SUPERINTENDENT’S RECOMMENDATIONS Capacity Utilization Arlington Public Schools December 3, 2009 Underlying Considerations These recommendations considered: • previous boundary studies • a commissioned study from MGT of America •
Download ReportTranscript SUPERINTENDENT’S RECOMMENDATIONS Capacity Utilization Arlington Public Schools December 3, 2009 Underlying Considerations These recommendations considered: • previous boundary studies • a commissioned study from MGT of America •
SUPERINTENDENT’S RECOMMENDATIONS Capacity Utilization Arlington Public Schools December 3, 2009 Underlying Considerations These recommendations considered: • previous boundary studies • a commissioned study from MGT of America • ongoing staff work • the work of the Projections/Capacities SubCommittee of the Facilities Advisory Council (P/CS), • input from over 250 parents and citizens at − summer open houses with staff − Summer Superintendent Chats − e-mails to and open-office hours with the School Board − over 450 responses to an online survey Underlying “Givens” • Community Input – – – – – Likes the schools their children currently attend Reluctant to make boundary changes Wants effective use of resources and capacity Supports strategic use of relocatables Supports reasoned changes • Financial Climate • Increasing Enrollment • Maximizing Efficiency Current Practices • Provide continuity and consistency of instruction • Provide equal access to educational opportunities • Recognize the value of diversity in enriching instruction • Continue use of relocatables to manage capacity at individual sites • Acknowledge the reluctance to move boundaries • Manage resources efficiently Most Aligned with Current Practices I II 6/7 Scheduling Team Options New Building Countywide Options Relocatables Class Size Increase Move preK Classes Utilize Other County Space Program Centers Convert Computer Labs Low Cost High Cost FEASIBILITY QUADRANTS – PRELIMINARY PLACEMENT Two Bell Schedules Flexible School Day Redistricting III IV Least Aligned with Current Practices Progressive Planning Model Approximate Timeline (may need to accelerated on a case-by-case basis) Phase Phase I – Immediate Timing September 2010 Phase II – Short-Term 1-3 Years Phase III – Mid-Term 4-6 Years Phase IV – Long-term 7+ Years Progressive Planning Model Phase I Immediate Action for September 2010 Elementary Secondary Convert computer labs and/or other available space to classrooms (e.g., convert six existing computer labs to classrooms)* Implement 6/7 scheduling model Increase class size by 1* Increase class size by 1* Add relocatable classrooms* Move individual preK classes * Options dependent on and to be addressed as part of the FY 2011 budget process Progressive Planning Model Phase II Consider in the Short-Term (may need to be accelerated) Elementary Add relocatable classrooms Convert computer labs and/or other available space to classrooms Increase class size by an additional 1 Secondary Add relocatable classrooms Increase class size by an additional 1 Progressive Planning Model Phase III Consider in the Mid-Term (may need to be accelerated) Elementary Secondary Consolidate program by creating Implement a staggered school centers (e.g., preK) day with two-bell schedules at high schools Utilize other county building space Team options Countywide options Consider flexible school day at high school Progressive Planning Model Phase IV Consider in the Long-Term (may need to be accelerated) Elementary Develop Wilson site Redistrict elementary schools Secondary Redistrict secondary schools Progressive Planning Model Impact – Elementary Schools Progressive Planning Model Impact – Middle Schools Progressive Planning Model Impact – High Schools Progressive Planning Model Impact – Moving 6 VPI Classes to Hoffman-Boston in 2010 School Capacity 2010 Pre-VPI Move 2010 Post-VPI Move (Reflects Class Size Increase of 1) Enrollment Percent Enrollment Percent Barrett 583 580 99.5% 564 96.7% Carlin Springs 600 593 98.8% 561 93.5% Hoffman-Boston 527 366 69.4% 462 87.7% Key 659 664 100.8% 648 98.3% Oakridge 588 593 100.9% 561 95.4% THIS IS AN ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE ONLY Progressive Planning Model Impact – Adding 12 Classrooms (conversions & relocatables) Additional Utilization Capacity (Labs & Relocatables) Capacity 2010 Utilization 530 94.7% +22 552 93.5% Ashlawn 418 88.5% +22 440 90.5% Barrett 553 95.3% +22 598* 97.0% Carlin Springs 563 101.1% +22 585 101.4% Glebe 489 91.8% +22 511 93.0% Henry 446 89.0% +22 468 91.7% Jamestown 572 100.5% +22 594 96.1% Nottingham 491 109.8% +45 603* 97.4% Oakridge 551 101.1% +22 573 103.5% Taylor 631 97.8% +45 676 97.2% School 2009 2009 Capacity ASF Site *Barrett and Nottingham’s total include current relocatables on site THIS IS AN ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE ONLY Next Steps • Implement each phase, or elements within a phase, as needed or revised to meet changing needs, challenges, and resources • Monitor through an ongoing process including a twice yearly review of capacity and enrollment • Monitor and evaluate process to allow for solutions to be fine-tuned in order to meet school-specific and systemwide needs. • Continue, consistent with the cycle of improvement model (Plan, Do, Study, Act), the review and analysis of the MGT report • Continue to work with the Projections/Capacities SubCommittee of the Facilities Advisory Council (P/CS), to monitor the progress of addressing our capacity issues Key Dates in the Process • December 3, 2009 MGT of America's (Consultant) Report (School Board Presentation) • December 3, 2009 Superintendent’s Recommendations to School Board (School Board Information Item) • December 9, 2009 School Board Community Forum on Superintendent’s Recommendations • December 17, 2009 School Board Action on Superintendent's Recommendations (School Board Action Item) Proposed School Board Action The School Board approves the Progressive Planning Model, as described in the memorandum dated December 3, 2009, to address crowding, capacity, and enrollment at elementary and secondary schools. Any actions that require budgetary or policy changes must be approved by the School Board. Web Page Information and materials related to process: http://www.apsva.us/elemcapacity In addition, the web page has an e-mail option for comments and suggestions. SUPERINTENDENT’S RECOMMENDATIONS Capacity Utilization Arlington Public Schools December 3, 2009