The Superintendent has designed a system of communication feedback loops that integrates input from AUSD stakeholders, creates a new Community Sounding Board of external community stakeholders, and provides for a series of community forums to share and receive input from the task forces. The continous flow of feedback from stakeholder groups is key to development and refinement of program and facility options. In addition, individuals send their comments to Board members.
With the Governor's proposed and subsequent identification of a $4,000,000 budget crisis for AUSD, the work of the two task force was suspended. The Superintendent formed a new K-12 Restructuring Task Force charged with developing a fiscal solvent K-12 school system.
After the initial task force meeting, Rob Siltanen new Blog School 94501/94502 posted this entry: Restructuring AUSD?.
Comments Received
Parent February 10, 2008
I'm hoping the board will ask to maintain the sibling preference for border families (who will only be able to enroll in "choice" schools this year. As many of the speakers in ESNN stated well, it's our neighborhood schools that make AUSD special and it's a hardship to separate kids from a single family into different schools.
Without sibling preference, the "grandfathering" of household with kids on the border is hardly a true choice for families with more than 1 young kid. And I have a hard time believing that the variability in enrollment will be that great over the next 5 years. I can't imagine the hassle of trying to get one child to Edison and one to Otis. I loved having the choice available to us when we started school. We chose Edison mainly because it was much closer to us. That would be the same for all Edison Border households.
As a household on the Edison side of the border, I'm not writing because of concerns over the impact on our family, or our housing situation. I just think that the staff may be getting too specific on this one issue with very little gain.
Parent January 4, 2008
In following the analsyis of the "mismatch" between enrollment and capacity, I am wondering if there is data on the students who register for kindergarten at their local school but are diverted. Does the District know how many of the diverted students actually enroll in another Alameda public school, versus those who opt for private school? It seems that in deciding between increasing capacity versus lottery/diversion at over-enrolled schools, data regarding lost funding and students due to declined diversions should be considered. Younger siblings in those families who enroll in private schools or other districts because they cannot enroll in their local Alameda elementary school should also be considered potentially lost funding, as presumably those families will maintain their child(ren)'s enrollment at the alternative schools. While some may consider this group to have a negligible fiscal impact, and may even perceive it as a way to alleviate the site-specific !
over-enrollment problem, this appears to be a growing trend which actually worsens the problems caused by declining enrollment District-wide. It also deprives the District of students who possess the characteristics to be successful, high achieving learners, and the parents who support them, and their schools.
Parent January 4, 2008
It is my understanding that one reason why NEA has the support of some Washington parents (even those who do not plan to send their children there) is that they know Alameda schools are unequal. Parent envolvement and the ability of parents to raise money for particular schools makes for inequities and involved West End school parents saw NEA as offering something different for students.
It would be lovely if AUSD did consider a magnet school and Washington would be a perfect place to start. And what kind of magnet school would I like to see.....let me think about that for a second. Washington School for the Arts has a nice ring to it. The cost: hiring a credentialed art teacher. Seems like a cheap price to turn around diminishing enrollment and really putting Washington on the map.
Parent January 4, 2008
I think it's critical for the Board and AUSD to acknowledge the demand for program diversity within Alameda's public school system, and be proactive in addressing this in ways that are complimentary to AUSD, not damaging to it.
With the current budget crunch, it's a lousy time to be contemplating expansion of programs on offer within the District, but if some movement is not made in this direction over the next few years, I think the alternative could be much worse. We could see a procession of 'boutique' charter school applications draining funds from the District, with AUSD being slowly nudged into the role of 'public education provider of last resort'.
The Elementary Task Force recently ranked magnet programs as a low-priority item with respect to addressing the short term Elementary Capacity problem. That's an understandable position for them to adopt, given their mandate, but taking the broader view, I think magnet programs should be re-examined in light of the charter school threat. Another option that could be explored is creation of charters that are more closely-aligned with AUSD - for example, converting an entire existing AUSD school to a charter program, with differentiated educational programs and governance, but without the negative financial implications associated with charters that cherry-pick students from across the district for niche programs.
Parent December 21
I’m really tired of hearing from a few people whining who just joined our island community and don’t even have kids in the school system. The system has worked fine for years. If some how this group has success in moving school boundries that have been in place for years there will be a war. There is no way my neighborhood will tolerate a hit on our home values and our neighborhood cohesiveness when we have owned and been in the Edison school district for years. This option or thinking is completely skewed and should be removed as a viable solution. We live on an island and we don’t have new subdivisions being added to this area. Demographics related to children are uncontrollable and will change randomly. The boundary suggestion is brought forward with short sighted thinking from selfish people who only have their personal interest in mind instead of what’s best for the community. Knee jerk reaction won’t resolve this challenge but adding more class rooms will. This is a capacity issue, change the capacity and resolve the issue.
Parent December 12
I appreciate your honesty and willingness to work with the public on all the
issues we are facing with the Overcapcity problem and more specifically
Edison school. As a current Edison parent, I am curious as to how the
Community Sounding Board Members are chosen. I have noticed two members
listed as representing Edison school that are actually not Edison parents at
all. Also, the two people listed are the founding members of Edison School Neighborhood Network, as I'm sure
you are aware. This is the same group that is/was pushing for the whole
Buffer zone thing. How are they representing a school where their children
do not even attend? Please explain this process of selection to me.
Editor Note: The Community Sounding Board is a Superintendent committee. As such, the Superintendent selects all of the representatives on the committee.
Thank you for your response. Why on earth would two people be choosen that have exactly the same agenda? And represent a school that their children do not even attend? What can I do to get myself appointed on this Community Sounding Board? My children actually attend Edison. This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard!
Parent December 12
I was unable to attend tonight’s meeting, but I have some feedback that I am hoping will be taken into account during this process. I have a son in kindergarten at Edison School. I am finding that there are some rather serious safety issues at Edison, especially around children (kindergartners) being left unattended by any adults during lunch and during transition times such as after lunch recess. I would be happy to document these issues in more detail if you would like additional information.
In short, it appears that Edison School is already groaning under the weight of an additional 20 kindergartners, for a total of 80 kindergartners. These now 80 kindergartners will of course mean 80 in each following grade. I know that many are calling to solve the capacity issue by simply adding portables. I am extremely concerned that adding more students into an already overcrowded school will not only lead to lower academic results but also increased safety issues. When students as young as four are left unattended outside near a school exit as a matter of daily procedure, the risks are large that something could happen to a student. I am assuming there are liability issues for the district around this.
Therefore I am very much hoping that the work group and the school board will continue to examine solutions to the problem that are more long term such as redrawing boundaries, creating buffer zones and using property that is currently sitting vacant, such as the former Island High property.
Educator November 23
I wish I could be a fly on the wall with the 6-12 task force to see how they are gathering their information on "what is" in operation and "what could be possible". One parent eluded to this in an earlier board meeting about the #'s of students who have left our district after 5th grade to other districts or gone private. I hope that this task force is gathering information on disciplinary actions at the current school sites. That is the elephant in the room that no parent wants to talk about let alone district personnel.
We have a progressive discipline policy in this district and it is not always followed through.
In my own site, the burn out for teachers is by one or two students in a class who continue to disrupt the learning environment and there are no programs to deal with these students academically. When you are at a Charter School, you can mandate that parents be involved or you let the student go. We cannot do that at Wood, so we need specialized smaller learning communitites with students who are behind academically and need behavior support. These are the students who are closing the achievement gap by slowing down the classroom pace to meet the standards by their continual disruption.
Educator October 23
According to the last minutes from the board meeting, the task force includes principals and other district personnel and teachers and parents(?) are not proposed until January on the timeline. Where is our transparency in our school system?
Educator October 10
I was disappointed to see that teacher voices are not included on the elementary task force and specifically that Bay Farm is not represented. There is a lot of history here, policies that have been modified and affect us in a negative way, and we have already lost a student this year to private school because she was diverted. We are in month one and have few seats available for the rest of the year in our school where there is definitely growth. In my neighborhood alone there were over 15 for sale signs just last weekend. We can all do the math. I’m not sure that we can afford the outcome.
Board Member Comments:
MCMAHON: At this point, we have 2 months to come to place of creating some type of recommendation. My hope is that focus of the Task Force begins to hone in on what can be done for the 08/09 year, immediately, so that we can dispel/squash/etc. the uncertainty around the 2008/09 year. That’s first and foremost in public’s mind. The recommendation should satisfy the broadest number of people in greatest way with least amount of controvesy, while continuing to work on a long-term solution.
FORBES: Looking at numbers, current and 5 years, we don’t need to jump to the 5 year solutions right now in February, but we do need to address some immediate issues. Long-term, at elementary level, we neeed to investigate some different options that address the desire for charter/private schools. While not a short-term issue, I would like a commitment by February, to see what programs community would support, along with dollars attached. This could serve as valuable input into a future parcel tax.
GIBSON: I’d like to see work on every solution that would allow the Edison and Otis (potential overflow) not to occur for next year and be able to stay in home school. A number of items mentioned that would be part of that solution. Look for those in short-term. Long-term, we do have to be creative and offer choices in our district. We had them in the past (Paden and BayFarm); think we have to offer that, not as a charter school, but as a district school. We need to excite people about attending Alameda schools.
| Chris Allen – Alameda High School |
Anne Neunsinger – Edison Elementary School |
| Christine Bailey - Alameda Park and Recreation |
Cathy Nielsen – Social Service Human Relations Board |
| Brooke Briggance – Alameda Education Foundation |
Ed O'Neil - Wood/Encinal |
| Donna Cala – Earhart Elementary School |
Dianne Richmond – Gold Coast Realty |
| Ana Coleman - Encinal High School |
Patrick Russi – Alameda Recreation & Park |
| Scott Hildreth – Edison Elementary School |
Walter Schlueter - Chamber of Commerce |
| Rebecca Holder – Alameda Multi-Cultural Center |
Christine Strena – Franklin Elementary School |
| Michael Kelly - Kane & Associates |
Rafael Virgen – Paden Elementary School |
| Karen Kenney – Girls, Inc |
Elisa Ruiz-Virgen – Paden Elementary School |
| Peg Kofman – Alameda High School |
Deborah Walker – Otis Elementary School |
| Lisa Lewis – Ruby Bridges Elementary School |
Karen Wellman – Bay Farm Elementary School |
| Kathy Moehring – West Alameda Business Association |
Veronica Whitehead – Coast Guard/Ruby Bridges |
| Ron Mooney – Alamedans for Better Schools |
Janet Wong - Lincoln/Earhart |
| Annalisa Moore - After-School Programs |
Michael Yoshii – Alameda Multi-Cultural Center |
| . |
Huruma Zulu – Bay Farm Elementry School |
April 17 Meeting
The third meeting of the task force was April 17th. Superintendent Dailey presented a revised problem statement and task force charge based on input from the Board of Education at the April 8th BOE meeting.
Problem Statement
In the absence of consistent and adequate funding, coupled with severe enrollment imbalances, AUSD is no longer able to support excellence and equity without restructuring our K-12 educational programs.
Task Force Charge
- Align core academic programs that ensure our students will graduate with the ability to pursue college and career pathways
- Connect grades K-12 program pathways via standards
- Examine choices/options for the whole school community (staff, parents, students)
- Examine and recommend alternative facility and program configurations that are fiscally sustainable
- Provide two-way communication between task force and representative stakeholder groups
>
The teack force spent the rest of the meeting examining facility capacity studies and examining the core academic programs offered across the District.
Schools in search of more classrooms
Projected enrollment increase leaves officials scrambling to find a solution
By Peter Hegarty, Alameda Journal, December 21, 2007
With elementary school enrollment set to climb during the next five years, district leaders are looking at ways to find more classroom space while not undercutting instruction.
What makes finding a solution difficult, however, is that the schools likely to face the crunch -- Ruby Bridges, Otis and Edison -- already are about full.
Among the ideas being floated to address the issue are installing portables at some campuses, shifting students to other schools and changing attendance boundaries.
The school board will vote on a recommendation in February.
"Enrollment is probably the biggest issue facing the district right now," Superintendent Ardella Dailey said. "It plays into how much money we have, the quality of education we can provide, everything."
None of the possible solutions is ideal: Sending children away from their neighborhood school is never popular with parents, while the cost of installing portables at some campuses still must be worked out.
A district task force -- comprising Chief Financial Officer Luz Cazares, Otis Principal Jeff Knoth and others -- met this month for a workshop to outline options and gather feedback.
Currently, there are 246 rooms that could be used as elementary school classrooms, according to Cazares.
Of those rooms not being used as classrooms, six house computer labs, 11 are used for day care and 22 are used for after-school and other programs.
The remaining 14 rooms are used for special education. One idea that emerged during the workshop was using portables for the day care programs -- freeing up the classroom space -- along with reducing the number of students attending Alameda elementary schools who don't live in the district. (Currently, there are about 149.)
Families moving into the city's new housing, such as the Bayport development near College of Alameda, are among the reasons cited for the enrollment jump.
About 10,000 students currently attend Alameda schools.
Ironically, the projected increase comes in the wake of district leaders deciding last year to close three elementary schools in the city's West End because of declining enrollment.
Some of the students from Longfellow, Miller and Woodstock were shifted to Ruby Bridges, one of the campuses now at capacity.
The former schools currently are being used for other district programs and are not likely to reopen. But the organizers behind the Nea Community Learning Center -- a proposed charter school -- are still hoping to open at one of the sites.
Trustee Mike McMahon noted that officials need to move quickly to find at least a short-term solution to put parents at ease for the upcoming school year.
"We need to develop a policy for how we handle a situation where two or three kids cannot get into a school," Dailey said. "And we need to look at demographic trends and what classroom space is available."
TOP
Comments. Questions. Broken links? Bad spelling! Incorrect Grammar? Let me know at webmaster.
Last modified: October, 2007
Disclaimer: This website is the sole responsibility of Mike
McMahon. It does not represent any official opinions, statement of facts or
positions of the Alameda Unified School District. Its sole purpose is to
disseminate information to interested individuals in the Alameda community.
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my effort to advance understanding of education issues vital to a democracy. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
