Discussion Boundary Map out for APS- elementary schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone really think they are going to decide where or if to move immersion by January and spend April and May planning for the boundary process next fall? I mean, aren’t parents going to be fighting any move or loss or neighborhood school all year?

The latest timeline doesn’t commit to making any decisions other than planning unit split recommendations in Spring and final approved boundaries in fall. I suspect anything and everything is on the table until the boundaries are approved in Dec 2020.

That’s a lot of time to “engage.” But we all know that they can change course at any time (even the last minute).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don’t think they’re going to carve up civic associations unless they absolutely have to in order to make the numbers work, even considering walk zones. Just conjecture on my part.

This has to be one of the funniest posts I’ve ever read- yes, god forbid they break up the Civic Associations— even if that means disregarding obvious and natural walk zones!

How does the Lyon Village Civic Association survive being split between Taylor and ASFS? It must be total chaos and unbearable. Best send them all to the new Key school.

+1. APS uses planning units, not civic associations. There are multiple civic associations in Arlington that are split between schools.

Yes; though very small associations shouldn't be split unless they absolutely need to be. Absolutely no reason at all a large civic association can't, or shouldn't, be divided.

Why? My kids have no idea what civic association we live in; it is a non issue to them. We live near the border of our CA, and they have more friends and more familiarity with the other CA neighborhood than the bulk of our own.

+1

WTF does the CA have to do with the schools? Answer: NOTHING.

Because some CA are so small that sending the kids off to different schools which each then split into two different schools for the next level does have a significant impact on the # of kids in the cohort going to the next new school together, essentially making the kids start over socially by knowing hardly anyone in the midst of a bunch of other kids who all went to school together and know each other and are on sports teams together and live in the same neighborhood with each other. I am not opposed to a school splitting off to two schools; but I don't think it's best to have the same kids split multiple times and if they start off being split from their neighborhood cohort, it's even more isolating.

You are confusing CAs with Planning Units. CAs have nothing to do with where kids go to school, sport teams or boundaries.

No, I am not confusing CAs with PUs. Kids from the same school often get on the same sports teams. So when the kids matriculate and split from their elementary cohort, they are joining other kids at middle school who live in other neighborhoods that went to school together and were on teams together, etc.

In the last boundary round, Columbia Heights kids were sent to three different elementary schools. It is not that big of a neighborhood. Gilliam Place was carved out into a new PU within Alcova heights and districted to a different school. A north section of that same civic association was also directed to a different school. Those small civic associations are split to different elementary schools and then one or two of those elementary schools split into different middle schools.

So you’re saying that you don’t want your CA split into different PUs, or if they are split, the PUs should go to the same elementary school, right? So in sum, PUs are what what folks should really focus on rather than what CA they belong to. I mean, if I’m on the border of a neighborhood, I would rather go to school with my actual neighbors, who might be in a different CA, but hopefully in the same PU.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone really think they are going to decide where or if to move immersion by January and spend April and May planning for the boundary process next fall? I mean, aren’t parents going to be fighting any move or loss or neighborhood school all year?

The latest timeline doesn’t commit to making any decisions other than planning unit split recommendations in Spring and final approved boundaries in fall. I suspect anything and everything is on the table until the boundaries are approved in Dec 2020.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don’t think they’re going to carve up civic associations unless they absolutely have to in order to make the numbers work, even considering walk zones. Just conjecture on my part.

This has to be one of the funniest posts I’ve ever read- yes, god forbid they break up the Civic Associations— even if that means disregarding obvious and natural walk zones!

How does the Lyon Village Civic Association survive being split between Taylor and ASFS? It must be total chaos and unbearable. Best send them all to the new Key school.

+1. APS uses planning units, not civic associations. There are multiple civic associations in Arlington that are split between schools.

Yes; though very small associations shouldn't be split unless they absolutely need to be. Absolutely no reason at all a large civic association can't, or shouldn't, be divided.

Why? My kids have no idea what civic association we live in; it is a non issue to them. We live near the border of our CA, and they have more friends and more familiarity with the other CA neighborhood than the bulk of our own.

+1

WTF does the CA have to do with the schools? Answer: NOTHING.

Because some CA are so small that sending the kids off to different schools which each then split into two different schools for the next level does have a significant impact on the # of kids in the cohort going to the next new school together, essentially making the kids start over socially by knowing hardly anyone in the midst of a bunch of other kids who all went to school together and know each other and are on sports teams together and live in the same neighborhood with each other. I am not opposed to a school splitting off to two schools; but I don't think it's best to have the same kids split multiple times and if they start off being split from their neighborhood cohort, it's even more isolating.

You are confusing CAs with Planning Units. CAs have nothing to do with where kids go to school, sport teams or boundaries.

No, I am not confusing CAs with PUs. Kids from the same school often get on the same sports teams. So when the kids matriculate and split from their elementary cohort, they are joining other kids at middle school who live in other neighborhoods that went to school together and were on teams together, etc.

In the last boundary round, Columbia Heights kids were sent to three different elementary schools. It is not that big of a neighborhood. Gilliam Place was carved out into a new PU within Alcova heights and districted to a different school. A north section of that same civic association was also directed to a different school. Those small civic associations are split to different elementary schools and then one or two of those elementary schools split into different middle schools.

Gilliam Place needed to be its own PU because of how dense it is, and it was the right thing to send them to Fleet rather than Barcroft, but to keep the majority of Alcova at Barcroft. No person lived in that PU prior to its being zoned, so nobody was “separated” from long time neighbors and friends. They took the N sliver of Alcova because during the walk zone review, that area was highlighted as potential walkers to Fleet, if they got a crossing guard at the intersection on Glebe. It’s also physically separated from the rest of the neighborhood by the fire station and Arlington Hall.

As for split feeders to MS, I think they will go back and tweak the MS boundaries as soon as the new ES boundaries are set, and hopefully try to minimize those situation where only a few PUs are split off from their ES cohorts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone really think they are going to decide where or if to move immersion by January and spend April and May planning for the boundary process next fall? I mean, aren’t parents going to be fighting any move or loss or neighborhood school all year?

The latest timeline doesn’t commit to making any decisions other than planning unit split recommendations in Spring and final approved boundaries in fall. I suspect anything and everything is on the table until the boundaries are approved in Dec 2020.

+1

Buy stock in t-shirt companies. Going to be a long year

Remember when the Swap was a done deal, no discussions b/c superintendent discretion?

You need to move McKinely to Reed, giving Westover a school, and not disintegrating an existing neighborhood school. They will be thrilled to have a new building. Immersion goes to HTS, HTS goes to McKinley, there will be drama but schools move together.

Capacity and right sizing is done system wide so yes a LOT of PUs move, but at least it’s happening to every school so no one can really get to riled up without looking ridiculous.

This is the only plan that won’t end up with Thunderdome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone really think they are going to decide where or if to move immersion by January and spend April and May planning for the boundary process next fall? I mean, aren’t parents going to be fighting any move or loss or neighborhood school all year?

The latest timeline doesn’t commit to making any decisions other than planning unit split recommendations in Spring and final approved boundaries in fall. I suspect anything and everything is on the table until the boundaries are approved in Dec 2020.

+1

Buy stock in t-shirt companies. Going to be a long year

Remember when the Swap was a done deal, no discussions b/c superintendent discretion?

You need to move McKinely to Reed, giving Westover a school, and not disintegrating an existing neighborhood school. They will be thrilled to have a new building. Immersion goes to HTS, HTS goes to McKinley, there will be drama but schools move together.

Capacity and right sizing is done system wide so yes a LOT of PUs move, but at least it’s happening to every school so no one can really get to riled up without looking ridiculous.

This is the only plan that won’t end up with Thunderdome.

If by HTS you mean ATS, immersion likely isn’t going there. It’s going south of 50 if Cintia Johnson has any influence on the board, and/or if they don’t want to scrap the program within a few years. Spanish speaker enrollment is not high enough in the north to sustain the 50:50 mix that Arlington uses. Look at Key this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Buy stock in t-shirt companies. Going to be a long year

Remember when the Swap was a done deal, no discussions b/c superintendent discretion?

You need to move McKinely to Reed, giving Westover a school, and not disintegrating an existing neighborhood school. They will be thrilled to have a new building. Immersion goes to HTS, HTS goes to McKinley, there will be drama but schools move together.

Capacity and right sizing is done system wide so yes a LOT of PUs move, but at least it’s happening to every school so no one can really get to riled up without looking ridiculous.

This is the only plan that won’t end up with Thunderdome.

If by HTS you mean ATS, immersion likely isn’t going there. It’s going south of 50 if Cintia Johnson has any influence on the board, and/or if they don’t want to scrap the program within a few years. Spanish speaker enrollment is not high enough in the north to sustain the 50:50 mix that Arlington uses. Look at Key this year.

Spanish speaker enrollment wasn't high enough in the north or south to sustain the 50:50 mix that Arlington uses. Look at both Key and Claremont this year. They need to eliminate one of the immersion programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Buy stock in t-shirt companies. Going to be a long year

Remember when the Swap was a done deal, no discussions b/c superintendent discretion?

You need to move McKinely to Reed, giving Westover a school, and not disintegrating an existing neighborhood school. They will be thrilled to have a new building. Immersion goes to HTS, HTS goes to McKinley, there will be drama but schools move together.

Capacity and right sizing is done system wide so yes a LOT of PUs move, but at least it’s happening to every school so no one can really get to riled up without looking ridiculous.

This is the only plan that won’t end up with Thunderdome.

If by HTS you mean ATS, immersion likely isn’t going there. It’s going south of 50 if Cintia Johnson has any influence on the board, and/or if they don’t want to scrap the program within a few years. Spanish speaker enrollment is not high enough in the north to sustain the 50:50 mix that Arlington uses. Look at Key this year.

Spanish speaker enrollment wasn't high enough in the north or south to sustain the 50:50 mix that Arlington uses. Look at both Key and Claremont this year. They need to eliminate one of the immersion programs.

They don't necessarily need to eliminate one, plenty of English speakers seek it out and you can have an immersion program that isn't 50/50. APS does need Key to be neighborhood, though.

[Anonymous]

If ATS goes to McKinley, some of MCK will move to the ATE building bc it’s within the McK boundaries. Still, it’s the most logical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone really think they are going to decide where or if to move immersion by January and spend April and May planning for the boundary process next fall? I mean, aren’t parents going to be fighting any move or loss or neighborhood school all year?

The latest timeline doesn’t commit to making any decisions other than planning unit split recommendations in Spring and final approved boundaries in fall. I suspect anything and everything is on the table until the boundaries are approved in Dec 2020.

+1

Buy stock in t-shirt companies. Going to be a long year

Remember when the Swap was a done deal, no discussions b/c superintendent discretion?

You need to move McKinely to Reed, giving Westover a school, and not disintegrating an existing neighborhood school. They will be thrilled to have a new building. Immersion goes to HTS, HTS goes to McKinley, there will be drama but schools move together.

Capacity and right sizing is done system wide so yes a LOT of PUs move, but at least it’s happening to every school so no one can really get to riled up without looking ridiculous.

This is the only plan that won’t end up with Thunderdome.

If by HTS you mean ATS, immersion likely isn’t going there. It’s going south of 50 if Cintia Johnson has any influence on the board, and/or if they don’t want to scrap the program within a few years. Spanish speaker enrollment is not high enough in the north to sustain the 50:50 mix that Arlington uses. Look at Key this year.

So which So Arlington school can be dissolved without drama?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If ATS goes to McKinley, some of MCK will move to the ATE building bc it’s within the McK boundaries. Still, it’s the most logical.

I seriously doubt ATS is slated for any sort of expansion given the IPP. If anything, it will be phased out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone really think they are going to decide where or if to move immersion by January and spend April and May planning for the boundary process next fall? I mean, aren’t parents going to be fighting any move or loss or neighborhood school all year?

The latest timeline doesn’t commit to making any decisions other than planning unit split recommendations in Spring and final approved boundaries in fall. I suspect anything and everything is on the table until the boundaries are approved in Dec 2020.

+1

Buy stock in t-shirt companies. Going to be a long year

Remember when the Swap was a done deal, no discussions b/c superintendent discretion?

You need to move McKinely to Reed, giving Westover a school, and not disintegrating an existing neighborhood school. They will be thrilled to have a new building. Immersion goes to HTS, HTS goes to McKinley, there will be drama but schools move together.

Capacity and right sizing is done system wide so yes a LOT of PUs move, but at least it’s happening to every school so no one can really get to riled up without looking ridiculous.

This is the only plan that won’t end up with Thunderdome.

If by HTS you mean ATS, immersion likely isn’t going there. It’s going south of 50 if Cintia Johnson has any influence on the board, and/or if they don’t want to scrap the program within a few years. Spanish speaker enrollment is not high enough in the north to sustain the 50:50 mix that Arlington uses. Look at Key this year.

So which So Arlington school can be dissolved without drama?

No drama? In Arlington?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If ATS goes to McKinley, some of MCK will move to the ATE building bc it’s within the McK boundaries. Still, it’s the most logical.

The chances of McKinley becoming choice and ATS becoming neighborhood are nil. ATS would not have a good walk zone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone really think they are going to decide where or if to move immersion by January and spend April and May planning for the boundary process next fall? I mean, aren’t parents going to be fighting any move or loss or neighborhood school all year?

The latest timeline doesn’t commit to making any decisions other than planning unit split recommendations in Spring and final approved boundaries in fall. I suspect anything and everything is on the table until the boundaries are approved in Dec 2020.

+1

Buy stock in t-shirt companies. Going to be a long year

Remember when the Swap was a done deal, no discussions b/c superintendent discretion?

You need to move McKinely to Reed, giving Westover a school, and not disintegrating an existing neighborhood school. They will be thrilled to have a new building. Immersion goes to HTS, HTS goes to McKinley, there will be drama but schools move together.

Capacity and right sizing is done system wide so yes a LOT of PUs move, but at least it’s happening to every school so no one can really get to riled up without looking ridiculous.

This is the only plan that won’t end up with Thunderdome.

If by HTS you mean ATS, immersion likely isn’t going there. It’s going south of 50 if Cintia Johnson has any influence on the board, and/or if they don’t want to scrap the program within a few years. Spanish speaker enrollment is not high enough in the north to sustain the 50:50 mix that Arlington uses. Look at Key this year.

So which So Arlington school can be dissolved without drama?

Carlin Springs and Barcroft are the easiest targets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If ATS goes to McKinley, some of MCK will move to the ATE building bc it’s within the McK boundaries. Still, it’s the most logical.

The chances of McKinley becoming choice and ATS becoming neighborhood are nil. ATS would not have a good walk zone.

Totally agree. But what happens if they move immersion to S Arlington, Key becomes neighborhood and those are the only changes made. You’ve just mad the seat deficit in S Arlington worse to give Clarendon/wealthy folks a neighborhood school. Right then and there they’d have to commit to a new neighborhood school in SA.