Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have property, children and a career that will be affected by the redistricting. I think it is the most logical way to proceed in order to pave the way for a legitimate argument for the construction of more schools. It is political science 101.
I am also a fan of magnet schools, but they typically serve such a small population of students; I'm not sure how much relief they would realistically offer. Other options such as multi-tracking and split-tracking may seem like a good idea on the surface, until you realize that in order to implement either of those, there becomes a real cost/staffing issue.
For example, with multi-tracking, any teacher/staff member that sees the general population ex.)counselors, arts, PE, media coordinator, cafeteria staff, etc. would have to become a 12 month employee. Teachers/counselors/support staff are currently 10 month employees. So when Dr. Ellis mentions the staffing costs, she's not making that up.
Same thing with K-6 schools, I really like the idea and I've always thought that the developmental differences between 6th and 8th grade are too great for them to be in the same building. But again, there are real challenges and costs behind implementing such a system.
I appreciate the frustration and hardships this will cause many families. Although I also have the benefit of seeing this from a different perspective, not just as a parent and property owner but also from an educator's perspective. (An educator in a VERY crowded school I might add!)
so Whxwlvr, you children are currently slated to move from their present school to another school? may i ask to which school they are being redistricted too?
so Whxwlvr, you children are currently slated to move from their present school to another school? may i ask to which school they are being redistricted too?
Sure....Parkwood. I also have a rental property that went from Sun Valley to Monroe. Still think I have an "agenda"?
mod cut
Last edited by SunnyKayak; 01-28-2014 at 06:13 PM..
Reason: refrain from attacking members
Sure....Parkwood. I also have a rental property that went from Sun Valley to Monroe. Still think I have an "agenda"?
off topic .
Seriously….when did i say you had an "agenda"? If you have children possibly being redistricted, ok, you feel the pain…..and if you are ok with that, more power to you. You be surprised at the amount of people when i talk to them, they have no problem with redistricting but when i ask, "would you let your kids be moved" the answer is "oh hell no, i don't want that to happen"….credibility is lost a tad bit with that type of situation, ya think?
Last edited by SunnyKayak; 01-28-2014 at 06:18 PM..
Mobile classrooms, keeping caps in place, multi track, build additions, build more schools….those are not "viable" options?
Mobile classrooms: In the schools that are overcrowded there are already multiple trailers in place (space issue for additional trailers at many schools....where do u suggest putting them when there is no space left?). There are real safety and security issues for the kids placed in trailers (not talking tornados here). They have real issues with the learning environment due to noise. There are real cost factors involved.
Keeping caps in place: This is a very temporary and short term measure. Transportation would immediately become inefficient and costly as pockets of kids from all over the county who move in (and thus subject to the cap) have to be bused to the temporary school assignment. And for kicks (since lots of you have brought this up) would be a killer for those trying to sell their homes.
Multi-track: Like I have said before, I suggested this one last time around and it went nowhere. While I personally like this as it can provide up to 30 % additional capacity, it will not get any traction due to cost and complexity. It does have a number of "pros" but also a number of "cons". There is, I believe, a charter type school that follows a year round schedule (?Union Academy) but I assume it is a single track.
Build Additions/Build more schools: Does not provide relief when it is needed (now). The BOE represent the entire UC population, and new building cannot happen while existing schools sit underutilized. It really wouldn't be fair to ask those living in those underutilized school areas to support (they pay taxes too) building new schools in the high growth part of the county. That building may eventually occur in the future if growth determines it is needed and after underutilized schools fill.
Unfortunately the real long term solution isn't likely to happen until the growth stabilizes. It has always boggled my mind how permits are handed out like candy at Halloween around here without regard to infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, emergency services schools etc).
Mobile classrooms: In the schools that are overcrowded there are already multiple trailers in place (space issue for additional trailers at many schools....where do u suggest putting them when there is no space left?). There are real safety and security issues for the kids placed in trailers (not talking tornados here). They have real issues with the learning environment due to noise. There are real cost factors involved.
Keeping caps in place: This is a very temporary and short term measure. Transportation would immediately become inefficient and costly as pockets of kids from all over the county who move in (and thus subject to the cap) have to be bused to the temporary school assignment. And for kicks (since lots of you have brought this up) would be a killer for those trying to sell their homes.
Multi-track: Like I have said before, I suggested this one last time around and it went nowhere. While I personally like this as it can provide up to 30 % additional capacity, it will not get any traction due to cost and complexity. It does have a number of "pros" but also a number of "cons". There is, I believe, a charter type school that follows a year round schedule (?Union Academy) but I assume it is a single track.
Build Additions/Build more schools: Does not provide relief when it is needed (now). The BOE represent the entire UC population, and new building cannot happen while existing schools sit underutilized. It really wouldn't be fair to ask those living in those underutilized school areas to support (they pay taxes too) building new schools in the high growth part of the county. That building may eventually occur in the future if growth determines it is needed and after underutilized schools fill.
Unfortunately the real long term solution isn't likely to happen until the growth stabilizes. It has always boggled my mind how permits are handed out like candy at Halloween around here without regard to infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, emergency services schools etc).
Denver, there are 3 schools that need relief….no reason to effect this many schools for just 3….If the overcrowding is that big of an issue for you and your kids, i am sure you could contact the BOE to see if you could move your children a bit earlier to a less crowded school. You could even help alleviate the overcrowding issue.
Denver, there are 3 schools that need relief….no reason to effect this many schools for just 3….If the overcrowding is that big of an issue for you and your kids, i am sure you could contact the BOE to see if you could move your children a bit earlier to a less crowded school. You could even help alleviate the overcrowding issue.
I believe you questioned why I felt that some of the other options were not "viable" (specifically trailers, capping, building additions and new schools). I responded to each of those issues as asked. Stating that my kids are currently sitting at overcrowded schools...simply stating a fact because some posters seem to think there is not an overcrowding issue at all. Two of my kids are in trailers for at least half of every day, and I tried to explain what THEY tell me is their experience in those trailers, as well as my concerns for their security (which unfortunately is a reality these days). The overcrowding issues affect more than 3 schools, the difference is by severity of overcrowding. If, as you say, only 3 schools are "affected", then how are you proposing to "fix" this small 3-school problem? As to your suggestion that I call the BOE and request to change schools, I won't even comment on such nonsense.
This impacts 4 clusters, not just 3 schools. Marvin, Weddington, Porter Ridge and Cuthbertson. Those clusters represent ~53% of the student population. Sun Valley is right on the cusp and represents another 13%.
I'm sure this data will be challenged with some random non related rhetorical question.
This impacts 4 clusters, not just 3 schools. Marvin, Weddington, Porter Ridge and Cuthbertson. Those clusters represent ~53% of the student population. Sun Valley is right on the cusp and represents another 13%.
I'm sure this data will be challenged with some random non related rhetorical question.
Kensington ES….Marvin Ridge MS & Porter Ridge MS….where is the Weddington school?
Stop with the "Cluster talk" Kensington is part of the Cuthbertson Cluster, yet Cuthbertson High school is no where near critical watch….instead of trying to fan the flames that we have serious Cluster overcrowding issues, lets stick to FACTS….the BOE identified 3 schools that needed assistance, not 53% of the school district
Mobile classrooms: In the schools that are overcrowded there are already multiple trailers in place (space issue for additional trailers at many schools....where do u suggest putting them when there is no space left?). There are real safety and security issues for the kids placed in trailers (not talking tornados here). They have real issues with the learning environment due to noise. There are real cost factors involved.
Keeping caps in place: This is a very temporary and short term measure. Transportation would immediately become inefficient and costly as pockets of kids from all over the county who move in (and thus subject to the cap) have to be bused to the temporary school assignment. And for kicks (since lots of you have brought this up) would be a killer for those trying to sell their homes.
Multi-track: Like I have said before, I suggested this one last time around and it went nowhere. While I personally like this as it can provide up to 30 % additional capacity, it will not get any traction due to cost and complexity. It does have a number of "pros" but also a number of "cons". There is, I believe, a charter type school that follows a year round schedule (?Union Academy) but I assume it is a single track.
Build Additions/Build more schools: Does not provide relief when it is needed (now). The BOE represent the entire UC population, and new building cannot happen while existing schools sit underutilized. It really wouldn't be fair to ask those living in those underutilized school areas to support (they pay taxes too) building new schools in the high growth part of the county. That building may eventually occur in the future if growth determines it is needed and after underutilized schools fill.
Unfortunately the real long term solution isn't likely to happen until the growth stabilizes. It has always boggled my mind how permits are handed out like candy at Halloween around here without regard to infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, emergency services schools etc).
lets look at your reasons….if they are a true safety and security issue as you claim, then every single trailer around the entire county should be removed IMMEDIATELY. A childs safety should not be jeopardized for even 5 minutes, so using them at all, should not be an option. but if you take a step back, we both know it really isn't a safety issue, just those who like to shoot down their effectiveness who are in favor of redistricting
Capping issue….its already been determined that Busing is a state expense, not a county, so the BOE cannot not use the "added expense" theory there
Multi track - you say its a con due to the cost and complexity….which is?????? or you don't really know what the cost and complexity is?
Build Additional….you claim that the BOE cannot build while other schools in the county sit underutilized, yet back in 2007 and 2010, both Parkwood and Forest Hills were under 100% capacity, yet the Marvin & Cuthbertson schools got built….what was the excuse back then?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
