APS Closing Nottingham

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First they overcrowded Glebe
And I did not speak out
Because I didn't have kids there and so eff that.
Then they repurposed McKinley
And I did not speak out
and in fact was a little grateful over it because better them than us.
Then they came for Nottingham
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
and in fact for some reason people don't seem to like me that much and they're starting to get on my nerves

When you behave like this for years and eff over other schools in the community to put your own schools’ needs as primary, you can’t reasonably claim that other parents are going to miss your upper middle class values and time and effort put into APS. Lots of other parents volunteer at APS without screwing everyone else over.

Uh, the attacks on Nottingham families/parents and karma arguments aren’t persuasive. I’m not in Nottingham but the idea that we should screw over a while school community because you didn’t like some former PTa mom is … stupid? And it makes you sound like a petty little person.

They are getting assigned to demographically identical schools in a nearby location. They are def not getting a raw deal if this passes! Goodness.

Non sequiter?

Nope- PP said the Nottingham community was getting “screwed over.” They aren’t! They will get assigned to wonderful nearby school communities.

.

Non sequiter: a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement

The reply was to a post about karma breathing dragons and nonsense about terrible families in Nottingham.

You responded they are getting assigned to great schools.

Hence. Non sequiter.

DP, but the PP asserted Nottingham was getting “screwed over” because people didn’t like Nottingham parents. Pointing out that no one is truly getting screwed over here is certainly a response to that assertion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems obvious that Nottingham should be shut down. Less than 400 kids? Give me a break. Unless there us another school with even fewer kids it just makes sense.

Fewer than 400 kids !!! I remember when the community was up in arms about leaving drew so underenrolled after MPSA left. Drew is now larger than Nottingham.

But the housing policies that filled up Drew don’t apply to Nottingham. Unless the community is asking the county to build a CAF up in that neighborhood to fill up the school. One building would do it.

I remember a few years ago Jamestown was so under enrolled that they had to fill it with pre school and sped programs. Is that still the case? Maybe Nott isn’t really the lowest enrollment if you compare the number of neighborhood kids across schools, and don’t take into account the other programs that don’t have to be in any particular place.

And why did APS fill up Jamestown with these other programs instead of closing it, but now wants to close Nott? Nott isn’t that underenrolled. APS could move some of the programs out of the overcrowded schools and get it right back up to 100.

But look at how fast a Nottingham parent is to point to Jamestown or some other elementary school as an alternative chopping block head to get them out of their problem. They do this every cycle, did it with McKinley a few times and Taylor or Tuckahoe when they didn’t want to take in excess kids and pointed them towards other schools instead. You guys are the worst.

They don't want more buses that come from being used as swing space; yet it's fine to to add buses to move the programs out of crowded schools from other parts of the county. NES folks need to come up with an agreed argument and stick to it.

You don't see the difference between adding 1-2 programs to a mostly walking school vs switching a 90% walking school to a 100% driving school?

As swing space, the 100% driving school would be mainly buses and probably not much more individual cars for pick-ups and such as you have as a neighborhood program. And probably a lot less independent drivers on those rainy or cold days when all those walkers don't actually walk. So, differences; but overall, not a tremendous increase in danger, no. As an option program, there would still be those same buses and maybe more drivers depending on the program and where most of the students come from.

Nevertheless, the other issue is the constant - or frequent - relocation of those programs. Instructional consistency is needed for special programs, too; and it isn't right to keep moving those around like second-class citizens. Sure, parents may only be involved in a preK program for a year or so; but the teachers also have to move with the program, schools have to re-arrange to accommodate, admin has to adapt, etc. personally, I think every single elementary school should have pre-K classrooms and all Montessori preK should be with Montessori (if we have to keep Montessori).

And you base this conclusion that it would be mainly buses on what? I completely disagree. With longer bus rides, more parents would likely drive and there would be a lot more individual cars in the neighborhood.

trust me, Nottingham is not convenient enough for most parents to drive their kids to and from school every day. The bus will be far more convenient.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First they overcrowded Glebe
And I did not speak out
Because I didn't have kids there and so eff that.
Then they repurposed McKinley
And I did not speak out
and in fact was a little grateful over it because better them than us.
Then they came for Nottingham
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
and in fact for some reason people don't seem to like me that much and they're starting to get on my nerves

When you behave like this for years and eff over other schools in the community to put your own schools’ needs as primary, you can’t reasonably claim that other parents are going to miss your upper middle class values and time and effort put into APS. Lots of other parents volunteer at APS without screwing everyone else over.

Uh, the attacks on Nottingham families/parents and karma arguments aren’t persuasive. I’m not in Nottingham but the idea that we should screw over a while school community because you didn’t like some former PTa mom is … stupid? And it makes you sound like a petty little person.

They are getting assigned to demographically identical schools in a nearby location. They are def not getting a raw deal if this passes! Goodness.

Non sequiter?

Nope- PP said the Nottingham community was getting “screwed over.” They aren’t! They will get assigned to wonderful nearby school communities.

.

Non sequiter: a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement

The reply was to a post about karma breathing dragons and nonsense about terrible families in Nottingham.

You responded they are getting assigned to great schools.

Hence. Non sequiter.

DP, but the PP asserted Nottingham was getting “screwed over” because people didn’t like Nottingham parents. Pointing out that no one is truly getting screwed over here is certainly a response to that assertion.

Thank you for understanding my point. I thought it was pretty clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems obvious that Nottingham should be shut down. Less than 400 kids? Give me a break. Unless there us another school with even fewer kids it just makes sense.

Fewer than 400 kids !!! I remember when the community was up in arms about leaving drew so underenrolled after MPSA left. Drew is now larger than Nottingham.

But the housing policies that filled up Drew don’t apply to Nottingham. Unless the community is asking the county to build a CAF up in that neighborhood to fill up the school. One building would do it.

I remember a few years ago Jamestown was so under enrolled that they had to fill it with pre school and sped programs. Is that still the case? Maybe Nott isn’t really the lowest enrollment if you compare the number of neighborhood kids across schools, and don’t take into account the other programs that don’t have to be in any particular place.

And why did APS fill up Jamestown with these other programs instead of closing it, but now wants to close Nott? Nott isn’t that underenrolled. APS could move some of the programs out of the overcrowded schools and get it right back up to 100.

But look at how fast a Nottingham parent is to point to Jamestown or some other elementary school as an alternative chopping block head to get them out of their problem. They do this every cycle, did it with McKinley a few times and Taylor or Tuckahoe when they didn’t want to take in excess kids and pointed them towards other schools instead. You guys are the worst.

They don't want more buses that come from being used as swing space; yet it's fine to to add buses to move the programs out of crowded schools from other parts of the county. NES folks need to come up with an agreed argument and stick to it.

You don't see the difference between adding 1-2 programs to a mostly walking school vs switching a 90% walking school to a 100% driving school?

As swing space, the 100% driving school would be mainly buses and probably not much more individual cars for pick-ups and such as you have as a neighborhood program. And probably a lot less independent drivers on those rainy or cold days when all those walkers don't actually walk. So, differences; but overall, not a tremendous increase in danger, no. As an option program, there would still be those same buses and maybe more drivers depending on the program and where most of the students come from.

Nevertheless, the other issue is the constant - or frequent - relocation of those programs. Instructional consistency is needed for special programs, too; and it isn't right to keep moving those around like second-class citizens. Sure, parents may only be involved in a preK program for a year or so; but the teachers also have to move with the program, schools have to re-arrange to accommodate, admin has to adapt, etc. personally, I think every single elementary school should have pre-K classrooms and all Montessori preK should be with Montessori (if we have to keep Montessori).

And you base this conclusion that it would be mainly buses on what? I completely disagree. With longer bus rides, more parents would likely drive and there would be a lot more individual cars in the neighborhood.

trust me, Nottingham is not convenient enough for most parents to drive their kids to and from school every day. The bus will be far more convenient.

Not for before care or extended day. Also, where are you going to park 12 busses? The school isn’t designed for this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First they overcrowded Glebe
And I did not speak out
Because I didn't have kids there and so eff that.
Then they repurposed McKinley
And I did not speak out
and in fact was a little grateful over it because better them than us.
Then they came for Nottingham
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
and in fact for some reason people don't seem to like me that much and they're starting to get on my nerves

When you behave like this for years and eff over other schools in the community to put your own schools’ needs as primary, you can’t reasonably claim that other parents are going to miss your upper middle class values and time and effort put into APS. Lots of other parents volunteer at APS without screwing everyone else over.

Uh, the attacks on Nottingham families/parents and karma arguments aren’t persuasive. I’m not in Nottingham but the idea that we should screw over a while school community because you didn’t like some former PTa mom is … stupid? And it makes you sound like a petty little person.

They are getting assigned to demographically identical schools in a nearby location. They are def not getting a raw deal if this passes! Goodness.

Non sequiter?

Nope- PP said the Nottingham community was getting “screwed over.” They aren’t! They will get assigned to wonderful nearby school communities.

So just because the Nottingham kids will end up at another good school means parents shouldn’t fight to keep their current school open?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems obvious that Nottingham should be shut down. Less than 400 kids? Give me a break. Unless there us another school with even fewer kids it just makes sense.

Fewer than 400 kids !!! I remember when the community was up in arms about leaving drew so underenrolled after MPSA left. Drew is now larger than Nottingham.

But the housing policies that filled up Drew don’t apply to Nottingham. Unless the community is asking the county to build a CAF up in that neighborhood to fill up the school. One building would do it.

I remember a few years ago Jamestown was so under enrolled that they had to fill it with pre school and sped programs. Is that still the case? Maybe Nott isn’t really the lowest enrollment if you compare the number of neighborhood kids across schools, and don’t take into account the other programs that don’t have to be in any particular place.

And why did APS fill up Jamestown with these other programs instead of closing it, but now wants to close Nott? Nott isn’t that underenrolled. APS could move some of the programs out of the overcrowded schools and get it right back up to 100.

But look at how fast a Nottingham parent is to point to Jamestown or some other elementary school as an alternative chopping block head to get them out of their problem. They do this every cycle, did it with McKinley a few times and Taylor or Tuckahoe when they didn’t want to take in excess kids and pointed them towards other schools instead. You guys are the worst.

They don't want more buses that come from being used as swing space; yet it's fine to to add buses to move the programs out of crowded schools from other parts of the county. NES folks need to come up with an agreed argument and stick to it.

You don't see the difference between adding 1-2 programs to a mostly walking school vs switching a 90% walking school to a 100% driving school?

As swing space, the 100% driving school would be mainly buses and probably not much more individual cars for pick-ups and such as you have as a neighborhood program. And probably a lot less independent drivers on those rainy or cold days when all those walkers don't actually walk. So, differences; but overall, not a tremendous increase in danger, no. As an option program, there would still be those same buses and maybe more drivers depending on the program and where most of the students come from.

Nevertheless, the other issue is the constant - or frequent - relocation of those programs. Instructional consistency is needed for special programs, too; and it isn't right to keep moving those around like second-class citizens. Sure, parents may only be involved in a preK program for a year or so; but the teachers also have to move with the program, schools have to re-arrange to accommodate, admin has to adapt, etc. personally, I think every single elementary school should have pre-K classrooms and all Montessori preK should be with Montessori (if we have to keep Montessori).

And you base this conclusion that it would be mainly buses on what? I completely disagree. With longer bus rides, more parents would likely drive and there would be a lot more individual cars in the neighborhood.

trust me, Nottingham is not convenient enough for most parents to drive their kids to and from school every day. The bus will be far more convenient.

Not for before care or extended day. Also, where are you going to park 12 busses? The school isn’t designed for this.

12 busses? Even the option schools don't have that many

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First they overcrowded Glebe
And I did not speak out
Because I didn't have kids there and so eff that.
Then they repurposed McKinley
And I did not speak out
and in fact was a little grateful over it because better them than us.
Then they came for Nottingham
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
and in fact for some reason people don't seem to like me that much and they're starting to get on my nerves

When you behave like this for years and eff over other schools in the community to put your own schools’ needs as primary, you can’t reasonably claim that other parents are going to miss your upper middle class values and time and effort put into APS. Lots of other parents volunteer at APS without screwing everyone else over.

Uh, the attacks on Nottingham families/parents and karma arguments aren’t persuasive. I’m not in Nottingham but the idea that we should screw over a while school community because you didn’t like some former PTa mom is … stupid? And it makes you sound like a petty little person.

They are getting assigned to demographically identical schools in a nearby location. They are def not getting a raw deal if this passes! Goodness.

Non sequiter?

Nope- PP said the Nottingham community was getting “screwed over.” They aren’t! They will get assigned to wonderful nearby school communities.

So just because the Nottingham kids will end up at another good school means parents shouldn’t fight to keep their current school open?

Are you serious? Yes, that’s exactly what it means.

[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:It seems obvious that Nottingham should be shut down. Less than 400 kids? Give me a break. Unless there us another school with even fewer kids it just makes sense.

Fewer than 400 kids !!! I remember when the community was up in arms about leaving drew so underenrolled after MPSA left. Drew is now larger than Nottingham.

But the housing policies that filled up Drew don’t apply to Nottingham. Unless the community is asking the county to build a CAF up in that neighborhood to fill up the school. One building would do it.

I remember a few years ago Jamestown was so under enrolled that they had to fill it with pre school and sped programs. Is that still the case? Maybe Nott isn’t really the lowest enrollment if you compare the number of neighborhood kids across schools, and don’t take into account the other programs that don’t have to be in any particular place.

And why did APS fill up Jamestown with these other programs instead of closing it, but now wants to close Nott? Nott isn’t that underenrolled. APS could move some of the programs out of the overcrowded schools and get it right back up to 100.

But look at how fast a Nottingham parent is to point to Jamestown or some other elementary school as an alternative chopping block head to get them out of their problem. They do this every cycle, did it with McKinley a few times and Taylor or Tuckahoe when they didn’t want to take in excess kids and pointed them towards other schools instead. You guys are the worst.

They don't want more buses that come from being used as swing space; yet it's fine to to add buses to move the programs out of crowded schools from other parts of the county. NES folks need to come up with an agreed argument and stick to it.

You don't see the difference between adding 1-2 programs to a mostly walking school vs switching a 90% walking school to a 100% driving school?

As swing space, the 100% driving school would be mainly buses and probably not much more individual cars for pick-ups and such as you have as a neighborhood program. And probably a lot less independent drivers on those rainy or cold days when all those walkers don't actually walk. So, differences; but overall, not a tremendous increase in danger, no. As an option program, there would still be those same buses and maybe more drivers depending on the program and where most of the students come from.

Nevertheless, the other issue is the constant - or frequent - relocation of those programs. Instructional consistency is needed for special programs, too; and it isn't right to keep moving those around like second-class citizens. Sure, parents may only be involved in a preK program for a year or so; but the teachers also have to move with the program, schools have to re-arrange to accommodate, admin has to adapt, etc. personally, I think every single elementary school should have pre-K classrooms and all Montessori preK should be with Montessori (if we have to keep Montessori).

And you base this conclusion that it would be mainly buses on what? I completely disagree. With longer bus rides, more parents would likely drive and there would be a lot more individual cars in the neighborhood.

trust me, Nottingham is not convenient enough for most parents to drive their kids to and from school every day. The bus will be far more convenient.

Not for before care or extended day. Also, where are you going to park 12 busses? The school isn’t designed for this.

12 busses? Even the option schools don't have that many

How do you know how many busses it’ll be? APS can’t even identify what schools would be using Nottingham before closing it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First they overcrowded Glebe
And I did not speak out
Because I didn't have kids there and so eff that.
Then they repurposed McKinley
And I did not speak out
and in fact was a little grateful over it because better them than us.
Then they came for Nottingham
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
and in fact for some reason people don't seem to like me that much and they're starting to get on my nerves

When you behave like this for years and eff over other schools in the community to put your own schools’ needs as primary, you can’t reasonably claim that other parents are going to miss your upper middle class values and time and effort put into APS. Lots of other parents volunteer at APS without screwing everyone else over.

Uh, the attacks on Nottingham families/parents and karma arguments aren’t persuasive. I’m not in Nottingham but the idea that we should screw over a while school community because you didn’t like some former PTa mom is … stupid? And it makes you sound like a petty little person.

They are getting assigned to demographically identical schools in a nearby location. They are def not getting a raw deal if this passes! Goodness.

Non sequiter?

Nope- PP said the Nottingham community was getting “screwed over.” They aren’t! They will get assigned to wonderful nearby school communities.

So just because the Nottingham kids will end up at another good school means parents shouldn’t fight to keep their current school open?

Are you serious? Yes, that’s exactly what it means.

A school is more than just academics and metrics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems obvious that Nottingham should be shut down. Less than 400 kids? Give me a break. Unless there us another school with even fewer kids it just makes sense.

Fewer than 400 kids !!! I remember when the community was up in arms about leaving drew so underenrolled after MPSA left. Drew is now larger than Nottingham.

But the housing policies that filled up Drew don’t apply to Nottingham. Unless the community is asking the county to build a CAF up in that neighborhood to fill up the school. One building would do it.

I remember a few years ago Jamestown was so under enrolled that they had to fill it with pre school and sped programs. Is that still the case? Maybe Nott isn’t really the lowest enrollment if you compare the number of neighborhood kids across schools, and don’t take into account the other programs that don’t have to be in any particular place.

And why did APS fill up Jamestown with these other programs instead of closing it, but now wants to close Nott? Nott isn’t that underenrolled. APS could move some of the programs out of the overcrowded schools and get it right back up to 100.

But look at how fast a Nottingham parent is to point to Jamestown or some other elementary school as an alternative chopping block head to get them out of their problem. They do this every cycle, did it with McKinley a few times and Taylor or Tuckahoe when they didn’t want to take in excess kids and pointed them towards other schools instead. You guys are the worst.

They don't want more buses that come from being used as swing space; yet it's fine to to add buses to move the programs out of crowded schools from other parts of the county. NES folks need to come up with an agreed argument and stick to it.

You don't see the difference between adding 1-2 programs to a mostly walking school vs switching a 90% walking school to a 100% driving school?

As swing space, the 100% driving school would be mainly buses and probably not much more individual cars for pick-ups and such as you have as a neighborhood program. And probably a lot less independent drivers on those rainy or cold days when all those walkers don't actually walk. So, differences; but overall, not a tremendous increase in danger, no. As an option program, there would still be those same buses and maybe more drivers depending on the program and where most of the students come from.

Nevertheless, the other issue is the constant - or frequent - relocation of those programs. Instructional consistency is needed for special programs, too; and it isn't right to keep moving those around like second-class citizens. Sure, parents may only be involved in a preK program for a year or so; but the teachers also have to move with the program, schools have to re-arrange to accommodate, admin has to adapt, etc. personally, I think every single elementary school should have pre-K classrooms and all Montessori preK should be with Montessori (if we have to keep Montessori).

And you base this conclusion that it would be mainly buses on what? I completely disagree. With longer bus rides, more parents would likely drive and there would be a lot more individual cars in the neighborhood.

trust me, Nottingham is not convenient enough for most parents to drive their kids to and from school every day. The bus will be far more convenient.

Not for before care or extended day. Also, where are you going to park 12 busses? The school isn’t designed for this.

I wouldn't be surprised if APS provides a later bus from extended day back to the home school.
600 kids. Minimum 60 kids per bus. That's no more than 10 total buses. And you're forgetting the hundreds that won't be riding the bus because their parents will prefer to drive all the way to NES and back twice a day so their kids don't have to be on the bus for 30 minutes. So, far less than 10 buses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First they overcrowded Glebe
And I did not speak out
Because I didn't have kids there and so eff that.
Then they repurposed McKinley
And I did not speak out
and in fact was a little grateful over it because better them than us.
Then they came for Nottingham
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
and in fact for some reason people don't seem to like me that much and they're starting to get on my nerves

When you behave like this for years and eff over other schools in the community to put your own schools’ needs as primary, you can’t reasonably claim that other parents are going to miss your upper middle class values and time and effort put into APS. Lots of other parents volunteer at APS without screwing everyone else over.

Uh, the attacks on Nottingham families/parents and karma arguments aren’t persuasive. I’m not in Nottingham but the idea that we should screw over a while school community because you didn’t like some former PTa mom is … stupid? And it makes you sound like a petty little person.

They are getting assigned to demographically identical schools in a nearby location. They are def not getting a raw deal if this passes! Goodness.

Non sequiter?

Nope- PP said the Nottingham community was getting “screwed over.” They aren’t! They will get assigned to wonderful nearby school communities.

So just because the Nottingham kids will end up at another good school means parents shouldn’t fight to keep their current school open?

Yes? I mean, if you have to ask. They will likely be moved with a number of their friends, and many of the staff will be moved as well. It’s not like they’re sending your kids far away, or to an inferior school. So maybe just don’t go nuclear? Ask questions, raise concerns, sure. But don’t act as if this is the worst thing to ever happen, or claim that it will destroy your community, or other hyperbole. It’s just tone deaf, and won’t be effective at accomplishing much other than angering and alienating other members of the Arlington community.

[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:It seems obvious that Nottingham should be shut down. Less than 400 kids? Give me a break. Unless there us another school with even fewer kids it just makes sense.

Fewer than 400 kids !!! I remember when the community was up in arms about leaving drew so underenrolled after MPSA left. Drew is now larger than Nottingham.

But the housing policies that filled up Drew don’t apply to Nottingham. Unless the community is asking the county to build a CAF up in that neighborhood to fill up the school. One building would do it.

I remember a few years ago Jamestown was so under enrolled that they had to fill it with pre school and sped programs. Is that still the case? Maybe Nott isn’t really the lowest enrollment if you compare the number of neighborhood kids across schools, and don’t take into account the other programs that don’t have to be in any particular place.

And why did APS fill up Jamestown with these other programs instead of closing it, but now wants to close Nott? Nott isn’t that underenrolled. APS could move some of the programs out of the overcrowded schools and get it right back up to 100.

But look at how fast a Nottingham parent is to point to Jamestown or some other elementary school as an alternative chopping block head to get them out of their problem. They do this every cycle, did it with McKinley a few times and Taylor or Tuckahoe when they didn’t want to take in excess kids and pointed them towards other schools instead. You guys are the worst.

They don't want more buses that come from being used as swing space; yet it's fine to to add buses to move the programs out of crowded schools from other parts of the county. NES folks need to come up with an agreed argument and stick to it.

You don't see the difference between adding 1-2 programs to a mostly walking school vs switching a 90% walking school to a 100% driving school?

As swing space, the 100% driving school would be mainly buses and probably not much more individual cars for pick-ups and such as you have as a neighborhood program. And probably a lot less independent drivers on those rainy or cold days when all those walkers don't actually walk. So, differences; but overall, not a tremendous increase in danger, no. As an option program, there would still be those same buses and maybe more drivers depending on the program and where most of the students come from.

Nevertheless, the other issue is the constant - or frequent - relocation of those programs. Instructional consistency is needed for special programs, too; and it isn't right to keep moving those around like second-class citizens. Sure, parents may only be involved in a preK program for a year or so; but the teachers also have to move with the program, schools have to re-arrange to accommodate, admin has to adapt, etc. personally, I think every single elementary school should have pre-K classrooms and all Montessori preK should be with Montessori (if we have to keep Montessori).

And you base this conclusion that it would be mainly buses on what? I completely disagree. With longer bus rides, more parents would likely drive and there would be a lot more individual cars in the neighborhood.

trust me, Nottingham is not convenient enough for most parents to drive their kids to and from school every day. The bus will be far more convenient.

Not for before care or extended day. Also, where are you going to park 12 busses? The school isn’t designed for this.

12 busses? Even the option schools don't have that many

How do you know how many busses it’ll be? APS can’t even identify what schools would be using Nottingham before closing it!

Doesn't matter. They aren't sending any school with 600 kids. NES capacity is around 500? 60-80 kids per bus. Plan for the maximum -- and it won't be 12 buses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't the main problem with dwindling numbers at Nottingham due to many Nottingham families going private? I think it was just under capacity before covid about 4 years ago. It's shrunk to under 400 kids because so many took their kids out for private, I thought? Not sure if I can find the 2017 numbers.

Here: In 2017, APS was projecting that Nottingham would have 535 kids attending in 2018, which for Nottingham is about 100% capacity (I think without trailers their capacity is 530). So in just 5 years they've lost more than 140 kids and their school now has under 400 kids. You're seeing that shrinkage more in the way way North where parents wend private due to school closures and less in the south where minority families who were actually more likely to be negatively affected by covid healthwise were often okay with the closures. But you can't have your cake and eat it too -- have kids leave the system in your northern elementary schools and think that's "fair" -- the reality is you're spending more on your school to staff and operate it when you've only got 400 kids compared to a school that's closer to full capacity.

I have to respond to this point. Many were not ok with the closures, especially the ones that continued to work outside the home in public facing jobs and wanted their kids to get an education or at least be supervised for 6-7 hours a day. They just didn’t have the resources to flee to private school.

No, sorry. Lower income families and many of the “brown” families you all pretended to care so much about chose virtual at a higher rate than privileged white people whose SAHM-ing or sitting-on-their-behind-in-yoga-pants “working” at home white moms was being cramped by their noisy kids being at home wanting attention and endless snacks.

I didn’t realize it at the time but turns out that APE was 100% right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First they overcrowded Glebe
And I did not speak out
Because I didn't have kids there and so eff that.
Then they repurposed McKinley
And I did not speak out
and in fact was a little grateful over it because better them than us.
Then they came for Nottingham
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
and in fact for some reason people don't seem to like me that much and they're starting to get on my nerves

When you behave like this for years and eff over other schools in the community to put your own schools’ needs as primary, you can’t reasonably claim that other parents are going to miss your upper middle class values and time and effort put into APS. Lots of other parents volunteer at APS without screwing everyone else over.

Uh, the attacks on Nottingham families/parents and karma arguments aren’t persuasive. I’m not in Nottingham but the idea that we should screw over a while school community because you didn’t like some former PTa mom is … stupid? And it makes you sound like a petty little person.

They are getting assigned to demographically identical schools in a nearby location. They are def not getting a raw deal if this passes! Goodness.

Non sequiter?

Nope- PP said the Nottingham community was getting “screwed over.” They aren’t! They will get assigned to wonderful nearby school communities.

So just because the Nottingham kids will end up at another good school means parents shouldn’t fight to keep their current school open?

Are you serious? Yes, that’s exactly what it means.

A school is more than just academics and metrics.

Great, I’ll get my tissues out for the public comment period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why isn't the Madison Community Center on the list for a swing space?

Used to be a school.

Because the County owns it and doesn’t share. It’s not going to happen.