Anonymous wrote:As a parent of kids zoned for a too-large ES that’s not a neighborhood school, I am supportive of this boundary study. Hoping we get rezoned to a better, smaller, closer option.
Anonymous wrote:Isn’t this a problem AI can solve?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am really worried about this ES boundary study. I get the sense they plan to move a lot of kids around and close some neighborhood schools. I know kids are resilient and yada yada yada. But moving to a new elementary school in fourth or fifth grade with only a small portion of your friends and none of the teachers/ staff/ traditions that you’ve grown to love sounds really crappy. There is a total disregard for minimizing disruption.
+1 and I don't understand the need for ES boundary changes in the way that HS boundary changes are obviously needed with new buildings and several over-crowded. What problem is the ES boundary study trying to solve, other than split articulations?
How are they going to solve split articulations with this? It seems like if they wanted to do that they would change the ES boundaries first and then address the middle and high school boundaries.
Couldn't they use the new middle school boundaries (whatever they are) as starting points, and say, this MS boundary contains the following ES's, let's figure out how best to divide up the expected ES students feeding to this MS among these however many ES's.
Yes, that's the idea. But waiting until after MS boundaries are locked in and then treating them as hard limits drastically limits the options in many cases. They need to do both studies at the same time, or be willing to reopen some MS/HS boundaries later as needed.
+1 very true downcounty with the Sligo Creek fiasco
Aren't the new options coming later in November meant to take that into account?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am really worried about this ES boundary study. I get the sense they plan to move a lot of kids around and close some neighborhood schools. I know kids are resilient and yada yada yada. But moving to a new elementary school in fourth or fifth grade with only a small portion of your friends and none of the teachers/ staff/ traditions that you’ve grown to love sounds really crappy. There is a total disregard for minimizing disruption.
+1 and I don't understand the need for ES boundary changes in the way that HS boundary changes are obviously needed with new buildings and several over-crowded. What problem is the ES boundary study trying to solve, other than split articulations?
How are they going to solve split articulations with this? It seems like if they wanted to do that they would change the ES boundaries first and then address the middle and high school boundaries.
Couldn't they use the new middle school boundaries (whatever they are) as starting points, and say, this MS boundary contains the following ES's, let's figure out how best to divide up the expected ES students feeding to this MS among these however many ES's.
Yes, that's the idea. But waiting until after MS boundaries are locked in and then treating them as hard limits drastically limits the options in many cases. They need to do both studies at the same time, or be willing to reopen some MS/HS boundaries later as needed.
+1 very true downcounty with the Sligo Creek fiasco
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am really worried about this ES boundary study. I get the sense they plan to move a lot of kids around and close some neighborhood schools. I know kids are resilient and yada yada yada. But moving to a new elementary school in fourth or fifth grade with only a small portion of your friends and none of the teachers/ staff/ traditions that you’ve grown to love sounds really crappy. There is a total disregard for minimizing disruption.
+1 and I don't understand the need for ES boundary changes in the way that HS boundary changes are obviously needed with new buildings and several over-crowded. What problem is the ES boundary study trying to solve, other than split articulations?
How are they going to solve split articulations with this? It seems like if they wanted to do that they would change the ES boundaries first and then address the middle and high school boundaries.
Couldn't they use the new middle school boundaries (whatever they are) as starting points, and say, this MS boundary contains the following ES's, let's figure out how best to divide up the expected ES students feeding to this MS among these however many ES's.
Yes, that's the idea. But waiting until after MS boundaries are locked in and then treating them as hard limits drastically limits the options in many cases. They need to do both studies at the same time, or be willing to reopen some MS/HS boundaries later as needed.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am really worried about this ES boundary study. I get the sense they plan to move a lot of kids around and close some neighborhood schools. I know kids are resilient and yada yada yada. But moving to a new elementary school in fourth or fifth grade with only a small portion of your friends and none of the teachers/ staff/ traditions that you’ve grown to love sounds really crappy. There is a total disregard for minimizing disruption.
+1 and I don't understand the need for ES boundary changes in the way that HS boundary changes are obviously needed with new buildings and several over-crowded. What problem is the ES boundary study trying to solve, other than split articulations?
How are they going to solve split articulations with this? It seems like if they wanted to do that they would change the ES boundaries first and then address the middle and high school boundaries.
Couldn't they use the new middle school boundaries (whatever they are) as starting points, and say, this MS boundary contains the following ES's, let's figure out how best to divide up the expected ES students feeding to this MS among these however many ES's.
Yes, that's the idea. But waiting until after MS boundaries are locked in and then treating them as hard limits drastically limits the options in many cases. They need to do both studies at the same time, or be willing to reopen some MS/HS boundaries later as needed.
Nothing preventing them from doing another study in the future!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am really worried about this ES boundary study. I get the sense they plan to move a lot of kids around and close some neighborhood schools. I know kids are resilient and yada yada yada. But moving to a new elementary school in fourth or fifth grade with only a small portion of your friends and none of the teachers/ staff/ traditions that you’ve grown to love sounds really crappy. There is a total disregard for minimizing disruption.
+1 and I don't understand the need for ES boundary changes in the way that HS boundary changes are obviously needed with new buildings and several over-crowded. What problem is the ES boundary study trying to solve, other than split articulations?
How are they going to solve split articulations with this? It seems like if they wanted to do that they would change the ES boundaries first and then address the middle and high school boundaries.
Couldn't they use the new middle school boundaries (whatever they are) as starting points, and say, this MS boundary contains the following ES's, let's figure out how best to divide up the expected ES students feeding to this MS among these however many ES's.
Yes, that's the idea. But waiting until after MS boundaries are locked in and then treating them as hard limits drastically limits the options in many cases. They need to do both studies at the same time, or be willing to reopen some MS/HS boundaries later as needed.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am really worried about this ES boundary study. I get the sense they plan to move a lot of kids around and close some neighborhood schools. I know kids are resilient and yada yada yada. But moving to a new elementary school in fourth or fifth grade with only a small portion of your friends and none of the teachers/ staff/ traditions that you’ve grown to love sounds really crappy. There is a total disregard for minimizing disruption.
+1 and I don't understand the need for ES boundary changes in the way that HS boundary changes are obviously needed with new buildings and several over-crowded. What problem is the ES boundary study trying to solve, other than split articulations?
How are they going to solve split articulations with this? It seems like if they wanted to do that they would change the ES boundaries first and then address the middle and high school boundaries.
Couldn't they use the new middle school boundaries (whatever they are) as starting points, and say, this MS boundary contains the following ES's, let's figure out how best to divide up the expected ES students feeding to this MS among these however many ES's.