Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 23:15     Subject: APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Campbell would lose 60 percent of its student or more if moved that far north. No longer title I. No nature center curriculum. It would be a total waste of a school. I have a kid there and without the wetland and nature center the curriculum would be trashed. Aps might as well eliminate the program if they move it. I would pull my kid because it would have no value as an option school. I know others would too, and not just the majority of low income families. The wealthier families chose the school for a reason.


Isn’t Campbell Title I because of the large number of VPI students that are guaranteed to continue?


So here's part of the issue with moving any option school that far north: what VPI-eligible families live anywhere near there? Option schools are all supposed to have VPI classrooms, so where are they going to find VPI kids near Nottingham?


Good point. Any option school they move to Nottingham would become much paler and more affluent, which isn’t a good look. The only thing that makes Nottingham at all compelling as an option site is the difficult of filling all of the seats at Tuckahoe after Reed opens. But for that, Nottingham would be effectively off the table.
Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 23:13     Subject: APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Campbell would lose 60 percent of its student or more if moved that far north. No longer title I. No nature center curriculum. It would be a total waste of a school. I have a kid there and without the wetland and nature center the curriculum would be trashed. Aps might as well eliminate the program if they move it. I would pull my kid because it would have no value as an option school. I know others would too, and not just the majority of low income families. The wealthier families chose the school for a reason.


Isn’t Campbell Title I because of the large number of VPI students that are guaranteed to continue?


So here's part of the issue with moving any option school that far north: what VPI-eligible families live anywhere near there? Option schools are all supposed to have VPI classrooms, so where are they going to find VPI kids near Nottingham?


They will draw down the numbers and attendance zone for Nottingham, making it smaller, then they will move Montessori there in 5 years.
I just read all of their documents, and they want to keep the “option School within a neighborhood school model” as a possibility.
This way Nottingham retains a neighborhood school of walkers, and Montessori can expand there (because the site has that potential).
Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 23:06     Subject: APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Campbell would lose 60 percent of its student or more if moved that far north. No longer title I. No nature center curriculum. It would be a total waste of a school. I have a kid there and without the wetland and nature center the curriculum would be trashed. Aps might as well eliminate the program if they move it. I would pull my kid because it would have no value as an option school. I know others would too, and not just the majority of low income families. The wealthier families chose the school for a reason.


What about moving it to Carlin Springs? Serious question. Isn't that still a 'walking' field trip to Long Branch nature center?


Other problem that no one seems to be addressing is that the Campbell building is tiny! To reach a capacity similar to what Carlin Springs has you would have to cover the field space with trailers!!


Given that this would largely be moving the Carlin Springs neighborhood to Campbell- Carlin Springs currently has a population of about 600. Campbell's 'optimization' suggests it can go to 628.

Incidentally- given the lack of space to expand is what is sinking Campbell is an option site. The Staff thinks option sites need to be able to go to 750.


This. Campbell can go to 628 students per APS and Carlin Springs to 928 - per APS!!
Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 23:04     Subject: APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Campbell would lose 60 percent of its student or more if moved that far north. No longer title I. No nature center curriculum. It would be a total waste of a school. I have a kid there and without the wetland and nature center the curriculum would be trashed. Aps might as well eliminate the program if they move it. I would pull my kid because it would have no value as an option school. I know others would too, and not just the majority of low income families. The wealthier families chose the school for a reason.


Isn’t Campbell Title I because of the large number of VPI students that are guaranteed to continue?


So here's part of the issue with moving any option school that far north: what VPI-eligible families live anywhere near there? Option schools are all supposed to have VPI classrooms, so where are they going to find VPI kids near Nottingham?
Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 23:00     Subject: APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Campbell is not going to Nottingham. No option programs are moving to the far North away from S Arlington.


Some kind of option choice HAS to move to nottingham, they have have built way too many seats in an overlapping walk zones, otherwise they will effectively create a school outside of its neighborhood (or maybe a school on a pipestem running to Rosslyn or something!)


Montessori!!! They didn’t put it on the table, because Montessori’s move is already coming up, but they can’t stay at the Henry site, when that site increases to 3500 high school students! That will just not work for any party.

I will say that the demand for Montessori is exceptionally low this year - only 60 applications so far for K.
Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 22:54     Subject: Re:APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They are still going to look at a lot of information. They want to know where the Spanish speaking populations reside, because they said the immersion programs have struggled to find enough native Spanish speakers, and the dual immersion program is set up to have equal numbers of Spanish and English speakers.

This is why I don't think they'll move immersion to ATS. I think if they move immersion in the south/west, it might be to Carlin Springs. As for the north/east, I don't know where they would put it that would have more Spanish speakers than Key, though from their numbers, Key would work better as a neighborhood school.


ATS is what would work better- ATS is next door to Barrett, which has a huge spanish speaking population (around Ballston).


Yeah, now that I look at the map more closely, it looks fairly close to Buckingham. But would ATS be the "west" or "east" location of immersion?


Why not just have one immersion lottery with 1st and 2nd location preference?


Transportation costs. Two immersion programs both covering the entire county requires essentially twice as many buses as having each school serve a dedicated half of the county, because you can’t run 90-minute bus routes for six-year-olds to get twice as much geographic coverage from the same number of buses.
Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 22:51     Subject: APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
Anonymous wrote:Campbell would lose 60 percent of its student or more if moved that far north. No longer title I. No nature center curriculum. It would be a total waste of a school. I have a kid there and without the wetland and nature center the curriculum would be trashed. Aps might as well eliminate the program if they move it. I would pull my kid because it would have no value as an option school. I know others would too, and not just the majority of low income families. The wealthier families chose the school for a reason.


Isn’t Campbell Title I because of the large number of VPI students that are guaranteed to continue?
Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 22:48     Subject: Re:APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
This is what I’m deducting from their analysis:

ATS stays put.
Claremont stays put.
ASFS and Key swap.
Campbell becomes a neighborhood school.
Campbell program moves to Nottingham, or Carlin Springs.
Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 22:44     Subject: APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Anyone got a link?



https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/arlington/Board.nsf/vpublic?open


Thanks!!
Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 22:35     Subject: APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
ASFS and Key as neighborhood. Key to ATS. ATS to Nottingham.

Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 21:59     Subject: APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
Did they really say they could fit 750 kids at the ASFS site? Did I read that correctly?
Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 21:53     Subject: Re:APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They are still going to look at a lot of information. They want to know where the Spanish speaking populations reside, because they said the immersion programs have struggled to find enough native Spanish speakers, and the dual immersion program is set up to have equal numbers of Spanish and English speakers.

This is why I don't think they'll move immersion to ATS. I think if they move immersion in the south/west, it might be to Carlin Springs. As for the north/east, I don't know where they would put it that would have more Spanish speakers than Key, though from their numbers, Key would work better as a neighborhood school.


ATS is what would work better- ATS is next door to Barrett, which has a huge spanish speaking population (around Ballston).


Why do they care where they move the school? Without neighborhood preference, the spanish speaking students can come from anywhere?


The issue is that the feedback they've gotten from these populations is (generally) that they want schools close to where they live. If they put immersion far away from the populations of native Spanish speakers, they won't apply to the program, which kills the program.
Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 21:53     Subject: Re:APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They are still going to look at a lot of information. They want to know where the Spanish speaking populations reside, because they said the immersion programs have struggled to find enough native Spanish speakers, and the dual immersion program is set up to have equal numbers of Spanish and English speakers.

This is why I don't think they'll move immersion to ATS. I think if they move immersion in the south/west, it might be to Carlin Springs. As for the north/east, I don't know where they would put it that would have more Spanish speakers than Key, though from their numbers, Key would work better as a neighborhood school.


ATS is what would work better- ATS is next door to Barrett, which has a huge spanish speaking population (around Ballston).


Yeah, now that I look at the map more closely, it looks fairly close to Buckingham. But would ATS be the "west" or "east" location of immersion?


Why not just have one immersion lottery with 1st and 2nd location preference?
Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 21:51     Subject: Re:APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They are still going to look at a lot of information. They want to know where the Spanish speaking populations reside, because they said the immersion programs have struggled to find enough native Spanish speakers, and the dual immersion program is set up to have equal numbers of Spanish and English speakers.

This is why I don't think they'll move immersion to ATS. I think if they move immersion in the south/west, it might be to Carlin Springs. As for the north/east, I don't know where they would put it that would have more Spanish speakers than Key, though from their numbers, Key would work better as a neighborhood school.


ATS is what would work better- ATS is next door to Barrett, which has a huge spanish speaking population (around Ballston).


Yeah, now that I look at the map more closely, it looks fairly close to Buckingham. But would ATS be the "west" or "east" location of immersion?
Anonymous
Post 04/12/2018 21:49     Subject: Re:APS Elementary Location Working Group 4/12
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They are still going to look at a lot of information. They want to know where the Spanish speaking populations reside, because they said the immersion programs have struggled to find enough native Spanish speakers, and the dual immersion program is set up to have equal numbers of Spanish and English speakers.

This is why I don't think they'll move immersion to ATS. I think if they move immersion in the south/west, it might be to Carlin Springs. As for the north/east, I don't know where they would put it that would have more Spanish speakers than Key, though from their numbers, Key would work better as a neighborhood school.


ATS is what would work better- ATS is next door to Barrett, which has a huge spanish speaking population (around Ballston).


Why do they care where they move the school? Without neighborhood preference, the spanish speaking students can come from anywhere?