Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
And it still comes down to the close proximity of McK and Reed and Ashlawn make it really hard to draw a reasonable boundary for all there to be neighborhood schools. If McK wanted to stay put they needed to fight the charge to make Reed a neighborhood school. But that wasn't happening because a good chunk of McK is in Westover and they wanted a neighborhood school there.


I'd want to see boundaries/walk zones map with Tuckahoe being option and compare that to option 1's map, before concluding the same, if I were McKinley PTA. Remember if one is not overwhelmingly 'better' then it's just a game of playing politics.


If they move ATS to Tuckahoe rather than to McKinley, you can create a map that balances capacity and looks very similar to the proposal #1 map. The problem with that proposal isn't the boundaries so much as how it will negatively affect ATS. By moving it further from SA, you will reduce the number of students it pulls from SA schools (particularly low-income students), and you be basically prevent any further expansion of a very in-demand program because it will effectively max out Tuckahoe's capacity. By putting it at McKinley, you keep it more accessible to low-income students and allow for future growth of the program.

I don't see APS successfully moving ATS to a location that is basically inaccessible for all of South Arlington and all high poverty communities in the County and getting away with it. The ATS community would lose their shit, AEM would get in a line to see who could condemn it the most in terms of impact on the poor.

McKrazy was already not a great look but if she is seriously arguing that the best solution is to keep her precious school from moving so she's not personally inconvenienced and to hoard ATS as only an option for the wealthiest of the wealthy - that is an even more selfish, self serving, terrible look. I think that would really be the straw that broke the camels back in terms of the County. Alot of people who have previously played along would start getting super on board with blowing the whole system up and support the future board member who wants to go all lottery.

The vast majority of SA kids that attend ATS are the UMC white people who don’t want to go to their neighborhood school. ATS’s diversity stats come from mostly their VPI kids. The worst part of moving ATS to McKinley is that the expansion of ATS would actually further the segregation of SA schools. The NA kids that attend ATS often applied to escape their overcrowded schools. Now that they won’t be overcrowded, not as many kids will apply - except they could get a flood of applicants from the 200+ kid in the McKinley walk zone. I predict if they move ATS to McKinley and expand it to 800 kids (likely McKinley currently houses w trailers) it could be detrimental the the SA neighborhood schools.

What if they expanded exclusively with more VPI students?

Or conduct a lottery that provides seats by the home neighborhood school proportionate to the FR/L rate?

Right! K lottery should have a FR/L preference.

Literally VPI

IN ADDITION to the VPI kids. VPI preference for K and then additional preference for FR/L kids that didn't get into VPI the year before.

Pretty sure APS was sued for a similar policy at HBW.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
And it still comes down to the close proximity of McK and Reed and Ashlawn make it really hard to draw a reasonable boundary for all there to be neighborhood schools. If McK wanted to stay put they needed to fight the charge to make Reed a neighborhood school. But that wasn't happening because a good chunk of McK is in Westover and they wanted a neighborhood school there.


I'd want to see boundaries/walk zones map with Tuckahoe being option and compare that to option 1's map, before concluding the same, if I were McKinley PTA. Remember if one is not overwhelmingly 'better' then it's just a game of playing politics.


If they move ATS to Tuckahoe rather than to McKinley, you can create a map that balances capacity and looks very similar to the proposal #1 map. The problem with that proposal isn't the boundaries so much as how it will negatively affect ATS. By moving it further from SA, you will reduce the number of students it pulls from SA schools (particularly low-income students), and you be basically prevent any further expansion of a very in-demand program because it will effectively max out Tuckahoe's capacity. By putting it at McKinley, you keep it more accessible to low-income students and allow for future growth of the program.

I don't see APS successfully moving ATS to a location that is basically inaccessible for all of South Arlington and all high poverty communities in the County and getting away with it. The ATS community would lose their shit, AEM would get in a line to see who could condemn it the most in terms of impact on the poor.

McKrazy was already not a great look but if she is seriously arguing that the best solution is to keep her precious school from moving so she's not personally inconvenienced and to hoard ATS as only an option for the wealthiest of the wealthy - that is an even more selfish, self serving, terrible look. I think that would really be the straw that broke the camels back in terms of the County. Alot of people who have previously played along would start getting super on board with blowing the whole system up and support the future board member who wants to go all lottery.

The vast majority of SA kids that attend ATS are the UMC white people who don’t want to go to their neighborhood school. ATS’s diversity stats come from mostly their VPI kids. The worst part of moving ATS to McKinley is that the expansion of ATS would actually further the segregation of SA schools. The NA kids that attend ATS often applied to escape their overcrowded schools. Now that they won’t be overcrowded, not as many kids will apply - except they could get a flood of applicants from the 200+ kid in the McKinley walk zone. I predict if they move ATS to McKinley and expand it to 800 kids (likely McKinley currently houses w trailers) it could be detrimental the the SA neighborhood schools.

What if they expanded exclusively with more VPI students?

Or conduct a lottery that provides seats by the home neighborhood school proportionate to the FR/L rate?

Right! K lottery should have a FR/L preference.

Literally VPI

IN ADDITION to the VPI kids. VPI preference for K and then additional preference for FR/L kids that didn't get into VPI the year before.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
And it still comes down to the close proximity of McK and Reed and Ashlawn make it really hard to draw a reasonable boundary for all there to be neighborhood schools. If McK wanted to stay put they needed to fight the charge to make Reed a neighborhood school. But that wasn't happening because a good chunk of McK is in Westover and they wanted a neighborhood school there.


I'd want to see boundaries/walk zones map with Tuckahoe being option and compare that to option 1's map, before concluding the same, if I were McKinley PTA. Remember if one is not overwhelmingly 'better' then it's just a game of playing politics.


If they move ATS to Tuckahoe rather than to McKinley, you can create a map that balances capacity and looks very similar to the proposal #1 map. The problem with that proposal isn't the boundaries so much as how it will negatively affect ATS. By moving it further from SA, you will reduce the number of students it pulls from SA schools (particularly low-income students), and you be basically prevent any further expansion of a very in-demand program because it will effectively max out Tuckahoe's capacity. By putting it at McKinley, you keep it more accessible to low-income students and allow for future growth of the program.

I don't see APS successfully moving ATS to a location that is basically inaccessible for all of South Arlington and all high poverty communities in the County and getting away with it. The ATS community would lose their shit, AEM would get in a line to see who could condemn it the most in terms of impact on the poor.

McKrazy was already not a great look but if she is seriously arguing that the best solution is to keep her precious school from moving so she's not personally inconvenienced and to hoard ATS as only an option for the wealthiest of the wealthy - that is an even more selfish, self serving, terrible look. I think that would really be the straw that broke the camels back in terms of the County. Alot of people who have previously played along would start getting super on board with blowing the whole system up and support the future board member who wants to go all lottery.

The vast majority of SA kids that attend ATS are the UMC white people who don’t want to go to their neighborhood school. ATS’s diversity stats come from mostly their VPI kids. The worst part of moving ATS to McKinley is that the expansion of ATS would actually further the segregation of SA schools. The NA kids that attend ATS often applied to escape their overcrowded schools. Now that they won’t be overcrowded, not as many kids will apply - except they could get a flood of applicants from the 200+ kid in the McKinley walk zone. I predict if they move ATS to McKinley and expand it to 800 kids (likely McKinley currently houses w trailers) it could be detrimental the the SA neighborhood schools.

What if they expanded exclusively with more VPI students?

Or conduct a lottery that provides seats by the home neighborhood school proportionate to the FR/L rate?

Right! K lottery should have a FR/L preference.

Literally VPI

IN ADDITION to the VPI kids. VPI preference for K and then additional preference for FR/L kids that didn't get into VPI the year before.

Don’t make a new process. Just expand VPI.

We are short on K-5 seats. Do we really want to make that worse by creating more VPI at this point in time?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
And it still comes down to the close proximity of McK and Reed and Ashlawn make it really hard to draw a reasonable boundary for all there to be neighborhood schools. If McK wanted to stay put they needed to fight the charge to make Reed a neighborhood school. But that wasn't happening because a good chunk of McK is in Westover and they wanted a neighborhood school there.


I'd want to see boundaries/walk zones map with Tuckahoe being option and compare that to option 1's map, before concluding the same, if I were McKinley PTA. Remember if one is not overwhelmingly 'better' then it's just a game of playing politics.


If they move ATS to Tuckahoe rather than to McKinley, you can create a map that balances capacity and looks very similar to the proposal #1 map. The problem with that proposal isn't the boundaries so much as how it will negatively affect ATS. By moving it further from SA, you will reduce the number of students it pulls from SA schools (particularly low-income students), and you be basically prevent any further expansion of a very in-demand program because it will effectively max out Tuckahoe's capacity. By putting it at McKinley, you keep it more accessible to low-income students and allow for future growth of the program.

I don't see APS successfully moving ATS to a location that is basically inaccessible for all of South Arlington and all high poverty communities in the County and getting away with it. The ATS community would lose their shit, AEM would get in a line to see who could condemn it the most in terms of impact on the poor.

McKrazy was already not a great look but if she is seriously arguing that the best solution is to keep her precious school from moving so she's not personally inconvenienced and to hoard ATS as only an option for the wealthiest of the wealthy - that is an even more selfish, self serving, terrible look. I think that would really be the straw that broke the camels back in terms of the County. Alot of people who have previously played along would start getting super on board with blowing the whole system up and support the future board member who wants to go all lottery.

The vast majority of SA kids that attend ATS are the UMC white people who don’t want to go to their neighborhood school. ATS’s diversity stats come from mostly their VPI kids. The worst part of moving ATS to McKinley is that the expansion of ATS would actually further the segregation of SA schools. The NA kids that attend ATS often applied to escape their overcrowded schools. Now that they won’t be overcrowded, not as many kids will apply - except they could get a flood of applicants from the 200+ kid in the McKinley walk zone. I predict if they move ATS to McKinley and expand it to 800 kids (likely McKinley currently houses w trailers) it could be detrimental the the SA neighborhood schools.

What if they expanded exclusively with more VPI students?

Or conduct a lottery that provides seats by the home neighborhood school proportionate to the FR/L rate?

Right! K lottery should have a FR/L preference.

Literally VPI

IN ADDITION to the VPI kids. VPI preference for K and then additional preference for FR/L kids that didn't get into VPI the year before.

Don’t make a new process. Just expand VPI.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
And it still comes down to the close proximity of McK and Reed and Ashlawn make it really hard to draw a reasonable boundary for all there to be neighborhood schools. If McK wanted to stay put they needed to fight the charge to make Reed a neighborhood school. But that wasn't happening because a good chunk of McK is in Westover and they wanted a neighborhood school there.


I'd want to see boundaries/walk zones map with Tuckahoe being option and compare that to option 1's map, before concluding the same, if I were McKinley PTA. Remember if one is not overwhelmingly 'better' then it's just a game of playing politics.


If they move ATS to Tuckahoe rather than to McKinley, you can create a map that balances capacity and looks very similar to the proposal #1 map. The problem with that proposal isn't the boundaries so much as how it will negatively affect ATS. By moving it further from SA, you will reduce the number of students it pulls from SA schools (particularly low-income students), and you be basically prevent any further expansion of a very in-demand program because it will effectively max out Tuckahoe's capacity. By putting it at McKinley, you keep it more accessible to low-income students and allow for future growth of the program.

I don't see APS successfully moving ATS to a location that is basically inaccessible for all of South Arlington and all high poverty communities in the County and getting away with it. The ATS community would lose their shit, AEM would get in a line to see who could condemn it the most in terms of impact on the poor.

McKrazy was already not a great look but if she is seriously arguing that the best solution is to keep her precious school from moving so she's not personally inconvenienced and to hoard ATS as only an option for the wealthiest of the wealthy - that is an even more selfish, self serving, terrible look. I think that would really be the straw that broke the camels back in terms of the County. Alot of people who have previously played along would start getting super on board with blowing the whole system up and support the future board member who wants to go all lottery.

The vast majority of SA kids that attend ATS are the UMC white people who don’t want to go to their neighborhood school. ATS’s diversity stats come from mostly their VPI kids. The worst part of moving ATS to McKinley is that the expansion of ATS would actually further the segregation of SA schools. The NA kids that attend ATS often applied to escape their overcrowded schools. Now that they won’t be overcrowded, not as many kids will apply - except they could get a flood of applicants from the 200+ kid in the McKinley walk zone. I predict if they move ATS to McKinley and expand it to 800 kids (likely McKinley currently houses w trailers) it could be detrimental the the SA neighborhood schools.

What if they expanded exclusively with more VPI students?

Or conduct a lottery that provides seats by the home neighborhood school proportionate to the FR/L rate?

Right! K lottery should have a FR/L preference.

Literally VPI

IN ADDITION to the VPI kids. VPI preference for K and then additional preference for FR/L kids that didn't get into VPI the year before.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
And it still comes down to the close proximity of McK and Reed and Ashlawn make it really hard to draw a reasonable boundary for all there to be neighborhood schools. If McK wanted to stay put they needed to fight the charge to make Reed a neighborhood school. But that wasn't happening because a good chunk of McK is in Westover and they wanted a neighborhood school there.


I'd want to see boundaries/walk zones map with Tuckahoe being option and compare that to option 1's map, before concluding the same, if I were McKinley PTA. Remember if one is not overwhelmingly 'better' then it's just a game of playing politics.


If they move ATS to Tuckahoe rather than to McKinley, you can create a map that balances capacity and looks very similar to the proposal #1 map. The problem with that proposal isn't the boundaries so much as how it will negatively affect ATS. By moving it further from SA, you will reduce the number of students it pulls from SA schools (particularly low-income students), and you be basically prevent any further expansion of a very in-demand program because it will effectively max out Tuckahoe's capacity. By putting it at McKinley, you keep it more accessible to low-income students and allow for future growth of the program.

I don't see APS successfully moving ATS to a location that is basically inaccessible for all of South Arlington and all high poverty communities in the County and getting away with it. The ATS community would lose their shit, AEM would get in a line to see who could condemn it the most in terms of impact on the poor.

McKrazy was already not a great look but if she is seriously arguing that the best solution is to keep her precious school from moving so she's not personally inconvenienced and to hoard ATS as only an option for the wealthiest of the wealthy - that is an even more selfish, self serving, terrible look. I think that would really be the straw that broke the camels back in terms of the County. Alot of people who have previously played along would start getting super on board with blowing the whole system up and support the future board member who wants to go all lottery.

The vast majority of SA kids that attend ATS are the UMC white people who don’t want to go to their neighborhood school. ATS’s diversity stats come from mostly their VPI kids. The worst part of moving ATS to McKinley is that the expansion of ATS would actually further the segregation of SA schools. The NA kids that attend ATS often applied to escape their overcrowded schools. Now that they won’t be overcrowded, not as many kids will apply - except they could get a flood of applicants from the 200+ kid in the McKinley walk zone. I predict if they move ATS to McKinley and expand it to 800 kids (likely McKinley currently houses w trailers) it could be detrimental the the SA neighborhood schools.

What if they expanded exclusively with more VPI students?

Or conduct a lottery that provides seats by the home neighborhood school proportionate to the FR/L rate?

Right! K lottery should have a FR/L preference.

Literally VPI

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
And it still comes down to the close proximity of McK and Reed and Ashlawn make it really hard to draw a reasonable boundary for all there to be neighborhood schools. If McK wanted to stay put they needed to fight the charge to make Reed a neighborhood school. But that wasn't happening because a good chunk of McK is in Westover and they wanted a neighborhood school there.


I'd want to see boundaries/walk zones map with Tuckahoe being option and compare that to option 1's map, before concluding the same, if I were McKinley PTA. Remember if one is not overwhelmingly 'better' then it's just a game of playing politics.


If they move ATS to Tuckahoe rather than to McKinley, you can create a map that balances capacity and looks very similar to the proposal #1 map. The problem with that proposal isn't the boundaries so much as how it will negatively affect ATS. By moving it further from SA, you will reduce the number of students it pulls from SA schools (particularly low-income students), and you be basically prevent any further expansion of a very in-demand program because it will effectively max out Tuckahoe's capacity. By putting it at McKinley, you keep it more accessible to low-income students and allow for future growth of the program.

I don't see APS successfully moving ATS to a location that is basically inaccessible for all of South Arlington and all high poverty communities in the County and getting away with it. The ATS community would lose their shit, AEM would get in a line to see who could condemn it the most in terms of impact on the poor.

McKrazy was already not a great look but if she is seriously arguing that the best solution is to keep her precious school from moving so she's not personally inconvenienced and to hoard ATS as only an option for the wealthiest of the wealthy - that is an even more selfish, self serving, terrible look. I think that would really be the straw that broke the camels back in terms of the County. Alot of people who have previously played along would start getting super on board with blowing the whole system up and support the future board member who wants to go all lottery.

The vast majority of SA kids that attend ATS are the UMC white people who don’t want to go to their neighborhood school. ATS’s diversity stats come from mostly their VPI kids. The worst part of moving ATS to McKinley is that the expansion of ATS would actually further the segregation of SA schools. The NA kids that attend ATS often applied to escape their overcrowded schools. Now that they won’t be overcrowded, not as many kids will apply - except they could get a flood of applicants from the 200+ kid in the McKinley walk zone. I predict if they move ATS to McKinley and expand it to 800 kids (likely McKinley currently houses w trailers) it could be detrimental the the SA neighborhood schools.

What if they expanded exclusively with more VPI students?

Or conduct a lottery that provides seats by the home neighborhood school proportionate to the FR/L rate?

Right! K lottery should have a FR/L preference.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you guys are missing the point. First - very low income kids aren't gonna want to schlep all the way up to Tuckahoe. There is no high poverty community anywhere near there. They were already freaking out about moving a mile from Key to ATS. Now you wanna move ATS to the far reaches of the county and what - tell all the people in affordable housing along Columbia Pike that they can take 2 buses and a Metro to pick up their kids from after care?

And 2nd - South Arlington schools are a shit-show and the only thing keeping Middle Class/UMC buy-in is option spaces. If you move the highest rated option school to a place where it is virtually inaccessible for all but the very rich AND or take away option spots via VPI and reserve slots based on FRL - you are going to have a massive rebellion of the MC/ UMC South Arlington and East Arlington families (who will also be pissed by an ATS move to Tuckahoe).

I know you think that the MC is just a group of annoying whiners who you wish would just move away so their existence wouldn't inconvenience you - but this is still the wrong play for everyone in the County - unless you think full lottery for every school in the county is gonna go great for you. APS staff is already floating the idea. One of the School Board candidates is running on the idea. Give every Middle Class person in Arlington a reason to F it and get on board with a lottery because its the only way their kids even have a chance. I promise you you won't love the result.

One small data-point. Any child has about a 6% chance of getting into ATS if they are not VPI. Therefore I don't your #2 is valid.

Yes - I don’t get that argument based on the # of kids who actually attend ATS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you guys are missing the point. First - very low income kids aren't gonna want to schlep all the way up to Tuckahoe. There is no high poverty community anywhere near there. They were already freaking out about moving a mile from Key to ATS. Now you wanna move ATS to the far reaches of the county and what - tell all the people in affordable housing along Columbia Pike that they can take 2 buses and a Metro to pick up their kids from after care?

And 2nd - South Arlington schools are a shit-show and the only thing keeping Middle Class/UMC buy-in is option spaces. If you move the highest rated option school to a place where it is virtually inaccessible for all but the very rich AND or take away option spots via VPI and reserve slots based on FRL - you are going to have a massive rebellion of the MC/ UMC South Arlington and East Arlington families (who will also be pissed by an ATS move to Tuckahoe).

I know you think that the MC is just a group of annoying whiners who you wish would just move away so their existence wouldn't inconvenience you - but this is still the wrong play for everyone in the County - unless you think full lottery for every school in the county is gonna go great for you. APS staff is already floating the idea. One of the School Board candidates is running on the idea. Give every Middle Class person in Arlington a reason to F it and get on board with a lottery because its the only way their kids even have a chance. I promise you you won't love the result.

MC whiner here. I think NA will miss us when we’re gone. They won’t like the republican private school types that replace us, and they won’t like having their kids rezoned to half empty south Arlington elementaries that function as social service centers first and elementary schools second.

Uh. I don’t think that is who will replace you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you guys are missing the point. First - very low income kids aren't gonna want to schlep all the way up to Tuckahoe. There is no high poverty community anywhere near there. They were already freaking out about moving a mile from Key to ATS. Now you wanna move ATS to the far reaches of the county and what - tell all the people in affordable housing along Columbia Pike that they can take 2 buses and a Metro to pick up their kids from after care?

And 2nd - South Arlington schools are a shit-show and the only thing keeping Middle Class/UMC buy-in is option spaces. If you move the highest rated option school to a place where it is virtually inaccessible for all but the very rich AND or take away option spots via VPI and reserve slots based on FRL - you are going to have a massive rebellion of the MC/ UMC South Arlington and East Arlington families (who will also be pissed by an ATS move to Tuckahoe).

I know you think that the MC is just a group of annoying whiners who you wish would just move away so their existence wouldn't inconvenience you - but this is still the wrong play for everyone in the County - unless you think full lottery for every school in the county is gonna go great for you. APS staff is already floating the idea. One of the School Board candidates is running on the idea. Give every Middle Class person in Arlington a reason to F it and get on board with a lottery because its the only way their kids even have a chance. I promise you you won't love the result.

MC whiner here. I think NA will miss us when we’re gone. They won’t like the republican private school types that replace us, and they won’t like having their kids rezoned to half empty south Arlington elementaries that function as social service centers first and elementary schools second.

Anonymous wrote:I think you guys are missing the point. First - very low income kids aren't gonna want to schlep all the way up to Tuckahoe. There is no high poverty community anywhere near there. They were already freaking out about moving a mile from Key to ATS. Now you wanna move ATS to the far reaches of the county and what - tell all the people in affordable housing along Columbia Pike that they can take 2 buses and a Metro to pick up their kids from after care?

And 2nd - South Arlington schools are a shit-show and the only thing keeping Middle Class/UMC buy-in is option spaces. If you move the highest rated option school to a place where it is virtually inaccessible for all but the very rich AND or take away option spots via VPI and reserve slots based on FRL - you are going to have a massive rebellion of the MC/ UMC South Arlington and East Arlington families (who will also be pissed by an ATS move to Tuckahoe).

I know you think that the MC is just a group of annoying whiners who you wish would just move away so their existence wouldn't inconvenience you - but this is still the wrong play for everyone in the County - unless you think full lottery for every school in the county is gonna go great for you. APS staff is already floating the idea. One of the School Board candidates is running on the idea. Give every Middle Class person in Arlington a reason to F it and get on board with a lottery because its the only way their kids even have a chance. I promise you you won't love the result.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you guys are missing the point. First - very low income kids aren't gonna want to schlep all the way up to Tuckahoe. There is no high poverty community anywhere near there. They were already freaking out about moving a mile from Key to ATS. Now you wanna move ATS to the far reaches of the county and what - tell all the people in affordable housing along Columbia Pike that they can take 2 buses and a Metro to pick up their kids from after care?

And 2nd - South Arlington schools are a shit-show and the only thing keeping Middle Class/UMC buy-in is option spaces. If you move the highest rated option school to a place where it is virtually inaccessible for all but the very rich AND or take away option spots via VPI and reserve slots based on FRL - you are going to have a massive rebellion of the MC/ UMC South Arlington and East Arlington families (who will also be pissed by an ATS move to Tuckahoe).

I know you think that the MC is just a group of annoying whiners who you wish would just move away so their existence wouldn't inconvenience you - but this is still the wrong play for everyone in the County - unless you think full lottery for every school in the county is gonna go great for you. APS staff is already floating the idea. One of the School Board candidates is running on the idea. Give every Middle Class person in Arlington a reason to F it and get on board with a lottery because its the only way their kids even have a chance. I promise you you won't love the result.

One small data-point. Any child has about a 6% chance of getting into ATS if they are not VPI. Therefore I don't your #2 is valid.

Anonymous wrote:I think you guys are missing the point. First - very low income kids aren't gonna want to schlep all the way up to Tuckahoe. There is no high poverty community anywhere near there. They were already freaking out about moving a mile from Key to ATS. Now you wanna move ATS to the far reaches of the county and what - tell all the people in affordable housing along Columbia Pike that they can take 2 buses and a Metro to pick up their kids from after care?

And 2nd - South Arlington schools are a shit-show and the only thing keeping Middle Class/UMC buy-in is option spaces. If you move the highest rated option school to a place where it is virtually inaccessible for all but the very rich AND or take away option spots via VPI and reserve slots based on FRL - you are going to have a massive rebellion of the MC/ UMC South Arlington and East Arlington families (who will also be pissed by an ATS move to Tuckahoe).

I know you think that the MC is just a group of annoying whiners who you wish would just move away so their existence wouldn't inconvenience you - but this is still the wrong play for everyone in the County - unless you think full lottery for every school in the county is gonna go great for you. APS staff is already floating the idea. One of the School Board candidates is running on the idea. Give every Middle Class person in Arlington a reason to F it and get on board with a lottery because its the only way their kids even have a chance. I promise you you won't love the result.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And it still comes down to the close proximity of McK and Reed and Ashlawn make it really hard to draw a reasonable boundary for all there to be neighborhood schools. If McK wanted to stay put they needed to fight the charge to make Reed a neighborhood school. But that wasn't happening because a good chunk of McK is in Westover and they wanted a neighborhood school there.

I'd want to see boundaries/walk zones map with Tuckahoe being option and compare that to option 1's map, before concluding the same, if I were McKinley PTA. Remember if one is not overwhelmingly 'better' then it's just a game of playing politics.

If they move ATS to Tuckahoe rather than to McKinley, you can create a map that balances capacity and looks very similar to the proposal #1 map. The problem with that proposal isn't the boundaries so much as how it will negatively affect ATS. By moving it further from SA, you will reduce the number of students it pulls from SA schools (particularly low-income students), and you be basically prevent any further expansion of a very in-demand program because it will effectively max out Tuckahoe's capacity. By putting it at McKinley, you keep it more accessible to low-income students and allow for future growth of the program.

Anonymous wrote:I think you guys are missing the point. First - very low income kids aren't gonna want to schlep all the way up to Tuckahoe. There is no high poverty community anywhere near there. They were already freaking out about moving a mile from Key to ATS. Now you wanna move ATS to the far reaches of the county and what - tell all the people in affordable housing along Columbia Pike that they can take 2 buses and a Metro to pick up their kids from after care?