Search:  

Public Notice Mayors' Task Force on School Assignment

June 30, 2003 

Key Preliminary Findings of the Mayors' Task Force on School Assignment

This short list of recommendations is made to and at the request of members of the Wake County Board of Education. The comprehensive report of the Mayors' Task Force on School Assignment, which will include and expand upon the recommendations included herein, will be transmitted to the school system early this fall. These preliminary findings, as well as the final report, is intended to bolster support for the public schools by getting the best education for Wake children.Established in November 2002 with representatives from Apex, Cary, and Garner, the Mayors' Task Force on School Assignment will articulate, prioritize, and work with the Wake County Public School Board to positively and effectively resolve the most critical school assignment issues.The Preliminary Key Findings are divided into three topics: choice, communications/community engagement, and planning.

Choice

Background

While the current Wake County Public School System (WCPSS) student assignment process allows some choice, it is clearly inadequate. School choice tends to be granted if it agrees with the school board's vision of socioeconomic/ethnic diversity. Many families are involuntarily assigned to schools far away from home through extensive forced busing. Evaluation of the current Wake County student assignment map reveals a confusing kaleidoscopic pattern that is difficult to understand. The public is now calling for a major reevaluation of student assignment and wants to elevate school choice to play a central role, while at the same time encouraging diversity. The following are some preliminary recommendations of issues that we feel are important. These and other issues will be expanded upon and discussed in more detail in our final report.

Establish a New, Countywide Assignment Map with Geographically Contiguous Zones
WCPSS, in collaboration with the community, should implement a comprehensive review of all current assignment patterns. Geographically contiguous zones should be established to enable parental involvement, academic excellence, and socioeconomic diversity. Zone alignment would vary based on demographic, geographic, and transportation constraints. For example, a densely populated urban zone may differ from an outlying suburban zone. We define these zones as follows:

• Zone 1 - The Base Zone would consist of the closest traditional base school for each level (K-5, 6-8, 9-12). Base residents would be guaranteed a slot and this would be the default assignment for any residence.
• Zone 2 - The Managed Choice Zone would expand options to include other traditional schools as well as at least one year-round and one magnet school that are the closest geographically. Transportation would be provided by WCPSS.
• Zone 3 - The Extended Choice Zone would permit application to schools of any type outside of Zones 1 and 2. WCPSS may opt to provide transportation.

Encourage Diversity Through Choice and Weighted Assignments to All Schools
Parents can choose what is in the best interests of their child and family by utilizing the many choices described above (Zones 1-3). When parents choose a school in Zones 2 or 3, which is outside of their Zone 1 base school, their application may be weighted to some degree if that student would enhance the diversity of the target school. This maneuver has been called "positive integration". Ideal parameters could be established with community input. The new assignment parameters should be transparent, unlike the variable and sometimes unclear parameters that were formerly used in the magnet/year-round lottery.

Stability Through Consistent Feeder Patterns and Expanded Grandfathering
Stable feeder patterns should be established (K-12), anchored from the high school. Once a student is assigned to a school, the student may remain until completion of its highest grade level. Siblings would receive high priority to keep families together.

Flexible Resource Allocation
So that every child can have an excellent academic environment, those schools that have higher needs should be given appropriate resources to improve academic performance. This promotes healthy schools and the implementation of No Child Left Behind.

Communications/Community Engagement

Main thrust of the Community Engagement recommendations is to convert from a staff driven redistricting plan to a community driven redistricting plan. Engagement should be an open, two-way exchange of ideas and should begin at least five years prior to re-districting. Recommended participants may include (but are not limited to): the community, WCPSS planning staff and administration, the PTA, Parent Liaisons, Wake Ed Partnership Facilitators, school board members and the towns/cities growth departments.

Conduct an informational meeting to develop a plan for incorporating "Community say" into decisions regarding:

• How population growth predictions are being factored into the plan
• Stability in assignment
• How the priorities of the community are being weighted in the plan
• How zones are established, i.e. dividing Wake County into pie shaped areas in which downtown Raleigh is at the center of the pie and feeds each contiguous pie
• Shaped area
• Site selection/land banking
• Facility design
• Types of schools built or converted, i.e. year round, traditional, magnets, etc.

Implementation of the Engagement Process

Publicize:

• Send out news releases
• Send out notices from school
• Send out notices to civic groups
• Broadcast announcements on TV, radio, and newsprint
• Post on WCPSS's Web site and individual school web sites

Conduct first "Town Meeting".

• School staff justifies the need to re-district
• Community participants separate into small groups, each with a trained facilitator
• Groups formulate responses/ideas for re-districting.
• Facilitator documents suggested plans on poster board for end of meeting review by attendees.
• School staff post recommendations on web sites for review by the community at large

Conduct second "Town Meeting".

• School staff presents plans tabulated from recommendations
• Discussion groups brainstorm pros and cons of each plan
• A master plan is developed, documented on poster board and posted on web sites for review at the third "Town Meeting"

Conduct third "Town Meeting".

• School staff presents community driven master plan recommendations
• Discussion groups brainstorm pros and cons of master plan
• Facilitator documents recommendations on poster board for end of the meeting review by attendees
• School staff post recommendations on web sites for review by the community at large

Present master plan to the Superintendent.

Present master plan to the community in a public hearing.

Conduct a fourth "Town Meeting" to incorporate public hearing feedback into the final master plan.

Submit the master plan for vote.

Planning

Planning, both long-range and short-range, are essential to developing and maintaining a mutually productive relationship between our school system and our community. With proper information gathering of demographic and student trends, early and ample meetings and hearings with our communities, and widely publicized communication of its process and recommendations, the school system will have a higher degree of community and parental acceptance with an easier rollout of annual student assignments. These recommendations, while varying in level of change, will provide a significant improvement in the process of student assignment and community involvement. A community which has knowledge of long range plans by having been a party in creating them is far more likely to support their required funding.

Create 10-year long-range and 5-year firm comprehensive plans for facility utilization and student assignment.

• The creation of these plans will BEGIN with community input to the school system via various public forums. Information from low-income families (who are typically under-represented in public comment) may be specifically solicited by parent liaisons. The objective is to have these plans created through community input, well publicized, supported with accurate demographics from WCPSS staff, and facilitated by the office of student assignment.
• Base population projections should be based on information from county and municipality planning boards as well as school system and census data.
• Update both long and short-range plans on a yearly rolling basis to account for updated information.
• Every revision to the assignment process must include an executive summary from the school system clearly delineating the overall goals of the reassignment, the reassignment process rational, and how these goals were met by the current revisions.

Re-draw and realign student assignment nodes/zones based upon the goals identified in the 5 and 10-year comprehensive plans.

• Create school-centered assignment zones based upon assignment to one or more adjacent high schools. These zones will include students of all grade levels, based upon eventual assignment to the high schools via defined feeder patterns.
• Follow consistent feeder patterns from elementary to middle to high school. he assignment area for an elementary school should not be split among multiple middle schools; the assignment area for a middle school should not be split among multiple high schools.
• The assignment areas for any given school shall come from a maximum of two self-contained closed-loop boundaries.
• Increase school stability by mandating that no neighborhood face involuntary reassignment within 4 four years of a previous reassignment.
• Realign school board districts to match the delineation of these school-centered assignment zones.

Base facilities decisions upon the goals delineated in the 5 and 10-year comprehensive plans.

• Site new schools in areas that are underserved by current facilities and/or are in areas of predicted population growth.
• Utilize land banking to purchase (or obtain via donation from developers) land in areas where future school siting may be desirable. In the event a banked site is eventually rejected as a school site, it may be sold in order to purchase land at a more suitable site.
• Accept that all schools will not be used at 100% capacity. 85% - 115% utilization should continue to be considered acceptable.
• New school construction should include 20% oversizing of essential shared facilities (cafeteria capacity, restroom capacity, etc.) in order to accommodate the additional needs imposed by mobile classrooms if they are required.
• In addition to planning new schools, long term planning must also consider the ongoing needs for renovation and updating facilities at existing schools. Consideration should be given to the demolition and subsequent replacement of existing schools where renovation costs and/or potential resale value of the property are high.

Move the central office areas of facilities and student assignment under the same supervisor in order to better coordinate planning around student assignment and facility utilization.
Redefine the criteria and factors in student assignment reflecting the improved changes through long and short range planning, creation of school-centered assignment zones, and greater parental choice