Anonymous wrote:Someone is promising to post pictures of the superior maps on AEM shortly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a parent who will be impacted, but I keep wondering WHY APS doesn't know how many Key families would move if it moved to the ATS location. It seems pretty darn easy to survey the current K-4 families and ask. They aren't committed to whatever they choose, but APS could at least have a ballpark number. That's one piece of data that makes me feel like they are being a bit sloppy and have just dug into this position, regardless of whether this whole cascade is the right one.

ASFS is vastly overcrowded, and I agree a building is needed, but APS is claiming not to know how many kids will stay behind.

The problem with doing a survey now is that you will get parents saying what they think will get them the best result vs. a real picture. If you want to keep Key on Key and they ask if you will move with the program, you say no, right? That doesn't mean that you won't move when the time comes.

Also, some parents apparently don't understand the move, that there will be transportation and that the students currently at ATS are moving out. I know it sounds ridiculous; but some parents do not realize their kids will get a bus to school and think they are being added to the students at ATS. The strong AEM Key advocates keep talking ABOUT and TO these families to garner support and petition signatures; but apparently aren't doing much talking WITH them to make sure they know what really will happen.

So, if you ask parents now, they may say "no" but when they realize these other things, they may say "yes."

What APS DOES know is that for every student outside the Key/ASFS attendance zone transferred into Key, one neighborhood seat opens regardless of how many current students opt to stay at a neighborhood Key. I don't know the exact numbers; but 260 students currently attend Key from outside what the neighborhood attendance zone is, then a minimum of 260 seats open up when those students relocate with immersion to ATS. Even if they drop out, they go back to their own neighborhood schools and do not keep occupying a seat in the new Key neighborhood school. It is most unlikely that nobody within the attendance zone will move with the program; so a lot more seats than just those 260 become available for neighborhood seats. Compare that to not moving the program: zero neighborhood seats open up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a parent who will be impacted, but I keep wondering WHY APS doesn't know how many Key families would move if it moved to the ATS location. It seems pretty darn easy to survey the current K-4 families and ask. They aren't committed to whatever they choose, but APS could at least have a ballpark number. That's one piece of data that makes me feel like they are being a bit sloppy and have just dug into this position, regardless of whether this whole cascade is the right one.

ASFS is vastly overcrowded, and I agree a building is needed, but APS is claiming not to know how many kids will stay behind.

The problem with doing a survey now is that you will get parents saying what they think will get them the best result vs. a real picture. If you want to keep Key on Key and they ask if you will move with the program, you say no, right? That doesn't mean that you won't move when the time comes.

Also, some parents apparently don't understand the move, that there will be transportation and that the students currently at ATS are moving out. I know it sounds ridiculous; but some parents do not realize their kids will get a bus to school and think they are being added to the students at ATS. The strong AEM Key advocates keep talking ABOUT and TO these families to garner support and petition signatures; but apparently aren't doing much talking WITH them to make sure they know what really will happen.

So, if you ask parents now, they may say "no" but when they realize these other things, they may say "yes."

What APS DOES know is that for every student outside the Key/ASFS attendance zone transferred into Key, one neighborhood seat opens regardless of how many current students opt to stay at a neighborhood Key. I don't know the exact numbers; but 260 students currently attend Key from outside what the neighborhood attendance zone is, then a minimum of 260 seats open up when those students relocate with immersion to ATS. Even if they drop out, they go back to their own neighborhood schools and do not keep occupying a seat in the new Key neighborhood school. It is most unlikely that nobody within the attendance zone will move with the program; so a lot more seats than just those 260 become available for neighborhood seats. Compare that to not moving the program: zero neighborhood seats open up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a parent who will be impacted, but I keep wondering WHY APS doesn't know how many Key families would move if it moved to the ATS location. It seems pretty darn easy to survey the current K-4 families and ask. They aren't committed to whatever they choose, but APS could at least have a ballpark number. That's one piece of data that makes me feel like they are being a bit sloppy and have just dug into this position, regardless of whether this whole cascade is the right one.

ASFS is vastly overcrowded, and I agree a building is needed, but APS is claiming not to know how many kids will stay behind.

The problem with doing a survey now is that you will get parents saying what they think will get them the best result vs. a real picture. If you want to keep Key on Key and they ask if you will move with the program, you say no, right? That doesn't mean that you won't move when the time comes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a parent who will be impacted, but I keep wondering WHY APS doesn't know how many Key families would move if it moved to the ATS location. It seems pretty darn easy to survey the current K-4 families and ask. They aren't committed to whatever they choose, but APS could at least have a ballpark number. That's one piece of data that makes me feel like they are being a bit sloppy and have just dug into this position, regardless of whether this whole cascade is the right one.

ASFS is vastly overcrowded, and I agree a building is needed, but APS is claiming not to know how many kids will stay behind.

They could survey the current Key families- but there is good reason to think they won't get very accurate information. Right now the Key families have an incentive to say they won't move. When they realize that their choice is actually to move or to go to their neighborhood school I suspect there will be different answers.

Anonymous wrote:Not a parent who will be impacted, but I keep wondering WHY APS doesn't know how many Key families would move if it moved to the ATS location. It seems pretty darn easy to survey the current K-4 families and ask. They aren't committed to whatever they choose, but APS could at least have a ballpark number. That's one piece of data that makes me feel like they are being a bit sloppy and have just dug into this position, regardless of whether this whole cascade is the right one.

ASFS is vastly overcrowded, and I agree a building is needed, but APS is claiming not to know how many kids will stay behind.

Anonymous wrote:Not a parent who will be impacted, but I keep wondering WHY APS doesn't know how many Key families would move if it moved to the ATS location. It seems pretty darn easy to survey the current K-4 families and ask. They aren't committed to whatever they choose, but APS could at least have a ballpark number. That's one piece of data that makes me feel like they are being a bit sloppy and have just dug into this position, regardless of whether this whole cascade is the right one.

ASFS is vastly overcrowded, and I agree a building is needed, but APS is claiming not to know how many kids will stay behind.

Anonymous wrote:Not a parent who will be impacted, but I keep wondering WHY APS doesn't know how many Key families would move if it moved to the ATS location. It seems pretty darn easy to survey the current K-4 families and ask. They aren't committed to whatever they choose, but APS could at least have a ballpark number. That's one piece of data that makes me feel like they are being a bit sloppy and have just dug into this position, regardless of whether this whole cascade is the right one.

ASFS is vastly overcrowded, and I agree a building is needed, but APS is claiming not to know how many kids will stay behind.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a family lives in an affordable housing complex it will be managed by AHC or APAH and have its own after school set up. I need to dig up the data on % use of extended day. The bus per am and pm usage alone shows the argument about walkers is either non existent or very very small.

Really? How does that work?

There are after school programs run in the building— people volunteer to help the kids with homework, etc. I’m not sure, but I think it’s free, but only open to residents of the building. Volunteers or the program coordinators pick the kids up from their bus stop.
I know this is the case for Woodbury park and at least one other building run by ahc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dumb question, because I just started paying attention after that thread blew up on AEM -- why can the Latinx families living near Key not send their kids to a neighborhood school at Key if a walkable school with aftercare is important? Wouldn't Key still be there? Why is the immersion part so important? Plenty of other Latinx kids in Arlington don't go to immersion schools/would have one closer if it moved somewhere else. What am I missing?

The achievement gap is much lower for immersion and studies show that Hispanic kids do better over their school career if they do immersion In elementary (just the messenger here)

OK, thanks

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dumb question, because I just started paying attention after that thread blew up on AEM -- why can the Latinx families living near Key not send their kids to a neighborhood school at Key if a walkable school with aftercare is important? Wouldn't Key still be there? Why is the immersion part so important? Plenty of other Latinx kids in Arlington don't go to immersion schools/would have one closer if it moved somewhere else. What am I missing?

The achievement gap is much lower for immersion and studies show that Hispanic kids do better over their school career if they do immersion In elementary (just the messenger here)

Well, looking at the data now, there are six APS schools with the same or higher percentage of Hispanic kids than Key, several of which have higher free lunch percentages than Key. It seems like a tough argument to make -- I get that the kids at Key now may be disadvantaged relative to the status quo, but the people who are against the move are talking like they are being singled out because they are disadvantaged, which is hardly the case (there are plenty of other disadvantaged kids in Arlington, some of whom might benefit from this move....for example kids living near Barrett, which is close to ATS). I don't get how this is considered racist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dumb question, because I just started paying attention after that thread blew up on AEM -- why can the Latinx families living near Key not send their kids to a neighborhood school at Key if a walkable school with aftercare is important? Wouldn't Key still be there? Why is the immersion part so important? Plenty of other Latinx kids in Arlington don't go to immersion schools/would have one closer if it moved somewhere else. What am I missing?

The achievement gap is much lower for immersion and studies show that Hispanic kids do better over their school career if they do immersion In elementary (just the messenger here)

Regardless of the research, not all native-Spanish-speaking families want their kids in immersion. Some want them in an English-dominant school thinking it will get them up to speed faster. This was referenced in some meeting where staff mentioned they'd had conversations w/ Spanish-speaking families about why they don't apply to immersion (presumably they did that outreach because they can't fill the 50% native-Spanish quota) and the main answers were not believing it's better for their kids and wanting a school closer to home. Moving Key closer to the concentration of Spanish-speakers at least helps address the 2nd reason.

The Key pop's concern is that they will lose too many students if it moves because of families for whom proximity is more important than immersion. The concern seems overblown. Yes, they will likely lose some but will ideally pull in more in the lower grades so it would just be a few years of smaller upper grades. At the school board meeting, it sounded like staff was aware of the concern about retaining the immersion faculty and perhaps they could allow for smaller classes in order to keep staff on board during that adjustment period. They do need to be clearer about that.