Reassignment committee meeting August 14, 2012

1,256 views

Published on

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,256
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Reassignment committee meeting August 14, 2012

  1. 1. STUDENT REASSIGNMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Media Center, Nash Central High School Tuesday, August 14, 2012 - 6:00 pm Call to Order……………………………………………………………………Victor Ward Sr. Roll Call………..…………………………………………………………………..Carina Bryant Approval of Minutes from the June 25, 2012 and July 17, 2012 Meeting Committee Operating Procedure Scenario Recommendations …….………………………………Mike Miller, OREd Report to School Board 8/27/2012…Regular Committee update 9/24/2012…Full Committee presentation to the School Board Questions? Next Meeting 9/10/2012 Committee voice vote 6:00 pm 3
  2. 2. Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools
  3. 3. Jan-Aug 2012 Aug - 2012 Aug – Dec 2012 August 2013 Committee Committee Public Input/ Community Deliberations/ Recommendations Engagement ImplementationMonthly Reports to Presented to the the School Board School Board Board of Education Approval 5
  4. 4. Board of Public Engagement Education Committee Chairs Technical SupportCommunity Feedback Committee ORED Staff 6
  5. 5. Contiguous boundaries:  Attempt to maintain contiguous school boundaries without using satellite attendance areas.Respect neighborhoods:  Avoid dividing easily recognized “neighborhoods” or identified “developments” or “sub- divisions” unless it is necessary to meet other guidelines. Whenever possible and practical use major highways, railroads, rivers, and streams as natural boundaries.Proximity to schools:  While it is recognized that all students cannot be assigned to their closest school, consider students proximity to other schools when creating school boundaries. 7
  6. 6. Modify feeder systems:  In order to maximize facility use and establish reasonable numbers of students at each site, consider the use of 6 middle school feeder systems instead of 5. This would allow smaller, more instructionally suited middle schools and less dependence on mobile classrooms.Stay within enrollment capacities:  Unless it is likely that a school enrollment will be declining, assign students to the four high schools in a way that their enrollments are under established capacities.Consider anticipated growth:  Enrollment growth patterns should be taken into consideration, where feasible, to ensure that anticipated growth will not adversely impact one school significantly more than the others.Enrollment balance:  In keeping with the intent of SB612, attempt to balance the percentage of academic and economic populations at each middle and high school. 8
  7. 7.  February 13 – Understanding the Optimization Process March 26 – Out of Capacity table and Scenario Data April 30 – Scenario Review and Revision May 29 – Scenario Review and Revision (cont.) June 12 – Scenario Review and Revision (cont.) June 25 – Scenario Review and Revision (cont.) July 17 – Scenario Review and Revision (cont.) August 14 – Scenario Recommendations 9
  8. 8.  Transparent Lines of Communications Committee Meetings  Open to the public Website  Information posted immediately after each meeting E-mail/ Phone Line  An e-mail address to answer questions/ receive feedback etc has been established to ensure seamless communication and to make all information readily available to the public.  A phone line has been established for those with limited or no internet access to provide feedback to the committee.
  9. 9. Mike Miller, OREd 11
  10. 10.  Committee Requests (deadline: 8/8/12)  MS 04, Rev. 2  HS 02, Rev. 2/MS 04, Rev. 3/ES 02, Rev. 1 12
  11. 11.  All requests submitted/processed according to scenario review rules (Scenario Tools – June 27, 2012) Requests may be applicable to specific scenarios Requests will be considered individually after general scenario recommendations 13
  12. 12. 14
  13. 13. 15
  14. 14. 16
  15. 15.  Addresses utilization concerns HS 01, Rev. 1 Impacts large number of children Impacts balance MS 01, Rev. 1 metrics Does not improve feeder pattern ES 01, Rev. 1 17
  16. 16.  Considers reassignment HS 02, Rev. 1 impact Considers balance metrics MS 03, Rev. 1 MS 04, Rev. 1 Considers feeder MS 05, Rev. 1 patterns Considers utilization ES 02 18
  17. 17. HS 02, Rev. 1 *MS 03, Rev. 1 * MS 04, Rev. 1 * * Recommendation will ES 02 * consider Committee requests as applicable. 19
  18. 18. HS 02, Rev. 1 *MS 03, Rev. 1 * (OR) MS 05, Rev. 1 *MS 04, Rev. 1 * * Recommendation will ES 02 * consider Committee requests as applicable. 20
  19. 19.  MS 04, Rev. 2 ? HS 02, Rev. 2/MS 04, Rev. 3/ES 02, Rev. 1 ? 21
  20. 20. February 13 (4:00) March 26 (6:00) April 30 (6:00) May 29 (6:00) June 12 (6:00) June 25 (4:00) July 17 (6:00) August 14 (6:00)Monday, Sept. 10 (6:00)
  21. 21. QUESTIONS

×