High School Engagement Taskforce - School Board Update 3/21/13

402
-1

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
402
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

High School Engagement Taskforce - School Board Update 3/21/13

  1. 1. HIGH SCHOOLENGAGEMENTTASKFORCE UPDATEMarch 21, 2014
  2. 2. HISTORY OF THE TASKFORCE Upon approval of the bond referendum to build asecond high school, the Board made a commitmentto review after a period of time. Engagement process last year with Dr. JimRickabaugh This group is a continuum of that engagement andpromise by our Board and school district.
  3. 3. CHARGE STATEMENT To study and then make recommendations to theSchool Board in spring 2013 regarding the followingissues: Consider allowing the high schools to developindividual personalities within clear, consistentparameters. Consider incentives or structural changes tobalance enrollment and student diversity in thehigh schools over time. Consider issues of site capacity and equity offacilities as outlined in the district facility report.
  4. 4. RESPONSIBILITIES Report to the school board on an on-going basis Review all pertinent data Seek public, staff, and student input prior to makinga recommendation to the school board Provide communication updates for districtdispersal Evaluate options and estimated expenditures Prepare a final recommendation to the schoolboard
  5. 5. GUIDELINES Optimize building space Ensure program equity Sustainable student attendance boundaries forthe next five to ten years unless there is asignificant enrollment loss or gain versus currentprojections Boundary changes would be considered in lightof pre-school, elementary and middle schoolcapacity discussions and potentialrecommendations Consider safety, transportation, and costs whendeveloping recommendations for consideration
  6. 6. MEMBERSHIP Carole Baab – School board Tim Klein – School Board Tim Dorway – Chanhassen Principal (co-chair) David Brecht – Chaska Principal (co-chair) Josh Omang – Chanhassen Teacher Jaime Schommer – Chanhassen Teacher Delphine Luzney – Chaska Teacher Jesse Longley – Chaska Teacher Chad Lea – Chanhassen Parent Rhonda Fletcher – Chanhassen parent Jill Anderson – MSE parent going to Chaska Michelle Hanson – MSW parent going to Chan Kelly Loosbrock – Chaska Parent Lynn Mattson-Little – Chaska Parent Daria Briol – Chanhassen Student Ryan Souza – Chanhassen Student Hannah Potter – Chaska Student Adam Hoxie – Chaska Student
  7. 7. DATA WE HAVECOLLECTED ANDCONSIDERED TO DATE
  8. 8. THE RICKABAUGH REPORT 50 students at each school 46 Chaska community members, 28 Chanhassen communitymembers Chan students (page 4) ―Absence of the diversity present atCHS resulting in educational disadvantage for students (atChan).‖ Chaska parents (page 11) ―Create better demographic balancebetween the high schools, possibly through boundarychanges.‖ Chan parents (page 12) ―Consider strategies to better balancediversity present in both student bodies.‖ Chan staff (page 13) ―Absence of diversity is an importantmissing element.‖ Question from Community Engagement meetings: ―Are thedifferences between the high schools of the magnitude that theSchool Board should consider options to address thedifferences?‖ Chanhassen: Yes 19% No 81% Chaska: Yes 80% No 20%
  9. 9. ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS AND OPENENROLLMENT DATA2012 demographic study projection reportedthat in 2022:Chan HS enrollment = 1735 capacity of 1731 100.2% of capacity (over capacity)Chaska HS enrollment = 1325 capacity of 1779 74.5% of capacityOpen enrollment out of the district--1200 totalstudents across the district including private,parochial and public
  10. 10. FACILITIES REPORT AND TECH ISSUES Chaska High School needs a Black Box and aScene Shop for facilities to be equal Synthetic turf facilities should be added into thedistrict exterior facilities as often as possible Technology needs have not yet been discussed foreither school by the group.
  11. 11. BOUNDARY HISTORYIntegration at elementary model has been apriorityCommunication and input-gathering is criticalto the process
  12. 12. SCHOOL DEMOGRAPHICS – ENROLLMENT,DIVERSITY, FREE AND REDUCED Current enrollment - 3/14/13 data Chan HS 1557 (25.8% more than Chaska)- Chaska HS 1238 Ethnic diversity - 3/14/13 data Chan HS 7.9% Chaska HS 20.4% Free and Reduced Priced Lunch - 10/1/12 MDEdata Chan HS 7.5% Chaska HS 21.4%
  13. 13. ATHLETIC AND ACTIVITIES PARTICIPATION Total participation is different because enrollment isdifferent. Proportionally, our schools are very close in thepercentage of participants in athletics and activities. In 2012-2013 unduplicated numbers were as follows: Chaska MDE enrollment of 1210 with 609 studentsparticipating (increase of 61 student participants from 2011)—50.3% Chanhassen MDE enrollment of 1515 with 845 studentsparticipating (increase of 75 student participants from 2011)—55.8%
  14. 14. MSHSL FORMULA FOR CONSIDERING FRPPARTICIPATIONFormula exists for recognizing the uniquesocioeconomic needs of schools in the MSHSLChanges are made to total enrollment toaccount for FRP population and results inschool size designation (ex: AAA, AA, A, etc.)Examples of impact from the formula Chaska went from 1210 to 1106 for classassignmentChanhassen went from 1515 to 1470 forclass assignment
  15. 15. SCHOOL DISTRICT ECONOMICCHARACTERISTICS Median household income data indicates a significant incomediscrepancy, which influences the non-district funded financialsupport for athletics and activities
  16. 16. BASED ON ALL OF THIS DATA, ISTHERE A SIGNIFICANT ENOUGHCONCERN THAT WE NEED TO DOSOMETHING?5 – yes, and I will be a leader in helping do something different – 2responded this way4 – yes, and I will be and advocate of doing something different – 8responded this way3 – yes, and I am comfortable agreeing that we need to do somethingbut I may not be an advocate or a leader in the effort – 3 respondedthis way2 – yes, but I still have questions – 0 responded this way1 – not sure, I have a lot of questions but will not block an effortmoving forward – 0 responded this way0 – No, there is not an issue and I would block doing somethingdifferent – 0 responded this way
  17. 17. NEXT STEPS Incentives and structural changes Presentations/surveys to/for our constituenciesfor feedback Making recommendations to the Board

×