Reply to APS Elementary Planning Mtg at Swanson - Option 1 in, Option 2 out, McKinley Moms out of contro

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "APS Elementary Planning Mtg at Swanson - Option 1 in, Option 2 out, McKinley Moms out of contro"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]If what the PP said is true, Save McKinley needs to distance itself from the McKrazies who obviously only care about themselves and are willing to make sure everyone else suffers because of their own entitlement.  However, the queen of screamers was wearing a SaveMcK shirt on tv, so.........[/quote]

The #SaveMcKinley crew is a self-created group of parents who got pissed at the McKinley PTA for not being aggressive enough to advocate for their family's interests. Emilie Heller-- aka McKrazy-- has yelled at our PTA leadership the same way she has yelled at APS staff. She yelled at our PTA president for being "too nice" during two of the recent PTA meetings. (And yes, I mean yelled.) Note, our PTA president is a 5th grade parent who got stuck in this role for a 2nd year in a row because no other parents volunteered to take over for her last year. Emilie should be thanking her, but instead she just throws insults. Most of the more vocal #SaveMcKinley crew are parents who never show up for PTA meetings and never volunteer. I don't think closing McKinley is the right decision because we can't open Reed with 830 students (see Proposal #1) but I am so horrified at the way some of these parents are acting.[/quote]

Where is this 830 number coming from?  From what I can see, proposal #1 puts an estimated 702 at Reed (and that's without boundary refinements).

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Analsysis-of-Students-Moving-rev_2019_Nov_16.pdf[/quote]

That's the old version. APS updated it after some errors were pointed out in the Nov. 16 analysis. You need to download the "Analysis of Walkers and Bus Eligible Students by Proposal" spreadsheet that was released on November 27. You can find that spreadsheet here. https://www.apsva.us/engage/planning-for-2020-elementary-school-boundary-process/

I am not making up the 830 number for Reed. Its on the spreadsheet-- Tab 2, Cell X32. 				
[/quote]

And they've already said they would make refinements in the boundary process to address this, so I'm not seeing the issue.  Ashlawn, Tuckahoe, Nottingham and Glebe are all projected to be well under capacity, there's plenty of space to reassign units to those schools to balance capacity.[/quote]

I have no idea where my kids will end up and I'm sure they'll be fine anywhere.  The problem is APS is selling this as "The majority of McK goes to Reed!  Everyone moves together!"  And while that may be technically accurate, because they may send 395 of the kids making it exactly half, that's not at all how they're presenting this.  And if they really intend to split the student population into 5 different schools to balance enrollment all around, they should just say that.  None of the presentations that I've seen show that.

[/quote]

Proposal 1 assumed that most would go to Reed, a good portion going to Ashlawn, and then one PU goes to Glebe. But that's not binding - it's just an assumption they made for this higher-level planning. The details will get worked out in the boundary process. 
[/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