Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Saw my first Krieger sign in someone's yard today.

Was it Krieger’s yard?

Nope. My neighbor's.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Saw my first Krieger sign in someone's yard today.

Was it Krieger’s yard?

Anonymous wrote:Saw my first Krieger sign in someone's yard today.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they explicitly grandfathered, but a lot of 8th graders transferred.

There are kids at WMS that live in the Hamm district. They basically granted any request of kids in any grade to go to/stay at WMS because of the contraction. Hamm will be much more full in 2-3 years. Parents were nervous about the transition to the new school, but of friends I know there, I've only heard wonderful things. I think as that area experiences growth it will be full soon enough.

I don't understand the fears of starting at a brand new school....

I don't understand a lot of Arlington parents' fears. I would understand if your kid was going to be the only one moving to a new school, but when they're part of a huge group moving (thinking of Hamm and Reed/Ashlawn) -- come on, your kids can cope better than you give them credit for

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they explicitly grandfathered, but a lot of 8th graders transferred.

There are kids at WMS that live in the Hamm district. They basically granted any request of kids in any grade to go to/stay at WMS because of the contraction. Hamm will be much more full in 2-3 years. Parents were nervous about the transition to the new school, but of friends I know there, I've only heard wonderful things. I think as that area experiences growth it will be full soon enough.

I don't understand the fears of starting at a brand new school....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they explicitly grandfathered, but a lot of 8th graders transferred.

There are kids at WMS that live in the Hamm district. They basically granted any request of kids in any grade to go to/stay at WMS because of the contraction. Hamm will be much more full in 2-3 years. Parents were nervous about the transition to the new school, but of friends I know there, I've only heard wonderful things. I think as that area experiences growth it will be full soon enough.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they explicitly grandfathered, but a lot of 8th graders transferred.

There are kids at WMS that live in the Hamm district. They basically granted any request of kids in any grade to go to/stay at WMS because of the contraction. Hamm will be much more full in 2-3 years. Parents were nervous about the transition to the new school, but of friends I know there, I've only heard wonderful things. I think as that area experiences growth it will be full soon enough.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think they explicitly grandfathered, but a lot of 8th graders transferred.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To play devil's advocate, I was pro-move, but I can see taking a stand against it on two grounds that might be justifiable:

1) Not being convinced APS really has the correct data or is properly resourced to make these decisions

2) Not knowing whether school moves will make us more or less segregated

To me this is just a permanent Get Out of Jail Free card for people who don't like what APS is proposing. The data will always be wrong and untrustworthy and not enough for some people. Have staff screwed up before? Sure. Will they make mistakes going forward? Sure. I thought they were pretty damn transparent this go around about the date they were using and what they've done to try to fix past errors.

I can tell you I trust APS staff more than the armchair warriors that put together the crazy alternative maps.

I think the biggest piece of uncertainty here is the assumptions they make regarding how many kids stick with the immersion program when it moves. If they assume everyone sticks with the program, then no-brainer, moves make a lot of sense. If you assume 60% stick the with program, then maybe it makes sense still, because there would still be room at Key for at least the more disadvantaged parts of the key walk zone and some of Rosslyn. If you assume no one stays with immersion, including the english speakers, then most of Rosslyn doesn't end up at key, they still end up having to go to Long Branch or Taylor (since they can't get bussed past key to asfs, and apparently asfs will be filled with kids from the ashlawn tail). If they honor the Key walk zone, then very little of Rosslyn ends up at key, most of them go to Taylor or Long Branch (since the key walk zone goes primarily west). Especially if you have to leave room for pre-K.

I am pro-move because long term wise, we need to have another elementary school in the eastern part of the county. But they are flying blind on drawing a boundary, since there is so much uncertainty with how things will shake out with the immersion move. Its very possible that a large chunk of the kids in apartments around key moved there specifically for immersion, and they may literally move with the program to a new apartment over by ats. I've heard three families say this personally. Its all very unclear.
Since you can't move kids once they've been moved, there is no margin for error here either, since everyone at neighborhood school key will have to stay there for at least five years. They can mitigate some of this by drawing a fuzzier boundary (having an upper/lower school for the entire eastern part of the county that is basically just current asfs + the taylor parts of the asfs and key walk zone), but according to aem, that's off the table. So I can understand some of the concerns about the data -- I personally don't trust APS staff to not screw this up, and it will take a lot of advocating from individual neighborhoods to make sure that they don't either completely empty out or overcrowd the new school at key. This entire thing is a mess of their own making -- people brought up that the change to the enrollments and transfers would create a unsustainable situation, but APSignored them at the time. People brought up that they were leaving Hamm underfilled at the time, APS ignored them there as well. There isn't a long history of APS making good decisions as far as the eastern part of the county is concerned.

Really? Are these the low-income families? I don't think most low-income families in immersion chose their apartment based on getting into immersion. You don't have many choices when you are low-income. Plus, any such families are dwindling because there are no more neighborhood guaranteed admissions to a program. It's most likely that low-income families picked their apartments based on familiarity/availability/walkability to Key with or without immersion. If they want and can move closer to ATS to stay in immersion, go ahead. What do they do when their kids reach middle school? Are they going to move to the Berkeley so they can be across the street from Gunston, or will they drop out of immersion?



I

Stop ranting, please.

I'm not ranting. I supported the moves. I just don't see a lot of low-income Spanish speaking families moving closer to ATS so they can stay in the program; so I'd like to know whether these families are low-income.

Yeah, if you are in CAF housing I assume moving is VERY complicated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To play devil's advocate, I was pro-move, but I can see taking a stand against it on two grounds that might be justifiable:

1) Not being convinced APS really has the correct data or is properly resourced to make these decisions

2) Not knowing whether school moves will make us more or less segregated

To me this is just a permanent Get Out of Jail Free card for people who don't like what APS is proposing. The data will always be wrong and untrustworthy and not enough for some people. Have staff screwed up before? Sure. Will they make mistakes going forward? Sure. I thought they were pretty damn transparent this go around about the date they were using and what they've done to try to fix past errors.

I can tell you I trust APS staff more than the armchair warriors that put together the crazy alternative maps.

I think the biggest piece of uncertainty here is the assumptions they make regarding how many kids stick with the immersion program when it moves. If they assume everyone sticks with the program, then no-brainer, moves make a lot of sense. If you assume 60% stick the with program, then maybe it makes sense still, because there would still be room at Key for at least the more disadvantaged parts of the key walk zone and some of Rosslyn. If you assume no one stays with immersion, including the english speakers, then most of Rosslyn doesn't end up at key, they still end up having to go to Long Branch or Taylor (since they can't get bussed past key to asfs, and apparently asfs will be filled with kids from the ashlawn tail). If they honor the Key walk zone, then very little of Rosslyn ends up at key, most of them go to Taylor or Long Branch (since the key walk zone goes primarily west). Especially if you have to leave room for pre-K.

I am pro-move because long term wise, we need to have another elementary school in the eastern part of the county. But they are flying blind on drawing a boundary, since there is so much uncertainty with how things will shake out with the immersion move. Its very possible that a large chunk of the kids in apartments around key moved there specifically for immersion, and they may literally move with the program to a new apartment over by ats. I've heard three families say this personally. Its all very unclear.
Since you can't move kids once they've been moved, there is no margin for error here either, since everyone at neighborhood school key will have to stay there for at least five years. They can mitigate some of this by drawing a fuzzier boundary (having an upper/lower school for the entire eastern part of the county that is basically just current asfs + the taylor parts of the asfs and key walk zone), but according to aem, that's off the table. So I can understand some of the concerns about the data -- I personally don't trust APS staff to not screw this up, and it will take a lot of advocating from individual neighborhoods to make sure that they don't either completely empty out or overcrowd the new school at key. This entire thing is a mess of their own making -- people brought up that the change to the enrollments and transfers would create a unsustainable situation, but APSignored them at the time. People brought up that they were leaving Hamm underfilled at the time, APS ignored them there as well. There isn't a long history of APS making good decisions as far as the eastern part of the county is concerned.

They under filled Hamm b/c they knew construction was not going to be done. It’s over a year late, that isn’t just rain delays, they knew it would be too small for the first year open but didn’t want to acknowledge it b/c drama.

Umm no. Their projections had Hamm at opening at 102% (of the final capacity). They screwed up big time, it opened up at closer to 70%.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To play devil's advocate, I was pro-move, but I can see taking a stand against it on two grounds that might be justifiable:

1) Not being convinced APS really has the correct data or is properly resourced to make these decisions

2) Not knowing whether school moves will make us more or less segregated

To me this is just a permanent Get Out of Jail Free card for people who don't like what APS is proposing. The data will always be wrong and untrustworthy and not enough for some people. Have staff screwed up before? Sure. Will they make mistakes going forward? Sure. I thought they were pretty damn transparent this go around about the date they were using and what they've done to try to fix past errors.

I can tell you I trust APS staff more than the armchair warriors that put together the crazy alternative maps.

I think the biggest piece of uncertainty here is the assumptions they make regarding how many kids stick with the immersion program when it moves. If they assume everyone sticks with the program, then no-brainer, moves make a lot of sense. If you assume 60% stick the with program, then maybe it makes sense still, because there would still be room at Key for at least the more disadvantaged parts of the key walk zone and some of Rosslyn. If you assume no one stays with immersion, including the english speakers, then most of Rosslyn doesn't end up at key, they still end up having to go to Long Branch or Taylor (since they can't get bussed past key to asfs, and apparently asfs will be filled with kids from the ashlawn tail). If they honor the Key walk zone, then very little of Rosslyn ends up at key, most of them go to Taylor or Long Branch (since the key walk zone goes primarily west). Especially if you have to leave room for pre-K.

I am pro-move because long term wise, we need to have another elementary school in the eastern part of the county. But they are flying blind on drawing a boundary, since there is so much uncertainty with how things will shake out with the immersion move. Its very possible that a large chunk of the kids in apartments around key moved there specifically for immersion, and they may literally move with the program to a new apartment over by ats. I've heard three families say this personally. Its all very unclear.
Since you can't move kids once they've been moved, there is no margin for error here either, since everyone at neighborhood school key will have to stay there for at least five years. They can mitigate some of this by drawing a fuzzier boundary (having an upper/lower school for the entire eastern part of the county that is basically just current asfs + the taylor parts of the asfs and key walk zone), but according to aem, that's off the table. So I can understand some of the concerns about the data -- I personally don't trust APS staff to not screw this up, and it will take a lot of advocating from individual neighborhoods to make sure that they don't either completely empty out or overcrowd the new school at key. This entire thing is a mess of their own making -- people brought up that the change to the enrollments and transfers would create a unsustainable situation, but APSignored them at the time. People brought up that they were leaving Hamm underfilled at the time, APS ignored them there as well. There isn't a long history of APS making good decisions as far as the eastern part of the county is concerned.

They under filled Hamm b/c they knew construction was not going to be done. It’s over a year late, that isn’t just rain delays, they knew it would be too small for the first year open but didn’t want to acknowledge it b/c drama.