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]APS has absolutely explained what has changed between the 2018 location review, and now.  The criteria have changed.  SOme of the criteria are the same- e.g. walking- but the rest are basically different.  
These are the current criteria-
Q: How did staff create these proposals?

A: After sharing the challenges facing the 2020 Boundary Change Process with instructional leaders and central office departments, staff created proposals that focused on:

Keeping as many students together in each school community as possible
Walking to neighborhood schools as much as possible
Addressing the need for neighborhood seats in Rosslyn-Ballston corridor
Using schools to maximum capacity and find efficiencies and keep resources in the classroom
Increasing access to options by utilizing a larger building or moving to a more central site
https://www.apsva.us/engage/planning-for-2020-elementary-school-boundary-process/faqs-elementary-school-planning-for-2021-boundary/

the first one- keeping students together- appears to me to be the reason why staff moved from optioning Nottingham to optioning McKinley.

i took this from the FAQ's- but it has basically been in every single lead off to every presentation about this topic so its not like its been buried.[/quote]

Clearly, the priorities are causing problems with making boundaries that balance enrollment and maximixe use of each of our buildings.  The priorities need to change.  [/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