Reply to APS - Elementary school -who is opting for virtual in 2021/22

Forum Index » VA Public Schools other than FCPS

Reply to "APS - Elementary school -who is opting for virtual in 2021/22"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]VL has lost it, now she says she's looking for a vaccine trial for her child. Now? This is what pushed her to do that?[/quote]
I think she needs help. So does EHN and a few other frequent posters. [/quote]

EHN doesn't even really know what she's fighting for anymore. She just wants to win.[/quote]

Is there really a point to MT running anymore? There aren't going to be more days this school year. It's almost May FFS. APE is getting what they want for the fall. What else she got? [/quote]

I’ll vote for her just because I remember how Kadera handled the school moves. I suspect I’m not the only one.[/quote]

What happened?[/quote]

DP. Kadera, in her capacity as McKinley PTA president, tried to throw a number of other schools under the bus when APS set its sights on McKinley as an option site.  In doing so, she also argued that roads like Lee Highway are some kind of uncrossable barrier to school zones, which is problematic since that mindset has fed into  the continuing geographic (and thus racial/FARMS) segregation in Arlington schools.[/quote]

I don’t think this is exactly true, otherwise the NES ride or die couple wouldn’t be willing to overlook this, even to keep MT off the SB. I think she was bound, as the McKinley PTA Pres, to bring forward questions and concerns from members of the PTA community, McCrazy included. I think it was an appropriate question whether or not the analysis APS did of which school in the NW quadrant should become an option took into account walkability, etc. If the idea was that option schools should be on sites that don’t lend themselves to walking, which is what APS was saying, asking which of the schools in that quadrant is the least walkable wasn’t because she believes in segregation. It’s what APS was saying was a determining factor. Of course, what wound up being the real determining factor was that the Reed school and McKinley had the largest overlap of walk zones, and the students would primarily be coming from that school. It was easier and more palatable for APS to just move the administration and staff from McK to the new school since the majority of kids would be drawn from the old McK boundary.  [/quote]

DP.  I don't know who you are referring to as the "NES ride or die" couple, and I've had kids at Nottingham this whole time (but won't when the boundaries go into effect next year, so I had no personal stake in that boundary process).

The part I think pp was referring to isn't the focus on "walkability," it was her repeated insistence that putting an option school at McKinley rather than Nottingham or Tuckahoe would result in too many seats in the NW quadrant north of Lee Highway, as if students couldn't possibly be bused across Lee Highway to those schools (never mind that they already are and have been for years).  I doubt Mary Kadera was thinking about the implications of her arguments for broader school segregation issues, but her rhetoric was very consistent with it in a way that I found troubling.   [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics