The Wake Education Partnership is warning about the challenges of converting schools back to a traditional calendar.
Today, the WEP released the first issue of "Understand Your Schools," which it said will be a periodic review of current topics affecting the school system. Much of the review focuses on the impact of losing between 100 to 250 seats per school if it converts from year-round to traditional.
The spectre of reassignment is laid out in the study.
The review says there are other unresolved issues, including:
* Deciding on the appropriate response rate for any given school before changes are made. The current thinking is that no school would be converted unless a minimum of 33% of the parents respond to the online survey. But if the result is close - say 52% to 48% -- and only one-third of parents voted, several board members have already said they feel uneasy about making changes. The issue could be addressed as soon as the Jan. 19 meeting.
* The board must decide how far away it is willing to send a student if a family wants to exercise its new right to attend a different calendar than the one in their assigned school. What if a student wants a year-round calendar but the next closest school is full? What if the second- and third-closest are also full? This is the situation in parts of southwest Wake County where rapid growth has filled many year-round schools. This also could be addressed at the Jan. 19 meeting.
* If a school has some room, but not enough to accommodate demand, who gets priority - a student who already attends the school by virtue of a year-round application or a student who lives close by in the base area?
* Should feeder patterns be considered? If nearby elementary schools are on a year-round schedule, then the middle school almost has to remain on a year-round schedule to accommodate rising sixth graders. To a lesser extent, the reverse is true when elementary schools on traditional calendars feed into a year-round middle school.
* If a school is converted to a traditional calendar and exceeds capacity sooner than predicted, should it be converted back to year-round? Would it make more sense to bring in modular classrooms in a case like that? A set of eight classrooms costs about $830,000 to purchase and install.
* How long can the board wait if the process bogs down? Principals are typically told in March how many teachers they should plan on hiring for the coming year. Parents typically want to know their child's schedule by early spring at the latest so they can arrange day-care, summer camps and family vacations. The more schools that get converted, the more difficult it will be to wrap up all the questions before April.
CORRECTION
Deleted references to Greater Raleigh Chabmer of Commerce having been involved in developing the study. The Chamber only co-sponsored the review.
Comments
Transportation Cost - $20m per year
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 16:19 — Solon77Transportation cost is approx $20m per year. I am not sure where the 30-50% savings will come from. A friend of my daughter lives 1/4 mile from her elementary school and takes the bus ! Why might we ask ? Because there are no sidewalks ! There are two elementary schools within 1 mile and 1 middle school at 1.25 miles of my house and although we are within the 1.5 mile threshold, we would be eligible for transportation because there are not enough sidewalks. This is common throughout the county. So the school system picks up the tab for inadequate infrastructure. So the fixed and most expensive cost of transportation (bus and driver) will remain. So we potentially save a little in gas.
I thought much of the
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 18:01 — user12345I thought much of the transportation cost like most of the student cost is paid by the state so any reduction in transportation will be state savings and will be directed to some other county. So, there won't be much of any "savings" to apply elsewhere from what I understand.
Transportation Funding
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 20:43 — Solon77I do not claim to be an expert on the inner workings of funding. There is a line item in the budget for $20m. Regardless of state or local funding we need to be good stewards of all expenditures. Nevertheless, savings on this line item may or may not be allowed to be redirected to another line item.
So...
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 18:50 — Bob_SconceThe state doesn't just say "How much did you spend? Here's 60% of it (or whatever)." It's just not that simple -- it depends on an assumption about how many miles you travel, how many students you have, how many busses, etc... If I recall correctly, the upshot is that if a local district does something to increase its transportation cost beyond the State's model, then that increase is mainly on the county.
The end result is that the local county gets most of the the savings if a district manages to reduce its transportation costs, and it's not "eaten" by the state.
To a first approximation, think of it as "Here's your per-student transportation funding from the State. Use it or lose it. But, if you spend more than that, you have to pick up the extra."
So, there are no "Savings"
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 15:09 — user12345So, there are no "Savings" to WCPSS right? Plus, state transportation funds can not be redirected to say the class room even it there were "savings"... so, if you reduce the number of miles the busses travel by ending diversity there won't be any "savings" to WCPSS that any classroom teacher can count on ... we just need to end that rumor that ending diversity will reap transportation savings ....
Huh?
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 16:46 — Bob_SconceWow. I really must not have been clear.
My point was basically that if WCPSS can save some money from the transportation budget, it gets to keep the money. The district still pays a big chunk of transportation costs, though. It's a bit akin to my telling my kids "If you want to buy X, I'll pay $10 and you have to pony up the rest." If they can get the price of X from $20 to $15, the entire savings goes in their pockets.
It's more complicated than that, but that's about it, to a first rough approximation.
newsobserver.com/opinion/lett
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 09:08 — AngelaWnewsobserver.com/opinion/letters/story/286491.html
The facts behind the year-round calendar
Outrage has been expressed at the new Wake County school board and its actions regarding surveying parents as to calendar preference and ending mandatory year-round assignments. Ironically, prior to the conversion of schools to a year-round calendar, the procedure for changing a school calendar actually began with a survey of parents from the proposed school; first with 80 percent approval, later 60 percent and finally to no parental input as to the change of the calendar. I applaud the new board for giving parents the chance to voice their opinions.
Critics of the survey say low-income families may lack fair access to computers to participate in this process. This was also argued by anti-mandatory year-round families, as calendar options were only online, but to no avail. This could be easily remedied, by sending "hard copies" home with students.
Despite heavy lobbying from the NAACP and other groups to encourage minority and low-income populations to accept year-round assignments, the majority of "opt outs" were minority or low-income families. The school system conducted a survey to ascertain why these parents opted out, but results were never published. I was told they were unavailable. Unfortunately, under the former board, research and surveys were made available only when favorable to the system.
Finally, supporters of mandated year-round calendars tout their ability to "seat more students" and save more money. Neither has been the case in Wake County.
The schools were not converted to deal with growth as advertised in the bond campaign of 2007, but largely as a vehicle to further the diversity policy. Since the conversions, the majority of class-size waivers sought over the last few years have been for year-round schools due to overpopulation of tracks 1 and 4, underuse and in some cases elimination of classes on tracks 2 and 3. Also, growth projections used to promote the bond issue were inflated.
Financially speaking, the "savings" that were supposed to have been realized through year-round schools were never realized and will not be without all of the tracks being fully populated. Few year-round schools in Wake have that status.
School calendars drastically affect lifestyle, finances and opportunities. Parents need to be able to make choices that positively affect their greatest responsibility: their child. By rightly allowing families to participate in the decision making of calendar and location of school, we are strengthening, not fragmenting, our families, students and community.
Dawn Graff
Co-founder, Wake CARES, Apex
The length limit on letters was waived to permit a fuller response.
Kudos to D Graff for this
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 21:09 — changewcpssKudos to D Graff for this articulate and honest assessment. She and Wake Cares set the stage for the changes that are finally going to happen. Thank you Ms. Graff.
Why didn't WEP care about
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 13:56 — changewcpssWhy didn't WEP care about forcing 23 schools to MYR without considering the impact? Why are they ignoring the waste that MYR has brought to Wake County?
Apex
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 12:09 — ncarolinagirlIn the Apex area, I think most people will stay at their neighborhood school regardless of calendar. They may prefer traditional, but they've stayed in year-round to avoid reassignment. Baucom is now the traditional option for Apex, it's close in proximity to multiple year-round elementary schools, has comparative test scores, and yet it's still under capacity. It'll be interesting to see what the survey results are and if any schools are converted back to traditional. I hope the new Board will look at feeder patterns and try to correct them in Apex. Most neighborhoods don't have calendar continuity, such as having Baucom (traditional) nodes feeding into Lufkin Middle (year round) and Olive Chapel and Turner Creek nodes (year round) feeding into Apex Middle (traditional ). Having children on different calendars is a burden to families that should be corrected and prevented, if possible.
Change of Nodes
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 17:27 — local23has got to come back into play as the GM gives correct and better answers to the BOE
..please remember, GM made multiple changes to nodes from 2005-2009 in order to accomodate growth, new schools, F&R and SOCIAL ECONOMIC theories - the question is did they make good change decisions or poor ones?
We can say all day long that a school will be converted back to TR - but the other questions are the nodes that feed into it, the feeder schools and the proposed next level of schools. Node changes may have to take place to offer parents a better selection of TR, YR and Magnet, along with when those closest schools are filled to capacity. They all have their work cut out for them, but they also need to look at what was done to node changes over the last couple of years too.
From WCPSS site
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 11:49 — nancync2009-2010 saw an increase of 1,893 students systemwide. A far cry from 6-7K.
Patti and Chuck "CRIED"
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 16:07 — choice4all"8,000 are coming". We have to do YR unless you can stop the Uhauls coming down I-95......That was a direct quote from the Chicken Littles of WCPSS/FOWC.
enrollment trends
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 15:39 — Solon77Nancync, wcpss website go to Demographic studies / Market share. You can view the tabular form but also go to the individual years. There one can gain an appreciation for the challenges at the time. It is not just about the end enrollment by also the ins and outs of the changes. Being on the BOE is not an easy job - basically a no win. There are alot of things the former board could have done better - one was communication. Being in a company that is growing at 15-20% per year, I have an appreciation for the amount of effort it takes to manage growth. There is no doubt other things tend to suffer. As I look back to my northern school districts - there was no growth so full attention could be directed towards other priorities. The current BOE will benefit from lower growth rates, so I have high expectations that other areas will be addressed.
As I look back to my
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 16:26 — user12345As I look back to my northern school districts - there was no growth so full attention could be directed towards other priorities.
I wonder the same thing about some of the folks here ... I remember one school being built in my hometown in the 20 years I lived and went to school there ... there have been what 15 schools? built here in the last 10 years? Given it takes 7-10 years? to plan, site and build a $25-$75M school you need to project that work many years in the future. Given that last week no one moved in to their neigborhood is no indication of what needs to be done. Just look at the ES population ... if not a single person moves to this area (still the fastest growing), the ES popluation alone will bulge the capacity of MSs and HSs which are full of trailers today.
Schools
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 18:06 — user12345I went back and counted the number of schools the county had each year since I moved here:
As I said, I came from a place where they built one new school in 20 years.
7-10 years to site plan and build
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 17:20 — stacy123This is way over-estimating the time 2 and 1/2 - 4 years is more realistic. But yes in some cases it cna take this long.
still need a crystal ball
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 15:38 — Solon77Even 4 years out is a challenge. It is only conjecture on my part - but is does not seem that the Wake Planning commission and the schools work very closely together. Not to take anything away from Margiotta and Tedesco, they have some very good ideas and the energy to improve performance is welcome. However, they come from school districts that : 1. encompassed a small area - couple of sq miles. and 2 - stable or declining growth. So 100% of the effort was dedicated to student achievement, which by the way has not materially progressed over the years. Compare this to the growth challenges that face us. While I have not looked at the numbers, I would estimate prior to this year districts of the new majority have been growing at double digits - not an easy challenge to manage let alone trying to please everyone.
for example .... Look at H6,
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 18:37 — user12345for example .... Look at H6, Forest Ridge ... I think planning started in 2004/2005 .... it was put in the construction plan 2006 ... with and opening of 2012 and will cost $73M ... hopefully it will be canceled since growth has slowed so much.
The school board and counity
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 01:06 — KeungHui (author)The school board and counity commissioners will discuss H6 at Wednesday's joint meeting. It's likely they'll walk away from the Forest Ridge site and pick an alternative. There's no plan to totally scrap the school. High school crowding is an issue in the northeastern part of Wake.
Eh...
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 00:19 — Bob_SconceI don't think it'll be cancelled. As you've pointed out, there's a mini baby-boom working its way up the WCPSS education ladder. And, high schools in that part of the county are severely overcrowded as-is.
Wakefield HS, for example, was built about 10 years ago. Then trailers were added. Then they added a "pod" Then the district rented a nearby grocery store as a 9th grade center. Then they added trailers to the 9th grade center! It has as many enrolled students as Guilford College.
(Note: The Northwest part of the county also has issues. Unfortunately, they're boxed in by the watershed, the Airport/Umstead and the county line. )
Increase was back in 2007
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 14:48 — Solon77Increase was back in 2007
This year's elementary school enrollment is down in part due the cut off being rolled back from October to August
Schools converted back to traditional - Baucom, Knightdale in 2009, Green Hope scheduled in 2010
there are no schools being
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 11:42 — JSBinNCthere are no schools being converted back that I have heard of. Where did you hear or read that??
Green hope was!
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 17:22 — stacy123Interesting that Geen Hope opened as year round voluntary and then when the forced conversions were opposed they did not convert one of these back - exactly the kind of thing that the old Board would do that ticked people off
Green Hope Elementary opened
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 01:04 — KeungHui (author)Green Hope Elementary opened as a traditional-calendar school. It was one of the 22 schools converted to year-round in 2007. it's converting back in 2010-11 when Alston Ridge Elementary opens.
Thanks
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 15:48 — Solon77Good thing none of this had to do with trying to manage growth. I was getting the impression the old board spent all of their time figuring out ways to tick off parents just for sport.
Growth has slowed
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 10:13 — nancyncScott - we are not expanding at 6-7K students per year. I can't recall a single year since I moved here that such a number was reached. It was typically around 4K at it's peak, and is falling off that peak dramatically due to the economy (illegals leaving and new illegals not coming) and less people moving into our area for jobs that don't exist.
I for one would like to see a study of what was 'saved' (since the whole study here seems to be about economics, not students anyway) two years ago when 22 schools were turned into MYR by the school board.
What are those figures? Anyone have them?
It is all about the $
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 14:58 — Solon77Nancync - how long have you lived here ? It is all about the $. And frankly no matter what school district you go to it is all about the $. The survey is a interesting, but at the end of the day the ultimate decision is dictated by what the taxpayers will support. We should be focusing on the actions need to improve performance , Traditional vs YR doesn't get us there.
Wake did grow by more than
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 13:45 — KeungHui (author)Wake did grow by more than 6,000 kids a year during the middle part of the decade. The high was 7,500 kids a few years ago. School officials say this year's net growth would have been more than 3,500 if not for the new law requring kindergarten students to turn 5 by Aug. 31.
Gosh, I wonder if the Edge4
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 18:47 — DrActualFactualGosh, I wonder if the Edge4 group (googled them and it looks like "Friends of Wake County" under a new title) sees the data and funds it or funds the study sight unseen. Needless to say, the report WEP provided OMITs pertinent data such as past school capacity prior to initial MYR conversion, application seats provided for calendar continuity for students from schools like Baucom that converted back, etc. I could list them but all the regular posters here know the issues. The average N&O reader will not know all the facts and this propaganda will likely sway those that don't dig deeper. I will really be a shame if the WEP report goes unanswered. I guess Raleigh businesses don't care about ALL of the county's students, only a select few--in a perfect world there would be a boycott of WEP and the Raleigh Chamber for the injustice of MYR. Keung, I love this blog but it is a double-edged sword in that it allows for important issues to be addressed, but it seems to compartmentalize it in an obscure place and what used to get front-page coverage has been reduced to a side-bar discussion.
....
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 17:37 — Sideburnshttp://www.raleighchamber.org/files/2009_02_focus.pdf
Edge4 views our school system as an "economic development tool", as the status-quo candidates would say. In searching the document, there is only one mention of WCPSS -- and that is in regards to Ann Goodnight winning an award for her work and support of the system.
Money makes the world (or, in the case, Wake County) go round -- and our students don't matter. Just bus them, shove them in YR, split some families, divide some communities, whatever it takes for the all mighty dollar. And WEP is in full support of it by publishing this nonsense.
Sorry WEP. Now that you
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 17:26 — shearertwSorry WEP. Now that you have proven yourself time and again to be a partisan, self-interest group, you have zero credibility and should be ignored.
lots of details
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 09:48 — stepbystepAfter reading the topic review in its entirety, I had a different impression. I think the report raises excellent questions that will need to be addressed in order for transitions to be as painless as possible for families. The BOE discussions thus far have been quite short on detail, and for families that will be affected by the changes, it would be helpful to start hearing some potential answers, realizing that until numbers (bodies and dollars) and family preferences are more clear, a few school populations will have to stay very flexible. Choice is great, but with expanded choice in a big system with uneven growth patterns, uncertainty may be a trade-off for awhile.
Correct! WakeEd is not an
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 18:56 — woodstockCorrect! WakeEd is not an organization seeking to understand the goals of the BoE and to work with and support them. Instead, they promote the interests of the ultra-left and, of course, Harvey Schmitt and his cronies who provide the marching orders for WakeED.
Oh I now how they will pay for this!
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 16:40 — stacy123Less transportation costs of course!! I think we have somewhere between $10 and $20 million and probably 1/3-1/2 could probably be saved (guesstimate).
Mr. Hui if you can post the total # thanks!
Keung? Did the Raleigh
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 16:20 — DrActualFactualKeung? Did the Raleigh Chamber of Commerce pay for/fund this study directly or thru one of their entities? Is that what you mean by "co-sponsored?"
They sponsored the study
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 17:23 — KeungHui (author)They sponsored the study through the chamber's Edge4Program. Ann Denlinger said the WEP produces reports and asks groups which ones they want to co-sponsor.
I don't recall WEP doing an
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 15:11 — jenmanI don't recall WEP doing an analysis like this when the schools were converted in the first place. That would have been nice.
Nice, yes, but likely never
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 17:29 — woodstockNice, yes, but likely never considered. You need to remember the bias of WakeEd and where their marching orders originate.
This was all considered - just poorly / not communicated
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 09:52 — ScottncThis was all considered when MYR was enacted. When the school system is growing at 6-7k students a year and the taxpayers make it clear no tax increases there is only one avenue - MYR. The prior school board just did a poor job of laying it out for the parents. If the prior school board was "out" to purposely wreck family's lives, why are MYR being converted back to traditional as new schools come on line ? My sense ( and I could be wrong) is the new board has passed resolutions based on a philosophical difference (Neighborhood traditional vs what we have in Wake County) without looking at the harsh realities of student population and school seat capacity. There is plenty of good demographic information on the wcpss site.
The system isn't growing at
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 10:34 — woodstockThe system isn't growing at 6-7K students a year; it is not even remotely close to that. (Last year I believe about 1500 students were added to the 153-school system - that is about 10 students per school on average) Also, no one has even mentioned having fewer year-round schools. Currently, there are more people seeking year-round assignments than are permitted to attend them. It may be that we may end up with more year-round schools.
You are right about one thing, it is about a philosophical difference. The new BoE majority values choice, parental input, and family-friendly options. They also place education as the top priority, not social engineering that was seeminly the sole focus of the old status quo school board.
...
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 10:04 — SideburnsWhere is that happening? Can you list those schools please?