APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Campbell would lose 60 percent of its student or more if moved that far north. No longer title I. No nature center curriculum. It would be a total waste of a school. I have a kid there and without the wetland and nature center the curriculum would be trashed. Aps might as well eliminate the program if they move it. I would pull my kid because it would have no value as an option school. I know others would too, and not just the majority of low income families. The wealthier families chose the school for a reason.

Isn’t Campbell Title I because of the large number of VPI students that are guaranteed to continue?

So here's part of the issue with moving any option school that far north: what VPI-eligible families live anywhere near there? Option schools are all supposed to have VPI classrooms, so where are they going to find VPI kids near Nottingham?

They will draw down the numbers and attendance zone for Nottingham, making it smaller, then they will move Montessori there in 5 years.
I just read all of their documents, and they want to keep the “option School within a neighborhood school model” as a possibility.
This way Nottingham retains a neighborhood school of walkers, and Montessori can expand there (because the site has that potential).

They’re not going to move the Montessori program twice in five years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Campbell would lose 60 percent of its student or more if moved that far north. No longer title I. No nature center curriculum. It would be a total waste of a school. I have a kid there and without the wetland and nature center the curriculum would be trashed. Aps might as well eliminate the program if they move it. I would pull my kid because it would have no value as an option school. I know others would too, and not just the majority of low income families. The wealthier families chose the school for a reason.

Isn’t Campbell Title I because of the large number of VPI students that are guaranteed to continue?

So here's part of the issue with moving any option school that far north: what VPI-eligible families live anywhere near there? Option schools are all supposed to have VPI classrooms, so where are they going to find VPI kids near Nottingham?

Good point. Any option school they move to Nottingham would become much paler and more affluent, which isn’t a good look. The only thing that makes Nottingham at all compelling as an option site is the difficult of filling all of the seats at Tuckahoe after Reed opens. But for that, Nottingham would be effectively off the table.

And if they make Nottingham option, they are going to have to fill McKinley with kids North of Lee Highway. So those kids will bus past Reed.

It is infuriating with the criteria staff presented that Reed isn’t being considered as an option site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Campbell would lose 60 percent of its student or more if moved that far north. No longer title I. No nature center curriculum. It would be a total waste of a school. I have a kid there and without the wetland and nature center the curriculum would be trashed. Aps might as well eliminate the program if they move it. I would pull my kid because it would have no value as an option school. I know others would too, and not just the majority of low income families. The wealthier families chose the school for a reason.

Isn’t Campbell Title I because of the large number of VPI students that are guaranteed to continue?

So here's part of the issue with moving any option school that far north: what VPI-eligible families live anywhere near there? Option schools are all supposed to have VPI classrooms, so where are they going to find VPI kids near Nottingham?

They will draw down the numbers and attendance zone for Nottingham, making it smaller, then they will move Montessori there in 5 years.
I just read all of their documents, and they want to keep the “option School within a neighborhood school model” as a possibility.
This way Nottingham retains a neighborhood school of walkers, and Montessori can expand there (because the site has that potential).

They’re not going to move the Montessori program twice in five years.

Not to mention that the option school within a neighborhood school model would,completely undermine the stated goal of giving option programs he flexibilit to grow to 750. Even if you max out Nottingham, that only leaves 50 seats available for the neighborhood portion of the school, not enough for even a single class at each grade level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Campbell would lose 60 percent of its student or more if moved that far north. No longer title I. No nature center curriculum. It would be a total waste of a school. I have a kid there and without the wetland and nature center the curriculum would be trashed. Aps might as well eliminate the program if they move it. I would pull my kid because it would have no value as an option school. I know others would too, and not just the majority of low income families. The wealthier families chose the school for a reason.

Isn’t Campbell Title I because of the large number of VPI students that are guaranteed to continue?

So here's part of the issue with moving any option school that far north: what VPI-eligible families live anywhere near there? Option schools are all supposed to have VPI classrooms, so where are they going to find VPI kids near Nottingham?

Good point. Any option school they move to Nottingham would become much paler and more affluent, which isn’t a good look. The only thing that makes Nottingham at all compelling as an option site is the difficult of filling all of the seats at Tuckahoe after Reed opens. But for that, Nottingham would be effectively off the table.

And if they make Nottingham option, they are going to have to fill McKinley with kids North of Lee Highway. So those kids will bus past Reed.

It is infuriating with the criteria staff presented that Reed isn’t being considered as an option site.

You can’t ask a community to give a year of their lives to planning a school under the promise that it will be their neighborhood school and then go back on your word. It would destroy community trust in the school board and people would be rightfully outraged at having been taken advantage of like that.

[Anonymous]

It is crazy that nearly everyone on DCUM and beyond thought the opening of Reed would destroy Tuckahoe, but instead it will sink Nottingham!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Campbell would lose 60 percent of its student or more if moved that far north. No longer title I. No nature center curriculum. It would be a total waste of a school. I have a kid there and without the wetland and nature center the curriculum would be trashed. Aps might as well eliminate the program if they move it. I would pull my kid because it would have no value as an option school. I know others would too, and not just the majority of low income families. The wealthier families chose the school for a reason.

What about moving it to Carlin Springs? Serious question. Isn't that still a 'walking' field trip to Long Branch nature center?

Other problem that no one seems to be addressing is that the Campbell building is tiny! To reach a capacity similar to what Carlin Springs has you would have to cover the field space with trailers!!

Given that this would largely be moving the Carlin Springs neighborhood to Campbell- Carlin Springs currently has a population of about 600. Campbell's 'optimization' suggests it can go to 628.

Incidentally- given the lack of space to expand is what is sinking Campbell is an option site. The Staff thinks option sites need to be able to go to 750.

This. Campbell can go to 628 students per APS and Carlin Springs to 928 - per APS!!

But there aren't 900 kids wanting to go to Campbell, are there? There aren't even 750, and I think they stated they considered growing this program up to around 650, not 750. Or did they change that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Campbell would lose 60 percent of its student or more if moved that far north. No longer title I. No nature center curriculum. It would be a total waste of a school. I have a kid there and without the wetland and nature center the curriculum would be trashed. Aps might as well eliminate the program if they move it. I would pull my kid because it would have no value as an option school. I know others would too, and not just the majority of low income families. The wealthier families chose the school for a reason.

Isn’t Campbell Title I because of the large number of VPI students that are guaranteed to continue?

So here's part of the issue with moving any option school that far north: what VPI-eligible families live anywhere near there? Option schools are all supposed to have VPI classrooms, so where are they going to find VPI kids near Nottingham?

They will draw down the numbers and attendance zone for Nottingham, making it smaller, then they will move Montessori there in 5 years.
I just read all of their documents, and they want to keep the “option School within a neighborhood school model” as a possibility.
This way Nottingham retains a neighborhood school of walkers, and Montessori can expand there (because the site has that potential).

They’re not going to move the Montessori program twice in five years.

Hmm. I think they will, unless demand will continue to dwindle...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And if they make Nottingham option, they are going to have to fill McKinley with kids North of Lee Highway. So those kids will bus past Reed.

It is infuriating with the criteria staff presented that Reed isn’t being considered as an option site.

Nottingham has ~525 students and they will need to be primarily absorbed by Tuckahoe because Discovery is only under-capacity by 50 kids or so. I think it is more likely that the Tuckahoe PUs south of Washington Blvd. shift to McKinley, the Tuckahoe PUs east of Sycamore but below Lee Highway shift to Reed, and then most of the Nottingham PUs shift to Tuckahoe. But that also underscores why it makes no sense to make Nottingham the choice school and not Tuckahoe-- most of Tuckahoe is going to be former Nottingham students when all of this shifting is finished.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Campbell would lose 60 percent of its student or more if moved that far north. No longer title I. No nature center curriculum. It would be a total waste of a school. I have a kid there and without the wetland and nature center the curriculum would be trashed. Aps might as well eliminate the program if they move it. I would pull my kid because it would have no value as an option school. I know others would too, and not just the majority of low income families. The wealthier families chose the school for a reason.

What about moving it to Carlin Springs? Serious question. Isn't that still a 'walking' field trip to Long Branch nature center?

Other problem that no one seems to be addressing is that the Campbell building is tiny! To reach a capacity similar to what Carlin Springs has you would have to cover the field space with trailers!!

Given that this would largely be moving the Carlin Springs neighborhood to Campbell- Carlin Springs currently has a population of about 600. Campbell's 'optimization' suggests it can go to 628.

Incidentally- given the lack of space to expand is what is sinking Campbell is an option site. The Staff thinks option sites need to be able to go to 750.

This. Campbell can go to 628 students per APS and Carlin Springs to 928 - per APS!!

But there aren't 900 kids wanting to go to Campbell, are there? There aren't even 750, and I think they stated they considered growing this program up to around 650, not 750. Or did they change that?

No, there aren’t. Of the 5 option programs the demand is the second lowest. If you eliminated the people fleeing Carlin Springs attendance zone (180?) it would be even less...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And if they make Nottingham option, they are going to have to fill McKinley with kids North of Lee Highway. So those kids will bus past Reed.

It is infuriating with the criteria staff presented that Reed isn’t being considered as an option site.

Nottingham has ~525 students and they will need to be primarily absorbed by Tuckahoe because Discovery is only under-capacity by 50 kids or so. I think it is more likely that the Tuckahoe PUs south of Washington Blvd. shift to McKinley, the Tuckahoe PUs east of Sycamore but below Lee Highway shift to Reed, and then most of the Nottingham PUs shift to Tuckahoe. But that also underscores why it makes no sense to make Nottingham the choice school and not Tuckahoe-- most of Tuckahoe is going to be former Nottingham students when all of this shifting is finished.

But will they use less buses??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ASFS and Key as neighborhood. Key to ATS. ATS to Nottingham.

Looks like someone from Cherrydale found this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And if they make Nottingham option, they are going to have to fill McKinley with kids North of Lee Highway. So those kids will bus past Reed.

It is infuriating with the criteria staff presented that Reed isn’t being considered as an option site.

Nottingham has ~525 students and they will need to be primarily absorbed by Tuckahoe because Discovery is only under-capacity by 50 kids or so. I think it is more likely that the Tuckahoe PUs south of Washington Blvd. shift to McKinley, the Tuckahoe PUs east of Sycamore but below Lee Highway shift to Reed, and then most of the Nottingham PUs shift to Tuckahoe. But that also underscores why it makes no sense to make Nottingham the choice school and not Tuckahoe-- most of Tuckahoe is going to be former Nottingham students when all of this shifting is finished.

Which means that Tuckahoe will still no longer be an EFC elementary school, it’ll be an EFC/Williamsburg/Yorktown school and EFC will be fractured between Tuckahoe and McKinley. Nottingham will largely keep its community and will just take over Tuckahoe’s building.

But yay for Tuckahoe?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Campbell would lose 60 percent of its student or more if moved that far north. No longer title I. No nature center curriculum. It would be a total waste of a school. I have a kid there and without the wetland and nature center the curriculum would be trashed. Aps might as well eliminate the program if they move it. I would pull my kid because it would have no value as an option school. I know others would too, and not just the majority of low income families. The wealthier families chose the school for a reason.

Isn’t Campbell Title I because of the large number of VPI students that are guaranteed to continue?

So here's part of the issue with moving any option school that far north: what VPI-eligible families live anywhere near there? Option schools are all supposed to have VPI classrooms, so where are they going to find VPI kids near Nottingham?

Good point. Any option school they move to Nottingham would become much paler and more affluent, which isn’t a good look. The only thing that makes Nottingham at all compelling as an option site is the difficult of filling all of the seats at Tuckahoe after Reed opens. But for that, Nottingham would be effectively off the table.

And if they make Nottingham option, they are going to have to fill McKinley with kids North of Lee Highway. So those kids will bus past Reed.

It is infuriating with the criteria staff presented that Reed isn’t being considered as an option site.

You can’t ask a community to give a year of their lives to planning a school under the promise that it will be their neighborhood school and then go back on your word. It would destroy community trust in the school board and people would be rightfully outraged at having been taken advantage of like that.

How has the community given a year of their lives to planning the school? Are they all architects and educators? Get real. The school board needs to work with the facts on the ground and make the numbers and budget work. At the end of the day though, they do give in to squeaky wheels on boundary issues.

[Anonymous]

Tuckahoe community is not more important than other Arlington communities even the ones from the western Pike!

[Anonymous]

Montessori may not move next year or 2020 but by 2023 it will have too. The career center is happening. Seats are going there for H.S. regardless of how it’s developed. hSchools need 3000 + seats. Demand for Montessori is down, it may bump slightly with the Fleet move but not enough to justify it taking the only realistic space for more H School seats and a 4th Comprehensive High School. There are lots of moving pieces and it’s not just elementary boundaries that are being debated and drawn right now.