Michelle and Lisa, I know this is just the first rev of the map, but I personally think that it does a great job of representing Mills and I would love to see it stay the same.
AISD staff did a great job of explaining their rationale for each of the changes, and they did a great job of threading the needle and satisfying the boundary criteria. The resulting numbers look doable for everyone, not perfect, but doable. Best of all, the few tracking problems that come up seem palatable to the kids affected. I really liked one particular explanation that Mr. Silva gave regarding some of the moves, that he had kept natural access roads in mind when selecting neighborhoods. This seems logical, and would certainly be important to me.
I give this map a 100% chance of changing. Oak Hill has input they want to give regarding the sections that have been moved.
Sunset Valley and Boone are very unhappy with the map.
And, frankly, while this map is a great start, this reduction isn't enough to adequately address Mills' overcrowding problems. The boundary reps met with Mrs. Butler and talked about how much more additional relief she needs to make the school function best.
Let's look at the numbers: The population projections from the district have us reducting by 105 students - or bringing our Population projection number down to 910, but if you add 71-75 transfer students into the mix, then you're right back up to 985 students, or 117% of our permanent capacity. Ideally, we need to find another 50-75 students to move.
We discussed this at length at the CAC meeting yesterday. This wrinkle doesn't change the committment Lisa and I have to the priorities defined by the parents or the task force. In a way, the district made the easy, obvious change. It's up to us (the Mills community) to figure out what the next move is.
As this map will definitely change, we need to be sure that Mills continues to have a strong presence at the meetings.
Michelle,
What is the impact to the school if we keep the student level the same as this map vs reducing by the 50-75 students? Also is there any likelihood of the transfers naturally decreasing. (i.e. are several of them 4th and 5th graders or some other factor)
Sorry for missing the obvious link to the FUBTF website!
Becca's question is a good one. It seems that the Mills population is slated to decrease a little bit as time goes on. Could we leave the map as is and see what that does long term? If we support this map, what is the best way to advocate for the initial plan?
I can understand Boone's unhappiness, but I don't really see what Sunset Valley expects to happen. They are far far away from the impetus for these changes, which is SWES. And there's no obvious area to move to their school.
AISD was very clear in the task force meeting that they preferred to leave near term, dynamic issues out of the map consideration. This is why they insisted on designing for total population of a school. They also mentioned that transfers change 'a lot' from year to year, and are perhaps a function of administration (school or district) choices, which are very much out of the scope of the boundary task force to address. I think there is a lot of logic to this argument, to restrict the FUBTF deliberation to the total population data. However, there was lots of discussion about the basic fact that at many schools, the day to day feel is much different than what the 'population' numbers suggest, and the overcrowding is likely to continue somewhat if this is ignored. I think they should make a guess about the actual membership numbers (and transfers) for plans under consideration(and put them on the chart). But I think the decision should be based on long term trends. Mills will tend to drift down slightly over the long term, and I think Boone and Sunset Valley will eventually grow organically. Mike
As a neighbor in one of the vulnerable areas, I really am concerned about how we discuss these issues without having to pit one neighborhood against each other. I have friends in all of the vulnerable areas - as I suspect we all do - and someone has to be the loser. I understand that grandfathering is a complicated business, but is it still on the table? Anne
Who can know how many transfer students will be approved by AISD? I think they decide that year by year, or whether to accept them at all. So to me, to make way for transfer students by cutting out students that live right by Mills seems like overkill. Of course that could be explicitly part of the mandate of the task force, I don't know. But I agree with an earlier poster who said that moving kids right by Mills off to Boone, in order to clear room for people who may, or may not transfer in, seems odd and kind of over-reaching.
While the task force does not have the authority to close a school, it also has the freedom to recommend a final map that is unacceptable to AISD. The FUBTF is not AISD's robot. AISD must answer for overconstraining this process and attempting to skew the result. One of the outcomes that they should be forced to publicly consider, is fixing the system East of Mopac, including the TAKS test result disparity, the population absurdities, and yes, potentially closing a school. These could easily be accomplished by making one school a PreK center, and by having some creativity in increasing programs at these schools. I don't care that this is not within the rules that the task force was given, it is important feedback to AISD, which must acknowledge these issues are interconnected.
Michelle and Lisa,
ReplyDeleteI know this is just the first rev of the map, but I personally think that it does a great job of representing Mills and I would love to see it stay the same.
AISD staff did a great job of explaining their rationale for each of the changes, and they did a great job of threading the needle and satisfying the boundary criteria. The resulting numbers look doable for everyone, not perfect, but doable. Best of all, the few tracking problems that come up seem palatable to the kids affected.
ReplyDeleteI really liked one particular explanation that Mr. Silva gave regarding some of the moves, that he had kept natural access roads in mind when selecting neighborhoods. This seems logical, and would certainly be important to me.
Michelle & Lisa -
ReplyDeleteThank you for all of your work keeping everyone so informed!
I think this "o" map makes a great deal of sense and like Chad, would like to see it remain as the final map.
It's a bit hard to see where the exact lines are drawn. Is there somewhere to see the detail a bit more clearly?
One other question, do you have any sense of how likely this map is to undergo change?
Thank you again!
I give this map a 100% chance of changing. Oak Hill has input they want to give regarding the sections that have been moved.
ReplyDeleteSunset Valley and Boone are very unhappy with the map.
And, frankly, while this map is a great start, this reduction isn't enough to adequately address Mills' overcrowding problems. The boundary reps met with Mrs. Butler and talked about how much more additional relief she needs to make the school function best.
Let's look at the numbers: The population projections from the district have us reducting by 105 students - or bringing our Population projection number down to 910, but if you add 71-75 transfer students into the mix, then you're right back up to 985 students, or 117% of our permanent capacity. Ideally, we need to find another 50-75 students to move.
We discussed this at length at the CAC meeting yesterday. This wrinkle doesn't change the committment Lisa and I have to the priorities defined by the parents or the task force. In a way, the district made the easy, obvious change. It's up to us (the Mills community) to figure out what the next move is.
RDD - you can go to the FUBTF website (the link is in the blog post above the map) to download the PDF and zoom in.
ReplyDeleteAs this map will definitely change, we need to be sure that Mills continues to have a strong presence at the meetings.
ReplyDeleteMichelle,
What is the impact to the school if we keep the student level the same as this map vs reducing by the 50-75 students? Also is there any likelihood of the transfers naturally decreasing. (i.e. are several of them 4th and 5th graders or some other factor)
Sorry for missing the obvious link to the FUBTF website!
ReplyDeleteBecca's question is a good one. It seems that the Mills population is slated to decrease a little bit as time goes on. Could we leave the map as is and see what that does long term?
If we support this map, what is the best way to advocate for the initial plan?
I can understand Boone's unhappiness, but I don't really see what Sunset Valley expects to happen. They are far far away from the impetus for these changes, which is SWES. And there's no obvious area to move to their school.
ReplyDeleteWhy would you move 50-75 children move from Mills when it makes geographical sense, yet you have 71-75 transfer students? I am at a loss.
ReplyDeleteAISD was very clear in the task force meeting that they preferred to leave near term, dynamic issues out of the map consideration. This is why they insisted on designing for total population of a school. They also mentioned that transfers change 'a lot' from year to year, and are perhaps a function of administration (school or district) choices, which are very much out of the scope of the boundary task force to address. I think there is a lot of logic to this argument, to restrict the FUBTF deliberation to the total population data.
ReplyDeleteHowever, there was lots of discussion about the basic fact that at many schools, the day to day feel is much different than what the 'population' numbers suggest, and the overcrowding is likely to continue somewhat if this is ignored.
I think they should make a guess about the actual membership numbers (and transfers) for plans under consideration(and put them on the chart). But I think the decision should be based on long term trends. Mills will tend to drift down slightly over the long term, and I think Boone and Sunset Valley will eventually grow organically.
Mike
As a neighbor in one of the vulnerable areas, I really am concerned about how we discuss these issues without having to pit one neighborhood against each other. I have friends in all of the vulnerable areas - as I suspect we all do - and someone has to be the loser. I understand that grandfathering is a complicated business, but is it still on the table?
ReplyDeleteAnne
Who can know how many transfer students will be approved by AISD? I think they decide that year by year, or whether to accept them at all. So to me, to make way for transfer students by cutting out students that live right by Mills seems like overkill. Of course that could be explicitly part of the mandate of the task force, I don't know. But I agree with an earlier poster who said that moving kids right by Mills off to Boone, in order to clear room for people who may, or may not transfer in, seems odd and kind of over-reaching.
ReplyDeleteI think this map looks great. Can't they just close Sunset Valley and combine it with Boone?
ReplyDeleteThis map does not have the latest numbers - please check today's post for a link to download the latest version.
ReplyDeleteClosing schools is not within the boundary task force scope.
While the task force does not have the authority to close a school, it also has the freedom to recommend a final map that is unacceptable to AISD. The FUBTF is not AISD's robot. AISD must answer for overconstraining this process and attempting to skew the result. One of the outcomes that they should be forced to publicly consider, is fixing the system East of Mopac, including the TAKS test result disparity, the population absurdities, and yes, potentially closing a school.
ReplyDeleteThese could easily be accomplished by making one school a PreK center, and by having some creativity in increasing programs at these schools.
I don't care that this is not within the rules that the task force was given, it is important feedback to AISD, which must acknowledge these issues are interconnected.
I fail to see how any plan that keeps any school above 100% is acceptable to ANYONE!
ReplyDelete