Anonymous wrote:Why not make clusters (with some minor boundary changes), and give everyone within the boundary four choices: immersion, Montessori, STEAM, or traditional/neighborhood. Then take three buildings and have an immersion/Montessori building, a STEAM building, and a neighborhood building. Everyone in the three-school boundary would rank their three choices and hopefully everyone would get their first or second choice. A good number of kids should be able to walk and APS would provide busing to all three but it wouldn't have to be cross-county. It wouldn't help diversity a ton if you wanted the boundaries to be contiguous but you could do east-west clusters and cross 50 where possible. Possible clusters could be Tuckahoe/McKinley/Ashlawn, Nottingham/Reed/ATS, Discovery/Glebe/ASF, Jamestown/Taylor/Key, Carlin Springs/Campbell/Barrett, Claremont/Abingdon/Drew, Barcroft/Randolph/New ES, and Long Branch/Patrick Henry/Hoffman Boston/Oakridge.
Anonymous wrote:No additional choice schools. Don't allow those that got into choice in elementary apply for choice in MS or HS.
Anonymous wrote:It seems that some people argue that Reed, if an IB choice program, will be filled with neighborhood kids. If that is the case, then why not make it a neighborhood school and allow transfers to fill any excess space that exists. Then we can get the boundary process to include diversity as a goal. A choice IB program for Reed cannot guarantee a majority neighborhood enrollment when the school opens, but especially in years to come. Fix the problem at its core.
Anonymous wrote:Why should anyone have to opt for IB just to escape an overcrowded school? Why is APS proposing a choice that nobody is asking for?
Anonymous wrote:If you want more integration, move to PG county.