reassignment committee meeting - april 30, 2012

Student Reassignment Committee

Meeting Monday, April 30, 2012

6:00 p.m.

Scenario Review and Revision

District Reassignment Committee

Meeting

3

AGENDASTUDENT REASSIGNMENT COMMITTEE MEETING

Media Center, Nash Central High SchoolMonday, April 30, 2012 - 6:00 pm

Call to Order……………………………………………………………………Victor Ward

Roll Call………………………………………………………………………..Carina Bryant

Approval of Minutes from the March 26, 2012 Meeting Committee Operating Procedure Scenario Review and Revision………………………………Mike Miller,

OREd Report to School Board 5/21/12 Questions?

Next Meeting Scenario Review and Revision (continued)

Tuesday, May 29, 2012 6:00 pm

Communications

Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools

5

TIME-LINE

Jan-Aug 2012

Committee Deliberations/

Monthly Reports to the School

Board

Aug - 2012Committee

Recommendations Presented to

the School Board

Aug – Dec 2012

Public Input/ Community Engagement

Board of Education Approval

August 2013Implementatio

n

6

PROCESS IS EVERYTHING

Board of Education

Community Feedback Committee

Committee Chairs

Public Engagement

Technical Support

OREDStaff

7

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.

School Board Priorities

8

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.

School Board Priorities

9

IPSAC – TimelineFebruary 13 – Understanding the Optimization

ProcessMarch 26 – Out of Capacity table and Scenario Data

April 30 – Scenario Review and Revision

May 29 – Scenario Review and Revision

June 25 – Final Scenario Presentation

TransparentLines of CommunicationsCommittee Meetings

Open to the publicWebsite

Information posted immediately after each meetingE-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.

COMMUNICATIONS

11

Mike Miller, OREd

Scenario Review and Revision

Integrated Planning For School and Community

Michael Miller, Program ManagerOperations Research and Education Laboratory (OREd)Institute for Transportation Research and EducationCentennial CampusNorth Carolina State University

Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools

Optimal ScenariosOptimal scenarios for each level: Elem, Mid,

HighScenario data presented at March 26 meetingOptimal with respect to Proximity + Utilization

OREd scenario reviewPlanning segment level review of optimal scenariosMultiple review criteriaAssignment changes to address geographic issues

IPSAC – Status

13

Membership forecast

School building

capacities

Optimization Algorithm

Optimal Attendance Zones


Balance index allowance

14


Scenario Review

Scenario Review/Revision Cycle

Track Edits & Update School

Data

15

Assignment Change Considerations:

Elem > Mid and Mid > High feeder pattern

ContiguityTransportation issuesNatural/man-made barriersCurrent assignmentCapacity

Scenario Review – Methodology

16

17

Scenario Review

• Identify potential issues

• Assess impact• Change

assignment

Assignment change fixes transportation issue, but may impact other criteria.

18

Scenario Review

Revision 1: 19 assignment changes (all 3 levels) made to 15 Planning Segments.

19

Reassignment Scenarios: Revision 1

CURRENT HIGH SCHOOL OPTIMAL HIGH SCHOOL

Scenario Review – High Schools

OPTIMAL HIGH SCHOOL OPTIMAL HIGH SCHOOL - REVISED

Scenario Review – High Schools

High School Attendance ZonesCurrent/Scenario - Rev. 1 Data

(See data tables in handouts.)

Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash

CURRENT 1232 1204 1130 1232

PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 1145 1201 1416 1036

100

300

500

700

900

1100

1300

1500

9-12 Student Count


CURRENT 1.07130434782609 1.04695652173913 0.81294964028777 1.15355805243446

PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 0.995652173913044 1.04434782608696 1.01870503597122 0.970037453183521

10%

30%

50%

70%

90%

110%

130%

Utilization


CURRENT 0.667207792207792 0.690199335548173 0.835398230088496 0.513798701298701

PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 0.529257641921397 0.621149042464613 0.939265536723164 0.528957528957529

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%75%85%95%

Minority %

Statistics based on residence (2011 geocode).Does not measure impact of special programs such as IB.


CURRENT 0.666460829493088 0.651086556169429 0.718038674033149 0.64117389298893

PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 0.501911350243403 0.591921841541756 0.856459868959869 0.66964745383324

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%75%85%

Free/Reduced Lunch %


CURRENT 0.597285067873303 0.614014933946008 0.530638029058749 0.631374453618261

PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 0.706395348837209 0.681395348837209 0.423751686909582 0.624926857811586

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%75%

Academic Proficiency %

Statistics based on residence (2011 geocode).Does not measure impact of special programs such as IB.

High School Attendance ZonesCurrent/Scenario - Rev. 1 Data

Maximum Utilization: 104%Minimum Utilization: 97%Total Grade 9-12 students reassigned:

1356

CURRENT MIDDLE SCHOOL OPTIMAL MIDDLE SCHOOL

Scenario Review – Middle Schools

OPTIMAL MIDDLE SCHOOLOPTIMAL MIDDLE SCHOOL - REVISED

Scenario Review – Middle Schools


Middle School Attendance ZonesCurrent/Scenario - Rev. 1 Data

Edwards Nash Central Parker Red Oak Southern Nash NEW MS (RM HS site)

CURRENT 729 633 433 910 1099 0

PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 661 639 445 705 695 659

100

300

500

700

900

1100

6-8 Student Count

Target Middle School capacity = 750. Parker capacity = 557.


CURRENT 0.881499395405079

0.944776119402985

0.77737881508079

1.07058823529412

1.29294117647059

0

PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1

0.881333333333333

0.852 0.798922800718133

0.94 0.926666666666667

0.878666666666667

10%30%50%70%90%

110%130%

Utilization


CURRENT 0.781893004115226

0.669826224328594

0.877598152424942

0.585714285714286

0.51410373066424

0


0.609682299546142

0.458528951486698

0.919101123595506

0.533333333333333

0.566906474820144

0.905918057663126

5%

25%

45%

65%

85%

Minority %


CURRENT 0.728409448818898

0.679363699582754

0.7765 0.581846153846154

0.64117389298893

0


0.629619952494062

0.495801354401806

0.847861015278462

0.552074281709881

0.701692698873956

0.821299019607843

5%

25%

45%

65%

85%



CURRENT 0.511127063890883

0.541571319603356

0.551357733175915

0.685584562996595

0.631374453618261

0


0.568198944988696

0.709339774557166

0.474330357142857

0.707554225878833

0.606923076923077

0.474015748031496

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%


Middle School Attendance ZonesCurrent/Scenario - Rev. 1 Data

Maximum Utilization: 94%Minimum Utilization: 85%Maximum MS > HS feeder: 3 (New Rocky

Mount MS)Total Grade 6-8 students reassigned:

1618 (including 659 to New Rocky Mount MS)

CURRENT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OPTIMAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Scenario Review – Elementary Schools

OPTIMAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOLOPTIMAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - REVISED

Scenario Review – Elementary Schools


Elementary School Attendance ZonesCurrent/Scenario - Rev. 1 Data

Bailey Baskerville

Benv-enue

Cedar Grove

Coop-ers

Johnson MB Hub-bard

Middle-sex

Nash-ville

Pope Red Oak/Swift Creek

Spring Hope

Willi-ford

Win-stead/Engle-wood

CUR-RENT

620 341 743 221 624 475 492 340 709 279 583 550 437 1081


620 399 640 214 514 511 477 340 686 304 706 520 575 989

100300500700900

1100

K-5 Student Count

Bailey Baskerville

Benv-enue

Cedar Grove

Coop-ers

Johnson MB Hub-bard

Middle-sex

Nash-ville


Spring Hope

Willi-ford


CURRENT

0.933734939759036

0.798594847775176

1.11227544910

18

0.991031390134529

1.03826955074

875

0.826086956521739

0.9609375

0.813397129186603

1.03958944281

525

0.897106109324759

0.719753086419753

1.01476014760

148

0.752151462994837

0.954104148278906


0.933734939759036

0.934426229508197

0.958083832335329

0.959641255605381

0.855241264559068

0.888695652173913

0.931640625

0.813397129186603

1.00586510263

93

0.977491961414791

0.871604938271605

0.959409594095941

0.989672977624785

0.872903795233892

10%

50%

90%

Utilization

Bailey Baskerville

Benv-enue

Cedar Grove

Coop-ers

Johnson MB Hub-bard

Middle-sex

Nash-ville


Spring Hope

Willi-ford


CURRENT

0.654838709677419

0.982404692082112

0.737550471063257

0.520361990950226

0.307692307692308

0.995789473684211

0.780487804878049

0.588235294117647

0.493653032440056

0.989247311827957

0.437392795883362

0.514545454545455

0.965675057208238

0.640148011100833


0.654838709677419

0.989974937343358

0.7234375

0.485981308411215

0.219844357976654

0.99412915851

272

0.775681341719078

0.588235294117647

0.486880466472303

0.980263157894737

0.439093484419263

0.511538461538462

0.895652173913044

0.656218402426694

10%

50%

90%

Minority %

Bailey Baskerville

Benv-enue

Cedar Grove

Coop-ers

Johnson MB Hub-bard

Middle-sex

Nash-ville


Spring Hope

Willi-ford


CURRENT

0.709450714823175

0.936566265060241

0.684589625738674

0.728067729083666

0.467428797468355

0.909124378109453

0.703311320754717

0.702206266318538

0.520635430038511

0.907741433021807

0.456706210746685

0.650129659643436

0.922113163972286

0.593824966681475


0.709450714823175

0.936272493573265

0.659783420463032

0.711359832635983

0.387806026365348

0.900924908424909

0.704201762977473

0.702206266318538

0.492967180174146

0.917930029154519

0.467365373480023

0.654667817083693

0.895189189189189

0.619392318911035

5%

35%

65%

95%


Bailey Baskerville

Benv-enue

Cedar Grove

Coop-ers

Johnson MB Hub-bard

Middle-sex

Nash-ville


Spring Hope

Willi-ford


CURRENT

0.618270799347471

0.450657894736842

0.629283489096573

0.731707317073171

0.729636048526863

0.377232142857143

0.575692963752665

0.613079019073569

0.705801104972376

0.348122866894198

0.721815519765739

0.601973684210526

0.348448687350835

0.606741573033708


0.618270799347471

0.471976401179941

0.651785714285714

0.748898678414097

0.782258064516129

0.360887096774194

0.577777777777778

0.613079019073569

0.699558173784978

0.355345911949686

0.724179829890644

0.602473498233216

0.384615384615385

0.597790055248619

5%25%45%65%85%


Elementary School Attendance ZonesCurrent/Scenario - Rev. 1 Data

Maximum Utilization: 101%Minimum Utilization: 81%Maximum MS > HS feeder: 4 (Benvenue

ES)Total Grade K-5 students reassigned:

1045

Summary

Scenario Review ProcessPlanning Segment assignment change protocol

Scenario - Revision 119 Planning Segments reassigned from optimal

scenariosRevision 1 scenario data + mapsTotal Grade K-12 students reassigned: 4019

(including 659 to New Rocky Mount MS)

38

February 13 – (4:00-5:30)*

March 26 (6:00)

April 30 (6:00)

Tuesday, May 29 (6:00)

June 25 (4:00–5:30)*

August/ Sept - TBD

MEETING SCHEDULE

QUESTIONS

reassignment committee meeting - april 30, 2012

Education

meeting optimal

nash central high schoolmonday

meeting scenario review

high scenario data

school enrollment

procedure scenario review

school significantlymore

contiguous school boundaries