Swim class in VA schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Learning to swim is extremely important. It's also a healthy activity. What a strange thing to complain about!

I think the complaint is that the budget is now cutting things that impact core education. Swim is just a nice to have and is limited at best, as no kid is learning to swim in these sessions. It's a lot of disruption for little benefit.

+1 Exactly! The people who are lobbying to keep it probably have kids who swim so have a vested interest in the 3 million APS pays to maintain pools for their family's benefit. Why should the rest of us subsidize that?

News flash tons of people use the public pools for swim lessons when their kids are at that age and lots of older people swim laps.

You can say this about anything in the community. My kids no longer use playgrounds. I don't want to subsidize that. Senior centers? I don't use them. Get rid of it. What about all those social services for poor people? Not our problem right?

No, you are not understanding the point at all. All of these are good services for people in the community. But they should be managed and paid for by the county not by APS.

You can't really be serious that APS should manage playground, senior center, social services?

The point is there is not some bright line and APS and the County are BOTH funded by all of us for the community. Pools are embedded in APS facilities and should be managed by APS just like it makes sense for school nurses to be managed out of county public health. It’s all the same larger pot of money and people should want their government to do what makes sense and provides the best outcome.

My understanding is that every non-school user pays a fee to APS to help cover the cost of the aquatics centers. It's not like APS is letting the community use the pools for free.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Learning to swim is extremely important. It's also a healthy activity. What a strange thing to complain about!

I think the complaint is that the budget is now cutting things that impact core education. Swim is just a nice to have and is limited at best, as no kid is learning to swim in these sessions. It's a lot of disruption for little benefit.

+1 Exactly! The people who are lobbying to keep it probably have kids who swim so have a vested interest in the 3 million APS pays to maintain pools for their family's benefit. Why should the rest of us subsidize that?

News flash tons of people use the public pools for swim lessons when their kids are at that age and lots of older people swim laps.

You can say this about anything in the community. My kids no longer use playgrounds. I don't want to subsidize that. Senior centers? I don't use them. Get rid of it. What about all those social services for poor people? Not our problem right?

No, you are not understanding the point at all. All of these are good services for people in the community. But they should be managed and paid for by the county not by APS.

You can't really be serious that APS should manage playground, senior center, social services?

The point is there is not some bright line and APS and the County are BOTH funded by all of us for the community. Pools are embedded in APS facilities and should be managed by APS just like it makes sense for school nurses to be managed out of county public health. It’s all the same larger pot of money and people should want their government to do what makes sense and provides the best outcome.

It's not the same pot of money though, do some research on how this works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Learning to swim is extremely important. It's also a healthy activity. What a strange thing to complain about!

I think the complaint is that the budget is now cutting things that impact core education. Swim is just a nice to have and is limited at best, as no kid is learning to swim in these sessions. It's a lot of disruption for little benefit.

+1 Exactly! The people who are lobbying to keep it probably have kids who swim so have a vested interest in the 3 million APS pays to maintain pools for their family's benefit. Why should the rest of us subsidize that?

News flash tons of people use the public pools for swim lessons when their kids are at that age and lots of older people swim laps.

You can say this about anything in the community. My kids no longer use playgrounds. I don't want to subsidize that. Senior centers? I don't use them. Get rid of it. What about all those social services for poor people? Not our problem right?

No, you are not understanding the point at all. All of these are good services for people in the community. But they should be managed and paid for by the county not by APS.

You can't really be serious that APS should manage playground, senior center, social services?

The point is there is not some bright line and APS and the County are BOTH funded by all of us for the community. Pools are embedded in APS facilities and should be managed by APS just like it makes sense for school nurses to be managed out of county public health. It’s all the same larger pot of money and people should want their government to do what makes sense and provides the best outcome.

It's not the same pot of money though, do some research on how this works.

I know exactly how it works. The county board holds the taxing authority and most (not all) of what funds local government comes from a variety of property and other taxes. The County Board then gives a portion of the revenue to the School Board via a revenue sharing agreement. Like I said, both entities (County and APS) are funded by the entire community through our tax base.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Learning to swim is extremely important. It's also a healthy activity. What a strange thing to complain about!

I think the complaint is that the budget is now cutting things that impact core education. Swim is just a nice to have and is limited at best, as no kid is learning to swim in these sessions. It's a lot of disruption for little benefit.

+1 Exactly! The people who are lobbying to keep it probably have kids who swim so have a vested interest in the 3 million APS pays to maintain pools for their family's benefit. Why should the rest of us subsidize that?

News flash tons of people use the public pools for swim lessons when their kids are at that age and lots of older people swim laps.

You can say this about anything in the community. My kids no longer use playgrounds. I don't want to subsidize that. Senior centers? I don't use them. Get rid of it. What about all those social services for poor people? Not our problem right?

No, you are not understanding the point at all. All of these are good services for people in the community. But they should be managed and paid for by the county not by APS.

You can't really be serious that APS should manage playground, senior center, social services?

The point is there is not some bright line and APS and the County are BOTH funded by all of us for the community. Pools are embedded in APS facilities and should be managed by APS just like it makes sense for school nurses to be managed out of county public health. It’s all the same larger pot of money and people should want their government to do what makes sense and provides the best outcome.

It's not the same pot of money though, do some research on how this works.

I know exactly how it works. The county board holds the taxing authority and most (not all) of what funds local government comes from a variety of property and other taxes. The County Board then gives a portion of the revenue to the School Board via a revenue sharing agreement. Like I said, both entities (County and APS) are funded by the entire community through our tax base.

Right, so the money in APS budge is separate, it's also a limited amount of money. It just doesn't flow easily from the County to APS. It's a big deal to get the county to cough up more. It's not just one pot. I don't think APS should have to use its share to manage and run pools for the greater non-school community. Let the county do that with its money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Learning to swim is extremely important. It's also a healthy activity. What a strange thing to complain about!

I think the complaint is that the budget is now cutting things that impact core education. Swim is just a nice to have and is limited at best, as no kid is learning to swim in these sessions. It's a lot of disruption for little benefit.

+1 Exactly! The people who are lobbying to keep it probably have kids who swim so have a vested interest in the 3 million APS pays to maintain pools for their family's benefit. Why should the rest of us subsidize that?

News flash tons of people use the public pools for swim lessons when their kids are at that age and lots of older people swim laps.

You can say this about anything in the community. My kids no longer use playgrounds. I don't want to subsidize that. Senior centers? I don't use them. Get rid of it. What about all those social services for poor people? Not our problem right?

No, you are not understanding the point at all. All of these are good services for people in the community. But they should be managed and paid for by the county not by APS.

You can't really be serious that APS should manage playground, senior center, social services?

The point is there is not some bright line and APS and the County are BOTH funded by all of us for the community. Pools are embedded in APS facilities and should be managed by APS just like it makes sense for school nurses to be managed out of county public health. It’s all the same larger pot of money and people should want their government to do what makes sense and provides the best outcome.

It's not the same pot of money though, do some research on how this works.

I know exactly how it works. The county board holds the taxing authority and most (not all) of what funds local government comes from a variety of property and other taxes. The County Board then gives a portion of the revenue to the School Board via a revenue sharing agreement. Like I said, both entities (County and APS) are funded by the entire community through our tax base.

Right, so the money in APS budge is separate, it's also a limited amount of money. It just doesn't flow easily from the County to APS. It's a big deal to get the county to cough up more. It's not just one pot. I don't think APS should have to use its share to manage and run pools for the greater non-school community. Let the county do that with its money.

Great then all the things the county does for APS can revert back to the APS budget.

Treating them like competing entities who should hoard resources and try to dump things back on the other one would not end well for APS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Learning to swim is extremely important. It's also a healthy activity. What a strange thing to complain about!

I think the complaint is that the budget is now cutting things that impact core education. Swim is just a nice to have and is limited at best, as no kid is learning to swim in these sessions. It's a lot of disruption for little benefit.

+1 Exactly! The people who are lobbying to keep it probably have kids who swim so have a vested interest in the 3 million APS pays to maintain pools for their family's benefit. Why should the rest of us subsidize that?

News flash tons of people use the public pools for swim lessons when their kids are at that age and lots of older people swim laps.

You can say this about anything in the community. My kids no longer use playgrounds. I don't want to subsidize that. Senior centers? I don't use them. Get rid of it. What about all those social services for poor people? Not our problem right?

No, you are not understanding the point at all. All of these are good services for people in the community. But they should be managed and paid for by the county not by APS.

You can't really be serious that APS should manage playground, senior center, social services?

The point is there is not some bright line and APS and the County are BOTH funded by all of us for the community. Pools are embedded in APS facilities and should be managed by APS just like it makes sense for school nurses to be managed out of county public health. It’s all the same larger pot of money and people should want their government to do what makes sense and provides the best outcome.

It's not the same pot of money though, do some research on how this works.

I know exactly how it works. The county board holds the taxing authority and most (not all) of what funds local government comes from a variety of property and other taxes. The County Board then gives a portion of the revenue to the School Board via a revenue sharing agreement. Like I said, both entities (County and APS) are funded by the entire community through our tax base.

Right, so the money in APS budge is separate, it's also a limited amount of money. It just doesn't flow easily from the County to APS. It's a big deal to get the county to cough up more. It's not just one pot. I don't think APS should have to use its share to manage and run pools for the greater non-school community. Let the county do that with its money.

Great then all the things the county does for APS can revert back to the APS budget.

Treating them like competing entities who should hoard resources and try to dump things back on the other one would not end well for APS.

Weird how against this you are. Maybe you work for the county. It's not about hoarding resources. They have two separate budgets, it's about who should pay. They County doesn't want to give more to APS so let the county pay for it's own stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's such a waste of instructional time. They should cut it, and it would save a lot of money too.

A family friend lost a college-bound 18 yo to a drowning accident. It was really, really traumatic, because the family had enough money to afford lessons, but chose not to. All kids need to learn how to swim. If parents aren’t doing it, then it’s appropriate for the school to step in. Dead kids don’t go to college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's such a waste of instructional time. They should cut it, and it would save a lot of money too.

A family friend lost a college-bound 18 yo to a drowning accident. It was really, really traumatic, because the family had enough money to afford lessons, but chose not to. All kids need to learn how to swim. If parents aren’t doing it, then it’s appropriate for the school to step in. Dead kids don’t go to college.

That is awful, but for the zillionth time the APS swim program does not teach the kids how to swim. There isn't enough time to do that. I went and volunteered with one of my kids. All they did was let the kids play in the water for the entire time. Zero benefit to anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's such a waste of instructional time. They should cut it, and it would save a lot of money too.

A family friend lost a college-bound 18 yo to a drowning accident. It was really, really traumatic, because the family had enough money to afford lessons, but chose not to. All kids need to learn how to swim. If parents aren’t doing it, then it’s appropriate for the school to step in. Dead kids don’t go to college.

That is awful, but for the zillionth time the APS swim program does not teach the kids how to swim. There isn't enough time to do that. I went and volunteered with one of my kids. All they did was let the kids play in the water for the entire time. Zero benefit to anyone.

That’s awful. My kids aren’t affected, but I’m user on behalf of families who areof.

[Anonymous]

My third grader did the swim unit this week. She's had some lessons off and on but we paused because she was too scared to be where she couldn't stand. The positive peer pressure was great for her this week. She proudly told us about the time she spent in deep water (they worked up to it with flippers and kickboards), and she used the diving board for the first time. She also learned the four strokes. So no they didn't just play the whole time, and this gives us momentum to build on for helping her enjoy swimming safely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My third grader did the swim unit this week. She's had some lessons off and on but we paused because she was too scared to be where she couldn't stand. The positive peer pressure was great for her this week. She proudly told us about the time she spent in deep water (they worked up to it with flippers and kickboards), and she used the diving board for the first time. She also learned the four strokes. So no they didn't just play the whole time, and this gives us momentum to build on for helping her enjoy swimming safely.

That’s great. When my kids did it, they also learned stuff and definitely didn’t just play in the water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My third grader did the swim unit this week. She's had some lessons off and on but we paused because she was too scared to be where she couldn't stand. The positive peer pressure was great for her this week. She proudly told us about the time she spent in deep water (they worked up to it with flippers and kickboards), and she used the diving board for the first time. She also learned the four strokes. So no they didn't just play the whole time, and this gives us momentum to build on for helping her enjoy swimming safely.

Lol. You're saying they taught butterfly to 3rd graders who can't already confidently swim as part of this? I don't believe it and really not a good use of resources.