APS Elementary Planning Mtg at Swanson - Option 1 in, Option 2 out, McKinley Moms out of contro

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
And it still comes down to the close proximity of McK and Reed and Ashlawn make it really hard to draw a reasonable boundary for all there to be neighborhood schools. If McK wanted to stay put they needed to fight the charge to make Reed a neighborhood school. But that wasn't happening because a good chunk of McK is in Westover and they wanted a neighborhood school there.


I'd want to see boundaries/walk zones map with Tuckahoe being option and compare that to option 1's map, before concluding the same, if I were McKinley PTA. Remember if one is not overwhelmingly 'better' then it's just a game of playing politics.


If they move ATS to Tuckahoe rather than to McKinley, you can create a map that balances capacity and looks very similar to the proposal #1 map. The problem with that proposal isn't the boundaries so much as how it will negatively affect ATS. By moving it further from SA, you will reduce the number of students it pulls from SA schools (particularly low-income students), and you be basically prevent any further expansion of a very in-demand program because it will effectively max out Tuckahoe's capacity. By putting it at McKinley, you keep it more accessible to low-income students and allow for future growth of the program.

I don't see APS successfully moving ATS to a location that is basically inaccessible for all of South Arlington and all high poverty communities in the County and getting away with it. The ATS community would lose their shit, AEM would get in a line to see who could condemn it the most in terms of impact on the poor.

McKrazy was already not a great look but if she is seriously arguing that the best solution is to keep her precious school from moving so she's not personally inconvenienced and to hoard ATS as only an option for the wealthiest of the wealthy - that is an even more selfish, self serving, terrible look. I think that would really be the straw that broke the camels back in terms of the County. Alot of people who have previously played along would start getting super on board with blowing the whole system up and support the future board member who wants to go all lottery.

The vast majority of SA kids that attend ATS are the UMC white people who don’t want to go to their neighborhood school. ATS’s diversity stats come from mostly their VPI kids. The worst part of moving ATS to McKinley is that the expansion of ATS would actually further the segregation of SA schools. The NA kids that attend ATS often applied to escape their overcrowded schools. Now that they won’t be overcrowded, not as many kids will apply - except they could get a flood of applicants from the 200+ kid in the McKinley walk zone. I predict if they move ATS to McKinley and expand it to 800 kids (likely McKinley currently houses w trailers) it could be detrimental the the SA neighborhood schools.

What if they expanded exclusively with more VPI students?

Or conduct a lottery that provides seats by the home neighborhood school proportionate to the FR/L rate?

Right! K lottery should have a FR/L preference.

Literally VPI

IN ADDITION to the VPI kids. VPI preference for K and then additional preference for FR/L kids that didn't get into VPI the year before.

Pretty sure APS was sued for a similar policy at HBW.

Yes I have heard that too. Next idea please.

Wow, really? That's what DC is considering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP, but you could have more VPI at ATS and less at, say, Carlin Springs or Hoffman Boston.

Two questions:
1) why not more VPI at all underenrolled schools like D, J, N, etc.?
2) do more VPI families stay at ATS through 5th than at other schools like maybe Jamestown, if so, why?

[Anonymous]

I tend to think that these moves won’t happen prior to the boundaries being redrawn. APS has talked in terms of exploring the moves and states that “any” moves would be in place for 3021. They have built in these weasel words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP, but you could have more VPI at ATS and less at, say, Carlin Springs or Hoffman Boston.

Two questions:
1) why not more VPI at all underenrolled schools like D, J, N, etc.?
2) do more VPI families stay at ATS through 5th than at other schools like maybe Jamestown, if so, why?

None of the schools listed above have VPI. They don't have a nearby population that is eligible for VPI. Jamestown has Montessori, and APS struggles/ is unable to fill the set aside.

VPI eligible students either attend VPI at a choice school or at the neighborhood school. If they can't get into their neighborhood school VPI, or if their neighborhood doesn't have VPI< they might go to a nearby neighhborhood school for VPI- but no VPI eligible family is going to choose to shelp to Jamestown for VPI when they could go at Glebe. If their choice is Jamestown or nothing I think a good deal would choose nothing, ,but those that did shlep are certainly not going to continue to shlep in kindergarten.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think that these moves won’t happen prior to the boundaries being redrawn. APS has talked in terms of exploring the moves and states that “any” moves would be in place for 3021. They have built in these weasel words.

^Excuse me... 2021.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP, but you could have more VPI at ATS and less at, say, Carlin Springs or Hoffman Boston.

Two questions:
1) why not more VPI at all underenrolled schools like D, J, N, etc.?
2) do more VPI families stay at ATS through 5th than at other schools like maybe Jamestown, if so, why?

None of the schools listed above have VPI. They don't have a nearby population that is eligible for VPI. Jamestown has Montessori, and APS struggles/ is unable to fill the set aside.

VPI eligible students either attend VPI at a choice school or at the neighborhood school. If they can't get into their neighborhood school VPI, or if their neighborhood doesn't have VPI< they might go to a nearby neighhborhood school for VPI- but no VPI eligible family is going to choose to shelp to Jamestown for VPI when they could go at Glebe. If their choice is Jamestown or nothing I think a good deal would choose nothing, ,but those that did shlep are certainly not going to continue to shlep in kindergarten.

Yes, this was directly addressed at a televised SB meeting or work session a couple of months ago. Too little demand for VPI as far north as Jamestown.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think that these moves won’t happen prior to the boundaries being redrawn. APS has talked in terms of exploring the moves and states that “any” moves would be in place for 3021. They have built in these weasel words.

Are you saying that you don’t think they’ll decide where schools should be moved until the boundary process, or that they’ll decide the locations now but not move schools until the new boundaries go into place? If the former, that’s contrary to everything they’re signaling. If the latter, um, of course, they can’t move schools until there are new boundaries drawn.

[Anonymous]

Moves can’t happen until 2021 bc Reed is just a pile of dirt

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think that these moves won’t happen prior to the boundaries being redrawn. APS has talked in terms of exploring the moves and states that “any” moves would be in place for 3021. They have built in these weasel words.

Are you saying that you don’t think they’ll decide where schools should be moved until the boundary process, or that they’ll decide the locations now but not move schools until the new boundaries go into place? If the former, that’s contrary to everything they’re signaling. If the latter, um, of course, they can’t move schools until there are new boundaries drawn.

Uh, I thought they were moving places like Key prior to drawing the new boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Chiming in to agree that the narrative that ATS is full of white UMC kids from south Arlington is overblown. The school is only 40% white, and draws disproportionately from the predominantly white neighborhoods around it. Not enough white kids for both to be true! I'd add that a number of my kids white classmates are also children of immigrants. ATS's diversity is not just a talking point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think that these moves won’t happen prior to the boundaries being redrawn. APS has talked in terms of exploring the moves and states that “any” moves would be in place for 3021. They have built in these weasel words.

Are you saying that you don’t think they’ll decide where schools should be moved until the boundary process, or that they’ll decide the locations now but not move schools until the new boundaries go into place? If the former, that’s contrary to everything they’re signaling. If the latter, um, of course, they can’t move schools until there are new boundaries drawn.

Uh, I thought they were moving places like Key prior to drawing the new boundaries.

Then you haven't been paying attention. They are planning where to move schools then redrawing boundaries. Everything will happen 2021 when Reed opens.

[Anonymous]

The funny (not funny?) thing is that when APS eventually gets to the boundary part of this process so many people are going to feel just as screwed as the McKinley and Key parents, they just don’t know it yet. Moving the option programs is a bandaid on a gushing artery and whether options move or not, the real magic comes through the reassignment of planning units. Nothing in this plan addresses the shortage of seats, and moving the option programs shifts the relative burden of the problem while doing nothing to solve it. What a mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think that these moves won’t happen prior to the boundaries being redrawn. APS has talked in terms of exploring the moves and states that “any” moves would be in place for 3021. They have built in these weasel words.

Are you saying that you don’t think they’ll decide where schools should be moved until the boundary process, or that they’ll decide the locations now but not move schools until the new boundaries go into place? If the former, that’s contrary to everything they’re signaling. If the latter, um, of course, they can’t move schools until there are new boundaries drawn.

Uh, I thought they were moving places like Key prior to drawing the new boundaries.

LOL, how to you think that would work? They move Key to ATS, ATS to McKinley, and McKinley to where? Bus them all to Key for a year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The funny (not funny?) thing is that when APS eventually gets to the boundary part of this process so many people are going to feel just as screwed as the McKinley and Key parents, they just don’t know it yet. Moving the option programs is a bandaid on a gushing artery and whether options move or not, the real magic comes through the reassignment of planning units. Nothing in this plan addresses the shortage of seats, and moving the option programs shifts the relative burden of the problem while doing nothing to solve it. What a mess.

I take it you haven’t been looking at any of the projections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the SB undermines staff again and pulls some sort of last minute crazy change to Ashlawn or Tuckahoe staff should quit en masse. Enough already. Why have a planning staff if you never take their recommendation? Just have a screaming contest and see who yells louder. Though I’m pretty sure Ashlawn and Tuckahoe have healthy lungs.

I think the SB will be hard-pressed to undermine the staff given that they're in the middle of a superintendent search. Any good candidate is going to look at this boundary process as Exhibit A for how the SB works with its superintendent and staff. If anything, I think the SB will be more deferential to the staff rather than less this time around.

That’s a good point.

Agreed plus two school board members are retiring. Perfect time for vote popular to most except a few who are also very vocal.