Below you will find a web link to our redistricting plan for the ICCSD over the next few years. The board of directors approved steps one and two. The remaining steps will be discussed at their upcoming meeting(s).
RSP & Associates, our consulting firm, is putting together maps that will visually show the details of these decisions. When they are completed, they will be posted on our website. We will send an update letting you know when this is done.
http://www.iccsd.k12.ia.us/district/redistrict/0525/BoardApproveMay25.pdf
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Update about Redistricting
This is a Thursday, May 13, 2010, redistricting update from Ann Feldmann.
Some have asked, “What is the new information that relates to redistricting?” The information to which board members referred in their May 11 meeting is twofold:
· some corrections on maps on pages 60, 66, and 68 (find these updated maps for the final Enrollment and Redistricting report on the district website at: http://www.iccsd.k12.ia.us/district/redistrict/index.html )
· a clarification of how Free and Reduced Lunch rates were calculated throughout the redistricting process. The clarification around FRL is as follows.
Q: The total FRL rates are different in each high school scenario. Since they represent the same students only distributed differently what accounts for the total percentages of 18.5% and 24.7% in 4D, 22.9% and 24.7% in 4E and 22.2% and 24.7% in 4F?
A: They are different because they are based on different years as noted on the maps. The two HS scenario is done by 2012/13, while the 3 HS is 2014/15. Also, the 3rd secondary bldg is a 9th grade center.
Q: So how DID the consultants at RSP calculate the FRL numbers in their map legends?
A: The number of 2009/10 students with FRL based on address is joined to a planning area. When there is a change in which facility the planning area attends in a future year, the FRL can be compared between 2009/10 and that future date. The reason projections from RSP show a lower overall FRL percentage five years into the future is: in these projections, there isn’t an attempt to project a number of students on FRL….so the number remains constant into the future. The FRL numbers remain the same, only distributed differently according to proposed boundary changes. RSP simply looked at where a FRL student resides in 09/10 and assumes if the boundary changes at some point in the future how that would impact enrollment at each facility with respect to that student being moved to that new attendance area in that given projected enrollment year. RSP makes no assumption on changing FRL – this is a tool to understand where FRL students reside in relation to the attendance area.
Q: The current numbers for FRL do not match our official district numbers. Why might that be?
A: The FRL percentages change on a daily basis (especially in October as families that qualified the previous year are allowed to remain on free and reduced lunch through October.) The district’s official enrollment report (see the district website: http://www.iowa-city.k12.ia.us/district/district_reports/2009-10Enrollment_Report.pdf ) uses the federal reporting date of October 31 for our official FRL percentage. The official rate for 2009-10 at West is 20.06% and at City is 27.50%.
Our consultants at RSP pulled enrollment and free and reduced data on October 19, so it may be assumed that City had a high number of students from the previous school year who qualified and remained on the list until the official reporting date of October 31.
Q: Why doesn’t the district administration make a prediction for FRL?
A: Other than to make a general overall prediction, there isn’t reliable way to accurately project FRL. There are factors that are hard to predict, such as a change in a city rental ordinance or a change in an apartment unit owner’s policy of accepting or discontinuing accepting Section 8 vouchers, for example. Even changes in other large urban centers’ housing policies or availability can noticeable affect our district or school averages. The floods two years ago correlated with a slower than average increase in the FRL rate.
All that being true, we believe it is unlikely that district average FRL rates will decrease over the next five years since historically they have steadily risen.
Bottom Line?
FRL process is only a tool-- not a projection-- to understand where FRL students reside in relation to an attendance area but without adjusting for an enrollment increase.
At their May 11th meeting, the board voted to endorse the vision of a 3rd high school. At the conclusion of the meeting, they went into closed session for the purpose of discussing “bargaining/land acquisition.” Did they buy land for a 3rd high school?
No, there was no decision or discussion regarding the purchase of a third high school site. However, as is prudent, the administration has taken and continues to take steps to prepare for the building of a third high school, including discussions regarding land acquisition.
Some have asked, “What is the new information that relates to redistricting?” The information to which board members referred in their May 11 meeting is twofold:
· some corrections on maps on pages 60, 66, and 68 (find these updated maps for the final Enrollment and Redistricting report on the district website at: http://www.iccsd.k12.ia.us/district/redistrict/index.html )
· a clarification of how Free and Reduced Lunch rates were calculated throughout the redistricting process. The clarification around FRL is as follows.
Q: The total FRL rates are different in each high school scenario. Since they represent the same students only distributed differently what accounts for the total percentages of 18.5% and 24.7% in 4D, 22.9% and 24.7% in 4E and 22.2% and 24.7% in 4F?
A: They are different because they are based on different years as noted on the maps. The two HS scenario is done by 2012/13, while the 3 HS is 2014/15. Also, the 3rd secondary bldg is a 9th grade center.
Q: So how DID the consultants at RSP calculate the FRL numbers in their map legends?
A: The number of 2009/10 students with FRL based on address is joined to a planning area. When there is a change in which facility the planning area attends in a future year, the FRL can be compared between 2009/10 and that future date. The reason projections from RSP show a lower overall FRL percentage five years into the future is: in these projections, there isn’t an attempt to project a number of students on FRL….so the number remains constant into the future. The FRL numbers remain the same, only distributed differently according to proposed boundary changes. RSP simply looked at where a FRL student resides in 09/10 and assumes if the boundary changes at some point in the future how that would impact enrollment at each facility with respect to that student being moved to that new attendance area in that given projected enrollment year. RSP makes no assumption on changing FRL – this is a tool to understand where FRL students reside in relation to the attendance area.
Q: The current numbers for FRL do not match our official district numbers. Why might that be?
A: The FRL percentages change on a daily basis (especially in October as families that qualified the previous year are allowed to remain on free and reduced lunch through October.) The district’s official enrollment report (see the district website: http://www.iowa-city.k12.ia.us/district/district_reports/2009-10Enrollment_Report.pdf ) uses the federal reporting date of October 31 for our official FRL percentage. The official rate for 2009-10 at West is 20.06% and at City is 27.50%.
Our consultants at RSP pulled enrollment and free and reduced data on October 19, so it may be assumed that City had a high number of students from the previous school year who qualified and remained on the list until the official reporting date of October 31.
Q: Why doesn’t the district administration make a prediction for FRL?
A: Other than to make a general overall prediction, there isn’t reliable way to accurately project FRL. There are factors that are hard to predict, such as a change in a city rental ordinance or a change in an apartment unit owner’s policy of accepting or discontinuing accepting Section 8 vouchers, for example. Even changes in other large urban centers’ housing policies or availability can noticeable affect our district or school averages. The floods two years ago correlated with a slower than average increase in the FRL rate.
All that being true, we believe it is unlikely that district average FRL rates will decrease over the next five years since historically they have steadily risen.
Bottom Line?
FRL process is only a tool-- not a projection-- to understand where FRL students reside in relation to an attendance area but without adjusting for an enrollment increase.
At their May 11th meeting, the board voted to endorse the vision of a 3rd high school. At the conclusion of the meeting, they went into closed session for the purpose of discussing “bargaining/land acquisition.” Did they buy land for a 3rd high school?
No, there was no decision or discussion regarding the purchase of a third high school site. However, as is prudent, the administration has taken and continues to take steps to prepare for the building of a third high school, including discussions regarding land acquisition.
Redistricting Update
At their regular board meeting on Tuesday, May 11, 2010, the ICCSD board of directors took the following steps in redistricting decision-making:
They agreed on the vision of a third high school when there is adequate enrollment and finances to open a new school. They agreed that they have time to determine what its programming, enrollment, and capacity should be and don’t have to make this decision immediately.
Prior to the opening of a third high school, the board agreed that we will utilize all available capacity at City and West. That will involve accommodating enrollments greater than the stated capacities at City and West.
The board agreed to not build additional permanent capacity at either City or West. Additional enrollment beyond their typical capacities will be accommodated through the use of temporary facilities.
The board asked administration to develop a recommendation for the May 25 board meeting regarding which elementary attendance/planning areas will be moved into City beginning in 2011-12. They also asked that the recommendation include other items such as how students will progress from elementary to junior high to high school and how to adjust some other elementary attendance areas.
The board voted to reject the high school boundary changes in scenario 4F as they are stated in the scenario, but reserved the right to choose boundary concepts from scenario 4F, 4D or any other ideas that would meet their four criteria. To view the four criteria, please see page 45 of the Enrollment & Redistricting Report on the district’s website at: http://www.iccsd.k12.ia.us/district/redistrict/0408/FinalReport2010/ICCSD_ER_BR0910_NoMaps.pdf
They agreed on the vision of a third high school when there is adequate enrollment and finances to open a new school. They agreed that they have time to determine what its programming, enrollment, and capacity should be and don’t have to make this decision immediately.
Prior to the opening of a third high school, the board agreed that we will utilize all available capacity at City and West. That will involve accommodating enrollments greater than the stated capacities at City and West.
The board agreed to not build additional permanent capacity at either City or West. Additional enrollment beyond their typical capacities will be accommodated through the use of temporary facilities.
The board asked administration to develop a recommendation for the May 25 board meeting regarding which elementary attendance/planning areas will be moved into City beginning in 2011-12. They also asked that the recommendation include other items such as how students will progress from elementary to junior high to high school and how to adjust some other elementary attendance areas.
The board voted to reject the high school boundary changes in scenario 4F as they are stated in the scenario, but reserved the right to choose boundary concepts from scenario 4F, 4D or any other ideas that would meet their four criteria. To view the four criteria, please see page 45 of the Enrollment & Redistricting Report on the district’s website at: http://www.iccsd.k12.ia.us/district/redistrict/0408/FinalReport2010/ICCSD_ER_BR0910_NoMaps.pdf
Friday, May 7, 2010
THANK YOU FAMILIES!
The Weber staff would like to THANK our Weber families for a wonderful
Staff Appreciation Week! We thoroughly enjoyed our flowers, gift cards, car wash passes, 30 minute breaks, 10 minute massages and all the yummy food!!
We appreciate your thoughtfulness and ongoing support!
Thanks again!
Staff Appreciation Week! We thoroughly enjoyed our flowers, gift cards, car wash passes, 30 minute breaks, 10 minute massages and all the yummy food!!
We appreciate your thoughtfulness and ongoing support!
Thanks again!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)