The argument has now been framed as a charge to fill up capacity, period. "Attend" to the "alignment" of feeder patterns only "As reasonable, and balanced against the other criteria" to me is sort of troubling language.
That's why we need as many signatures from parents/residents in the Mills attendance zone as possible. Spread the word to your neighbors. It's time to act, before the next meeting.
if the top priority is fill rate, we should start with that and not with how to fill a school that isn't open yet. how do we go about changing the order in which we work the priorities from filling meridian to filling undercapacity schools? it seems like that's the harder problem and the more time we spend on that the better served our children and those schools will be....
The progression of tasks before the boundary task force has already been decided - we voted at the last meeting (October 20). The majority voted to tackle Meridian first. (Lisa and I voted against this proposal and voted for drawing the lines for all schools together.) I don't think we have time to change this. And I don't think it's a major issue either way.
At last nights meeting, the ordering restriction was lifted. Also, the member's comments were not particularly aligned with a 'priority' ordering of schools. That said, I didn't see a strategic advantage one way or the other.
At last nights meeting, the AISD staff and the facilitator made repeated statements in support of honoring all four of the criteria. It does seem as though the utilization is more important, at least there was a spoken commitment to avoid breaking any one of them too badly. Also noteworthy was mention of the idea that fixing overcrowding is sacrosanct, but underuse is slightly less important. Thus a door was open that we should drive the truck through! It is true, though, that the sticker will be the extent to which these things are honored.
Will the plans be altered and re-presented at the next meeting? Or did you get the feeling that everyone was happy? It's hard for me to understand whether the "next steps" after the meeting are changing the boundaries more.. or not.
All the schools mentioned some concerns they have with some sections of the boundaries in Plan0. Also, all the schools asked for more precise data about how many students live in subsections of many of the planning areas that are now on boundaries, indicating that they are planning to manipulate the map themselves to meet the criteria as well as Plan0 does but also meet their own goals. It is certain that the next meeting will include some discrete proposals for changes to Plan0. This is also implied in the nomenclature of calling it a 'straw' plan. Note the, by plan, Plan0 was created by AISD staff, with the intention that the task force has the authority and role of changing it in order to come up with the final solution. It is the task force that presumably has final say, with the caveat that they have to meet the goals provided. Mike Fair
The argument has now been framed as a charge to fill up capacity, period. "Attend" to the "alignment" of feeder patterns only "As reasonable, and balanced against the other criteria" to me is sort of troubling language.
ReplyDeleteThat's why we need as many signatures from parents/residents in the Mills attendance zone as possible. Spread the word to your neighbors. It's time to act, before the next meeting.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJust figured out from my VOWO neighborhood... Distance to Mills: less than a mile. Distance to Kiker: 2 miles. Distance to Boone: 2.6 miles.
ReplyDeleteif the top priority is fill rate, we should start with that and not with how to fill a school that isn't open yet. how do we go about changing the order in which we work the priorities from filling meridian to filling undercapacity schools? it seems like that's the harder problem and the more time we spend on that the better served our children and those schools will be....
ReplyDeleteBrad,
ReplyDeleteThe progression of tasks before the boundary task force has already been decided - we voted at the last meeting (October 20). The majority voted to tackle Meridian first. (Lisa and I voted against this proposal and voted for drawing the lines for all schools together.) I don't think we have time to change this. And I don't think it's a major issue either way.
At last nights meeting, the ordering restriction was lifted. Also, the member's comments were not particularly aligned with a 'priority' ordering of schools.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I didn't see a strategic advantage one way or the other.
At last nights meeting, the AISD staff and the facilitator made repeated statements in support of honoring all four of the criteria. It does seem as though the utilization is more important, at least there was a spoken commitment to avoid breaking any one of them too badly. Also noteworthy was mention of the idea that fixing overcrowding is sacrosanct, but underuse is slightly less important. Thus a door was open that we should drive the truck through!
ReplyDeleteIt is true, though, that the sticker will be the extent to which these things are honored.
Will the plans be altered and re-presented at the next meeting? Or did you get the feeling that everyone was happy? It's hard for me to understand whether the "next steps" after the meeting are changing the boundaries more.. or not.
ReplyDeleteAll the schools mentioned some concerns they have with some sections of the boundaries in Plan0. Also, all the schools asked for more precise data about how many students live in subsections of many of the planning areas that are now on boundaries, indicating that they are planning to manipulate the map themselves to meet the criteria as well as Plan0 does but also meet their own goals.
ReplyDeleteIt is certain that the next meeting will include some discrete proposals for changes to Plan0. This is also implied in the nomenclature of calling it a 'straw' plan.
Note the, by plan, Plan0 was created by AISD staff, with the intention that the task force has the authority and role of changing it in order to come up with the final solution. It is the task force that presumably has final say, with the caveat that they have to meet the goals provided.
Mike Fair
There most certainly will be changes to the Plan that we saw Tuesday night. Oak Hill wants to completely overhaul the lines drawn for them.
ReplyDeleteAs soon as the district posts the map (I called them yesterday to find out why it's delayed) I will post it.