What do you expect from APS staff (option/neighborhood) on 4/30?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the other map they published from the census. Lots of Spanish Speakers around Nottingham.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Language_ACS16_5Year_Count_Census.pdf

Are you planning to put teenagers into an elementary immersion program? That map looks at children 5-17, so roughly elementary through high school. The APS map pp shared reflects only the elementary-aged Spanish-speaking population in the area, which is the relevant consideration for this analysis.

Then why did APS decide to make it an appendix?

They are both relevant. Its about where spanish speaking families are. Right now the only kids impacted by this are maybe 2nd grade and below- more likely 1st grade and below.

I see that the Key parents who live near Key have switched to advocating for no changes whatsoever-
https://www.change.org/p/arlington-school-board-leave-all-elementary-schools-in-their-current-locations-and-change-boundaries?recruiter=279815821&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_message

That's such a dick move. We can debate which moves make the most sense, but the status quo is just terrible and something needs to change (even if that ends up being my school, which is on the table).

Good for them. No one on this board who isn’t a Key parent has the slightest clue how Key works, the families and students who make Key what it is, or anything else about Key. Key parents are advocating for Key the same as other parents are advocating for their schools and their children. If you think that’s a “dick move,” go suck an egg.

That is such bullshit. Key had a perfectly fine petition going already advocating for Key to stay where it is. They could have stuck with that and simply advocated for themselves in the staff's process rather than throwing every other community that needs changes under the bus by advocating for nothing to change. This petition is is basically a big middle finger to the rest of Arlington, an overt statement that Key families that no one matters but them. Even Nottingham didn't go there.

Per the analysis "Comparing the Options -As part of the Elementary Planning Initiative, the School Board directed staff to develop two proposals for the location of neighborhood and option school sites. One proposal will leave elementary schools in their current locations and change boundaries. The second proposal could result in changing the location of some option and neighborhood schools, while maintaining the same number of elementary option and neighborhood schools and changing boundaries. "

The petition is in support of the first option and I believe it was made to be inclusive of all schools. It is not just Keep Key on Key, or ATS at ATS but rather a petition in support of one of the options mentioned in the document.

We don't even know what the second option will be yet, so it seems a little premature to assume the status quo is better unless the status quo is working for you and you only care about yourself. And unless you're either in an option school, you can't even know what the status quo means for you yet because you don't know how they'll draw the school boundaries (and don't assume being in a walk zone protects you, some people in walk zones will have to be bused to make the boundaries work). So yeah, it's pretty clear whose interest this is directed toward.

[Anonymous]

The second option is the status quo with boundary changes. That has been made clear from the start

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the other map they published from the census. Lots of Spanish Speakers around Nottingham.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Language_ACS16_5Year_Count_Census.pdf

Are you planning to put teenagers into an elementary immersion program? That map looks at children 5-17, so roughly elementary through high school. The APS map pp shared reflects only the elementary-aged Spanish-speaking population in the area, which is the relevant consideration for this analysis.

Then why did APS decide to make it an appendix?

They are both relevant. Its about where spanish speaking families are. Right now the only kids impacted by this are maybe 2nd grade and below- more likely 1st grade and below.

I see that the Key parents who live near Key have switched to advocating for no changes whatsoever-
https://www.change.org/p/arlington-school-board-leave-all-elementary-schools-in-their-current-locations-and-change-boundaries?recruiter=279815821&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_message

That's such a dick move. We can debate which moves make the most sense, but the status quo is just terrible and something needs to change (even if that ends up being my school, which is on the table).

Good for them. No one on this board who isn’t a Key parent has the slightest clue how Key works, the families and students who make Key what it is, or anything else about Key. Key parents are advocating for Key the same as other parents are advocating for their schools and their children. If you think that’s a “dick move,” go suck an egg.

That is such bullshit. Key had a perfectly fine petition going already advocating for Key to stay where it is. They could have stuck with that and simply advocated for themselves in the staff's process rather than throwing every other community that needs changes under the bus by advocating for nothing to change. This petition is is basically a big middle finger to the rest of Arlington, an overt statement that Key families that no one matters but them. Even Nottingham didn't go there.

How does this make them any different than any of the rest of you? Please stop pretending that you all are advocates for anyone other than yourselves. And, above all, please stop pretending that any of you give a sh!t about poor kids when you do everything you can to avoid your own kids associating with them.

I'm the same poster who posted a few pages back about how the guiding decision point on the analysis needed to be which was a higher priority for ED South Arlington families, proximity to neighborhood schools or easier access to choice programs, and who further said that since I live in North Arlington, I don't feel comfortable answering that question for them and would defer to them on which direction it should go. What happens to us (which will be something, even if we stay at our school but there's a boundary shift around us) is secondary to that in my mind.

I'm a South Arlington parent. I'll answer for you. If I'm an UMC parent in the Henry, Oakridge, or Hoffman Boston walk zone, I want walkable neighborhood schools.

If I'm an UMC parent in any of the other zones, I want access to option programs (I am fine with a long bus ride, too, just want to be able to get into one).

If I'm a disadvantaged parent, I will send my kids to school wherever is closest and easiest to get to, don't mind too much if the kid has a short bus trip because then I don't have to walk them, but I want a school that is safe and welcoming, and I don't care so much about the program focus. Wherever we get in to VPI is where kid will go for Kindergarten.

If I am educated immigrant parent, I want access to option programs because we can't afford to live in-bounds to a "good" school, but we moved here just to give the kids a "good" education. So I want access to option programs. Or I'll report a fake address and send kids to the "good" school anyway.

Any questions?

Yes, are you really a south Arlington parent and if so, which category do you belong in?

I am a south Arlington parent. I am what you would probably consider a UMC parent in "any of the other zones" but couldn't care less about access to option programs for my family. I do, however, care about access to high-performing neighborhood schools and access to high-quality option programs for the concentrations of disadvantaged families in SW Arlington.

I appreciate the OP and the genuine desire to consider what's best for the system, rather than what's "best" for OP's family. So unfortunate that people couldn't just respond accordingly. Likewise, I appreciate the responders who have replied in the spirit OP had intended and hoped.

My answer to OP is "both." It shouldn't be one or the other. Just like everyone else everywhere else in the County, access to both. Making CS, Campbell, and Barcroft all option schools will essentially eliminate all walkable neighborhood schools for the entire western end of Columbia Pike. The biggest obstacle to making any positive changes has been the advocacy groups insistence that those communities cannot be broken apart and must have walkable neighborhood schools. I would love to see SB actually have the courage to make some bold changes here. I would support Claremont immersion moving to Carlin Springs and retaining Campbell as a countywide option program. But Key immersion should not move to Barcroft - if it has to move out of NE, it would be better suited to the current ATS site. That will still draw from the concentration of Spanish-speaking families and not eliminate all neighborhood school options for the west end. And it gives south Arlington ED families access to both neighborhood and option programs. I'm sure someone will take issue that Barcroft and Randolph are not "high-performing" schools that I mentioned earlier; but breaking the highest concentration of ED students at CS and opening Claremont as neighborhood, along with new 2019 boundaries around Drew can all have a tremendous impact throughout South Arlington and therefore for all of APS. What a concept.

Where would you suggest putting the ATS program if Key goes to its current building?

And that's the wrench in it, right? I still don't understand the staff's reasoning behind Nottingham as the suggested school. I know, boundaries, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that even if they put an option school at Nottingham the boundaries are still going to be awful for McKinley and Ashlawn when Reed opens, probably even worse than they are now. It seems like they could put an option school at one of those, still get a lot of boundary drawing relief, and have it been in closer proximity to and thus more accessible to South Arlington. In fact, if they put it at McKinley, they could potentially solve the boundary issue both north and south of Lee Highway because Tuckahoe's boundaries could go south of Lee Highway and southwest of Washington Blvd to pick up a bunch of current McKinley along Washington Blvd that can't walk to Reed, and then some of Tuckahoe's units move to Nottingham to make room for the McKinley people and replace the current Nottingham people who will go to Reed. And then Ashlawn's boundaries could become more compact if the take the portions of McKinley south of Reed that Tuckahoe doesn't get and that can't walk to Reed, and Reed's boundary could start at its walkzone in the west and then move east to pick up south of Glebe and maybe a Glebe unit or two (yes, they will be units walkable to Glebe, but Glebe will be way over capacity if some of their walkers don't get bused elsewhere).

The only Tuckahoe families you could move to Nottingham would probably be the few that are south of Lee Highway. You have issues because they won’t want to move walkers. But anyone else would create a non-contiguous boundary that they seem to insist on having. No more islands. But without islands that area gets super tricky to keep walkers where they can walk and contiguous boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the other map they published from the census. Lots of Spanish Speakers around Nottingham.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Language_ACS16_5Year_Count_Census.pdf

Are you planning to put teenagers into an elementary immersion program? That map looks at children 5-17, so roughly elementary through high school. The APS map pp shared reflects only the elementary-aged Spanish-speaking population in the area, which is the relevant consideration for this analysis.

Then why did APS decide to make it an appendix?

They are both relevant. Its about where spanish speaking families are. Right now the only kids impacted by this are maybe 2nd grade and below- more likely 1st grade and below.

I see that the Key parents who live near Key have switched to advocating for no changes whatsoever-
https://www.change.org/p/arlington-school-board-leave-all-elementary-schools-in-their-current-locations-and-change-boundaries?recruiter=279815821&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_message

That's such a dick move. We can debate which moves make the most sense, but the status quo is just terrible and something needs to change (even if that ends up being my school, which is on the table).

Good for them. No one on this board who isn’t a Key parent has the slightest clue how Key works, the families and students who make Key what it is, or anything else about Key. Key parents are advocating for Key the same as other parents are advocating for their schools and their children. If you think that’s a “dick move,” go suck an egg.

That is such bullshit. Key had a perfectly fine petition going already advocating for Key to stay where it is. They could have stuck with that and simply advocated for themselves in the staff's process rather than throwing every other community that needs changes under the bus by advocating for nothing to change. This petition is is basically a big middle finger to the rest of Arlington, an overt statement that Key families that no one matters but them. Even Nottingham didn't go there.

Per the analysis "Comparing the Options -As part of the Elementary Planning Initiative, the School Board directed staff to develop two proposals for the location of neighborhood and option school sites. One proposal will leave elementary schools in their current locations and change boundaries. The second proposal could result in changing the location of some option and neighborhood schools, while maintaining the same number of elementary option and neighborhood schools and changing boundaries. "

The petition is in support of the first option and I believe it was made to be inclusive of all schools. It is not just Keep Key on Key, or ATS at ATS but rather a petition in support of one of the options mentioned in the document.

I would not support that petition. The status quo is no longer acceptable nor viable.

[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:Look at the other map they published from the census. Lots of Spanish Speakers around Nottingham.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Language_ACS16_5Year_Count_Census.pdf

Are you planning to put teenagers into an elementary immersion program? That map looks at children 5-17, so roughly elementary through high school. The APS map pp shared reflects only the elementary-aged Spanish-speaking population in the area, which is the relevant consideration for this analysis.

Then why did APS decide to make it an appendix?

They are both relevant. Its about where spanish speaking families are. Right now the only kids impacted by this are maybe 2nd grade and below- more likely 1st grade and below.

I see that the Key parents who live near Key have switched to advocating for no changes whatsoever-
https://www.change.org/p/arlington-school-board-leave-all-elementary-schools-in-their-current-locations-and-change-boundaries?recruiter=279815821&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_message

That's such a dick move. We can debate which moves make the most sense, but the status quo is just terrible and something needs to change (even if that ends up being my school, which is on the table).

Good for them. No one on this board who isn’t a Key parent has the slightest clue how Key works, the families and students who make Key what it is, or anything else about Key. Key parents are advocating for Key the same as other parents are advocating for their schools and their children. If you think that’s a “dick move,” go suck an egg.

That is such bullshit. Key had a perfectly fine petition going already advocating for Key to stay where it is. They could have stuck with that and simply advocated for themselves in the staff's process rather than throwing every other community that needs changes under the bus by advocating for nothing to change. This petition is is basically a big middle finger to the rest of Arlington, an overt statement that Key families that no one matters but them. Even Nottingham didn't go there.

How does this make them any different than any of the rest of you? Please stop pretending that you all are advocates for anyone other than yourselves. And, above all, please stop pretending that any of you give a sh!t about poor kids when you do everything you can to avoid your own kids associating with them.

I'm the same poster who posted a few pages back about how the guiding decision point on the analysis needed to be which was a higher priority for ED South Arlington families, proximity to neighborhood schools or easier access to choice programs, and who further said that since I live in North Arlington, I don't feel comfortable answering that question for them and would defer to them on which direction it should go. What happens to us (which will be something, even if we stay at our school but there's a boundary shift around us) is secondary to that in my mind.

I'm a South Arlington parent. I'll answer for you. If I'm an UMC parent in the Henry, Oakridge, or Hoffman Boston walk zone, I want walkable neighborhood schools.

If I'm an UMC parent in any of the other zones, I want access to option programs (I am fine with a long bus ride, too, just want to be able to get into one).

If I'm a disadvantaged parent, I will send my kids to school wherever is closest and easiest to get to, don't mind too much if the kid has a short bus trip because then I don't have to walk them, but I want a school that is safe and welcoming, and I don't care so much about the program focus. Wherever we get in to VPI is where kid will go for Kindergarten.

If I am educated immigrant parent, I want access to option programs because we can't afford to live in-bounds to a "good" school, but we moved here just to give the kids a "good" education. So I want access to option programs. Or I'll report a fake address and send kids to the "good" school anyway.

Any questions?

Yes, are you really a south Arlington parent and if so, which category do you belong in?

I am a south Arlington parent. I am what you would probably consider a UMC parent in "any of the other zones" but couldn't care less about access to option programs for my family. I do, however, care about access to high-performing neighborhood schools and access to high-quality option programs for the concentrations of disadvantaged families in SW Arlington.

I appreciate the OP and the genuine desire to consider what's best for the system, rather than what's "best" for OP's family. So unfortunate that people couldn't just respond accordingly. Likewise, I appreciate the responders who have replied in the spirit OP had intended and hoped.

My answer to OP is "both." It shouldn't be one or the other. Just like everyone else everywhere else in the County, access to both. Making CS, Campbell, and Barcroft all option schools will essentially eliminate all walkable neighborhood schools for the entire western end of Columbia Pike. The biggest obstacle to making any positive changes has been the advocacy groups insistence that those communities cannot be broken apart and must have walkable neighborhood schools. I would love to see SB actually have the courage to make some bold changes here. I would support Claremont immersion moving to Carlin Springs and retaining Campbell as a countywide option program. But Key immersion should not move to Barcroft - if it has to move out of NE, it would be better suited to the current ATS site. That will still draw from the concentration of Spanish-speaking families and not eliminate all neighborhood school options for the west end. And it gives south Arlington ED families access to both neighborhood and option programs. I'm sure someone will take issue that Barcroft and Randolph are not "high-performing" schools that I mentioned earlier; but breaking the highest concentration of ED students at CS and opening Claremont as neighborhood, along with new 2019 boundaries around Drew can all have a tremendous impact throughout South Arlington and therefore for all of APS. What a concept.

Where would you suggest putting the ATS program if Key goes to its current building?

That is a difficult one. The first problem is Reed and Fleet having been taken off the table in considering the best locations for option schools, particularly Reed. Reed would be a very good location for an option school - yes, despite the high "walkability" of it, blah blah blah.
But, if ATS has to go far north, then let it go far north. The only reason it has the diversity it has is because of the VPI program - and that does not guarantee consistent diversity K-5 if the VPI students do not choose to stay. It is still primarily a privileged community's school anyway. Immersion would be of greater benefit to the majority of the Pike's west end communities. They could move ATS to ASFS and just deal with moving boundaries around. Let's rile up some more people and suggest it could go to the Ed Center! I think it's more important to provide greater benefit to the most students possible; and access to immersion IMO will provide a greater amount of benefit to more students than ATS offers. Many of ATS' students would be equally served in their high-performing neighborhood schools. We have to start decreasing the high FRL %ages. Period.

[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:Look at the other map they published from the census. Lots of Spanish Speakers around Nottingham.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Language_ACS16_5Year_Count_Census.pdf

Are you planning to put teenagers into an elementary immersion program? That map looks at children 5-17, so roughly elementary through high school. The APS map pp shared reflects only the elementary-aged Spanish-speaking population in the area, which is the relevant consideration for this analysis.

Then why did APS decide to make it an appendix?

They are both relevant. Its about where spanish speaking families are. Right now the only kids impacted by this are maybe 2nd grade and below- more likely 1st grade and below.

I see that the Key parents who live near Key have switched to advocating for no changes whatsoever-
https://www.change.org/p/arlington-school-board-leave-all-elementary-schools-in-their-current-locations-and-change-boundaries?recruiter=279815821&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_message

That's such a dick move. We can debate which moves make the most sense, but the status quo is just terrible and something needs to change (even if that ends up being my school, which is on the table).

Good for them. No one on this board who isn’t a Key parent has the slightest clue how Key works, the families and students who make Key what it is, or anything else about Key. Key parents are advocating for Key the same as other parents are advocating for their schools and their children. If you think that’s a “dick move,” go suck an egg.

That is such bullshit. Key had a perfectly fine petition going already advocating for Key to stay where it is. They could have stuck with that and simply advocated for themselves in the staff's process rather than throwing every other community that needs changes under the bus by advocating for nothing to change. This petition is is basically a big middle finger to the rest of Arlington, an overt statement that Key families that no one matters but them. Even Nottingham didn't go there.

How does this make them any different than any of the rest of you? Please stop pretending that you all are advocates for anyone other than yourselves. And, above all, please stop pretending that any of you give a sh!t about poor kids when you do everything you can to avoid your own kids associating with them.

I'm the same poster who posted a few pages back about how the guiding decision point on the analysis needed to be which was a higher priority for ED South Arlington families, proximity to neighborhood schools or easier access to choice programs, and who further said that since I live in North Arlington, I don't feel comfortable answering that question for them and would defer to them on which direction it should go. What happens to us (which will be something, even if we stay at our school but there's a boundary shift around us) is secondary to that in my mind.

I'm a South Arlington parent. I'll answer for you. If I'm an UMC parent in the Henry, Oakridge, or Hoffman Boston walk zone, I want walkable neighborhood schools.

If I'm an UMC parent in any of the other zones, I want access to option programs (I am fine with a long bus ride, too, just want to be able to get into one).

If I'm a disadvantaged parent, I will send my kids to school wherever is closest and easiest to get to, don't mind too much if the kid has a short bus trip because then I don't have to walk them, but I want a school that is safe and welcoming, and I don't care so much about the program focus. Wherever we get in to VPI is where kid will go for Kindergarten.

If I am educated immigrant parent, I want access to option programs because we can't afford to live in-bounds to a "good" school, but we moved here just to give the kids a "good" education. So I want access to option programs. Or I'll report a fake address and send kids to the "good" school anyway.

Any questions?

Yes, are you really a south Arlington parent and if so, which category do you belong in?

I am a south Arlington parent. I am what you would probably consider a UMC parent in "any of the other zones" but couldn't care less about access to option programs for my family. I do, however, care about access to high-performing neighborhood schools and access to high-quality option programs for the concentrations of disadvantaged families in SW Arlington.

I appreciate the OP and the genuine desire to consider what's best for the system, rather than what's "best" for OP's family. So unfortunate that people couldn't just respond accordingly. Likewise, I appreciate the responders who have replied in the spirit OP had intended and hoped.

My answer to OP is "both." It shouldn't be one or the other. Just like everyone else everywhere else in the County, access to both. Making CS, Campbell, and Barcroft all option schools will essentially eliminate all walkable neighborhood schools for the entire western end of Columbia Pike. The biggest obstacle to making any positive changes has been the advocacy groups insistence that those communities cannot be broken apart and must have walkable neighborhood schools. I would love to see SB actually have the courage to make some bold changes here. I would support Claremont immersion moving to Carlin Springs and retaining Campbell as a countywide option program. But Key immersion should not move to Barcroft - if it has to move out of NE, it would be better suited to the current ATS site. That will still draw from the concentration of Spanish-speaking families and not eliminate all neighborhood school options for the west end. And it gives south Arlington ED families access to both neighborhood and option programs. I'm sure someone will take issue that Barcroft and Randolph are not "high-performing" schools that I mentioned earlier; but breaking the highest concentration of ED students at CS and opening Claremont as neighborhood, along with new 2019 boundaries around Drew can all have a tremendous impact throughout South Arlington and therefore for all of APS. What a concept.

I think this is probably what they will do. But here's the issue: they're moving Alcova into Fleet. Barcroft will become the in-boundary school for half of the families who don't want Immersion at CS, but only the poor half. Glencarlyn is being moved to Ashlawn. So Barcroft is going to become more economically disadvantaged in the process. The only way they can avoid this scenario is by making Barcroft an option school, too. But, like you said, then there are "too many" option schools right here. What exactly do you think they can do for Barcroft to make it "high-performing" if it faces even greater economic challenge? Overall it's a plus, but definitely not for Barcroft.

Doesn't HAVE to be that way. Claremont can draw from several directions, the immersion program will hopefully draw significantly as well. Not all UMC will be able to get into immersion; so they'll be more likely to actually attend Barcroft, Randolph.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the other map they published from the census. Lots of Spanish Speakers around Nottingham.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Language_ACS16_5Year_Count_Census.pdf

Are you planning to put teenagers into an elementary immersion program? That map looks at children 5-17, so roughly elementary through high school. The APS map pp shared reflects only the elementary-aged Spanish-speaking population in the area, which is the relevant consideration for this analysis.

Then why did APS decide to make it an appendix?

They are both relevant. Its about where spanish speaking families are. Right now the only kids impacted by this are maybe 2nd grade and below- more likely 1st grade and below.

I see that the Key parents who live near Key have switched to advocating for no changes whatsoever-
https://www.change.org/p/arlington-school-board-leave-all-elementary-schools-in-their-current-locations-and-change-boundaries?recruiter=279815821&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_message

That's such a dick move. We can debate which moves make the most sense, but the status quo is just terrible and something needs to change (even if that ends up being my school, which is on the table).

Good for them. No one on this board who isn’t a Key parent has the slightest clue how Key works, the families and students who make Key what it is, or anything else about Key. Key parents are advocating for Key the same as other parents are advocating for their schools and their children. If you think that’s a “dick move,” go suck an egg.

That is such bullshit. Key had a perfectly fine petition going already advocating for Key to stay where it is. They could have stuck with that and simply advocated for themselves in the staff's process rather than throwing every other community that needs changes under the bus by advocating for nothing to change. This petition is is basically a big middle finger to the rest of Arlington, an overt statement that Key families that no one matters but them. Even Nottingham didn't go there.

Per the analysis "Comparing the Options -As part of the Elementary Planning Initiative, the School Board directed staff to develop two proposals for the location of neighborhood and option school sites. One proposal will leave elementary schools in their current locations and change boundaries. The second proposal could result in changing the location of some option and neighborhood schools, while maintaining the same number of elementary option and neighborhood schools and changing boundaries. "

The petition is in support of the first option and I believe it was made to be inclusive of all schools. It is not just Keep Key on Key, or ATS at ATS but rather a petition in support of one of the options mentioned in the document.

I would not support that petition. The status quo is no longer acceptable nor viable.

Pretty sure it is viable. Maybe not acceptable. But why not?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the other map they published from the census. Lots of Spanish Speakers around Nottingham.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Language_ACS16_5Year_Count_Census.pdf

Are you planning to put teenagers into an elementary immersion program? That map looks at children 5-17, so roughly elementary through high school. The APS map pp shared reflects only the elementary-aged Spanish-speaking population in the area, which is the relevant consideration for this analysis.

Then why did APS decide to make it an appendix?

They are both relevant. Its about where spanish speaking families are. Right now the only kids impacted by this are maybe 2nd grade and below- more likely 1st grade and below.

I see that the Key parents who live near Key have switched to advocating for no changes whatsoever-
https://www.change.org/p/arlington-school-board-leave-all-elementary-schools-in-their-current-locations-and-change-boundaries?recruiter=279815821&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_message

That's such a dick move. We can debate which moves make the most sense, but the status quo is just terrible and something needs to change (even if that ends up being my school, which is on the table).

Good for them. No one on this board who isn’t a Key parent has the slightest clue how Key works, the families and students who make Key what it is, or anything else about Key. Key parents are advocating for Key the same as other parents are advocating for their schools and their children. If you think that’s a “dick move,” go suck an egg.

That is such bullshit. Key had a perfectly fine petition going already advocating for Key to stay where it is. They could have stuck with that and simply advocated for themselves in the staff's process rather than throwing every other community that needs changes under the bus by advocating for nothing to change. This petition is is basically a big middle finger to the rest of Arlington, an overt statement that Key families that no one matters but them. Even Nottingham didn't go there.

How does this make them any different than any of the rest of you? Please stop pretending that you all are advocates for anyone other than yourselves. And, above all, please stop pretending that any of you give a sh!t about poor kids when you do everything you can to avoid your own kids associating with them.

I'm the same poster who posted a few pages back about how the guiding decision point on the analysis needed to be which was a higher priority for ED South Arlington families, proximity to neighborhood schools or easier access to choice programs, and who further said that since I live in North Arlington, I don't feel comfortable answering that question for them and would defer to them on which direction it should go. What happens to us (which will be something, even if we stay at our school but there's a boundary shift around us) is secondary to that in my mind.

I'm a South Arlington parent. I'll answer for you. If I'm an UMC parent in the Henry, Oakridge, or Hoffman Boston walk zone, I want walkable neighborhood schools.

If I'm an UMC parent in any of the other zones, I want access to option programs (I am fine with a long bus ride, too, just want to be able to get into one).

If I'm a disadvantaged parent, I will send my kids to school wherever is closest and easiest to get to, don't mind too much if the kid has a short bus trip because then I don't have to walk them, but I want a school that is safe and welcoming, and I don't care so much about the program focus. Wherever we get in to VPI is where kid will go for Kindergarten.

If I am educated immigrant parent, I want access to option programs because we can't afford to live in-bounds to a "good" school, but we moved here just to give the kids a "good" education. So I want access to option programs. Or I'll report a fake address and send kids to the "good" school anyway.

Any questions?

Yes, are you really a south Arlington parent and if so, which category do you belong in?

I am a south Arlington parent. I am what you would probably consider a UMC parent in "any of the other zones" but couldn't care less about access to option programs for my family. I do, however, care about access to high-performing neighborhood schools and access to high-quality option programs for the concentrations of disadvantaged families in SW Arlington.

I appreciate the OP and the genuine desire to consider what's best for the system, rather than what's "best" for OP's family. So unfortunate that people couldn't just respond accordingly. Likewise, I appreciate the responders who have replied in the spirit OP had intended and hoped.

My answer to OP is "both." It shouldn't be one or the other. Just like everyone else everywhere else in the County, access to both. Making CS, Campbell, and Barcroft all option schools will essentially eliminate all walkable neighborhood schools for the entire western end of Columbia Pike. The biggest obstacle to making any positive changes has been the advocacy groups insistence that those communities cannot be broken apart and must have walkable neighborhood schools. I would love to see SB actually have the courage to make some bold changes here. I would support Claremont immersion moving to Carlin Springs and retaining Campbell as a countywide option program. But Key immersion should not move to Barcroft - if it has to move out of NE, it would be better suited to the current ATS site. That will still draw from the concentration of Spanish-speaking families and not eliminate all neighborhood school options for the west end. And it gives south Arlington ED families access to both neighborhood and option programs. I'm sure someone will take issue that Barcroft and Randolph are not "high-performing" schools that I mentioned earlier; but breaking the highest concentration of ED students at CS and opening Claremont as neighborhood, along with new 2019 boundaries around Drew can all have a tremendous impact throughout South Arlington and therefore for all of APS. What a concept.

Where would you suggest putting the ATS program if Key goes to its current building?

And that's the wrench in it, right? I still don't understand the staff's reasoning behind Nottingham as the suggested school. I know, boundaries, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that even if they put an option school at Nottingham the boundaries are still going to be awful for McKinley and Ashlawn when Reed opens, probably even worse than they are now. It seems like they could put an option school at one of those, still get a lot of boundary drawing relief, and have it been in closer proximity to and thus more accessible to South Arlington. In fact, if they put it at McKinley, they could potentially solve the boundary issue both north and south of Lee Highway because Tuckahoe's boundaries could go south of Lee Highway and southwest of Washington Blvd to pick up a bunch of current McKinley along Washington Blvd that can't walk to Reed, and then some of Tuckahoe's units move to Nottingham to make room for the McKinley people and replace the current Nottingham people who will go to Reed. And then Ashlawn's boundaries could become more compact if the take the portions of McKinley south of Reed that Tuckahoe doesn't get and that can't walk to Reed, and Reed's boundary could start at its walkzone in the west and then move east to pick up south of Glebe and maybe a Glebe unit or two (yes, they will be units walkable to Glebe, but Glebe will be way over capacity if some of their walkers don't get bused elsewhere).

The only Tuckahoe families you could move to Nottingham would probably be the few that are south of Lee Highway. You have issues because they won’t want to move walkers. But anyone else would create a non-contiguous boundary that they seem to insist on having. No more islands. But without islands that area gets super tricky to keep walkers where they can walk and contiguous boundaries.

No matter what they do, I guarantee you that somewhere there will be people who could walk to one school but end up bused to another. Tuckahoe families are not more special than anyone else, despite their moral cohesion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the other map they published from the census. Lots of Spanish Speakers around Nottingham.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Language_ACS16_5Year_Count_Census.pdf

Are you planning to put teenagers into an elementary immersion program? That map looks at children 5-17, so roughly elementary through high school. The APS map pp shared reflects only the elementary-aged Spanish-speaking population in the area, which is the relevant consideration for this analysis.

Then why did APS decide to make it an appendix?

They are both relevant. Its about where spanish speaking families are. Right now the only kids impacted by this are maybe 2nd grade and below- more likely 1st grade and below.

I see that the Key parents who live near Key have switched to advocating for no changes whatsoever-
https://www.change.org/p/arlington-school-board-leave-all-elementary-schools-in-their-current-locations-and-change-boundaries?recruiter=279815821&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_message

That's such a dick move. We can debate which moves make the most sense, but the status quo is just terrible and something needs to change (even if that ends up being my school, which is on the table).

Good for them. No one on this board who isn’t a Key parent has the slightest clue how Key works, the families and students who make Key what it is, or anything else about Key. Key parents are advocating for Key the same as other parents are advocating for their schools and their children. If you think that’s a “dick move,” go suck an egg.

That is such bullshit. Key had a perfectly fine petition going already advocating for Key to stay where it is. They could have stuck with that and simply advocated for themselves in the staff's process rather than throwing every other community that needs changes under the bus by advocating for nothing to change. This petition is is basically a big middle finger to the rest of Arlington, an overt statement that Key families that no one matters but them. Even Nottingham didn't go there.

How does this make them any different than any of the rest of you? Please stop pretending that you all are advocates for anyone other than yourselves. And, above all, please stop pretending that any of you give a sh!t about poor kids when you do everything you can to avoid your own kids associating with them.

I'm the same poster who posted a few pages back about how the guiding decision point on the analysis needed to be which was a higher priority for ED South Arlington families, proximity to neighborhood schools or easier access to choice programs, and who further said that since I live in North Arlington, I don't feel comfortable answering that question for them and would defer to them on which direction it should go. What happens to us (which will be something, even if we stay at our school but there's a boundary shift around us) is secondary to that in my mind.

I'm a South Arlington parent. I'll answer for you. If I'm an UMC parent in the Henry, Oakridge, or Hoffman Boston walk zone, I want walkable neighborhood schools.

If I'm an UMC parent in any of the other zones, I want access to option programs (I am fine with a long bus ride, too, just want to be able to get into one).

If I'm a disadvantaged parent, I will send my kids to school wherever is closest and easiest to get to, don't mind too much if the kid has a short bus trip because then I don't have to walk them, but I want a school that is safe and welcoming, and I don't care so much about the program focus. Wherever we get in to VPI is where kid will go for Kindergarten.

If I am educated immigrant parent, I want access to option programs because we can't afford to live in-bounds to a "good" school, but we moved here just to give the kids a "good" education. So I want access to option programs. Or I'll report a fake address and send kids to the "good" school anyway.

Any questions?

that's truth

[Anonymous]

Here’s the plan that should happen: no more option schools, including immersion.

[Anonymous]

--I'm a South Arlington parent. I'll answer for you. If I'm an UMC parent in the Henry, Oakridge, or Hoffman Boston walk zone, I want walkable neighborhood schools.

If I'm an UMC parent in any of the other zones, I want access to option programs (I am fine with a long bus ride, too, just want to be able to get into one).

If I'm a disadvantaged parent, I will send my kids to school wherever is closest and easiest to get to, don't mind too much if the kid has a short bus trip because then I don't have to walk them, but I want a school that is safe and welcoming, and I don't care so much about the program focus. Wherever we get in to VPI is where kid will go for Kindergarten.

If I am educated immigrant parent, I want access to option programs because we can't afford to live in-bounds to a "good" school, but we moved here just to give the kids a "good" education. So I want access to option programs. Or I'll report a fake address and send kids to the "good" school anyway.

Any questions?--

Another SA parent, PP;s statement above is truth. We are in the neighborhood of a low performing school and we choiced out when choicing out was an option. Now with the long waitlists at immersion and Campbell, that is not an option for SA parents who want out. Every single family on my block choiced out. Every single one. Families who move into the neighborhood often already have kids in private or in choice. One family down the street is moving before kids get into K, as are 4 other families I know of in the last couple years. Something is really wrong with a school system when UMC of any ethnic group choice out of neighborhoods schools.

Don't force Barcroft to Randolph, families will literally leave the neighborhood or go private if they cannot get into a choice program. Only the lower income families on the edge of the neighborhood will be left. They get the scraps. Even if they all want immersion, there are not nearly enough seats to accommodate them.

Breaking up Barcroft will have very different consequences for UMC and poor families than doing the same to Nottingham. Very different considerations going on.

[Anonymous]

There is not room to force Barcroft to Randolph anyway. While not overcrowded, Randolph is at capacity.

-happy Randolph parent

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:--I'm a South Arlington parent. I'll answer for you. If I'm an UMC parent in the Henry, Oakridge, or Hoffman Boston walk zone, I want walkable neighborhood schools.

If I'm an UMC parent in any of the other zones, I want access to option programs (I am fine with a long bus ride, too, just want to be able to get into one).

If I'm a disadvantaged parent, I will send my kids to school wherever is closest and easiest to get to, don't mind too much if the kid has a short bus trip because then I don't have to walk them, but I want a school that is safe and welcoming, and I don't care so much about the program focus. Wherever we get in to VPI is where kid will go for Kindergarten.

If I am educated immigrant parent, I want access to option programs because we can't afford to live in-bounds to a "good" school, but we moved here just to give the kids a "good" education. So I want access to option programs. Or I'll report a fake address and send kids to the "good" school anyway.

Any questions?--

Another SA parent, PP;s statement above is truth. We are in the neighborhood of a low performing school and we choiced out when choicing out was an option. Now with the long waitlists at immersion and Campbell, that is not an option for SA parents who want out. Every single family on my block choiced out. Every single one. Families who move into the neighborhood often already have kids in private or in choice. One family down the street is moving before kids get into K, as are 4 other families I know of in the last couple years. Something is really wrong with a school system when UMC of any ethnic group choice out of neighborhoods schools.

Don't force Barcroft to Randolph, families will literally leave the neighborhood or go private if they cannot get into a choice program. Only the lower income families on the edge of the neighborhood will be left. They get the scraps. Even if they all want immersion, there are not nearly enough seats to accommodate them.

Breaking up Barcroft will have very different consequences for UMC and poor families than doing the same to Nottingham. Very different considerations going on.

In addition to not moving an option program to Barcroft, is there anything else you think could be done in this process to help things over there? I'm being very serious, I'm a NA parent so I won't pretend to understand the dynamics of SA, but I know my kids will be fine no matter what happens up by us and so to extent I can say anything people will listen to, I'd like to be able to help, or at the very least not hurt.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the other map they published from the census. Lots of Spanish Speakers around Nottingham.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Language_ACS16_5Year_Count_Census.pdf

Are you planning to put teenagers into an elementary immersion program? That map looks at children 5-17, so roughly elementary through high school. The APS map pp shared reflects only the elementary-aged Spanish-speaking population in the area, which is the relevant consideration for this analysis.

Then why did APS decide to make it an appendix?

They are both relevant. Its about where spanish speaking families are. Right now the only kids impacted by this are maybe 2nd grade and below- more likely 1st grade and below.

I see that the Key parents who live near Key have switched to advocating for no changes whatsoever-
https://www.change.org/p/arlington-school-board-leave-all-elementary-schools-in-their-current-locations-and-change-boundaries?recruiter=279815821&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_message

That's such a dick move. We can debate which moves make the most sense, but the status quo is just terrible and something needs to change (even if that ends up being my school, which is on the table).

Good for them. No one on this board who isn’t a Key parent has the slightest clue how Key works, the families and students who make Key what it is, or anything else about Key. Key parents are advocating for Key the same as other parents are advocating for their schools and their children. If you think that’s a “dick move,” go suck an egg.

That is such bullshit. Key had a perfectly fine petition going already advocating for Key to stay where it is. They could have stuck with that and simply advocated for themselves in the staff's process rather than throwing every other community that needs changes under the bus by advocating for nothing to change. This petition is is basically a big middle finger to the rest of Arlington, an overt statement that Key families that no one matters but them. Even Nottingham didn't go there.

How does this make them any different than any of the rest of you? Please stop pretending that you all are advocates for anyone other than yourselves. And, above all, please stop pretending that any of you give a sh!t about poor kids when you do everything you can to avoid your own kids associating with them.

I'm the same poster who posted a few pages back about how the guiding decision point on the analysis needed to be which was a higher priority for ED South Arlington families, proximity to neighborhood schools or easier access to choice programs, and who further said that since I live in North Arlington, I don't feel comfortable answering that question for them and would defer to them on which direction it should go. What happens to us (which will be something, even if we stay at our school but there's a boundary shift around us) is secondary to that in my mind.

I'm a South Arlington parent. I'll answer for you. If I'm an UMC parent in the Henry, Oakridge, or Hoffman Boston walk zone, I want walkable neighborhood schools.

If I'm an UMC parent in any of the other zones, I want access to option programs (I am fine with a long bus ride, too, just want to be able to get into one).

If I'm a disadvantaged parent, I will send my kids to school wherever is closest and easiest to get to, don't mind too much if the kid has a short bus trip because then I don't have to walk them, but I want a school that is safe and welcoming, and I don't care so much about the program focus. Wherever we get in to VPI is where kid will go for Kindergarten.

If I am educated immigrant parent, I want access to option programs because we can't afford to live in-bounds to a "good" school, but we moved here just to give the kids a "good" education. So I want access to option programs. Or I'll report a fake address and send kids to the "good" school anyway.

Any questions?

Yes, are you really a south Arlington parent and if so, which category do you belong in?

I am a south Arlington parent. I am what you would probably consider a UMC parent in "any of the other zones" but couldn't care less about access to option programs for my family. I do, however, care about access to high-performing neighborhood schools and access to high-quality option programs for the concentrations of disadvantaged families in SW Arlington.

I appreciate the OP and the genuine desire to consider what's best for the system, rather than what's "best" for OP's family. So unfortunate that people couldn't just respond accordingly. Likewise, I appreciate the responders who have replied in the spirit OP had intended and hoped.

My answer to OP is "both." It shouldn't be one or the other. Just like everyone else everywhere else in the County, access to both. Making CS, Campbell, and Barcroft all option schools will essentially eliminate all walkable neighborhood schools for the entire western end of Columbia Pike. The biggest obstacle to making any positive changes has been the advocacy groups insistence that those communities cannot be broken apart and must have walkable neighborhood schools. I would love to see SB actually have the courage to make some bold changes here. I would support Claremont immersion moving to Carlin Springs and retaining Campbell as a countywide option program. But Key immersion should not move to Barcroft - if it has to move out of NE, it would be better suited to the current ATS site. That will still draw from the concentration of Spanish-speaking families and not eliminate all neighborhood school options for the west end. And it gives south Arlington ED families access to both neighborhood and option programs. I'm sure someone will take issue that Barcroft and Randolph are not "high-performing" schools that I mentioned earlier; but breaking the highest concentration of ED students at CS and opening Claremont as neighborhood, along with new 2019 boundaries around Drew can all have a tremendous impact throughout South Arlington and therefore for all of APS. What a concept.

Where would you suggest putting the ATS program if Key goes to its current building?

And that's the wrench in it, right? I still don't understand the staff's reasoning behind Nottingham as the suggested school. I know, boundaries, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that even if they put an option school at Nottingham the boundaries are still going to be awful for McKinley and Ashlawn when Reed opens, probably even worse than they are now. It seems like they could put an option school at one of those, still get a lot of boundary drawing relief, and have it been in closer proximity to and thus more accessible to South Arlington. In fact, if they put it at McKinley, they could potentially solve the boundary issue both north and south of Lee Highway because Tuckahoe's boundaries could go south of Lee Highway and southwest of Washington Blvd to pick up a bunch of current McKinley along Washington Blvd that can't walk to Reed, and then some of Tuckahoe's units move to Nottingham to make room for the McKinley people and replace the current Nottingham people who will go to Reed. And then Ashlawn's boundaries could become more compact if the take the portions of McKinley south of Reed that Tuckahoe doesn't get and that can't walk to Reed, and Reed's boundary could start at its walkzone in the west and then move east to pick up south of Glebe and maybe a Glebe unit or two (yes, they will be units walkable to Glebe, but Glebe will be way over capacity if some of their walkers don't get bused elsewhere).

The only Tuckahoe families you could move to Nottingham would probably be the few that are south of Lee Highway. You have issues because they won’t want to move walkers. But anyone else would create a non-contiguous boundary that they seem to insist on having. No more islands. But without islands that area gets super tricky to keep walkers where they can walk and contiguous boundaries.

No matter what they do, I guarantee you that somewhere there will be people who could walk to one school but end up bused to another. Tuckahoe families are not more special than anyone else, despite their moral cohesion.

You missed the point and obviously can’t look at a map.

While there may be people bussed past a closer neighborhood school. If a school is a neighborhood school, those in the walk zone will walk there until walker fill it way over capacity. And the SB has said boundaries have to be contiguous. All of that will be impossible under the plan from the poster above.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the other map they published from the census. Lots of Spanish Speakers around Nottingham.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Language_ACS16_5Year_Count_Census.pdf

Are you planning to put teenagers into an elementary immersion program? That map looks at children 5-17, so roughly elementary through high school. The APS map pp shared reflects only the elementary-aged Spanish-speaking population in the area, which is the relevant consideration for this analysis.

Then why did APS decide to make it an appendix?

They are both relevant. Its about where spanish speaking families are. Right now the only kids impacted by this are maybe 2nd grade and below- more likely 1st grade and below.

I see that the Key parents who live near Key have switched to advocating for no changes whatsoever-
https://www.change.org/p/arlington-school-board-leave-all-elementary-schools-in-their-current-locations-and-change-boundaries?recruiter=279815821&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_message

That's such a dick move. We can debate which moves make the most sense, but the status quo is just terrible and something needs to change (even if that ends up being my school, which is on the table).

Good for them. No one on this board who isn’t a Key parent has the slightest clue how Key works, the families and students who make Key what it is, or anything else about Key. Key parents are advocating for Key the same as other parents are advocating for their schools and their children. If you think that’s a “dick move,” go suck an egg.

That is such bullshit. Key had a perfectly fine petition going already advocating for Key to stay where it is. They could have stuck with that and simply advocated for themselves in the staff's process rather than throwing every other community that needs changes under the bus by advocating for nothing to change. This petition is is basically a big middle finger to the rest of Arlington, an overt statement that Key families that no one matters but them. Even Nottingham didn't go there.

How does this make them any different than any of the rest of you? Please stop pretending that you all are advocates for anyone other than yourselves. And, above all, please stop pretending that any of you give a sh!t about poor kids when you do everything you can to avoid your own kids associating with them.

I'm the same poster who posted a few pages back about how the guiding decision point on the analysis needed to be which was a higher priority for ED South Arlington families, proximity to neighborhood schools or easier access to choice programs, and who further said that since I live in North Arlington, I don't feel comfortable answering that question for them and would defer to them on which direction it should go. What happens to us (which will be something, even if we stay at our school but there's a boundary shift around us) is secondary to that in my mind.

I'm a South Arlington parent. I'll answer for you. If I'm an UMC parent in the Henry, Oakridge, or Hoffman Boston walk zone, I want walkable neighborhood schools.

If I'm an UMC parent in any of the other zones, I want access to option programs (I am fine with a long bus ride, too, just want to be able to get into one).

If I'm a disadvantaged parent, I will send my kids to school wherever is closest and easiest to get to, don't mind too much if the kid has a short bus trip because then I don't have to walk them, but I want a school that is safe and welcoming, and I don't care so much about the program focus. Wherever we get in to VPI is where kid will go for Kindergarten.

If I am educated immigrant parent, I want access to option programs because we can't afford to live in-bounds to a "good" school, but we moved here just to give the kids a "good" education. So I want access to option programs. Or I'll report a fake address and send kids to the "good" school anyway.

Any questions?

Yes, are you really a south Arlington parent and if so, which category do you belong in?

I am a south Arlington parent. I am what you would probably consider a UMC parent in "any of the other zones" but couldn't care less about access to option programs for my family. I do, however, care about access to high-performing neighborhood schools and access to high-quality option programs for the concentrations of disadvantaged families in SW Arlington.

I appreciate the OP and the genuine desire to consider what's best for the system, rather than what's "best" for OP's family. So unfortunate that people couldn't just respond accordingly. Likewise, I appreciate the responders who have replied in the spirit OP had intended and hoped.

My answer to OP is "both." It shouldn't be one or the other. Just like everyone else everywhere else in the County, access to both. Making CS, Campbell, and Barcroft all option schools will essentially eliminate all walkable neighborhood schools for the entire western end of Columbia Pike. The biggest obstacle to making any positive changes has been the advocacy groups insistence that those communities cannot be broken apart and must have walkable neighborhood schools. I would love to see SB actually have the courage to make some bold changes here. I would support Claremont immersion moving to Carlin Springs and retaining Campbell as a countywide option program. But Key immersion should not move to Barcroft - if it has to move out of NE, it would be better suited to the current ATS site. That will still draw from the concentration of Spanish-speaking families and not eliminate all neighborhood school options for the west end. And it gives south Arlington ED families access to both neighborhood and option programs. I'm sure someone will take issue that Barcroft and Randolph are not "high-performing" schools that I mentioned earlier; but breaking the highest concentration of ED students at CS and opening Claremont as neighborhood, along with new 2019 boundaries around Drew can all have a tremendous impact throughout South Arlington and therefore for all of APS. What a concept.

Where would you suggest putting the ATS program if Key goes to its current building?

And that's the wrench in it, right? I still don't understand the staff's reasoning behind Nottingham as the suggested school. I know, boundaries, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that even if they put an option school at Nottingham the boundaries are still going to be awful for McKinley and Ashlawn when Reed opens, probably even worse than they are now. It seems like they could put an option school at one of those, still get a lot of boundary drawing relief, and have it been in closer proximity to and thus more accessible to South Arlington. In fact, if they put it at McKinley, they could potentially solve the boundary issue both north and south of Lee Highway because Tuckahoe's boundaries could go south of Lee Highway and southwest of Washington Blvd to pick up a bunch of current McKinley along Washington Blvd that can't walk to Reed, and then some of Tuckahoe's units move to Nottingham to make room for the McKinley people and replace the current Nottingham people who will go to Reed. And then Ashlawn's boundaries could become more compact if the take the portions of McKinley south of Reed that Tuckahoe doesn't get and that can't walk to Reed, and Reed's boundary could start at its walkzone in the west and then move east to pick up south of Glebe and maybe a Glebe unit or two (yes, they will be units walkable to Glebe, but Glebe will be way over capacity if some of their walkers don't get bused elsewhere).

The only Tuckahoe families you could move to Nottingham would probably be the few that are south of Lee Highway. You have issues because they won’t want to move walkers. But anyone else would create a non-contiguous boundary that they seem to insist on having. No more islands. But without islands that area gets super tricky to keep walkers where they can walk and contiguous boundaries.

No matter what they do, I guarantee you that somewhere there will be people who could walk to one school but end up bused to another. Tuckahoe families are not more special than anyone else, despite their moral cohesion.

You missed the point and obviously can’t look at a map.

While there may be people bussed past a closer neighborhood school. If a school is a neighborhood school, those in the walk zone will walk there until walker fill it way over capacity. And the SB has said boundaries have to be contiguous. All of that will be impossible under the plan from the poster above.

You are overlooking something. If there is already a bus traveling near a planning unit that would have the available capacity to pick up that planning unit, it costs APS very little to have that us go a few blocks out of its way to pick up those kids too, even if they could walk elsewhere.