Anonymous wrote:Also, any parent in the world of rec soccer has used the discovery playground! It’s great and we use it often. My child has never been invited to any science program at ASFS, so I don’t really know what it has to offer. Again, private money offering unique educational opportunities in a public school not available to residents assigned to other schools. Are they building crappy new schools elsewhere in the school district? I think those are the only other facilities you can compare with discovery in a conversation about equity.

Fleet will nice, but not nearly as nice as Discovery. There are market reasons at play, but I don’t think APS should be let off the hook. They ignored/ cooked enrollment projections. Anyone with half a brain would have used that opportunity to get a school built economically. Now we have more and more kids and a shrunken commercial real estate base. Chadwick should be shown the door.
Also, this discussion is trivial compared to the crisis of SES diversity south Arlington is facing. Discovery was built. Bad decisions were made. Move on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the people who seem opposed to a PTA raising money for nice, even extravagant, features for their school, what would you prefer those parents do instead? Send their kid (and all of their financial resources) to private school? Send their kid to public but not give money to the school? What does that help? It’s obviously well-off parents that fund this sort of project, but it’s not like only the rich kids in the school benefit from any enrichments. It makes the school better for all the kids that go there.

(This is setting aside the question of whether these sorts of improvements should now be relocated, and at whose expense. Just seems like some people object to the idea of the lab in the first place.)

But that’s the real issue here- this could have flown under the radar and not been a big deal. APS stepped into this pile of manure when they decided it was necessary and beneficial to swap the schools AND promised the ASFS community to move its precious lab. They should have just said, we need to swap the buildings and now ASFS will stand for Arlington Spanish Focus & Science and Key will just be Key[Neighborhood] School. Why does this one community get such special treatment from APS??? If the boundaries around Discovery change and some of the current community have to move, are they entitled to get a new or recreated slide at the building they get sent to?

^THIS. No way they can justify the costs for names changes on top of the already colossal waste of taxpayer dollars for this nonsense plan. Just look at JEB-->Justice $1M price tag that Fairfax Co. went and begged for donations to help pay for. What a waste of limited resources! Arlington Spanish Focus School (ASFS) and Key Elementary stays Key Elementary

We need to switch the name of the thread to Key/Arlington Spanish Focus School!

Also, any parent in the world of rec soccer has used the discovery playground! It’s great and we use it often. My child has never been invited to any science program at ASFS, so I don’t really know what it has to offer. Again, private money offering unique educational opportunities in a public school not available to residents assigned to other schools. Are they building crappy new schools elsewhere in the school district? I think those are the only other facilities you can compare with discovery in a conversation about equity.

I don't follow this. So we shouldn't build new schools? Or we should build them like 1950's buildings if they only serve kids who can afford lunch?

Of course newer buildings are state of the art. I'm sure my kids' nasty decrepit school building that doesn't have functional air conditioning was state of the art at some point too. But I don't begrudge Discovery a new school. We do have to build them.

Building a state of the art facility (Discovery) that does not have equal access by all is far worse than some silly science room at ASF. People have really lost sight of the issues here. There are less than 5% of ED children in the school community at Discovery benefiting from access to the state of the art facilities at Discovery. By contrast, ASFS provides experiences to 25-30% of ED children in it's school community. Those that think the program there only benefits the affluent families are way off base. It's a great diverse program where ED children also greatly benefit from the donations described.

Discovery is not a privately funded project on public school property. The construction and related funding was part of a very public process. Private money can not permissibly be used in a way that exacerbates inequities in our school district, and I would say the installation of a state of the art laboratory not made accessible to other students in the county does just that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given that the story is getting a little press coverage, it will be interesting to see if any reporter digs up what, if any, role the school board and superintendent played in approving the privately funded lab, and whether there is any precedent for other schools in APS getting that type of private cash infusion to improve their facilities. What other school community has convinced the board to just hand them a new building without s vote and outside the boundary process?

If you’re worried about inequality, Discovery is the bigger story.

No, it’s really not.

Have you ever been in Discovery and ASFS??? Discovery got 6 play structures (and they aren't small, not sure who was stating that nonsense), and two art rooms, as well as a the overall sweeping architecture and slide. HB is also blowing a TON of cash for LEED and nice design. The ASFS building is a rundown cinderblock affair, with a 20 year old play structure the size of just one of discovery's half dozen. Yeah, but a solar system mobile donated by the PTA is the true inequality.

Wait. The NEW school is nice?
In other news: water is wet

You obviously don’t get it. Of course a new school is nice. It is new. But these news schools went beyond the basic walls, lunch room and basic amenities and are blowing lots of cash on things they don’t need. I don’t care if the slide cost $50. That money should not have been spent on such a feature. And the new HB school is a case study is inefficient spending. Three times as many kids should get seats for what they are spending.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given that the story is getting a little press coverage, it will be interesting to see if any reporter digs up what, if any, role the school board and superintendent played in approving the privately funded lab, and whether there is any precedent for other schools in APS getting that type of private cash infusion to improve their facilities. What other school community has convinced the board to just hand them a new building without s vote and outside the boundary process?

If you’re worried about inequality, Discovery is the bigger story.

No, it’s really not.

Have you ever been in Discovery and ASFS??? Discovery got 6 play structures (and they aren't small, not sure who was stating that nonsense), and two art rooms, as well as a the overall sweeping architecture and slide. HB is also blowing a TON of cash for LEED and nice design. The ASFS building is a rundown cinderblock affair, with a 20 year old play structure the size of just one of discovery's half dozen. Yeah, but a solar system mobile donated by the PTA is the true inequality.

Wait. The NEW school is nice?
In other news: water is wet

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given that the story is getting a little press coverage, it will be interesting to see if any reporter digs up what, if any, role the school board and superintendent played in approving the privately funded lab, and whether there is any precedent for other schools in APS getting that type of private cash infusion to improve their facilities. What other school community has convinced the board to just hand them a new building without s vote and outside the boundary process?

If you’re worried about inequality, Discovery is the bigger story.

No, it’s really not.

Have you ever been in Discovery and ASFS??? Discovery got 6 play structures (and they aren't small, not sure who was stating that nonsense), and two art rooms, as well as a the overall sweeping architecture and slide. HB is also blowing a TON of cash for LEED and nice design. The ASFS building is a rundown cinderblock affair, with a 20 year old play structure the size of just one of discovery's half dozen. Yeah, but a solar system mobile donated by the PTA is the true inequality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given that the story is getting a little press coverage, it will be interesting to see if any reporter digs up what, if any, role the school board and superintendent played in approving the privately funded lab, and whether there is any precedent for other schools in APS getting that type of private cash infusion to improve their facilities. What other school community has convinced the board to just hand them a new building without s vote and outside the boundary process?

If you’re worried about inequality, Discovery is the bigger story.

No, it’s really not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the people who seem opposed to a PTA raising money for nice, even extravagant, features for their school, what would you prefer those parents do instead? Send their kid (and all of their financial resources) to private school? Send their kid to public but not give money to the school? What does that help? It’s obviously well-off parents that fund this sort of project, but it’s not like only the rich kids in the school benefit from any enrichments. It makes the school better for all the kids that go there.

(This is setting aside the question of whether these sorts of improvements should now be relocated, and at whose expense. Just seems like some people object to the idea of the lab in the first place.)

But that’s the real issue here- this could have flown under the radar and not been a big deal. APS stepped into this pile of manure when they decided it was necessary and beneficial to swap the schools AND promised the ASFS community to move its precious lab. They should have just said, we need to swap the buildings and now ASFS will stand for Arlington Spanish Focus & Science and Key will just be Key[Neighborhood] School. Why does this one community get such special treatment from APS??? If the boundaries around Discovery change and some of the current community have to move, are they entitled to get a new or recreated slide at the building they get sent to?

^THIS. No way they can justify the costs for names changes on top of the already colossal waste of taxpayer dollars for this nonsense plan. Just look at JEB-->Justice $1M price tag that Fairfax Co. went and begged for donations to help pay for. What a waste of limited resources! Arlington Spanish Focus School (ASFS) and Key Elementary stays Key Elementary

Ok. Just rename W-L and stop the swap. Save some money.

Anonymous wrote:Given that the story is getting a little press coverage, it will be interesting to see if any reporter digs up what, if any, role the school board and superintendent played in approving the privately funded lab, and whether there is any precedent for other schools in APS getting that type of private cash infusion to improve their facilities. What other school community has convinced the board to just hand them a new building without s vote and outside the boundary process?

If you’re worried about inequality, Discovery is the bigger story.

Given that the story is getting a little press coverage, it will be interesting to see if any reporter digs up what, if any, role the school board and superintendent played in approving the privately funded lab, and whether there is any precedent for other schools in APS getting that type of private cash infusion to improve their facilities. What other school community has convinced the board to just hand them a new building without s vote and outside the boundary process?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the people who seem opposed to a PTA raising money for nice, even extravagant, features for their school, what would you prefer those parents do instead? Send their kid (and all of their financial resources) to private school? Send their kid to public but not give money to the school? What does that help? It’s obviously well-off parents that fund this sort of project, but it’s not like only the rich kids in the school benefit from any enrichments. It makes the school better for all the kids that go there.

(This is setting aside the question of whether these sorts of improvements should now be relocated, and at whose expense. Just seems like some people object to the idea of the lab in the first place.)

But that’s the real issue here- this could have flown under the radar and not been a big deal. APS stepped into this pile of manure when they decided it was necessary and beneficial to swap the schools AND promised the ASFS community to move its precious lab. They should have just said, we need to swap the buildings and now ASFS will stand for Arlington Spanish Focus & Science and Key will just be Key[Neighborhood] School. Why does this one community get such special treatment from APS??? If the boundaries around Discovery change and some of the current community have to move, are they entitled to get a new or recreated slide at the building they get sent to?

^THIS. No way they can justify the costs for names changes on top of the already colossal waste of taxpayer dollars for this nonsense plan. Just look at JEB-->Justice $1M price tag that Fairfax Co. went and begged for donations to help pay for. What a waste of limited resources! Arlington Spanish Focus School (ASFS) and Key Elementary stays Key Elementary

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the people who seem opposed to a PTA raising money for nice, even extravagant, features for their school, what would you prefer those parents do instead? Send their kid (and all of their financial resources) to private school? Send their kid to public but not give money to the school? What does that help? It’s obviously well-off parents that fund this sort of project, but it’s not like only the rich kids in the school benefit from any enrichments. It makes the school better for all the kids that go there.

(This is setting aside the question of whether these sorts of improvements should now be relocated, and at whose expense. Just seems like some people object to the idea of the lab in the first place.)

How about give some money to the school’s with 70% poverty. Where kids are food insecure and don’t have coats. Just a thought.

Well, if you are going to redistribute my PTA donations, I simply won't donate as much. Title 1 schools do get lots of monetary advantages over UMC schools, they get extra teachers, programs, etc... They may not have fancy trinkets, but those programs are well funded already. The differences between UMC public schools and ED public schools is not really about the money, it is more cultural and parent education.

Incorrect on every count. Title 1 funds are extremely limited in their use, and barely make a dent in inequities. They pay for extra teachers, and possibly one literacy event per year. That's it. Not after school programs or enrichment, not school supplies (which many teacher wind up paying for out of pocket), not field trips, not technology, not even classroom libraries. And they don't pay for the winter coats, or boots, or the emergency food pantry that many high poverty schools need just to meet the basic needs of the kids who face every single impediment to education that could possibly exist.

I don't care about a lab. Honestly, from what I hear it sounds like, while well-intended, a very large waste of good money and space. I think the money could've been better spent, even within ASFS's own community. And I think neither recreating nor maintaining the lab is a prudent use of taxpayer funds or limited internal space.