First grader going to Arlington Traditional?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re happy we took a spot at ATS. APS maxes out class sizes at ATS and it’s possible our kids would have smaller classes at our neighborhood school based on planning factors. But we like so many of the practices that it’s worth that trade off and longer commute time. Small amounts of nightly homework (less common in APS these days because “equity” even though ATS is really diverse too) , weekly reports from teachers, weekly assemblies that build community, expectations around student behavior. All of it adds up to a learning environment that serves its majority-minority, high EL and high farms population well.

All of this could be done in other neighborhood
Schools and some do. But overall APS moving towards watering down standards and expectations. Really happy we’re at ATS.

ATS is not high FARMS unless compared to the upper North schools.

If you do the math, it looks like the ONLY FARMS students come from VPI — so it seems likely FARMS family aren’t navigating the regular lottery. The VPI has outreach at community centers food banks and shelters.

ATS should be an auto enrolled program, and then families can decline when they are selected rather than filtering for proactive parents.

Nope, not anymore. FARMS % is very high, and ever growing due to its set up and preference with the lottery. The VPI program is very large with 3 classes, and auto-admits all siblings of large under-resourced families. These parents can be just as checked out, if they wanted, since they get help with everything, including the lottery. There are several elementary schools in S.Arlington with lower FARMS. However, ATS so far manages to have no achievement gap for these kids, nor any other groups of kids, which is remarkable. Expectations are high for everyone, especially academically, and personally I think the homework helps as well. It fosters good habits from the beginning, and detects problems or lack of parental involvement early.

The majority of its FRL students coming from a quality preK program (VPI) is likely a significant contributing factor to the narrower achievement gap at ATS. Something other schools with the highest FRL%s like Randolph and Carlin Springs do not benefit from.

Both Randolph and Carling Springs have VPI programs.

APS website says VPI programs at the following schools:

Neighborhood schools:

Abingdon, Alice West Fleet, Ashlawn, Barcroft, Barrett, Carlin Springs, Dr. Charles R. Drew, Hoffman-Boston, Innovation, Long Branch, Oakridge, Randolph

Option Schools:

Arlington Traditional School
Campbell
Escuela Key and Claremont (Dual Language English and Spanish Immersion) program. Note: Families can only apply to ONE Dual Language School based on their assigned neighborhood school.

My point is: the majority of underprivileged/ELL students enrolled in each of those schools do not come from VPI. Whereas, ATS naturally has a lower percentage of those students overall to begin with and a significant portion of those that are there come from the VPI program.

To add: what is the "achievement gap" between the FRL and non FRL students in the immersion programs v. ATS? Does partially learning in their native language impact the gap? If so, does it do so equally as ATS or vice versa? What % of ATS' FRL students come from the VPI program v. % of Claremont or key or any other school?

I can't find APS data on achievement by FRL status. But on every other subgroup metric, ATS outperforms immersion. Both are self-selected via lottery. Looking at the equity dashboard, ATS has 35% EL, claremont has 32%, and Key has 35%. But ATS outperforms both schools by huge margins on every public measure (SOL, DIBEL, Math Inventory).

All three schools also have VPI. Of the 3 schools, Claremont has the largest ratio of VPI/total enrollment, then ATS, then key.

What point are you trying to make? That fewer kids are in immersion VPI and that explains why ATS is leaps and bounds higher in achievement? Not true. Claremont has the most kids in VPI relative to their size.

ATS has less EL? Also not true. ATS is as high as Key and higher than Claremont.

ATS has more engaged parents than immersion? All three are lottery schools.

So why does ATS run laps around other lottery schools? Look at the data for montessori too. Highest ration of pre-k and lowest number of EL of the option schools.

Thank you. You said it better than I ever could. I am so sick of this ATS hate.

I don't hate ATS. In fact, I wish all of our schools would take more of the traditional, disciplined, high expectations approach of ATS. (And no, we were not ATS parents, either).

I was - believe it or not, here on DCUM - genuinely suggesting that at least part of ATS' success re. the gap in achievement levels is very likely due to the fact that most(?) of their FRL students came from VPI. As opposed to Randolph, or Barcroft, for example - where some or many may come through VPI, but not most. Quality preschool being a significant factor in achievement at the outset, I think that's a key point to consider.

I appreciate the information provided in response to my question about Claremont, etc. I don't know the stats. That's why I posed the questions, including the one about partially learning in the native language. Because I think it's important to know if, and to what extent, our option programs are actually effective as opposed to our neighborhood schools and programs. To your point, I think that's more clearly evident when looking at Randolph, Barcroft, CS - is it not?

I would still be interested in the FRL-specific information with additional insight into % of each school's FRL population also being ELL and VPI "graduates." I think it's an interesting aspect to know more about, that may lend additional credibility and justification for pushing access and participation in quality preschool programs, etc.

You can believe ATS is merely superior in all aspects. But I don't see any harm to you or to ATS' reputation to acknowledge that the proportion of students, especially from ED groups, just might have an effect on the level of ATS' success in regards to achievement gaps.

ATS has a significant level of FRMs kids. No achievement data on the specific subgroup. But if there was a gap, you’d see it pulling ATS down more. And ATS levels overall are crazy high including for subgroups.

Maybe you don’t hate ATS. But In my experience, everyone tries to explain away ATS’s success. It starts with it’s all white or UMV families or North Arlington. It’s not that. Look at the data.

Then it’s about the parents or the self selection or the mix of kids or VPI. But it’s not that either. If that, you’d see the same results at more options schools. But look at the data.

I think people really don’t believe EL, FRM, and SWD can achieve at high levels and so they don’t believe that ATS is getting those results with all kids. But they do. Nothing at ATS is done by accident.

This. I honestly think a lot of ATS’ success has to do with expectations, both behaviorally and academically as well as the help they offer. They believe that the classroom should be orderly and kids are expected to follow the rules. An orderly classroom creates an environment that is conducive to learning. Then there are the academic expectations. They expect their students to do well and to meet the high standards that they place. They expect students to complete their homework and do not make excuses for them. All students are held to a high standard - yes with some students, completing homework is more exhausting because their parents work long hours and they have to take care of their siblings and the house. But it doesn’t matter. They are still held to high standards. In my experience, kids from these types of families complain the least and their parents push them the most. Then you have the third element, which is helping kids who need the help. If the kid is still not getting it then they will make sure that he or she does. There is also the direct instruction part. The more I read, the more it seems that direct instruction as opposed to inquiry based learning makes a huge difference. And yes add to it parents who apply because they care about academics as well as vpi students who are there from the beginning. The combo of all these things lead to success but there are a lot of lessons that can be learned. I think there has been s lot of focus on ATS’ phonics and reading block when it comes to “lessons learned” and not enough focus on direct instruction and high behavioral standards. Kids are out of control in schools making it difficult to learn. Kids need structure and a safe orderly environment. You can’t learn if someone is throwing stuff at you all day.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re happy we took a spot at ATS. APS maxes out class sizes at ATS and it’s possible our kids would have smaller classes at our neighborhood school based on planning factors. But we like so many of the practices that it’s worth that trade off and longer commute time. Small amounts of nightly homework (less common in APS these days because “equity” even though ATS is really diverse too) , weekly reports from teachers, weekly assemblies that build community, expectations around student behavior. All of it adds up to a learning environment that serves its majority-minority, high EL and high farms population well.

All of this could be done in other neighborhood
Schools and some do. But overall APS moving towards watering down standards and expectations. Really happy we’re at ATS.

ATS is not high FARMS unless compared to the upper North schools.

If you do the math, it looks like the ONLY FARMS students come from VPI — so it seems likely FARMS family aren’t navigating the regular lottery. The VPI has outreach at community centers food banks and shelters.

ATS should be an auto enrolled program, and then families can decline when they are selected rather than filtering for proactive parents.

Nope, not anymore. FARMS % is very high, and ever growing due to its set up and preference with the lottery. The VPI program is very large with 3 classes, and auto-admits all siblings of large under-resourced families. These parents can be just as checked out, if they wanted, since they get help with everything, including the lottery. There are several elementary schools in S.Arlington with lower FARMS. However, ATS so far manages to have no achievement gap for these kids, nor any other groups of kids, which is remarkable. Expectations are high for everyone, especially academically, and personally I think the homework helps as well. It fosters good habits from the beginning, and detects problems or lack of parental involvement early.

The majority of its FRL students coming from a quality preK program (VPI) is likely a significant contributing factor to the narrower achievement gap at ATS. Something other schools with the highest FRL%s like Randolph and Carlin Springs do not benefit from.

Both Randolph and Carling Springs have VPI programs.

APS website says VPI programs at the following schools:

Neighborhood schools:

Abingdon, Alice West Fleet, Ashlawn, Barcroft, Barrett, Carlin Springs, Dr. Charles R. Drew, Hoffman-Boston, Innovation, Long Branch, Oakridge, Randolph

Option Schools:

Arlington Traditional School
Campbell
Escuela Key and Claremont (Dual Language English and Spanish Immersion) program. Note: Families can only apply to ONE Dual Language School based on their assigned neighborhood school.

My point is: the majority of underprivileged/ELL students enrolled in each of those schools do not come from VPI. Whereas, ATS naturally has a lower percentage of those students overall to begin with and a significant portion of those that are there come from the VPI program.

To add: what is the "achievement gap" between the FRL and non FRL students in the immersion programs v. ATS? Does partially learning in their native language impact the gap? If so, does it do so equally as ATS or vice versa? What % of ATS' FRL students come from the VPI program v. % of Claremont or key or any other school?

I can't find APS data on achievement by FRL status. But on every other subgroup metric, ATS outperforms immersion. Both are self-selected via lottery. Looking at the equity dashboard, ATS has 35% EL, claremont has 32%, and Key has 35%. But ATS outperforms both schools by huge margins on every public measure (SOL, DIBEL, Math Inventory).

All three schools also have VPI. Of the 3 schools, Claremont has the largest ratio of VPI/total enrollment, then ATS, then key.

What point are you trying to make? That fewer kids are in immersion VPI and that explains why ATS is leaps and bounds higher in achievement? Not true. Claremont has the most kids in VPI relative to their size.

ATS has less EL? Also not true. ATS is as high as Key and higher than Claremont.

ATS has more engaged parents than immersion? All three are lottery schools.

So why does ATS run laps around other lottery schools? Look at the data for montessori too. Highest ration of pre-k and lowest number of EL of the option schools.

Thank you. You said it better than I ever could. I am so sick of this ATS hate.

I don't hate ATS. In fact, I wish all of our schools would take more of the traditional, disciplined, high expectations approach of ATS. (And no, we were not ATS parents, either).

I was - believe it or not, here on DCUM - genuinely suggesting that at least part of ATS' success re. the gap in achievement levels is very likely due to the fact that most(?) of their FRL students came from VPI. As opposed to Randolph, or Barcroft, for example - where some or many may come through VPI, but not most. Quality preschool being a significant factor in achievement at the outset, I think that's a key point to consider.

I appreciate the information provided in response to my question about Claremont, etc. I don't know the stats. That's why I posed the questions, including the one about partially learning in the native language. Because I think it's important to know if, and to what extent, our option programs are actually effective as opposed to our neighborhood schools and programs. To your point, I think that's more clearly evident when looking at Randolph, Barcroft, CS - is it not?

I would still be interested in the FRL-specific information with additional insight into % of each school's FRL population also being ELL and VPI "graduates." I think it's an interesting aspect to know more about, that may lend additional credibility and justification for pushing access and participation in quality preschool programs, etc.

You can believe ATS is merely superior in all aspects. But I don't see any harm to you or to ATS' reputation to acknowledge that the proportion of students, especially from ED groups, just might have an effect on the level of ATS' success in regards to achievement gaps.

ATS has a significant level of FRMs kids. No achievement data on the specific subgroup. But if there was a gap, you’d see it pulling ATS down more. And ATS levels overall are crazy high including for subgroups.

Maybe you don’t hate ATS. But In my experience, everyone tries to explain away ATS’s success. It starts with it’s all white or UMV families or North Arlington. It’s not that. Look at the data.

Then it’s about the parents or the self selection or the mix of kids or VPI. But it’s not that either. If that, you’d see the same results at more options schools. But look at the data.

I think people really don’t believe EL, FRM, and SWD can achieve at high levels and so they don’t believe that ATS is getting those results with all kids. But they do. Nothing at ATS is done by accident.

This. I honestly think a lot of ATS’ success has to do with expectations, both behaviorally and academically as well as the help they offer. They believe that the classroom should be orderly and kids are expected to follow the rules. An orderly classroom creates an environment that is conducive to learning. Then there are the academic expectations. They expect their students to do well and to meet the high standards that they place. They expect students to complete their homework and do not make excuses for them. All students are held to a high standard - yes with some students, completing homework is more exhausting because their parents work long hours and they have to take care of their siblings and the house. But it doesn’t matter. They are still held to high standards. In my experience, kids from these types of families complain the least and their parents push them the most. Then you have the third element, which is helping kids who need the help. If the kid is still not getting it then they will make sure that he or she does. There is also the direct instruction part. The more I read, the more it seems that direct instruction as opposed to inquiry based learning makes a huge difference. And yes add to it parents who apply because they care about academics as well as vpi students who are there from the beginning. The combo of all these things lead to success but there are a lot of lessons that can be learned. I think there has been s lot of focus on ATS’ phonics and reading block when it comes to “lessons learned” and not enough focus on direct instruction and high behavioral standards. Kids are out of control in schools making it difficult to learn. Kids need structure and a safe orderly environment. You can’t learn if someone is throwing stuff at you all day.

Right, because with involved parents you can’t expect them to respond to a discipline request or or academic instruction directives.

You don’t get new disruptive kids transferring to ATS mid grade with parents who will ignore the Principals emails. 99% of kids have been in this system since they were kindergartners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re happy we took a spot at ATS. APS maxes out class sizes at ATS and it’s possible our kids would have smaller classes at our neighborhood school based on planning factors. But we like so many of the practices that it’s worth that trade off and longer commute time. Small amounts of nightly homework (less common in APS these days because “equity” even though ATS is really diverse too) , weekly reports from teachers, weekly assemblies that build community, expectations around student behavior. All of it adds up to a learning environment that serves its majority-minority, high EL and high farms population well.

All of this could be done in other neighborhood
Schools and some do. But overall APS moving towards watering down standards and expectations. Really happy we’re at ATS.

ATS is not high FARMS unless compared to the upper North schools.

If you do the math, it looks like the ONLY FARMS students come from VPI — so it seems likely FARMS family aren’t navigating the regular lottery. The VPI has outreach at community centers food banks and shelters.

ATS should be an auto enrolled program, and then families can decline when they are selected rather than filtering for proactive parents.

Nope, not anymore. FARMS % is very high, and ever growing due to its set up and preference with the lottery. The VPI program is very large with 3 classes, and auto-admits all siblings of large under-resourced families. These parents can be just as checked out, if they wanted, since they get help with everything, including the lottery. There are several elementary schools in S.Arlington with lower FARMS. However, ATS so far manages to have no achievement gap for these kids, nor any other groups of kids, which is remarkable. Expectations are high for everyone, especially academically, and personally I think the homework helps as well. It fosters good habits from the beginning, and detects problems or lack of parental involvement early.

The majority of its FRL students coming from a quality preK program (VPI) is likely a significant contributing factor to the narrower achievement gap at ATS. Something other schools with the highest FRL%s like Randolph and Carlin Springs do not benefit from.

Both Randolph and Carling Springs have VPI programs.

APS website says VPI programs at the following schools:

Neighborhood schools:

Abingdon, Alice West Fleet, Ashlawn, Barcroft, Barrett, Carlin Springs, Dr. Charles R. Drew, Hoffman-Boston, Innovation, Long Branch, Oakridge, Randolph

Option Schools:

Arlington Traditional School
Campbell
Escuela Key and Claremont (Dual Language English and Spanish Immersion) program. Note: Families can only apply to ONE Dual Language School based on their assigned neighborhood school.

My point is: the majority of underprivileged/ELL students enrolled in each of those schools do not come from VPI. Whereas, ATS naturally has a lower percentage of those students overall to begin with and a significant portion of those that are there come from the VPI program.

To add: what is the "achievement gap" between the FRL and non FRL students in the immersion programs v. ATS? Does partially learning in their native language impact the gap? If so, does it do so equally as ATS or vice versa? What % of ATS' FRL students come from the VPI program v. % of Claremont or key or any other school?

I can't find APS data on achievement by FRL status. But on every other subgroup metric, ATS outperforms immersion. Both are self-selected via lottery. Looking at the equity dashboard, ATS has 35% EL, claremont has 32%, and Key has 35%. But ATS outperforms both schools by huge margins on every public measure (SOL, DIBEL, Math Inventory).

All three schools also have VPI. Of the 3 schools, Claremont has the largest ratio of VPI/total enrollment, then ATS, then key.

What point are you trying to make? That fewer kids are in immersion VPI and that explains why ATS is leaps and bounds higher in achievement? Not true. Claremont has the most kids in VPI relative to their size.

ATS has less EL? Also not true. ATS is as high as Key and higher than Claremont.

ATS has more engaged parents than immersion? All three are lottery schools.

So why does ATS run laps around other lottery schools? Look at the data for montessori too. Highest ration of pre-k and lowest number of EL of the option schools.

Thank you. You said it better than I ever could. I am so sick of this ATS hate.

I don't hate ATS. In fact, I wish all of our schools would take more of the traditional, disciplined, high expectations approach of ATS. (And no, we were not ATS parents, either).

I was - believe it or not, here on DCUM - genuinely suggesting that at least part of ATS' success re. the gap in achievement levels is very likely due to the fact that most(?) of their FRL students came from VPI. As opposed to Randolph, or Barcroft, for example - where some or many may come through VPI, but not most. Quality preschool being a significant factor in achievement at the outset, I think that's a key point to consider.

I appreciate the information provided in response to my question about Claremont, etc. I don't know the stats. That's why I posed the questions, including the one about partially learning in the native language. Because I think it's important to know if, and to what extent, our option programs are actually effective as opposed to our neighborhood schools and programs. To your point, I think that's more clearly evident when looking at Randolph, Barcroft, CS - is it not?

I would still be interested in the FRL-specific information with additional insight into % of each school's FRL population also being ELL and VPI "graduates." I think it's an interesting aspect to know more about, that may lend additional credibility and justification for pushing access and participation in quality preschool programs, etc.

You can believe ATS is merely superior in all aspects. But I don't see any harm to you or to ATS' reputation to acknowledge that the proportion of students, especially from ED groups, just might have an effect on the level of ATS' success in regards to achievement gaps.

ATS has a significant level of FRMs kids. No achievement data on the specific subgroup. But if there was a gap, you’d see it pulling ATS down more. And ATS levels overall are crazy high including for subgroups.

Maybe you don’t hate ATS. But In my experience, everyone tries to explain away ATS’s success. It starts with it’s all white or UMV families or North Arlington. It’s not that. Look at the data.

Then it’s about the parents or the self selection or the mix of kids or VPI. But it’s not that either. If that, you’d see the same results at more options schools. But look at the data.

I think people really don’t believe EL, FRM, and SWD can achieve at high levels and so they don’t believe that ATS is getting those results with all kids. But they do. Nothing at ATS is done by accident.

This. I honestly think a lot of ATS’ success has to do with expectations, both behaviorally and academically as well as the help they offer. They believe that the classroom should be orderly and kids are expected to follow the rules. An orderly classroom creates an environment that is conducive to learning. Then there are the academic expectations. They expect their students to do well and to meet the high standards that they place. They expect students to complete their homework and do not make excuses for them. All students are held to a high standard - yes with some students, completing homework is more exhausting because their parents work long hours and they have to take care of their siblings and the house. But it doesn’t matter. They are still held to high standards. In my experience, kids from these types of families complain the least and their parents push them the most. Then you have the third element, which is helping kids who need the help. If the kid is still not getting it then they will make sure that he or she does. There is also the direct instruction part. The more I read, the more it seems that direct instruction as opposed to inquiry based learning makes a huge difference. And yes add to it parents who apply because they care about academics as well as vpi students who are there from the beginning. The combo of all these things lead to success but there are a lot of lessons that can be learned. I think there has been s lot of focus on ATS’ phonics and reading block when it comes to “lessons learned” and not enough focus on direct instruction and high behavioral standards. Kids are out of control in schools making it difficult to learn. Kids need structure and a safe orderly environment. You can’t learn if someone is throwing stuff at you all day.

Right, because with involved parents you can’t expect them to respond to a discipline request or or academic instruction directives.

You don’t get new disruptive kids transferring to ATS mid grade with parents who will ignore the Principals emails. 99% of kids have been in this system since they were kindergartners.

*can expect

The key is parents and the way the lottery works and how the only FARMS have pre-instruction at VPI really makes for a much more controlled environment

Anyone in a neighborhood school can recall the 1-4 kids in the class who were always in trouble, that’s where all the time comes from at ATS for homework and individual weekly reports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re happy we took a spot at ATS. APS maxes out class sizes at ATS and it’s possible our kids would have smaller classes at our neighborhood school based on planning factors. But we like so many of the practices that it’s worth that trade off and longer commute time. Small amounts of nightly homework (less common in APS these days because “equity” even though ATS is really diverse too) , weekly reports from teachers, weekly assemblies that build community, expectations around student behavior. All of it adds up to a learning environment that serves its majority-minority, high EL and high farms population well.

All of this could be done in other neighborhood
Schools and some do. But overall APS moving towards watering down standards and expectations. Really happy we’re at ATS.

ATS is not high FARMS unless compared to the upper North schools.

If you do the math, it looks like the ONLY FARMS students come from VPI — so it seems likely FARMS family aren’t navigating the regular lottery. The VPI has outreach at community centers food banks and shelters.

ATS should be an auto enrolled program, and then families can decline when they are selected rather than filtering for proactive parents.

Nope, not anymore. FARMS % is very high, and ever growing due to its set up and preference with the lottery. The VPI program is very large with 3 classes, and auto-admits all siblings of large under-resourced families. These parents can be just as checked out, if they wanted, since they get help with everything, including the lottery. There are several elementary schools in S.Arlington with lower FARMS. However, ATS so far manages to have no achievement gap for these kids, nor any other groups of kids, which is remarkable. Expectations are high for everyone, especially academically, and personally I think the homework helps as well. It fosters good habits from the beginning, and detects problems or lack of parental involvement early.

The majority of its FRL students coming from a quality preK program (VPI) is likely a significant contributing factor to the narrower achievement gap at ATS. Something other schools with the highest FRL%s like Randolph and Carlin Springs do not benefit from.

Both Randolph and Carling Springs have VPI programs.

APS website says VPI programs at the following schools:

Neighborhood schools:

Abingdon, Alice West Fleet, Ashlawn, Barcroft, Barrett, Carlin Springs, Dr. Charles R. Drew, Hoffman-Boston, Innovation, Long Branch, Oakridge, Randolph

Option Schools:

Arlington Traditional School
Campbell
Escuela Key and Claremont (Dual Language English and Spanish Immersion) program. Note: Families can only apply to ONE Dual Language School based on their assigned neighborhood school.

My point is: the majority of underprivileged/ELL students enrolled in each of those schools do not come from VPI. Whereas, ATS naturally has a lower percentage of those students overall to begin with and a significant portion of those that are there come from the VPI program.

To add: what is the "achievement gap" between the FRL and non FRL students in the immersion programs v. ATS? Does partially learning in their native language impact the gap? If so, does it do so equally as ATS or vice versa? What % of ATS' FRL students come from the VPI program v. % of Claremont or key or any other school?

I can't find APS data on achievement by FRL status. But on every other subgroup metric, ATS outperforms immersion. Both are self-selected via lottery. Looking at the equity dashboard, ATS has 35% EL, claremont has 32%, and Key has 35%. But ATS outperforms both schools by huge margins on every public measure (SOL, DIBEL, Math Inventory).

All three schools also have VPI. Of the 3 schools, Claremont has the largest ratio of VPI/total enrollment, then ATS, then key.

What point are you trying to make? That fewer kids are in immersion VPI and that explains why ATS is leaps and bounds higher in achievement? Not true. Claremont has the most kids in VPI relative to their size.

ATS has less EL? Also not true. ATS is as high as Key and higher than Claremont.

ATS has more engaged parents than immersion? All three are lottery schools.

So why does ATS run laps around other lottery schools? Look at the data for montessori too. Highest ration of pre-k and lowest number of EL of the option schools.

Yes, all of this. It is what ATS does right, not about the lottery pre-selecting - in comparison with other lottery schools this is especially clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re happy we took a spot at ATS. APS maxes out class sizes at ATS and it’s possible our kids would have smaller classes at our neighborhood school based on planning factors. But we like so many of the practices that it’s worth that trade off and longer commute time. Small amounts of nightly homework (less common in APS these days because “equity” even though ATS is really diverse too) , weekly reports from teachers, weekly assemblies that build community, expectations around student behavior. All of it adds up to a learning environment that serves its majority-minority, high EL and high farms population well.

All of this could be done in other neighborhood
Schools and some do. But overall APS moving towards watering down standards and expectations. Really happy we’re at ATS.

ATS is not high FARMS unless compared to the upper North schools.

If you do the math, it looks like the ONLY FARMS students come from VPI — so it seems likely FARMS family aren’t navigating the regular lottery. The VPI has outreach at community centers food banks and shelters.

ATS should be an auto enrolled program, and then families can decline when they are selected rather than filtering for proactive parents.

Nope, not anymore. FARMS % is very high, and ever growing due to its set up and preference with the lottery. The VPI program is very large with 3 classes, and auto-admits all siblings of large under-resourced families. These parents can be just as checked out, if they wanted, since they get help with everything, including the lottery. There are several elementary schools in S.Arlington with lower FARMS. However, ATS so far manages to have no achievement gap for these kids, nor any other groups of kids, which is remarkable. Expectations are high for everyone, especially academically, and personally I think the homework helps as well. It fosters good habits from the beginning, and detects problems or lack of parental involvement early.

The majority of its FRL students coming from a quality preK program (VPI) is likely a significant contributing factor to the narrower achievement gap at ATS. Something other schools with the highest FRL%s like Randolph and Carlin Springs do not benefit from.

Both Randolph and Carling Springs have VPI programs.

APS website says VPI programs at the following schools:

Neighborhood schools:

Abingdon, Alice West Fleet, Ashlawn, Barcroft, Barrett, Carlin Springs, Dr. Charles R. Drew, Hoffman-Boston, Innovation, Long Branch, Oakridge, Randolph

Option Schools:

Arlington Traditional School
Campbell
Escuela Key and Claremont (Dual Language English and Spanish Immersion) program. Note: Families can only apply to ONE Dual Language School based on their assigned neighborhood school.

My point is: the majority of underprivileged/ELL students enrolled in each of those schools do not come from VPI. Whereas, ATS naturally has a lower percentage of those students overall to begin with and a significant portion of those that are there come from the VPI program.

To add: what is the "achievement gap" between the FRL and non FRL students in the immersion programs v. ATS? Does partially learning in their native language impact the gap? If so, does it do so equally as ATS or vice versa? What % of ATS' FRL students come from the VPI program v. % of Claremont or key or any other school?

I can't find APS data on achievement by FRL status. But on every other subgroup metric, ATS outperforms immersion. Both are self-selected via lottery. Looking at the equity dashboard, ATS has 35% EL, claremont has 32%, and Key has 35%. But ATS outperforms both schools by huge margins on every public measure (SOL, DIBEL, Math Inventory).

All three schools also have VPI. Of the 3 schools, Claremont has the largest ratio of VPI/total enrollment, then ATS, then key.

What point are you trying to make? That fewer kids are in immersion VPI and that explains why ATS is leaps and bounds higher in achievement? Not true. Claremont has the most kids in VPI relative to their size.

ATS has less EL? Also not true. ATS is as high as Key and higher than Claremont.

ATS has more engaged parents than immersion? All three are lottery schools.

So why does ATS run laps around other lottery schools? Look at the data for montessori too. Highest ration of pre-k and lowest number of EL of the option schools.

Thank you. You said it better than I ever could. I am so sick of this ATS hate.

I don't hate ATS. In fact, I wish all of our schools would take more of the traditional, disciplined, high expectations approach of ATS. (And no, we were not ATS parents, either).

I was - believe it or not, here on DCUM - genuinely suggesting that at least part of ATS' success re. the gap in achievement levels is very likely due to the fact that most(?) of their FRL students came from VPI. As opposed to Randolph, or Barcroft, for example - where some or many may come through VPI, but not most. Quality preschool being a significant factor in achievement at the outset, I think that's a key point to consider.

I appreciate the information provided in response to my question about Claremont, etc. I don't know the stats. That's why I posed the questions, including the one about partially learning in the native language. Because I think it's important to know if, and to what extent, our option programs are actually effective as opposed to our neighborhood schools and programs. To your point, I think that's more clearly evident when looking at Randolph, Barcroft, CS - is it not?

I would still be interested in the FRL-specific information with additional insight into % of each school's FRL population also being ELL and VPI "graduates." I think it's an interesting aspect to know more about, that may lend additional credibility and justification for pushing access and participation in quality preschool programs, etc.

You can believe ATS is merely superior in all aspects. But I don't see any harm to you or to ATS' reputation to acknowledge that the proportion of students, especially from ED groups, just might have an effect on the level of ATS' success in regards to achievement gaps.

ATS has a significant level of FRMs kids. No achievement data on the specific subgroup. But if there was a gap, you’d see it pulling ATS down more. And ATS levels overall are crazy high including for subgroups.

Maybe you don’t hate ATS. But In my experience, everyone tries to explain away ATS’s success. It starts with it’s all white or UMV families or North Arlington. It’s not that. Look at the data.

Then it’s about the parents or the self selection or the mix of kids or VPI. But it’s not that either. If that, you’d see the same results at more options schools. But look at the data.

I think people really don’t believe EL, FRM, and SWD can achieve at high levels and so they don’t believe that ATS is getting those results with all kids. But they do. Nothing at ATS is done by accident.

This. I honestly think a lot of ATS’ success has to do with expectations, both behaviorally and academically as well as the help they offer. They believe that the classroom should be orderly and kids are expected to follow the rules. An orderly classroom creates an environment that is conducive to learning. Then there are the academic expectations. They expect their students to do well and to meet the high standards that they place. They expect students to complete their homework and do not make excuses for them. All students are held to a high standard - yes with some students, completing homework is more exhausting because their parents work long hours and they have to take care of their siblings and the house. But it doesn’t matter. They are still held to high standards. In my experience, kids from these types of families complain the least and their parents push them the most. Then you have the third element, which is helping kids who need the help. If the kid is still not getting it then they will make sure that he or she does. There is also the direct instruction part. The more I read, the more it seems that direct instruction as opposed to inquiry based learning makes a huge difference. And yes add to it parents who apply because they care about academics as well as vpi students who are there from the beginning. The combo of all these things lead to success but there are a lot of lessons that can be learned. I think there has been s lot of focus on ATS’ phonics and reading block when it comes to “lessons learned” and not enough focus on direct instruction and high behavioral standards. Kids are out of control in schools making it difficult to learn. Kids need structure and a safe orderly environment. You can’t learn if someone is throwing stuff at you all day.

Wholeheartedly agree - 1000%!!!
--The poster who posed the FRL%/VPI question and being accused of hating ATS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re happy we took a spot at ATS. APS maxes out class sizes at ATS and it’s possible our kids would have smaller classes at our neighborhood school based on planning factors. But we like so many of the practices that it’s worth that trade off and longer commute time. Small amounts of nightly homework (less common in APS these days because “equity” even though ATS is really diverse too) , weekly reports from teachers, weekly assemblies that build community, expectations around student behavior. All of it adds up to a learning environment that serves its majority-minority, high EL and high farms population well.

All of this could be done in other neighborhood
Schools and some do. But overall APS moving towards watering down standards and expectations. Really happy we’re at ATS.

ATS is not high FARMS unless compared to the upper North schools.

If you do the math, it looks like the ONLY FARMS students come from VPI — so it seems likely FARMS family aren’t navigating the regular lottery. The VPI has outreach at community centers food banks and shelters.

ATS should be an auto enrolled program, and then families can decline when they are selected rather than filtering for proactive parents.

Nope, not anymore. FARMS % is very high, and ever growing due to its set up and preference with the lottery. The VPI program is very large with 3 classes, and auto-admits all siblings of large under-resourced families. These parents can be just as checked out, if they wanted, since they get help with everything, including the lottery. There are several elementary schools in S.Arlington with lower FARMS. However, ATS so far manages to have no achievement gap for these kids, nor any other groups of kids, which is remarkable. Expectations are high for everyone, especially academically, and personally I think the homework helps as well. It fosters good habits from the beginning, and detects problems or lack of parental involvement early.

The majority of its FRL students coming from a quality preK program (VPI) is likely a significant contributing factor to the narrower achievement gap at ATS. Something other schools with the highest FRL%s like Randolph and Carlin Springs do not benefit from.

Both Randolph and Carling Springs have VPI programs.

APS website says VPI programs at the following schools:

Neighborhood schools:

Abingdon, Alice West Fleet, Ashlawn, Barcroft, Barrett, Carlin Springs, Dr. Charles R. Drew, Hoffman-Boston, Innovation, Long Branch, Oakridge, Randolph

Option Schools:

Arlington Traditional School
Campbell
Escuela Key and Claremont (Dual Language English and Spanish Immersion) program. Note: Families can only apply to ONE Dual Language School based on their assigned neighborhood school.

My point is: the majority of underprivileged/ELL students enrolled in each of those schools do not come from VPI. Whereas, ATS naturally has a lower percentage of those students overall to begin with and a significant portion of those that are there come from the VPI program.

To add: what is the "achievement gap" between the FRL and non FRL students in the immersion programs v. ATS? Does partially learning in their native language impact the gap? If so, does it do so equally as ATS or vice versa? What % of ATS' FRL students come from the VPI program v. % of Claremont or key or any other school?

I can't find APS data on achievement by FRL status. But on every other subgroup metric, ATS outperforms immersion. Both are self-selected via lottery. Looking at the equity dashboard, ATS has 35% EL, claremont has 32%, and Key has 35%. But ATS outperforms both schools by huge margins on every public measure (SOL, DIBEL, Math Inventory).

All three schools also have VPI. Of the 3 schools, Claremont has the largest ratio of VPI/total enrollment, then ATS, then key.

What point are you trying to make? That fewer kids are in immersion VPI and that explains why ATS is leaps and bounds higher in achievement? Not true. Claremont has the most kids in VPI relative to their size.

ATS has less EL? Also not true. ATS is as high as Key and higher than Claremont.

ATS has more engaged parents than immersion? All three are lottery schools.

So why does ATS run laps around other lottery schools? Look at the data for montessori too. Highest ration of pre-k and lowest number of EL of the option schools.

Thank you. You said it better than I ever could. I am so sick of this ATS hate.

I don't hate ATS. In fact, I wish all of our schools would take more of the traditional, disciplined, high expectations approach of ATS. (And no, we were not ATS parents, either).

I was - believe it or not, here on DCUM - genuinely suggesting that at least part of ATS' success re. the gap in achievement levels is very likely due to the fact that most(?) of their FRL students came from VPI. As opposed to Randolph, or Barcroft, for example - where some or many may come through VPI, but not most. Quality preschool being a significant factor in achievement at the outset, I think that's a key point to consider.

I appreciate the information provided in response to my question about Claremont, etc. I don't know the stats. That's why I posed the questions, including the one about partially learning in the native language. Because I think it's important to know if, and to what extent, our option programs are actually effective as opposed to our neighborhood schools and programs. To your point, I think that's more clearly evident when looking at Randolph, Barcroft, CS - is it not?

I would still be interested in the FRL-specific information with additional insight into % of each school's FRL population also being ELL and VPI "graduates." I think it's an interesting aspect to know more about, that may lend additional credibility and justification for pushing access and participation in quality preschool programs, etc.

You can believe ATS is merely superior in all aspects. But I don't see any harm to you or to ATS' reputation to acknowledge that the proportion of students, especially from ED groups, just might have an effect on the level of ATS' success in regards to achievement gaps.

ATS has a significant level of FRMs kids. No achievement data on the specific subgroup. But if there was a gap, you’d see it pulling ATS down more. And ATS levels overall are crazy high including for subgroups.

Maybe you don’t hate ATS. But In my experience, everyone tries to explain away ATS’s success. It starts with it’s all white or UMV families or North Arlington. It’s not that. Look at the data.

Then it’s about the parents or the self selection or the mix of kids or VPI. But it’s not that either. If that, you’d see the same results at more options schools. But look at the data.

I think people really don’t believe EL, FRM, and SWD can achieve at high levels and so they don’t believe that ATS is getting those results with all kids. But they do. Nothing at ATS is done by accident.

This. I honestly think a lot of ATS’ success has to do with expectations, both behaviorally and academically as well as the help they offer. They believe that the classroom should be orderly and kids are expected to follow the rules. An orderly classroom creates an environment that is conducive to learning. Then there are the academic expectations. They expect their students to do well and to meet the high standards that they place. They expect students to complete their homework and do not make excuses for them. All students are held to a high standard - yes with some students, completing homework is more exhausting because their parents work long hours and they have to take care of their siblings and the house. But it doesn’t matter. They are still held to high standards. In my experience, kids from these types of families complain the least and their parents push them the most. Then you have the third element, which is helping kids who need the help. If the kid is still not getting it then they will make sure that he or she does. There is also the direct instruction part. The more I read, the more it seems that direct instruction as opposed to inquiry based learning makes a huge difference. And yes add to it parents who apply because they care about academics as well as vpi students who are there from the beginning. The combo of all these things lead to success but there are a lot of lessons that can be learned. I think there has been s lot of focus on ATS’ phonics and reading block when it comes to “lessons learned” and not enough focus on direct instruction and high behavioral standards. Kids are out of control in schools making it difficult to learn. Kids need structure and a safe orderly environment. You can’t learn if someone is throwing stuff at you all day.

Wholeheartedly agree - 1000%!!!
--The poster who posed the FRL%/VPI question and being accused of hating ATS.

DP. These are things that other schools could do more of. Set higher expectations, more direct instruction, regular homework, and so on. We have VPI at alot of schools. Other option schools should have the same parent and VPI boost that ATS has, but neighborhood schools have less control over either. APS should be able to track VPI kids over time though and see how they are doing whether they are at option or neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

It’s so aggravating APS doesn’t have higher expectations of students at all schools. APS is focused on the wrong things and I keep hoping it turns around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re happy we took a spot at ATS. APS maxes out class sizes at ATS and it’s possible our kids would have smaller classes at our neighborhood school based on planning factors. But we like so many of the practices that it’s worth that trade off and longer commute time. Small amounts of nightly homework (less common in APS these days because “equity” even though ATS is really diverse too) , weekly reports from teachers, weekly assemblies that build community, expectations around student behavior. All of it adds up to a learning environment that serves its majority-minority, high EL and high farms population well.

All of this could be done in other neighborhood
Schools and some do. But overall APS moving towards watering down standards and expectations. Really happy we’re at ATS.

ATS is not high FARMS unless compared to the upper North schools.

If you do the math, it looks like the ONLY FARMS students come from VPI — so it seems likely FARMS family aren’t navigating the regular lottery. The VPI has outreach at community centers food banks and shelters.

ATS should be an auto enrolled program, and then families can decline when they are selected rather than filtering for proactive parents.

Nope, not anymore. FARMS % is very high, and ever growing due to its set up and preference with the lottery. The VPI program is very large with 3 classes, and auto-admits all siblings of large under-resourced families. These parents can be just as checked out, if they wanted, since they get help with everything, including the lottery. There are several elementary schools in S.Arlington with lower FARMS. However, ATS so far manages to have no achievement gap for these kids, nor any other groups of kids, which is remarkable. Expectations are high for everyone, especially academically, and personally I think the homework helps as well. It fosters good habits from the beginning, and detects problems or lack of parental involvement early.

The majority of its FRL students coming from a quality preK program (VPI) is likely a significant contributing factor to the narrower achievement gap at ATS. Something other schools with the highest FRL%s like Randolph and Carlin Springs do not benefit from.

Both Randolph and Carling Springs have VPI programs.

APS website says VPI programs at the following schools:

Neighborhood schools:

Abingdon, Alice West Fleet, Ashlawn, Barcroft, Barrett, Carlin Springs, Dr. Charles R. Drew, Hoffman-Boston, Innovation, Long Branch, Oakridge, Randolph

Option Schools:

Arlington Traditional School
Campbell
Escuela Key and Claremont (Dual Language English and Spanish Immersion) program. Note: Families can only apply to ONE Dual Language School based on their assigned neighborhood school.

My point is: the majority of underprivileged/ELL students enrolled in each of those schools do not come from VPI. Whereas, ATS naturally has a lower percentage of those students overall to begin with and a significant portion of those that are there come from the VPI program.

To add: what is the "achievement gap" between the FRL and non FRL students in the immersion programs v. ATS? Does partially learning in their native language impact the gap? If so, does it do so equally as ATS or vice versa? What % of ATS' FRL students come from the VPI program v. % of Claremont or key or any other school?

I can't find APS data on achievement by FRL status. But on every other subgroup metric, ATS outperforms immersion. Both are self-selected via lottery. Looking at the equity dashboard, ATS has 35% EL, claremont has 32%, and Key has 35%. But ATS outperforms both schools by huge margins on every public measure (SOL, DIBEL, Math Inventory).

All three schools also have VPI. Of the 3 schools, Claremont has the largest ratio of VPI/total enrollment, then ATS, then key.

What point are you trying to make? That fewer kids are in immersion VPI and that explains why ATS is leaps and bounds higher in achievement? Not true. Claremont has the most kids in VPI relative to their size.

ATS has less EL? Also not true. ATS is as high as Key and higher than Claremont.

ATS has more engaged parents than immersion? All three are lottery schools.

So why does ATS run laps around other lottery schools? Look at the data for montessori too. Highest ration of pre-k and lowest number of EL of the option schools.

Thank you. You said it better than I ever could. I am so sick of this ATS hate.

I don't hate ATS. In fact, I wish all of our schools would take more of the traditional, disciplined, high expectations approach of ATS. (And no, we were not ATS parents, either).

I was - believe it or not, here on DCUM - genuinely suggesting that at least part of ATS' success re. the gap in achievement levels is very likely due to the fact that most(?) of their FRL students came from VPI. As opposed to Randolph, or Barcroft, for example - where some or many may come through VPI, but not most. Quality preschool being a significant factor in achievement at the outset, I think that's a key point to consider.

I appreciate the information provided in response to my question about Claremont, etc. I don't know the stats. That's why I posed the questions, including the one about partially learning in the native language. Because I think it's important to know if, and to what extent, our option programs are actually effective as opposed to our neighborhood schools and programs. To your point, I think that's more clearly evident when looking at Randolph, Barcroft, CS - is it not?

I would still be interested in the FRL-specific information with additional insight into % of each school's FRL population also being ELL and VPI "graduates." I think it's an interesting aspect to know more about, that may lend additional credibility and justification for pushing access and participation in quality preschool programs, etc.

You can believe ATS is merely superior in all aspects. But I don't see any harm to you or to ATS' reputation to acknowledge that the proportion of students, especially from ED groups, just might have an effect on the level of ATS' success in regards to achievement gaps.

ATS has a significant level of FRMs kids. No achievement data on the specific subgroup. But if there was a gap, you’d see it pulling ATS down more. And ATS levels overall are crazy high including for subgroups.

Maybe you don’t hate ATS. But In my experience, everyone tries to explain away ATS’s success. It starts with it’s all white or UMV families or North Arlington. It’s not that. Look at the data.

Then it’s about the parents or the self selection or the mix of kids or VPI. But it’s not that either. If that, you’d see the same results at more options schools. But look at the data.

I think people really don’t believe EL, FRM, and SWD can achieve at high levels and so they don’t believe that ATS is getting those results with all kids. But they do. Nothing at ATS is done by accident.

This. I honestly think a lot of ATS’ success has to do with expectations, both behaviorally and academically as well as the help they offer. They believe that the classroom should be orderly and kids are expected to follow the rules. An orderly classroom creates an environment that is conducive to learning. Then there are the academic expectations. They expect their students to do well and to meet the high standards that they place. They expect students to complete their homework and do not make excuses for them. All students are held to a high standard - yes with some students, completing homework is more exhausting because their parents work long hours and they have to take care of their siblings and the house. But it doesn’t matter. They are still held to high standards. In my experience, kids from these types of families complain the least and their parents push them the most. Then you have the third element, which is helping kids who need the help. If the kid is still not getting it then they will make sure that he or she does. There is also the direct instruction part. The more I read, the more it seems that direct instruction as opposed to inquiry based learning makes a huge difference. And yes add to it parents who apply because they care about academics as well as vpi students who are there from the beginning. The combo of all these things lead to success but there are a lot of lessons that can be learned. I think there has been s lot of focus on ATS’ phonics and reading block when it comes to “lessons learned” and not enough focus on direct instruction and high behavioral standards. Kids are out of control in schools making it difficult to learn. Kids need structure and a safe orderly environment. You can’t learn if someone is throwing stuff at you all day.

Right, because with involved parents you can’t expect them to respond to a discipline request or or academic instruction directives.

You don’t get new disruptive kids transferring to ATS mid grade with parents who will ignore the Principals emails. 99% of kids have been in this system since they were kindergartners.

*can expect

The key is parents and the way the lottery works and how the only FARMS have pre-instruction at VPI really makes for a much more controlled environment

Anyone in a neighborhood school can recall the 1-4 kids in the class who were always in trouble, that’s where all the time comes from at ATS for homework and individual weekly reports.

There are kids who get into trouble all the time at ATS too and there are parents who are less involved. Yes ATS is a lottery school. But so is Campbell, Claremont, Key, & Montessori. ATS has better outcomes than all these lottery schools. Also parents in the wealthier portions of Arlington are super involved as well. Look at the Nottingham parents for example, or the former McKinley parents. Many ATS parents are low income and have less time to advocate for their kids or navigate the system like the affluent North Arlington parents do. However outcomes are comparable if not better at ATS than these affluent North Arlington school. That being said ATS has very strict behavioral standards and families who send their kids there are expected to abide by these standards so yes, there is an element of that. We need to look at culture more generally. Why are overly involved affluent Arlington parents against behavioral standards in school? If their kid gets in trouble they will raise hell. Immigrants (which make up a large portion of ATS) do not do that. They expect their kids to behave in school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re happy we took a spot at ATS. APS maxes out class sizes at ATS and it’s possible our kids would have smaller classes at our neighborhood school based on planning factors. But we like so many of the practices that it’s worth that trade off and longer commute time. Small amounts of nightly homework (less common in APS these days because “equity” even though ATS is really diverse too) , weekly reports from teachers, weekly assemblies that build community, expectations around student behavior. All of it adds up to a learning environment that serves its majority-minority, high EL and high farms population well.

All of this could be done in other neighborhood
Schools and some do. But overall APS moving towards watering down standards and expectations. Really happy we’re at ATS.

ATS is not high FARMS unless compared to the upper North schools.

If you do the math, it looks like the ONLY FARMS students come from VPI — so it seems likely FARMS family aren’t navigating the regular lottery. The VPI has outreach at community centers food banks and shelters.

ATS should be an auto enrolled program, and then families can decline when they are selected rather than filtering for proactive parents.

Nope, not anymore. FARMS % is very high, and ever growing due to its set up and preference with the lottery. The VPI program is very large with 3 classes, and auto-admits all siblings of large under-resourced families. These parents can be just as checked out, if they wanted, since they get help with everything, including the lottery. There are several elementary schools in S.Arlington with lower FARMS. However, ATS so far manages to have no achievement gap for these kids, nor any other groups of kids, which is remarkable. Expectations are high for everyone, especially academically, and personally I think the homework helps as well. It fosters good habits from the beginning, and detects problems or lack of parental involvement early.

The majority of its FRL students coming from a quality preK program (VPI) is likely a significant contributing factor to the narrower achievement gap at ATS. Something other schools with the highest FRL%s like Randolph and Carlin Springs do not benefit from.

Both Randolph and Carling Springs have VPI programs.

APS website says VPI programs at the following schools:

Neighborhood schools:

Abingdon, Alice West Fleet, Ashlawn, Barcroft, Barrett, Carlin Springs, Dr. Charles R. Drew, Hoffman-Boston, Innovation, Long Branch, Oakridge, Randolph

Option Schools:

Arlington Traditional School
Campbell
Escuela Key and Claremont (Dual Language English and Spanish Immersion) program. Note: Families can only apply to ONE Dual Language School based on their assigned neighborhood school.

My point is: the majority of underprivileged/ELL students enrolled in each of those schools do not come from VPI. Whereas, ATS naturally has a lower percentage of those students overall to begin with and a significant portion of those that are there come from the VPI program.

To add: what is the "achievement gap" between the FRL and non FRL students in the immersion programs v. ATS? Does partially learning in their native language impact the gap? If so, does it do so equally as ATS or vice versa? What % of ATS' FRL students come from the VPI program v. % of Claremont or key or any other school?

I can't find APS data on achievement by FRL status. But on every other subgroup metric, ATS outperforms immersion. Both are self-selected via lottery. Looking at the equity dashboard, ATS has 35% EL, claremont has 32%, and Key has 35%. But ATS outperforms both schools by huge margins on every public measure (SOL, DIBEL, Math Inventory).

All three schools also have VPI. Of the 3 schools, Claremont has the largest ratio of VPI/total enrollment, then ATS, then key.

What point are you trying to make? That fewer kids are in immersion VPI and that explains why ATS is leaps and bounds higher in achievement? Not true. Claremont has the most kids in VPI relative to their size.

ATS has less EL? Also not true. ATS is as high as Key and higher than Claremont.

ATS has more engaged parents than immersion? All three are lottery schools.

So why does ATS run laps around other lottery schools? Look at the data for montessori too. Highest ration of pre-k and lowest number of EL of the option schools.

Thank you. You said it better than I ever could. I am so sick of this ATS hate.

I don't hate ATS. In fact, I wish all of our schools would take more of the traditional, disciplined, high expectations approach of ATS. (And no, we were not ATS parents, either).

I was - believe it or not, here on DCUM - genuinely suggesting that at least part of ATS' success re. the gap in achievement levels is very likely due to the fact that most(?) of their FRL students came from VPI. As opposed to Randolph, or Barcroft, for example - where some or many may come through VPI, but not most. Quality preschool being a significant factor in achievement at the outset, I think that's a key point to consider.

I appreciate the information provided in response to my question about Claremont, etc. I don't know the stats. That's why I posed the questions, including the one about partially learning in the native language. Because I think it's important to know if, and to what extent, our option programs are actually effective as opposed to our neighborhood schools and programs. To your point, I think that's more clearly evident when looking at Randolph, Barcroft, CS - is it not?

I would still be interested in the FRL-specific information with additional insight into % of each school's FRL population also being ELL and VPI "graduates." I think it's an interesting aspect to know more about, that may lend additional credibility and justification for pushing access and participation in quality preschool programs, etc.

You can believe ATS is merely superior in all aspects. But I don't see any harm to you or to ATS' reputation to acknowledge that the proportion of students, especially from ED groups, just might have an effect on the level of ATS' success in regards to achievement gaps.

ATS has a significant level of FRMs kids. No achievement data on the specific subgroup. But if there was a gap, you’d see it pulling ATS down more. And ATS levels overall are crazy high including for subgroups.

Maybe you don’t hate ATS. But In my experience, everyone tries to explain away ATS’s success. It starts with it’s all white or UMV families or North Arlington. It’s not that. Look at the data.

Then it’s about the parents or the self selection or the mix of kids or VPI. But it’s not that either. If that, you’d see the same results at more options schools. But look at the data.

I think people really don’t believe EL, FRM, and SWD can achieve at high levels and so they don’t believe that ATS is getting those results with all kids. But they do. Nothing at ATS is done by accident.

This. I honestly think a lot of ATS’ success has to do with expectations, both behaviorally and academically as well as the help they offer. They believe that the classroom should be orderly and kids are expected to follow the rules. An orderly classroom creates an environment that is conducive to learning. Then there are the academic expectations. They expect their students to do well and to meet the high standards that they place. They expect students to complete their homework and do not make excuses for them. All students are held to a high standard - yes with some students, completing homework is more exhausting because their parents work long hours and they have to take care of their siblings and the house. But it doesn’t matter. They are still held to high standards. In my experience, kids from these types of families complain the least and their parents push them the most. Then you have the third element, which is helping kids who need the help. If the kid is still not getting it then they will make sure that he or she does. There is also the direct instruction part. The more I read, the more it seems that direct instruction as opposed to inquiry based learning makes a huge difference. And yes add to it parents who apply because they care about academics as well as vpi students who are there from the beginning. The combo of all these things lead to success but there are a lot of lessons that can be learned. I think there has been s lot of focus on ATS’ phonics and reading block when it comes to “lessons learned” and not enough focus on direct instruction and high behavioral standards. Kids are out of control in schools making it difficult to learn. Kids need structure and a safe orderly environment. You can’t learn if someone is throwing stuff at you all day.

Right, because with involved parents you can’t expect them to respond to a discipline request or or academic instruction directives.

You don’t get new disruptive kids transferring to ATS mid grade with parents who will ignore the Principals emails. 99% of kids have been in this system since they were kindergartners.

*can expect

The key is parents and the way the lottery works and how the only FARMS have pre-instruction at VPI really makes for a much more controlled environment

Anyone in a neighborhood school can recall the 1-4 kids in the class who were always in trouble, that’s where all the time comes from at ATS for homework and individual weekly reports.

There are kids who get into trouble all the time at ATS too and there are parents who are less involved. Yes ATS is a lottery school. But so is Campbell, Claremont, Key, & Montessori. ATS has better outcomes than all these lottery schools. Also parents in the wealthier portions of Arlington are super involved as well. Look at the Nottingham parents for example, or the former McKinley parents. Many ATS parents are low income and have less time to advocate for their kids or navigate the system like the affluent North Arlington parents do. However outcomes are comparable if not better at ATS than these affluent North Arlington school. That being said ATS has very strict behavioral standards and families who send their kids there are expected to abide by these standards so yes, there is an element of that. We need to look at culture more generally. Why are overly involved affluent Arlington parents against behavioral standards in school? If their kid gets in trouble they will raise hell. Immigrants (which make up a large portion of ATS) do not do that. They expect their kids to behave in school.

Also, as I said previously, I think we need to examine the importance of direct instruction and the role it plays in improving learning outcomes. I believe that no-one (including ATS parents) has examined this issue closely. But the more I learn, the more I am convinced that direct instruction is key, especially in public schools with large class sizes. Natalie Wexler, who leans liberal, has a substack where she writes a lot about this. See here for example:

https://nataliewexler.substack.com/p/elementary-classroom-are-too-noisy

Another good resource is Danial Buck, who leans conservative and writes a lot about direct instruction as well. See here https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/commentary/stop-using-learning-stations and here

https://www.city-journal.org/article/californias-math-framework-is-flawed?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Organic_Social

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s so aggravating APS doesn’t have higher expectations of students at all schools. APS is focused on the wrong things and I keep hoping it turns around.

Parents need to push for this and elect school board members who believe in this. I have high hopes for Miranda Turner. Mary Kadera isn't that bad. Sutton, Priddy and Diaz-Torres need to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so aggravating APS doesn’t have higher expectations of students at all schools. APS is focused on the wrong things and I keep hoping it turns around.

Parents need to push for this and elect school board members who believe in this. I have high hopes for Miranda Turner. Mary Kadera isn't that bad. Sutton, Priddy and Diaz-Torres need to go.

I have been voting in ways that I think would lend a hand towards this mindset. As well as advocating and reaching out to school board members. It falls on deaf ears or that’s how it feels. We really need a change in how things are ran … maybe some of the folks the above poster listed will help us all get there. Time will tell…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re happy we took a spot at ATS. APS maxes out class sizes at ATS and it’s possible our kids would have smaller classes at our neighborhood school based on planning factors. But we like so many of the practices that it’s worth that trade off and longer commute time. Small amounts of nightly homework (less common in APS these days because “equity” even though ATS is really diverse too) , weekly reports from teachers, weekly assemblies that build community, expectations around student behavior. All of it adds up to a learning environment that serves its majority-minority, high EL and high farms population well.

All of this could be done in other neighborhood
Schools and some do. But overall APS moving towards watering down standards and expectations. Really happy we’re at ATS.

ATS is not high FARMS unless compared to the upper North schools.

If you do the math, it looks like the ONLY FARMS students come from VPI — so it seems likely FARMS family aren’t navigating the regular lottery. The VPI has outreach at community centers food banks and shelters.

ATS should be an auto enrolled program, and then families can decline when they are selected rather than filtering for proactive parents.

Nope, not anymore. FARMS % is very high, and ever growing due to its set up and preference with the lottery. The VPI program is very large with 3 classes, and auto-admits all siblings of large under-resourced families. These parents can be just as checked out, if they wanted, since they get help with everything, including the lottery. There are several elementary schools in S.Arlington with lower FARMS. However, ATS so far manages to have no achievement gap for these kids, nor any other groups of kids, which is remarkable. Expectations are high for everyone, especially academically, and personally I think the homework helps as well. It fosters good habits from the beginning, and detects problems or lack of parental involvement early.

The majority of its FRL students coming from a quality preK program (VPI) is likely a significant contributing factor to the narrower achievement gap at ATS. Something other schools with the highest FRL%s like Randolph and Carlin Springs do not benefit from.

Both Randolph and Carling Springs have VPI programs.

APS website says VPI programs at the following schools:

Neighborhood schools:

Abingdon, Alice West Fleet, Ashlawn, Barcroft, Barrett, Carlin Springs, Dr. Charles R. Drew, Hoffman-Boston, Innovation, Long Branch, Oakridge, Randolph

Option Schools:

Arlington Traditional School
Campbell
Escuela Key and Claremont (Dual Language English and Spanish Immersion) program. Note: Families can only apply to ONE Dual Language School based on their assigned neighborhood school.

My point is: the majority of underprivileged/ELL students enrolled in each of those schools do not come from VPI. Whereas, ATS naturally has a lower percentage of those students overall to begin with and a significant portion of those that are there come from the VPI program.

To add: what is the "achievement gap" between the FRL and non FRL students in the immersion programs v. ATS? Does partially learning in their native language impact the gap? If so, does it do so equally as ATS or vice versa? What % of ATS' FRL students come from the VPI program v. % of Claremont or key or any other school?

I can't find APS data on achievement by FRL status. But on every other subgroup metric, ATS outperforms immersion. Both are self-selected via lottery. Looking at the equity dashboard, ATS has 35% EL, claremont has 32%, and Key has 35%. But ATS outperforms both schools by huge margins on every public measure (SOL, DIBEL, Math Inventory).

All three schools also have VPI. Of the 3 schools, Claremont has the largest ratio of VPI/total enrollment, then ATS, then key.

What point are you trying to make? That fewer kids are in immersion VPI and that explains why ATS is leaps and bounds higher in achievement? Not true. Claremont has the most kids in VPI relative to their size.

ATS has less EL? Also not true. ATS is as high as Key and higher than Claremont.

ATS has more engaged parents than immersion? All three are lottery schools.

So why does ATS run laps around other lottery schools? Look at the data for montessori too. Highest ration of pre-k and lowest number of EL of the option schools.

Thank you. You said it better than I ever could. I am so sick of this ATS hate.

I don't hate ATS. In fact, I wish all of our schools would take more of the traditional, disciplined, high expectations approach of ATS. (And no, we were not ATS parents, either).

I was - believe it or not, here on DCUM - genuinely suggesting that at least part of ATS' success re. the gap in achievement levels is very likely due to the fact that most(?) of their FRL students came from VPI. As opposed to Randolph, or Barcroft, for example - where some or many may come through VPI, but not most. Quality preschool being a significant factor in achievement at the outset, I think that's a key point to consider.

I appreciate the information provided in response to my question about Claremont, etc. I don't know the stats. That's why I posed the questions, including the one about partially learning in the native language. Because I think it's important to know if, and to what extent, our option programs are actually effective as opposed to our neighborhood schools and programs. To your point, I think that's more clearly evident when looking at Randolph, Barcroft, CS - is it not?

I would still be interested in the FRL-specific information with additional insight into % of each school's FRL population also being ELL and VPI "graduates." I think it's an interesting aspect to know more about, that may lend additional credibility and justification for pushing access and participation in quality preschool programs, etc.

You can believe ATS is merely superior in all aspects. But I don't see any harm to you or to ATS' reputation to acknowledge that the proportion of students, especially from ED groups, just might have an effect on the level of ATS' success in regards to achievement gaps.

ATS has a significant level of FRMs kids. No achievement data on the specific subgroup. But if there was a gap, you’d see it pulling ATS down more. And ATS levels overall are crazy high including for subgroups.

Maybe you don’t hate ATS. But In my experience, everyone tries to explain away ATS’s success. It starts with it’s all white or UMV families or North Arlington. It’s not that. Look at the data.

Then it’s about the parents or the self selection or the mix of kids or VPI. But it’s not that either. If that, you’d see the same results at more options schools. But look at the data.

I think people really don’t believe EL, FRM, and SWD can achieve at high levels and so they don’t believe that ATS is getting those results with all kids. But they do. Nothing at ATS is done by accident.

This. I honestly think a lot of ATS’ success has to do with expectations, both behaviorally and academically as well as the help they offer. They believe that the classroom should be orderly and kids are expected to follow the rules. An orderly classroom creates an environment that is conducive to learning. Then there are the academic expectations. They expect their students to do well and to meet the high standards that they place. They expect students to complete their homework and do not make excuses for them. All students are held to a high standard - yes with some students, completing homework is more exhausting because their parents work long hours and they have to take care of their siblings and the house. But it doesn’t matter. They are still held to high standards. In my experience, kids from these types of families complain the least and their parents push them the most. Then you have the third element, which is helping kids who need the help. If the kid is still not getting it then they will make sure that he or she does. There is also the direct instruction part. The more I read, the more it seems that direct instruction as opposed to inquiry based learning makes a huge difference. And yes add to it parents who apply because they care about academics as well as vpi students who are there from the beginning. The combo of all these things lead to success but there are a lot of lessons that can be learned. I think there has been s lot of focus on ATS’ phonics and reading block when it comes to “lessons learned” and not enough focus on direct instruction and high behavioral standards. Kids are out of control in schools making it difficult to learn. Kids need structure and a safe orderly environment. You can’t learn if someone is throwing stuff at you all day.

Right, because with involved parents you can’t expect them to respond to a discipline request or or academic instruction directives.

You don’t get new disruptive kids transferring to ATS mid grade with parents who will ignore the Principals emails. 99% of kids have been in this system since they were kindergartners.

*can expect

The key is parents and the way the lottery works and how the only FARMS have pre-instruction at VPI really makes for a much more controlled environment

Anyone in a neighborhood school can recall the 1-4 kids in the class who were always in trouble, that’s where all the time comes from at ATS for homework and individual weekly reports.

There are kids who get into trouble all the time at ATS too and there are parents who are less involved. Yes ATS is a lottery school. But so is Campbell, Claremont, Key, & Montessori. ATS has better outcomes than all these lottery schools. Also parents in the wealthier portions of Arlington are super involved as well. Look at the Nottingham parents for example, or the former McKinley parents. Many ATS parents are low income and have less time to advocate for their kids or navigate the system like the affluent North Arlington parents do. However outcomes are comparable if not better at ATS than these affluent North Arlington school. That being said ATS has very strict behavioral standards and families who send their kids there are expected to abide by these standards so yes, there is an element of that. We need to look at culture more generally. Why are overly involved affluent Arlington parents against behavioral standards in school? If their kid gets in trouble they will raise hell. Immigrants (which make up a large portion of ATS) do not do that. They expect their kids to behave in school.

Underprivileged students benefit from being in more economically balanced schools which expose them to experiences and opportunities they otherwise would not be exposed to, through the additional financial and other (time, experience, etc) resources more affluent households bring to the school, etc.

The second key is expectations, standards, and enforcement.

I'm not taking anything away from ATS. But there are, as people are pointing out, multiple reasons for its success. And, yes, part of it is the families who choose to enter the lottery and attend. They are more sold on good old fashioned discipline, stricter dress codes, and kids rising up to meet expectations rather than bringing expectations down to meet kids. Sorry, but I do think the "self-selected" folks of ATS are - as a whole group - more like-minded on those things and a little different than those who choose Campbell or Montessori or Immersion. Those three programs don't require the same buy-in to the things ATS requires. Same at our neighborhood schools.

[Anonymous]

Let's remember that ATS's "success" refers to its standardized test scores. You may like it's culture or not. But if your kid didn't get in and you're disappointed, you can replicate the requirements and test prep at home while your kid attends their neighborhood school.

And in 6th grade it won't matter anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's remember that ATS's "success" refers to its standardized test scores. You may like it's culture or not. But if your kid didn't get in and you're disappointed, you can replicate the requirements and test prep at home while your kid attends their neighborhood school.

And in 6th grade it won't matter anymore.

No. I cannot homeschool my child and I certainly can't homeschool my child on top of them going to school all day. And it isn't just about prepping for tests. Our neighborhood schools already teach for the tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's remember that ATS's "success" refers to its standardized test scores. You may like it's culture or not. But if your kid didn't get in and you're disappointed, you can replicate the requirements and test prep at home while your kid attends their neighborhood school.

And in 6th grade it won't matter anymore.

Why should parents have to fill the gaps for schools that aren’t teaching their kids to read and do math? This is not a new problem in APS. I give the superintendent credit for putting it on a dash board for the community to see how many kids in APS need support for foundational skills.

ATS is getting it right which is why the wait list is so huge there.