ATS Move?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Got another one: emersion in entire school. Rather than bus these kids west and these kids east, could we have emersion in the schools where they are now, but also have some parts that are not emersion so we don't have to bus out non-emersion kids?

That's basically what it was before Claremont came along. APS already had Key, but wanted to open access to the program in S Arlington. So it started "schools within a school" at Oakridge, Abingdon & Hoffman-Boston. The neighborhood kids went through the normal curriculum, but there was a subset of students taking the immersion curriculum. It's why families zoned to those schools had a priority to get into Claremont, once it opened. But from what I heard, that "two schools in one" concept did not work as well as intended - and I don't think APS is going back to it. Hence the Montessori program moving out of Drew and into its own building at the Patrick Henry site. I'm not saying it couldn't work, as MoCo uses this format throughout many of its choice schools. But APS is not high on it.

[Anonymous]

If we continue choice programs, and I don't think we should, they should be in S. ARL because the population growth down there is substantial.

ATS and HB are not central to the population and not really geographically unless you are looking at a traffic-free ARL.

Claremont is pretty central. Love that background PP. Wow on the information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we continue choice programs, and I don't think we should, they should be in S. ARL because the population growth down there is substantial.

ATS and HB are not central to the population and not really geographically unless you are looking at a traffic-free ARL.

Claremont is pretty central. Love that background PP. Wow on the information.

Shouldn't we put choice programs in N Arlington to open up spaces in S Arlington for all of the population growth?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ATS's test scores also reflect its drill-and-kill culture. (There was a magazine article a while back in which the principal talked about how she gets kids who aren't reading by the end of K to be happy about being held back. So if you're down with arbitrary, developmentally measures, ATS is the place for you. But it's not better for kids.)

I'd be curious about the long-term benefits of ATS on test scores, high school graduation, and employment.

I know I sound hostile to ATS, but I promise I'm not. I may roll my eyes, but I don't have steam coming out of my ears. I just think APS should be making neighborhood ESs its first priority, the immersion, then Montessori, and then, ONLY THEN, other choice programs. And for every high-intensity academic grind, there should be a laid-back, groovy, low-tech school, or you don't really have choice.

Uh, maybe you should re-check your list of option schools. Because I think you might have missed one that is exactly what you're complaining APS doesn't have.

HB? No. It's got that branding but it's not much different. Plus, everybody tries to get in; test scores equal. NOt a choice. A neighborhood school that looks like a cherry for administration.

No, try again. You forgot an option ES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Let me draw your attention to the year-round calendar at Barcroft. Cut that first.

Summer learning loss is a real issue. The case against year-round calendar is more economic (loss of summer jobs, potentially higher costs for teacher/transport/building) and not a practical one. A good overview is here: https://www.learningliftoff.com/year-round-school/ I wouldn't say it's a luxury and it may be use of the school building more efficient as the article points out.

The cost of transportation for the transfers out is a cost. Either make it an option school and rezone the neighborhood to a different school(s) or end the calendar. Or if it's such a benefit and not any more costly, make every school in the system have the calendar.

The neighborhood can option out to Randolph.

No, they have to apply for a transfer and then drive their kids to the school every day. It's neither efficient nor environmentally friendly to send kids out of their own neighborhood to a different neighborhood school. You would have more walkers to Barcroft if not for the calendar, and if you make Randolph the default you have to create NEW bus routes to a school that is currently 100% walkers. Just scrap the calendar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The PTA has been discussing this at our last couple of meetings. One proposal on the table is to add a bunch more trailers and increase the school to 5 classes/grade, which would be a significant shift from the current enrollment. (3 classes some grades, 4 in others.) I suggested that we should just counter with 4 classes per grade and hopefully hold off the 5 class idea - the school doesn't really have the infrastructure to go from a 534-kid school to the 750-kid school that has been proposed, without an addition. (official capacity is 465.)

There is some talk of moving ATS, but we're fighting to keep it in a central location because we think that moving the school to a location far North would really discourage the South Arlington parents whose kids really benefit from the program.

I love the program and I'm glad we're there, but I admit, I'd be less likely to send my daughter there if it were located in Oakridge or Randolph or something. (using these as examples.) At some point, it becomes too much of a hike in rush hour traffic. My daughter takes the morning bus, but I work, so the afternoon bus isn't an option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Uh, maybe you should re-check your list of option schools. Because I think you might have missed one that is exactly what you're complaining APS doesn't have.

HB? No. It's got that branding but it's not much different. Plus, everybody tries to get in; test scores equal. NOt a choice. A neighborhood school that looks like a cherry for administration.

No, try again. You forgot an option ES.

A -- It doesn't have enough room for everyone who would like to transfer
B -- It's still got iPads and FLES and not enough recess

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Let me draw your attention to the year-round calendar at Barcroft. Cut that first.

Summer learning loss is a real issue. The case against year-round calendar is more economic (loss of summer jobs, potentially higher costs for teacher/transport/building) and not a practical one. A good overview is here: https://www.learningliftoff.com/year-round-school/ I wouldn't say it's a luxury and it may be use of the school building more efficient as the article points out.

The cost of transportation for the transfers out is a cost. Either make it an option school and rezone the neighborhood to a different school(s) or end the calendar. Or if it's such a benefit and not any more costly, make every school in the system have the calendar.

The neighborhood can option out to Randolph.

No, they have to apply for a transfer and then drive their kids to the school every day. It's neither efficient nor environmentally friendly to send kids out of their own neighborhood to a different neighborhood school. You would have more walkers to Barcroft if not for the calendar, and if you make Randolph the default you have to create NEW bus routes to a school that is currently 100% walkers. Just scrap the calendar.

The schools are a mile apart. Hardly much travel time. Enjoy Randolph!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Got another one: emersion in entire school. Rather than bus these kids west and these kids east, could we have emersion in the schools where they are now, but also have some parts that are not emersion so we don't have to bus out non-emersion kids?

That's basically what it was before Claremont came along. APS already had Key, but wanted to open access to the program in S Arlington. So it started "schools within a school" at Oakridge, Abingdon & Hoffman-Boston. The neighborhood kids went through the normal curriculum, but there was a subset of students taking the immersion curriculum. It's why families zoned to those schools had a priority to get into Claremont, once it opened. But from what I heard, that "two schools in one" concept did not work as well as intended - and I don't think APS is going back to it. Hence the Montessori program moving out of Drew and into its own building at the Patrick Henry site. I'm not saying it couldn't work, as MoCo uses this format throughout many of its choice schools. But APS is not high on it.

It is also very costly and difficult to ensure qualified staff for so many individual programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Let me draw your attention to the year-round calendar at Barcroft. Cut that first.

Summer learning loss is a real issue. The case against year-round calendar is more economic (loss of summer jobs, potentially higher costs for teacher/transport/building) and not a practical one. A good overview is here: https://www.learningliftoff.com/year-round-school/ I wouldn't say it's a luxury and it may be use of the school building more efficient as the article points out.

The cost of transportation for the transfers out is a cost. Either make it an option school and rezone the neighborhood to a different school(s) or end the calendar. Or if it's such a benefit and not any more costly, make every school in the system have the calendar.

The neighborhood can option out to Randolph.

No, they have to apply for a transfer and then drive their kids to the school every day. It's neither efficient nor environmentally friendly to send kids out of their own neighborhood to a different neighborhood school. You would have more walkers to Barcroft if not for the calendar, and if you make Randolph the default you have to create NEW bus routes to a school that is currently 100% walkers. Just scrap the calendar.

The schools are a mile apart. Hardly much travel time. Enjoy Randolph!

Nope, we'll apply to choice first like every other person because they can get a bus. So stupid when we could just walk.

[Anonymous]

Hasn’t APS mandated that ATS needs to, and will, grow by several classrooms? Possibly more than the current building can handle?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hasn’t APS mandated that ATS needs to, and will, grow by several classrooms? Possibly more than the current building can handle?

. No, they haven’t mandated. But it has been discussed. ATS already has relocatables. Which other buildings are so much bigger?
Do they have a very large gym/auditorium/theater space?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Uh, maybe you should re-check your list of option schools. Because I think you might have missed one that is exactly what you're complaining APS doesn't have.

HB? No. It's got that branding but it's not much different. Plus, everybody tries to get in; test scores equal. NOt a choice. A neighborhood school that looks like a cherry for administration.

No, try again. You forgot an option ES.

A -- It doesn't have enough room for everyone who would like to transfer
B -- It's still got iPads and FLES and not enough recess

I never said it had enough room for everyone. No school could accommodate every kid in the county, that's ridiculous. And what's your issue with FLES? That somehow makes a school a pressure-cooker? Learning to sing songs in Spanish?

You're misinformed about the other issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Let me draw your attention to the year-round calendar at Barcroft. Cut that first.

Summer learning loss is a real issue. The case against year-round calendar is more economic (loss of summer jobs, potentially higher costs for teacher/transport/building) and not a practical one. A good overview is here: https://www.learningliftoff.com/year-round-school/ I wouldn't say it's a luxury and it may be use of the school building more efficient as the article points out.

The cost of transportation for the transfers out is a cost. Either make it an option school and rezone the neighborhood to a different school(s) or end the calendar. Or if it's such a benefit and not any more costly, make every school in the system have the calendar.

The neighborhood can option out to Randolph.

No, they have to apply for a transfer and then drive their kids to the school every day. It's neither efficient nor environmentally friendly to send kids out of their own neighborhood to a different neighborhood school. You would have more walkers to Barcroft if not for the calendar, and if you make Randolph the default you have to create NEW bus routes to a school that is currently 100% walkers. Just scrap the calendar.

The schools are a mile apart. Hardly much travel time. Enjoy Randolph!

Nope, we'll apply to choice first like every other person because they can get a bus. So stupid when we could just walk.

Sending 1-2 buses through Barcroft to pick up kids is no big deal. Enjoy Randolph!

[Anonymous]

21:58 - yes, APS has proposed (not mandated - yet) that ATS grow by a lot. We are currently at 534 kids on an official capacity of 465 - they are proposing to take us to 750 kids by sticking a bunch of trailers on our only outdoor paved space, plus a piece of playground currently heavily used by the county softball leagues.

The lunchroom is already full for all three shifts and kids eat lunch as early as 10:20 a.m. Adding 200 kids to an already fully-utilized lunch room will mean that some kids might literally be standing in line to buy lunch the entire lunch period. (which would most affect the FARMS kids who buy lunch every day.)

We are gradually moving to 4 classes per grade anyway, but with the county projected to have excess capacity of over 200 students in a few years, we are fighting the idea of serious overcrowding.