The demise of McKinley ES (APS)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm at ATS and there is very little resistence to the move (although the extra 10 minutes each way on the bus will be a drawback for many). The concern is the school not being in the IPP. I don't think it's unhinged to ask for a straight-forward explanation of what that means for the program.

\

Not an ATS parent or a parent that will be much impacted by the moves -- and also not in favor of options programs in an environment in which we need to balance enrollment -- but I 100% agree. They should not be dodging this question or deflecting to other issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm at ATS and there is very little resistence to the move (although the extra 10 minutes each way on the bus will be a drawback for many). The concern is the school not being in the IPP. I don't think it's unhinged to ask for a straight-forward explanation of what that means for the program.

I'm actually thinking leaving ATS out of the IPP was a brilliant move on the part of the staff. Rather than being focussed on the move, or the program growth, ATS is focused on the extensional threat to its existence- the fact that it appears earmarked for elimination or transition in the IPP. The rallying cry is save ATS, and we are okay with moving and growing.

The Board can look like heros- agree to amend the IPP to include ATS, and move its location with minimal opposition.

The Board is probably hedging on ATS because that's fundamentally a recommendation by the Supe and Asst Supe for Learning and Instruction, both of whom left earlier this year. ATS was to be replaced by IB, which would feed to a Williamsburg-based IB middle school. With Murphy and Nattress gone, that is in limbo.

As for McKinley, parents I know range across the spectrum of views. The initial draft proposals do nothing to balance capacity, they leave hundreds of seats open in the upper NW part of the county while opening Reed and Ashlawn at or over capacity in 2021. It doesn't provide relief to McKinley and its surrounding communities, it just moves the problem elsewhere. If we're going to have schools sitting at 80 or 90% capacity in anticipation of future growth, let's put them in a part of Arlington more likely to see that growth or more geographically central to absorb it from surrounding areas. The #savemckinley trope was a kneejerk reaction by some of the more rabid parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm at ATS and there is very little resistence to the move (although the extra 10 minutes each way on the bus will be a drawback for many). The concern is the school not being in the IPP. I don't think it's unhinged to ask for a straight-forward explanation of what that means for the program.

\

Not an ATS parent or a parent that will be much impacted by the moves -- and also not in favor of options programs in an environment in which we need to balance enrollment -- but I 100% agree. They should not be dodging this question or deflecting to other issues.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm at ATS and there is very little resistence to the move (although the extra 10 minutes each way on the bus will be a drawback for many). The concern is the school not being in the IPP. I don't think it's unhinged to ask for a straight-forward explanation of what that means for the program.

\

Not an ATS parent or a parent that will be much impacted by the moves -- and also not in favor of options programs in an environment in which we need to balance enrollment -- but I 100% agree. They should not be dodging this question or deflecting to other issues.

Also not an ATS parent or a parent that will be much impacted by the moves, but I am totally in favor of options. They are not subservient to your petty neighborhood desires. The animus toward options only fuels the disdain for neighborhood cliques. We revel in your little world being shaken to its core by a .5 mile move to another UMC bubble school. Will your snow flakes handle it? Boo!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm at ATS and there is very little resistence to the move (although the extra 10 minutes each way on the bus will be a drawback for many). The concern is the school not being in the IPP. I don't think it's unhinged to ask for a straight-forward explanation of what that means for the program.

It’s not “unhinged” to want an answer to that question, but it has absolutely zero to do with the location review. They could move ATS but otherwise keep it exactly the same, or they could keep it where it is and fundamentally change it. The ATS program discussion does not belong in the location review process, and it’s obnoxious and counterproductive to keep trying to derail one process with your personal concerns about a wholly separate process.

[Anonymous]

MCK-ATS might take 20 minutes on bike. I drive it 4 times a week and it's usually am at Wilson within 5 minutes. Run it through Google maps and you get "typically 6-10 minutes" even as you scroll through the hours. It's not distance that is going to change things.


The idea of moving Key to Jamestown or Tuckahoe would provide actual seats since those schools can't seem to fill themselves up. I never applied to Claremont b/c it was too far away. Tuckahoe, however, would have been a different story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MCK-ATS might take 20 minutes on bike. I drive it 4 times a week and it's usually am at Wilson within 5 minutes. Run it through Google maps and you get "typically 6-10 minutes" even as you scroll through the hours. It's not distance that is going to change things.


The idea of moving Key to Jamestown or Tuckahoe would provide actual seats since those schools can't seem to fill themselves up. I never applied to Claremont b/c it was too far away. Tuckahoe, however, would have been a different story.

How would you respond to the often-cited concerns about your proposal?

[Anonymous]

Immersion has no shortage of English speakers. Moving it to a different school within n Arlington, with the possible exception of Barrett, won’t do a thing to boost the population that needs to be boosted to keep the program viable- Spanish speakers. Moving it to Jamestown? lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Immersion has no shortage of English speakers. Moving it to a different school within n Arlington, with the possible exception of Barrett, won’t do a thing to boost the population that needs to be boosted to keep the program viable- Spanish speakers. Moving it to Jamestown? lol.

Immersion does not require a 50/50 split to be effective. APS decided that it wanted those proportions, but there's no evidence requiring it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCK-ATS might take 20 minutes on bike. I drive it 4 times a week and it's usually am at Wilson within 5 minutes. Run it through Google maps and you get "typically 6-10 minutes" even as you scroll through the hours. It's not distance that is going to change things.


The idea of moving Key to Jamestown or Tuckahoe would provide actual seats since those schools can't seem to fill themselves up. I never applied to Claremont b/c it was too far away. Tuckahoe, however, would have been a different story.

How would you respond to the often-cited concerns about your proposal?

Jamestown can’t fill. Tuckahoe can and is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Immersion has no shortage of English speakers. Moving it to a different school within n Arlington, with the possible exception of Barrett, won’t do a thing to boost the population that needs to be boosted to keep the program viable- Spanish speakers. Moving it to Jamestown? lol.

LOL. Spanish immersion would last less than a year before the surrounding neighborhood demanded it be changed to French.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCK-ATS might take 20 minutes on bike. I drive it 4 times a week and it's usually am at Wilson within 5 minutes. Run it through Google maps and you get "typically 6-10 minutes" even as you scroll through the hours. It's not distance that is going to change things.


The idea of moving Key to Jamestown or Tuckahoe would provide actual seats since those schools can't seem to fill themselves up. I never applied to Claremont b/c it was too far away. Tuckahoe, however, would have been a different story.

How would you respond to the often-cited concerns about your proposal?

Jamestown can’t fill. Tuckahoe can and is.

What concern do you think you’re addressing with that comment?

[Anonymous]

If ATS is in such demand why not move it to Jamestown? That is the only way to fill it to capacity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If ATS is in such demand why not move it to Jamestown? That is the only way to fill it to capacity.

When talking to option school advocates, the county is tiny if you are talking about busing neighborhood kids but insurmountably wide if you're talking about moving an option school. True story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If ATS is in such demand why not move it to Jamestown? That is the only way to fill it to capacity.

Or better yet, why not replicate it at drew? Open the school up for transfers, but have ats be the exemplary project that the school has so that people on the wait list for ats can opt to go there.