south mecklenburg transportation zones · 2016-09-12 · some transportation isnt needed,...

Student Assignment Review Phase I Community Meetings, August 2016

At the August 2016 community engagement sessions for the Student Assignment Review, small groups of participants shared input and feedback by writing on individual and table comments sheets and had their discussion captured on the whiteboard. This document is a verbatim compilation of the comments and discussion notes from the meeting. You can access the scanned version of the actual comment sheets and photos of the whiteboard on the CMS website as well as copies of the handouts and session presentation at http://bit.ly/SAR-Feedback.

Meeting #/Location: South Mecklenburg

Transportation Zones What Matters Most to You in Creating Transportation Zones? Why are these attributes important or not important to you? Balance Percentage of Students in Poverty Why most important (6)

Creates communities of schools w/global thinking

Make schools more equal, need creates more burden on schools (test scores)

SES was diverse at my child’s school and I liked that

Non-diverse schools cannot educate all students fairly

Entire school composed of high poverty is setting it up to fail Why least important (5)

It will just happen as a result of good planning

Different learning styles should be the focus

Diversity through other means Similar Programs in Each Zone Why most important (16)

As a parent of a magnet student, wanted diversity and without option it would have been discouraging; everyone should have access

Was able to attend, enjoyed diversity and equality; so many parents want kids to go but there are not enough

Equal opportunity for choices, should not be left out of a choice because of how CMS zones

Equity—all zones should have same programs

Options can help negate effects of high-poverty schools

Options for all

Tension created by lack of opportunity/imbalance

http://bit.ly/SAR-Feedback


Why least important (1)

Feasibility in large district Size of Zone Why most important (7)

Wouldn’t want kids on a school bus for 2 hours

Student in poverty shouldn’t have to ride a bus for hours to get to better school

Hard on parents who have to deal w/long rides

*this is not an issue because I drive child

Magnet might not be appropriate for all children and would be difficult to have one in different zone

Don’t want a long bus ride

Shuttle stops worked well faster than the bus Why least important (11)

A 15-20 minute ride versus 5 minute not a concern

Family drives kids—doesn’t use transportation

Size is not as important consideration

Traffic patterns vs. geographic size

TIME

Population concentrations Intact High School Feeder pattern Why most important (22)

Had privilege and chose it and wanted to know they’d go to school in elementary trajectory

Hard to be a kid, wants consistency for relationships

Proximity and mini community

Affects afterschool activity and parental ability to stay involved

Consider those who had choice and investment in house—w/this gone, may pull out of CMS

Connections w/peers

Social/emotional concerns

High school serves as larger community

Student relationships Why least important (1)


Other comments

Will a new plan “rip” out students who have been @ a school and are upperclassmen when new plan instituted?

Whole Town within single zone Why most important (4)

Outside towns can get left out

Common institution is school (community identity) Why least important (18)

All live in CLT

Don’t live in a town Other comments

But what about strain on local schools if others come in?

Clear up definition of “intact towns” Which is the best option overall for CMS families & children? Why? Do you have any suggestions to improve this option?

3 zones would allow students access to more magnet schools, more equitable access. Possibly saving money by not running buses that are less than 50% full.

**overall, seems like group liked the 3 zone option**; 4 zones (A)—total student amounts seemed unbalanced with grey and violet zones having half student numbers of blue and green zones; more full magnet options seems more equitable for choice

Did not reach consensus but felt 3 gave more options, more choice. Regardless, need more magnet schools further out from city center

4A fits best for our sample

4A = less potential for excess sized zones and a good mix of magnet choices

Option 3—b/c spreads out magnets more; 4B—would encourage kids to go to homeschools b/c less magnets (making decision on how magnets are now but they will change); 4A—I believe in equity and it looks like most equitable distribution. Zones are same size, magnets are aggregated most centrally; 4A—most compact zones; 4A—was clear favorite in this group.

Option 3 provides the most transportation options for the highest concentration of poverty


4A—4 zones is more manageable; keeps high school feeders intact; poverty levels are similar

Equal option; option 3 zone (3 colors)—break up poverty zones while keeping neighborhoods intact; total # of students and EDS by zone

4A—size of zones, while maintaining the most choice; open most magnets in zone green and grey

**3 of 4 people picked 4A; I abstained**; not enough information to determine based on anything but size of zone and EDS %. Major consideration for our group was intact high school feeder patterns and similar programs in each zone; 4A best option (like neighborhoods more intact)

#3—0; #4A*—1 parent preferred because the violet is not jetting into other areas; #4B—0

o *all parents (6 of them) liked this option. We felt it more evenly

distributes the magnets in the zones. Example—less in the purple and more in the green in option 4A

#1. 4B—shorter transportation (bus rides) very important to many families; #2. 3—offers a lot of options to each zone, but concerned about potential long bus rides

3 zones and 4A zones tied—choices, distance, more magnets In your opinion, which is the least preferable option overall for CMS families and children? Why?

4B is less balanced socioeconomically and breaks up the county in an unnatural way

Four zone A—hard to determine balance based on quick look at numbers

4A—doesn’t look like districts were really taken into consideration; equality not there

Option 3 is equitable but has longer bus rides, which we feel will not solve the problem

4B = limited magnet options for grey, blue and green zones

4B—because it encompasses 90% of the of the full magnet options, not fairly distributed. A lot of full magnet programs are in the same area. Too concentrated; 3—because zones are too large. HS students have to get up too early.

Option 4B because of the high concentration of full magnets and because levels of poverty are not evenly dispersed

4B—does not keep high school feeder patterns intact; SM area loses all elem. magnets; all magnets in one zone (violet)


Zone 4B seems divided wonky and doesn’t keep towns intact

Zone 3 is way too large to accommodate a relatively reasonable amount of time on the bus while maintaining a sense of community

Remaining magnets in blue zone w/4B are not good options; 4A—why is there a chunk that should not be blue, should be purple?

#3—6 (all parents agreed it is too big); #4A—0; #4B—0

4A—gray zone doesn’t have as many magnet options as other zones

4B zones—too many gaps, more expense What is most important for your table to share with CMS about transportation zones? (Please summarize – in a sentence or a few key points )

We want balance both size and socioeconomically; equitable access to magnet options

Similar access is key and our group feels can be achieved through focus on percentage of students in poverty and similar programs in each zone

Generally, not most important—feeder system is greater priority

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT is going to make improvements—finding ways to engage local communities with the local school; equal opportunity to choose a magnet and a way to get there; shorter bus rides for all zones

More transparency regarding what is on the table for Phase 2; are you taking into consideration the outcome of the initial survey where 75-80% of polled said they were happy where they were currently?

Can’t understand fairness of programs from maps; can’t make decision now b/c magnet programs may change—hard to make decision; single parent says proximity is important

All of the options for transportation zones show a need for more magnet options; this exercise does not factor in the impact of each zone to the non-magnet schools and population changes that may result

SM and MP should remain in the same zone. The high schools have historic rivalry; most of these families consider this area their “town” within the community

Breaking up poverty and providing equal options to all

Magnet locations need to be more geographically dispersed across each zone rather than geographically centered in the center city; have we considered a central zone that is shared between zones to help better manage choice?

o Magnets should not have geography as a factor in the lottery because transportation zones already address that


EDS & zone size are not our top priorities for determining zones; the assumption appears to assume transportation in each zone would be the same. It would not be the same; magnet placement within the zones needs to be equitable; no option here gives equitable full magnets in zones. They are all clustered in the center of the zones; why are we being asked about transportation zones first? This should be the last part of the discussion

Common theme of feedback was parents like the option that seemed to provide the most options for magnets in each zone. 4A seemed to be most evenly distributed.

For families on the border of 2 zones, is there a way to allow them to choose a different zone?

o 1 parent did not feel there was enough time to study in order to comment

Distance, length of bus; choices; shuttles work to reduce stops Any other comments about Transportation Zones?

Some transportation isn’t needed, Touchstone neighborhood does not need bus service to McAlpine. Carrington/Rosecliff/part of Raintree/Windswept do not need transportation to South Charlotte Middle

Intact towns should include intact neighborhoods vs. “defined” towns* o + HS feeders o + zone size o *that’s what was key point

Not as important as neighborhood school; no larger than they are currently

o similar programs o % poverty (socioeconomic)

Intact HS feeder patterns (best option overall); intact towns (least preferable option); bus times per student need to decrease. I’d love to see bus rides less than 30min

Most important—similar programs in each zone, economic diversity; least important—intact HS feeder

Intact towns; % students in poverty; similar programs; size of zone; intact HS feeders

Feeder patterns; size of zone; intact towns

Most important transportation zone factor—size of zone, intact HS feeder patterns; least important—intact towns


Most important—intact high school feeder patterns

Most—similar programs in each zone; least—size of zone

Size of zone; similar programs in each zone

Transportation zone considerations o intact HS feeder patterns o similar options in each zone o size of zone o percentage of students in poverty o intact towns

Lottery Which do you believe is the best option overall for CMS families & children and why?

We are answering based on FULL MAGNET… we think B is the best option because it has equal distribution, proximity to school stays intact. We like Option C, just unnecessary confusion

Scenario A speaks to our group based on its simplicity

Choice B—those who live within ½ mile should have ability to attend local school, but others within that SES group should not be excluded because they fill up the slots

We believe there is not enough information to make an informed decision

Scenario A = equal shot for everyone and feels most diplomatic

Proximity weight; majority liked C best

Scenario B because proximity priority is not limited

B—½ mile people should be able to go to close school; ½ mile people should not count in SES, because most likely will fall in same category, which will take spots away from community

Scenario C—SES and proximity is important

Scenario A—makes the magnet option available to those students who are most interested while achieving socioeconomic diversity

A—all prefer this but w/different distribution. Should reflect county SES %. Proximity to school is not a priority to us for magnet schools.


A is fair for everybody. Concerned about high SES families buying their way into homes close to desirable schools. High SES families already have more options.

B—was preferred since it gave weight to the families that lived within the zone

o However, we felt an option should then distribute the remaining seats to balance the SES shake up of the school

A or B for full or partial based on abilities Which option do you believe is the least preferable overall for CMS families and children? And why?

Option A since it does not include proximity especially when Partial Magnet is the (sentence ends here)

Scenario C seems more complicated in determination—and our focus for magnet choice is not as much about proximity

Choice C because if school is in low income area, low SES spots would fill—children from further out w/need would not get in. Same for magnets in high income area

Scenario A seems to continue the problem

Scenario B

Option B is the least favorite—depending on where the school is sited, will change the SES diversity

Scenario A because no proximity priority

A does not consider homeschool for ½ mile people

Scenario A—neighborhood schools relationship are very important; proximity is not a consideration

Scenario B—because it is based on geography and promotes proximity versus interest and socioeconomic diversity. Local students will tend to fall into one SES bucket therefore negating the idea of SED

B—proximity seats do not take SES into consideration; lacks diversity of C

B has potential to skew SES and we are concerned about that

C—uncertain on how selection and data gathering What is most important for your table to share with CMS about the lottery? (Please summarize – in a sentence or a few key points)

Keep proximity intact; consider SES


First come first served seems a much easier way to handle lottery entry for some @ our table, but there is a con thought too as to making it unfair for some parents who don’t fully understand the lottery process

True diversity in schools is the focus of our group

The lottery needs to include neighborhood children. Neighborhood children should be able to go to their “home” school and be included in the magnet program.

We feel as though we have NOT been given a full picture. I would like to understand which % of students choose to engage in magnet by zone. I feel like we are solving for a small # of students

Proximity weighting is important b/c develops ties by neighborhood in a full magnet—less important if partial magnet b/c rest of school

Leaving the neighborhood intact and able to attend the magnet

Clarification and transparency on lottery. Are Title I weighted? Do schools/admin have choice? Seems to be an uneven system. Do people in unsuccessful schools have advantage in lottery? Does that keep magnets strong?

Communities of how the lottery system works; knows their options from language barriers, technology knowledge; can a parent get 1:1 education on what “lottery” means

Magnet lottery should be focused on program interest and not location. Location guarantee should be for neighborhood schools

That everyone in the zone have equal opportunity to attend; distribution by SES should be mirrored to county SES %. If low is 60%—magnets should be 60% low

We would like to see higher % of seats available to low SES students

All students must meet criteria of the magnet. Ability-based magnets should be full magnets

Any other comments about Lottery Priorities?

B is best; A is least preferable

Transportation zones achieve geography goals. Proximity to a magnet should not be a factor in the lottery.

Transportation zones should be equal across

Magnet/School Options


EXISTING MAGNETS: Choose up to 3 programs –IN RANK ORDER – you think are most important for CMS expand or replicate. And why? Top-why?

1. Language 2. STEM 3. Arts

1. STEM—focus pertaining to WORLD STAGE 2. World Language (cool & global focus) 3. Traditional (provides diversity)

1. Languages—lack of language in elem. 2. IB high school to address transportation distance 3. STEM—expanding interest

Why don’t you take the money for magnet schools and put it into home schools. What about investing in schools, so people want to move to poor areas because the schools are good and they are safe.

1. Languages reflect the world 2. STEM

1. STEM 2. LITD 3. Lang. Immersion

1. Learning Immersion/Talent Development—nonexistent in south CLT, need continuation to IB at MPHS

2. STEM 3. World Languages—language immersion

1. Language (dual or immersion)—popular, waiting lists, learn differently, reading, writing, international competitiveness

2. STEM 3. Montessori

1. Blended Learning—provides flexibility to all regardless of schedules, weather

2. Visual & performing arts—need a school in south CLT

1. Trade school for high schools like BOCES in New York 2. Visual and Performing Arts (middle and HS only) 3. Expand language immersion in elementary programs

1. STEM—need more of this; relevant to society needs 2. Learning Immersion/Talent Dev—increased academic rigor in lower

grades 3. Language Immersion


*need additional arts high school **need definitions of what the type of magnets are

1. Montessori—high demand, low # seats available 2. STEM—important focus for future jobs, attract best teachers 3. World Languages—improve language skills

1. Learning Immersion 2. Montessori 3. Visual & Performing Arts 4. Language

1. World Languages 2. Learning Immersion/Talent Development 3. Montessori

*data for applied not admitted would help

New School Options And Magnet Programs Under Consideration For 2017: Are there options in the pipeline you believe CMS should not pursue? Why?

With computer & coding in elementary, we feel it is important to only supplement the curriculum not be all encompassing

No—we like having options!

None

All of them. Connect the programs that we currently have and use the money that would have been spent on magnets and info cons schools

Sedgefield Montessori

Museum—not good resources to support; Micro Society—too much for magnet

We don’t have opposition to the list but the list does not address 1 or 3 above (LITD and World Languages)

All look good—but both coding magnets are north area

No

Honestly, we feel that we should stop expanding magnet schools and integrate this curriculum into our neighborhood schools to improve their performance and retention

Coding—should be middle schools, elem. too young; what is iMeck?—too many missing descriptions and definitions

Don’t see need for 6-8 grades to attend health sciences HS; don’t understand iMeck offerings/needs

Museum magnet—fold it into another option; Micro-society

None, all seem appropriate


Themes NOT CURRENTLY in CMS: Choose up to 3 magnets not currently offered by CMS –IN RANK ORDER – that you would most like to see at CMS. Please include your own program idea if it is not included on this list. Why for each choice?

1. Civic 2. Prep 3. Expeditionary

1. Micro Society—POSITIVITY, teaching leadership 2. Additional career based—CTE—to reach a broader base of students 3. Civic engagement—leads back to WORLD STAGE FOCUS

1. Career Based Themes 2. Single Sex Preparatory 3. Civil Engagement

Invest in the teachers

1. Micro Society or Civic Engagement/Commu. Leader 2. Expeditionary

1. Multiple Intell. 2. Career-Based Themes 3. Young Men/Women Prep

*Civic Engagement, Expeditionary Learning

1. Cambridge (Bradley MS, Hopewell HS) 2. Expeditionary Learning

*provide TD related program to South CLT

1. Career-Based—people need job skills, can move into CPCC

1. Young Men’s Prep/Young Women’s Prep—advantage of same sex can compete w/private schools

2. Additional career—former ethnicking for kids w/strong interests and talents; builds on STEM

3. Civic Engagement

1. Trade schools

1. Health Sciences 2. Alternative Energy (green eng.) or Career-Based Themes 3. Agriculture/Environmental Science

*more early/middle college HS **trade magnets—plumbing? certifications, etc.

We do not like any of these ideas. We prefer a more limited # of themes which can be then offered to more students. CMS does not need to be all things to all people.

1. Vocational/Trade


2. Computer Technology

1. Expeditionary Learning—very engaging, reach all learners 2. Multiple Intelligences 3. Additional Career-Based Themes

*why could get company backing

Billingsville Elementary: Based on its location, would you view that as a viable option for your child? If so, what theme would make it most attractive to you?

Language Magnet

No viable option because of distance partnership w/Mint Museum

Language immersion

No—too far

¾—no; ¼—yes

Yes if Talent Development Magnet

Too far. Language magnet (full)

No

No, location is not viable. Should consider another location not currently near the bulk of our magnet schools

Yes, Environmental Science/Agriculture

No—concerns about safety in surrounding neighborhood. Strong preference to have a school very close to our homes

Billingsville—either Learning Immersion or Language or Montessori

Yes, if it’s the right program for child & family museum What barriers to accessing to magnets CMS must address?

Transportation, distance, navigating the application process

Communication & simplification of magnet process—better website, clarity of form

Giving all students the services they need

Better education about how to sign up, what is available, benefits, etc.

Different magnet than what’s already offered; performing arts

Transportation; application process accessible

Locations; long bus rides; late school times

Communication, language, education level of understanding the “MAGNET” program, level of poverty

Geography is the barrier. We need to streamline to fewer magnets open to everyone and more specialized schools. Geography becomes less of a factor when we focus on our neighborhood schools


CMS should connect w/businesses and industries in comm.

Distance from home/time on bus. Availability of high demand programs

Parent education & knowledge of options; get the message out

Location distance What is most important for your table to share with CMS about Magnets/ Options? (Please summarize – in a sentence or a few key)

Magnets provide a safety valve for lower performing home schools; magnets provide a comforting option for people who are not happy w/their home school

Magnets are currently not equitably diverse

What about our “home schools”—what about investing in those!!

Computer science & coding is important—differential from STEM

Partial magnets do not draw people unless separated in school. IB magnets at elem. level are not effective

Need definition around what does ‘traditional” mean; or “Blended Learning”; or what is “Service & Protection”

We need to streamline our magnet programs to the critical few (visual arts, trade schools, language immersion) and then redirect the remaining to our neighborhood schools

Magnets we offer (Expeditionary Learning) should reflect needs and relevance in the community; trade magnets—culinary, auto mech., cosmetology

Why aren’t magnet schools more geographically disbursed—i.e. few options in North; consider decreasing # of themes offered in order to increase seats @ high demand themes

Integrity of program; look the part Individual Comments: Magnet/School Options Billingsville Elementary: Based on its location, would you view this as a viable option for your child? If so, what theme would make it most attractive to you?

No

No, too far—not another centralized magnet! Any other comments about Magnet/School Options?

Existing Magnets:


o STEM, IB, Language Immersion o Visual and Performing Arts, STEM

New School Options & Magnet Programs Under Consideration for 2017: o High School Programs—YES!

Themes Not Currently Offered in CMS: o Career Based Themes, Young Men/Women, Civic Engagement is

good but drop the “social justice” BS (social justice = socialism!) o Trades for high schools

What barriers to accessing magnets must CMS address? o They are concentrated in poor areas

It seems that most full magnets are in poorer parts of town. Living in South Charlotte, we don’t have access because we’re not going to send our kids into those areas. Definitely not worth the drive and hassle

We need to strengthen our neighborhood schools by improving talent development and IB programs as well as Personalized Learning. This will keep magnets focused on themes and improve neighborhood schools

Please add a description of magnet programs

Would like to see the Micro-Society magnet curriculum offered as an enrichment program at several schools rather than a magnet

Other Optional Transcriber Observations:

Overwhelming theme of this meeting seems to be inclusivity/equality, whether with bus transport times, access to magnet schools, or consideration of SES/proximity within zones

o intact neighborhoods/towns/communities = important

Transportation zones: o 4A = majority liked o 4B = majority disliked

Lottery: o A/B seemed like most-liked options; dislikes vary o again, inclusivity seems the priority (calls for true diversity, inclusion

of neighborhood schools)

Magnet/school options


o STEM and Language Immersion/World Languages seem the most popular options

o again there seems to be a desire for more global/practical skills—career-based themes and trade schools

Safety of children in various areas (some magnet schools are not in areas considered “safe” by some parents?) also came up a couple times

south mecklenburg transportation zones · 2016-09-12 · some transportation isnt needed,...

Documents