled in reporting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

APS is offering a private school program for free, but it costs more than the regular ol' neighborhood program.

What makes you think that Montessori costs more than a "regular neighborhood program?" Other than buses, I suppose.

Teachers have to have specific Montessori training/certification; there is an assistant teacher in every classroom. Maximum class sizes, theoretically, are not as flexible as neighborhood programs. Montessori uses different curriculum and materials.

Rather than continuing to interrogate the people questioning or asking questions about Montessori, how about answering the questions being asked about Montessori? If the "critics" are so wrong, you would do better to prove them so than to continue accusing them of being anti-Montessoi/bitter Henry parents/resentful parents whose kids didn't get in/or angry antagonists with some vendetta against Montessori.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait to see the FRL numbers for Montessori. ESPECIALLY 1-5. Finally it will be public how few disadvantaged kids are getting any benefit from this program. It's publicly subsidized specialty education. At least they FINALLY got rid of the "prior experience" requirement that was limiting any additional elementary enrollment to rich families who could afford private montessori preK. That was the best thing Tara Nattrass did.

The Montessori preschool is part time so requires a SAHM, so it was subsides for single earner households. If that second parent worked they likely would be over the 80%.

It wasn’t a requirement, it was a preference and it was never practiced because up until a couple years ago there was no waitlist at elementary Montessori. So bitter.

Duh. If it was a full day preschool the waitlist would be endless. That’s why it’s a subsidy.

You’re confused. Montessori public preschool charges fees on sliding scale at at the top of the range are comparable to private preschool. The only kids being subsidized are those who by definition are not “rich”.

Then Arlington doesn't need to keep providing Montessori - parents can pay the same in private Montessori. But I don't believe that. How does the post-kindergarten tuition compare?

t

Wow you are confusing. What don't you believe, that preK tuition is a sliding scale? That 2/3 slots got 80% local household median or below? Or The fact that the rich actually have to pay full freight at public Montessori is for real? All true, look it up.
I look forward to the FRLs. I look forward to Montessori showing excellent results with a population that is economically and otherwise diverse. I look forward to the program expanding because of demand, and county taxpayers realizing it provides great bang for the in closing achievement gap, in part because it brings in tuition.

I don't believe APS Montessori is paying the same as private Montessori. I know there's a sliding scale and I've seen it. I know there's supposed to be a 2/3 seat set-aside for 80% median below; but I don't know that those seats are completely filled by such. I'd like to see how many are actually FRL-eligible, which is much farther below 80% median income - and that's a significant difference. Montessori keeps touting that it serves so many low-income students; but that doesn't automatically mean its FRL% is the 50% and up you see at other APS schools. And I would like to see the academic performance measures for those students. If the FRL% is lower and test scores are higher, I'd like to see that as potential support for the impacts of socioeconomic diversity to help bolster that argument systemwide.

People criticize Montessori as a subsidy for the rich because nobody in K-5 pays any tuition. So don't try to convince people that the program should expand because it brings in tuition. Preschool tuition is not paying for the costs of higher level Montessori. and Montessori does cost more.

It costs the same as immersion. Do you think immersion and Montessori families don’t pay taxes?

Oh please. People sending kids to private schools pay taxes. That's not the point and you know it.
I guess my sentence should have been longer: People criticize Montessori a a subsidy or the rich because nobody in K-5 (actually K-8) pays any tuition AND Montessori is traditionally a PRIVATE SCHOOL for which people pay tuition. APS is offering a private school program for free, but it costs more than the regular ol' neighborhood program. So to argue it should expand because it brings in tuition is disingenuous. VPI provides state funding - and it serves ONLY the LOWEST income kids and doesn't cost low-income families ANY money. Let's expand THAT!

Give us the actual relevant statistics and THEN argue for expansion. Insist APS posts those statistics to the community separately, because they will be reporting them as part of the students' assigned neighborhood school to the state and we will never see Montessori's actual results unless they make the extra effort to report them separately. You can already see them for immersion.

This part is not true. They will be reporting Montessori 3-5 SOL scores separately, now that they are a standalone school. I believe the MS years are a program within a school, so those are the only scores that will still be bundled in reporting.

Then it isn't entirely untrue, is it? Get APS to publish all Montessori stats separately, they can easily pull out Montessori and Immersion student data from all of Gunston middle school data - and they should. They can report it to the State together if they have to; but there is no reason they cannot separate them for the purposes of evaluating the effectiveness of all APS programs, identifying areas of weaknesses and strengths and responding accordingly. That's what good stewards of public money do.

And why do Montessori advocates only address points they think they can "correct"? Why won't any Montessori advocates ever address the other comments or questions people offer? I guess one can presume that since you specifically stated a particular part is not true, the rest of it is and there's nothing else to dispute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait to see the FRL numbers for Montessori. ESPECIALLY 1-5. Finally it will be public how few disadvantaged kids are getting any benefit from this program. It's publicly subsidized specialty education. At least they FINALLY got rid of the "prior experience" requirement that was limiting any additional elementary enrollment to rich families who could afford private montessori preK. That was the best thing Tara Nattrass did.

The Montessori preschool is part time so requires a SAHM, so it was subsides for single earner households. If that second parent worked they likely would be over the 80%.

It wasn’t a requirement, it was a preference and it was never practiced because up until a couple years ago there was no waitlist at elementary Montessori. So bitter.

Duh. If it was a full day preschool the waitlist would be endless. That’s why it’s a subsidy.

You’re confused. Montessori public preschool charges fees on sliding scale at at the top of the range are comparable to private preschool. The only kids being subsidized are those who by definition are not “rich”.

Then Arlington doesn't need to keep providing Montessori - parents can pay the same in private Montessori. But I don't believe that. How does the post-kindergarten tuition compare?

t

Wow you are confusing. What don't you believe, that preK tuition is a sliding scale? That 2/3 slots got 80% local household median or below? Or The fact that the rich actually have to pay full freight at public Montessori is for real? All true, look it up.
I look forward to the FRLs. I look forward to Montessori showing excellent results with a population that is economically and otherwise diverse. I look forward to the program expanding because of demand, and county taxpayers realizing it provides great bang for the in closing achievement gap, in part because it brings in tuition.

I don't believe APS Montessori is paying the same as private Montessori. I know there's a sliding scale and I've seen it. I know there's supposed to be a 2/3 seat set-aside for 80% median below; but I don't know that those seats are completely filled by such. I'd like to see how many are actually FRL-eligible, which is much farther below 80% median income - and that's a significant difference. Montessori keeps touting that it serves so many low-income students; but that doesn't automatically mean its FRL% is the 50% and up you see at other APS schools. And I would like to see the academic performance measures for those students. If the FRL% is lower and test scores are higher, I'd like to see that as potential support for the impacts of socioeconomic diversity to help bolster that argument systemwide.

People criticize Montessori as a subsidy for the rich because nobody in K-5 pays any tuition. So don't try to convince people that the program should expand because it brings in tuition. Preschool tuition is not paying for the costs of higher level Montessori. and Montessori does cost more.

It costs the same as immersion. Do you think immersion and Montessori families don’t pay taxes?

Oh please. People sending kids to private schools pay taxes. That's not the point and you know it.
I guess my sentence should have been longer: People criticize Montessori a a subsidy or the rich because nobody in K-5 (actually K-8) pays any tuition AND Montessori is traditionally a PRIVATE SCHOOL for which people pay tuition. APS is offering a private school program for free, but it costs more than the regular ol' neighborhood program. So to argue it should expand because it brings in tuition is disingenuous. VPI provides state funding - and it serves ONLY the LOWEST income kids and doesn't cost low-income families ANY money. Let's expand THAT!

Give us the actual relevant statistics and THEN argue for expansion. Insist APS posts those statistics to the community separately, because they will be reporting them as part of the students' assigned neighborhood school to the state and we will never see Montessori's actual results unless they make the extra effort to report them separately. You can already see them for immersion.

Jesus you’re bitter. There no extra effort involved. Montessori has been around for twice as long as immersion but has never had its own building. Now that it does, you’ll see the scores in five weeks. And you’ll be disappointed to learn that it’s economically and racially diverse and doesn’t fit your stereotypes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really want to know what was said about boundaries at the SB meeting this week— anyone watch yet/can provide a summary!

It wasn’t on the agenda, so probably nothing.

Can confirm there was nothing about boundaries.

They discussed Reed school and the tree drama, PE and sports issues including the swim unit and middle school diving, budgetary issues including giving themselves a raise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait to see the FRL numbers for Montessori. ESPECIALLY 1-5. Finally it will be public how few disadvantaged kids are getting any benefit from this program. It's publicly subsidized specialty education. At least they FINALLY got rid of the "prior experience" requirement that was limiting any additional elementary enrollment to rich families who could afford private montessori preK. That was the best thing Tara Nattrass did.

The Montessori preschool is part time so requires a SAHM, so it was subsides for single earner households. If that second parent worked they likely would be over the 80%.

It wasn’t a requirement, it was a preference and it was never practiced because up until a couple years ago there was no waitlist at elementary Montessori. So bitter.

Duh. If it was a full day preschool the waitlist would be endless. That’s why it’s a subsidy.

You’re confused. Montessori public preschool charges fees on sliding scale at at the top of the range are comparable to private preschool. The only kids being subsidized are those who by definition are not “rich”.

Then Arlington doesn't need to keep providing Montessori - parents can pay the same in private Montessori. But I don't believe that. How does the post-kindergarten tuition compare?

t

Wow you are confusing. What don't you believe, that preK tuition is a sliding scale? That 2/3 slots got 80% local household median or below? Or The fact that the rich actually have to pay full freight at public Montessori is for real? All true, look it up.
I look forward to the FRLs. I look forward to Montessori showing excellent results with a population that is economically and otherwise diverse. I look forward to the program expanding because of demand, and county taxpayers realizing it provides great bang for the in closing achievement gap, in part because it brings in tuition.

I don't believe APS Montessori is paying the same as private Montessori. I know there's a sliding scale and I've seen it. I know there's supposed to be a 2/3 seat set-aside for 80% median below; but I don't know that those seats are completely filled by such. I'd like to see how many are actually FRL-eligible, which is much farther below 80% median income - and that's a significant difference. Montessori keeps touting that it serves so many low-income students; but that doesn't automatically mean its FRL% is the 50% and up you see at other APS schools. And I would like to see the academic performance measures for those students. If the FRL% is lower and test scores are higher, I'd like to see that as potential support for the impacts of socioeconomic diversity to help bolster that argument systemwide.

People criticize Montessori as a subsidy for the rich because nobody in K-5 pays any tuition. So don't try to convince people that the program should expand because it brings in tuition. Preschool tuition is not paying for the costs of higher level Montessori. and Montessori does cost more.

It costs the same as immersion. Do you think immersion and Montessori families don’t pay taxes?

Oh please. People sending kids to private schools pay taxes. That's not the point and you know it.
I guess my sentence should have been longer: People criticize Montessori a a subsidy or the rich because nobody in K-5 (actually K-8) pays any tuition AND Montessori is traditionally a PRIVATE SCHOOL for which people pay tuition. APS is offering a private school program for free, but it costs more than the regular ol' neighborhood program. So to argue it should expand because it brings in tuition is disingenuous. VPI provides state funding - and it serves ONLY the LOWEST income kids and doesn't cost low-income families ANY money. Let's expand THAT!

Give us the actual relevant statistics and THEN argue for expansion. Insist APS posts those statistics to the community separately, because they will be reporting them as part of the students' assigned neighborhood school to the state and we will never see Montessori's actual results unless they make the extra effort to report them separately. You can already see them for immersion.

Jesus you’re bitter. There no extra effort involved. Montessori has been around for twice as long as immersion but has never had its own building. Now that it does, you’ll see the scores in five weeks. And you’ll be disappointed to learn that it’s economically and racially diverse and doesn’t fit your stereotypes.

Ok, I'll be bitter if you want me to be bitter.
But to the contrary, I will be delighted if it is revealed to be economically and racially diverse and the lowest income/ELL students are doing significantly better than their cohorts elsewhere. At least then people who keep asking for statistics or questioning Montessori parents' assertions will finally get a direct response, since we can't seem to get any from you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really want to know what was said about boundaries at the SB meeting this week— anyone watch yet/can provide a summary!

It wasn’t on the agenda, so probably nothing.

Can confirm there was nothing about boundaries.

They discussed Reed school and the tree drama, PE and sports issues including the swim unit and middle school diving, budgetary issues including giving themselves a raise.

Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait to see the FRL numbers for Montessori. ESPECIALLY 1-5. Finally it will be public how few disadvantaged kids are getting any benefit from this program. It's publicly subsidized specialty education. At least they FINALLY got rid of the "prior experience" requirement that was limiting any additional elementary enrollment to rich families who could afford private montessori preK. That was the best thing Tara Nattrass did.

The Montessori preschool is part time so requires a SAHM, so it was subsides for single earner households. If that second parent worked they likely would be over the 80%.

It wasn’t a requirement, it was a preference and it was never practiced because up until a couple years ago there was no waitlist at elementary Montessori. So bitter.

Duh. If it was a full day preschool the waitlist would be endless. That’s why it’s a subsidy.

You’re confused. Montessori public preschool charges fees on sliding scale at at the top of the range are comparable to private preschool. The only kids being subsidized are those who by definition are not “rich”.

Then Arlington doesn't need to keep providing Montessori - parents can pay the same in private Montessori. But I don't believe that. How does the post-kindergarten tuition compare?

t

Wow you are confusing. What don't you believe, that preK tuition is a sliding scale? That 2/3 slots got 80% local household median or below? Or The fact that the rich actually have to pay full freight at public Montessori is for real? All true, look it up.
I look forward to the FRLs. I look forward to Montessori showing excellent results with a population that is economically and otherwise diverse. I look forward to the program expanding because of demand, and county taxpayers realizing it provides great bang for the in closing achievement gap, in part because it brings in tuition.

I don't believe APS Montessori is paying the same as private Montessori. I know there's a sliding scale and I've seen it. I know there's supposed to be a 2/3 seat set-aside for 80% median below; but I don't know that those seats are completely filled by such. I'd like to see how many are actually FRL-eligible, which is much farther below 80% median income - and that's a significant difference. Montessori keeps touting that it serves so many low-income students; but that doesn't automatically mean its FRL% is the 50% and up you see at other APS schools. And I would like to see the academic performance measures for those students. If the FRL% is lower and test scores are higher, I'd like to see that as potential support for the impacts of socioeconomic diversity to help bolster that argument systemwide.

People criticize Montessori as a subsidy for the rich because nobody in K-5 pays any tuition. So don't try to convince people that the program should expand because it brings in tuition. Preschool tuition is not paying for the costs of higher level Montessori. and Montessori does cost more.

It costs the same as immersion. Do you think immersion and Montessori families don’t pay taxes?

Oh please. People sending kids to private schools pay taxes. That's not the point and you know it.
I guess my sentence should have been longer: People criticize Montessori a a subsidy or the rich because nobody in K-5 (actually K-8) pays any tuition AND Montessori is traditionally a PRIVATE SCHOOL for which people pay tuition. APS is offering a private school program for free, but it costs more than the regular ol' neighborhood program. So to argue it should expand because it brings in tuition is disingenuous. VPI provides state funding - and it serves ONLY the LOWEST income kids and doesn't cost low-income families ANY money. Let's expand THAT!

Give us the actual relevant statistics and THEN argue for expansion. Insist APS posts those statistics to the community separately, because they will be reporting them as part of the students' assigned neighborhood school to the state and we will never see Montessori's actual results unless they make the extra effort to report them separately. You can already see them for immersion.

Jesus you’re bitter. There no extra effort involved. Montessori has been around for twice as long as immersion but has never had its own building. Now that it does, you’ll see the scores in five weeks. And you’ll be disappointed to learn that it’s economically and racially diverse and doesn’t fit your stereotypes.

Ok, I'll be bitter if you want me to be bitter.
But to the contrary, I will be delighted if it is revealed to be economically and racially diverse and the lowest income/ELL students are doing significantly better than their cohorts elsewhere. At least then people who keep asking for statistics or questioning Montessori parents' assertions will finally get a direct response, since we can't seem to get any from you.

I already told you what my estimate was, and told you how to calculate it from publicly available information released during the boundary process. I also told you why Montessori numbers hadn’t been released before and when to expect them, next month, when APS published statistics for every school like they always do. I don’t know what more you want from me, but I’ve given you substantive facts and you just whine and whine. I’ll dip back into this thread in five weeks to rub your nose in the stats. Later.