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.
16 years is a long time to find a solution. I would like to see the city and state use binding arbitration on differences of opinion that drag out so long.
It should be built into things like this, statewide.
I do think Weickers Two Connecticuts idea was spot on, and our outcome differential in education harms our citizens.
Did you ever consider that no one wants the solution and the solution causes more problems than it solves?
The solution would be busing kids all over town and that’s just ridiculous. It means kids must get up earlier to get to school across town. It means they get home later as well. It destroys a tight knit neighborhood communities that the schools affected are the center of. It puts the kids on buses, exposing them to traffic hazards they don’t currently face. And for what? So they meet some arbitrary racial percentage that the unconnected bureaucrats in Hartford think is appropriate?
How about instead doing a democratic thing and letting the voters in the school district decide if they want to meet this ridiculous mandate? I think you will find the answer would be a very loud NO. Jay
Did you ever consider that no one wants the solution and the solution causes more problems than it solves?
The solution would be busing kids all over town and that’s just ridiculous. It means kids must get up earlier to get to school across town. It means they get home later as well. It destroys a tight knit neighborhood communities that the schools affected are the center of. It puts the kids on buses, exposing them to traffic hazards they don’t currently face. And for what? So they meet some arbitrary racial percentage that the unconnected bureaucrats in Hartford think is appropriate?
How about instead doing a democratic thing and letting the voters in the school district decide if they want to meet this ridiculous mandate? I think you will find the answer would be a very loud NO. Jay
Destroys neighborhoods is dramatic, doubt that. They have to eventually travel further for middle, high school, and privates if they go that route.
I think the Issue that Mckinley is facing may be a data collection problem, and not an actual racial problem. I tried to find the hard data of the racial makeup of the Mckinley student population, and while it was hard to find, it seems the largest segment of the "minority" groups is the hispanic student population. Lol! Hispanic is an ethnic group and not a racial group. And hispanics are also the largest ethnic group in CT. AKA, not a minority. What's next, bussing students around North Haven because one school is too Italian? It's a data collection problem. Poblem solved.
McKinley could certainly not be rehabbed at a lower cost of the rebuild.
Little bit of inside baseball but all of this was brought up almost 25 years ago when the school expansion plans started to take shape. Long story short: building of the elementary school/middle schools and the splitting of the singular high school really messed up districting. I'm trying to play it down the middle as much as possible but the warnings and concerns about the current state of FPS was right there at the beginning and again one side's predictions came true in the most part and the other's, well, didn't. Even then they knew that how the town was structuring and placement the schools was going to have big issues including very much this exact one. Even 6-10 years ago the issues were clear, and the administrators and teachers very much felt the pressures and did their jobs to excellence despite.
That said, it's really a shame that they want to break up McKinnley's district and are floating closing Jennings, both idea make zero sense for the supposed issues.
So is the law bad? In this case no. The entirety of the rebuilding, new construction, and initial redistricting were known to be bad ideas from the start.
What are you talking about?
It wasn’t like the town had a blank slate 25 years ago and a bottomless pot of money to completely overhaul the school system and build all new schools.
Nor did it have the ability to eliminate history and tradition and the ties those schools had to the neighborhoods they served.
Plus remember that student populations shift with the years so one year a neighborhood could have hundreds of school age kids but ten years later, there could be few. It’s a moving target that no one knows what will happen to.
Back when the town decided to replace the old McKinley School building with a new one, they had a building that had a serious mold problem that was going to be very hard to remediate. They had closed the school and shipped the kids to other schools that had excess space so they wanted as quick a solution as possible. I don’t even think cost was an issue. They came up with a plan to build a new school on the ballfields in front of the school so they wouldn’t have to wait to demolish the old school to start construction. Racial imbalance wasn’t even a consideration at the time. I believe that within two years the new school opened and the neighborhood kids returned to their school. That’s impressive. It certainly was NOT a bad idea. I’m not sure what you think the alternative could have been.
It does seem ridiculous though that the town is considering closing Jennings School but I’m not sure that shifting McKinley kids there makes sense either. You might be able to shift Knapp’s Village kids there but I’m not sure it would give you the numbers needed to change the racial balance significantly. I know the town has looked at shifting district lines in the past and while it was better, it did not fully solve the problem. As I said it’s not as easy as people think.
Maybe we should be asking if this law makes sense. Why is it 25% and not 30% or 40%? How should public opinion play into it and should it override a questionable state mandate? I believe it should as long as it does not mean a substandard education for the children. Jay
We're very much in agreement re: McKinley and Jennings. McKinley was in dire need of replacement for exactly the reasons you stated, including many more that made rehabbing a fiscal nightmare. And the proposed idea of closing Jennings also makes no sense.
I will say that student population forecasting is a mix of art and science, and perfectly allocating resources with limited assets is not an easy order. What I'm talking about are essentially a few decisions that really made zero sense at the time when the numbers and projections were looked at that really threw the catchment sheds off in town. The current Superintendent agrees with my general position:
“There are some things that have no rhyme or reason in how the lines are drawn. And we could make things maybe a little bit more balanced within that,” said Testani.
IIRC the big debate was if enrollment numbers for certain districts would be 25-30% over projections or not. I graduated FHS in the thick of the big bubble for the school system (HS grad years 1999-2009) of which afterwards the enrollment was projected to drop, which looking over the enrollment numbers it very much did in those districts. What would have made sense at the time would have been another k-5 school in the eastern portion of town, a split temporary k-5 campus in the Sherman district, and closing a particular k-5 that was very hard to get to and an absolutely decrepit building. All were proposed, and would have pushed the catchments more outward from the districts in question.
To others reading, FPS has it's faults but I stand by that it remains one of the premier education systems in the state that really focuses on well rounded education. A big reason why just splitting up the district in question is untenable is that the parents of this school absolutely adore it and consider it the jewel of the neighbourhood.
We're very much in agreement re: McKinley and Jennings. McKinley was in dire need of replacement for exactly the reasons you stated, including many more that made rehabbing a fiscal nightmare. And the proposed idea of closing Jennings also makes no sense.
I will say that student population forecasting is a mix of art and science, and perfectly allocating resources with limited assets is not an easy order. What I'm talking about are essentially a few decisions that really made zero sense at the time when the numbers and projections were looked at that really threw the catchment sheds off in town. The current Superintendent agrees with my general position:
“There are some things that have no rhyme or reason in how the lines are drawn. And we could make things maybe a little bit more balanced within that,” said Testani.
IIRC the big debate was if enrollment numbers for certain districts would be 25-30% over projections or not. I graduated FHS in the thick of the big bubble for the school system (HS grad years 1999-2009) of which afterwards the enrollment was projected to drop, which looking over the enrollment numbers it very much did in those districts. What would have made sense at the time would have been another k-5 school in the eastern portion of town, a split temporary k-5 campus in the Sherman district, and closing a particular k-5 that was very hard to get to and an absolutely decrepit building. All were proposed, and would have pushed the catchments more outward from the districts in question.
Redistricting based on enrollments is not the issue in question, that's fine. It's the racial thing. In 2023, we should be passed that.
What happened that it was such a problem in Boston? given it's glorified perfection as a model city. Please rant
To be clear, as far as urban school systems go, Boston Public Schools is pretty good and bussing does provide access to better schools for some kids. I would not have had an issue sending my kid to a lot of the schools in the city. The some of the issues are the complex lottery, the length of bus rides, and the hit to community engagement without true neighborhood schools. Kids who have schools in walking distance end up getting bussed in 30+ minutes, even if they want the local school, even if the local school is better. Of course, let's not forget the cost - in 2020, transportation cost $125 MILLION to the city of Boston. Putting that money into new schools, smaller classes, and additional community outreach program (wraparound services, etc) would do far more equity and improved outcomes than busing ever could.
I would not say "no one" as there are no statewide, massive polls on the issue.
No one in the McKinley School district, not the state.
I’m just going by what my family member who has kids in the school, tells me. She doesn’t know anyone who wants the students moved around.
This should be up to the people in the McKinley district. If they don’t have a problem, why should the state stick their nose in it? Again it’s a local matter and should be decided at the local level. Jay
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.
