Anonymous
11/11/2019 21:03
Subject: Re:The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
Name one school district that has successfully and popularly dealt geographically severe segregation by socio-economic class.
Anonymous
11/11/2019 19:48
Subject: Re:The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
They are not going to budge. They’ve sunk a lot of time and money into these proposals. They made a video! They planned this all summer. We might get a SB surprise. They love to do that. But staff won’t change course. That’s my prediction. And not sure they should. These are some pretty well thought plans.
The first plan is well thought out. The second one is not. It’s just too many moves and more than they really need to do to get reasonable boundaries around Reed. It also boxes them in for planning additions/new schools in the SW quadrant in the next CIP.
I disagree. The second plan was more thoughtful and nuanced - that's why more schools are involved!!
Where’s the nuance in moving a program away from the thing that makes it special and appealing just to take away neighborhood seats? Taking Carlin Springs offline isn’t smart until they have built a new school or addition in the SW quadrant. That’s why. Unlike the Key to ATS swap, this swap takes away neighborhood seats. It gives the bigger building to an option program. And either they plan to shrink the Campbell boundary, in which case many neighborhood kids will have to be bused to schools outside of their neighborhood not by choice, or they will put them in trailers rather than keep them in existing permanent seats until an adopted is built.
The idea is that many of those displaced Carlin Springs students will enter the immersion program. Then, CS' FRL goes down - and Campbell's goes up in its place.
Only if there's a neighborhood preference. If there's still a lottery there's no guarantee that more than a handful will enter it.
Assuming the lottery is like it is today, there is no need for neighborhood preference for native speakers. They can show up and register up to the week before school starting -- there isn't a waiting list and the spots are held for them. If APS does any outreach (which could be as simple as the registrar at Campbell/Barcroft/Ashlawn/whereever letting them know the program exists), there has to be an improvement versus how many kids apply now.
Did I miss something -- isn't Campbell already a Title 1 school even though its a county wide option (because most of the seats go to VPI)? How does making it a neighborhood school really effect things that much, considering up until last year it was a neighborhood school (there was neighborhood preference right)? It seems like they are trying to create another school like Randolph, which honestly may not be a bad idea since it allows them to really concentrate services and they make it an almost 100% walking school. I think its unfortunate that they have to move the EL program, but it doesn't seem like Campbell is a real county wide option as it is right now, since they reserve so many seats for VPI.
UGH!! This is exactly the mentality causing the problems!
So here is the reality - they will never zone across 50. Look at the uproar from N. Arlington having to move from 1 all rich school school to another all rich school. They will never use N. Arlington to fix segregation south of 50.
Reality part 2 - there are so many frl kids in the south (really the population numbers are astounding) that any attempt to rezone only south of 50 where you purposely tried to spread poverty, would just make every single school south of 50 over 50% frl and ever rising due to continued housing policies.
Reality part 3 - right now there are a handful of schools South of 50 that have balanced demographics and are pretty good. The people who live in those neighborhoods paid a premium to go to those schools (just like the people in N. Arlington did) and do not want their schools rezoned to be high poverty. Especially if its an only South Arlington solution while North Arlington sits with their 10% frl rates.
So unless you are going to topple the entire power structure of the County to dismantle the Affordable Housing beast; and also somehow force County-wide busing along North-South lines; and stay in power long enough to continue to enforce that busing --- There is no solution to this. Ever.
At which point you have to decide what is the best of a very bad situation - some 100% poverty schools with wrap around services that do the best they can while you maintain some good schools and decent pockets of prosperity South of 50? Or fully sacrifice half the County? If Arlington rezoned every school south of 50 to be over 50% poverty the UMC and MC would bail. And then you end up with every school in a death spiral.
saying that "this mentality causes the problems" is disingenuous at best. Housing Policy and segregation caused the problems.
It isn't disingenuous. Yes, housing policies are the most direct and influential factor. But even those policies were made from NIMBY desires and "protecting" MC and UMC neighborhoods. Nevertheless, the rationale that concentrating these populations in our schools so that we can efficiently provide wraparound services perpetuates the problem and precludes anyone from pursuing any policies to mitigate the impacts. There ARE things a school system can do to mitigate the impacts of those housing policies - it just won't ever happen in Arlington. And so we rationalize that it's a good thing to do because it better serves these populations. Except, it DOESN'T really serve them the best they can be served. What gets my goat even more is the people who justify this system adamantly denying that other kids "caught" in these schools are not being served as well as they could or should be and most certainly are not being served as well as their cohorts in those under 20% schools. And they will fall on their swords denying it because their kids aren't in these schools and will never be affected. If we're going to intentionally administer a segregated system and believe the low-income, ELL students are best served in this manner, then non low-income/non-ELL students districted to those schools should have a guaranteed opt-out to a neighborhood school with less than 25% FRL and ELL.
Anonymous
11/11/2019 18:18
Subject: The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
Anonymous wrote:And god forbid your home gets zoned with the schools that "specialize in addressing the needs of our immigrant communities." Barcroft, Randolph, Carlin Springs. Because you are destined to be at 60-70 FRL for good. My home was in one of those neighborhoods. I bought it when the numbers were around 50 %. Thought that would be great and that it might gentrify to something like 35-40 over the years. Then, I learned about the County plans for Columbia Pike. And I watched the numbers rise and rise. The Pike will never gentrify. It's 100% CAF buildings have 60 year leases.
Maybe not gentrify but if it could get a balance that would be worth fighting for. Instead of fighting against AH, which is a non starter, fight for middle class density, e.g., townhomes and duplexes and triplexes.
Anonymous
11/11/2019 18:07
Subject: The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
And god forbid your home gets zoned with the schools that "specialize in addressing the needs of our immigrant communities." Barcroft, Randolph, Carlin Springs. Because you are destined to be at 60-70 FRL for good. My home was in one of those neighborhoods. I bought it when the numbers were around 50 %. Thought that would be great and that it might gentrify to something like 35-40 over the years. Then, I learned about the County plans for Columbia Pike. And I watched the numbers rise and rise. The Pike will never gentrify. It's 100% CAF buildings have 60 year leases.
Anonymous
11/11/2019 17:39
Subject: Re:The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
They are not going to budge. They’ve sunk a lot of time and money into these proposals. They made a video! They planned this all summer. We might get a SB surprise. They love to do that. But staff won’t change course. That’s my prediction. And not sure they should. These are some pretty well thought plans.
The first plan is well thought out. The second one is not. It’s just too many moves and more than they really need to do to get reasonable boundaries around Reed. It also boxes them in for planning additions/new schools in the SW quadrant in the next CIP.
I disagree. The second plan was more thoughtful and nuanced - that's why more schools are involved!!
Where’s the nuance in moving a program away from the thing that makes it special and appealing just to take away neighborhood seats? Taking Carlin Springs offline isn’t smart until they have built a new school or addition in the SW quadrant. That’s why. Unlike the Key to ATS swap, this swap takes away neighborhood seats. It gives the bigger building to an option program. And either they plan to shrink the Campbell boundary, in which case many neighborhood kids will have to be bused to schools outside of their neighborhood not by choice, or they will put them in trailers rather than keep them in existing permanent seats until an adopted is built.
The idea is that many of those displaced Carlin Springs students will enter the immersion program. Then, CS' FRL goes down - and Campbell's goes up in its place.
Only if there's a neighborhood preference. If there's still a lottery there's no guarantee that more than a handful will enter it.
Assuming the lottery is like it is today, there is no need for neighborhood preference for native speakers. They can show up and register up to the week before school starting -- there isn't a waiting list and the spots are held for them. If APS does any outreach (which could be as simple as the registrar at Campbell/Barcroft/Ashlawn/whereever letting them know the program exists), there has to be an improvement versus how many kids apply now.
Did I miss something -- isn't Campbell already a Title 1 school even though its a county wide option (because most of the seats go to VPI)? How does making it a neighborhood school really effect things that much, considering up until last year it was a neighborhood school (there was neighborhood preference right)? It seems like they are trying to create another school like Randolph, which honestly may not be a bad idea since it allows them to really concentrate services and they make it an almost 100% walking school. I think its unfortunate that they have to move the EL program, but it doesn't seem like Campbell is a real county wide option as it is right now, since they reserve so many seats for VPI.
UGH!! This is exactly the mentality causing the problems!
So here is the reality - they will never zone across 50. Look at the uproar from N. Arlington having to move from 1 all rich school school to another all rich school. They will never use N. Arlington to fix segregation south of 50.
Reality part 2 - there are so many frl kids in the south (really the population numbers are astounding) that any attempt to rezone only south of 50 where you purposely tried to spread poverty, would just make every single school south of 50 over 50% frl and ever rising due to continued housing policies.
Reality part 3 - right now there are a handful of schools South of 50 that have balanced demographics and are pretty good. The people who live in those neighborhoods paid a premium to go to those schools (just like the people in N. Arlington did) and do not want their schools rezoned to be high poverty. Especially if its an only South Arlington solution while North Arlington sits with their 10% frl rates.
So unless you are going to topple the entire power structure of the County to dismantle the Affordable Housing beast; and also somehow force County-wide busing along North-South lines; and stay in power long enough to continue to enforce that busing --- There is no solution to this. Ever.
At which point you have to decide what is the best of a very bad situation - some 100% poverty schools with wrap around services that do the best they can while you maintain some good schools and decent pockets of prosperity South of 50? Or fully sacrifice half the County? If Arlington rezoned every school south of 50 to be over 50% poverty the UMC and MC would bail. And then you end up with every school in a death spiral.
saying that "this mentality causes the problems" is disingenuous at best. Housing Policy and segregation caused the problems.
This is a very accurate summary. You either live with these realities or you leave, because the south Arlington middle and upper middle class has zero clout with our elected officials.
Probably the best that can be done is to support policies that ensure future density in South Arlington is not entirely low income housing and rentals for singles. To be blunt, we need townhouses out the wazoo, and to push back on efforts to limit them (AH proponents hate townhomes) using the county’s own “missing middle” language.
Anonymous
11/11/2019 17:29
Subject: The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
Anyone heard about McKinley and ATS working together? That's why I'd do if I were one those fringe McKinley families who doesn't want it to move to Reed.
Other idea. We save McKinley in name: McKinley Elementary at the Reed School. Like Hamm Middle at the Stafford Building. Everyone happy now?
Other idea. We save McKinley in name: McKinley Elementary at the Reed School. Like Hamm Middle at the Stafford Building. Everyone happy now?
Anonymous
11/11/2019 16:59
Subject: Re:The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
Some of the McKinley families majorly grasping at straws. Suggesting key move to Jamestown. I’m sure there will be plenty of Spanish speaking families jumping to be bussed to Jamestown ?
Anonymous
11/11/2019 16:38
Subject: Re:The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
They are not going to budge. They’ve sunk a lot of time and money into these proposals. They made a video! They planned this all summer. We might get a SB surprise. They love to do that. But staff won’t change course. That’s my prediction. And not sure they should. These are some pretty well thought plans.
The first plan is well thought out. The second one is not. It’s just too many moves and more than they really need to do to get reasonable boundaries around Reed. It also boxes them in for planning additions/new schools in the SW quadrant in the next CIP.
I disagree. The second plan was more thoughtful and nuanced - that's why more schools are involved!!
Where’s the nuance in moving a program away from the thing that makes it special and appealing just to take away neighborhood seats? Taking Carlin Springs offline isn’t smart until they have built a new school or addition in the SW quadrant. That’s why. Unlike the Key to ATS swap, this swap takes away neighborhood seats. It gives the bigger building to an option program. And either they plan to shrink the Campbell boundary, in which case many neighborhood kids will have to be bused to schools outside of their neighborhood not by choice, or they will put them in trailers rather than keep them in existing permanent seats until an adopted is built.
The idea is that many of those displaced Carlin Springs students will enter the immersion program. Then, CS' FRL goes down - and Campbell's goes up in its place.
Only if there's a neighborhood preference. If there's still a lottery there's no guarantee that more than a handful will enter it.
Assuming the lottery is like it is today, there is no need for neighborhood preference for native speakers. They can show up and register up to the week before school starting -- there isn't a waiting list and the spots are held for them. If APS does any outreach (which could be as simple as the registrar at Campbell/Barcroft/Ashlawn/whereever letting them know the program exists), there has to be an improvement versus how many kids apply now.
Did I miss something -- isn't Campbell already a Title 1 school even though its a county wide option (because most of the seats go to VPI)? How does making it a neighborhood school really effect things that much, considering up until last year it was a neighborhood school (there was neighborhood preference right)? It seems like they are trying to create another school like Randolph, which honestly may not be a bad idea since it allows them to really concentrate services and they make it an almost 100% walking school. I think its unfortunate that they have to move the EL program, but it doesn't seem like Campbell is a real county wide option as it is right now, since they reserve so many seats for VPI.
UGH!! This is exactly the mentality causing the problems!
So here is the reality - they will never zone across 50. Look at the uproar from N. Arlington having to move from 1 all rich school school to another all rich school. They will never use N. Arlington to fix segregation south of 50.
Reality part 2 - there are so many frl kids in the south (really the population numbers are astounding) that any attempt to rezone only south of 50 where you purposely tried to spread poverty, would just make every single school south of 50 over 50% frl and ever rising due to continued housing policies.
Reality part 3 - right now there are a handful of schools South of 50 that have balanced demographics and are pretty good. The people who live in those neighborhoods paid a premium to go to those schools (just like the people in N. Arlington did) and do not want their schools rezoned to be high poverty. Especially if its an only South Arlington solution while North Arlington sits with their 10% frl rates.
So unless you are going to topple the entire power structure of the County to dismantle the Affordable Housing beast; and also somehow force County-wide busing along North-South lines; and stay in power long enough to continue to enforce that busing --- There is no solution to this. Ever.
At which point you have to decide what is the best of a very bad situation - some 100% poverty schools with wrap around services that do the best they can while you maintain some good schools and decent pockets of prosperity South of 50? Or fully sacrifice half the County? If Arlington rezoned every school south of 50 to be over 50% poverty the UMC and MC would bail. And then you end up with every school in a death spiral.
saying that "this mentality causes the problems" is disingenuous at best. Housing Policy and segregation caused the problems.
I disagree that South Arlington families would bail at 50%. That’s a totally workable number and what Henry had when it was posting some great results and just a few years before Blue Ribbon status. It’s good to have Title 1 money and still be able to raise PTA funds. That’s a number where many families decide to stick around and really try to invest in their own communities, rather than moving N or W, because nobody moves to South Arlington for the low poverty schools. Families bail closer to 60%, and when they get the message that their kids are not a priority at all. Making a “community” school that really only addresses the symptoms of poverty, without providing any of the opportunities or enrichment of lower poverty schools just a mile away only accelerates segregation and limits opportunities for children of all backgrounds.
Anonymous
11/11/2019 16:15
Subject: Re:The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
They are not going to budge. They’ve sunk a lot of time and money into these proposals. They made a video! They planned this all summer. We might get a SB surprise. They love to do that. But staff won’t change course. That’s my prediction. And not sure they should. These are some pretty well thought plans.
The first plan is well thought out. The second one is not. It’s just too many moves and more than they really need to do to get reasonable boundaries around Reed. It also boxes them in for planning additions/new schools in the SW quadrant in the next CIP.
I disagree. The second plan was more thoughtful and nuanced - that's why more schools are involved!!
Where’s the nuance in moving a program away from the thing that makes it special and appealing just to take away neighborhood seats? Taking Carlin Springs offline isn’t smart until they have built a new school or addition in the SW quadrant. That’s why. Unlike the Key to ATS swap, this swap takes away neighborhood seats. It gives the bigger building to an option program. And either they plan to shrink the Campbell boundary, in which case many neighborhood kids will have to be bused to schools outside of their neighborhood not by choice, or they will put them in trailers rather than keep them in existing permanent seats until an adopted is built.
The idea is that many of those displaced Carlin Springs students will enter the immersion program. Then, CS' FRL goes down - and Campbell's goes up in its place.
Only if there's a neighborhood preference. If there's still a lottery there's no guarantee that more than a handful will enter it.
Assuming the lottery is like it is today, there is no need for neighborhood preference for native speakers. They can show up and register up to the week before school starting -- there isn't a waiting list and the spots are held for them. If APS does any outreach (which could be as simple as the registrar at Campbell/Barcroft/Ashlawn/whereever letting them know the program exists), there has to be an improvement versus how many kids apply now.
Did I miss something -- isn't Campbell already a Title 1 school even though its a county wide option (because most of the seats go to VPI)? How does making it a neighborhood school really effect things that much, considering up until last year it was a neighborhood school (there was neighborhood preference right)? It seems like they are trying to create another school like Randolph, which honestly may not be a bad idea since it allows them to really concentrate services and they make it an almost 100% walking school. I think its unfortunate that they have to move the EL program, but it doesn't seem like Campbell is a real county wide option as it is right now, since they reserve so many seats for VPI.
UGH!! This is exactly the mentality causing the problems!
So here is the reality - they will never zone across 50. Look at the uproar from N. Arlington having to move from 1 all rich school school to another all rich school. They will never use N. Arlington to fix segregation south of 50.
Reality part 2 - there are so many frl kids in the south (really the population numbers are astounding) that any attempt to rezone only south of 50 where you purposely tried to spread poverty, would just make every single school south of 50 over 50% frl and ever rising due to continued housing policies.
Reality part 3 - right now there are a handful of schools South of 50 that have balanced demographics and are pretty good. The people who live in those neighborhoods paid a premium to go to those schools (just like the people in N. Arlington did) and do not want their schools rezoned to be high poverty. Especially if its an only South Arlington solution while North Arlington sits with their 10% frl rates.
So unless you are going to topple the entire power structure of the County to dismantle the Affordable Housing beast; and also somehow force County-wide busing along North-South lines; and stay in power long enough to continue to enforce that busing --- There is no solution to this. Ever.
At which point you have to decide what is the best of a very bad situation - some 100% poverty schools with wrap around services that do the best they can while you maintain some good schools and decent pockets of prosperity South of 50? Or fully sacrifice half the County? If Arlington rezoned every school south of 50 to be over 50% poverty the UMC and MC would bail. And then you end up with every school in a death spiral.
saying that "this mentality causes the problems" is disingenuous at best. Housing Policy and segregation caused the problems.
Anonymous
11/11/2019 15:25
Subject: The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They are not going to budge. They’ve sunk a lot of time and money into these proposals. They made a video! They planned this all summer. We might get a SB surprise. They love to do that. But staff won’t change course. That’s my prediction. And not sure they should. These are some pretty well thought plans.
The first plan is well thought out. The second one is not. It’s just too many moves and more than they really need to do to get reasonable boundaries around Reed. It also boxes them in for planning additions/new schools in the SW quadrant in the next CIP.
I disagree. The second plan was more thoughtful and nuanced - that's why more schools are involved!!
Where’s the nuance in moving a program away from the thing that makes it special and appealing just to take away neighborhood seats? Taking Carlin Springs offline isn’t smart until they have built a new school or addition in the SW quadrant. That’s why. Unlike the Key to ATS swap, this swap takes away neighborhood seats. It gives the bigger building to an option program. And either they plan to shrink the Campbell boundary, in which case many neighborhood kids will have to be bused to schools outside of their neighborhood not by choice, or they will put them in trailers rather than keep them in existing permanent seats until an adopted is built.
The idea is that many of those displaced Carlin Springs students will enter the immersion program. Then, CS' FRL goes down - and Campbell's goes up in its place.
Only if there's a neighborhood preference. If there's still a lottery there's no guarantee that more than a handful will enter it.
Assuming the lottery is like it is today, there is no need for neighborhood preference for native speakers. They can show up and register up to the week before school starting -- there isn't a waiting list and the spots are held for them. If APS does any outreach (which could be as simple as the registrar at Campbell/Barcroft/Ashlawn/whereever letting them know the program exists), there has to be an improvement versus how many kids apply now.
Did I miss something -- isn't Campbell already a Title 1 school even though its a county wide option (because most of the seats go to VPI)? How does making it a neighborhood school really effect things that much, considering up until last year it was a neighborhood school (there was neighborhood preference right)? It seems like they are trying to create another school like Randolph, which honestly may not be a bad idea since it allows them to really concentrate services and they make it an almost 100% walking school. I think its unfortunate that they have to move the EL program, but it doesn't seem like Campbell is a real county wide option as it is right now, since they reserve so many seats for VPI.
UGH!! This is exactly the mentality causing the problems!
Anonymous
11/11/2019 14:11
Subject: The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
Great post above. Speaks the truth about the MC experience at S Arl schools. Seems great in K and then your kids get older and you realize they are “fine.”
Anonymous
11/11/2019 13:32
Subject: The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They are not going to budge. They’ve sunk a lot of time and money into these proposals. They made a video! They planned this all summer. We might get a SB surprise. They love to do that. But staff won’t change course. That’s my prediction. And not sure they should. These are some pretty well thought plans.
The first plan is well thought out. The second one is not. It’s just too many moves and more than they really need to do to get reasonable boundaries around Reed. It also boxes them in for planning additions/new schools in the SW quadrant in the next CIP.
I disagree. The second plan was more thoughtful and nuanced - that's why more schools are involved!!
Where’s the nuance in moving a program away from the thing that makes it special and appealing just to take away neighborhood seats? Taking Carlin Springs offline isn’t smart until they have built a new school or addition in the SW quadrant. That’s why. Unlike the Key to ATS swap, this swap takes away neighborhood seats. It gives the bigger building to an option program. And either they plan to shrink the Campbell boundary, in which case many neighborhood kids will have to be bused to schools outside of their neighborhood not by choice, or they will put them in trailers rather than keep them in existing permanent seats until an adopted is built.
The idea is that many of those displaced Carlin Springs students will enter the immersion program. Then, CS' FRL goes down - and Campbell's goes up in its place.
Only if there's a neighborhood preference. If there's still a lottery there's no guarantee that more than a handful will enter it.
Assuming the lottery is like it is today, there is no need for neighborhood preference for native speakers. They can show up and register up to the week before school starting -- there isn't a waiting list and the spots are held for them. If APS does any outreach (which could be as simple as the registrar at Campbell/Barcroft/Ashlawn/whereever letting them know the program exists), there has to be an improvement versus how many kids apply now.
Did I miss something -- isn't Campbell already a Title 1 school even though its a county wide option (because most of the seats go to VPI)? How does making it a neighborhood school really effect things that much, considering up until last year it was a neighborhood school (there was neighborhood preference right)? It seems like they are trying to create another school like Randolph, which honestly may not be a bad idea since it allows them to really concentrate services and they make it an almost 100% walking school. I think its unfortunate that they have to move the EL program, but it doesn't seem like Campbell is a real county wide option as it is right now, since they reserve so many seats for VPI.
The problem with creating these high poverty community schools is that they tend to be segregated, and they also don’t well serve kids who don’t need language instruction, social workers, and other services. They’re mostly good for poor kids and the efficient distribution of services they require.
MC and UMC kids have far, far fewer peers in the classroom, And the consequence is that and the pace of instruction lags relative to more integrated schools and schools where SOLs are more of chore instead a decisive, all important event (because achievement gap). That is why UMC parents avoid these schools. Not because of poverty itself, but because the remedies for it actually hinder their own children’s progress (for many parents, academic excellence starts early and def not the same as “they’ll be fine”). This is not an imaginary either; lots of open minded parents give these schools a go and after a couple years realize that their kid needs something else.
Anonymous
11/11/2019 12:53
Subject: The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They are not going to budge. They’ve sunk a lot of time and money into these proposals. They made a video! They planned this all summer. We might get a SB surprise. They love to do that. But staff won’t change course. That’s my prediction. And not sure they should. These are some pretty well thought plans.
The first plan is well thought out. The second one is not. It’s just too many moves and more than they really need to do to get reasonable boundaries around Reed. It also boxes them in for planning additions/new schools in the SW quadrant in the next CIP.
I disagree. The second plan was more thoughtful and nuanced - that's why more schools are involved!!
Where’s the nuance in moving a program away from the thing that makes it special and appealing just to take away neighborhood seats? Taking Carlin Springs offline isn’t smart until they have built a new school or addition in the SW quadrant. That’s why. Unlike the Key to ATS swap, this swap takes away neighborhood seats. It gives the bigger building to an option program. And either they plan to shrink the Campbell boundary, in which case many neighborhood kids will have to be bused to schools outside of their neighborhood not by choice, or they will put them in trailers rather than keep them in existing permanent seats until an adopted is built.
The idea is that many of those displaced Carlin Springs students will enter the immersion program. Then, CS' FRL goes down - and Campbell's goes up in its place.
Only if there's a neighborhood preference. If there's still a lottery there's no guarantee that more than a handful will enter it.
Assuming the lottery is like it is today, there is no need for neighborhood preference for native speakers. They can show up and register up to the week before school starting -- there isn't a waiting list and the spots are held for them. If APS does any outreach (which could be as simple as the registrar at Campbell/Barcroft/Ashlawn/whereever letting them know the program exists), there has to be an improvement versus how many kids apply now.
Did I miss something -- isn't Campbell already a Title 1 school even though its a county wide option (because most of the seats go to VPI)? How does making it a neighborhood school really effect things that much, considering up until last year it was a neighborhood school (there was neighborhood preference right)? It seems like they are trying to create another school like Randolph, which honestly may not be a bad idea since it allows them to really concentrate services and they make it an almost 100% walking school. I think its unfortunate that they have to move the EL program, but it doesn't seem like Campbell is a real county wide option as it is right now, since they reserve so many seats for VPI.
Anonymous
11/11/2019 11:44
Subject: The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They are not going to budge. They’ve sunk a lot of time and money into these proposals. They made a video! They planned this all summer. We might get a SB surprise. They love to do that. But staff won’t change course. That’s my prediction. And not sure they should. These are some pretty well thought plans.
The first plan is well thought out. The second one is not. It’s just too many moves and more than they really need to do to get reasonable boundaries around Reed. It also boxes them in for planning additions/new schools in the SW quadrant in the next CIP.
I disagree. The second plan was more thoughtful and nuanced - that's why more schools are involved!!
Where’s the nuance in moving a program away from the thing that makes it special and appealing just to take away neighborhood seats? Taking Carlin Springs offline isn’t smart until they have built a new school or addition in the SW quadrant. That’s why. Unlike the Key to ATS swap, this swap takes away neighborhood seats. It gives the bigger building to an option program. And either they plan to shrink the Campbell boundary, in which case many neighborhood kids will have to be bused to schools outside of their neighborhood not by choice, or they will put them in trailers rather than keep them in existing permanent seats until an adopted is built.
The idea is that many of those displaced Carlin Springs students will enter the immersion program. Then, CS' FRL goes down - and Campbell's goes up in its place.
Only if there's a neighborhood preference. If there's still a lottery there's no guarantee that more than a handful will enter it.
Anonymous
11/11/2019 11:42
Subject: The demise of McKinley ES (APS)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They. Do. Not. Care. You cannot get this Board to care about FRL percentages. They won't hear it. Just try raising that with VanDoren, Talento or O'Grady. I dare you.
They are all running for re-election next year.
Just two: van doren and talento