The demise of McKinley ES (APS)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think those making a loud stink for Mckinley to stay sound tone deaf. Do they not see that many other schools will have children shifted? Why do they think that their situation is the most important? They are coming across as very entitled. They get a brand new building and the kids that move are moving to other excellent schools. I don’t think they see that they will have very little support from the broader Arlington community and are unlikely to have any sympathy from SB. They would be better off pitting their energies elsewhere.

Hey, they’re just following the path laid down by other APS school communities that didn’t want to be moved. Sometimes it worked.

All of them are intolerable, but this isn’t exactly new behavior.

Exactly. You don't even have to go back further than April 2018 in the case of the NW schools: https://www.arlnow.com/2018/04/24/parents-push-back-on-proposed-attendance-changes-at-nottingham-elementary-school/

It is a hot potato among the NW schools who gets ATS. And there are arguments pro and con for almost every building. Maybe they should just put all the schools in a hat and randomly pick one.

Or put it in the place with least # of walkers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is McKinley really complaining? Really?

After complaining for years about the overcrowding, now they are complaining that there's a solution?! Priceless.

No, most people aren't complaining, at least not about the move to Reed. What people are upset about is that APS is representing that the McKinley building got picked as a choice school because "McKinley can move as a whole to Reed" when the data doesn't support that fact. You can't open Reed, Glebe, and Ashlawn at full capacity with no room to grow and leave 350-369 empty seats spread among Tuckahoe, Jamestown, Nottingham, and Discovery. When the boundaries are drawn, every school but Jamestown is going to need to shift planning units north under this plan if the school buildings are really going to be fully utilized. Just do the math based on what APS put out and you can see what NW schools have empty space to take more kids under both proposals (hint: Jamestown and Discovery).

And if you are a diversity advocate, you should be upset about this proposal too, because it effectively seals up the N/S divide in elementary schools. Without McKinley as a neighborhood school, there is no way that you can ever draw a N/S ES school boundary, because every seat in Ashlawn is going to be needed to address the population needs of the central-west section of the county that are being lost by using both ATS and McKinley as option sites.

And even then, Jamestown will have 24-28% of its students moved. Every school in the north of the county will have fairly significant changes.

McKinley whiners - talk time your Westover friends. They locked the school board into Reed as neighborhood only. Schools have been broken up in the past (Fleet, Discovery) and it truly worked out just fine. Kids made new friends and it is nice to have friends at your old school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think those making a loud stink for Mckinley to stay sound tone deaf. Do they not see that many other schools will have children shifted? Why do they think that their situation is the most important? They are coming across as very entitled. They get a brand new building and the kids that move are moving to other excellent schools. I don’t think they see that they will have very little support from the broader Arlington community and are unlikely to have any sympathy from SB. They would be better off pitting their energies elsewhere.

So true. Not an ASFS parent, but I saw nearly their entire school will no longer be in that building. Major changes at many schools 20-90% of students moved in some schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, did you advocate for the Henry community last year during the South Arlington boundary redrawing? Did you advocate for Nottingham two years ago when the staff tried to do the same thing to that school that they’re now proposing for McKinley? If not, why should anyone else care what happens to McKinley when you didn’t care what happened to them?

Yes.

We don't believe you.

I was trying to think of a way to explain the things I did without outing myself but couldn't figure it out so just said yes. I k now, not helpful..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ask Henry parents how far you can get arguing that your community is being torn apart. And the difference between Fleet and Drew was significantly larger than the delta between McKinley and wherever you guys are gonna get moved to.

Which is why the drama last fall. Fleet/Henry like its level of diversity, and didn’t like what was likely to be a much more disadvantaged Drew. Had some of the school been rezoned to a school with a similar demographic profile to Henry, things would’ve been a lot quieter. School boundary drama is always about FRL rates. It’s a non issue with McKinley and Reed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think those making a loud stink for Mckinley to stay sound tone deaf. Do they not see that many other schools will have children shifted? Why do they think that their situation is the most important? They are coming across as very entitled. They get a brand new building and the kids that move are moving to other excellent schools. I don’t think they see that they will have very little support from the broader Arlington community and are unlikely to have any sympathy from SB. They would be better off pitting their energies elsewhere.

Hey, they’re just following the path laid down by other APS school communities that didn’t want to be moved. Sometimes it worked.

All of them are intolerable, but this isn’t exactly new behavior.

Exactly. You don't even have to go back further than April 2018 in the case of the NW schools: https://www.arlnow.com/2018/04/24/parents-push-back-on-proposed-attendance-changes-at-nottingham-elementary-school/

It is a hot potato among the NW schools who gets ATS. And there are arguments pro and con for almost every building. Maybe they should just put all the schools in a hat and randomly pick one.

Or put it in the place with least # of walkers.

LOL. That's ATS's current location. Very few walkers.

[Anonymous]

I think some Mckinley families fear being sent to Ashlawn and then Kenmore (if rezoned) as those schools are more diverse and have more poverty. They might not call it this but I think that’s part of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is McKinley really complaining? Really?

After complaining for years about the overcrowding, now they are complaining that there's a solution?! Priceless.

The whole proposed elementary school swap is like a 180 on everything parents have been saying for years. The school board proposes a plan that:

--moves option schools to the edges of the county
--makes option programs grow
--makes walkable neighborhood schools
--balances enrollment so there aren't overcapacity and undercapacity schools near each other
--does it all in one fell swoop instead of a bunch of incremental painful changes year after year with no strategy

and everyone loses their shit

Well, for every parent saying options should be moved to the edges, there were others saying the opposite, move them more centrally. And for everyone saying increase their capacity, there were others arguing not to do that, or at least not to give them the largest capacity buildings, to save those for neighborhood seats and make options flex and contract with trailers if needed to meet the demands of overall enrollment. And certainly, while some parents have been arguing that the most important thing for them is to be able to walk to school, there are others pointing out that the tighter the boundaries become, the more segregated the schools become, and for whom having the ability to attend a diverse school is of greater importance than proximity.

Personally, I think option 1 is preferable, because it leaves them more wiggle room. If it turns out they’ve missed projections and the seats aren’t needed where they thought they’d be, they still have a couple schools they could move. If they move 3 of the 5 option programs now, they are really tying their hands for the future. Once they move them, they won’t move them again for 20 or more years, and it may be that they could use that flexibility again in the not-to-distant future. If they are building additions or a new school in 5 years, that might be a better time to look at the option locations again.

Yes. And the parents who wanted central option schools, and increased size option schools got them (Montessori, HB), and the people who wanted neighborhood boundaries also got them (Discovery, Drew). And now everyone else gets a turn. People have been saying look at it holistically, don't just do one school at a time, don't just do north or south, don't just do the option schools. Fine. That's what they are doing!

[Anonymous]

I mean... They're literally doubling the ATS program by moving it to McKinley. Couldn't McKinley folks who are unhappy with the redistricting just work on applying to the lottery? Seems like a good option to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think some Mckinley families fear being sent to Ashlawn and then Kenmore (if rezoned) as those schools are more diverse and have more poverty. They might not call it this but I think that’s part of it.

I think they are just being selfish, but sure, why not ascribe some racist/classist motives while we are at it. This is Arlington, after all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean... They're literally doubling the ATS program by moving it to McKinley. Couldn't McKinley folks who are unhappy with the redistricting just work on applying to the lottery? Seems like a good option to me.

The proposal is to increase the ATS program by 100 more students (including siblings). Not doubling

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some Mckinley families fear being sent to Ashlawn and then Kenmore (if rezoned) as those schools are more diverse and have more poverty. They might not call it this but I think that’s part of it.

I think they are just being selfish, but sure, why not ascribe some racist/classist motives while we are at it. This is Arlington, after all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean... They're literally doubling the ATS program by moving it to McKinley. Couldn't McKinley folks who are unhappy with the redistricting just work on applying to the lottery? Seems like a good option to me.

The proposal is to increase the ATS program by 100 more students (including siblings). Not doubling

There's a video for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think some Mckinley families fear being sent to Ashlawn and then Kenmore (if rezoned) as those schools are more diverse and have more poverty. They might not call it this but I think that’s part of it.

I don't think it's that at all, as the county has said it won't move kids twice. I think it's about being sent from a school where they can walk to a school where they can't. And that's a valid concern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean... They're literally doubling the ATS program by moving it to McKinley. Couldn't McKinley folks who are unhappy with the redistricting just work on applying to the lottery? Seems like a good option to me.

The proposal is to increase the ATS program by 100 more students (including siblings). Not doubling

There's a video for that.

Could the McK whiners make a video? That bus ride to Ashlawn across wilson...ugg...and the possibility of going to Kenmore in the next MS redistricting? Can't wait for the t-shirts.