DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY Student Reassignment Survey Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools October 1 – November 1, 2012

DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY

Student Reassignment Survey

Nash-Rocky Mount Public SchoolsOctober 1 – November 1, 2012


Overview

Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools invited parents and other community members to participate in a survey about the district’s plans for student reassignment. Three plans were considered by survey participants — an Elementary School Plan, a Middle School Plan and a High School Plan. The purpose of the survey was to determine the level of support for the proposed plans and to gather input on each plan’s strengths and weaknesses.

The survey covered issues related to the reassignment plans and the district’s communication efforts to inform parents and community members about student reassignment.

The survey was available from October 1 to November 1, 2012. This report provides survey results.

2


Participation Rate

Parents who had provided an email address to the district were sent an invitation to participate in the survey. Parents and other community members could also participate by accessing the survey on the district’s website.

RespondingGroup

Number of Responses

Parents & Community Members 1,124

Type of Respondent Number of Responses Percent of Total Respondents

NRMPS Parent 1,063 94.6%

Non-NRMPS Parent 20 1.8%

Community Member 41 3.6%

3


Support of Reassignment Plans

4

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%89%

83% 81%

Overall

Overall

Supportor

Support withreservation

The majority of survey participants indicated support or support with reservationsfor each of the three proposed reassignment plans.


Support of Reassignment Plans

5

OverallNRMPS Parent

(n=1063)

Non-NRMPS Parent(n=20)

Community Member

(n=41)

"I support" or "I support with reservation"

Elementary School Plan 89% 89% 90% 88%

Middle School Plan 83% 83% 80% 80%

High School Plan 81% 82% 85% 76%


Effect on Children

6

Survey participants who responded that their children would be affected by student reassignment plans were asked additional questions about their concerns and opportunities, which are presented on the following slides.

39%

52%

9%

Would your children be affected by any of the recommended plans?

Yes No I don't know


Concerns for ReassignmentGenerally, the majority of parents of students affected by reassignment indicated that potential concerns have been addressed by the new reassignment plans and are no longer a concern.

7This set of items was presented only to survey participants who responded their child would be affected by reassignment.

Lack of diversity

Student safety

Proximity of middle schools

Time spent riding the bus

Keeping students together from MS to HS

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

60%

48%

67%

60%

52%


Information Needs

The majority of respondents ( approximately 80%) said that they did not need any additional information regarding the reassignment plans.

OverallNRMPS Parent

(n=1063)


Community Member

(n=41)

"No"

Elementary School Plan 85% 86% 89% 77%

Middle School Plan 80% 80% 89% 86%

High School Plan 76% 77% 74% 73%

8


Additional Information Requested

Other information includes: Street names, demographic comparisons between old and new plans, safety plans and number of potential enrollment

9

These items were presented only to survey participants who responded their child would be affected by reassignment. Multiple answers per participant possible. Percentages added may exceed 100 since a participant may select more than one answer for this question.

Offering flexibility ("grandfathering")

Transitioning between schools

Transportation changes

Academic program changes

Extra-curricular changes

Other (see below)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

66%

52%

41%

76%

63%

4%

Percent of Responses


Committee Input

Almost 60% of survey participants were aware of the input process to the Student Reassignment Committee. Fourteen percent of survey participants provided input to the committee.

10

OverallNRMPS Parent

(n=1063)


Community Member

(n=41)

Responses Received

I was aware and gave input to the committee. 14% 14% 10% 17%

I was aware but did not give any input to the committee. 45% 45% 40% 54%

I was not aware that the Student Reassignment Committee was seeking community input.

40% 41% 50% 29%


Communication Effectiveness

The Student Reassignment Committee used several methods to provide information to and gather feedback from parents and the community. The NRMPS website was the most frequently cited as an effective source of information.

11

OverallNRMPS Parent

(n=1063)


Community Member

(n=41)

"Very effective" or "Effective"

Public meetings held by the Student Reassignment Committee 50% 50% 60% 52%

Student reassignment information on the NRMPS website 69% 69% 100% 70%

The Superintendent’s Community Office Hours 44% 43% 60% 63%

Email or telephone communication with the Student Reassignment Committee 54% 55% 50% 41%


Comfort with Process

The majority of parents and community members felt comfortable communicating with the school district student reassignment committee.

12

OverallNRMPS Parent

(n=1063)


Community Member

(n=41)

"Yes"

Were you comfortable with how information was shared between the committee and community members?

63% 63% 75% 75%

Were you comfortable sharing your thoughts with the committee? 46% 46% 61% 61%

Overall, were you pleased with the process the committee used? 58% 58% 71% 71%

Do you think this process should be used in the future? 60% 60% 71% 71%


Summary of Elementary School Plan Open-Ended Questions

Strengths

The elementary plan seems to keep neighborhoods together.

Community schools are kept intact for the most part and limits the number of students who need to be bused.

New reassignment boundaries appear to reduce overcrowding at some schools.

Visualization of the map depicts somewhat an even balance of area for each district.

There appears to be a good balance of diversity for each school and boundaries seem sensible.

New zones will allow for maximum use of facilities.

Students will be close to their neighborhood and not have to travel long distances by bus.

13

Challenges

The inner city schools appear to be isolated.

The maps do not show the number of students who would be attending the reassigned school.

There doesn’t appear to be a balanced distribution of students from diverse economic, ethnic and racial backgrounds.

Some communities and neighborhoods are not assigned to the closest school.

Overcrowding will still be a problem for some elementary schools.


Summary of Middle School Plan Open-Ended Questions

14

Strengths

The new boundaries seem to be equally divided.

The majority of students will be closer to home and reduce travel time on buses.

Clearer feeder patterns are formed using the new proposed reassignment plan. Using middle schools as feeders to the high schools is a strength because it keeps the middle school students together at high school in the proposed plan.

The new reassignment plan reduces overcrowding at some of the middle schools.

ChallengesSome communities are divided in the proposed plan.Lack of facilities for expansion. It was suggested that there be 4 middle schools to feed into the 4 high schools. Others suggested that there was not a need to operate 4 middle schools.Students may be bused away from school in their community which may cost more and increase travel time. Transportation time may exceed 45 minutes.Too many transitions for some students who will attend a new school for the next two years.The proximity of the new middle school and the existing middle schools is too close. There will be a lack of diversity at Rocky Mount and Parker Middle Schools.Facilities will still be underutilized and overcrowded.Some survey participants raised concern about increases in class size and teacher/student ratio.


Summary of High School Plan Open-Ended Questions

15

Strengths

The majority of students will be attending the school that is centrally located and closest to their home.

The plan stabilizes feeder patterns whereby neighborhoods are not jumping back and forth between elementary, middle and high schools.

Plan appears to meet the school board priorities regarding diversity and facility utilization.

Several respondents identified proximity of school and neighborhoods as a strength.

The plan seems to be fair and balanced.

Some survey participants think that bus routes are shortened if the proposed plan were implemented.

The current proposed plan is an improvement from the original plan.

Enrollments will be balanced at all high schools.

Challenges

Some of the community boundaries were divide.

Travel times may be too long for students.

General concern that rising seniors will not be grandfathered into current school is a perceived weakness.

There is a perception that some school enrollments will be disproportionate with students eligible for free and reduced-priced meals, while other schools will have an over representation of students from high-income families.

Several parents voiced concerns that moving students in the middle of their high school years is a weakness.

Diverse student populations are seen as both strength and weakness by parents, with many concerned about racial and ethnic enrollment distributions.

DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLYSummary of Recommendation Improvements Open-Ended Questions

Comments

Comments were divided over whether it was more of a priority for children to attend their neighborhood school or if a diverse student population was more important. Many commented that equitable education should be offered to all students.

Many responded that they feel middle and high school students should be allowed to continue attending their current school. As students are rising to middle or high school, they can be reassigned.

The district should have notified parents and community members about the process earlier so they could be involved. Many did not receive notice of the information meetings until the day before.

Several respondents had suggestions for changing the school attendance boundaries.

Many respondents commented that they felt the process was transparent and made the best decisions for student reassignment.

16

DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLYSummary of Suggestions to Improve Communication

Comments

Email and phone calls were given as the most effective means of communicating with parents. Sending information home with students was also listed as effective.

However, several respondents commented that they receive too many phone calls from the district and have begun to ignore them.

Many respondents said they follow district activities on the website but find that it is difficult to navigate.

Several parents requested that meetings be held at each school and at times that are more convenient for them to attend.

Several respondents commented that they felt the district had improved its communication efforts and hoped that would continue.

17


Survey Participants By Child’s School Level

Elementary Schools

Middle Schools

High Schools

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

58%

41%

46%

Percent of Responses

Multiple answers per participant possible. Percentages added may exceed 100 since a participant may select more than one answer for this question.

DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLYConclusions

Next Steps

19

• Board work session is scheduled for November 19.

• Action will be taken on December 3rd.

• Implementation of adopted reassignment plans will take place in the 2013-2014 school year.

Documents

DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY Student Reassignment Survey Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools October 1 – November 1, 2012