APS: Think the "no move" campaign is going to work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a McK family outside of Reed walk zone but we are not filling out the "no move" petition. It stinks to lose our walkable neighborhood school but we don't see other good options to rebalance and gain enough seats.

But, McK is such a new school, it concerns us to hear ATS folks requesting renovations to retrofit the school... huh? Besides freshening up with a coat of paint, APS should just shut down any attempts to waste our taxpayer dollars needlessly. It's a larger school (playground is small, tough luck) so just deal with it!

Agreed. What does ATS need structurally customized to its program? Does it even need a fresh coat of paint? Give 'em a new sign and call it a day.

Is this request in writing somewhere/what specific “requests” are they making?

I'm at ATS and haven't heard anything about this. The only facility questions have been about whether there is a space for all-school assembly (e.g. the gym) and a place for the upper grades to play instruments. I can't think of anything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a McK family outside of Reed walk zone but we are not filling out the "no move" petition. It stinks to lose our walkable neighborhood school but we don't see other good options to rebalance and gain enough seats.

But, McK is such a new school, it concerns us to hear ATS folks requesting renovations to retrofit the school... huh? Besides freshening up with a coat of paint, APS should just shut down any attempts to waste our taxpayer dollars needlessly. It's a larger school (playground is small, tough luck) so just deal with it!

Agreed. What does ATS need structurally customized to its program? Does it even need a fresh coat of paint? Give 'em a new sign and call it a day.

Is this request in writing somewhere/what specific “requests” are they making?

I'm at ATS and haven't heard anything about this. The only facility questions have been about whether there is a space for all-school assembly (e.g. the gym) and a place for the upper grades to play instruments. I can't think of anything else.

Yes and Yes. The McK school holds all-school assemblies in the gym and it has a bigger population than ATS. There is also an instrumental music room separate from the music rooms and plenty of space on the stage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a McK family outside of Reed walk zone but we are not filling out the "no move" petition. It stinks to lose our walkable neighborhood school but we don't see other good options to rebalance and gain enough seats.

But, McK is such a new school, it concerns us to hear ATS folks requesting renovations to retrofit the school... huh? Besides freshening up with a coat of paint, APS should just shut down any attempts to waste our taxpayer dollars needlessly. It's a larger school (playground is small, tough luck) so just deal with it!

Agreed. What does ATS need structurally customized to its program? Does it even need a fresh coat of paint? Give 'em a new sign and call it a day.

Is this request in writing somewhere/what specific “requests” are they making?

I'm at ATS and haven't heard anything about this. The only facility questions have been about whether there is a space for all-school assembly (e.g. the gym) and a place for the upper grades to play instruments. I can't think of anything else.

Yes and Yes. The McK school holds all-school assemblies in the gym and it has a bigger population than ATS. There is also an instrumental music room separate from the music rooms and plenty of space on the stage.

Not an ATS parent, but I took the tour last year. We learned about how the hallway walls are gray to soothe the students and how the tiles were specially chosen. Maybe that's what they're asking for?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a McK family outside of Reed walk zone but we are not filling out the "no move" petition. It stinks to lose our walkable neighborhood school but we don't see other good options to rebalance and gain enough seats.

But, McK is such a new school, it concerns us to hear ATS folks requesting renovations to retrofit the school... huh? Besides freshening up with a coat of paint, APS should just shut down any attempts to waste our taxpayer dollars needlessly. It's a larger school (playground is small, tough luck) so just deal with it!

Agreed. What does ATS need structurally customized to its program? Does it even need a fresh coat of paint? Give 'em a new sign and call it a day.

Is this request in writing somewhere/what specific “requests” are they making?

I'm at ATS and haven't heard anything about this. The only facility questions have been about whether there is a space for all-school assembly (e.g. the gym) and a place for the upper grades to play instruments. I can't think of anything else.

Yes and Yes. The McK school holds all-school assemblies in the gym and it has a bigger population than ATS. There is also an instrumental music room separate from the music rooms and plenty of space on the stage.

If so, too bad. They can have bright and cheery and new like all the other bright cheery new schools.

Not an ATS parent, but I took the tour last year. We learned about how the hallway walls are gray to soothe the students and how the tiles were specially chosen. Maybe that's what they're asking for?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a McK family outside of Reed walk zone but we are not filling out the "no move" petition. It stinks to lose our walkable neighborhood school but we don't see other good options to rebalance and gain enough seats.

But, McK is such a new school, it concerns us to hear ATS folks requesting renovations to retrofit the school... huh? Besides freshening up with a coat of paint, APS should just shut down any attempts to waste our taxpayer dollars needlessly. It's a larger school (playground is small, tough luck) so just deal with it!

Agreed. What does ATS need structurally customized to its program? Does it even need a fresh coat of paint? Give 'em a new sign and call it a day.

Is this request in writing somewhere/what specific “requests” are they making?

I'm at ATS and haven't heard anything about this. The only facility questions have been about whether there is a space for all-school assembly (e.g. the gym) and a place for the upper grades to play instruments. I can't think of anything else.

Yes and Yes. The McK school holds all-school assemblies in the gym and it has a bigger population than ATS. There is also an instrumental music room separate from the music rooms and plenty of space on the stage.

That sounds great. I've never heard the paint thing, I'm pretty sure they can handle bright colors.

[Anonymous]

Agree. I'm an ATS parent and haven't heard anything about renovation demands. Gray walls are interesting - never knew that. The classrooms are super colorful though, so not sure how big a focus this is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a McK family outside of Reed walk zone but we are not filling out the "no move" petition. It stinks to lose our walkable neighborhood school but we don't see other good options to rebalance and gain enough seats.

But, McK is such a new school, it concerns us to hear ATS folks requesting renovations to retrofit the school... huh? Besides freshening up with a coat of paint, APS should just shut down any attempts to waste our taxpayer dollars needlessly. It's a larger school (playground is small, tough luck) so just deal with it!

Agreed. What does ATS need structurally customized to its program? Does it even need a fresh coat of paint? Give 'em a new sign and call it a day.

Not fair at all to all APS ES's but the reality is that McK has one half-a$$ed playground and ATS has 5 play spaces. That's messed up! I understand that Fleet does not have adequate playspace and many S. ARL playgrounds suck. Not cool.

I'm a McK parent and don't think the playspace is safe. No matter what school or program is there, it needs to be bigger/ there needs to be another space.

Also APS needs to ensure that all Es's have adaquate play spaces.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree. I'm an ATS parent and haven't heard anything about renovation demands. Gray walls are interesting - never knew that. The classrooms are super colorful though, so not sure how big a focus this is.

I thought that the grey walls were because the physical plant was older. Maybe I zoned out on the part of the tour where grey calms kids.

[Anonymous]

Vegas odds on the move? Move on, move off, move on....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Vegas odds on the move? Move on, move off, move on....

Good question...we should have a better idea after the Jan. 24th Webinar. Will be interesting if the APS staff can keep a straight face when responding to the "Community Scenarios". Have you submitted your questions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a McK family outside of Reed walk zone but we are not filling out the "no move" petition. It stinks to lose our walkable neighborhood school but we don't see other good options to rebalance and gain enough seats.

But, McK is such a new school, it concerns us to hear ATS folks requesting renovations to retrofit the school... huh? Besides freshening up with a coat of paint, APS should just shut down any attempts to waste our taxpayer dollars needlessly. It's a larger school (playground is small, tough luck) so just deal with it!

Agreed. What does ATS need structurally customized to its program? Does it even need a fresh coat of paint? Give 'em a new sign and call it a day.

Not fair at all to all APS ES's but the reality is that McK has one half-a$$ed playground and ATS has 5 play spaces. That's messed up! I understand that Fleet does not have adequate playspace and many S. ARL playgrounds suck. Not cool.

I'm a McK parent and don't think the playspace is safe. No matter what school or program is there, it needs to be bigger/ there needs to be another space.

Also APS needs to ensure that all Es's have adaquate play spaces.

Maybe SA schools' playgrounds suck in comparison because NA PTAs buy playground equipment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a McK family outside of Reed walk zone but we are not filling out the "no move" petition. It stinks to lose our walkable neighborhood school but we don't see other good options to rebalance and gain enough seats.

But, McK is such a new school, it concerns us to hear ATS folks requesting renovations to retrofit the school... huh? Besides freshening up with a coat of paint, APS should just shut down any attempts to waste our taxpayer dollars needlessly. It's a larger school (playground is small, tough luck) so just deal with it!

Agreed. What does ATS need structurally customized to its program? Does it even need a fresh coat of paint? Give 'em a new sign and call it a day.

Not fair at all to all APS ES's but the reality is that McK has one half-a$$ed playground and ATS has 5 play spaces. That's messed up! I understand that Fleet does not have adequate playspace and many S. ARL playgrounds suck. Not cool.

I'm a McK parent and don't think the playspace is safe. No matter what school or program is there, it needs to be bigger/ there needs to be another space.

Also APS needs to ensure that all Es's have adaquate play spaces.

Maybe SA schools' playgrounds suck in comparison because NA PTAs buy playground equipment.

Do S. Arlington playgrounds suck? I have been to Claremont, Abingdon, Drew, and Barcroft and think they are good playgrounds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a McK family outside of Reed walk zone but we are not filling out the "no move" petition. It stinks to lose our walkable neighborhood school but we don't see other good options to rebalance and gain enough seats.

But, McK is such a new school, it concerns us to hear ATS folks requesting renovations to retrofit the school... huh? Besides freshening up with a coat of paint, APS should just shut down any attempts to waste our taxpayer dollars needlessly. It's a larger school (playground is small, tough luck) so just deal with it!

Agreed. What does ATS need structurally customized to its program? Does it even need a fresh coat of paint? Give 'em a new sign and call it a day.

Not fair at all to all APS ES's but the reality is that McK has one half-a$$ed playground and ATS has 5 play spaces. That's messed up! I understand that Fleet does not have adequate playspace and many S. ARL playgrounds suck. Not cool.

I'm a McK parent and don't think the playspace is safe. No matter what school or program is there, it needs to be bigger/ there needs to be another space.

Also APS needs to ensure that all Es's have adaquate play spaces.

Maybe SA schools' playgrounds suck in comparison because NA PTAs buy playground equipment.

That may be and is also a flixable problem. The problem with McK is nearly 800 children have about 1/4 of the playspace that ATS children have. McK needs another playspace. Sounds like Fleet does too. Due to sports, I've seen some S. Arl playgrounds that are great and some that are not so great but they are big and there is room for growth (of the playground).

I think our kids don't really need an IPad each but I do think they need to runaround outside.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a McK family outside of Reed walk zone but we are not filling out the "no move" petition. It stinks to lose our walkable neighborhood school but we don't see other good options to rebalance and gain enough seats.

But, McK is such a new school, it concerns us to hear ATS folks requesting renovations to retrofit the school... huh? Besides freshening up with a coat of paint, APS should just shut down any attempts to waste our taxpayer dollars needlessly. It's a larger school (playground is small, tough luck) so just deal with it!

Agreed. What does ATS need structurally customized to its program? Does it even need a fresh coat of paint? Give 'em a new sign and call it a day.

Not fair at all to all APS ES's but the reality is that McK has one half-a$$ed playground and ATS has 5 play spaces. That's messed up! I understand that Fleet does not have adequate playspace and many S. ARL playgrounds suck. Not cool.

I'm a McK parent and don't think the playspace is safe. No matter what school or program is there, it needs to be bigger/ there needs to be another space.

Also APS needs to ensure that all Es's have adaquate play spaces.

Maybe SA schools' playgrounds suck in comparison because NA PTAs buy playground equipment.

Do S. Arlington playgrounds suck? I have been to Claremont, Abingdon, Drew, and Barcroft and think they are good playgrounds.

I'm the PP with the NA PTA comment. I haven't seen all the playgrounds in SA; but the ones I've seen are fine. Though I can't say Fleet's playground looks very enticing, it is at least shiny and new - and apparently non-inclusive. I was just responding to the comment that many SA playgrounds suck, apparently as a NA parent sees it. So by comparison, I guess SA playgrounds don't meet expectations of those at schools with PTAs who can buy fixes for APS' deficiencies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a McK family outside of Reed walk zone but we are not filling out the "no move" petition. It stinks to lose our walkable neighborhood school but we don't see other good options to rebalance and gain enough seats.

But, McK is such a new school, it concerns us to hear ATS folks requesting renovations to retrofit the school... huh? Besides freshening up with a coat of paint, APS should just shut down any attempts to waste our taxpayer dollars needlessly. It's a larger school (playground is small, tough luck) so just deal with it!

Agreed. What does ATS need structurally customized to its program? Does it even need a fresh coat of paint? Give 'em a new sign and call it a day.

Not fair at all to all APS ES's but the reality is that McK has one half-a$$ed playground and ATS has 5 play spaces. That's messed up! I understand that Fleet does not have adequate playspace and many S. ARL playgrounds suck. Not cool.

I'm a McK parent and don't think the playspace is safe. No matter what school or program is there, it needs to be bigger/ there needs to be another space.

Also APS needs to ensure that all Es's have adaquate play spaces.

Maybe SA schools' playgrounds suck in comparison because NA PTAs buy playground equipment.

Do S. Arlington playgrounds suck? I have been to Claremont, Abingdon, Drew, and Barcroft and think they are good playgrounds.

Half of Claremont’s playground equipment is broken. It hasn’t been updated since 2003. There’s a county owned mini park next to the school that is newer that kids always use but technically it’s a county park not a school park.