Reassignment committee meeting march 26-revised

Student Reassignment Committee

Meeting Monday, March 26, 2012

6:00 p.m.

Out of Capacity Table and Scenario

Data

District Reassignment Committee

Meeting

3

STUDENT REASSIGNMENT COMMITTEE MEETING

Media Center, Nash Central High School

Monday, March 26, 2012 - 6:00 pm

Call to Order Victor Ward

Roll Call Carina Bryant

Approval of the Minutes from the February 13, 2012,

Committee Organizational Meeting

Committee Operating Procedure

Data Provided to ORED Lisa Ballance

Out of Capacity Table and Scenario Data Mike Miller ORED

Report to School Board 4/26/12

Questions

Next Meeting Scenario Review and Revision

Monday, April 30, 2012

6:00 pm

AGENDA

Communications

Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools

5

TIME-LINE

Jan-Aug 2012

Committee Deliberations/

Monthly Reports to the School

Board

Aug - 2012Committee

Recommendations Presented to

the School Board

Aug – Dec 2012

Public Input/ Community Engagement

Board of Education Approval

August 2013Implementatio

n

6

PROCESS IS EVERYTHING

Board of Education

Community Feedback

Committee

Committee Chairs

Public Engagement

Technical Support

OREDStaff

7

Contiguous boundaries: Attempt to maintain contiguous school boundaries without using satellite

attendance areas.

Respect neighborhoods: Avoid dividing easily recognized “neighborhoods” or identified

“developments” or “sub- divisions” unless it is necessary to meet other guidelines. Whenever possible and practical use major highways, railroads, rivers, and streams as natural boundaries.

Proximity to schools: While it is recognized that all students cannot be assigned to their closest

school, consider students proximity to other schools when creating school boundaries.

School Board Priorities

8

Modify feeder systems: In order to maximize facility use and establish reasonable numbers of students at each site,

consider the use of 6 middle school feeder systems instead of 5. This would allow smaller, more instructionally suited middle schools and less dependence on mobile classrooms.

Stay within enrollment capacities: Unless it is likely that a school enrollment will be declining, assign students to the four high

schools in a way that their enrollments are under established capacities.

Consider anticipated growth: Enrollment growth patterns should be taken into consideration, where feasible, to ensure that

anticipated growth will not adversely impact one school significantly more than the others.

Enrollment balance: In keeping with the intent of SB612, attempt to balance the percentage of academic and

economic populations at each middle and high school.

School Board Priorities

IPSAC – Timeline

9

February 13 – Understanding the Optimization Process

March 26 – Out of Capacity table and Scenario Data

April 30 – Scenario Review and Revision

May 29 – Scenario Review and Revision

June 25 – Final Scenario Presentation

TransparentLines of CommunicationsCommittee Meetings

Open to the publicWebsite

Information posted immediately after each meetingE-mail/ Phone Line

An e-mail address to answer questions/ receive feedback etc has been established to ensure seamless communication and to make all information readily available to the public.

A phone line has been established for those with limited or no internet access to provide feedback to the committee.

COMMUNICATIONS

11

Mike Miller, OREd

Out of Capacity table and Scenario Data

Integrated Planning For School and Community

Michael Miller, Program ManagerOperations Research and Education Laboratory (OREd)Institute for Transportation Research and EducationCentennial CampusNorth Carolina State University

Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools

Data Collection/CompilationPlanning Segment review: Complete

263 Planning Segments61 K-12 students/segment

Planning Segment Data loaded:Free/Reduced Lunch eligibility percentage (K-12 2011-12)Academic Proficiency percentage (Grades 3-8 EOG 2010-

11)Minority percentage

Student Transfer Data (see handout)Optimization Models

Data loaded for three levels: Elem, Mid, HighPreliminary analysis/scenarios

IPSAC – Status

13

Elementary and Middle schools grouped in High School “clusters”

NC DPI Month-1 Average Daily Membership (K-12) *

Target Middle School Capacity = 750 **

IPSAC – Out-of-Capacity Worksheet

14

** Parker Middle School capacity = 557

* Schools-of-Choice not included in this analysis

15

NRMPS 2011-12

Out-of-CapacityWorksheet

(see handout)

16

IPSAC – Methodology

OPTIMIZATION

Operations Research techniques enable users to solve large-scale optimization problems involving many variables and constraints.

The driving variable in the optimization algorithm is total distance traveled by students to school. The solutions generated by these OR techniques are optimal in the following way:

the system-wide student travel distance is minimized while satisfying constraints such as

building utilization and student balance metrics

17


The following preliminary scenarios will establish a baseline for all future scenario work, including those involving student balance metrics. The preliminary scenarios focus on:

PROXIMITY – Minimization of system-wide student travel distance

UTILIZATION – Balancing system-wide building utilization

18


Note: Student Balance Metric Data

Free/Reduced Lunch – percentage of impacted population eligible for Free or Reduced Lunch . Data supplied in aggregate form by NRMPS, calculated across K-12.

Academic Proficiency – percentage of impacted population scoring Proficient in both Reading and Math. Data supplied by NRMPS, calculated across grades 3-8.

Minority – percentage of non-white impacted population . Data obtained from NCWISE download, calculated by level (E/M/H)

Data represented in aggregate form only as percentage of school population. 19


20

High School Attendance Zones

Note: 2011-12 zones shown. >>>

Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash

CURRENT 1232 1204 1130 1232

PROXIMITY + UTILIZATION 1169 1182 1411 1036

100300500700900

110013001500

9-12 Student Count

High School Attendance ZonesCurrent/Optimal Scenario Data

(See data tables in handouts.)


CURRENT 0.667207792207793 0.690199335548174 0.835398230088496 0.513798701298702

PROXIMITY + UTI-LIZATION

0.532078699743371 0.62098138747885 0.939759036144579 0.528957528957529

5%

25%

45%

65%

85%

Minority %


CURRENT 1.07130434782609 1.04695652173913 0.81294964028777 1.15355805243446


1.01652173913043 1.02782608695652 1.01510791366906 0.970037453183521

10%30%50%70%90%

110%130%

Utilization


CURRENT 0.666460829493088 0.651086556169429 0.71803867403315 0.64117389298893


0.508411027568922 0.592597613882863 0.854338493292054 0.669647453833241

5%

25%

45%

65%

85%

Free/Reduced Lunch %


CURRENT 0.597285067873303 0.614014933946008 0.530638029058749 0.631374453618262


0.7 0.682539682539683 0.425068119891008 0.624926857811586

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%75%

Academic Proficiency %

24

Middle School Attendance Zones


Middle School Attendance ZonesCurrent/Optimal Scenario Data


Edwards Nash Central Parker Red Oak Southern Nash NEW MS (RM HS site)

CURRENT 729 633 433 910 1099 0

PROXIMITY + UTILIZA-TION

661 684 504 646 677 632

100300500700900

1100

6-8 Student Count


CURRENT 0.781893004115226

0.669826224328595

0.877598152424943

0.585714285714286

0.51410373066424

0


0.609682299546143

0.482456140350877

0.904761904761904

0.51702786377709

0.556868537666175

0.905063291139241

5%25%45%65%85%

Minority %


CURRENT 0.881499395405079

0.944776119402985

0.777378815080791

1.07058823529412

1.29294117647059

0


0.881333333333333

0.912 0.904847396768403

0.861333333333334

0.902666666666667

0.842666666666667

10%

50%

90%

130%

Utilization

Target Middle School capacity = 750. Parker capacity = 557.


CURRENT 0.728409448818898

0.679363699582754

0.7765 0.581846153846154

0.64117389298893

0


0.629619952494063

0.504822569198013

0.831594393342094

0.543636363636364

0.696655505952381

0.829088589135983

5%

25%

45%

65%

85%



CURRENT 729 633 433 910 1099 0


661 684 504 646 677 632

100300500700900

1100


28

Elementary School Attendance Zones


Elementary School Attendance ZonesCurrent/Optimal Scenario Data


Bailey Baskerville

Benv-enue

Cedar Grove

Coop-ers

John-son

MB Hub-bard

Mid-dlesex

Nash-ville

Pope Red Oak/Swift Creek

Spring Hope

Willi-ford

Win-stead/Engle-wood

CUR-RENT

620 341 743 221 624 475 492 340 709 279 583 550 437 1081

PROX-IMITY + UTI-LIZA-TION

620 430 584 214 551 511 499 340 663 304 635 520 588 1036

100

500

900

K-5 Student Count

Bailey Baskerville

Benv-enue

Cedar Grove

Coop-ers

John-son

MB Hub-bard

Mid-dlesex

Nash-ville


Spring Hope

Willi-ford


CURRENT

0.933734939759036

0.798594847775176

1.1122754491

018

0.991031390134529

1.03826955074875

0.826086956521739

0.9609375

0.813397129186603

1.03958944281525

0.897106109324758

0.719753086419753

1.01476014760148

0.752151462994837

0.954104148278906

PROXIMITY + UTILIZATION

0.933734939759036

1.00702576112412

0.874251497005988

0.959641255605382

0.916805324459235

0.888695652173914

0.974609375

0.813397129186603

0.972140762463344

0.977491961414791

0.783950617283951

0.959409594095941

1.01204819277108

0.914386584289497

10%

50%

90%

Utilization

Bailey Baskerville

Benv-enue

Cedar Grove

Coop-ers

John-son

MB Hub-bard

Mid-dlesex

Nash-ville


Spring Hope

Willi-ford


CURRENT

0.65483870967742

0.982404692082112

0.737550471063257

0.520361990950226

0.307692307692308

0.995789473684211

0.780487804878049

0.588235294117647

0.493653032440056

0.989247311827956

0.437392795883362

0.514545454545455

0.965675057208239

0.640148011100833


0.65483870967742

0.976744186046512

0.702054794520548

0.485981308411215

0.257713248638838

0.99412915851272

0.781563126252505

0.588235294117647

0.494720965309201

0.980263157894736

0.428346456692913

0.511538461538462

0.909863945578231

0.62934362934363

10%

50%

90%

Minority %

Bailey Baskerville

Benv-enue

Cedar Grove

Coop-ers

John-son

MB Hub-bard

Mid-dlesex

Nash-ville


Spring Hope

Willi-ford


CURRENT

0.709450714823176

0.93656626506024

0.684589625738674

0.728067729083666

0.467428797468355

0.909124378109453

0.703311320754717

0.702206266318538

0.520635430038512

0.907741433021808

0.456706210746685

0.650129659643437

0.922113163972286

0.593824966681475


0.709450714823176

0.9230677764

566

0.643067823343849

0.711359832635984

0.419016536118364

0.900924908424909

0.716614481409002

0.702206266318538

0.508616573033708

0.917930029154519

0.469841772151899

0.654667817083694

0.906984698469847

0.58110401459854

5%

35%

65%

95%


Bailey Baskerville

Benv-enue

Cedar Grove

Coop-ers

John-son

MB Hub-bard

Mid-dlesex

Nash-ville


Spring Hope

Willi-ford


CURRENT

0.618270799347472

0.450657894736842

0.629283489096574

0.731707317073172

0.729636048526863

0.377232142857143

0.575692963752665

0.61307901907357

0.705801104972376

0.348122866894198

0.721815519765739

0.601973684210527

0.348448687350836

0.606741573033709


0.618270799347472

0.472677595628415

0.652751423149906

0.748898678414098

0.755597014925374

0.360887096774194

0.583333333333333

0.61307901907357

0.697428139183056

0.355345911949686

0.721485411140584

0.602473498233216

0.380149812734082

0.624605678233439

5%25%45%65%


Utilization/Capacity

Demographic Balance

Proximity

Feeder Pattern

32


Summary

Data Collection/Compilation Complete!Out-of-Capacity WorksheetPreliminary Optimal Scenario Data

Proximity + Utilization onlyStudent balance metrics tracked

33

February13 – (4:00-5:30)*

March26 (6:00)

April30 (6:00)

May

29 (6:00)

June25 (4:00–5:30)*

August/ Sept

TBD

MEETING SCHEDULE

QUESTIONS