Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where will Key immersion be moved to?

Either Carlin Springs, ATS, or Barcroft.

Makes no sense. They are taking something that is working very well and have decided to ruin it. Who hates immersion so much?

No one. Have you read the analysis or are you simply getting upset? They are advocating that immersion schools should be closer to dense populations of native Spanish speakers. Changes in residential patterns means that you have more pockets of native Spanish elsewhere than in the current Key area, and by moving immersion schools closer you might get more native Spanish participation than if you put it somewhere further from them.

Seems more like rich white people shoving off immersion to s Arlington. Key is in n Arlibgton now and has a good balance. And it was a partial neighborhood school. So that dog won’t hunt.

So moving immersion to a location where there is a large Spanish speaking population and 83% reduced lunch (Carlin Springs) is unfair to who? Also, it's not a neighborhood school anymore.

Anonymous wrote:Key is two way immersion. That means native English and native Spanish. I think this idea will effectively end one of the immersion schools.

There is plenty of demand from parents who want their kids to learn Spanish. So APS will have no problem filling 2 schools when they are close to the native speakers. Time to get on the Bus.

Anonymous wrote:Key is two way immersion. That means native English and native Spanish. I think this idea will effectively end one of the immersion schools.

How so? There are more than enough Spanish and English speakers in South Arlington to fill two schools.

Key is two way immersion. That means native English and native Spanish. I think this idea will effectively end one of the immersion schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where will Key immersion be moved to?

Either Carlin Springs, ATS, or Barcroft.

Makes no sense. They are taking something that is working very well and have decided to ruin it. Who hates immersion so much?

No one. Have you read the analysis or are you simply getting upset? They are advocating that immersion schools should be closer to dense populations of native Spanish speakers. Changes in residential patterns means that you have more pockets of native Spanish elsewhere than in the current Key area, and by moving immersion schools closer you might get more native Spanish participation than if you put it somewhere further from them.

Seems more like rich white people shoving off immersion to s Arlington. Key is in n Arlibgton now and has a good balance. And it was a partial neighborhood school. So that dog won’t hunt.

I love that woman who can write on maps and post on DCUM...seriously impressed. My old self can't do that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where will Key immersion be moved to?

Either Carlin Springs, ATS, or Barcroft.

Makes no sense. They are taking something that is working very well and have decided to ruin it. Who hates immersion so much?

No one. Have you read the analysis or are you simply getting upset? They are advocating that immersion schools should be closer to dense populations of native Spanish speakers. Changes in residential patterns means that you have more pockets of native Spanish elsewhere than in the current Key area, and by moving immersion schools closer you might get more native Spanish participation than if you put it somewhere further from them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where will Key immersion be moved to?

Either Carlin Springs, ATS, or Barcroft.

Makes no sense. They are taking something that is working very well and have decided to ruin it. Who hates immersion so much?

Oh, please. Moving Key immersion to one of those sites won't ruin it. It would just make it less convenient for you because you couldn't walk there anymore.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where will Key immersion be moved to?

Either Carlin Springs, ATS, or Barcroft.

Makes no sense. They are taking something that is working very well and have decided to ruin it. Who hates immersion so much?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay, I couldn't resist digging into it now. From what I'm seeing, and assuming IB refers to ATS (because ATS otherwise isn't listed), it looks like Tara, Gladis and Lisa have all had Nottingham marked for ATS from the start. Maybe the IB label means they are contemplating rebranding ATS as an IB elementary school as part of the move?

It looks like they've also been in agreement all along that Campbell should stay EL and immersion should be at Carlin Springs. They originally thought the other immersion program should be at ASFS, but I guess they realized that wasn't going to be workable. So ATS was potentially on the table to become neighborhood?

It is hard to accept anything they say after seeing that. So, so dishonest.

Could someone please post the full link? I'm not seeing the -1.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Data-Table-04122018-Web.xlsx

Wow.

In all fairness, it doesn't mean they've had it marked from the start. There aren't dates on when they made their assessments, and I'm going to assume they did so after having reviewed all of the data. Big mistake posting this.

What it means that even though the staff has saying publicly that they're not considering which program should go where at this stage, they're only looking for optimal sites, they had in fact come up with their preferred arrangement of all of the programs within the sites before they released the first round of analysis. They lied about their process, which makes all of their other public statements suspect as well. It certainly make sense now why they overlooked their errors on Nottingham, they'd already decided they wanted it for ATS/IB and if the first pass got them the result they wanted, they weren't going to scrutinize it too closely.

This process is a total sham. The last modified timestamp on the Excel Spreadsheet is 4/12/2018 3:12pm. Lisa, Zachary Larnard, Tara and Gladis had decided on April 12th that Nottingham would become IB/ATS. Why do we even have an engage process? APS Sucks.

Does APS have an IG? Would the SB even care or are they in on these shenanigans. What is the process for...?

Seems like there was a bait and switch.

Anonymous wrote:What's really cute about the way they clustered the schools for their purposes is that they extended NE all the way out to include the ATS site even though if you draw it by straight lines, ATS in undeniably in the west. That lets them further justify putting an option school at Nottingham by saying it's the best balance of option locations, because NW, NE, M will all have one, SW will have two and SE won't have have any but Henry is really close to the border so it's okay. More honest alignments would mean that the ATS/IB move to Nottingham would put two option programs in NW, two in SW, one in M, and none in either NE or SE, but then they'd have a problem because if 4 option programs in South would be unfair to them, 4 option programs in West should be unfair as well. Having the NE cluster reach into NW to take the ATS site fixes that for them.

Gotta love that nice, straight line dividing east and west. No gerrymandering there at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Uh . . . how would you feel if they moved 3 option schools to the NW. Might that tax your neighborhood schools? Please have some perspective beyond your little bubble. And I live in the same area.

What is with all the assumptions here PP. Maybe you are talking to someone else. I live in North Arlington. Plus my child will be in MS by the time this happens so I have no skin in the game.

My point was having 4 options in the south is not a great scenario for either north or south. It will be difficult for many families in the north to access the school and if they do it will overtax the school in the south.
The SB's statement seems to imply they want to option schools to be primarily for students in South Arlington b/c if North Arlington families use them it could cause a problem. This seems to go against equal access, as would moving 4 to the north.

Equity does not mean equal. Making access to the programs equitable means making them MORE accessible to populations that struggle with transportation, engagement, understanding the American school system, etc. And if that means making them less accessible to families who can afford to live anywhere in the county, then so be it.

Also, there is nothing they can do about economically segregated housing patterns, and I suppose they realize how much MORE segregated our housing is about to become. Thank heavens they acknowledge that the outcomes for students ARE affected by economic segregation, especially during the early years. If they can induce the MC and UMC families who live in South Arlington, and maybe some in North Arlington, too, to VOLUNTARILY integrate economically segregated schools, it's a party all around. Nobody is forced to bus across the county, and more people will feel like their children, regardless of where they can afford to live within Arlington, have access to the same opportunities. I'm honestly ready to cry I am so proud of staff! I didn't think they would ever be so bold.

I don't know that I agree that Nottingham makes sense as the option school, but I absolutely believe that the majority of option programs, if we're going to have them, need to be located as close to economically disadvantaged populations as possible. And I hope that ATS, through maintaining VPI classrooms, and community outreach, is able to maintain their current level of diversity wherever they are located.

And no, schools in South Arlington will not be "overtaxed." It might be more, if they make Claremont neighborhood seats again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay, I couldn't resist digging into it now. From what I'm seeing, and assuming IB refers to ATS (because ATS otherwise isn't listed), it looks like Tara, Gladis and Lisa have all had Nottingham marked for ATS from the start. Maybe the IB label means they are contemplating rebranding ATS as an IB elementary school as part of the move?

It looks like they've also been in agreement all along that Campbell should stay EL and immersion should be at Carlin Springs. They originally thought the other immersion program should be at ASFS, but I guess they realized that wasn't going to be workable. So ATS was potentially on the table to become neighborhood?

It is hard to accept anything they say after seeing that. So, so dishonest.

Could someone please post the full link? I'm not seeing the -1.

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Data-Table-04122018-Web.xlsx

Wow.

In all fairness, it doesn't mean they've had it marked from the start. There aren't dates on when they made their assessments, and I'm going to assume they did so after having reviewed all of the data. Big mistake posting this.

What it means that even though the staff has saying publicly that they're not considering which program should go where at this stage, they're only looking for optimal sites, they had in fact come up with their preferred arrangement of all of the programs within the sites before they released the first round of analysis. They lied about their process, which makes all of their other public statements suspect as well. It certainly make sense now why they overlooked their errors on Nottingham, they'd already decided they wanted it for ATS/IB and if the first pass got them the result they wanted, they weren't going to scrutinize it too closely.

This process is a total sham. The last modified timestamp on the Excel Spreadsheet is 4/12/2018 3:12pm. Lisa, Zachary Larnard, Tara and Gladis had decided on April 12th that Nottingham would become IB/ATS. Why do we even have an engage process? APS Sucks.

Anonymous wrote:Where will Key immersion be moved to?

Either Carlin Springs, ATS, or Barcroft.