Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Rather than pissing off every group of parents possible by changing and moving and reconfiguring option programs, I wish they would devote all of their attention to creating new seats through land acquisition and construction. The limited benefits of shuffling programs and changing program focus shouldn’t be anyone’s priority right now! If they spend multiple school board meetings exploring the relative value of traditional education vs IB without showing how such a change will have a meaningful contribution to alleviating the capacity crisis, they’re focusing on the wrong thing.
Making new seats is needed at high school level; Hamm and Reed address lower grade capacity for several years (except all to the west).
High school capacity is a thorny crisis, they rather fiddle IB in the style of Nemo
Not sure what data you are looking at. They have a plan for high school seats, it may not be a great or even good plan, but it is at least a plan. The most recent projections show that at the elementary school level, APS needs three new schools over the next ten years.
Elementary School: Hamm & Reed add seats, but updated projections still show a deficit every year that increases by almost 300 seats each year and is over 600 again by 2022-23, over 1100 by 2024-25, and over 1800 by 2026-27.
Middle School: Deficit in 2021, over 500 in 2024-25, and over 600 in 2026-27
High School: Getting seats in the next few years from both the Ed center and the Career Center and the most recent projections don't show a deficit until 2026-27 and then it is only 53 seats.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}