Anonymous wrote:

Do you think academic support can be improved, the achievement gap addressed, and quality instruction - including small class sizes - can happen without additional employees? There's a new CDEIO position that everyone insists APS has. He needs staff to do his job. One teacher specialist added to the gifted services office - someone who might help APS actually properly serve gifted students. Math coaches - real people providing direct academic support to students.

Everybody seems to complain that APS is overloaded with central office personnel. I disagree. APS operates, generally speaking, with a skeleton crew for the size and quality of our school system.
I don't even know what an "equity audit" for curriculum even means; so I might be with you there. But if it's just reviewing curriculum for inclusive and honest content, I don't think that requires additional staff; so what's the harm?

PP must work at Syphax. Schools do not need a bunch of additional GT and math coaches to lord over the teachers. They need these people to get out of the teachers' way and give them more time to plan.

Seriously? Do you think poor teachers will improve without additional support from the county? I'm not opposed to keeping middle school activities. But the most important part of APS is the educational support. People have been complaining for years about academics, and that's gotten worse with the pandemic. Duran should be praised for trying to hire additional staff to improve in academic areas.

Do you think academic support can be improved, the achievement gap addressed, and quality instruction - including small class sizes - can happen without additional employees? There's a new CDEIO position that everyone insists APS has. He needs staff to do his job. One teacher specialist added to the gifted services office - someone who might help APS actually properly serve gifted students. Math coaches - real people providing direct academic support to students.

Everybody seems to complain that APS is overloaded with central office personnel. I disagree. APS operates, generally speaking, with a skeleton crew for the size and quality of our school system.
I don't even know what an "equity audit" for curriculum even means; so I might be with you there. But if it's just reviewing curriculum for inclusive and honest content, I don't think that requires additional staff; so what's the harm?

PP must work at Syphax. Schools do not need a bunch of additional GT and math coaches to lord over the teachers. They need these people to get out of the teachers' way and give them more time to plan.

Is APS only looking at cutting sports, are they cutting all MS clubs? Will this include things like after school theater productions? Robotics and math clubs? Odyssey of the Mind? Model United Nations?

Only if the staff involved are paid for their efforts. For most of the clubs listed above, teachers volunteer after school to run them, a fact that not enough parents appreciate.

Meanwhile, https://www.arlnow.com/2021/03/22/county-board-approves-revised-plans-for-crystal-city-water-park/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously. It’s so unfair how only privileged white people make it in the NBA and NFL.

You are hilarious. I just want kids to have a chance to play on a team with school mates, after school rather than having to ferry around the county.

Now the limits shut out huge swaths of kids.

Is there any data on how many kids are actually shut out? I would find it interesting to see a breakout by sport (and school) the # of kids trying out and the # of kids cut; and see just how much of a "problem" it really is. As I understand it, the teams/sports that are no-cut are no-cut precisely because they are less popular and they want to encourage students to participate. Likewise, it's rather unfeasible to field multiple football or basketball teams that each would require their own coaches, practice times and space, game schedules, etc.

I agree that we should not be eliminating MS sports and activities. In fact, I support increasing the options. But you can't increase options without the coaches or adults willing to supervise and lead and train and teach the kids - paid or volunteer.

I know my son didn’t try out for basketball b/c it was clear he would not make the team. It’s a pretty clear hierarchy. They could make V/JV teams and just split the practice times up. So meet once a week instead of two. It’s not ideal but it’s what we have feasible with current funding and facilities. Simply shutting out less experienced kids is the worst way.

I think cutting middle school clubs and sports after a year of pandemic lockdown and sports/activities cancellations is brutal. Right now kids need more opportunities not less. Yes, some kids have the means to participate in rec sports but others don’t. Some don’t have the money or even with “scholarships” won’t have the transportation to attend practices and games. School based free after school activities level that playing field and between Act II and the sports teams and the clubs there is something for everyone.

Yes, some of the sports work out better than others. Soccer was disappointing because in our case the coach was biased towards kids he knew from coaching a travel team. Swimming was great because my child got to compete and gained enough confidence to be on a summer swim team. Full range of kids did swimming, from near beginners to year round swimmers. Yes, some were learning to swim as part of swim team. Seems like a natural extension of APS swimming curriculum to me.

Not everyone has access to all the things the DCUM posters think are so basic. There are a lot of people in this county who don’t belong to private swim clubs, have disposable income, or the time and transportation to take kids swimming at the public pools. Even if they make it over to Wakefield or WL, if the parents don’t swim how will they teach the kids to swim? Sign up for lessons they can’t afford?

If we’re saving money, would ya’ll eliminate the high school sports too? Same argument right? Kids can play rec and travel right? Don’t be ridiculous - sports and activities and enrichment are all part of educational experience. Terrible time to cut these things when kids need them most.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.insidenova.com/news/arlington/budget-cuts-could-imperil-arlington-middle-school-sports/article_db250602-8714-11eb-b396-0fa81fd8b40e.html

Most other public schools don’t have school funded sports. APS can easily go without. Kids can just do rec or travel sports on their own time.

It wasn’t very equitable anyway, since there was very limited slots in most sports, the only people who made the teams were people who already paid for private lessons (like tennis) or played on travel sports (soccer basketball). I think they had frisbee as the only walk on sport. The school system is too crowded to have distractions like MS Sports that only go to a select few.

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

No, they do. My son’s best friend tried out for tennis, and he had had lessons and was a decent player, and was not given a spot. Middle school sports should not be this exclusive - where I grew up school sports, even at the middle school level, had the equivalent of a JV where anyone who showed up could participate, especially in their first year. It was complete BS. Let the semi-pros keep spending thousands of dollars a year for their private “teams” and let public school sports be for those who can’t spend the big bucks. And the extracurriculars in middle school are also very odd. I wanted my son to participate in something, and he said “these all stink” and when he showed me the options I had to agree. So I’m okay with them cutting funding. - what they have benefits only a small few now.

It’s not just about the rich kids, ffs. Lots of FARMS kids depend on after school activities to fill hours that they would otherwise be unsupervised.

Is that what you think? Or is that what you know?

In terms of sports, how many actual middle schools students sign up and then participate? What are the demographics? Are the sports utilized across all demographics or concentrated in a few. Again, not what you think you know but what is actually known through numbers.

Same with after school clubs and after school programs. How many students sign up vs. how many students actually attend the programs on an ongoing basis? Sign up can be high and utilization can actually be low.

I don't favor completely cutting out everything but I do think that there likely could be some cuts based on actual utilization.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually there are no cut sports in swimming, diving, and track as well as ultimate. Plus clubs that teachers get money to sponsor. It’s definitely valuable and if you say it’s not it’s because you have no MS kids.

Swimming. DIVING??? Again Unless a kid has had lots of private lessons, they will be floundering in the water.

Sure track. Running kids in a circle. Great.

At Gunston diving was no cut and the rule was "you have to be willing to jump in the water."

Right. But to be able to SWIM well enough to not be terrified to jump in the water, parents have to have already paid for lessons. Where would they have learned to swim well enough to feel safe on 12 ft tank??

They teach you to swim if you join the swim team (also a no cut sport). These aren’t elite sports here. Why not trim down highschool activities and at least offer after school clubs for middle school (if you have to cut the team sports that’s fine, but cutting after school activities altogether is a bad idea).

That must be a joy for a middle schooler, to be learning to swim like a toddler in front of all your classmates.

And I know that was never communicated, that the would teach you to swim. Nothing I saw said anything like that. The elementary swimming lessons are basically anti-drowning learn to tread water, not real swim lessons.

OMG. Take your kid to the pool when they’re little and sign them up for swim lessons. It isn’t that hard.

So just because some parents don’t teach their kids to swim when little, we must abandon swim teams for all? Give me a break.

This x1000.

I'm sure the equity police will pop in here and say not everyone can do this. Know what I don't care. Sometimes life is not fair. Sorry but it just isn't.

I saw someone posted an article on AEM about pools being segregated in the 50s. Yes, that was dead wrong. But guess what? They haven’t been segregated for a long time. Access to a pool is no longer expensive (I used to swim at Wakefield quite a bit). Get out there and do it, or stop complaining.

Lots of "privileged" folks can't swim, too; or choose not to. I am guessing that they usually don't choose to join swim or dive teams. So I don't see why it matters that they would be "floundering in the water." They're not being forced to join the team. However, they are required to take the swim units in PE in certain grades. Should that be stopped because they might be embarrassed "floudering" in front of their classmates who already know how to swim?

Of course not. And I was responding to the poster complaining about the inequity of some students not having access to club sports. Everyone wants to complain that it’s a privilege issue, when it isn’t.

Anonymous wrote:Is APS only looking at cutting sports, are they cutting all MS clubs? Will this include things like after school theater productions? Robotics and math clubs? Odyssey of the Mind? Model United Nations?

All clubs. That’s why the poster saying who cares there are only 7 clubs must be a troll.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously. It’s so unfair how only privileged white people make it in the NBA and NFL.

You are hilarious. I just want kids to have a chance to play on a team with school mates, after school rather than having to ferry around the county.

Now the limits shut out huge swaths of kids.

Is there any data on how many kids are actually shut out? I would find it interesting to see a breakout by sport (and school) the # of kids trying out and the # of kids cut; and see just how much of a "problem" it really is. As I understand it, the teams/sports that are no-cut are no-cut precisely because they are less popular and they want to encourage students to participate. Likewise, it's rather unfeasible to field multiple football or basketball teams that each would require their own coaches, practice times and space, game schedules, etc.

I agree that we should not be eliminating MS sports and activities. In fact, I support increasing the options. But you can't increase options without the coaches or adults willing to supervise and lead and train and teach the kids - paid or volunteer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being a part of a school team or sport or club is one of life's joys and should be accessible to more people, especially middle schoolers. I wish they had a 6th grade team, a 7th grade team, and an 8th grade team for all the sports. We need to fund more, not less. We should also offer cross-country as a middle school sport. It costs almost nothing to offer it, and everyone can do it.

But that would be unfair to the out-of-shape kids that don’t have the stamina to run long distances.

and it would be humiliating for them to perform so poorly in front of their more physically fit and talented peers

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have any of you ever been to an APS middle school swim meet? I have! The teams are full of kids who can barely swim. It's beautiful. It really is a no-cut sport and should be kept.

I’m not saying to get rid of swimming. I’m saying it’s place as one of only 3 no cut sports is inadequate. Swimming. Track (running in circle). Frisbee. That’s it.

NP - Some tennis is no cut. Marching band should be no cut. I agree it would be great to have more no-=cut sports. But I dont think the competitive sports/teams need to be eliminated. There is a great deal of value in striving to make a team, experiencing disappointment, learning to work hard to try again, etc. And we're not talking so elite that it's 5 very wealthy and privileged kids getting these opportunities. Life is competitive and kids are going to face much steeper competition for good jobs. The labor force is not no-cut.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually there are no cut sports in swimming, diving, and track as well as ultimate. Plus clubs that teachers get money to sponsor. It’s definitely valuable and if you say it’s not it’s because you have no MS kids.

Swimming. DIVING??? Again Unless a kid has had lots of private lessons, they will be floundering in the water.

Sure track. Running kids in a circle. Great.

At Gunston diving was no cut and the rule was "you have to be willing to jump in the water."

Right. But to be able to SWIM well enough to not be terrified to jump in the water, parents have to have already paid for lessons. Where would they have learned to swim well enough to feel safe on 12 ft tank??

They teach you to swim if you join the swim team (also a no cut sport). These aren’t elite sports here. Why not trim down highschool activities and at least offer after school clubs for middle school (if you have to cut the team sports that’s fine, but cutting after school activities altogether is a bad idea).

That must be a joy for a middle schooler, to be learning to swim like a toddler in front of all your classmates.

And I know that was never communicated, that the would teach you to swim. Nothing I saw said anything like that. The elementary swimming lessons are basically anti-drowning learn to tread water, not real swim lessons.

OMG. Take your kid to the pool when they’re little and sign them up for swim lessons. It isn’t that hard.

So just because some parents don’t teach their kids to swim when little, we must abandon swim teams for all? Give me a break.

This x1000.

I'm sure the equity police will pop in here and say not everyone can do this. Know what I don't care. Sometimes life is not fair. Sorry but it just isn't.

I saw someone posted an article on AEM about pools being segregated in the 50s. Yes, that was dead wrong. But guess what? They haven’t been segregated for a long time. Access to a pool is no longer expensive (I used to swim at Wakefield quite a bit). Get out there and do it, or stop complaining.

Lots of "privileged" folks can't swim, too; or choose not to. I am guessing that they usually don't choose to join swim or dive teams. So I don't see why it matters that they would be "floundering in the water." They're not being forced to join the team. However, they are required to take the swim units in PE in certain grades. Should that be stopped because they might be embarrassed "floudering" in front of their classmates who already know how to swim?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually there are no cut sports in swimming, diving, and track as well as ultimate. Plus clubs that teachers get money to sponsor. It’s definitely valuable and if you say it’s not it’s because you have no MS kids.

Swimming. DIVING??? Again Unless a kid has had lots of private lessons, they will be floundering in the water.

Sure track. Running kids in a circle. Great.

At Gunston diving was no cut and the rule was "you have to be willing to jump in the water."

Right. But to be able to SWIM well enough to not be terrified to jump in the water, parents have to have already paid for lessons. Where would they have learned to swim well enough to feel safe on 12 ft tank??

They teach you to swim if you join the swim team (also a no cut sport). These aren’t elite sports here. Why not trim down highschool activities and at least offer after school clubs for middle school (if you have to cut the team sports that’s fine, but cutting after school activities altogether is a bad idea).

That must be a joy for a middle schooler, to be learning to swim like a toddler in front of all your classmates.

And I know that was never communicated, that the would teach you to swim. Nothing I saw said anything like that. The elementary swimming lessons are basically anti-drowning learn to tread water, not real swim lessons.

OMG. Take your kid to the pool when they’re little and sign them up for swim lessons. It isn’t that hard.

So just because some parents don’t teach their kids to swim when little, we must abandon swim teams for all? Give me a break.

This x1000.

I'm sure the equity police will pop in here and say not everyone can do this. Know what I don't care. Sometimes life is not fair. Sorry but it just isn't.

NP. Thank you! "equity" does not mean "exactly the same." And it doesn't mean kids who are able and have access should be denied the opportunity.

Anonymous wrote:if you are concerned with APS budget bloat, especially in the central office- you need to seriously question Mary Kadera's platform of giving advisory councils 'a real voice in planning and decision making.'
I am appalled at how many of the recommendations coming out of the committees for advisory council on teaching and learning involve additional central office staff and budget dollars. e.g. perform an 'equity audit' across the curriculum (social studies advisory committee); add a teacher specialist to the gifted service office (gifted advisory committee); increase math coach from .5 FTE to 1 FTE for all elementary schools (math advisory committee); add a full time outdoor learning classroom coordinator (science advisory committee); develop an SEL coordinator position (student services advisory committee).
https://www.apsva.us/actl/committee-reports/

Those are FTE additions. There are also tons of recommendations for additional mandatory training, which leads to both a budget expense and additional time off of teaching.

I think ACTL plays a valuable role- and you can debate the merits of each of these individual proposals- but I see these proposals, and then I hear the concern about central office bloat, etc. We need school board members who are able to listen and make tough choices- not who blindly accept citizen recommendations (aka give a 'real voice.')

Do you think academic support can be improved, the achievement gap addressed, and quality instruction - including small class sizes - can happen without additional employees? There's a new CDEIO position that everyone insists APS has. He needs staff to do his job. One teacher specialist added to the gifted services office - someone who might help APS actually properly serve gifted students. Math coaches - real people providing direct academic support to students.

Everybody seems to complain that APS is overloaded with central office personnel. I disagree. APS operates, generally speaking, with a skeleton crew for the size and quality of our school system.
I don't even know what an "equity audit" for curriculum even means; so I might be with you there. But if it's just reviewing curriculum for inclusive and honest content, I don't think that requires additional staff; so what's the harm?