What did you think of the APS email sent out today?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a single reference to equity or closing achievement gaps in that long, scolding e-mail. I truly am starting to despise APS and its leadership.

I agree. I feel like we just got told off by APS and we better be prepared to be told off again by our principals.

Disagree. Unlike many school districts, APS does engage the community. It may not always change the outcomes, but I think they are at least willing to listen to potentially helpful input. The nastiness and winner-take-all attitude is appalling and this is their effort to say enough.

Disagree. Community engagement means more than a portal and some public hearings for people to express their views and then get completely ignored.

Look, I know you're used to always getting your way, but that is just not sustainable. Welcome to the world that the majority of us having been living in all along.

And then to send out an imperious e-mail asking parents to tone it down, when they are as heavy-handed and sanctimonious as they can possibly be. Blech.

The SB can dish it out but can't take it.

This isn't about being disrespectful to other communities. This is about them being criticized from every angle. In usual boundary stuff, you have a few planning units on the edges that are fired up. Here, it is entire school communities and neighborhoods. They can't handle it.

They’ve been confronted with petitions saying don’t make changes to this school, that school, ANY school. People have attempted to get their representative involved, have posted laundry lists of talking points on neighborhood listservs and social media, imploring everyone in the community to get involved to “save” their school. It’s about time the school board addressed all this ridiculousness.

AMEN a thousand times over! Decades late - but finally!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, so if Reed gets delayed, are they planning to delay the entire Elementary boundary /option-moving process?

No, because they still would need to do boundaries for Fleet, and they still would have to deal with schools like ASFS, McKinley and Oakridge that are massively overcrowded. Plus, if they do a fourth high school they may need to find a new home for Montessori in this process because Henry would come down a lot sooner than originally thought. No Reed would mean that NW is off the table for an option program, because it'll have a significant seat deficit without Reed.

North Arlington would have room for Montessori at Jamestown.

That isn’t happening, no matter how many times you repeat it. It isn’t even in the mix.

I agree that it’s not likely to happen, but I’m not sure how you can say it’s not in the mix after Monday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, so if Reed gets delayed, are they planning to delay the entire Elementary boundary /option-moving process?

No, because they still would need to do boundaries for Fleet, and they still would have to deal with schools like ASFS, McKinley and Oakridge that are massively overcrowded. Plus, if they do a fourth high school they may need to find a new home for Montessori in this process because Henry would come down a lot sooner than originally thought. No Reed would mean that NW is off the table for an option program, because it'll have a significant seat deficit without Reed.

North Arlington would have room for Montessori at Jamestown.

That isn’t happening, no matter how many times you repeat it. It isn’t even in the mix.

I agree that it’s not likely to happen, but I’m not sure how you can say it’s not in the mix after Monday.

I say it’s not in the mix because 90% of things they may say are being discussed aren’t actually in the mix of things actually being discovered. I could tell them to take a golf club by eminent domain to build a school and they would list it as under discussion but it wouldn’t be in the mix.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, so if Reed gets delayed, are they planning to delay the entire Elementary boundary /option-moving process?

No, because they still would need to do boundaries for Fleet, and they still would have to deal with schools like ASFS, McKinley and Oakridge that are massively overcrowded. Plus, if they do a fourth high school they may need to find a new home for Montessori in this process because Henry would come down a lot sooner than originally thought. No Reed would mean that NW is off the table for an option program, because it'll have a significant seat deficit without Reed.

North Arlington would have room for Montessori at Jamestown.

That isn’t happening, no matter how many times you repeat it. It isn’t even in the mix.

I agree that it’s not likely to happen, but I’m not sure how you can say it’s not in the mix after Monday.

I say it’s not in the mix because 90% of things they may say are being discussed aren’t actually in the mix of things actually being discovered. I could tell them to take a golf club by eminent domain to build a school and they would list it as under discussion but it wouldn’t be in the mix.

The school board openly acknowledged they will need to find a new home for Montessori if they decide to go ahead with the comprehensive high school plan. Granted, we don’t know which way the high school discussions will come out, but there’s really nothing we can know for sure about the elementary planning process until that decision is made and we know which elementary schools, if any, will be sacrificed for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was somewhat schoolmarmish in tone. And still a bit oblivious to the fact that the population surge could have been handled much, much better years ago. Other than that, fine, yeah, whatever. Just redraw the boundaries and put Key in S Arlington somewhere, declare victory, and move on.

Most of the current board wasn't there when those decisions were made, so there's no point in blaming them for what their predecessors did. All they can do make the best of the mess they inherited.

It was an institutional failure. Don’t be thick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was somewhat schoolmarmish in tone. And still a bit oblivious to the fact that the population surge could have been handled much, much better years ago. Other than that, fine, yeah, whatever. Just redraw the boundaries and put Key in S Arlington somewhere, declare victory, and move on.

Most of the current board wasn't there when those decisions were made, so there's no point in blaming them for what their predecessors did. All they can do make the best of the mess they inherited.

It was an institutional failure. Don’t be thick.

I get that but there's no time machine, we can't go back and fix past mistakes, the most we can ask for is the current board to make the best decisions they can with what's available to them now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was somewhat schoolmarmish in tone. And still a bit oblivious to the fact that the population surge could have been handled much, much better years ago. Other than that, fine, yeah, whatever. Just redraw the boundaries and put Key in S Arlington somewhere, declare victory, and move on.

Most of the current board wasn't there when those decisions were made, so there's no point in blaming them for what their predecessors did. All they can do make the best of the mess they inherited.

It was an institutional failure. Don’t be thick.

I get that but there's no time machine, we can't go back and fix past mistakes, the most we can ask for is the current board to make the best decisions they can with what's available to them now.

But the redrawing, etc., is fundamentally about fixing things. Here’s hoping they make the right decisions. I’m skeptical because the county struggles with basic things, but I hope for the best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, so if Reed gets delayed, are they planning to delay the entire Elementary boundary /option-moving process?

No, because they still would need to do boundaries for Fleet, and they still would have to deal with schools like ASFS, McKinley and Oakridge that are massively overcrowded. Plus, if they do a fourth high school they may need to find a new home for Montessori in this process because Henry would come down a lot sooner than originally thought. No Reed would mean that NW is off the table for an option program, because it'll have a significant seat deficit without Reed.

North Arlington would have room for Montessori at Jamestown.

That isn’t happening, no matter how many times you repeat it. It isn’t even in the mix.

I agree that it’s not likely to happen, but I’m not sure how you can say it’s not in the mix after Monday.

I say it’s not in the mix because 90% of things they may say are being discussed aren’t actually in the mix of things actually being discovered. I could tell them to take a golf club by eminent domain to build a school and they would list it as under discussion but it wouldn’t be in the mix.

The school board openly acknowledged they will need to find a new home for Montessori if they decide to go ahead with the comprehensive high school plan. Granted, we don’t know which way the high school discussions will come out, but there’s really nothing we can know for sure about the elementary planning process until that decision is made and we know which elementary schools, if any, will be sacrificed for it.

Probably none, is my guess. It's backers are vocal and o'Grady is on the SB, but montesorri has never had the sort of protected status many seem to think it has. The old timers in Nauck basically kicked it out of Drew over a decade of lobbying; there's a lot of history there that I don't want to discount but it's a drastically different community than it was in the early 1970s and most of the people who moved in since 2000 and with children would prob prefer Montessori to have stayed at Drew. Who wouldn't, given the uncertain alternative that will unfold over the next year? That said, I'm glad the move finally forced aps to do something about the graded program. Another prob for montesorri is the instructional model isn't reducible to a marketing slogan like the other option schools (ATS: traditionally waspy, sir and ma'am!; immersion: half the day in Spanish, buenas tardes!; Campbell: time for a nature walk, recess=learning!) but I'm open to suggestions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, so if Reed gets delayed, are they planning to delay the entire Elementary boundary /option-moving process?

.

.

.

.

.

.

Probably none, is my guess. It's backers are vocal and o'Grady is on the SB, but montesorri has never had the sort of protected status many seem to think it has. The old timers in Nauck basically kicked it out of Drew over a decade of lobbying; there's a lot of history there that I don't want to discount but it's a drastically different community than it was in the early 1970s and most of the people who moved in since 2000 and with children would prob prefer Montessori to have stayed at Drew. Who wouldn't, given the uncertain alternative that will unfold over the next year? That said, I'm glad the move finally forced aps to do something about the graded program. Another prob for montesorri is the instructional model isn't reducible to a marketing slogan like the other option schools (ATS: traditionally waspy, sir and ma'am!; immersion: half the day in Spanish, buenas tardes!; Campbell: time for a nature walk, recess=learning!) but I'm open to suggestions

That's actually the most to-the-point description ever!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, so if Reed gets delayed, are they planning to delay the entire Elementary boundary /option-moving process?

No, because they still would need to do boundaries for Fleet, and they still would have to deal with schools like ASFS, McKinley and Oakridge that are massively overcrowded. Plus, if they do a fourth high school they may need to find a new home for Montessori in this process because Henry would come down a lot sooner than originally thought. No Reed would mean that NW is off the table for an option program, because it'll have a significant seat deficit without Reed.

North Arlington would have room for Montessori at Jamestown.

That isn’t happening, no matter how many times you repeat it. It isn’t even in the mix.

I agree that it’s not likely to happen, but I’m not sure how you can say it’s not in the mix after Monday.

I say it’s not in the mix because 90% of things they may say are being discussed aren’t actually in the mix of things actually being discovered. I could tell them to take a golf club by eminent domain to build a school and they would list it as under discussion but it wouldn’t be in the mix.

The school board openly acknowledged they will need to find a new home for Montessori if they decide to go ahead with the comprehensive high school plan. Granted, we don’t know which way the high school discussions will come out, but there’s really nothing we can know for sure about the elementary planning process until that decision is made and we know which elementary schools, if any, will be sacrificed for it.

Probably none, is my guess. It's backers are vocal and o'Grady is on the SB, but montesorri has never had the sort of protected status many seem to think it has. The old timers in Nauck basically kicked it out of Drew over a decade of lobbying; there's a lot of history there that I don't want to discount but it's a drastically different community than it was in the early 1970s and most of the people who moved in since 2000 and with children would prob prefer Montessori to have stayed at Drew. Who wouldn't, given the uncertain alternative that will unfold over the next year? That said, I'm glad the move finally forced aps to do something about the graded program. Another prob for montesorri is the instructional model isn't reducible to a marketing slogan like the other option schools (ATS: traditionally waspy, sir and ma'am!; immersion: half the day in Spanish, buenas tardes!; Campbell: time for a nature walk, recess=learning!) but I'm open to suggestions

Montessori: learning through toys, but you must use them the correct way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, so if Reed gets delayed, are they planning to delay the entire Elementary boundary /option-moving process?

No, because they still would need to do boundaries for Fleet, and they still would have to deal with schools like ASFS, McKinley and Oakridge that are massively overcrowded. Plus, if they do a fourth high school they may need to find a new home for Montessori in this process because Henry would come down a lot sooner than originally thought. No Reed would mean that NW is off the table for an option program, because it'll have a significant seat deficit without Reed.

North Arlington would have room for Montessori at Jamestown.

That isn’t happening, no matter how many times you repeat it. It isn’t even in the mix.

I agree that it’s not likely to happen, but I’m not sure how you can say it’s not in the mix after Monday.

I say it’s not in the mix because 90% of things they may say are being discussed aren’t actually in the mix of things actually being discovered. I could tell them to take a golf club by eminent domain to build a school and they would list it as under discussion but it wouldn’t be in the mix.

The school board openly acknowledged they will need to find a new home for Montessori if they decide to go ahead with the comprehensive high school plan. Granted, we don’t know which way the high school discussions will come out, but there’s really nothing we can know for sure about the elementary planning process until that decision is made and we know which elementary schools, if any, will be sacrificed for it.

Probably none, is my guess. It's backers are vocal and o'Grady is on the SB, but montesorri has never had the sort of protected status many seem to think it has. The old timers in Nauck basically kicked it out of Drew over a decade of lobbying; there's a lot of history there that I don't want to discount but it's a drastically different community than it was in the early 1970s and most of the people who moved in since 2000 and with children would prob prefer Montessori to have stayed at Drew. Who wouldn't, given the uncertain alternative that will unfold over the next year? That said, I'm glad the move finally forced aps to do something about the graded program. Another prob for montesorri is the instructional model isn't reducible to a marketing slogan like the other option schools (ATS: traditionally waspy, sir and ma'am!; immersion: half the day in Spanish, buenas tardes!; Campbell: time for a nature walk, recess=learning!) but I'm open to suggestions

Montessori: learning through toys, but you must use them the correct way.

Good one, and I'm the parent of a montesorri preschooler. Not aps.

All the option schools lend themselves to caricature, but jesus, isn't any of them better than he rote teach to the test garbage rampant in SA neighborhood schools. That's what I find most detestable, pardon the pun. Turning these schools into absolute drudgery and just killing children's curiosity and desire to learn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Probably an unpopular view:

I think some parents lack any kind of comprehensive vision beyond their own self-interest and they are incredibly entitled and often don't have all the information. Which they do not let stop them from taking on an accusatory, toxic, and paranoid tone. And unfortunately, this shrieking minority dominates the dialogue.

In that environment, I would not want to be an APS staff person or an APS School Board member. A thankless job.

So, I think the email was fine and said some things that needed to be said, but as this thread shows, it won't make a bit of difference to the generally toxic discourse.

And yes, I have children affected by all this.

+1,000,000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, so if Reed gets delayed, are they planning to delay the entire Elementary boundary /option-moving process?

No, because they still would need to do boundaries for Fleet, and they still would have to deal with schools like ASFS, McKinley and Oakridge that are massively overcrowded. Plus, if they do a fourth high school they may need to find a new home for Montessori in this process because Henry would come down a lot sooner than originally thought. No Reed would mean that NW is off the table for an option program, because it'll have a significant seat deficit without Reed.

North Arlington would have room for Montessori at Jamestown.

That isn’t happening, no matter how many times you repeat it. It isn’t even in the mix.

I agree that it’s not likely to happen, but I’m not sure how you can say it’s not in the mix after Monday.

I say it’s not in the mix because 90% of things they may say are being discussed aren’t actually in the mix of things actually being discovered. I could tell them to take a golf club by eminent domain to build a school and they would list it as under discussion but it wouldn’t be in the mix.

The school board openly acknowledged they will need to find a new home for Montessori if they decide to go ahead with the comprehensive high school plan. Granted, we don’t know which way the high school discussions will come out, but there’s really nothing we can know for sure about the elementary planning process until that decision is made and we know which elementary schools, if any, will be sacrificed for it.

Probably none, is my guess. It's backers are vocal and o'Grady is on the SB, but montesorri has never had the sort of protected status many seem to think it has. The old timers in Nauck basically kicked it out of Drew over a decade of lobbying; there's a lot of history there that I don't want to discount but it's a drastically different community than it was in the early 1970s and most of the people who moved in since 2000 and with children would prob prefer Montessori to have stayed at Drew. Who wouldn't, given the uncertain alternative that will unfold over the next year? That said, I'm glad the move finally forced aps to do something about the graded program. Another prob for montesorri is the instructional model isn't reducible to a marketing slogan like the other option schools (ATS: traditionally waspy, sir and ma'am!; immersion: half the day in Spanish, buenas tardes!; Campbell: time for a nature walk, recess=learning!) but I'm open to suggestions

Montessori = actual personalized learning (but Nattrass won't want people to know that because Montessori doesn't require iPads).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, so if Reed gets delayed, are they planning to delay the entire Elementary boundary /option-moving process?

No, because they still would need to do boundaries for Fleet, and they still would have to deal with schools like ASFS, McKinley and Oakridge that are massively overcrowded. Plus, if they do a fourth high school they may need to find a new home for Montessori in this process because Henry would come down a lot sooner than originally thought. No Reed would mean that NW is off the table for an option program, because it'll have a significant seat deficit without Reed.

North Arlington would have room for Montessori at Jamestown.

That isn’t happening, no matter how many times you repeat it. It isn’t even in the mix.

I agree that it’s not likely to happen, but I’m not sure how you can say it’s not in the mix after Monday.

I say it’s not in the mix because 90% of things they may say are being discussed aren’t actually in the mix of things actually being discovered. I could tell them to take a golf club by eminent domain to build a school and they would list it as under discussion but it wouldn’t be in the mix.

The school board openly acknowledged they will need to find a new home for Montessori if they decide to go ahead with the comprehensive high school plan. Granted, we don’t know which way the high school discussions will come out, but there’s really nothing we can know for sure about the elementary planning process until that decision is made and we know which elementary schools, if any, will be sacrificed for it.

Probably none, is my guess. It's backers are vocal and o'Grady is on the SB, but montesorri has never had the sort of protected status many seem to think it has. The old timers in Nauck basically kicked it out of Drew over a decade of lobbying; there's a lot of history there that I don't want to discount but it's a drastically different community than it was in the early 1970s and most of the people who moved in since 2000 and with children would prob prefer Montessori to have stayed at Drew. Who wouldn't, given the uncertain alternative that will unfold over the next year? That said, I'm glad the move finally forced aps to do something about the graded program. Another prob for montesorri is the instructional model isn't reducible to a marketing slogan like the other option schools (ATS: traditionally waspy, sir and ma'am!; immersion: half the day in Spanish, buenas tardes!; Campbell: time for a nature walk, recess=learning!) but I'm open to suggestions

Montessori = actual personalized learning (but Nattrass won't want people to know that because Montessori doesn't require iPads).

What's her beef with montesorri?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Montessori needs to be central and on easy transportation routes to support ED families. 2/3 of the Montessori preschool is ED. Also must have easy public transportation.

But they are already happily going to Jamestown now, including the 2/3rds ED.
Jamestown has 3 Montessori classrooms now, it’s a popular and familiar location for the program. Discovery has one classroom also.
And the classrooms are not 2/3rds disadvantaged after K, this is only an APS requirement for age 3-K.