Transcript School Board Work Session on Maximizing Use of Elementary Capacity August 27, 2009

School Board Work Session on
Maximizing Use of Elementary
Capacity
August 27, 2009
Overview of Work Session
• Timetable – No change in boundary or admissions
policy for 2010-2011
• Scope – elementary and secondary
• Approaches to Address Crowding – June 2009 Report
• Consultant Information Gathering and Analysis
• Next Steps
Community Feedback
•
May 11 Community Meeting
•
July 24 Meeting with Principals (elementary and
secondary)
•
August 3, 6, & 10 Meetings with parents/citizens
•
Online survey in English and Spanish
Guiding Question #1
What is the timetable and scope?
Note: School Board direction/comment in yellow
• School Board Actions/Community Feedback
– No boundary or admissions policies decisions to effect 2010-11 school
year - Agree
– Consultant work complete in Nov 2009 - Agree
– December 2009 recommendations will frame further conversations for
systematic, long-term approach; may also include short-term actions to
manage crowding for Sept 2010 (relocatables, room conversions,
program moves, class size) - Agree
– Scope will include both elementary and secondary schools - Agree
– Questions and Suggestions from Community Outreach Meetings - Agree
• School Board Direction
- consultant look both at analytical capacity and “real-world” usage
- equitable standard (not necessarily the same) in applying capacity
- factual look at current state of programs in school
Guiding Question #2
What is the School Board’s direction on the approaches to address crowding
described in the staff’s June 2009 report (listed below) and used in the community
outreach process this past spring and summer?
Note: School Board direction/comment in yellow
• School Board Actions/Community Feedback
– Increase the recommended maximum class size [remove: for example, K (23),
Grade 1 (24), Grades 2 and 3 (26), and Grades 4 and 5 (28)]
– Add relocatable classrooms to increase capacity
– Convert interior space [Remove: (i.e., computer labs)] to increase capacity
– Add and/or move programs – What is criteria for decision-making?
– Boundary changes
– Build new elementary school at Wilson site – Or other sites
• School Board Direction
- Assess functional capacity of common areas, tipping point as related to class size,
relocatables
- Consultant to provide options for class size increases
- Consultant to consider consolidating PreK Programs
- Look for capacity at other sites (Langston, Reed, Wilson, other APS/County
buildings)
- Look at leased spaces in context of adding capacity
Guiding Question #3
What information and analysis does the School Board expect from the
consultant’s work?
•
Note: School Board direction/comment in yellow
School Board Actions/Community Feedback
– General Information and Data Analysis – consider adding relocatable
capacity as a column in utilization table
– Short-Term [remove: (3-5 years)]
– Long-Term [remove: (6+ years)]
– Funding Options – focus on using existing buildings; partnerships Wilson
and Career Center
• School Board Direction
- transfer policies system-wide (including neighborhood/teaming, clusters,
employee’s students); alternative solutions
- projections – impact of housing development; generation factors
- choice pattern analysis
- impact of moving to 6/7 model at secondary schools on common areas
- transportation system efficiencies and alternatives
- define problem (criteria and tipping point)
- flexible schedule/locations for high school students
- analysis and options, not recommendations
Next Steps
• Consultant – Contract, Begin Work, Consult with
Projections/Capacities Sub-Committee & Staff
• Community Outreach
• Monitoring Update to School Board – September
Web Page
Information and materials related to process:
http://www.apsva.us/elemcapacity
In addition, the web page has an online survey in
English and Spanish
Elementary Capacity Study Team
Report
June 16, 2009