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.
Here are a couple from the Objectives and Criteria for Student Realignment Committee
-Neighborhood school concept. Students should be assigned to the school within the closest
proximity to their homes, where possible. (Source: BOE Resolution, December 6, 2016)
-Account for future growth – Allow for increasing attendance in high growth areas.
-Allow for grandfathering – Allow for a “no questions asked” grandfathering option for parents
who do not feel it is in the best interest of their children to endure another move. (Source: BOE Resolution, December 6, 2016)
Will be interesting to see how all that is balanced. In high growth areas, you may not be able to go to the closest, if the schools fill up with people even closer, right?
It is kinda funny, for a group that was so against redistricting, they sure are ready to put in place a plan to redistrict again...I wonder why that is?
It is kinda funny, for a group that was so against redistricting, they sure are ready to put in place a plan to redistrict again...I wonder why that is?
To basically correct a wrong. Generally to go back to schools that are closer to their homes....not have to drive 10 miles to a school where there is one 3 miles away.
To basically correct a wrong. Generally to go back to schools that are closer to their homes....not have to drive 10 miles to a school where there is one 3 miles away.
What if you can't go to the closest school or even the second closest school, because the school is filled up with people who live even closer? What then?
According to Vice Chair Sides, with no opposition from other board members, you will be able to go to whatever school you desire. Evidently schools of choice will be available in UC. Don't trust this forum, call Mr. Sides for clarification.
If I missed him saying that, then please correct me. I don't remember hearing Mr. Sides declare you can "go where you want"....the BOE along with the committee are looking into correcting the mess the previous board created with that "cluster" of a redistricting. I believe Mr Sides indicated he would like to create the concept of neighborhood schools to cut down on children being bussed to the 3rd or 4th further school from where they live. He also stated that if they are currently attending a school, they could opt to stay so they wouldn't be moved again. That is a far cry from "you can go to any school you want"
If I missed him saying that, then please correct me. I don't remember hearing Mr. Sides declare you can "go where you want"....the BOE along with the committee are looking into correcting the mess the previous board created with that "cluster" of a redistricting. I believe Mr Sides indicated he would like to create the concept of neighborhood schools to cut down on children being bussed to the 3rd or 4th further school from where they live. He also stated that if they are currently attending a school, they could opt to stay so they wouldn't be moved again. That is a far cry from "you can go to any school you want"
Thanks UCT, I stand corrected. Mr. Sides did state during the motion at the Dec 2016 meeting that there would be a no-questions-asked policy of allowing the student to stay at their currently assigned school or attend their newly assigned school. That is a far cry from my original statement.
Thanks to the last re-assignment there is currently room enough at most schools to honor those requests.
Thanks to the last re-assignment there is currently room enough at most schools to honor those requests.
I assume you are saying that tongue in cheek....3 months after the last redistricting, New Town Elementary was capped. A redistricting when implemented is supposed to alleviate over crowding for the long term. How do you justify implementing the most drastic form of shifting population and cap a school 3 months later? ....Porter Ridge was basically busting at the seams and after redistricting, no noticeable change. The old regime used the McKibbin report as their bible for redistricting. When later asked, Mr McKibbin essentially said his report should have never been used as a guideline for redistricting. This type of conflicting info plays into the hands of the conspiracy theorists. The report basically said that in 5 yrs, the school population would DECREASE. So if not the alleviate population concerns, which this redistricting clearly failed to address, why was it done? Help school scores? Help developers? Clearly population wasn't the concern
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.
....Porter Ridge was basically busting at the seams and after redistricting, no noticeable change. The old regime used the McKibbin report as their bible for redistricting. When later asked, Mr McKibbin essentially said his report should have never been used as a guideline for redistricting. This type of conflicting info plays into the hands of the conspiracy theorists. The report basically said that in 5 yrs, the school population would DECREASE. So if not the alleviate population concerns, which this redistricting clearly failed to address, why was it done? Help school scores? Help developers? Clearly population wasn't the concern
