Wake County school administrators are recommending that the school board implement a 15 percent seat set aside at the high-performing regional choice schools for applicants from low-performing nodes.
But staff isn't recommending changes in some areas. For instance, staff wants to leave the current selection priorities alone that have proximity above student achievement.
Staff also isn't recommending changes to the feeder patterns for this fall or delaying the start of the application process on Jan. 17.
In the case of rising sixth- and ninth-graders who face not having transportation because of their approved feeder pattern, staff is suggesting three options to the school board.
One option varies in how much transportation would be provided:
* For all students for three years as new plan is implemented.
* For the affected rising sixth- and ninth-graders for 2012-13
* For the affected students and their younger siblings until the oldest child ages out.
* By student until they all age out.
Option two varies in how selection priorities would be handled so those affected students could get into a different school.
* Run their applications first in a separate process.
* Give them the second-highest priority (behind only siblings) for this fall.
* Give them the second-highest priority (behind only siblings) for three years.
* Give them the second-highest priority (behind only siblings) for all years.
* Give these students higher priority than siblings for x years.
The third option is to not make any changes.
CLARIFICATION
Staff said they'd recommend the 15 percent set aside if the board agreed to use set asides. Since the board decided not to go ahead with set asides, at least for now, they're not in the plan.
Comments
Question to Mr. Hui
Thu, 01/12/2012 - 12:01 — morrisville_parentWas there any discussion about the case of rising sixth- and ninth-graders who face not having transportation because of their approved feeder pattern? Did they decide what to do about them? Thanks.
No change to what's in the
Thu, 01/12/2012 - 12:10 — KeungHui (author)No change to what's in the plan. Supt. Tata said they'd see how many of the 1,000 or so students affected by this situation request and receive placement to other schools. He said they'll then see how many are still set to go without transportation and see whether they can provide bus service to them. But he's not making promises they'll provide transporation. Boar attorney Ann Majestic told the board there's no legal requirement that they provide bus service to them.
Complicated change
Tue, 01/10/2012 - 16:33 — sam123456So staff is able to accomodate this complicated change, but they can't address a simple tweak to the Brassfield situation. This staff is extremely frustrating...lots of political agendas with the "Millbrooks".
Yep--look at how they
Tue, 01/10/2012 - 18:21 — jenmanYep--look at how they changed the feeder pattern for Fox Road to Wakefield instead of Millbrook That will make it even harder for anybody to get into Wakefield High, especially in several years when Abbotts Creek Elem kids are entering high school.
All those that dislike the
Tue, 01/10/2012 - 16:55 — mnordbergAll those that dislike the feeder patterns should get into the get rid of feeder pattern all together camp so that when you get to MS and HS that you get ability to have lots of seats to get into and if you are proxmity closer to the HS you want, then you have a better chance to get in. As I get told now with the current feeder pattern, "You can just apply to the MS or HS on your list". I laugh and ask how many seats are left and then I get the "a few".
The staff is being given an agenda by their leader and they do what he tells them to. Going to be a lot of butting of heads between board and current school leadership and it started with the concept that a pro of something is they already did the work, not the technical details or concepts around it.
Sorry Yvonne & Barber, you lose
Tue, 01/10/2012 - 16:16 — FSandYOUSo if they are going forward now we can focus on what happens in 6 weeks once the data is compiled and they have to cap schools and tell parents they aren't getting
choice #1.
choice #2.
choice #3 ...
15% of what?
Tue, 01/10/2012 - 15:27 — Bob_SconceOf the unallocated seats left over from the feeders, or 15% of the total number of seats?
Of all avalable openings.
Tue, 01/10/2012 - 15:31 — KeungHui (author)Of all avalable openings. Biggest impact would be kindergarten, sixth- and ninth-grades.
15% of available openings
Tue, 01/10/2012 - 16:31 — mnordberg15% of available openings after feeder pattern students take the spots...15% of not much isn't much. I find it interesting that essentially feeder patterns even trump this.
15% is significant at ES
Tue, 01/10/2012 - 16:46 — finalfrontier15% is significant at ES level. It's not worth a change for MS and HS if feeder patterns get priority.
15% is significant at K in
Tue, 01/10/2012 - 17:55 — mnordberg15% is significant at K in ES but once people are in, the available seats each year are extremely limited. If they got rid of feeder patterns it would be significant at MS and HS but alas the school district must think parents have crystal balls when enrolling their K that they know what MS and HS are best for them and are the best when they get there.
FYI....most school districts
Wed, 01/11/2012 - 09:16 — shearertwFYI....most school districts in the nation operate on a feeder patter from ES to HS. There are thousands of small towns with only one HS period. The plan gives you stability if you want it and some choices if you want it. Most places just have stability. The former policy provided choice for some but not others and no stability for most. Now EVERYONE has stability and some choice. I’d argue that's a friendlier assignment plan than most places in the country. Now, perhaps, we can focus on actually making the schools themselves better than most places in the country.
And...
Tue, 01/10/2012 - 15:35 — Bob_SconceWhat happens if the 15% aren't all taken?
Not specified in the
Tue, 01/10/2012 - 15:37 — KeungHui (author)Not specified in the documentation but Susan Evans previously suggested that proximity students who don't get in should be put on a wait list and get any of the unused seats that are set aside.
that is what logic would dictate
Tue, 01/10/2012 - 16:32 — mnordbergthat would be logical in that open seats go to the wait list. But I have a hard time believing that anything logic will be done.
Yep. They need to specify
Tue, 01/10/2012 - 18:19 — jenmanYep. They need to specify exactly what they are going to do with those seats if the low income families don't choose those schools.