the Key/ASFS building switch...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who advocated for the swap outside the public view this summer? The idea that there is broad consensus as opposed to wealthy interests advocating for this just doesn’t seem to match reality. The “we’ll save a few bucks on buses” line does zero to explain why this isn’t being explored as part of the boundary process.

nobody. Seriously nobody. There is no grand conspiracy of wealthy interests trying to 'steal key' so they can 'walk to school'. APS has been totally transparent about why they are doing this. 1) ASFS is outside the walkzone of its current school. 2) if they draw a walkzone, 85% of the school changes; 3) they want to delay those type of changes until 2021 when Reed is coming on so they have a better idea of numbers.

+1. The swap is the least disruptive action to better align school populations and boundaries until the full boundary process kicks off with Reed.

How is it less disruptive than achieving the same outcome using the boundary process that everyone else is forced to participate in? I think there would be more confidence and acceptance of a swap if the school board would subject it to a vote, as is pretty much always the case when a decision is going to move kids around. This has the appearance of impropriety and that is reason enough to put on the brakes and follow ordinary procedure.

They really just didn’t want to deal with the ASFS thunder dome this fall. That’s it, the whole story. It’ll be thrown back into the next boundary thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who advocated for the swap outside the public view this summer? The idea that there is broad consensus as opposed to wealthy interests advocating for this just doesn’t seem to match reality. The “we’ll save a few bucks on buses” line does zero to explain why this isn’t being explored as part of the boundary process.

nobody. Seriously nobody. There is no grand conspiracy of wealthy interests trying to 'steal key' so they can 'walk to school'. APS has been totally transparent about why they are doing this. 1) ASFS is outside the walkzone of its current school. 2) if they draw a walkzone, 85% of the school changes; 3) they want to delay those type of changes until 2021 when Reed is coming on so they have a better idea of numbers.

+1. The swap is the least disruptive action to better align school populations and boundaries until the full boundary process kicks off with Reed.

How is it less disruptive than achieving the same outcome using the boundary process that everyone else is forced to participate in? I think there would be more confidence and acceptance of a swap if the school board would subject it to a vote, as is pretty much always the case when a decision is going to move kids around. This has the appearance of impropriety and that is reason enough to put on the brakes and follow ordinary procedure.

They really just didn’t want to deal with the ASFS thunder dome this fall. That’s it, the whole story. It’ll be thrown back into the next boundary thing.

Yeah not sure what PP issue is. It will be part of the North Arlington boundary process with reed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who advocated for the swap outside the public view this summer? The idea that there is broad consensus as opposed to wealthy interests advocating for this just doesn’t seem to match reality. The “we’ll save a few bucks on buses” line does zero to explain why this isn’t being explored as part of the boundary process.

nobody. Seriously nobody. There is no grand conspiracy of wealthy interests trying to 'steal key' so they can 'walk to school'. APS has been totally transparent about why they are doing this. 1) ASFS is outside the walkzone of its current school. 2) if they draw a walkzone, 85% of the school changes; 3) they want to delay those type of changes until 2021 when Reed is coming on so they have a better idea of numbers.

+1. The swap is the least disruptive action to better align school populations and boundaries until the full boundary process kicks off with Reed.

How is it less disruptive than achieving the same outcome using the boundary process that everyone else is forced to participate in? I think there would be more confidence and acceptance of a swap if the school board would subject it to a vote, as is pretty much always the case when a decision is going to move kids around. This has the appearance of impropriety and that is reason enough to put on the brakes and follow ordinary procedure.

The school board will vote on Key boundaries in 2020.

[Anonymous]

It’s official! They are moving the science lab. Praise Jesus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s official! They are moving the science lab. Praise Jesus.

I just read that on arl news now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s official! They are moving the science lab. Praise Jesus.

I just read that on arl news now.

If ASFS were still a semi-option program, they could probably justify hoarding a $200k facility perk that was privately funded, with the rationale that everyone in the county could theoretically seek admission to that school. As a strictly neighborhood school, a $200k perk not made available to other elementary schools starts to feel very unequal. I wonder if the board has fully considered the legal implications of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s official! They are moving the science lab. Praise Jesus.

I just read that on arl news now.

If ASFS were still a semi-option program, they could probably justify hoarding a $200k facility perk that was privately funded, with the rationale that everyone in the county could theoretically seek admission to that school. As a strictly neighborhood school, a $200k perk not made available to other elementary schools starts to feel very unequal. I wonder if the board has fully considered the legal implications of this.

Why don’t you go ahead and file that lawsuit to find out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s official! They are moving the science lab. Praise Jesus.

I just read that on arl news now.

If ASFS were still a semi-option program, they could probably justify hoarding a $200k facility perk that was privately funded, with the rationale that everyone in the county could theoretically seek admission to that school. As a strictly neighborhood school, a $200k perk not made available to other elementary schools starts to feel very unequal. I wonder if the board has fully considered the legal implications of this.

Practically speaking, who is going to challenge them moving it or having it? Or should they be more concerned with the precedent going forward?

[Anonymous]

I wouldn't get too upset about this since the invisible writing is already on the wall. This will play out in the following way.

1. Key building will become a neighborhood school (new ASFS?)
2. Immerson probably won't move to current ASFS building since a significant # of kids won't transfer with the program.
3. Immerson at some point will move to a South Arlington school with concentrated poverty and lots of native speakers. Question is will that be before the "proposed swap" or after a few years?
4. Current ASFS Building will become a neighborhood school - but may be immersion for a handful of years
5. Even if they move the "Science Lab" it is mostly tables, chairs, storage, and some science toys, etc..so nothing to get upset about.

Key parents should strongly advocate for where to move Immersion now - what is best for the program since most parents I speak with do not believe it to be ASFS for the long term. We aren't keeping it at KEY - so where do we want it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s official! They are moving the science lab. Praise Jesus.

I just read that on arl news now.

If ASFS were still a semi-option program, they could probably justify hoarding a $200k facility perk that was privately funded, with the rationale that everyone in the county could theoretically seek admission to that school. As a strictly neighborhood school, a $200k perk not made available to other elementary schools starts to feel very unequal. I wonder if the board has fully considered the legal implications of this.

Practically speaking, who is going to challenge them moving it or having it? Or should they be more concerned with the precedent going forward?

If it crosses a line, it’s probably a civil rights issue that would be raised via complaint with the department of education, right?

[Anonymous]

I don't think this "reporting" states anything but speculation and vague responses from APS staff. Basically, they are reporting what is already in this thread. It's highly unlikely that they will allow two classrooms worth of interior space at Key to be eaten up by a "lab." They may move the equipment, but I find it very hard to believe that it will be reconstructed in a similar way, particularly because there is no program to speak of that depends upon the equipment for instruction. Maybe they will get a science trailer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think this "reporting" states anything but speculation and vague responses from APS staff. Basically, they are reporting what is already in this thread. It's highly unlikely that they will allow two classrooms worth of interior space at Key to be eaten up by a "lab." They may move the equipment, but I find it very hard to believe that it will be reconstructed in a similar way, particularly because there is no program to speak of that depends upon the equipment for instruction. Maybe they will get a science trailer?

Now this is a science trailer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25q3hxlgvw4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think this "reporting" states anything but speculation and vague responses from APS staff. Basically, they are reporting what is already in this thread. It's highly unlikely that they will allow two classrooms worth of interior space at Key to be eaten up by a "lab." They may move the equipment, but I find it very hard to believe that it will be reconstructed in a similar way, particularly because there is no program to speak of that depends upon the equipment for instruction. Maybe they will get a science trailer?

Is it possible to make it into some kind of science trailer that can actually travel? Like a roving science lab that can do 2 weeks at each school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Key parents should strongly advocate for where to move Immersion now - what is best for the program since most parents I speak with do not believe it to be ASFS for the long term. We aren't keeping it at KEY - so where do we want it?

I completely 100% agree with you. And I think that not moving twice would be better for the program. The problem is that the location where the program would most likely thrive- e.g. Carlin Springs- is not at all convenient for the majority of families currently at the school, who are largely located close to Key. ASFS would be a much more convenient location.
A second choice would be ATS- I think it would do well there as well, but it is still not a great location for most of the families currently at Key.
I think that is why the school has entered into a bunker, wealthy conspiracy mentality- they don't see good options.

[Anonymous]

I like the idea of a mobile science lab! One poster keeps saying it’s just s bunch of old chairs, but that seems unlikely given the $200,000 price tag.