School capacity figures and enrollment projections are on the school board's agenda today.
Both issues will come up during the board's facilities committee meeting. They're a big deal because it's likely that they'll become an issue as the new board attempts to implement its policies.
Asst. Supt. Chuck Dulaney will discuss the 2009 facilities utilization report. The report lists the capacities and enrollments of each school.
Dulaney will then discuss the joint enrollment projections developed by school and county staff.
Don't be surprised if opponents of the new board argue that the capacity figures and enrollment projections show Wake can't switch to neighborhood schools.
The committee meeting starts at 9 a.m. in the board conference room, 3600 Wake Forest Road in Raleigh. It's open to the public.
Comments
School Inspections
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 21:12 — tigger516Better yet, the new school board members should personally visit each school after receiving the "capacity numbers" from School Administration.
We have schools with empty wings and schools that are busting at the seams. There are schools with empty tracks and then there are schools with trailers (both empty and full).
Let's make sure the numbers on the paper correspond with the numbers of empty classrooms, empty tracks and empty trailers.
As we now know, the data and numbers have not been accurate. Nonetheless, they have been used to suppport agendas such as mandatory year-round schools w/the millions $$ they could save, but do not.
Was there really a DIRE need to convert 22 schools to year-round when there were already underenrolled year-round schools in the same areas?
Was there really a DIRE need to open ALL new schools on a year-round calendar when there were already plenty of underenrolled year-round schools in the same areas?
Let's hope the new school board members venture out to the school sites to see for themselves...
Distrust...
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 09:23 — Bob_SconceIf there's really that much distrust for the current administration, then the proper response should be to fire the administrators. The Board does not have the capacity to independently verify everything that the administration tells it. Better to replace them with administrators who do have the Board's trust.
That's a pretty big 'IF.' I hope administrators will prove themselves loyal to whatever Board the voters elect, even if that Board's views don't jibe with their own. Of course, that would be a departure from the past, where the board has basically rubber-stamped the administration's policy preferences.
"There is nothing more
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 09:36 — CaryCurmudgeon"There is nothing more difficult to take in hand,
more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to
take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things."
"The wise man does at once what the fool does finally."
-- N.Machiavelli
Instead of performiing a physical inventory of schools,
Thu, 11/12/2009 - 06:51 — Athey01could they request the information from the school principals in their district? IMO, at some point, you must trust someone, otherwise you are not very productive.
The fact is that they
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 16:20 — jenmanThe fact is that they couldn't assign kids where they wanted to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are right that under Manning's ruling they couldn't assign kids where they wanted to. But that didn't preclude them from filling YR schools. Their own policies stopped them from filling YR schools and kept traditional school overcrowded. Patti Head even said at a work session "We could fill YR schools with volunteers, but it messes up the diversity numbers."
WCPSS screwed itself and wanted to place blame with anybody they could foist it upon.
The capacity and utilization #'s WCPSS uses are useless!
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 11:10 — stacy123When my school was re-assigned we went through these #'s thoroughly *(as did a # of other parents/schools). Our research (from WCPSS own records) -we showed that their capacity #'s were skewed way low to support the WCPSS re-assingment plans (based on past actual enorllment). Based on my experience with this WCPSS board, I am sure this will be the same result. John Tedesco and all the newbies + Ron as always - PLEASE PLEASE make sure you go back at least 5-7 years of actual enrollment utilization to see the true capacity of schools. Also, in light of the budget crises the state has given (at least temporarily) a waiver on the # of students per class. Please work with good #'s as the data showed more kids could stay at their current schools (i.e. "neighborhood school" capacity is much higher than the internal dept. was and presumably will show) than what WCPSS presented in the last major re-assignment for the 2008-2009 school year - this caused major uproar as we showed how much of the re-assigned children could have stayed at their current school using previous enrollments - and of course the WCPSS did not reduce the # of reassigned kids based on any of our data.
Please also consider how
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 12:10 — RevHiDPlease also consider how crowded the schools were when they were running at previous capacity. What time was lunch? How long did the children have to eat? Were the cafeteria, gym, bathrooms and media center overwhelmed with too many students in trailers? If not, great, but remember that 5-7 years ago parents were complaining that their schools were overcrowded.
Some were some were not
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 12:32 — stacy123Not all parents were complaining 1st of all 2nd of all most parents would have rather stayed in their current crowded/overcrowded traditional school than re-assigned *(repeatedly!! in some cases) to year round far away schools and the maim point is all the new schools are/were not needed and definitely are not needed to be year round based on these latest projections! As the parents have shown with the data and verbally with their votes! Please continue to post you replies are clarifying and reminding everyone why we voted and how neccessary this change was.
New Schools for 2010-11
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 09:03 — ForCryingOutLoudAs the BOE looks at capacity figures and enrollment projections -and- we parents hope for less MYR, remember that 2 new middle schools are set to open for the the 2010-2011 school year -- one in Holly Springs and one in Cary (Cary Park area, I think?). That's makes for a lot of year-round middle schools in the western part of the county -- 2 new + Salem Middle + Lufkin Middle + West Lake Middle. With both the YR and the traditional middle schools bursting at the seams, these new schools are badly needed. I hope the BOE and the Office of Growth Management can consider not only capacity, but calendar and "peer group continuity" flow as they add these schools to the mix.
Haven't we learned that
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 10:29 — changewcpssHaven't we learned that their projections are fluid and change with the wind? Actual capacity is much more valid.
Opponents can argue all they want, but
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 08:32 — g88ky07they can't ignore the fact that MANY MYR schools are well under capacity. Those schools should be converted back to traditioanl calendars AS SOON AS POSSIBLE and the neighborhood schools can follow right behind.
Many of us don't mind that happening as soon as the Christmas break, that's how serious we are about it! :c )
My question is, will they have the ACTUAL capacity numbers to discuss? We know their projection #'s won't even be close, so I think those are irrelevant, but I doubt they'll have ACCURATE #'s of any kind. They never do!
After December 1st I would say this meeting should take place again, after those who have been lying about the #'s all along are kicked out of the door with a big steel toe boot and we can get some REAL information to work with!
Data
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 16:16 — louiselee44I've posted this before, along with some cost info., but for those who missed it...
(of course, these figures came from the WCPSS)
Here’s a look at a few of the schools that were converted from traditional to mandatory year-round in 2007-08.
Ballentine Elementary: capacity prior to YR conversion, 761
current enrollment, 668
Knightdale Elementary: capacity prior to YR conversion, 616
current enrollment, 528
Lockhart Elementary: capacity prior to YR conversion, 885
current enrollment, 728
Wakefield Elementary: capacity prior to YR conversion, 1,009
current enrollment, 831
These are just some of the examples of converted MYR schools in which the current YR enrollment figure is less than the capacity figure when they were traditional. Wake County’s explanation for that has been that they couldn’t fill the YR schools because they had to have parents’ permission to assign students there. But the May 1, 2009 ruling by the state Supreme Court knocked that reasoning out of the picture. Now, even with the authority to assign students to YR schools against parents’ wishes, enrollment is down, and tracks are being dropped left and right.
(Note)
Wed, 11/11/2009 - 09:40 — louiselee44Knightdale Elementary has been converted back to the traditional calendar with the opening of Lake Myra Elementary nearby.
Right on the mark, as always!
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 22:32 — g88ky07Your top listed school is absolutely correct and I've been screaming against this, as have many others, since Horace Tart voted to shove it down our throats!
Ballentine had the 2nd highest turn out in both recent elections, I believe that is correct, and missed having the highest on Nov. 3rd by 9 votes! You think people in the immediate area were a little fed up?
Schools such as those listed above, and many others, should be looked at to be reversed as soon as possible after the new board takes over. Paying for these schools to continue under the old board agenda is only taking away money from a lot of other areas that could greatly use it. I also think the new schools coming online must be looked at as to whether they really need to be on a YR schedule.
Thanks for continuing to spot light the failures of the past board(s) Louise. The new board is going to have a lot of hard decisions to make, but I have total faith in where we are headed!
thank you!
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 22:43 — louiselee44I share your faith!
Not the whole story
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 16:47 — supportwcpssCome on Ms. Lee. Please tell all the facts. The fact is that they couldn't assign kids where they wanted to. The fact is if they had done this on May 2 for the upcoming year everyone on here said they would have created an uproar.
So they have not started a year with the Supreme Court ruling in place. In addition, we had the slow down in growth which causes this decrease also.
State all the facts next time please. I think we should focus on getting rid of trailers.
Interesting...
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 19:06 — Bob_SconceYou're complaining about obscuring the facts while doing the same thing yourself.
There were not that many people who decided to take the "traditional calendar option" set up by the school district, largely because the district tried to make the traditional option quite unappealing. For example, the traditional calendar option for Wakefield ES is Rolesville, about 25 minutes away by car. (A lot longer by bus).
In fact, if you look at Rolesville, you find that they have empty space. Moving students "back" to WES would leave Rolesville significantly underenrolled.
Wakefield ES is so underenrolled that we don't have a track 2. It could convert back to a traditional calendar and never have more students at a time.
Facts??
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 17:20 — louiselee44You're talking to me about giving "all the facts"? Sorry, I just find that humorous.
Besides, it's easy to see that I was relating how things stand now with enrollment at certain schools. Believe me, I don't have time or space to put every fact I know about the subject on this blog (although I've shared plenty in the past).
As far as the reasons for seats being vacant - I'm just relating what I was told - that it was due to Judge Manning's decision and that if the ruling was overturned, the problem would be solved. I never bought in to that.
" I think we should concentrate on getting rid of trailers." Later, yes. As a top priority right now? I can think of more pressing things to concentrate on.
Have they considered
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 10:28 — changewcpssHave they considered reversing a few MYR conversions in each district for 2010 and the rest in 2011? It is crystal clear that MYR has not worked. Put VYR and choice back into the mix.
I think that is and will be considered
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 12:59 — g88ky07I do not think it is unreasonable to reverse about 1/2+ of the latest 22 schools wrongly converted and reconsider the new ones opening. I know MANY that are being reassigned to Holly Grove who would love to see that school be a traditional school!
Nothing these people do
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 08:22 — changewcpssNothing these people do surprises me. They will protect their mistakes and lie until the end. Fighting against what is best for students is what they do best. December 1 will be a new beginning for Wake County families.