Most, if not all, 2010-2011 Kindergarten Assignments were mailed out and received today. Along with that, I also have the first response from my Lottery FOIA with Unit 4; I originally asked for the entire spreadsheet, but they only gave me a summary. Hopefully more information is forthcoming.
Here is some of the summary information:
| TOTAL K | 710 | ||
| Pre Asg Retentions: | 19 | ||
| K Applicants: | 691 | ||
| CH 1 Pre Asg SP | 4 | ||
| CH 1 Lottery Asg | 537 | ||
| Total CH 1 Asg | 541 | 78.3% | |
| CH 2 Asg | 68 | 9.8% | |
| CH 3 Asg | 27 | 3.9% | |
| Total CH Asg | 636 | 92.0% | |
| Unassigned | 55 | 8.0% |
I do not know what all those fields mean, yet. I hope to find out soon. Of the 710 Kindergarten school assignments, the FIC recieved 691 during the March registration process. Of those 691, 78.3% received their first choice, 92% received at least one of their choices. I have to assume that the remaining 8% (55) are on a waiting list. Last year several were unassigned with NO waiting list, which seems just wrong.
As I work with Ms. Duckworth at the FIC (Family Information Center), we both agree that we very much would appreciate feedback from the community about the Lottery process, especially in the form of constructive criticism. I have said this before and I’ll say it again, I have been very impressed by Ms. Duckworth’s mentality that she wants to know how to make things better. And I believe 100% that she is genuine and sincere.
To that end, we are thinking it would be nice to have a “Customer Satisfaction Survey”. How many people would fill it out? We would invite parents and community members that have questions to come to the FIC with the confidence that they know their concerns will not only be listened to, but acted upon. I myself would go so far as to say that you could even voice those opinions/thoughts here and I’ll pass it on, but Unit 4 has not sanctioned this blog, so for the meantime I am merely a very independent voice. And perhaps it is best that I stay that way.
At our last meeting, Ms. Duckworth also mentioned the legal ramifications of me filing an FOIA and then posting information gleaned from that data here on this blog. She is going to talk to the School District’s attorney (one of many, from what I understand) and see what there is to see. I have no desire to burn bridges with Unit 4, but I also believe there is a lot of room for more transparency, and I hope we can find a way that best serves the community. Even if it means stepping on a couple toes, so be it.
24 April 2010 8:29 pm at 8:29 pm
I can agree that there are good people at Unit 4. In my experience, this goodness disappears when “the chips are down” or there is a problem to solve.
Administration is not interested in explaining themselves nor listening to ANY sort of criticism. I’ll wait and see how you experience the system once your interests and the districts diverge.
24 April 2010 8:37 pm at 8:37 pm
There is a problem right now – the FIC website does not address all issues that incoming parents have. I have raised these criticisms and Ms. Duckworth has responded positively. Although she has been swamped with Registrations and Hearings, she at least did make a small change to the FIC website already. And I have reason to believe she is willing to make further changes.
Perhaps when you say “Admiistration” you mean certain individuals? I have developed a pretty good relationship with several of the staff, both at the Mellon Center and the FIC, not to mention the BOE. As you say, it will be interesting to see if and how the chips change when the pressure is on.
To wit, however, I am very concerned that you have this perception. Please know that I want to walk the walk, not merely talk the talk. What constructive criticisms can you throw my way that I can chew on and incorporate into my own pursuits? Apparently, your interests have diverged from the district’s. Care to elaborate? I am looking for specifics, actionable items. Edumacate me! =)
24 April 2010 9:16 pm at 9:16 pm
I really feel cheated with the “school of choice” results. Here I explain why:
Personal demographic: Grad student + Air Force Officer. Both are Hispanic.
1 children which we would like more exposed to Spanish language given that she is so fluent in English.
Did our homework and our paperwork early.
Applied to Barkstall (first choice and proximity b school by 1.8 miles) Second choice was South Side which was still pretty close to where we live. Third choice was Washington mostly because we figured we are staying for one more year childwould benefit from hearing Spanish more often.
Results:
We got our third choice: Washington.
So then why do we feel cheated?
1. The day we submitted our paperwork we were told that since we spoke Spanish at home, our child needed to take a language exam regardless of language ability. We argued that our child didn’t had any problem with English whatsoever, that in fact we wanted child to speak Spanish but that child preferred English. We were told to come some days later to take the test. As expected, child didn’t had any problem at all, and got 100% on the test. That seemed to came as a surprise to the woman that demanded the test, she had an expression of utter unbelief.
2. When that same woman saw our choices, she told us that given her 9 years of experience in the school district we were not gonna get our first two choices. She never mentioned Booker T Washington as a problem. It seemed as if she was discouraging us for pursuing our options further! We had a lot of back and forth among ourselves trying to decide whether we should list or not Washington as our third choice as it seemed that they were pushing us toward it. I finally decided to leave it there.
I didn’t expected to be this angry when I got the results today. Don’t get me wrong. I know I lack direct experience with the school and that I should give it a try first. I am very committed to the public school system and I firmly believe in parents involvement at school. It is not the school but the fact that my child was labeled. If one of the goals is cultural and racial diversity, do they really needed to “export” a Hispanic child to a school where 44% of their students are Hispanic, 42% African American and only 7% white? The school is really far from where we live, 4.5 miles to be exact, while I have a year round calendar school that is only 1.8 miles from our house! We live in the same road Barkstall is located! And how much change there is between the school of choice and the system they had before if one school official can predict the outcome so clearly, a school official I should add, which doesn’t have anything to do with the “election process”?
I would greatly appreciate if anyone could tell me through this forum if I have other choices in the Champaign public school district right now for my daughter to reapply to other schools (ones that are at least closer to where we live).
24 April 2010 10:03 pm at 10:03 pm
DFlores,
I sent a private email to you expressing my concern and sympathies for your situation. I am making a public comment here that will differ slightly from my private email.
First off, I think your situation represents one of the downsides of the current “Controlled Choice” system and from a scientific point, it is important to study this. However, for the sake of other readers, my particular public response will deal with numbers, my private message was more personal and said nothing about numbers.
As you mentioned, BT Washington has very little White representation:
http://iirc.niu.edu/School.aspx?schoolID=090100040262020
Prior to last year’s lottery (2009-2010), Unit 4 used Race as a factor in the School lottery system; more specifically, it divided applicants between two classes, Black and non-Black. Thus, while there was a cap on how many African American students were allowed at each school, the resulting “non-African American” population was not controlled in any sense at all. Starting with last year’s lottery, Race was deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, hence Socio-Economic Status (SES) was used, and will be used going forward. You are right that it seems really absurd that, if the goal of Controlled Choice is to have a cultural and racial diversity, why does BT Washington have such a large over-representation of minorities, specifically African-American and Latino. From reading Dr. Michael Alve’s work, and speaking with him, I can tell you from personal experience that the goal of Controlled Choice is to make all schools in the district both Excellent and Equitable. It is my own personal opinion that there has been measurable progress to that end, but there is still quite a bit of room for more.
You seem to indicate that you live in an area that has no Proximity A to any schools, and a Proximity B to Barkstall. There are a number of areas within the Unit 4 District that have similar situations, and for this reason, a percentage of seats are reserved for residents that have Proximity B. I do not know if those seats are reserved for those that ONLY have Proximity B, or if they count for households that also have Proximity A at a different school. Regardless, choosing Barkstall would have pitted you against a number of other folks who qualified for Proximity B. It is my understanding, and I could be wrong, that you only qualify for the Proximity B reserved pool at your first choice, thus your 2nd choice (South Side) would be against all others, including Proximity A residents.
From what you described, it sounds like your Registration experience was downright horrible. That saddens me. Keep in mind that I am not officially affiliated with Unit 4 at all (other than now having a Kindergarten student myself next year). I highly recommend that you contact the Family Information Center and speak with Ms. Sandra Duckworth on this issue.
While you may feel otherwise, all is not lost. BT Washington is getting some nice upgrades in the very near future. Also, you have the option to get on the wait list at any school (so I understand). Lastly, you have the option to switch to a different school next year (going through the same lottery process and/or wait list).
I hope this helps. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.
26 April 2010 7:59 am at 7:59 am
DFlores, to address another question you had:
“And how much change there is between the school of choice and the system they had before if one school official can predict the outcome so clearly, a school official I should add, which doesn’t have anything to do with the “election process”?”
Based purely on historical numbers, I could have said the same thing – hopefully with more tact. =) For instance, let us look at last year’s numbers:
http://champaignunit4.wordpress.com/2010/02/05/kindergarten-lottery-data-mining-2009/
142 parents requested Barkstall [i]as their first choice[/i], yet only 70 total seats were available, thus it was “overchosen” by 72, or 51.5%. 56 parents chose South Side as a first choice, yet only 46 were assigned (of those 56). I could look further at the data to see about South Side as a 2nd choice, but the point is that the chances of getting South Side as a second choice are rather slim. It is my understanding that some schools, especially Barkstall and Bottenfield, typically are “overchosen”, thus the chances of getting in are automatically reduced based purely on numbers. I am puzzled why Unit 4 does not make this more public, especially during the time of registration – it seems a number of parents have very similar negative feelings when they are not given their first choice. It makes “Schools of Choice” sound very hypocritical.
I hope that helps. Still looking into your other questions.
26 April 2010 10:03 pm at 10:03 pm
My child is one of the 55 unassigned children. I live within 1.5 miles (priority A limits) of 5 elementary schools, and I was not assigned to any. It would be laughable if it wasn’t so serious. I was called with the schools that remained open after the sorting took place, but they were all outside my priority A area, and were underperforming according to the only sources of information I have available (test scores on Unit 4 web site, greatschools.org, and yes, I understand that numbers are not everything). I chose not to accept any of them, and I don’t know why any parent would if they have a choice. We make barely more money than the national average, and will not be able to afford private school tuition when both our children come of school age. We are counting on the public school system, and have put our hopes for the waiting list for our local school that performs well.
Looking back at the information you’ve posted (found by me after the sorting took place), I can see how we ended up unassigned, but the rules of the game that allowed it to happen need to be changed because children need to have the right to attend a local school, especially when blessed with 5 of them near my house.
Before discussing potential improvements, I think it would be instructive to know who these 55 unassigned children are. Are they mostly disadvantaged students from the north end whose schools are underperforming, and they are looking for an improved school experience? If so, more places need to be found for them (perhaps reserving 18% of spaces for non-priority A students in a school is insufficient?). Or, are the 55 mostly affluent children from the south end whose schools are good but overchosen, and they are being forced out of their local schools due to their average or higher socioeconomic status and being asked to go to underperforming schools outside their priority A area in the name of diversifying (so much for choosing your school). If so, perhaps reserving 82% for priority A children is insufficient. I think it would be instructive to know this, and if this has been an unaddressed trend for a number of years. This seems to be a direct mechanism for increasing the flight of higher SES students to private schools, and a drain on test scores in the public schools.
This leads me to my second question. Who chose 82% for priority A children, and why? Are the remaining 18% going to be sufficient to increase diversity to acceptable levels under most or all circumstances? If there is not a good reason for choosing 82%, then perhaps my comments above about changing the percentage need to be considered.
As far as suggestions go, I would submit the following:
1) Perhaps the 82/18 split needs to vary, depending on whether diversity goals are met within the 82% from the priority A area. If diversity goals are met, then perhaps the school should continue to fill with students from the priority A area until all requests are met, then priority B children can fill the rest.
2) In my case, reserving 82% of desks for priority A children is insufficient to meet the need.
2) It seems to me that, if one does not get their first choice, then a child should get priority A for their second and third choices, at least up to the 82% limit (if not higher). Indeed, if none of the choices are available, and the child becomes unassigned, then perhaps the child should be assigned a school within the priority A area if any seats are still available within the 82% limit, prior to the time that priority B students are allowed.
3) All the very helpful information you’ve given in this and the previous posting should be summarized annually and handed out to parents as a guide to strategy to choosing.
I’d like to think that if I strategized better (if I’d have known all this beforehand), I would have been assigned to a neighborhood school. However, your data from last year suggests that all of my priority A area schools were overchosen, so perhaps I would not have been assigned to any, even if I chose the lowest ranked school in my priority A area (which I did not…who would?). That suggests strongly that 82% is insufficient for the need in my area. It also seems to mean that additional schools or classrooms need to be built in my area (south of University) to accommodate neighborhood children, plus those priority B students who want to attend. That, of course, is a larger issue that calls into question the ultimate solution to diversification, but I’d rather not get into that because I would like to focus on my current situation and the poor experience we’ve had in this year’s sorting.
Thanks for the opportunity to ask questions, and I hope my situation provides some illustration of the room and mechanisms for improvement.
27 April 2010 4:37 am at 4:37 am
Charles,
I just wanted to thank you for providing needed transparency to the school system. I grew up here and had a great experience with a “neighborhood” based public school system, so it saddens me to see so many families who would truly be advocates of public schooling and active in the classrooms turn to private schools. I try to understand the reasons behind it but can’t help but think this system is causing more exclusion than inclusion at the expense of all of the kids in the system. I hear the frustrations of families continually and watch them turn to private schooling on a regular basis or move to smaller communities where there kids will be in neighborhood schools.
Add to this the rise in childhood obesity and the fact that we are taking away opportunities to walk to school, which also causes concern.
I don’t pretend to be an expert in any of this, but here are some thoughts . . . Why don’t we focus the dollars we spend for this controlled choice system on the underchosen schools and allow parents to choose them for specific reasons . . . true specialities and expertise in arts, sports, etc. As I said before, I support neighborhood schools, but if there was a well-defined, specialized program in which I felt would be of benefit to my kids due to their interests, I might decide to pursue it.
Why don’t we encourage more mixed socioeconomic housing within the community? Many larger cities are developing communities that reserve a portion of housing for those who are economically disadvantaged. This would assist in balancing our neighborhoods more holistically and not just through the school system.
One more random thought, unrelated to the controlled choice system, why don’t more public schools require uniforms similar to what Barkstall enforces? It seems very economical for families and a great way to take the focus away from material items such as clothing.
Just some thoughts, and again, thank you so much for your dedication and insights. I found your site very helpful as I entered the lottery process.
27 April 2010 6:15 am at 6:15 am
Our child is one of the 55 unassigned children. We live in Savoy, have an income that was the highest on the scale while I have a J.D. and my wife has a Masters. Our school choices were Barkstall, Bottenfield, and South Side. We have been placed 4th on the waiting list at Barkstall and are hoping we can get our child in there. Otherwise, we are supposed to send our child to one of the schools on the north side of town. If it comes down to that we will opt for private school even though we don’t think we can afford it. Doesn’t seem right IMO.
27 April 2010 7:17 am at 7:17 am
You all are raising excellent points, and I am humbled because I cannot provide any satisfactory answers at this point. I am pointing these issues out to Unit 4 Administration and I will press them for answers.
In my opinion, there has been a lack of open discussion about these issues. I am not in a position to lay this responsibility at the feet of any one person or any one group. But I do think it is going to take some maturity and hard work at active listening on both sides.
What I observe is that we have two distinct groups of involved parties; one is in charge, the administrators, the overseers, the researchers, the other is the participant, the parents. I almost said that the “community” is a participant, but what we have to remember is that the ones in charge are also community – this is very crucial! I also do not know what group teachers fall into. I lean towards putting them in the participant group.
I make the distinction between these two groups because I think (and I could be wrong) it is necessary to see how these groups are supposed to work together. Sometimes it seems like these groups are at odds, and there is no good reason for that (many bad reasons, though).
I have heard a lot of parents express the desire to go to a neighborhood school, or whichever school is closest. Or, if there is this nebulous “choice”, why not “choose” to go to the school with the highest AYP? These seem like very rational, very logical, very “normal” thoughts. Who wouldn’t?!? And thus the crux of the problem. There are only 69 seats at the school with the highest AYP – who gets to go to that one? And let’s be realistic, unless there is a really bizarre phenomenon, there will always be a rank ordering of schools by AYP. So you want to go to the school that is closest – if Barkstall has the least walking distance from your home, how will it seat you and all your neighbors?
Please know that I ask those questions not to defend Unit 4 (or anyone else), but mostly as rhetoric. I truly do understand and sympathize with the frustration of parents who are trying to make good (ie, the Best) choices for their precious children. I have a child entering Kindergarten. “I feel ya mon”.
My biggest concern is that there is still quite a disparity between various facilities even after so many decades. Garden Hills and BT Washington have been long overdue in getting an overhaul; fresh materials, technology, much-needed maintenance. Where the Consent Decree failed us, in my opinion, is that it divided the community. If we had a galvanizing force instead, I think we would have seen rapid improvements not only to the facilities, but to the perceived quality of the underchosen schools. Keep in mind that I hold that all the schools offer excellent, top-notch education despite the handicaps of cramped space and short staff.
I dearly hope we can find opportunities for more discussion. It was my hope that the Education Excellence Equity (EEE) Committee would have been the catalyst for these discussions, but so far I am disappointed. Going to have to be one of those “grassroots” things. *grin*
Please keep the comments, complaints, thoughts, etc, coming. I value them, and will continue to work with Unit 4.
27 April 2010 8:58 am at 8:58 am
Let me also add that our child is African American and we just moved down from Chicago. At no time in the process did anyone explain that our top three choices were schools that were traditionally oversubscribed and that essentially it made no sense to list Bottenfield 2nd and Southside 3rd. I learned that from reading this forum.
27 April 2010 9:19 am at 9:19 am
Thanks for any information you may be able to obtain from Unit4 about the 55 unassigned kids and other issues.
You raise an interesting point about the elusive “choice” that we are given. For those who are at the low end of the SES ladder, they can choose any higher-ranked school at no cost to them. If they don’t get it, their local underselected school (which may be a perfectly good school, as you point out) will still have availability. Personally, I think that is good that there is no penalty to them for reaching for a “better” school.
But for those higher in SES, you cannot really choose to go to a school outside your priority A area. If you tried to choose the “best” school in town, but you don’t live in its priority A area, you will not be selected due to limited places for non-priority A applicants (and the few that exist will be given to low SES students). This choice costs you your priority A status, and you will not get into any other overselected (i.e. “good”) local school because remaining places are reserved for lower SES children. You are left with underchosen schools outside your priority A area and a long way from home. So, choice for many is simply a mirage. Indeed, with my experience, my modest SES appears to have left us out of ANY of the local schools, suggesting that there are not enough desks in my local schools (at least, desks that are not being reserved for other purposes, such as diversification). For clarity, I chose the closest school to my house as our first choice, which is a good, decently-ranked school in our priority A area, but not the “best” school in town according to rankings. I didn’t want to take a chance of not getting a good, local school by trying to get into the “best” school. If I received assignment to my good local school, I would not be upset at not being allowed to choose the “best” school.
Ironically, I now know of two minority/multiracial families who tried to get into the same overselected school south of University, and both were turned away because they had too high of a SES (and neither are wealthy). We are unassigned, and the other is now assigned to a school north of University. Using SES as a proxy for race seems to be a failure. It is penalizing any minorities who have made it to middle class.
After this experience, I feel fleeced, like the first time I played poker. I might have known the basic rules, but I didn’t know any strategy and didn’t have the knowledge or data to play the game well (and no one else at the table wanted to share any information, because it got in the way of them getting what they wanted, which was diversification in this case). And ignorance has a high cost.
I don’t pretend to know anything about their particular computer model, but I know about computer models. The unassigned kids should be called the “error” of the program, and a nearly 10% error is much too high. The input parameters need to be adjusted to minimize the error and the program run again, in an iterative manner, until an optimal solution is found. There is no evidence that they tried to maximize giving each parent one of their 3 choices, likely because adjusting the input parameters would likely mean reducing resources being used for consent decree purposes. But, can someone justify the amount of resources being reserved for diversification? Is the right amount being reserved (too little or too much)? Will the results of excluding 55 kids from their chosen local schools benefit the school district and community, or cost it? We need to balance the costs and benefits, and I don’t see anyone adding anything up and showing it to us.
27 April 2010 2:53 pm at 2:53 pm
One more thing about this issue. I previously mentioned that being excluded from my local school called into question the methods of diversifying. I’d like to expand on that a little, because it suggests a reason why nothing has been done about this issue.
Given a Choice of schools, many or most people will choose a local school, almost no matter what its performance. The social aspects of knowing neighborhood children, ease of attendance, comfort level, being in the majority rather than the minority, and other issues will favor this choice.
However, some students will choose a “better” performing school, many of which are south of University, and the Choice program encourages lower SES students to make this choice by way of its rules. I think most people would encourage people to migrate to “better” schoold, because it allows motivated students a chance for a better education and broadens the ethnic experiences of all students, which most of us recognize as a good thing. However, this leaves empty seats north of University, and strains the availability of seats south of University. Therefore, Unit 4 needs a counter-flow of students to fill those seats and take pressure off the schools south of University. They try to encourage northward movement, by concentrating all gifted classrooms north of University, as well as making the STEM school there shortly, building new buildings, and other measures. However, I suspect this is of limited effectiveness, for the reasons I gave above. Many or most people prefer a neighborhood school, no matter how it performs.
The current system appears to squeeze a number of children out of the overchosen schools in their neighborhood to make way for these lower SES students. This year, 55 children were not given a space yet (unallocated), which is almost an entire elementary school of children. This means that, unless they move away or go to private school, their only choice is to migrate to underchosen schools, and all but one school that still has seats is north of University. In essence, this is forced relocation of students to accommodate Choice. I expect that the Administration knows this, and has to rely on it to balance schools north of University. Given that it only happens to about 10% of the children, is this why there has been no outcry and no alterations to the selection process?
Can’t we make more seats south of University to accommodate those who wish for a “better” school without hurting the neighborhood children who wish to attend their local school? Why does this have to be a zero-sum game, where one person has to lose for another to gain? This is why diversity and integration get a bad rap. Change the methods, and you change the opinions about it. Can’t we maximize the number of children given one of their 3 choices? Or at least another local school, since we can only choose 3 (for those who didn’t read my previous posts, I have 5 schools in my priority A area and did not get assigned to any of them)?
While I may not know enough about the sorting program to know how to fix it, we should give the program’s creator the direction to make the changes that need to happen. My poor experience should not have to be repeated next year. And how many times has that been said in the past 10 years of the Controlled Choice program?
27 April 2010 9:19 pm at 9:19 pm
I agree with Jon about the lack of transparency in schools being overchosen. The official presentation gives the rules on proximity and the SES, but no information on historic rates of application to particular schools. I did get information on the likelihood of getting into a given school from a FIC employee when I asked. I have proximity to Barkstall and that was my first choice. But I knew that Barkstall was the most overchosen and wanted a solid second choice. I asked about Bottenfield and Westview and was told that those fill up with first choicers. I ended up listing those two schools as my second and third choices anyway after being pretty disappointed with the Robeson tour.
Another thing I am noticing in these posts is some misunderstanding of how the system works (e.g. your proximity A “power” only works on your first choice, not to your second or third choices.) And I think Proximity B refers to no school within 1.5 miles, not to the closest school. (Although I double checked the FIC website and one spot said no schools and another link described it as outside 1.5 miles and closest school).
Obviously people commenting on this blog care very much about the process and if they are misunderstanding it, then there are communication problems between the district and the parents.
27 April 2010 9:42 pm at 9:42 pm
Elizabeth,
Just out of curiosity, why did you find your tour of Robeson disappointing? My child was assigned to Robeson. I would love to hear more from other parents of incoming kindergartners on why they chose the schools they did.
Thanks.
27 April 2010 10:00 pm at 10:00 pm
Good stuff, keep it coming.
Let me first say that my personal observation, after working with many of the Unit 4 Admin staff, is that they are simply very very busy; whenever I have talked with Ms. Duckworth, Ms. Norris and Ms. Shepperd, they have all been very open, attentive and quite open. I think there is a perception (a legitimate one, none the less) that the Administration overall is not forthcoming. I personally think that is a result of how Unit 4 is not taking advantage of information distribution systems in the 21st century like websites or facebook, or even general purpose discussion boards. Which is what I am pressing the FIC to get more involved in – putting more information online to not only react to parent’s concerns and questions, but to be proactive and answer them up front.
On that note, please please contact the FIC, particularly Ms. Sandra Duckworth with these very good questions and comments. She really does want to hear these things, and if you all contact her directly, it lends weight to my own words when I tell her things like “I hear lots of folks saying….”.
Factiod on Proximity A:
http://www.champaignschools.org/FIC/Schools%20of%20Choice%20Brochure%202009.pdf
If we live within walking distance of a school,
will we be guaranteed assignment to that
No. However, you will receive a proximity
preference in the school assignment process.
Students living within the 1.5 mile walk limit
(Proximity A) will be given preference over
students outside the walk limit. For schools with
a Proximity B zone (more than 1.5 miles from any
school, Proximity B priority school is school
closest to home mileage wise) after Choice
guidelines and programmatic needs have been
met, the remaining seats will be assigned to nonsibling
students based on the 82% Proximity A
and 18% Proximity B guidelines.
Basically, you get one Proximity A school (if you live within 1.5 “walking” miles) and/or one Proximity B school (the closest school over 1.5 “walking” miles).
Jim, I do not know how familiar you are with the history of the Consent Decree, but the whole reason that got kicked off was because the “better” schools were in the south, and the African Americans were being shipped like crazy away from their majority minority local schools to the newer, more “white” schools in the south (note the quotes, these are broad stroke generalizations). One of the stated goals of the Consent Decree was to reduce busing, but what it really did was to bus everyone “equally”, with a increase in net busing.
Of the 55 children who were assigned, the stated policy is that they are assigned to a waiting list of the First Choice school. I am hoping that when I get the comprehensive data from my FOIA, it will help explain that a little better. If it does not, I will be sure to ask specifically about waiting list information.
Jon, what you speak of is a huge communication problem, and I am pressing the FIC to address that. I started bugging the FIC only a couple months ago with the overly optimistic hopes that I could instigate a full-blown disclosure of objective data and statistics on the FIC website by the time the 2010 lottery kicked off. That obviously did not happen.
Keep in mind that I want to foster a “us with them” mindset – I very much do not want to entice a “us versus them” environment. The Unit 4 staff who know the answers and are willing to share them are not necessarily savvy with databases and all forms of electronic communication – one of my goals is to show them how much it would help to get information published. I do think that there is an unhealthy amount of stress and thin ice during the registration, and I have that on my list of concerns to hold the FIC accountable to.
Also, know that if any one of you desire to author posts on this forum, just drop me a note; I believe that is a good way to encourage ownership and participation. I do not want to give the impression that I am running some kind of late night show. *grin*
28 April 2010 8:15 am at 8:15 am
Hi Charles. Indeed, I am aware one only gets priority A status for the first choice. As I hoped I had made clear in my overly lengthy posts above, this is one of the rules of the game that prevents parents of children attending “good” schools from choosing the “best” school (because you lose your priority to get into the “good” but overchosen school). This is a disincentive to Choice that is specifically built into the system to prevent even more overselection of the “best” schools. While I am satisfied with my child attending a “good” local school rather than the “best” school, Choice provides us with no real “choice” if we can’t choose something better. On top of that, it requires that we now need to strategize and fight just to stay in our “good” local school.
Given that I have 5 schools to choose from within 1.5 miles of me, I feel especially fleeced that I didn’t manage to get into any of them. In the vein of offering constructive criticism, I am suggesting that the rule needs to be changed so that you get priority A status with ANY of your top 3 schools, thus increasing the odds you can get into a local school. Indeed, if a child is not placed in any of the 3 chosen schools, but more are within 1.5 miles of home, that the child be given priority A status for those schools as well if they did not get any of their top 3 choices.
The overall concern is why 55 kids (about 10% of the lottery) didn’t get any of their top 3 choices and were not assigned to any school, and how that can be corrected. Who those kids are and where they live will tell a lot who is being disadvantaged by the current rules, and how those rules need to be changed. It seems that if more desks were allocated to priority A children, my child would be attending a good local school.
Again, does anyone know how they decided that only 82% of desks would go to priority A children? Is this enough to meet the goals of the Choice program, or is it too much? I just want an accounting of how the process is going, and if that percentage needs to be reexamined. Is that too much to ask?
28 April 2010 8:49 am at 8:49 am
Though it is true that there are “good people” at Mellon and FIC, I’m not sure I see how that is relevant. None of us are looking to eat BBQ with these people, we expect them to do their job. That’s why we’re interacting with them.
Good but incompetent people get to slide more than jerks but in the end, being “not necessarily savvy with databases and all forms of electronic communication” is a handicap to their effectiveness, not an invitation for coddling.
If we are talking about grass roots then I would like to see specific metrics that can measure how the district is doing in areas that the local community cares about. I am happy to help come up with them or to become involved in a local discussion to make this happen.
My kids go to a school that did not make AYP this year. That doesn’t mean it is a worse school than it was last year when they did make AYP. There are factors out of the school’s control, the most significant of them being that non-english speaking students were forced to take the test in English for the first time last year. We missed AYP by four students. There are other changes to the program as well, like how students with IEPs (special ed) take the test. Lastly, the standard goes up every year so that if 75% of the students made the grade last year, it will take 82.5% of the students to pass the test this year for the school to make AYP. Much of that has to do with a law that is changing soon (or so we hear) rather than the quality of the school year to year. One last point about AYP that I am stealing from another source is that AYP is the MINIMUM. I don’t want my school or my kids to just get grades of C, D, and F. I want As.
Talk to teachers and you will find that for all the “good ideas” that are floating around, the administration is more of a hindrance to educating students than it is a help. Of course the bosses want documentation, parent contact logs, teachers to collaborate with one another and more. The reality is that student engagement suffers when a teacher’s workload is too high. Adding demands to satisfy bean counters without removing other responsibilities is not helping our children.
29 April 2010 10:32 am at 10:32 am
Ali-I don’t want to dump on Robeson too much so I will describe my impressions from all my school visits. My impressions of the schools are based on one visit during the official visit times. I visited Barkstall and Robeson during morning visit times, Westview during an afternoon visit time, and Bottenfield and Carrie Busey during the evening time.
Since you asked about Robeson, I will start with that. A few external negatives-the earlier start time (8 ish), location in a neighborhood not on the way to work for my husband or I, and Robeson is the largest school with 4 strands of kindergarten. The tour was lead by the principal. No current parents or teachers spoke to us during the tour. The principal did not have very much to say about what made the school great or distinguished the school from any other. She was happy to answer questions but didn’t seem to have a strong vision for the school. She seemed nice but I had a hard time seeing her resolving conflicts or being a leader.
Barkstall is 2 blocks from my house so it was an obvious favorite. The Barkstall tour was lead by the principal with a large chunk of time dedicated to Q and A with a veteran K teacher. The principal was definitely in charge of the tour. The differences in the school were described by the principal–uniform dress code, balanced calendar, highest test scores last year. The time with a teacher gave parents a chance to ask questions directly to the person who is in the classroom. The building is new and has its own gym.
The Westview tour was led by a teacher with a power point presentation by two older students and a Q and A session with a K teacher. Two current parents were also on hand to answer questions. The principal at Westview went along on the tour but let the staff do the talking. The principal is highly regarded in the district. Westview also has an early start time (7:45). The building is old and needs an upgrade.
The night tours were a little different. No chance to get the vibe with the kids in the building.
The assistant principal was in charge at Carrie Busey (principal was visiting her new school). Another parent had some questions about some of the stats about truancy that the asst principal did a nice job answering. The move to Savoy makes this slightly less desirable as then it would be out of the way for going to work. The teachers were in their classrooms and were happy to chat with parents.
At Bottenfield, parents led the tours, the principal greeted people and the teachers were in the library to answer questions. I had a very nice discussion with a veteran K teacher there.
The tours were helpful in making a decision, but again, I want to stress that external things also influenced our decision. There were definitely different approaches to the tours in each building. The decision to include parents and teachers (and students) said something about the attitude at the schools.
My choices were Barkstall, Bottenfield, and Westview.
I would be interested to hear other people’s visit experiences.
5 May 2010 9:27 am at 9:27 am
Jim,
Thanks again for your thoughts and comments. To summarize, you are suggesting that something be changed about the current process in an effort to make sure no child is unassigned? Or is that too general? Perhaps you are saying the process be changed to give preference to a local school if none of the top three are available?
I think that is a good idea. So let us take you for example. You mentioned that you have five schools within 1.5 miles – should the system simply loop alphabetically over each local school to see if it has seats? While address data is fed into the program, I have not seen evidence that “walking miles” are inputted.
Your last set of questions are important as well. In fact, I just sent a note to Ms. Duckworth because the FIC states that those numbers are open for reevaluation each year, but I have not heard that anyone actually ever questioned it or suggested something different. The good news is that at least on paper, the Administration is open to discussing new thresholds.
5 May 2010 9:29 am at 9:29 am
Elizabeth, I wrote briefly about our “school tour” experience:
http://champaignunit4.wordpress.com/2010/02/25/comparing-the-schools/
21 July 2010 6:54 pm at 6:54 pm
I find it very disturbing that everyone is not assigned a Priority A school! As someone who will have a child entering the Unit 4 system in a few years I find this very disturbing! My neighborhood is without a Priority A assignment. Where does this leave me? In addition, why does this system follow different rules for different schools? Uniforms at Barkstall and nowhere else…year round school at Kenwood and Barkstall…I find that absurd! I understand Barkstall and Kenwood are the only ones with air conditioning at the time, but why even go with a nontraditional calender then. And why can’t all students wear uniforms or not?
22 July 2010 7:34 am at 7:34 am
Sonia,
I know what you mean; prior to Carrie Busey moving, we were in the same boat. I am aware of several neighborhoods that have no priority, which is what prompted me to contact Unit 4 and Dr. Alves directly about making sure everyone has a Priority A assignment. Dr. Alves responded, and you read a little bit of our correspondence here:
http://champaignunit4.wordpress.com/2010/06/29/response-from-dr-alves-re-unassigned-students-%E2%80%93-part-ii/
There are some things which make certain schools unique; it is my observation that uniqueness, within moderation, is encouraged. It is also my observation that not all parents want their children to wear uniforms. That is probably a contentious issue and will be filled with subjective opinions.
To bring things down to earth, let me say that, in my limited experience, I believe all the Unit 4 elementary schools offer a quality education. I do not believe your child will graduate 5th grade with a “bad” education. Now the experience, on the other hand, is a much different beast altogether.
May I ask what in particular you are concerned about as your child gets closer and closer to school age? I cannot promise to have an answer (and maybe you do not even want an answer), but I can at least promise to hear you out.
4 May 2011 6:02 pm at 6:02 pm
Elizabeth,
Trust your instincts. The staff and parents at Robeson may not have spoken to you due to the overall dissatisfaction with the lack of leadership in the building and a poorly rated principal.