Reply to APS: Fall 2022 Boundary Changes will be Limited due to low enrollment

Forum Index » VA Public Schools other than FCPS

Reply to "APS: Fall 2022 Boundary Changes will be Limited due to low enrollment "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I love all the...if people would just cooperate with boundary adjustments.

1.  Pay attention when they do boundary adjustments that do not directly impact you and speak up and say the things you are saying and advocate for bigger-picture thinking.  So few people do this.  Which is why...

2.  Wait until these changes affect your school.  Because somehow in the history of these boundary changes (and I've been hanging around this stuff for too long due to the age of my kids), no school community behaves well.  The loudest parents and in particular the PTAs are self-interested, loud, and atrociously obnoxious.

[/quote]
It would be one thing if APS made sensible recommendations.  Their proposals often border on nuts.  The last round proposed moving Glebe from 110% capacity to 145% capacity while Nottingham and Discovery were below 90%.  At Glebe this would have meant classes in hallways and covering the small basketball court with more trailers.  It was a ridiculous proposal.  If a school community sits quietly by then the have to deal with the consequences of APS not having one shred of common sense.[/quote]

This is not accurate.  From APS's initial presentations for Glebe posted October 2020:

2019-20 PreK-5 Capacity Utilization 113% (including 4 existing relocatables 95%)
Estimated 2021-22 PreK-5 Capacity Utilization 128% (including 4 existing relocatables 108%)
Estimated 2023-24 PreK-5 Capacity Utilization 122% (including 4 existing relocatables 103%)

The same presentation references that one planning unit already assigned to Glebe could be designated walkable to Reed (and eventually was designated as such) so that would have further alleviated pressure at Glebe and made sense from a transportation perspective.  The process wasn't allowed to play out in any way that made sense.  It was just immediate freak outs and APS shut the whole thing down.
[/quote]Those numbers are the second iteration after APS realized their mistake and walked back their proposal somewhat.  The initial version from APS was worse.  It never made it into school board slides, but was DCUM fodder.[/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