Reply to The demise of McKinley ES (APS)

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "The demise of McKinley ES (APS)"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Nottingham parents on here keep saying the 2018 facility study was faulty, but APS has never retracted it. And whatever faults were found have never been made public. [/quote]

The faults absolutely were made public. That you weren’t paying attention doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.[/quote]

NP here - I only moved to Arlington recently, and I'm trying to figure out more about what happened in the past to understand the current fights. Can someone please explain the issues in the 2018 report? 
[/quote]
If you weren’t here for the 2018 process, it’s not worth rehashing because it’s irrelevant now.[/quote]

Except for the fact that everyone keeps bringing up past mistakes by the county/SB. I am not a McKinley parent, but I keep hearing from various sources that Nottingham mobilized and hurt other schools during the last zoning go round. It would be helpful to know if there's truth to that. 
[/quote]
That is incorrect. Nottingham was suggested as an option school site in the last process. Some Nottingham people got involved and pointed out that 1) the staff’s conclusion was based in part on a typographical error that indicated Nottingham met one of the criteria the staff otherwise stated it didn’t (the staff corrected this error), 2) the staff misapplied another criteria in trying to create an exception just for Nottingham that otherwise was irrelevant to the criteria, solely to justify making Nottingham an option school when it otherwise didn’t qualify (the staff ignored this), and 3) one of the criteria was counter productive to the stated purpose of managing population growth (the SB agreed and had the staff remove that criteria from the analysis for all schools). Even with #2 remaining in place, the staff’s own analysis didn’t support making Nottingham an option school, which was the basis for Nottingham’s further objection.  Nottingham never threw other schools under the bus and certainly didn’t hurt other schools, they simply pointed out that the staff’s conclusion was inconsistent with their stated reasoning and data and asked them to either fix their analysis or provide the real basis for the decision.

It later came out that the staff had decided on Nottingham at the beginning before analyzing the data and then tried to create a framework and data to justify it, which they screwed up (hence the issues noted above).  This called into question the integrity of the entire process, which may have contributed to the SB suspending the process at that time.[/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