Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) - 0 - School Portfolio Management 2007-2008 Intervention and Programmatic Adjustment Recommendations December 12, 2007.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) - 0 - School Portfolio Management 2007-2008 Intervention and Programmatic Adjustment Recommendations December 12, 2007."— Presentation transcript:

1 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) School Portfolio Management Intervention and Programmatic Adjustment Recommendations December 12, 2007

2 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) I. School Portfolio Management Framework II Focus School Process Review III. Focus School Recommendations IV.Other Recommended Adjustments to the Portfolio V. Conclusions and Next Steps Appendix A: Data on Focus Schools Appendix B: AdvancePath Program Description School Portfolio Management

3 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) I. School Portfolio Management Framework

4 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) School Portfolio Management Framework Coherent Governance Policy (Operational Expectation OE-12) The Chief Executive Officer shall assure the availability of a diverse portfolio of high quality schools (traditional, new small schools, charter schools, etc) for students and families both within neighborhoods and district-wide The Chief Executive Officer shall: 1. Assure that all district quality standards apply equally to all schools regardless of size and type 2. Regularly monitor all schools to assure their cost-effectiveness and compliance with quality standards 3. Assure the sustainability of all schools and programs, especially in a declining revenue environment 4. Create meaningful partnerships between district and charter schools that improve the conditions for both and that enhance choices for students and their families 5. Review school attendance boundaries annually to assure reasonable balance in student enrollment

5 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) School Portfolio Management: Managing the Success and Quality of Schools Every family will have access to at least two quality school options in their neighborhood, and the ability to select from a diverse range of educational options throughout Oakland DEMAND High quality and diverse educational options SUPPLY Enrollment / Capacity Quality Programmatic Diversity OUSD is continually managing its dynamic portfolio of schools across these three dimensions School Portfolio Management Framework

6 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) II Focus School Review Process

7 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Decision Making Timeline DateTopic By October 10 th Network Officer led engagement (for enrollment / enrollment AND Academic categories) Preliminary Staff meeting Preliminary Community meeting October 10 th Area of focus schools presented to Board of Education By November 16 th Network Officer led engagement (for enrollment / enrollment AND Academic categories) 2-3 dialogues with Staff & Community October 10 th – December 10 th Strategy Team and Network Officer evaluation of appropriate solutions for each focus school based on: input from community engagement, close review of quantitative AND qualitative data For enrollment related focus schools, a close look at possible attendance boundary adjustments will also be factored in By December 10 th Network Officer led engagement (for enrollment / enrollment AND Academic categories) Recommendation presented to Staff Recommendation presented to Community December 12 th Special Board of Education meeting to present staff recommendations for interventions December 19 th State Administrator decisions regarding appropriate interventions Board of Education decisions regarding attendance boundary adjustments

8 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Criteria for Area of Focus Schools Academic TieringScreens for Under Enrollment Absolute Performance Program Improvement Status Adequate Yearly Progress targets School Size Amount below minimum size 360 = elementary 300 = middle school 400 = high school Facility capacity is factored into analysis (i.e. some facilities are not large enough to hold these minimum sizes Student Level Growth % of students moving from one performance band to the next (30% = accelerated growth) Evaluated over one and three year periods Enrollment Trend % loss of students over 1 year % loss of students over 5 years Achievement Gap Change in the difference between School and Lowest performing subgroup API All groups must score above at least 550 Facility Utilization Utilization by students living in Attendance Area Utilization by students attending school in neighborhood For the 2007 evaluation of the portfolio, Academic and Enrollment screens were used in combination to identify Focus schools Its important to note that this process supported a continued investment in high quality small schools. For example, a school that is under sized but categorized as GREEN in the Tiered Support & Intervention model would not be identified as a focus school

9 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Focus Schools: Academic SUMMARY Schools Academic: (14) Bret Harte Oakland High Allendale Media College Prep Brookfield Oakland Tech Madison Urban Promise Claremont Frick Roosevelt Robeson CBIT Westlake Progress reports and descriptions of interventions underway at Academic focus schools will be brought to the Board in February

10 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Focus Schools: Enrollment / Enrollment & Academic SUMMARY SchoolsIntervention Alternatives Enrollment (4) Burckhalter Howard M.L. King Lafayette Increased monitoring & Support Internal Restructuring Incubation services to facilitate redesign Attendance Boundary adjustment School merger School closure Enrollment & Academic (5) Sankofa Yes Best Explore Peralta Creek

11 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Summary of Staff & Community Engagement SchoolStaff & Community Meeting Dates Lafayette 9/27 10/15 (WOETF) 11/15 11/26 (WOETF) 12/4 ML King 10/8 10/15 (WOETF) 10/22 11/5 11/26 (WOETF) 12/4 Howard 10/11 11/13 12/5 12/11 Peralta Creek 9/26 10/2 10/25 11/6 12/5 EXPLORE 10/2 11/1 11/15 12/4 BEST 10/3 10/9 10/25 12/5 YES 10/2 11/2711/6 Sankofa 11/6 11/7 11/14 12/3 Burckhalter 10/2 10/9 10/22 11/5 11/27 12/4 Each school community held an average of 4 meetings as part of our engagement process The number of participants at these meetings ranged from

12 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Focus Schools: Factors incorporated into recommendations Solution for Focus School Qualitative evaluation of conditions for success: e.g. how is school performing against the Professional Learning Community and Family Engagement rubrics? Quantitative student achievement data analysis: is the school accelerating academic achievement for all students? Community Engagement: What do community members believe is the best solution for the school? Survey data of satisfaction: What does the Use Your Voice data say about stakeholder satisfaction with the school? Programmatic Sustainability: Is the school able to provide the resources families deserve based on its size? Attendance Boundaries: Would a shift of attendance boundaries solve some of the challenges facing the school? MegaBoundary Impact: How would an intervention in this particular school impact other schools in the megaboundary? ACADEMIC FACTORSCOMMUNITY FACTORSENROLLMENT FACTORS School monitoring and observation data: Based on classroom observations, is the school demonstrating a capacity to accelerate academic achievement for all students? Long-Term Enrollment Trends: What is the projected enrollment in the attendance area over the next five years?

13 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) III. Focus School Recommendations

14 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Summary of Recommendations and Next Steps RecommendationSchoolsNext Steps (IF recommendation is upheld by State Administrator) School Closure (2)Sankofa Burckhalter Targeted support for each individual family to ensure a quality school is selected for through the options process Targeted support for staff to ensure smooth transition Intensive Monitoring and Support (7) Lafayette ML King Howard Peralta Creek EXPLORE BEST YES Network Executive Officer led monitoring and support to ensure schools meet enrollment and academic targets District support to allocate funding through RBB in alignment with the enrollment targets schools will be required to meet School Transition (1) Bunche (into continuation school) Planning and program development to prepare for Fall 2008 transition. Apply for a new CDS code. New Program within School (1) Castlemont Contract to be ratified 12/19. Implementation plan underway for February launch

15 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Lafayette: Recommendation RecommendationEnrollment TargetsAcademic Targets Intensive monitoring and support to increase enrollment and continue academic acceleration : 320 students (+42) : 360 students (+40) : Make AYP and exit PI status Enrollment FactorsAcademic Factors Data: Enrollment Enrollment: year change: -8% 5 year change: -13% Data: Residents 2006 Residents: Residents (est): 281 Facilities Capacity (approx): 450 Data OUSD Tier: Yellow PI Status: Year 3. MADE AYP in API: 670. INCREASED 58 points from to Evidence for Recommendation Approximately 200 students live in the neighborhood and attend other schools. Based on the academic acceleration happening at the school, Lafayette is well positioned to attract families back to their neighborhood school The long-term enrollment trends suggest that it will be critical for Lafayette to attract non-neighborhood students to the school in the future in order to maintain the school at a sustainable size Evidence for Recommendation Stable strong leadership; Principal is receiving intensive coaching and support from Network Officer Strong ELA and ELD coaching Implementing SI SWUN Math Summer PLC training Instructional Leadership Team: regular monitoring and walkthroughs Math Professional development coordination with neighboring schools Increased staff engagement with Date with Data Working with PLEA to empower parents School will receive QEIA funds through 2014 to reduce class size Focus School Category: Enrollment

16 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) M.L. King: Recommendation RecommendationEnrollment TargetsAcademic Targets Intensive monitoring and support to increase enrollment and continue academic acceleration : 310 (+44) : 360 (+50) : Make AYP : Make AYP and Exit PI Enrollment FactorsAcademic Factors Data: Enrollment Enrollment: year change: -7% 5 year change: -18% Data: Residents 2006 Residents: Residents (est): 281 Facilities Capacity (approx): 400 Data OUSD Tier: YELLOW PI Status: Year 3. DID NOT make AYP in API: 640. INCREASED 28 points Evidence for Recommendation Approximately 200 students live in the neighborhood and attend other schools Schools enrollment was approximately 40 students over projections. This indicates that families may be starting to select the school Evidence for Recommendation Academic performance improved at ML King during the school year, as measured by the API School is poised to be a true complementary learning school with the CDC, After School Programs, Community Partners The school piloted the Early Numeracy project in Math last year in the primary grades with positive results The school will receive QEIA funds through 2014 to reduce class size Focus School Category: Enrollment

17 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Howard: Recommendation RecommendationEnrollment Targets*Academic Targets Intensive monitoring and support to increase enrollment academic acceleration : 310 (+58) : 360 (+50) : Score Green in 1 OR 3 year accelerated student level growth metric : Score Green in 1 OR 3 year accelerated student level growth metric Enrollment FactorsAcademic Factors Data: Enrollment Enrollment: year change: 2% 5 year change: -14% Data: Residents 2006 Residents: Residents (est): 198 Facilities Capacity (approx): 430 Data OUSD Tier: Yellow PI Status: None API: 672. DECREASED by 50 points Evidence for Recommendation There are 147 students who live in the neighborhood and currently attend other schools. The school community created a recruitment plan last Spring. Successful implementation of this plan should enable the school to recruit additional students Evidence for Recommendation School leader has instituted school-wide systems that utilize data to make informed decisions Classroom observations demonstrate evidence of some effective teaching strategies Staff is using data to design intervention plan for FBB/BB students Increased alignment of academic plan with ELA workshop and after school program Focus School Category: Enrollment * Note: Howard was a focus school for enrollment last year. The school did not meet its target of 40 additional students

18 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Peralta Creek: Recommendation RecommendationEnrollment TargetsAcademic Targets Intensive monitoring and support to increase enrollment and continue academic acceleration. Consider a possible boundary adjustment to increase the number of neighborhood students to recruit to the school : 225 (+71) : 300 (+75) : Make AYP : Make AYP Enrollment FactorsAcademic Factors Data: Enrollment Enrollment: year change: -12% 5 year change: NA Data: Residents* 2006 Residents: 1, Residents (est): 769 Facilities Capacity (approx): 350 Data OUSD Tier: New Year 2 PI Status: Not in PI. DID NOT MAKE AYP in API: 517. Evidence for Recommendation Of the 956 non-SDC students living in the Simmons attendance area, approximately 300 are attending outside the neighborhood Based on enrollment trends there are too many middle school seats (inclusive of the other neighborhood schools) for the number of residents living in the Simmons attendance area. HOWEVER, many other neighboring schools – Bret Harte, Edna Brewer, Frick – are larger than their optimal size. Keeping Peralta Creek open will enable a reduction in overcrowding at these nearby schools and ensure that every student had access to their neighborhood school Engagement with staff and community at Peralta Creek and United For Success indicated a desire to keep the school open Evidence for Recommendation New leader has cultivated a positive and productive school culture Classrooms demonstrate evidence of an academic focus with consistent blackboard configurations Attendance in October was 95.0% (compared to 94.7% for the same period last year) Suspension rate was 2.5% in October (compared with 10.6% for the same period last year) School is piloting Extreme Learning for After School Program with 60 (basic and above) students and QUAD with 60 (Far Below Basic and Basic) students * Sankofa sits within the Calvin Simmons attendance area. Residents have priority at Peralta Creek, United for Success, Ascend and UPA Focus School Category: Enrollment and Academic New Year 2

19 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) EXPLORE: Recommendation RecommendationEnrollment TargetsAcademic Targets Intensive monitoring and support to increase enrollment and accelerate achievement. Continue evaluation of possibly implementing a Middle Years International Baccalaureate program : 250 (+42) : 300 (+50) : Make AYP : Make AYP and Exit PI Enrollment FactorsAcademic Factors Data: Enrollment Enrollment: year change: -24% 5 year change: NA Data: Residents 2006 Residents: Residents (est): 390 Facilities Capacity (approx): 325 Data OUSD Tier: Orange PI Status: Year 1. DID NOT MAKE AYP in API: 586. DECREASED by 13 points Evidence for Recommendation New leader has already begun recruiting students for He intends to recruit students from surrounding elementary schools, including the school where he was formerly principal. There are 291 students living in the EXPLORE neighborhood but attending school elsewhere. EXPLORE would only need to attract back 30% of these students to reach a sustainable size. Evidence for Recommendation Strong new leadership at site Climate and culture have dramatically improved at the school since last year Instructional Leadership Team has agreed upon school wide focus of reading comprehension. Evidence of key instructional strategies being used: reciprocal teaching and direct instruction Read 180 is being used with a group of intervention 6 th graders Teachers are producing weekly lesson plans and units that are aligned with pacing and instructional guides Student work is displayed Focus School Category: Enrollment

20 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Youth Empowerment School (YES): Recommendation RecommendationEnrollment TargetsAcademic Targets Intensive monitoring and support to increase enrollment and accelerate academic achievement : 275 (+48) : 325 (+50) : 375 (+50) : Make AYP and Exit PI Enrollment FactorsAcademic Factors Data: Enrollment Enrollment: year change: +10% 5 year change: NA Data: Residents* 2006 Residents: 2, Residents (est): 1,300 Facilities Capacity (approx): 375 Data OUSD Tier: Orange PI Status: Year 2. MADE AYP in API: 521. INCREASED by 90 points Evidence for Recommendation The trend at the 9 th grade level shows the school has potential for growth over time. Currently 70 students enrolled in 9 th and 10 th graders Key will be the schools ability to retain the students they have recruited In 2004 the freshmen class was 94 students. In 2007, the senior class had 44 students (a loss of 50 students over 4 years). In 2006 there were 62 9 th grade students and this year there were th grade students (a gain of 1 student). Evidence for Recommendation The school made significant gains in , as measured by the API Objectives are addressing a higher level of rigor PLCs meet weekly to examine student work, lesson plans and curriculum Leader is engaged in frequent observation of teachers; feedback is given immediately Increase in students feeling safe at the school as measured by Use Your Voice (80% in vs. 35% in 05-06) 91% of students believe that they are being held to high standards, up from 60% in * YES sits within the Castlemont attendance area. Focus School Category: Enrollment and Academic

21 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) BEST: Recommendation RecommendationEnrollment TargetsAcademic Targets Intensive monitoring and support to increase enrollment and accelerate academic achievement : 250 (+47) : 300 (+50) : 350 (+50) : Make AYP : Make AYP and Exit PI Enrollment FactorsAcademic Factors Data: Enrollment Enrollment: year change: -7% 5 year change: NA Data: Residents 2006 Residents: Residents (est): 1,041 Facilities Capacity (approx): 350 Data OUSD Tier: Orange PI Status: Year 1. DID NOT MAKE AYP in API: 551. INCREASED by 65 points Evidence for Recommendation Approximately 250 high school students living in West Oakland are choosing to attend school elsewhere The number of 9-12 residents in West Oakland is projected to increase slightly over the next 5 years Plans to open an International Trade and Transportation Academy at BEST would support the schools efforts to attract additional students Evidence for Recommendation The school made significant gains in 06-07, as measured by the API Staff is working with two BayCES coaches to improve instructional strategies Master schedule was revamped to assure that all students are taking the appropriate A-G sequence of classes Operational systems are functioning smoothly Focus School Category: Enrollment and Academic

22 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Sankofa: Recommendation Recommendation School closure Enrollment FactorsAcademic Factors Data: Enrollment Enrollment: year change: -53% 5 year change: NA Data: Residents* 2006 Residents: Residents (est): 199 Facilities Capacity (approx): 300 Data OUSD Tier: Orange PI Status: Year 1. DID NOT MAKE AYP in API: 535. DECREASED by 43 points Evidence for Recommendation School is not fiscally sustainable at its current size Currently only 13 neighborhood students are selecting Sankofa as their school Last year the school had 119 students in grade K-4. This year, the school added a 5 th grade but enrollment decreased in K-5 to 115 students Based on these enrollment trends and the number of students living in the neighborhood, it is not feasible for Sankofa to grow to a fiscally sustainable size Evidence for Recommendation Academic performance was extremely low for each of the schools first two years. During the school year, only 13% of students scored proficient in Math and only 13% of students score proficient in ELA Sankofas K-5 program significantly under-performed the district during the school year in both Math and ELA Classroom observations indicate a lack of rigor * Sankofa sits within the Peralta attendance area. Residents have priority at both Sankofa and Peralta Focus School Category: Enrollment and Academic

23 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Burckhalter: Recommendation Recommendation School closure Enrollment FactorsAcademic Factors Data: Enrollment Enrollment: year change: 2% 5 year change: 14%* Data: Residents 2006 Residents: Residents (est): 251 Facilities Capacity (approx): 250 Data OUSD Tier: Yellow PI Status: None API: 666. DECREASED by 54 points Evidence for Recommendation Due to the small size of Burckhalter, monies are not generated to provide the extra support which other typical schools can provide, as noted by several families during the community engagement process This year, only 28% of families living in the Burckhalter attendance area chose to attend the school. This number is down from 29% in and 33% in The trend of neighborhood families not choosing Burckhalter is not new. Since 1999, no more than 50% of the families living in the neighborhood have chosen to send their child to this school Evidence for Recommendation Academic performance declined significantly during the school year. API decreased 54 points. The percentage of student scoring Proficient or Advanced in ELA decreased from 39% to 26% (a decline of 13%). Classroom instructional practices have not enhanced the acceleration of student learning There is minimal evidence that instruction is differentiated to address the varying needs of students Teachers and administrators are at the initiation stage of development in forming their Professional Learning Community and in creating effective systems that monitor student achievement * Increase due to expanded boundary with the closure of Burbank Focus School Category: Enrollment

24 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) IV. Other Recommendations

25 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Expansion of Continuation School and Drop out Recovery Alternatives Recommendation 1.Transition Bunche into a third continuation school for OUSD 2.Pilot an AdvancePath* drop out recovery academy within Leadership Prep on the Castlemont campus in Spring Evaluate the feasibility of opening a second AdvancePath drop out recovery academy in West Oakland for Fall 2008 RationaleCost Estimate Transition Bunche into a continuation school Bunche is not achieving its mission of accelerating 8 th and 9 th grade students back into traditional high schools at grade level. The significant investment in new small middle schools has created the structures which should be accelerating students to grade level in middle school There is a need for additional continuation school options within OUSD. Both Dewey and Rudsdale have reached full capacity with each school enrolling approximately 30 more students than projected. Opening a third continuation school located in West Oakland would reduce transportation challenges that many students face with regards to Dewey and Rudsdale Start Up CyberHigh: $50,000 Textbooks: $15,000 (Can be funded through categoricals, State block grant, or lottery) Operating: Funded through ADA Opening 1-2 AdvancePath Dropout Recovery Academies OUSD is currently not serving a large and growing population of drop outs and students at risk of dropping out AdvancePath academies have a track record of success graduating students who had formerly dropped out or who were at risk of dropping out. The program uses an innovative instructional model of technology based student driving learning Facilities: $50,000 (funded through Measure B) Operating: Funded through ADA * AdvancePath is an organization which operates drop out recovery academies serving students within a district school. For additional information see Appendix B

26 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Other Recommendation Melrose Leadership Academy: Grade configuration Leadership at Melrose Leadership Academy has expressed an interest in transitioning the school into a dual language immersion K-8 Due to the complexity of successful implementation of such a model, there is a significant amount of design work which would need to occur prior to the school enrolling students. A recommendation for transitioning the school would therefore need to contain a full year incubation process. As such, the current recommendation is to continue to evaluate the feasibility of transitioning the school into a dual language immersion K-8 in 2009, based on capacity and funding availability for incubation during A final recommendation will be made by June 2008 International High School: Permanent location The current recommendation is to keep International High School at the Carter facility For the purposed of the options window, the school should continue to use their current address This recommendation will be finalized as part of the facility utilization plan which will be brought to Board in February Redwood Heights: Solution to overcrowding We are continuing to engage with the Redwood Heights community regarding their issues of overcrowding Although the school is currently overcrowded, the number of elementary school residents living in the neighborhood (180) is significantly less than the facilities capacity (approximately 315). As a result, we are not making a recommendation for an structural changes such as attendance boundary adjustments We will continue to work with the school community to ensure that clear processes are being followed regarding how students are assigned and, if necessary, redirected in accordance with Board policy

27 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) V. Conclusion

28 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Summary of Recommendations and Next Steps RecommendationSchoolsNext Steps (IF recommendation is upheld by State Administrator) School Closure (2)Sankofa Burckhalter Targeted support for each individual family to ensure a quality school is selected for through the options process Targeted support for staff to ensure smooth transition Intensive Monitoring and Support (7) Lafayette ML King Howard Peralta Creek EXPLORE BEST YES Network Executive Officer led monitoring and support to ensure schools meet enrollment and academic targets District support to allocate funding through RBB in alignment with the enrollment targets schools will be required to meet School Transition (1) Bunche (into continuation school) Planning and program development to prepare for Fall 2008 transition. Apply for a new CDS code. New Program within School (1) Castlemont Contract to be ratified 12/19. Implementation plan underway for February launch

29 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Board of Education: Next Steps DateTopic December 19 th State Administrator decision regarding interventions recommended in this report, including school closures January / February Multiyear Fiscal Recovery Planning Process February Red school (Academic focus school) progress report presentation Facility Utilization Plan

30 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Appendix A: Focus School Data

31 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Lafayette: Academic Trends Over Time Lafayettes API increased by 58 points this year to 670

32 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Lafayette: Academic Trends Over Time Lafayette met the Adequate Yearly Progress targets this year with 26% of students scoring proficient in ELA and 41% of students scoring proficient in Math. However, the majority of students in both categories are still scoring below grade level.

33 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) TIER A combination of Absolute Performance, Growth, and Achievement Gap data. This tier informs the level of support & intervention a School received X Absolute Performance Score: How is the school performing against Adequate Yearly Progress Targets (AYP)? X Student Level Growth: One Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for one year? X Student Level Growth: Three Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for three years? X Achievement Gap: How is the school closing the achievement gap between the school-wide performance and that of the lowest performing sub- groups? X Based on OUSDs Tiered Accountability & Support Model, Lafayette has been categorized as a YELLOW school As a Program Improvement Year 3 school, Lafayette was initially categorized as an Orange school but moved UP because of high scores in growth and the achievement gap Lafayette: Tiered Accountability & Support

34 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Lafayette: Historical Enrollment Trends Enrollment at Lafayette Elementary School has declined 47 percent since 1999 * * Based on 15 th day counts

35 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Lafayette: Students who live in neighborhood The number of district residents in the Lafayette neighborhood has declined 56 percent since 1999 *

36 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Neighborhood going outside for school: 201 Students Neighborhood students attending School: 174 Students Number of OUSD elementary school students living in the Lafayette Neighborhood: 375 Students at from other neighborhoods: 127 Students 46% of students who live in the neighborhood attend school in the neighborhood* Number of non SDC students attending Lafayette: 301 Lafayette: Where Students Live and Go to School

37 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) M.L. King: Academic Trends Over Time M.L. Kings API increased by 28 points during the school year to 640

38 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) M.L. King: Academic Trends Over Time M. L. King increased the percentage of students performing Proficient/Advanced in both ELA and Math. However, the school has not yet met the Adequate Yearly Progress targets in either category

39 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) TIER A combination of Absolute Performance, Growth, and Achievement Gap data. This tier informs the level of support & intervention a School received X Absolute Performance Score: How is the school performing against Adequate Yearly Progress Targets (AYP)? X Student Level Growth: One Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for one year? X Student Level Growth: Three Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for three years? X Achievement Gap: How is the school closing the achievement gap between the school-wide performance and that of the lowest performing sub- groups? X Based on OUSDs Tiered Accountability & Support Model, M.L. King has been categorized as a YELLOW school As a Program Improvement Year 3 school, M.L. King was initially categorized as an Orange school but moved UP because of high scores in growth and the achievement gap M.L. King: Tiered Accountability & Support

40 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) M.L. King: Historical Enrollment Trends Enrollment at ML King Elementary School has declined 50 percent since 1999 * * Based on 15 th day counts

41 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) M.L. King: Students who live in neighborhood * Prior to the boundary shift in 2004, district residents in the King neighborhood were steadily declining

42 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Neighborhood going outside for school: 209 Students Neighborhood students attending School: 217 Students Number of OUSD elementary school students living in the King Neighborhood: 426 Students at from other neighborhoods: 69 Students Number of non SDC students attending King: percent of the elementary students attend school in the neighborhood M.L. King: Where Students Live and Go to School

43 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Howard: Academic Trends Over Time Howards API decreased by 50 points during the school year to 672

44 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Howard: Academic Trends Over Time The percentage of students performing Proficient and Advanced in ELA increased slightly during However, the percentage of students performing Far Below and Below Basic increased significantly The percentage of students performing Proficient and Advanced decreased from and the percentage of students performing Far Below and Below Basic increased

45 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) TIER A combination of Absolute Performance, Growth, and Achievement Gap data. This tier informs the level of support & intervention a School received X Absolute Performance Score: How is the school performing against Adequate Yearly Progress Targets (AYP)? X Student Level Growth: One Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for one year? X Student Level Growth: Three Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for three years? X Achievement Gap: How is the school closing the achievement gap between the school-wide performance and that of the lowest performing sub- groups? X Based on OUSDs Tiered Accountability & Support Model, Howard has been categorized as an YELLOW school As a school not in Program Improvement, Howard was initially categorized as an Green school but moved DOWN because of low scores in growth and the achievement gap Howard: Tiered Accountability & Support

46 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Howard: Historical Enrollment Trends Enrollment at Howard Elementary School has declined 23 percent since 1999 * * Based on 15 th day counts

47 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Howard: Students who live in neighborhood District residents in the Howard neighborhood have fallen by 43 percent since 1999 *

48 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Neighborhood going outside for school: 147 Students Neighborhood students attending School: 105 Students Number of OUSD elementary school students living in the Howard Neighborhood: 252 Students at from other neighborhoods: 125 Students Number of non SDC students attending Howard:230 Only 41 percent of the elementary students attend school in the neighborhood Howard: Where Students Live and Go to School

49 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Peralta Creek: Academic Performance During the school year, only 8% of students scored Proficient in English Language Arts and only 6% of students scored Proficient in Math

50 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Peralta Creek: Historical Enrollment Trends * * 15 th Day Count Used

51 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Peralta Creek Reside in the Calvin Simmons Attendance Area Simmons middle school residents are expected to decline 30 percent in the next five years

52 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Neighborhood going outside for school: 448 Students * Neighborhood students attending School: 129 Students Number of OUSD middle school students living in the Calvin Simmons Neighborhood: 956 Students at from other neighborhoods: 41 Students 47% of students who live in the neighborhood attend school in the neighborhood* * 223 students attend Urban Promise; 156 attend United for Success Number of non SDC students attending Peralta Creek:170 Peralta Creek: Where Students Live and Go to School

53 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) EXPLORE: Academic Performance Over its three years in existence, EXPLOREs API has decreased by 55 points

54 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) EXPLORE: Academic Performance The percentage of students scoring Proficient on the CST has remained flat or declined over the past three years, while the percentage of students scoring Far Below and Below Basic has increased

55 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) TIER A combination of Absolute Performance, Growth, and Achievement Gap data. This tier informs the level of support & intervention a School received X Absolute Performance Score: How is the school performing against Adequate Yearly Progress Targets (AYP)? X Student Level Growth: One Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for one year? X Student Level Growth: Three Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for three years? X Achievement Gap: How is the school closing the achievement gap between the school-wide performance and that of the lowest performing sub- groups? X Based on OUSDs Tiered Accountability & Support Model, EXPLORE has been categorized as an ORANGE school As a Program Improvement Year 1 school, EXPLORE was initially categorized as a Yellow school but moved DOWN because of low scores in growth and the achievement gap EXPLORE: Tiered Accountability & Support

56 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) EXPLORE: Historical Enrollment Trends * * 15 th Day Count Used As of the 15 th day count, EXPLOREs enrollment is down by 20% compared to

57 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) EXPLORE: Students who live in the neighborhood The number of 6 th -8 th grade residents living in the EXPLORE neighborhood is projected to decline by 13% over the next 5 years King Estates attendance area data: * Birth rates from the census tracts in the EXPLORE neighborhood are used to forecast Kindergarten residents. Historical grade progressions from the neighborhood are used to forecast future EXPLORE residents.

58 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Neighborhood going outside for school: 291 Students Neighborhood students attending School: 134 Students Number of OUSD middle school students living in the EXPLORE Neighborhood: 425 Students at from other neighborhoods: 127 Students Only 31% of students who live in the neighborhood attend school in the neighborhood* Number of students attending EXPLORE: 261 EXPLORE: Where Students Live and Go to School

59 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) YES: Academic Performance YES API increased 90 points during

60 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) YES: Academic Performance The percentage of students scoring Proficient on the CST increased in ELA but decreased in Math

61 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) TIER A combination of Absolute Performance, Growth, and Achievement Gap data. This tier informs the level of support & intervention a School received X Absolute Performance Score: How is the school performing against Adequate Yearly Progress Targets (AYP)? X Student Level Growth: One Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for one year? X Student Level Growth: Three Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for three years? Achievement Gap: How is the school closing the achievement gap between the school-wide performance and that of the lowest performing sub- groups? X Based on OUSDs Tiered Accountability & Support Model, YES has been categorized as an ORANGE school As a Program Improvement Year 2 school, YES was initially categorized as an Yellow school but moved DOWN because of low scores in growth and the achievement gap NA YES: Tiered Accountability & Support

62 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) YES: Historical Enrollment Trends * 15 th Day Count Used enrollment at YES is up 20 percent compared to 06-07

63 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) YES Residents Live in the Castlemont Attendance Area * Birth rates from the census tracts in the Castlemont neighborhood are used to forecast Kindergarten residents. Historical grade progressions from the neighborhood are used to forecast future Castlemont residents. 9 th to 12 th grade residents in the Castlemont area are expected to decline over 50 percent over the next five years

64 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Neighborhood students going outside for school: 1,578 Students * Neighborhood students attending School: 126 Students Number of OUSD high school students living in the Castlemont Neighborhood: 2,669 Students at from other neighborhoods: 67 Students 65 percent of students who attend YES live in the neighborhood Number of students attending YES: 193 * 311 students attend Leadership Prep, 278 students attend EOSA, 376 students attend CBIT YES: Where Students Live and Go to School

65 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) BEST: Academic Performance Index (API) BESTs API increased by 65 points this year from 486 to 551

66 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) BEST: Academic Performance The percentage of students scoring Proficient on the CST increased in both ELA and Math. However, only 19% and 4% of students are scoring Proficient in ELA and Math respectively

67 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) TIER A combination of Absolute Performance, Growth, and Achievement Gap data. This tier informs the level of support & intervention a School received X Absolute Performance Score: How is the school performing against Adequate Yearly Progress Targets (AYP)? X Student Level Growth: One Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for one year? X Student Level Growth: Three Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for three years? Achievement Gap: How is the school closing the achievement gap between the school-wide performance and that of the lowest performing sub- groups? X Based on OUSDs Tiered Accountability & Support Model, BEST has been categorized as an ORANGE school As a Program Improvement Year 1 school, BEST was initially categorized as an Yellow school but moved DOWN because of low scores in growth and the achievement gap NA BEST: Tiered Accountability & Support

68 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) BEST: Historical Enrollment Trends Enrollment at BEST fell 29 percent between 2005 and 2006 and is projected to fall 14 percent between 2006 and 2007

69 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) BEST: McClymonds Residents 9 th -12 th grade residents of the McClymonds neighborhood is projected to increase slightly over the next five years

70 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Neighborhood going outside for school: 482 Students * McClymonds Neighborhood students attending School: 167 Students Students at from other neighborhoods: 42 Students 45 percent of the McClymonds neighborhood attends either BEST or EXCEL * 241 students from the neighborhood attend EXCEL **Based on Data Number of non SDC students attending BEST: 209 Number of OUSD high school students living in the McClymonds Neighborhood: 890** BEST: Where Students Live and Go to School

71 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Sankofa: Academic Performance During , Sankofas API decreased by 43 points from 578 to 535

72 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Sankofa: Academic Performance The percentage of students scoring Proficient/Advanced decreased in both Math and ELA during the school year while the percentage of students scoring Below Basic or Far Below Basic increased for both Math and ELA

73 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) TIER A combination of Absolute Performance, Growth, and Achievement Gap data. This tier informs the level of support & intervention a School received X Absolute Performance Score: How is the school performing against Adequate Yearly Progress Targets (AYP)? X Student Level Growth: One Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for one year? X Student Level Growth: Three Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for three years? X Achievement Gap: How is the school closing the achievement gap between the school-wide performance and that of the lowest performing sub- groups? X Based on OUSDs Tiered Accountability & Support Model, Sankofa has been categorized as an ORANGE school As a Program Improvement Year 1 school, Sankofa was initially categorized as an Yellow school but moved DOWN because of low scores in growth and the achievement gap Sankofa: Tiered Accountability & Support

74 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Sankofa: Historical Enrollment Trends * * 15 th Day Count Used As of the 15 th day count, Sankofas K-4 enrollment is down by 13% compared to

75 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Sankofa Residents Live in Peralta Attendance Area Elementary residents in the Peralta are projected to grow slightly over the next five years. However, the total number of students living in the neighborhood is not projected to grow above 200

76 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Neighborhood going outside for school: 31 Students Neighborhood students attending School: 13 Students Number of OUSD elementary school students living in the Peralta Neighborhood: 132 Students at from other neighborhoods: 106 Students Only 11 percent of the students who attend Sankofa live in the neighborhood Number of K-4 students attending Sankofa: 119 Students attending neighborhood school Peralta: 88 Sankofa: Where Students Live and Go to School

77 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Burckhalter: Academic Trends Over Time Burckhalters API declined 54 points this year from 740 to 686

78 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Burckhalter: Academic Trends Over Time The percentage of students proficient in ELA decreased by 13% this year from 39% to 26%

79 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) TIER A combination of Absolute Performance, Growth, and Achievement Gap data. This tier informs the level of support & intervention a School received X Absolute Performance Score: How is the school performing against Adequate Yearly Progress Targets (AYP)? X Student Level Growth: One Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for one year? X Student Level Growth: Three Year: How is the school accelerating achievement for the students who have been in the school for three years? X Achievement Gap: How is the school closing the achievement gap between the school-wide performance and that of the lowest performing sub- groups? X Based on OUSDs Tiered Accountability & Support Model, Burckhalter has been categorized as an YELLOW school Burckhalter was initially categorized as an Green school but moved DOWN because of low scores in growth and the achievement gap Burckhalter: Tiered Accountability & Support

80 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Burckhalter: Historical Enrollment Trends Enrollment at Burckhalter Elementary School has declined 28 percent since 1999 * * Based on 15th day counts

81 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Burckhalter: Students who live in neighborhood Prior to the boundary shift in 2005, the number of district residents in the Burckhalter neighborhood was steadily declining

82 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Neighborhood going outside for school: 192 Students Neighborhood students attending School: 84 Students Number of OUSD elementary school students living in the Burckhalter Neighborhood: 276* Students at Burckhalter from other neighborhoods: 75 Students Number of non SDC students attending Burckhalter:159* Only 30 percent of the elementary students attend school in the neighborhood * Based on CBEDS Burckhalter: Where Students Live and Go to School

83 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Appendix B: AdvancePath Program Description

84 Executive Summary The high school drop-out crisis the Silent Epidemic is one of the largest and least addressed issues facing public education AdvancePath Academics creates innovative partnerships with districts and high schools to operate technology rich, in-school Academies that provide high quality education services to recover, educate, and graduate out-of-school youth and those at risk of not earning their high school diplomas For administrators and educators our model is low risk and potentially high reward

85 Vision AdvancePath Academics provides – Educators high quality, cost-effective alternative programs to educate and graduate at risk and disengaged students; Communities a well-educated, productive workforce able to make positive social and economic contributions; and, Students an appreciation for learning, motivation for personal growth, better employment prospects, and the foundation for a productive life and good citizenship

86 Value Proposition Increase the number of your students who graduate from high school Improve the cost-effectiveness of your alternative programs while mitigating your financial risk Advance the safety, stability, and prosperity of your community

87 A Simple & Effective Model AdvancePath recovers, educates and graduates disengaged, at-risk & out-of-school students Society benefits from a more productive workforce Students receive state recognized high-school diplomas in preparation for post-secondary and work opportunities District improves overall graduation rates The district has limited commercial and financial risk and shares in student revenue Higher earnings potential The board and superintendent are appreciated more by the community

88 AdvancePath & District Responsibilities AdvancePath Provides Fully provisioned Academy with a technology rich learning environment A positive social environment where achievement is immediately rewarded District staff trained & managed by AdvancePath Student & community outreach Auditing & reporting to district for ADA submissions to state Academy oversight & management Job & Post-Secondary Preparation District Provides Facilities (~3,000 sq/ft) Coordination on Academy staff hiring and payroll administration Project facilitator to work with AdvancePath implementation team Support from business office to comply with state reporting and payment

89 88 The AdvancePath Academy Contemporary look and feel State-of-the-art learning environment Inviting and welcoming A place students want to be

90 89 Elements Of The AdvancePath Academy Program The AdvancePath Program (focus of AdvancePath Research and Development) Curriculum Curricular design Mastery-based, student- paced courses Online courseware Offline literature components, writing projects, and other activities Assessment Diagnostic-prescriptive placements Formative checks for understanding Mastery & summative tests Alignment State standards District requirements Standardized tests Student management Personalized student- teacher interaction Emphasis on goal setting and life skills development Discipline process and referral process management Family connection Intake interviews and commitments Regular involvement and communication Facility layout Professional design Attractive and inviting environment Ergonomic / functional furniture Placement / hiring Coordination with district HR to meet unique staffing profile Union acceptance Professional development Intensive upfront and ongoing training AdvancePath-specific curricular alignment Support Ongoing and frequent interactions with corporate team Focus on meeting direct needs / issues Exchange of best practices across AdvancePath community Community outreach Emphasis on building community network Strong coordination with local employers Alignment with social service providers and agencies District coordination Integration into district processes Tracking systems Proprietary data systems Diligent (daily) follow up (where needed) Phone bank Workflow & Processes Integration and coordination with host school policies Academy workflow optimization around instruction and learning Provisioning & Supplies Selecting, provisioning, and maintaining all furniture, fixture, hardware, software, and materials IT Optimized network solution Self-supported IT Culture Staffing & Training Student Recruitment Operations & Technology

91 Example: Gilroy USD AdvancePath Academy Academy Established: April 2006 Current Enrollment: 108 Students Graduation Summary: April 2006 – August Students September 2006 – June Students September 2007 – June Students (actual & projected) Total Graduates76 Students 50% of current graduates are enrolled a 2 or 4 year college Average time from enrollment to graduation: 18 months Average Success Rate: 77.5%* *Defined as a student graduating, continuing their studies or transferring to another school inside or outside the District.

92 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) School Portfolio Management Attendance Boundary Adjustment Recommendations December 12, 2007

93 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) I.Coherent Governance Policy OE 12.5 II.Hillcrest III. Middle School Boundaries Appendix: Hillcrest Analysis School Portfolio Management

94 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) School Portfolio Management Framework Coherent Governance Policy (Operational Expectation OE-12) The Chief Executive Officer shall assure the availability of a diverse portfolio of high quality schools (traditional, new small schools, charter schools, etc) for students and families both within neighborhoods and district-wide The Chief Executive Officer shall: 1. Assure that all district quality standards apply equally to all schools regardless of size and type 2. Regularly monitor all schools to assure their cost-effectiveness and compliance with quality standards 3. Assure the sustainability of all schools and programs, especially in a declining revenue environment 4. Create meaningful partnerships between district and charter schools that improve the conditions for both and that enhance choices for students and their families 5. Review school attendance boundaries annually to assure reasonable balance in student enrollment As per Board policy, this presentation specifically makes recommendations regarding Operational Expectation 12.5 The adjustments presented herein are a recommendation to right size boundaries which will ensure families have access to neighborhood schools.

95 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Hillcrest: Solution for Overcrowding Recommendation 1.Shrink attendance boundary to ensure that the number of neighborhood students more closely approximates the number of seats at Hillcrest 2.Cap kindergarten class at 40 students beginning in 2008 (NOTE: this does not necessarily mean classes of 20:1) 3.Cap 6 th grade class at 20 students beginning in 2009 (IF there is not sufficient attrition to ensure that students current progressing through the school can fit. This will be reviewed annually) Rationale* The number of students living in the current Hillcrest attendance area is increasing: Long-term enrollment trends and current neighborhood birth rates suggest there will be neighborhood kindergartners living in the current attendance boundary for each of the next 5 years The current facility can hold no more than 310 students. There is neither space nor funding to create additional capacity on site. Eliminating the middle school was an option considered. However, doing so would still require a reduction in neighborhood demand for the school, as this alternative would result in an estimated school size of students Shrinking the boundary to reduce the number of neighborhood students, while also reducing the number of middle school students overtime is the most equitable solution to overcrowding Siblings of current Hillcrest students living in the portions of the former attendance boundary now re-districted to Chabot and Montclair will be grandfathered for one year by receiving priority over other non-sibling neighborhood families (as long as there is space) * More detailed analysis can be found in Appendix

96 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Hillcrest: Recommended Boundary Adjustment Portion re-districted to CHABOT recommended to be drawn along: Broadway Terrace Estimated number of Kindergarten students impacted: 5-15 Portion re-districted to MONTCLAIR recommended to be drawn along: Hilltop, Harbord, Sheridan Estimated number of Kindergarten students impacted: 5- 15

97 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Adjustment of Middle School Boundaries Recommendation Right size attendance boundaries across the district as shown on the next page. These adjustments will result in the following estimated changes to residents within each boundary: Boundaries Gaining Residents Claremont (+187) Simmons (+161) Edna Brewer (+81) Madison (+160) Montera (+105) Boundaries Losing Residents Elmhurst (-160) Bret Harte (-113) Havenscourt (-154) Roosevelt (-86) Westlake (-187) Rationale We believe that families should have access to neighborhood schools, as articulated in Board Policy Currently, many of the middle school attendance boundaries do not represent a number of residents equivalent to the school facilities capacities within their neighborhood. For example, Elmhurst and Havenscourt each have many more families living in their neighborhoods than there are seats at neighborhood schools. In contrast, Claremont and Calvin Simmons currently have many less students living in their neighborhood than there are seats at neighborhood schools In making these boundary adjustments, it is important to note that OUSDs current options policy allows students to select any school across the city. With only an estimated 60% of students attending school within their neighborhood, we know that these attendance boundaries do not reflect the actual students attending each school. However it is important that we maintain a system within which families have the OPTION to attend their neighborhood school should they so desire

98 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Adjustment of Middle School Boundaries [Insert picture of boundary changes with exact streets] The map below represents the recommended new middle school attendance boundaries (for example, the recommended new North Oakland boundary is BLUE) Regions with annotated streets represent the areas which are proposed to be moved

99 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Summary of Recommendations and Next Steps RecommendationSchoolsNext Steps (IF recommendation is approved by the Board of Education) Attendance Boundary Adjustment (2) Hillcrest Middle School Boundaries Coordination with student assignment office to ensure students are assigned through the options process using new attendance boundaries Communication with families in impacted regions to support smooth transition

100 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Board of Education: Next Steps DateTopic December 19 th Board of Education decision regarding attendance boundary adjustments

101 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Appendix: Hillcrest Analysis

102 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Defining and Measuring Grade Progressions A grade progression measures the change in the number of students from one year to the next This years Kindergartners become next years first graders and the following years second graders and so on. EXAMPLE: In 2004, 38 Hillcrest Kindergartners were enrolled. In 2005, 32 1st graders were enrolled. The K to 1 st (K>1) grade progression between 2004 and 2005 was 84.2% 15.8% of the students left between K and 1 st grade from 2004 to 2005 ` 2004: : 32

103 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Factors Considered in for the Scenario Models The standard Grade Progression Model (also referred to as Attrition Rate Model) is used to forecast future Hillcrest enrollment Several Grade Progressions (GPs) were considered Using GPs from a particular year Average GPs from the last 2 years Average GPs from the last 3 years Average GPs from the last 5 years Maximum GPs of the last 2, 3, 5 years ** Both OUSD and LRPCs analysis indicate that grade progressions in recent years are significantly higher than in the past **

104 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) LRPC Scenario 1 (Table S-4 in report) Scenario 1 presented by the LRPC assumes 40 future incoming K students with no change to the middle school. This scenario forecasts a slight increase of students until the year 2011, before reaching a steady state of the optimal 310 students Challenges to Scenario: As the LRPC has noted, attrition rates have declined significantly in recent years. The attrition rates used in this model are lower than attrition rates that were actually experienced between 2006 and 2007 Most notably, the LRPC is utilizing an average grade progression of 80.2% between 5 th and 6 th grade whereas the actual grade progression between 2006 and 2007 was 93.1%

105 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Scenario 2 presented by the LRPC assumes 40 future incoming K students with no change to the middle school. This model forecasts a continued increase in enrollment over the next 6 years The attrition rates used in this model are more realistic and more accurately reflect current attrition rates Challenges to Scenario: Hillcrest school does not have the facilities capacity to house this number of students LRPC Scenario 2 (Table S-5 in report)

106 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) How Grade Progressions were Determined Medium Scenario uses grade progressions we feel most accurately reflects what is currently happening at the school Average of the 2 highest grade progressions of the last 3 years From 5 th to 6 th grade, the higher grade progression from the 06>07 school year was used to account for a shift in the attrition rate from historical patterns High Scenario Maximum grade progressions from the last three years for each grade

107 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Scenarios Considered OUSD SCENARIO 1: Eliminate middle school (This scenario was not proposed by the LRPC. However as a district, we felt that it was very important to consider this alternative given that it was recommended by a number of pre-Kindergarten Hillcrest families) Advantages : Allows a greater number of Kindergartens in incoming classes Challenges: Strong likelihood based on survey results that there will be at least 60 Kindergarten families within the current Hillcrest boundary Hillcrest facilities cannot sustain future incoming classes of 60 Kindergarteners Medium Scenario with GPs as discussed on Slide #5High Scenario with Maximum GPs of the last 3 years 345 projected students is significantly greater than Hillcrests facility capacity

108 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Scenarios Considered OUSD SCENARIO 2: Cap at 40 Kindergarteners with no change to middle school Advantages: Programmatically, the scenario would preserve the communitys commitment to preserving a K-8 option for families Challenges: Based on even a relatively conservative prediction of future grade progressions, this solution does not fully solve the challenges of overcrowding With the uncertainty of future grade progressions, its very possible that this solution would not at all solve the situation Medium Scenario with GPs as discussed on Slide #5High Scenario with Maximum GPs of the last 3 years 355 projected students is significantly greater than Hillcrests facility capacity

109 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Scenarios Considered OUSD SCENARIO 3: Reduce cohort of neighborhood students by shrinking boundary Cap Kindergarten at 40 Annually review attrition rates and cap Middle School at 20 if current grade progressions continue* Challenges: Enrollment will still be over the facilities capacity of 310 for the next three years Advantages: As requested by the LRPC, model utilizes a more realistic attrition rate for projecting student population. Reduces some overcrowding while preserving the communitys commitment to a K-8 option Medium Scenario with GPs as discussed on Slide #5High Scenario with Maximum GPs of the last 3 years * Beginning in 2009, all 5 th grade Hillcrest students must fill out an Options form. Middle school seats will be drawn through a lottery process

110 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Recommendation 1. Shrink attendance boundary to reduce number of students living in boundary Approximately 5-15 kindergarteners will be redistricted to Chabot * Approximately 5-15 kindergarteners will be redistricted to Montclair * **NOTE: These numbers are only estimates. Until OUSD has access to ALL specific resident information about incoming students gathered by the LRPC, we cannot make any assurances that these adjustments will fully reduce over demand for the 2008 kindergarten seats ** 2. Cap Kindergarten at 40 students beginning in 2008 This does NOT necessarily mean 2 classes of 20 K 3. Annually review attrition rates and cap Middle School at 20 if current grade progressions continue* 4. Adhere to published OUSD enrollment priorities and administrative regulations * These figures may range according to new data presented

111 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) OUSD Enrollment Priorities Enrollment Priorities Neighborhood students Sibling Non-neighborhood Program Improvement neighborhood Open Lottery Enrollment Dates December 7 th, 8 th : Options Fair 1/15/08: Options forms due 3/1/08: Placement letters mailed 3/2/08-Ongoing: Appeals window

112 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) OUSD Enrollment Priorities Priority OrderCurrent Hillcrest Students Live in New Hillcrest Boundary Live in Re-districted portion Never Lived at Hillcrest SiblingNon- Sibling 1 ** Students are GUARANTEED their space at Hillcrest ** X 2XX 3 ** Grandfathered for only** XX 4XX 5XX 6XXX OR

113 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) OUSD Enrollment Priorities 1)Current Hillcrest Student Population ** Students are GUARANTEED their space at Hillcrest. They do not participate in the options process ** 2)Students living in the New Hillcrest Boundary with a sibling already attending Hillcrest 3)For the school year only, grandfathered students who live in the previously defined Hillcrest boundary with a sibling already attending Hillcrest 4)Students living in the New Hillcrest Boundary without a sibling attending Hillcrest 5)Students who do not live in the Hillcrest boundary with a sibling already attending Hillcrest 6)Students who do not live in the Hillcrest boundary without a sibling already attending Hillcrest

114 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Questions Asked by the LRPC What is the current OUSD policy concerning what happens to current Hillcrest students whose addresses are reallocated to alternative attendance areas? These students can continue at Hillcrest. If these students wish to select a new school, they will receive first priority at their new neighborhood school Is there a current OUSD policy concerning what happens to the siblings of existing Hillcrest students? Pursuant to AR (Administrative Regulation) 5116, when boundaries are changed, the Superintendent or designee will make every effort to keep siblings together, therefore grandfathering the neighborhood sibling priority based on space availability If younger siblings of existing Hillcrest students are grandfathered into the school despite their home addresses falling into a new alternative attendance area, does current or proposed policy dictate that they be given the same (or less) priority that new prospective Hillcrest students residing in the attendance area (who do not have siblings already at the school) when it comes to allocating kindergarten slots? Pursuant to AR 5116, during the school year, students who reside in the re-districted portion with a sibling already attending Hillcrest will have priority over students who live in the Hillcrest neighborhood without siblings. Pursuant to AR 5116, after , students living in the Hillcrest neighborhood without siblings will be prioritized before students who reside in the re-districted portion with a sibling already attending Hillcrest.

115 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) How will the middle school lottery occur for 2009? – If the natural attrition rate is less than the number of middle school seats available, a lottery process will take place at the district according to the 2009 Board Options policies. Options policies will be reviewed annually and could be altered as a result of the review What happens if there is an extra seat in 7th grade as a result of 6th grade students not moving forward? – Because of ongoing challenges with overcrowding, this space will not be refilled. How will this information be communicated to Real Estate Agents? -The options policy will be distributed and made available to the Oakland Realtors Association and broadcast in the Real Estate Associations newsletter -A meeting will be set up after the Options policies are distributed Questions Asked by the LRPC

116 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Hillcrest: Impact on Neighboring Schools

117 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Chabot: Total Enrollment (Neighborhood vs. Non-Neighborhood) Currently, 57% of Chabots student come from outside the neighborhood There are 229 elementary residents who live in the Chabot neighborhood. The school has facilities capacity for 470 students. Even with the addition of 32 additional neighborhood students, the school will continue to have capacity for 44% of the students to come from outside the neighborhood Neighborhood/Non-Neighborhood Split at Chabot

118 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Chabot: Possible impact on incoming Kindergarten class Currently, approximately 36% of the Kindergarten class comes from outside the neighborhood The anticipated 11 additional neighborhood students would reduce the non-neighborhood seats to 20. However, this still represents 23% of the seats being available for non-neighborhood students This proposed attendance boundary change would add approximately 11 Kindergartners to the Chabot attendance area. ASSUMING all these students want to attend Chabot, there would still be approximately 20 seats available for non- neighborhood Kindergartners (or 23% of the incoming class) Anticipated change in Kindergarten class with new Hillcrest families

119 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Chabot: Projected Enrollment Chabots enrollment is projected to remain relatively stable for the next five years. Currently, there are 481 students enrolled. Currently, 57% of Chabots students come from outside the neighborhood. Over the next five years, enrollment is projected to shift to a mix of 67% neighborhood and 33% non-neighborhood because of: –Higher grade progressions for neighborhood students –Smaller incoming non-neighborhood K class and fewer non-neighborhood students progressing through the grades

120 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Montclair: Total Enrollment (Neighborhood vs. Non-Neighborhood) Currently, 41% of Montclairs student come from outside the neighborhood There are 238 elementary residents who live in the Montclair neighborhood. The school has facilities capacity for 335 students. Even with the addition of 16 additional neighborhood students, the school will continue to have capacity for 24% of the students to come from outside the neighborhood Neighborhood/Non-Neighborhood Split at Montclair

121 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Montclair: Possible impact on incoming Kindergarten class Currently, approximately 23% of the Kindergarten class comes from outside the neighborhood The anticipated 7 additional neighborhood students would reduce the non-neighborhood seats to 7. However, this still represents 12% of the seats being available for non-neighborhood students Anticipated change in Kindergarten class with new Hillcrest families

122 December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) Montclair: Projected Enrollment Montclairs enrollment is projected to remain relatively stable for the next five years. Currently, there are 356 students enrolled. In 2006, 59% of Montclairs students come from outside the neighborhood. Over the next five years, enrollment is projected to shift to a mix of 78% neighborhood, 22% non-neighborhood because of: –Higher grade progressions for neighborhood students –Smaller incoming non-neighborhood K class and fewer non-neighborhood students progressing through the grades


Download ppt "December 12 BOE (v5 12/06/07) - 0 - School Portfolio Management 2007-2008 Intervention and Programmatic Adjustment Recommendations December 12, 2007."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google