Registration Dashboard information on March 29th

Making the kindergarten lottery data look pretty

Or in other words, “visualization”

 

I have put together two different sets of interactive charts (using two different software vendors) to put a fresh spin on the “Schools of Choice” data. Please note, I do not yet have the 2013 data; these charts are for previous years. I am merely preparing to make some pretty pictures when I finally get the 2013 data. :)

 

2012_overchosen_google_thumbnail

Via Google MotionChart

2012_overchosen_highcharts_thumbnail

Via HighCharts

PS – the one to the right has a cool “time-lapse” feature; look for the “play” button.

 

 

First taste of 2013 “Schools of Choice” data

So far, Unit 4 has only provided the summary page – I have followed up and asked for the complete set of data.

{Note: I had to type this by hand because the version delivered by Unit 4 was a picture of a printout. :( Also, Alves called School #19 SS, which was just wrong}

Spreadsheet version: 2013 kindergarten lottery summary

Code school program capacity assigned low ses as % low ses non low a % non lo available seats
9 BA RE 86 86 39 45.35% 47 54.65% 0
9 BA SP 6 6 4 66.67% 2 33.33% 0
10 BO RE 78 78 29 37.18% 49 62.82% 0
10 BO SP 8 7 6 85.71% 1 14.29% 1
10 BO ESL 6 6 2 33.33% 4 66.67% 0
11 CB RE 77 74 26 35.14% 48 64.86% 3
11 CB SP 9 9 6 66.67% 3 33.33% 0
11 CB ESL 6 2 0 0.00% 2 100.00% 4
12 ST RE 51 37 31 83.78% 6 16.22% 14
12 ST SP 3 3 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 0
12 ST ESL 15 9 6 66.67% 3 33.33% 6
13 DH RE 67 34 22 64.71% 12 35.29% 33
13 DH SP 2 2 1 50.00% 1 50.00% 0
14 GH RE 46 40 30 75.00% 10 25.00% 6
14 GH SP 8 3 3 100.00% 0 0.00% 5
14 GH ESL 15 12 10 83.33% 2 16.67% 3
14 GH BL 20 20 20 100.00% 0 0.00% 0
15 KW RE 68 52 38 73.08% 14 26.92% 16
15 KW SP 1 1 1 100.00% 0 0.00% 0
16 RO RE 40 40 20 50.00% 20 50.00% 0
16 RO SP 6 6 2 33.33% 4 66.67% 0
16 RO BL 20 5 5 100.00% 0 0.00% 15
17 SS RE 42 42 16 38.10% 26 61.90% 0
17 SS SP 4 4 2 50.00% 2 50.00% 0
18 WA RE 61 57 19 33.33% 38 66.67% 4
18 WA SP 2 2 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 0
18 WA ESL 6 5 5 100.00% 0 0.00% 1
19 WV RE 45 45 23 51.11% 22 48.89% 0
19 WV SP 9 7 2 28.57% 5 71.43% 2
19 WV ESL 15 15 13 86.67% 2 13.33% 0
Totals RE 76
SP 8
ESL 14
BL 15
Assigned 709 386 54.44% 323 45.56%
Unassigned 42 2 4.76% 40 95.24%
K Students 751 388 51.66% 363 48.34%

quick Schools of Choice update

re: http://www.champaignschools.org/news/news_view.php?action=view&news_type=press_release&id_news=833

Parents of incoming kindergarten students who registered during the month of March should receive their kindergarten assignment in the next few days, as letters were mailed the evening of April 26. This year, 85.0% of students who registered received their first choice assignment.*
While last year’s kindergarten class was the largest in Unit 4 history topping out over 860 students, kindergarten registration for 2013-2014 is on track to meet this year’s projection of 800 kindergarten students. In anticipation of the projected enrollment for next year’s Kindergarten classes, three bubble classrooms have been added Bottenfield, Barkstall, and Carrie Busey. These classrooms have been added in order to avoid exceeding the District’s classroom capacity, set for 2013-2014 at 23 students.

This year, 94.2% of all students registered received one of their top five choices.** Family Information Center staff members are contacting families of the 42 students who did not receive one of their top five choices. They will continue to work with these families so that each child may be assigned a seat as soon as possible and those families are offered seats on the waitlists at each of their top five schools should a seat become available.

Schools of Controlled Choice – Historical Assignment Statistics

Percent Receiving First Choice Assignment*
09-10 – 84.2% received their first choice assignment
10-11 – 78.3% received their first choice assignment
11-12 – 85.4% received their first choice assignment
12-13 – 89.1% received their first choice assignment
13-14 – 85.0% received their first choice assignment

Percent Receiving One of Top Five Choices**
09-10 – 91.9% received an assignment
10-11 – 92% received an assignment
11-12 – 95.4% received an assignment
12-13 – 95.4% received an assignment
13-14 – 94.2% received an assignment

 

I have requested the full suite of SoC data (as in previous years). I have also asked for an update on the SoC RFP. I am curious why the percentage of folks being unassigned went up slightly.

Special board meeting tonight, update on Schools of Choice RFP

Tonight is a special Special Board Meeting. Occasionally the Board is called in to deal with one of these issues:

  • 120/2(c)(1) Employee appointments, employment, compensation, dismissals, complaints
  • 120/2(c)(2) Negotiations
  • 120/2(c)(5) Property Acquisition/Lease/Purchase
  • 120/2(c)(8) Emergency Security Procedures
  • 120/2(c)(9) Student Discipline
  • 120/2(c)(11) Actual/Potential Litigation
  • 120/2(c)(16) Self-Evaluation, practices and procedures or professional ethics when meeting with a representative of a statewide association of which the public body is a member
  • 120/2(c)(21) Closed Meeting Minutes Discussion/Review

 

What I am torn about is that I think they are technically abiding by OMA, but they are not disclosing as much information as they possibly can. For instance, I have since learned that the meeting was specifically called for 120/2(c)(9) Student Discpipline. Why is that not mentioned on board docs? The only reason I have right now is that it is not required (not by OMA nor by Policy). I get it that it is the “easy” thing to do to announce all the possibilities for Executive Session “just in case”, but I sincerely wonder, is that the best way?

 

Here is the flip side. What if I just shut up about this? I have to question myself, is my pestering of the Board in this manner productive in any way? I really don’t know. I hear both sides; some of you like what I am doing, some of you think I am a hindrance and an obstruction. As always, I am glad there are differences of opinion – I highly value that! But what good is my question-asking really doing? That is what I am searching for right now.

 

On that note, I recently asked about the progress with the Schools of Choice (SoC) RFP. From the school attorney, Mr. Tom Lockman:

I have been working with District staff on the Choice RFP and am comfortable with where it stands at this point.  The District is planning to follow the same schedule as last year in terms of issuing the RFP.  This will allow us to have gone all the way through the selection, determination and notification processes to determine if there is anything the District feels needs to be added or changed to the existing language based on how things go.  If you do have additional thoughts beyond what was shared at our first meeting which you wish to share, please feel free to email me.  Thanks.

 

I told Mr. Lockman at “our first meeting” that I had at least two bottom lines (sometimes you just can’t have one *grin*):

  • make a system that is intuitive and garners a positive experience from all who interact with it
  • we don’t waste taxpayers dollars (which I fully believe we have been doing for many years)

 

So again, I wonder about my effectiveness. Is it worthwhile for me to raise my voice and become a “squeaky wheel”? Or what would happen if I just turned my attention elsewhere? I really really want to hunt this down. But at what cost?

 

For my part, I want to see the RFP; I want to make sure we stop sending money to Massachusetts; I would love to have the software solution be handled locally. But I personally do not need these things. My question then becomes, what is best for all of us? That I do not know.

 

Tom is no stranger to the Schools of Choice saga; just a couple years ago, he was instrumental in writing some enhancements like going from 3 to 5 choices (5 was a compromise, we wanted more), and I think helped to spur the video and other little things that have slightly improved this beast. One of my options is to just trust Tom and see where this goes.

Unit 4 online registration being turned off at 8:am Thursday, March 28th

EDIT: I said Friday, but I meant Thursday. Sorry!

This was a little bit of a surprise, especially for anyone waiting for the last moment. :) If you want to do your registration online, do it before 8:am!!

http://www.champaignschools.org/news/news_view.php?action=view&news_type=press_release&id_news=776

The final day of the Schools of Controlled Choice registration period will end tomorrow, March 28, 2013 at 7 p.m.

Parents beginning their registration online will need to come to the Family Information Center by 7 p.m. tomorrow to complete their applications and verify residency. If families do not complete this final step of verifying residency in person by tomorrow’s deadline, they will not be included in the assignment process. Families can also complete all of the necessary paperwork in person at the Family Information Center.

To reduce the number of incomplete applications, we will de-activate the online registration form tomorrow morning, March 28 at 8 a.m. to encourage parents to visit the Family Information Center on this final day. We believe this will help families ensure their applications are complete.

Since tomorrow is the last day of the registration period, we will have additional staff on hand until the Family Information Center closes at 7 p.m.

Wrapping up the March Registration

As of 8:20 am, the Unit registration “dashboard” showed that 534 parents had submitted applications and that the required paperwork had been processed – I suspect there are still a large number of parents who still need to file paperwork and/or wait for it to be processed. But still, with only one day left, it seems like a long way to go ’till we get to the expected 800 ballpark.

 

A reader has made the following comment:

“[The FIC]  said that they had contacted about 100 people who had registered at least partially online but have not been in to the FIC.  Some were not aware of the need to come in, others just hadn’t made it in yet, and others were purposefully waiting and watching the numbers to make their decision (I don’t know why when you can change your selections through the 28th).”

 

According to the dashboard this morning, only two slots are at or over capacity; the Garden Hills Bilingual program (20 out of 20) and Westview (56 out of 54). Which is a bit interesting, considering the history of Choice in the past (2012, 2011). Still, we have a few hundred more the district is expecting, which will dramatically change the existing picture. But …. only one day left*.

 

We will check back tomorrow to see what things look like.

 

* “one day left” is essentially only for “priority” selections; parents can still register and choose schools after March 28th, but they will effectively be placed on an ad hoc waiting list. Obviously, if the school is underchosen, the waiting list is empty. :) My guess is that, if we assume the dashboard to be an accurate, real-time count (a HUGE assumption), then a ton of parents will be registering after March 28th and causing all kinds of fun for the FIC.

Registration Dashboard: The school selections are now a lot more open

unit4-dashboard  First, go here: http://choice.champaignschools.org/onlineforms2013/firstchoice.aspx

Yes, Unit 4 finally has a good (ie, decent) look at registration numbers. Armed with this knowledge (for those whom take advantage of it – not everyone will), I can see two things happening:

  1. Some parents will want to “rush” to be first on the list (which is not counted at all – first or last gets the same priority), some parents will tarry until the end of March to see what the numbers look like. I am betting more will wait (of those that look at the dashboard).
  2. Parents will see some “overchosen” schools and make different choices. I think that is a good thing – it increases the chances of getting the school you select for everyone involved.

The tricky part will be “is this too much information?” Will it lead to more confusion with statistics, proximity and priorities? Will the not-so-tech-savvy utilize this tool much by asking folks at the Family Information Center (FIC)?

Overall, I think it is a great thing; I have been looking forward to this information for several years. It is encouraging that the school district sees this as important as well.

Also, the vendor (enrolledU and his software partners) have fixed a number of problems, including the issue with seeing my child’s name, but at the cost of removing the notification of a sibling priority altogether. Probably safer than sorry, but I hope they meet a compromise next time. Also, they fixed an issue with picking the program which I had not noticed before.

PS – I still prefer pictures (ie, a pie chart). Maybe that’s just me.

I’ll be at the Choice Community Forum tonight

The school district is holding their second community forum on the Choice process tonight at Carrie Busey in Savoy. I’ll be there – my goal is to observe how the community forum is being run, what information they share with new parents, and how parents react to the information. Maybe we will even get down to the nitty gritty details of numbers. :)

 

http://www.champaignschools.org/news/news_files/2013-01-04_Community%20Forum%20Flyer.pdf

 

Tuesday, February 5, 2013 6:00 p.m. Carrie Busey Elementary – 304 Prairie Rose Lane – Savoy
(Parking lot is located on the east side of the building)

Updates from the schools

428048_429237587144295_831096359_n

The first of three “Community Forums” on the Kindergarten selection process will be tonight, Thursday, January 24, 2013 6:00 p.m. Stratton Elementary – 902 N. Randolph Street. This is generally for new (to the district) parents who will be going through the registration process and selecting which school they want their child to attend. As such, there is a short presentation about the selection process itself, followed by a general open house where visitors can visit booths for each school.

 

  • Meg Dickinson of the News-Gazette covered a really cool kick-off event for the Young Entrepreneurship program, matching local business reps with aspiring high school students in a mentoring-style relationship:

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/business/entrepreneurs/2013-01-23/new-champaign-schools-program-has-local-pros-mentoring-high-s

 

  • The next iteration of the Future Facilities project will be a “Community Dialog” on February 12 at the I-Hotel and Conference Center from 3-5 p.m. and 6-8 p.m. Both times will cover the same agenda. Note the translation services (Spanish, French and Korean) and shuttle.

http://www.champaignschools.org/news/news_view.php?action=view&news_type=press_release&id_news=673

Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/275293649266997/?ref=22

Updates on school assignment (aka, Choice, Kindergarten Lottery, etc)

I have been bugging Dr. Susan Zola a bit about the upcoming school registration, especially in regards to the little-known Choice Committee and the status of Dr. Alves’ work with the new software for school assignment. Amidst my many questions, I finally just decided to call the Family Information Center (FIC); I highly recommend calling the FIC, and moreover, ask for the “choice specialist”. She knows a bit.

So, some updates from Dr. Zola first. Alves is finishing up the new software and they are hoping to do some in-house trials next week. The new software interfaces with Edulog, thus allowing parents to get a pretty good idea exactly what their “Proximity” is, answering one of the most perplexing pieces of “Choice”. This is pretty exciting, for as small of a thing that it is. Also, I have requested to be made a part of the Choice Committee – crossing my fingers. :)

The Choice Specialist (Becky Loss (spelling?)) confirmed the Edulog work, but unfortunately it sounds like it will not be ready to demo for the Jan 24th Community Forum on Choice. So take note, if you plan to go to the Community Forums at all, they will talk about Proximity and busroutes and stuff, but you won’t be able to actually see the software yet. Hopefully by the next community forum (Feb 5th) it will be ready.

I also asked some specific questions about how Magnet school registration coincides with “normal” registration. Here is the low down. If you choose a magnet school(s) as your first choices, it will be processed in a special “Magnet registration” queue. The cool thing is that your first non-magnet school choice becomes your first choice in the non-magnet registration queue. I know that is confusing, so let me try a few examples.

Example 1

You really want to try for Bottenfield, BTW and Dr. Howard. Because BTW is a magnet school, you can choose BTW as your first choice and Bottenfield (which is typically rather difficult to get into) as your second choice. Due to the new rules, your Bottenfield choice becomes your First choice against everyone else if you don’t make it into BTW. But keep in mind, the chances of getting into BTW are extremely high, so keep that in mind.

Example 2

You try for Bottenfield and BTW and South Side, but this time you make Bottenfield your first choice and South Side your second choice. Because BTW is not listed first, it will not be processed in the magnet queue. Bottenfield will be your first choice and processed alongside everyone else. If you don’t get in on the first shot, you will be placed on the waitlist (with potentially a hundred other parents) and then the computer will stack you up for South Side, and then BTW if South Side doesn’t work out. On the odd chance that BTW has filled up by the 3rd round, you are out of luck.

Some interesting things to come out of this. You can choose all three magnet schools as your top three, and then any other school as #4 and that school will automatically become your “regular school registration” number one choice. Weird, eh?

Another interesting thing that the Choice Specialist mentioned is that you can choose all 11 schools if you like. Wow! I highly recommend all parents to rank-order all schools! :) Or in other words, number the schools 1 through 11 in order of your personal preference. I specifically asked if Dr. Alves’ program would handle more than 5 choices; “Probably not”. *grin* None the less, if you fear the dreaded “unassigned” letter, then by all means do yourself a favor and rank order as many schools as you possibly can. Most of the unassigned letters in years past are because parents only choose 1, 2 or sometimes even 3 schools.

School Assignment

On November 5th, Dr. Susan Zola will present the first reading for some modifications to the existing student assignment process via Policy 705.09 (they vote on it Dec 10th).

Over the last two days, I have been reading the policy, reviewing past emails with members of the Board, Gene Logas, Greg Novak, Michael Alves, Sandra Duckworth and posts on this blog. And I have been crunching some numbers. I have come up with 4 suggestions for the Policy that fall into two groups, and two further suggestions that probably fall outside the scope of Policy. In summary, my suggestions are as follows:

Choosing schools

1. Allow incoming parents to rank-order all schools, not just 5

2. In light of how Magnet registration will occur concurrently, place the magnet schools on a separate list from the non-magnet schools

Defining SES

3. Standardize the definition of SES to match all other areas of District Administration and Title I funding

4. Publish the SES ratio for the current year to be used to determine what SES “quotas” are in effect

Non-policy requests

5. Explain how Choice and diversity promotes academic excellence

6. Provide parents with a personalized table of schools and distance from their house sorted by distance. Don’t use the word “proximity”

Looking over the proposed changes to Policy 705.09, I am really glad that District Administration is continuing to act upon suggestions provided to the Board back in 2010; for example, getting rid of Proximity B (that was SO confusing!) and changing the name of the process from “Lottery” and “Choice” to something else. It is obvious and encouraging that the district is acknowledging the need for changes and are doing something about it. I applaud this recent effort. Having said that, I feel it is important to not stop here but push for a few more changes that I believe will make a world of difference.

Choosing Schools

My first two suggestions Read the rest of this entry »

School assignment: Wake County pulling off the gloves

The News-Observer has been reporting over the past few weeks a number of articles that highlight the displeasure of some folks about the “choice” school assignment based on Dr. Michael Alves’ program. Personally, I find all the riff-raff of anonymous haters and rare thoughtful comments to be confusing, only making the waters more muddy. In the latest piece, supposedly the Wake County Board is directing the superintendent to develop a “node-based” assignment process (fancy talk for “neighborhood schools”).

I ran this by our Unit 4 Board, and one of the emails I received in response was that the “directive” looks very much like the system we have now; a hybrid solution (a mix of Proximity and SES priorities, weighted towards Proximity by the way), a “stay where you start” clause, and still some measure of unpredictability.

In all my reading of Wake County and Unit 4 articles, blogs and comments, what strikes me the most is the perception that people have of the system. I am inclined to think that for the most part, the current system gets the job done. Not perfectly – there are still some big issues with those who end up on a wait list. But the bigger problem, I think, is when folks either have an expectation of having the privilege of choosing one (or maybe two) school and getting it (for any number of reasons) or being totally overwhelmed and drowned in all the technical details (Proximity? Priority? SES?). The system, as it operated in March 2012, did not avail itself well for either end of that spectrum.

I don’t know what the perfect system is. Greg Novak had some pretty interesting ideas that tweaked the current system just a tad more, but Read the rest of this entry »

Overchosen Schools Chart is back: new data for 2012

It took a bit of work, but for those that like to go look at pictures and mouse-over a semi-interactive chart right away:

http://lottery.cb-pta.com/test/visualize.php?year=2012

 

If you want previous years:

 

[just change the last number]

 

Some Notes:

  1. I have not yet got the “Maxiumum Occupancy” data to show up – it is in the javascript, but I believe Highcharts slightly modified a loophole I was hacking
  2. Alves delivered some messy data again. The most notable to you is that the names of the schools are all abbreviated
  3. Oh, you might also notice that the numbers seem a little low, especially for the magnet schools. I have to tweak the code a bit more to account for magnet selections, since they are reported in a funny way.

The Dilemma of Controlled Choice – community dialog requested

[warning: super link heavy]

In responding to Pattsi’s suggestion that I repost my many posts on the topic of Controlled Choice and Dr. Alves, I am remembering and re-learning various aspects of this program that had gathered dust in my own mind. After clearing away cobwebs, I am left with a quandary. At the bottom of this post, I will present an outline of earlier posts; major points will be post tags or general categories, with minor points covering a brief description of individual posts. I did think about doing them chronologically as suggested, but I think that gets a little too confusing. But all that is later. First we need to uncover a little history. [note: Brian Dolinar also provided a great historical piece via IMC]

The United States District Court contains a wealth of historical context for the Consent Decree. Relevant to where we are at now, pages 3-6 of the Controlled Choice Memorandum states 29 distinct goals for the Controlled Choice Plan. There are a number of eye-opening statements Read the rest of this entry »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 74 other followers