Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

....We should also keep in mind that these recommendations are, at least, informed by school Principals. Say what you will about Central Administration, but if the school Principals are saying it would be better for their students to be bused to a slightly further diverse school rather than walk to a more convenient but highly segregated one, maybe, just maybe, they have good reasons for their thinking and advocacy. Most of the Principals and administrators have worked at multiple schools within APS. They know what's working and what is not. Certainly they know more about how to ensure every child receives an equitable education within APS than do competing groups of myopic and self-interested parents.

great post. bravo!

Except that's not what the staff was asking the principals about, they were asking the principals what their student populations would need if they were to be bused elsewhere. It's a subtle, but huge, distinction.

Okay, well even if we believe that staff has some super secret agenda, do we think staff is doing this for sh**s and giggles? Because they are bored and don't have enough to do?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

....We should also keep in mind that these recommendations are, at least, informed by school Principals. Say what you will about Central Administration, but if the school Principals are saying it would be better for their students to be bused to a slightly further diverse school rather than walk to a more convenient but highly segregated one, maybe, just maybe, they have good reasons for their thinking and advocacy. Most of the Principals and administrators have worked at multiple schools within APS. They know what's working and what is not. Certainly they know more about how to ensure every child receives an equitable education within APS than do competing groups of myopic and self-interested parents.

great post. bravo!

Except that's not what the staff was asking the principals about, they were asking the principals what their student populations would need if they were to be bused elsewhere. It's a subtle, but huge, distinction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Always interesting to look at the data. Over twice as many kids in South Arlington schools transfer out of their home school than North. And the top three feeders to ATS are from the schools closest to ATS. I’d like to see more of the options in South Arlington to strategically break up pockets of extreme ED and drive socioeconomic diversity. By having the options closer together, it may be possible to share buses so that buses pick up at fewer stops, then drop off at more than one school (could stagger start times).

Carlin Springs - new home for Claremont Immersion (2nd largest number of transfers out countywide, open larger building that is highly walkable and use less walkable building for option)
ATS - new home for Key Immersion (closer to Spanish speakers, more central, less walkable)
Campbell - EL
Barcroft - new home for ATS (3rd highest transfers out in county, brings a high-performing school South and may be more convenient for SA families)
Henry - new Montessori (although, perhaps put these seats at Nottingham and let the Career Center tear down the Henry building to make better use of that land for a high school)

Net-net, this would move one additional option south, but that suppports the numbers. More Souty Arlington families are choicing out of their schools, so stop fighting it and give SA more conveniently located choice schools.

Transfers:

SOUTH
Abington 413
Barcroft 297
Carlin Springs 352
Drew 107
Henry 115
Hoffman Boston 100
Oakridge 204
Randolph 160
TOTAL: 1748

NORTH
Ashlawn 122 (54 to ATS)
Barrett 108
Discovery 70
Glebe 109 (41 to ATS)
Jamestown 70
Long Branch 169
McKinley 106 (47 to ATS)
Nottingham 54
Tuckahoe 39
Taylor 225 - 105 (Sci Foc)
TOTAL: 897

Note: Not including Key with 569 because that is people who select Science Focus, effectively their neighborhood school.

Source: APS Transfer Report - https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Transfer-Report-2016-17.pdf

Exactly.
People aren’t understanding that umc families can’t just solve this problem by enrolling at some of these neighborhood schools as they are now. We can’t have it both ways. Either we focus on diversity or EXTRME
Convenience. Barcroft kids WILLNhave a neighborhood school. It will just be a different one.

But it is not right to leave the entire west end of Columbia Pike without a neighborhood school. Everyone else on here is clamoring for their neighborhood school and how they have to have a walkable neighborhood school. Yet putting option programs in all three of CS, Campbell, and Barcroft eliminates all neighborhood schools for the entire west end of CP. Not EVERYone in all those neighborhoods want an option program, particularly immersion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

....We should also keep in mind that these recommendations are, at least, informed by school Principals. Say what you will about Central Administration, but if the school Principals are saying it would be better for their students to be bused to a slightly further diverse school rather than walk to a more convenient but highly segregated one, maybe, just maybe, they have good reasons for their thinking and advocacy. Most of the Principals and administrators have worked at multiple schools within APS. They know what's working and what is not. Certainly they know more about how to ensure every child receives an equitable education within APS than do competing groups of myopic and self-interested parents.

great post. bravo!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Always interesting to look at the data. Over twice as many kids in South Arlington schools transfer out of their home school than North. And the top three feeders to ATS are from the schools closest to ATS. I’d like to see more of the options in South Arlington to strategically break up pockets of extreme ED and drive socioeconomic diversity. By having the options closer together, it may be possible to share buses so that buses pick up at fewer stops, then drop off at more than one school (could stagger start times).

Carlin Springs - new home for Claremont Immersion (2nd largest number of transfers out countywide, open larger building that is highly walkable and use less walkable building for option)
ATS - new home for Key Immersion (closer to Spanish speakers, more central, less walkable)
Campbell - EL
Barcroft - new home for ATS (3rd highest transfers out in county, brings a high-performing school South and may be more convenient for SA families)
Henry - new Montessori (although, perhaps put these seats at Nottingham and let the Career Center tear down the Henry building to make better use of that land for a high school)

Net-net, this would move one additional option south, but that suppports the numbers. More Souty Arlington families are choicing out of their schools, so stop fighting it and give SA more conveniently located choice schools.

Transfers:

SOUTH
Abington 413
Barcroft 297
Carlin Springs 352
Drew 107
Henry 115
Hoffman Boston 100
Oakridge 204
Randolph 160
TOTAL: 1748

NORTH
Ashlawn 122 (54 to ATS)
Barrett 108
Discovery 70
Glebe 109 (41 to ATS)
Jamestown 70
Long Branch 169
McKinley 106 (47 to ATS)
Nottingham 54
Tuckahoe 39
Taylor 225 - 105 (Sci Foc)
TOTAL: 897

Note: Not including Key with 569 because that is people who select Science Focus, effectively their neighborhood school.

Source: APS Transfer Report - https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Transfer-Report-2016-17.pdf

Exactly.
People aren’t understanding that umc families can’t just solve this problem by enrolling at some of these neighborhood schools as they are now. We can’t have it both ways. Either we focus on diversity or EXTRME
Convenience. Barcroft kids WILLNhave a neighborhood school. It will just be a different one.

But it is not right to leave the entire west end of Columbia Pike without a neighborhood school. Everyone else on here is clamoring for their neighborhood school and how they have to have a walkable neighborhood school. Yet putting option programs in all three of CS, Campbell, and Barcroft eliminates all neighborhood schools for the entire west end of CP. Not EVERYone in all those neighborhoods want an option program, particularly immersion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Always interesting to look at the data. Over twice as many kids in South Arlington schools transfer out of their home school than North. And the top three feeders to ATS are from the schools closest to ATS. I’d like to see more of the options in South Arlington to strategically break up pockets of extreme ED and drive socioeconomic diversity. By having the options closer together, it may be possible to share buses so that buses pick up at fewer stops, then drop off at more than one school (could stagger start times).

Carlin Springs - new home for Claremont Immersion (2nd largest number of transfers out countywide, open larger building that is highly walkable and use less walkable building for option)
ATS - new home for Key Immersion (closer to Spanish speakers, more central, less walkable)
Campbell - EL
Barcroft - new home for ATS (3rd highest transfers out in county, brings a high-performing school South and may be more convenient for SA families)
Henry - new Montessori (although, perhaps put these seats at Nottingham and let the Career Center tear down the Henry building to make better use of that land for a high school)

Net-net, this would move one additional option south, but that suppports the numbers. More Souty Arlington families are choicing out of their schools, so stop fighting it and give SA more conveniently located choice schools.

Transfers:

SOUTH
Abington 413
Barcroft 297
Carlin Springs 352
Drew 107
Henry 115
Hoffman Boston 100
Oakridge 204
Randolph 160
TOTAL: 1748

NORTH
Ashlawn 122 (54 to ATS)
Barrett 108
Discovery 70
Glebe 109 (41 to ATS)
Jamestown 70
Long Branch 169
McKinley 106 (47 to ATS)
Nottingham 54
Tuckahoe 39
Taylor 225 - 105 (Sci Foc)
TOTAL: 897

Note: Not including Key with 569 because that is people who select Science Focus, effectively their neighborhood school.

Source: APS Transfer Report - https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Transfer-Report-2016-17.pdf

Exactly.
People aren’t understanding that umc families can’t just solve this problem by enrolling at some of these neighborhood schools as they are now. We can’t have it both ways. Either we focus on diversity or EXTRME
Convenience. Barcroft kids WILLNhave a neighborhood school. It will just be a different one.

But it is not right to leave the entire west end of Columbia Pike without a neighborhood school. Everyone else on here is clamoring for their neighborhood school and how they have to have a walkable neighborhood school. Yet putting option programs in all three of CS, Campbell, and Barcroft eliminates all neighborhood schools for the entire west end of CP. Not EVERYone in all those neighborhoods want an option program, particularly immersion.

Anonymous wrote:

....We should also keep in mind that these recommendations are, at least, informed by school Principals. Say what you will about Central Administration, but if the school Principals are saying it would be better for their students to be bused to a slightly further diverse school rather than walk to a more convenient but highly segregated one, maybe, just maybe, they have good reasons for their thinking and advocacy. Most of the Principals and administrators have worked at multiple schools within APS. They know what's working and what is not. Certainly they know more about how to ensure every child receives an equitable education within APS than do competing groups of myopic and self-interested parents.

Anonymous wrote:I think you would be suprised by the number of rising kindergarten families who are not aware this process is going on as they make their option decisions. Heck, I was surprised by the number of current elementary families I know who have no idea what's going on because their schools haven't made a short list so their PTAs aren't keeping them informed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Always interesting to look at the data. Over twice as many kids in South Arlington schools transfer out of their home school than North. And the top three feeders to ATS are from the schools closest to ATS. I’d like to see more of the options in South Arlington to strategically break up pockets of extreme ED and drive socioeconomic diversity. By having the options closer together, it may be possible to share buses so that buses pick up at fewer stops, then drop off at more than one school (could stagger start times).

Carlin Springs - new home for Claremont Immersion (2nd largest number of transfers out countywide, open larger building that is highly walkable and use less walkable building for option)
ATS - new home for Key Immersion (closer to Spanish speakers, more central, less walkable)
Campbell - EL
Barcroft - new home for ATS (3rd highest transfers out in county, brings a high-performing school South and may be more convenient for SA families)
Henry - new Montessori (although, perhaps put these seats at Nottingham and let the Career Center tear down the Henry building to make better use of that land for a high school)

Net-net, this would move one additional option south, but that suppports the numbers. More Souty Arlington families are choicing out of their schools, so stop fighting it and give SA more conveniently located choice schools.

Transfers:

SOUTH
Abington 413
Barcroft 297
Carlin Springs 352
Drew 107
Henry 115
Hoffman Boston 100
Oakridge 204
Randolph 160
TOTAL: 1748

NORTH
Ashlawn 122 (54 to ATS)
Barrett 108
Discovery 70
Glebe 109 (41 to ATS)
Jamestown 70
Long Branch 169
McKinley 106 (47 to ATS)
Nottingham 54
Tuckahoe 39
Taylor 225 - 105 (Sci Foc)
TOTAL: 897

Note: Not including Key with 569 because that is people who select Science Focus, effectively their neighborhood school.

Source: APS Transfer Report - https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Transfer-Report-2016-17.pdf

Exactly.
People aren’t understanding that umc families can’t just solve this problem by enrolling at some of these neighborhood schools as they are now. We can’t have it both ways. Either we focus on diversity or EXTRME
Convenience. Barcroft kids WILLNhave a neighborhood school. It will just be a different one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

anonymous wrote:

This fall (which probably means mid to late September at the earlier), the staff will issue its draft recommendation with proposed boundaries; this will be the first time they see boundaries. The board is scheduled to vote on the options at its early-November board meeting, and there is zero room to push that back again because the decision needs to be made before the option process starts in January. What that means is that from the time the staff issues its recommendations to when the school board votes, there will be maybe six weeks to make adjustments to the recommendation. That is enough time to tweak some proposed boundaries to see if they can improve either option, but it is not enough time to revisit were they propose siting the schools. Unless the staff expands the community engagement again, which is unlikely since we're headed into summer, we most likely will not see any further analysis from the staff until they release their final siting determination in September.

This is an important point. They are going to be releasing recommendations on school changes and boundaries at the same time, with only a few weeks to hammer out details. I think we're in for a big mess this fall if they don't release anything until then.

That is what they are counting on, that by the time people start paying attention, it will be too late to change it. Those of us at option of neighborhood schools that may move are easy to dismiss as purely self-interested and not concerned with the needs of the community as a whole. If the other schools don't start speaking up and demanding more transparency in this process, they're going to keep going on this path.

If you want schools to speak up, people need to stop bashing them when they do. All of the schools that have spoken up have been vilified. And as far as I know, none of the people posting here were actually in on the conversations these schools had with staff. Yet, everyone talks like they know what was said and it was the worst one could imagine.

Sure, Nottingham was tone-deaf to petition its Congressman. And the use by Tuckahoe of "moral cohesion" was ill-advised. And Key is just trying to preserve its community by wanting things to be the same. But, at least they have been out there trying to hammer information out of APS and get their parents involved.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

anonymous wrote:

This fall (which probably means mid to late September at the earlier), the staff will issue its draft recommendation with proposed boundaries; this will be the first time they see boundaries. The board is scheduled to vote on the options at its early-November board meeting, and there is zero room to push that back again because the decision needs to be made before the option process starts in January. What that means is that from the time the staff issues its recommendations to when the school board votes, there will be maybe six weeks to make adjustments to the recommendation. That is enough time to tweak some proposed boundaries to see if they can improve either option, but it is not enough time to revisit were they propose siting the schools. Unless the staff expands the community engagement again, which is unlikely since we're headed into summer, we most likely will not see any further analysis from the staff until they release their final siting determination in September.

This is an important point. They are going to be releasing recommendations on school changes and boundaries at the same time, with only a few weeks to hammer out details. I think we're in for a big mess this fall if they don't release anything until then.

That is what they are counting on, that by the time people start paying attention, it will be too late to change it. Those of us at option of neighborhood schools that may move are easy to dismiss as purely self-interested and not concerned with the needs of the community as a whole. If the other schools don't start speaking up and demanding more transparency in this process, they're going to keep going on this path.

Anonymous wrote:

anonymous wrote:

This fall (which probably means mid to late September at the earlier), the staff will issue its draft recommendation with proposed boundaries; this will be the first time they see boundaries. The board is scheduled to vote on the options at its early-November board meeting, and there is zero room to push that back again because the decision needs to be made before the option process starts in January. What that means is that from the time the staff issues its recommendations to when the school board votes, there will be maybe six weeks to make adjustments to the recommendation. That is enough time to tweak some proposed boundaries to see if they can improve either option, but it is not enough time to revisit were they propose siting the schools. Unless the staff expands the community engagement again, which is unlikely since we're headed into summer, we most likely will not see any further analysis from the staff until they release their final siting determination in September.

This is an important point. They are going to be releasing recommendations on school changes and boundaries at the same time, with only a few weeks to hammer out details. I think we're in for a big mess this fall if they don't release anything until then.

Anonymous wrote:What is ATS saying in all of this?

Do they want to move and switch to IB?