Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Right, EVERYONE should be doing that, not just the parents who support the moves. They didn't word it "help hold APS accountable", they said "hold APS accountable". Implying it wasn't their responsibility.

We will see what they actually do when it comes down to it. Will they be spiteful or constructive?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/arlington-makes-a-bad-move-on-elementary-schools/2020/02/09/e4812398-4a9d-11ea-8a1f-de1597be6cbc_story.html

I can’t access it. Who wrote it?

The McKinley PTA president. Her gotcha points are that they didn't follow the boundary procedure and that it hurts poor minority kids. Apparently she didn't see the inherent contradiction in this sentence: "One of these programs, Key Immersion, will be moved into a building where it will have to try to function at 152 percent capacity. Many Spanish-speaking families won’t be able to move with Key to its new location."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Right, EVERYONE should be doing that, not just the parents who support the moves. They didn't word it "help hold APS accountable", they said "hold APS accountable". Implying it wasn't their responsibility.

We will see what they actually do when it comes down to it. Will they be spiteful or constructive?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/arlington-makes-a-bad-move-on-elementary-schools/2020/02/09/e4812398-4a9d-11ea-8a1f-de1597be6cbc_story.html

I can’t access it. Who wrote it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Right, EVERYONE should be doing that, not just the parents who support the moves. They didn't word it "help hold APS accountable", they said "hold APS accountable". Implying it wasn't their responsibility.

We will see what they actually do when it comes down to it. Will they be spiteful or constructive?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/arlington-makes-a-bad-move-on-elementary-schools/2020/02/09/e4812398-4a9d-11ea-8a1f-de1597be6cbc_story.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Right, EVERYONE should be doing that, not just the parents who support the moves. They didn't word it "help hold APS accountable", they said "hold APS accountable". Implying it wasn't their responsibility.

We will see what they actually do when it comes down to it. Will they be spiteful or constructive?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/arlington-makes-a-bad-move-on-elementary-schools/2020/02/09/e4812398-4a9d-11ea-8a1f-de1597be6cbc_story.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how many of these vocal anti-move parents will stick around and actually support these communities that they "care" so much about? Or will they do what they can to sabotage the move out of spite - and hurt the kids and at-risk families and kids in the process?

I saw a few posts on AEM implying that the responsibility for successful moves falls to the parents who supported the moves. Uh....no. That's not how this works.

It will be very telling how they handle the moves - it will reveal their true motivations for opposing the moves.

I think what they're saying is that the moves-supporters need to help hold APS accountable for the supports that will be needed. I don't believe they themselves will abandon the needs of their own community members. And being their consistent selves, the anti-movers fail to see that neighborhood school parents who supported the moves will also be focused on ensuring the needs of their own community members moving in and out are met, too.

Anonymous wrote:Right, EVERYONE should be doing that, not just the parents who support the moves. They didn't word it "help hold APS accountable", they said "hold APS accountable". Implying it wasn't their responsibility.

We will see what they actually do when it comes down to it. Will they be spiteful or constructive?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how many of these vocal anti-move parents will stick around and actually support these communities that they "care" so much about? Or will they do what they can to sabotage the move out of spite - and hurt the kids and at-risk families and kids in the process?

I saw a few posts on AEM implying that the responsibility for successful moves falls to the parents who supported the moves. Uh....no. That's not how this works.

It will be very telling how they handle the moves - it will reveal their true motivations for opposing the moves.

True. A lot of the "concerns" are things that can be accommodated.

Too far to walk from the bus on Wilson to McKinley? Work with ART to add a bus route that stops right in front of the school.

Parents who live in Courthouse can't pick up kids from extended day? Advocate to bus kids from ATS building back to Key building for extended day.

ATS building is too small to fit Key? Advocate for expansion.

Parents without transportation can't get to PTA meetings or school events? PTA at Key is well resourced and could set aside funds for Uber or set up rides.

Agreed.
APS could also, instead of busing kids to another site for extended day, provide a late bus/shuttle to the Key neighborhood school at the end of extended day.
I was going to say something similar re. Uber or other rides. The Key PTA has quite a healthy budget - they could reallocate funds for transportation services when parents without cars need to pickup a sick child or get to school events, etc. Heaven forbid they carpool with them....
Families need a food pantry? Make sure Key neighborhood school has one, and continue offering one at the ATS site.

“Heaven forbid they carpool with them...” wtf? It’s next level insane how little you know about, and how much smoke you have, for the key community. Whatever happened to you must have been pretty bad.

DP. That's great - so the Key families are willing to set up carpools for families who don't have vehicles for PTA meetings, school events, enrichment classes, etc.? That will definitely help with the move to the ATS site.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how many of these vocal anti-move parents will stick around and actually support these communities that they "care" so much about? Or will they do what they can to sabotage the move out of spite - and hurt the kids and at-risk families and kids in the process?

I saw a few posts on AEM implying that the responsibility for successful moves falls to the parents who supported the moves. Uh....no. That's not how this works.

It will be very telling how they handle the moves - it will reveal their true motivations for opposing the moves.

True. A lot of the "concerns" are things that can be accommodated.

Too far to walk from the bus on Wilson to McKinley? Work with ART to add a bus route that stops right in front of the school.

Parents who live in Courthouse can't pick up kids from extended day? Advocate to bus kids from ATS building back to Key building for extended day.

ATS building is too small to fit Key? Advocate for expansion.

Parents without transportation can't get to PTA meetings or school events? PTA at Key is well resourced and could set aside funds for Uber or set up rides.

Agreed.
APS could also, instead of busing kids to another site for extended day, provide a late bus/shuttle to the Key neighborhood school at the end of extended day.
I was going to say something similar re. Uber or other rides. The Key PTA has quite a healthy budget - they could reallocate funds for transportation services when parents without cars need to pickup a sick child or get to school events, etc. Heaven forbid they carpool with them....
Families need a food pantry? Make sure Key neighborhood school has one, and continue offering one at the ATS site.

“Heaven forbid they carpool with them...” wtf? It’s next level insane how little you know about, and how much smoke you have, for the key community. Whatever happened to you must have been pretty bad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how many of these vocal anti-move parents will stick around and actually support these communities that they "care" so much about? Or will they do what they can to sabotage the move out of spite - and hurt the kids and at-risk families and kids in the process?

I saw a few posts on AEM implying that the responsibility for successful moves falls to the parents who supported the moves. Uh....no. That's not how this works.

It will be very telling how they handle the moves - it will reveal their true motivations for opposing the moves.

True. A lot of the "concerns" are things that can be accommodated.

Too far to walk from the bus on Wilson to McKinley? Work with ART to add a bus route that stops right in front of the school.

Parents who live in Courthouse can't pick up kids from extended day? Advocate to bus kids from ATS building back to Key building for extended day.

ATS building is too small to fit Key? Advocate for expansion.

Parents without transportation can't get to PTA meetings or school events? PTA at Key is well resourced and could set aside funds for Uber or set up rides.

Agreed.
APS could also, instead of busing kids to another site for extended day, provide a late bus/shuttle to the Key neighborhood school at the end of extended day.
I was going to say something similar re. Uber or other rides. The Key PTA has quite a healthy budget - they could reallocate funds for transportation services when parents without cars need to pickup a sick child or get to school events, etc. Heaven forbid they carpool with them....
Families need a food pantry? Make sure Key neighborhood school has one, and continue offering one at the ATS site.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how many of these vocal anti-move parents will stick around and actually support these communities that they "care" so much about? Or will they do what they can to sabotage the move out of spite - and hurt the kids and at-risk families and kids in the process?

I saw a few posts on AEM implying that the responsibility for successful moves falls to the parents who supported the moves. Uh....no. That's not how this works.

It will be very telling how they handle the moves - it will reveal their true motivations for opposing the moves.

I think what they're saying is that the moves-supporters need to help hold APS accountable for the supports that will be needed. I don't believe they themselves will abandon the needs of their own community members. And being their consistent selves, the anti-movers fail to see that neighborhood school parents who supported the moves will also be focused on ensuring the needs of their own community members moving in and out are met, too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how many of these vocal anti-move parents will stick around and actually support these communities that they "care" so much about? Or will they do what they can to sabotage the move out of spite - and hurt the kids and at-risk families and kids in the process?

I saw a few posts on AEM implying that the responsibility for successful moves falls to the parents who supported the moves. Uh....no. That's not how this works.

It will be very telling how they handle the moves - it will reveal their true motivations for opposing the moves.

True. A lot of the "concerns" are things that can be accommodated.

Too far to walk from the bus on Wilson to McKinley? Work with ART to add a bus route that stops right in front of the school.

Parents who live in Courthouse can't pick up kids from extended day? Advocate to bus kids from ATS building back to Key building for extended day.

ATS building is too small to fit Key? Advocate for expansion.

Parents without transportation can't get to PTA meetings or school events? PTA at Key is well resourced and could set aside funds for Uber or set up rides.

Anonymous wrote:So how many of these vocal anti-move parents will stick around and actually support these communities that they "care" so much about? Or will they do what they can to sabotage the move out of spite - and hurt the kids and at-risk families and kids in the process?

I saw a few posts on AEM implying that the responsibility for successful moves falls to the parents who supported the moves. Uh....no. That's not how this works.

It will be very telling how they handle the moves - it will reveal their true motivations for opposing the moves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They will certainly grandfather. Besides, Key's going to "lose" so many of their current students, there should be plenty of room at ATS for anyone who wants to stay!

I actually don't think there will be grandfathering. The scope of the changes are going to be so high that allowing grandfathering will really gum up the works and make planning extremely difficult.

I don’t believe that they would force kids to change programs and leave all their friends behind after the outcry caused by the recent move proposal, or even before it.

Well, a kid who's currently attending Key would either need to stay with the program and move to ATS, or return to their neighborhood school. If they were from another part of Arlington and stayed at Key after it was a neighborhood, then THEY would be the ones leaving their friends behind.

You are talking about two different things. The 'grandfathering' being referred to here is whether kids whose immersion choice is currently Key, but with the realignment the immersion choice becomes Claremont, will have to move to Claremont or will stick with Key- and vice versa. Right now kids who live next door to ATS, and choose immersion are going to Claremont. There are also more kids overall and many many more Spanish speakers who are zoned to Claremont for immersion than are zoned to Key. APS has been talking about doing a realignment of the immersion feeder schools for at least 4 years, but keeps on putting it off b/c they also knew that a program move might be necessary.
When Discovery opened it became a Key feeder school, but some kids who had previously had Nottingham as their neighborhood school (which is a Claremont feeder school) were already at Claremont. APS agreed to grandfather those kids to Claremont, but not their younger siblings. It remains to be seen what will happen here, and it may partly depend on how large scale a realignment it is.