Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

I agree this makes the most sense.

But APS ruled out Williamsburg for Immersion because of lack of centrality and lack of public transportation. Yet ignores these same considerations for Nottingham as a swing space.

APS has no idea what they are doing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we get rid of all these stupid option programs that make it impossible to plan for neighborhood needs and waste transportation money year after year? Sensible neighborhood boundaries with ability to request administrative transfers to underenrolled schools. Done - all problems solved.

This only works if enough SA parents are willing to bus their kids to NA. I’m sure some would but I doubt it would be enough.

APS needs to do a better job of forecasting where students will live. Close schools that are underutilized. Sell that land, and buy and build schools where they are needed.

Are you at all familiar with Arlington???
Do you have any idea how long it takes to build a new school?
And do we just keep selling and re-building elsewhere every time the populations shift?
Transportation costs a heckuva lot less than your proposal. There's no good reason Arlington can't just balance its enrollment and bus/otherwise transport (ie, public transit for secondary students) to wherever their schools are. You bring kids to the schools; not schools to the kids. Kids are mobile; schools are not.

Yes I'm familiar with arlington. I've been through several boundary changes. Its ridiculous.
It takes about a year to build a new school.
Maybe if better forecasting were done APS wouldn't need to sell and re-build schools every time the population shifts. Is Arlington really so unique that this is the only place the school district has to do so many boundary shifts as a result of population shifts? We're not that special here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we get rid of all these stupid option programs that make it impossible to plan for neighborhood needs and waste transportation money year after year? Sensible neighborhood boundaries with ability to request administrative transfers to underenrolled schools. Done - all problems solved.

This only works if enough SA parents are willing to bus their kids to NA. I’m sure some would but I doubt it would be enough.

APS needs to do a better job of forecasting where students will live. Close schools that are underutilized. Sell that land, and buy and build schools where they are needed.

Lol. Where are they going to find this land? There are no parcels that are big enough to purchase and build a new school. That’s why they didn’t build a comprehensive 4th high school and why they keep playing musical chairs with their properties.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we get rid of all these stupid option programs that make it impossible to plan for neighborhood needs and waste transportation money year after year? Sensible neighborhood boundaries with ability to request administrative transfers to underenrolled schools. Done - all problems solved.

This only works if enough SA parents are willing to bus their kids to NA. I’m sure some would but I doubt it would be enough.

APS needs to do a better job of forecasting where students will live. Close schools that are underutilized. Sell that land, and buy and build schools where they are needed.

Are you at all familiar with Arlington???
Do you have any idea how long it takes to build a new school?
And do we just keep selling and re-building elsewhere every time the populations shift?
Transportation costs a heckuva lot less than your proposal. There's no good reason Arlington can't just balance its enrollment and bus/otherwise transport (ie, public transit for secondary students) to wherever their schools are. You bring kids to the schools; not schools to the kids. Kids are mobile; schools are not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Immersion, unlike HB and Montessori, is not a self contained program. Kids in Immersion take some immersion classes and the rest are with the rest of the school’s population.

That doesn't matter. There is no academic advantage to immersion kids being in other classes with non-immersion classmates. Your issue would actually be about the total overall offerings, like at HBW. But there is absolutely no reason the program itself could not be self-contained.

You’d have to basically an entire middle school worth of teachers. Is the immersion program large enough to warrant that? I don’t think so but maybe I’m wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

I agree this makes the most sense.

But APS ruled out Williamsburg for Immersion because of lack of centrality and lack of public transportation. Yet ignores these same considerations for Nottingham as a swing space.

APS has no idea what they are doing.

So what you're advocating for is Nottingham to be used as a swing space to meet needs. Sounds a lot like what APS is talking about....

How am I doing that? I’m saying that APS decided it was not ok to use Williamsburg for a county wide program because it wasn’t central enough nor was it close enough to mass transit.

But they don’t even consider that Nottingham may not be central enough for a countywide program or have enough mass transit. They completely ignore these issues - issues which they themselves thought were significant hurdles to stop consideration of Williamsburg for immersion. Somehow what was not OK for WMS is ok for Nottingham.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Immersion, unlike HB and Montessori, is not a self contained program. Kids in Immersion take some immersion classes and the rest are with the rest of the school’s population.

That doesn't matter. There is no academic advantage to immersion kids being in other classes with non-immersion classmates. Your issue would actually be about the total overall offerings, like at HBW. But there is absolutely no reason the program itself could not be self-contained.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

I agree this makes the most sense.

But APS ruled out Williamsburg for Immersion because of lack of centrality and lack of public transportation. Yet ignores these same considerations for Nottingham as a swing space.

APS has no idea what they are doing.

So what you're advocating for is Nottingham to be used as a swing space to meet needs. Sounds a lot like what APS is talking about....

How am I doing that? I’m saying that APS decided it was not ok to use Williamsburg for a county wide program because it wasn’t central enough nor was it close enough to mass transit.

But they don’t even consider that Nottingham may not be central enough for a countywide program or have enough mass transit. They completely ignore these issues - issues which they themselves thought were significant hurdles to stop consideration of Williamsburg for immersion. Somehow what was not OK for WMS is ok for Nottingham.

The Nottingham thing is temporary. Elementary numbers will increase and it will reopen as a school in a few years. They're just using it as a swing space temporarily.

Immersion MS isn't going to Williamsburg.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

I agree this makes the most sense.

But APS ruled out Williamsburg for Immersion because of lack of centrality and lack of public transportation. Yet ignores these same considerations for Nottingham as a swing space.

APS has no idea what they are doing.

So what you're advocating for is Nottingham to be used as a swing space to meet needs. Sounds a lot like what APS is talking about....

How am I doing that? I’m saying that APS decided it was not ok to use Williamsburg for a county wide program because it wasn’t central enough nor was it close enough to mass transit.

But they don’t even consider that Nottingham may not be central enough for a countywide program or have enough mass transit. They completely ignore these issues - issues which they themselves thought were significant hurdles to stop consideration of Williamsburg for immersion. Somehow what was not OK for WMS is ok for Nottingham.

The Nottingham thing is temporary. Elementary numbers will increase and it will reopen as a school in a few years. They're just using it as a swing space temporarily.

Immersion MS isn't going to Williamsburg.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

I agree this makes the most sense.

But APS ruled out Williamsburg for Immersion because of lack of centrality and lack of public transportation. Yet ignores these same considerations for Nottingham as a swing space.

APS has no idea what they are doing.

So what you're advocating for is Nottingham to be used as a swing space to meet needs. Sounds a lot like what APS is talking about....

How am I doing that? I’m saying that APS decided it was not ok to use Williamsburg for a county wide program because it wasn’t central enough nor was it close enough to mass transit.

But they don’t even consider that Nottingham may not be central enough for a countywide program or have enough mass transit. They completely ignore these issues - issues which they themselves thought were significant hurdles to stop consideration of Williamsburg for immersion. Somehow what was not OK for WMS is ok for Nottingham.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

I agree this makes the most sense.

But APS ruled out Williamsburg for Immersion because of lack of centrality and lack of public transportation. Yet ignores these same considerations for Nottingham as a swing space.

APS has no idea what they are doing.

So what you're advocating for is Nottingham to be used as a swing space to meet needs. Sounds a lot like what APS is talking about....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we get rid of all these stupid option programs that make it impossible to plan for neighborhood needs and waste transportation money year after year? Sensible neighborhood boundaries with ability to request administrative transfers to underenrolled schools. Done - all problems solved.

This only works if enough SA parents are willing to bus their kids to NA. I’m sure some would but I doubt it would be enough.

APS needs to do a better job of forecasting where students will live. Close schools that are underutilized. Sell that land, and buy and build schools where they are needed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we get rid of all these stupid option programs that make it impossible to plan for neighborhood needs and waste transportation money year after year? Sensible neighborhood boundaries with ability to request administrative transfers to underenrolled schools. Done - all problems solved.

This only works if enough SA parents are willing to bus their kids to NA. I’m sure some would but I doubt it would be enough.

APS needs to do a better job of forecasting where students will live. Close schools that are underutilized. Sell that land, and buy and build schools where they are needed.

Anonymous wrote:Immersion, unlike HB and Montessori, is not a self contained program. Kids in Immersion take some immersion classes and the rest are with the rest of the school’s population.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are actually enough middle school seats, they are just at Williamsburg. If they were willing to put Immersion in the upper NW quadrant (which frankly, they should seriously consider) they could just put it there and solve the problem. Williamsburg is projected to be at 65% in a few years!

Or, they can relocate immersion to Kenmore and redraw boundaries to balance enrollment. Same difference; just less palatable to NA for some reason.

Have you seen the proposed new boundaries? They are clearly worse for Kenmore, Swanson, and Hamm than they would be if they moved immersion to Williamsburg. Also, Williamsburg would require fewer busses overall. They are saving exactly 1 immersion bus with Kenmore vs other middle schools, which is quickly overtaken by the new routes that would be required for current walkzone kids.