Middle Schools & Redistricting Policy on the Agenda

At this Thursday's School Board meeting, there will be a couple of items presented for information (not action) that I would like to bring to the public's attention.

1) Middle School Program Guide for 2006-07 - Last year, when the School Board discussed changes in our middle schools related to block schedules (Henley and Jouett did not have them), reorganizing exploratories, and strengthening world languages, we were also informed that a team was going to continue its work through the end of 2005.  The Middle School Program Review report identified several areas for continued work including ensuring that there is no variance in core offerings across middle schools and the development and distribution of a common middle school program guide.  The goal was to develop a general overview of baseline expectations for the county’s middle school program.  This draft version of the guide is being presented to the School Board Thursday, December 8th. This issue is open for public comment.

The materials for this agenda item can be found here: http://www.wheeleronboard.com/documents.htm (see Middle School Program Review section)

2) Proposed changes to redistricting policies (Policy FB) - During the 2004-05 redistricting process, the School Board and staff received feedback about ways to improve the redistricting process.  Some of those ideas were included earlier this year in the Superintendent's redistricting proposal, including: 1) the recommendation that a redistricting committee should only be formed if we are trying to fill a new school; 2) that capacity triggers should be used to identify when to redistrict; and 3) the identification of eight neighborhood areas that are on-deck for future redistricting.   Since the School Board's approval of the redistricting plans for school year 2006-07, staff have continued to review Policy FB and some proposed changes are before the board for information on Thursday, December 8th.  Also, at its December 1st meeting, the School Board decided to schedule a vote on this policy in January 2006.  This issue is open for public comment.

The materials for this agenda item can be found here: http://www.wheeleronboard.com/documents.htm (see Long Range Planning section)

I will support improvements to Policy FB, but I place a priority on public involvement and representation in any redistricting process.  I am concerned about the current proposal to change policy FB because of the following issues:

• It eliminates public involvement in a redistricting committee unless a new school is being built.
• It eliminates the Long Range Planning Committee's role (appointed by School Board with each district having a representative, plus 2 at-large seats) in identifying when a redistricting should take place, except that they still recommend when and where to build new schools in the capital budget (their role replaced by triggers).
• It delegates to staff all responsibility for drawing the boundary lines for redistrictings that don't involve opening a new school (certainly all subject to School Board approval and public feedback in the end)
• It implements one-size-fits-all capacity triggers and gives the impression we will only redistrict when these triggers are met.  For example, 110% over capacity at Yancey Elementary and Albemarle High School are not treated differently.  It doesn't explain what happens if one school hits 120% (triggering a redistricting) when the schools near by are also at capacity (domino effect).  Can those nearby schools face redistricting even though their triggers are not met?
• I think we should define capacity in the policy so it will never be viewed to include mobile classrooms.
• Have we given consideration to other redistricting models used in other school divisions?

The School Board just approved a redistricting plan, most of which would not have been done had this policy been in place.  Approving this policy would send, in my opinion, the message that a redistricting like 2005 should never happen again.  I know many in the public might agree with that sentiment, but the School Board approved redistricting because it thought it was in the best interests of all students, it better utilized our school capacity, and it eliminated many split feeder patterns.

I look forward to the School Board's discussion and the public's feedback on this important policy, because I think it still needs some work if we want to make the best use of our facilities and keep the public engaged in our work.

Brian Wheeler

Comments

[Chuck Witt]

On the topic of middle school courses and equal offerings throughout the county, Henley Middle School students (in the advanced level) take their math class every other day (twice one week, three times the next) while every other middle school in the county offers it everyday. Being a math teacher at Western Albemarle, it disturbs me to know that the advanced math students we will be getting have only spent 50% as much time as all other incoming 9th graders in the county. I view this as a major discrepancy and I hope it will be addressed. As a father of a 4th grader, I have become more and more concerned with this issue and the increasing number of 6th graders being placed into an extremely accelerated math sequence that rushes them through pre-algebra curriculum and throws them into Algebra I in 7th grade which, up until a few years ago, only a handful, if that, were allowed to do. I have never been given a good reason (other than Dr. Castner thought it should be done) to justify this, and as a high school math teacher, I see absolutely no reason to place 6th grade students into such a track that would cause them to run out of math courses to take before their senior year in high school. (this is assuming they can stay on this track which many are not able to do so, putting them into another difficult spot.) I would be happy to discuss this further with you if needed. Chuck Witt