Transcript SUPERINTENDENT’S RECOMMENDATIONS Capacity Utilization Arlington Public Schools December 17, 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 17, 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
Progressive Planning Model – Timing
Phase I – Immediate
FY 2010
Plan
Phase II – Short-Term
Approximately 1-3 Years (may need
to be accelerated)
Plan
Phase III – Mid-Term
Approximately 4-6 Years (may need
to be accelerated)
Plan
2010
Phase IV – Long-Term
Approximately 6+ Years (may need
to be accelerated)
2016
Progressive Planning Model Phase I
Consider for Immediate Action for September 2010
Elementary
Convert computer labs and/or
other available space to
classrooms (e.g., convert six
existing computer labs to
classrooms)*
Secondary
Implement 6/7 scheduling model
Increase class size by one based Increase class size by one based
on recommended maximum class on recommended maximum class
size*
size *
Add relocatable classrooms*
Consider moving 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
Secondary
Add relocatable classrooms
Add relocatable classrooms
Convert computer labs and/or
other available space to
classrooms
Increase recommended
maximum class size by an
additional one student
Increase recommended
maximum class size by an
additional one student
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
Consider flexible school day at
high school
Team options
Consider use of Career Center
Countywide options
Countywide options
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
Next Steps
• Begin implementation of Phase I
• As we move to implementation of Phase I, continue the
process to research, study and plan for Phases II, III, and IV
• Monitor through an ongoing process – including an update to
the School Board in March 2010 and a twice yearly review of
capacity and enrollment
• Implement each phase, or elements within a phase, as needed
or revised to meet changing needs, challenges, and resources
• 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
Proposed School Board Action
The School Board approves the Progressive Planning Model, as described in
the memorandum dated December 17, 2009, to address crowding, capacity,
and enrollment at elementary and secondary schools based on projections for
the next six years to 2015-2016.
****
This model, each phase of the model, and/or elements within a phase can be
implemented as needed or revised by the School Board to meet changing
needs, challenges, and resources. Next steps to implementing this model
will involve:
• working with the Facilities Advisory Council (FAC) and the
Projections/Capacity Sub-Committee (P/CS) of the FAC and
• providing the School Board with twice yearly reviews including capacity
and enrollment data and the progress and forecast for each upcoming
phase.
Any actions that require budgetary or policy changes must be approved by
the School Board.
SUPERINTENDENT’S
RECOMMENDATIONS
Capacity Utilization
Arlington Public Schools
December 17, 2009