Reply to Overcrowding at Arlington Traditional School

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "Overcrowding at Arlington Traditional School"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]ATS is crying about five kindergartens. BOO HOO. Other schools have had seven.

It's about time the choice schools share in this overcrowding pain. Either utilize the choice schools as fully as all the neighborhood schools, or disband them altogether. The entitlement is astonishing. [/quote]

So, not an ATS parent but I wonder what happens when we catch up at the neighborhood schools. After Reed is built, there won't be any schools in NW Arlington over capacity, supposedly they will even have to close one neighborhood school and move an option program into its building. Does ATS get to scale back at that point? Or is it forced to keep growing when neighborhood schools are no longer in such dire straights? [b]I don't really think parents at ATS would be freaking out so much if it were clear that this was a temporary situation that would mirror whatever is happening across the system. [/b]If increased enrollment is permanent, at ATS or Campbell, or at any neighborhood school, then I think they need to be renovating to enlarge the schools and the common spaces.

Also, what of HB? Why are we talking about that? I know they can't have trailers because of their location in Rosslyn, but how else can they do their share? Are they having that discussion yet? [/quote]

The bolded part is exactly right.  A lot of ATS parents are worried, because in two years, according to APS, all overcrowding in the elementary schools will be over, [b]and APS doesn’t even know, if they can fill all the seats, perhaps closing down an entire school?! [/b] But ATS shall sit there with 16 (!) trailers, if they make a decision right now to add 6 classes to ATS and take it over to 700 students?  It will stay that way for 6 years.

So while all trailers are gone from all the other schools (fingers crossed!), you  want ATS to sit there with 16 trailers?
Really? Right now, the record of any elementary is 10 trailers!  You can hate ATS as much as you want, but that is just purely malicious. 
And has nothing to do anymore with sharing the burden.

The other choice programs loose kids through moves, etc. and those seats do NOT refill. Their upper grades are always at least an entire class smaller.  ATS is different in that all its classes are filled to capacity all the way through, and 5K classes now are 5th grade classes years later. The common areas can’t hold that many kids for their mandatory assemblies and theater and orchestra and all that’s part of the program. [/quote]

No one is talking about closing down a school. They are talking about relocating an option program so that the neighborhood seats are in a different location. The seats will all be full, there will just potentially be a neighborhood school in the east (Key?) and option program in the west (at Tuckahoe?) instead of how it is now. [/quote]

Not only is no one talking about closing down a school, but no one is talking about 16 trailers at APS (they have 4 now, and Facilities Optimization says they can only accommodate a maximum of 12 on the site). Further, there is no expectation that the trailers will be gone from all of the other elementary schools after Reed opens because, given the projected school-age population growth, APS as a whole will still be over capacity at the elementary level at that point. [b]Some schools may no longer have trailers, but others will.[/quote][/b]

But will they have 12? Supposedly, there is another ES in the pipeline after Reed, so as long as they don't totally mess up this boundary re-do, there should be a reduction in trailers at the most crowded schools in the near term, and another school opening as the school age population keeps coming and other schools begin facing new capacity problems.

I'm not saying the ATS parents are being totally reasonable, but I also don't think it's fair to force them to keep growing and adding trailers as other nearby schools are contracting. It sounds like that's what some posters on here are advocating: make them suffer.

Should they grow? Sure. Should it include trailers? Yes, if need be. But unless the program is getting a larger permanent space, either through a move or an addition, a field covered by trailers shouldn't be permanent. Same for ALL schools, whether they are neighborhood or option schools.

The programs that aren't going to be moved/get additions and are at or over capacity now, what of them? Do they have to grow to meet all demand, or is there some sort of reasonable cap? Presumably, you can help neighborhood schools facing a capacity crisis with open transfers or equitable boundary readjustments, which hasn't always happened. But there isn't a mechanism for option schools other than capping enrollment. I think it would be helpful if staff made clear the option program enrollments will continue to have some sort of reasonable cap, tied to the size of the permanent structure that houses each program. Otherwise, we're giving the option schools the McKinley treatment. And I think that should be avoided at both neighborhood and option schools.
[/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