CSD Enrollment Growth Occurring at Almost All Grade Levels
Decatur Metro | August 3, 2011 | 9:56 am
The chart above details student enrollment growth by grade in the City Schools of Decatur over the past year.
Even after removing the 62 enrollment student’s from the equation, growth is 10% higher than at the end of the last school year and 5% higher than projected. Growth is not only occurring in the most talked about grade – Kindergarten – but also growing at a double-digit pace in 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 10th grade. None of the three grades that experienced declines – 1st, 7th and 9th – come close to compensating for the growth in other grade levels.
Where are all these kids coming from? In her note to the School Board prior to next week’s meeting – which is where this chart came from – Dr. Phyllis Edwards provides another layer of context…
…a good percentage are coming from out of state or out of the country. We are receiving applications from people who have bought homes in Decatur and have the paperwork in hand.
Also note that CSD originally projected that the kindergarten class for this year would decline from size of the 1st grade class . However, the opposite is true and this year’s kindergarten class is not only bigger than the new 1st grade class, but any grade level.
Related Posts:
-
January 7, 2011 Trailers Needed at Oakhurst & Winnona Next Year Due to 3rd Grade Waiver Requests (9)
-
August 31, 2011 Superintendent Authorizes Additional Positions for CSD Kindergarten Classes (34)
-
January 8, 2013 Decatur Schools Looking to Lease Their Own Buses, End Relationship with DeKalb (8)
The obvious question this raises is how CSD comes up with its enrollment projections, and whether they can be improved. I understand that making projections cannot be an exact science, but having overall projections off by 7% (and kindergarten by 19%!) causes problems. I don’t know where the numbers come from, though, so I don’t know whether or not having glitches like this occasionally is inevitable.
I think this is an ongoing issue.
Predicting the future is imperfect. Is the weather forecast or my family budget or tomorrow’s Braves score predictable within 10-15%. accuracy ? Probably so. That is a reasonable margin in my opinion. CSD does not drive enrollment, they anticipate and plan for it. This is a challenge we are well prepared to meet, not a crisis.
+1.
+1, too.
So, what you are saying is it’s OK to have 156 more students show up for K-5, 39 more for 6-8 and 20 for H.S. and there are no consequences?
K-5 has had enough students show up to create at least 3 more kindergarten classes, another 2nd grade class and another 5th grade class.
The middle school another 6th grade class.
This is a pretty big “miss”. What are the implications to the budget ? 215 more kids have got to cost something, I would think.
Seems like you are suggesting they should have known, I.e. They aren’t doing their job well. So what should they have done? The letter sent out by the CSD weeks ago says clearly that there is no good data on school population growth. It is a guess. I’m sure a household survey has been considered but we all know how we treat mail like that – we say it is a good idea but life with two kids is busy and we just don’t make the time to fill it out and send it in. And it would still be a guess. Like Rick, I don’t see an inaccurate projection being a huge problem.
They have a fiduciary responsibility to be right.. Also, have you read the comment that the math is wrong on the chart at the top of the post? Yikes, I am not blaming them, it is their responsibility.
i think you meant, “lived ‘here’ longer than you.”
nope it’s “hear” because I “hear” ya’ll!!
I am saying that nobody knows the future with precision. Budgets, staffing, space allocation, all of these things that rely on projected numbers, have appropriate contingencies. Plans of any kind must be as accurate as possible and then also be flexible, knowing in advance that no projection will be exactly right. I am confident that CSD operates in that way.
Their responsibility is to educate children, not to lock all of the doors after student #3073 enters.
K’garten classes are big this year due to low projections. 23 kids in my son’s class.
25 in mine, IIRC. Although having an extra half of a parapro (so 1 1/2 parapros for the class, plus the teacher) should make it a decent learning environment even with the big size.
I’m hearing 28 students per classrooom on average in FAVE–the highest in the last 10 years for this age group, I think. But students come and go during the first two weeks of school due to families that just got to town (e.g. from the North where school starts over a month later so they didn’t know they were late already!), confusion with DeKalb’s schedule, residency checks, etc. So maybe it’ll settle out lower. I hate to see elementary class sizes increase beyond 25 unless there’s a full-time parapro in the classroom. Some real hard budget decisions are coming CSD’s way during the next decade, I fear, as enrollment increases faster than CSD budget. The School Leadership Teams need to be sure that they fully use the Charter to give input, participate in decisions, and assist with changes.
I’ve heard 28 per classroom at FAVE too.
My kid has 28 at FAVE. No dedicated para-pro. That’s too many kids. Hate to say it but we are considering private school now.
Before you decide, be sure and let CSD leadership know your concerns. There are still choices for CSD, although fewer and fewer as its budget gets tighter. Paraprofessionals are incredibly cheap compared to other budget items and, if high quality individuals are hired, can make a big difference in classrooms. We lost a few fine paraprofessionals recently and I hope lessons have been learned about how to retain them.
Nah dude, go for it–private school or bust!
I intend to. Thanks for your permission.
There’s many good reasons to choose private school, including that it’s just a better fit. I know you are being sarcastic, but still, don’t ever let a “love it or leave it” comment sway you even a little bit one way or another. Consider that:
– The first weeks of a new school may not be indicative of the whole year. Watch class size and any other issues you have carefully to see if they persist or are just growing pains.
– If your child is already at Fifth Avenue, you only have a year or two more before middle school. The classroom size dynamic is completely different at Renfroe because every child has a completely different schedule.
– Many families have left at the 4/5 level in recent years, for a whole variety of reasons and for a whole variety of private schools, and then returned in middle or high school. You can always return. Even folks who have had to take legal action to advocate for their children have been able to come back successfully at another time and/or with another child. The main relationship that counts for your child is the one they have with their teacher(s).
– CSD needs your feedback no matter what you choose to do. A school board election is coming up and you should ask about how each candidate would like to address class size or any other issue you have. If you leave, be sure and give an exit interview and/or send an exit letter; copy your School Leadership Team, the Superintendent, and the School Board. If you stay, let your School Leadership Team know of your concerns. I doubt you are the only one with any particular concern and, if multiple folks from multiple corners of CSD chime in, it’s more likely that the issue will become a higher priority for resolution.
– As someone recently posted, the personas that people assume on this and other blogs are often not representative of the nice people they are in real life. Make any decision about CSD based on the real life relationships and observations that your family has, not on what people joke about on a blog.
You don’t need my permission–why announce it?If your kid was in my kid’s class then there’d be 27. Just go, don’t rub it in that you can afford private school over an outstanding public system–just go.
Karass, I wasn’t joking.
Um, because Bradley was stating it as an indicator of his/her tolerance level with the current class sizes? Doesn’t seem like rubbing it in to me.
That’s like saying someone is “rubbing it in” when they ask where to get their BMW serviced.
I don’t know how CSD can project attendance from kids who at the end of last school year didn’t live in Decatur, and didn’t attend CSD, and their parents didn’t even have a contract on a house by that time.
Counting strollers, perhaps?
It’s one thing to count strollers among families that already live in Decatur. That’s predictable. It is quite another to count them in other cities (states?) who themselves may not even know yet that they’re moving to Decatur next year. How do you propose CSD does that? And control/predict the real estate market? Fallout from the APD and DCS scandals?
Hopefully you are being sarcastic. That would be just about the least scientific, and least useful method of projecting enrollments I can possibly think of. But if enough people keep demanding it, CSD might have to pacify them with some wasteful effort.
Wow, there are twice as many kids in K than 12. If this trend continues that is a huge bulge of kids that will be coming into the system.
I am sure CSD is aware of this, and I certainly hope they are thinking about how they will address this huge increase in population.
I’m sure they are aware to some degree, but parents tried their best to stress the burgeoning issue during the redistricting sessions last year. The K class next year will be even larger in my estimation, as 2007 was a baby boom year. 40 kids were left out of the pre-K lottery for this year, and that doesn’t count kids families who didn’t even try (I can name 10 off the top of my head, including mine). And that doesn’t count the families that continue to move in. I hope they do some sort of family survey to get a realistic count, rather than polling city preschools.
I believe extra classes were added and all the kids in the lottery were accommodated.
That is amazing. At this rate, instead of reopening Westchester, we may need to bulldoze it and build a second high school!
Sooo… does FAVE have room for 650- 700 kids in a few years? Does Renfroe have room for 900-1050 kids? Does DHS have room for 1200 – 1400 kids? This presumes that the K/1/2 numbers stay at their current levels – not a likely scenario given this year’s growth.
Houston…we have a problem.
Here’s a bit more context from previous comments:
From Garrett Goebel on Oct 12, 2010 – “According to the enrollment comparison presented at the August Board Meeting, we currently have upwards of 1047+ K-3 enrollments. The chart presented listed 1047 K-3 students not including 77 absences across K-12. Assuming equal absences across grades, 4/13ths of 77 rounded down is 23. Giving an estimate of 1070 current K-3 students.
The enrollment zone proposal lists classroom capacity at K-3 with Glennwood at 1254 students. It estimates 1184 enrollments next year. This would represent 10-11% growth at K-3 and an average of 296 students per grade.”
From Garrett Goebel on Oct 11, 2010 – “- Westchester’s 11 classrooms give an additional 242 student capacity”
Back on March 9, 2009, Garrett wrote – “For interdisciplinary grades, the number of classrooms required, I believe, is calculated by dividing the number of enrollments by 25 and then figuring on 85% efficiency. Because 300 divides evenly by 25, we can calculate this as: (900/25) / .85 = 42.352941
Which we would round up to 43. Which conveniently is how many classrooms Renfroe has. -So there can be no doubt that Renfroe as is, is big enough to deal with never before seen 6-8 enrollment levels.”
Can’t find anything on DHS off-hand. Umm…Garrett?
Based on a quick calc based on the above: opening Westchester would be enough to accommodate 350 students in each grade K-3 (1496 spaces vs. 1400 students.).
And that Renfroe could also handle that number of students, though just barely: (1075 spaces vs. 1050 students).
However, I’m not applying the “85% efficiency” that Garrett does above, because I don’t understand it.
Also, though I can’t find anything on DHS, I recall from previous conversations that has the most available space of any school. Another question I don’t know the answer to: could/would CSD cannibalize the Career Academy if they needed more space?
Why SHOULD they “cannabalize” the Career Acad? Those areas hold classes. Further, you always have teachers on a planning break. Plus, there are spaces inside the auditorium where classes could be held.
Portables — nobody likes to hear about them — but they do offer some quick classroom space.
But we’re only on the second day of classes. Perhaps the system just needs time to adjust?
I’m not suggesting it. Was just wondering. Personally I think the Career Academy is a great add.
You’re right it’s only the second day of classes, but I’m more than a bit concerned about the viability of our excellent school system if these trends continue and we can’t up our density and/commericial real estate. I’m not sure who’s got the right answer, but I’ve been trying to make hay about this for a while.
Eventually, it seems like Decatur will need to have a conversation about density and annexation in relation to the school system. Maybe that conversation is five/ten years off. Maybe it will never happen. But we’re a city that’s 85% residential! That was a problem for the city manager 40 years ago (I know because I read it in a 40 year old newspaper article) and it’s still a problem today. A great school system with huge residential housing stock (percentage wise) seems to me like a recipe for serious problems unless we mitigate.
I don’t think the city commission tried to push annexation 2 years ago because it was politically advantageous. It was the opposite. It seemed a topic that some residents were, at best, indifferent about and everyone else was angrily opposed to. My hunch is they brought it up because they believed it was one of the few viable options to benefit the city in the long term. Unfortunately for everyone, there were issues with the calculations, which will make the whole conversation more difficult next time.
Anyway, that’s sorta where my question was coming from. I wasn’t bashing the Career Academy. I just think we need to get all the data and projections and options on the table – not to mention both the city and CSD at the table – and talk this thru sooner rather than later so we have a better idea of what we’re getting ourselves into down the road.
Obviously commercial annexation would be a big help, but numbers like these from CSD make residential annexation, especially single family detached housing, impossible for the foreseeable future. The model from two years ago, with its 45% population increase, looks even worse in retrospect.
The basic trouble, as I understand it, is how to get commercial (whose owners don’t want to pay higher Dec taxes and so won’t come voluntarily) without adding on residential (setting aside that they too would face higher taxes).
Yep. That’s the problem all right. I actually asked the city and the mayor if annexation was on the docket for this year – since 2011 is when it was postponed until – and both signaled in their own ways that it wasn’t. A document attached to the last commission meeting said something about “next 5 years” though.
I guess they’re waiting for DeKalb to raise taxes a bit more.
I’ve always heard that Decatur is the most densely populated city in Georgia, so I’m not sure why you’d be pushing to “up the density” of the city.
As someone else said, these are GOOD problems to have. They don’t indicate, to me, that there are serious problems in the school system. On the contrary–they seem to indicate that folks LIKE the school system.
My own personal experience. My daughter just graduated, was NOT in the top 10 percent of the graduating class, but has a Zell Miller (i.e. 100 percent Hope) scholarship to UGA, where she has already earned 16 credits thanks to DHS’s Advanced Placement classes and the innovative Spanish program. That’s the equivalent of an entire semester.
She wasn’t ever in the Gifted and Talented program, which I think is a fancy way of doing ability grouping to the detriment of many able students. She went to Renfroe when lots of folks avoided it, and we went through four principals in about a year. She had a few lousy teachers. She did, however, attend Westchester, with the fabulous Ms. Kuebler as principal.
I think Decatur schools are a terrific value, and our quibbles with those running the schools pale in comparison to the problems at systems surrounding us. I’m just glad the school system is responsive to our concerns, because I can tell you, they don’t respond in other systems.
The only problem I’m pointing to is a financial one. One where CSD maxes out it’s millage rate at 25 because of enrollment increases and can’t do anything else but start cutting. Is that not worth being concerned about?
As for density, high-rise development is the only way to easily up the number of tax-paying residents who pay in more than they take out in taxes. (ie residents without kids) That’s why I referenced that. Here’s a link in case you’re interested: http://www.decaturmetro.com/2009/05/05/children-found-in-fewer-than-1-of-decatur-condos/
Would you trade greater density for a viable school system?
I would. I’m quite happy to have lots of high-rise condos downtown to pack in people who want to take advantage of our hipster pedestrian-friendly vibe. Add street-level retail along the developments too.
+1
I don’t understand how higher density is going to help the schools.
Isn’t higher density cheaper, so it may attract MORE kids to the city, but paying LOWER taxes? How is that gonna help the schools? Or am I missing something?
I believe urban planners have some reality-based assumptions that higher-density developments attract more adults and fewer children
Nellie would be correct. High density, urban development around transit nodes — such as downtown Decatur or what’s planned for East Decatur Station and, in large part, the DeVry property — skews heavily, sometimes exclusively, to childless buyers. In some instances it’s empty nesters; in others, young, single professionals; in others, simply DINKs who have no desire to raise a family.
That’s who wants to live in such places (and note that context is key; without it all you have is a Post-style apartment pod which draws a totally different customer) and those people put in more money tax-wise than they take out in services. So a dense downtown helps *pay* the costs of our schools without *adding* to the costs of our schools.
No one argues that families with kids *could* buy a downtown condo because that’s irrelevant. Years of buyer’s behavior has shown that, even if they could, they don’t want to. They want the house, yard and dog that has been the definition of child-rearing for generations. So opposing further development in downtown Decatur is basically just severing a CSD funding stream.
And some of us DINKs actually want a house with a yard for our dogs, too…
Good points all around, tho– and thanks for underscoring one of the most important points: So many of the self-important childeds who believe we child-free folk just don’t matter or contribute as much as they do (“‘Cause our chiiiiiildren will provide your fuuuuture Social Securiteee!”) should actually be thanking their lucky stars that OUR taxes help provide a cushion on which their kinder can coast all the way to college. You’re welcome!
Just for the record, I have always appreciated the contribution of the child-free residents. I was child free and paying school taxes for a long period in the past. Sometimes one has to do something for the common good, but one should also be appreciated for it.
Karass– you oughtta know I was only half-serious (after all, isn’t “gadfly” a rather large part of my persona here?)…but I do ‘preshate the props!
We maxed at 25 mils once before. Legislation was passed to allow Decatur to tax on 50% of the assessed value of a home, rather than the 40% that was used previously, so with that increased revenue, they were able to lower the millage so as not to be hitting the ceiling anymore. It could be that we are the only entity in Georgia taxing on 50%, but I wouldn’t swear to it. Someone correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks, great background! I haven’t ever heard the story of the 50%. I’ll ask around about whether it can be raised higher.
Sorry DM… just now catching up.
To summarize enrollments and facility capacity… It appears we currently have the capacity for ~300 students per grade spread across all of our facilities at an average of 25 students per classroom.
The 85% efficiency adjustment is a built-in assumption that from the 6-12th grades all classrooms won’t be in use 100% of the time at 100% capacity. It is probably a bit misleading. The law on maximum classroom sizes changed a while back from an absolute cap on the number of students in a classroom, to the maximum allowed average size of classrooms. Assuming a 25 students/classroom average… we could likely handle as many as 350 students per grade. F.Ave currently has an average of ~27 students/classroom.
Another reality is that the majority of our revenue comes from property taxes. Rising enrollments effectively decreases per pupil funding. I.e. the same pie has to be cut into smaller pieces. -If enrollments exceed 300 students per grade on average, we can either build more classrooms and hire more teachers… or we can increase classroom sizes.
The challenge going forward is find savings and making the cuts that will allow us to live within our means. Which means balancing millage rate increases against increasing classrooms sizes and teacher pay. We can only go back to the well so many times before it runs dry. It is hard to ask folks to pay more taxes during hard times. Our schools protect our property values. In short, we are a victim of our own success.
For people concerned that 352 Kindergartners will eventually become 352 high school seniors… I can tell you that that would be historically unprecedented. Going back as far as the Kindergarten class of 1986 which graduated in 1997… That has never happened. On average for the years I’ve looked at 1986-2006, between Kindergarten and 12th grade the class size drops by roughly 40%.
However, the current enrollment growth is also unprecedented. As the recent article on 2010 Census demographics for Decatur shows, we have almost as many households with children under 6 as children between the ages of 6-17. Which means there may be considerable enrollment growth yet to come.
Finally finished reading all the comments.
I’d like to echo the comments that the current challenges are part of a success story.
Enrollment growth and folks beating down the door to move into Decatur is a good problem to have. Look at Dekalb’s 13% drop in property values, and consider how good schools have been a good investment for Decatur property owners.
Garrett, from 1986 to 1995 could you attribute the loss of students from K to 9th to the fact that many parents did not consider Renfroe and Decatur High to be good schools so they pulled their kids after K-5. If that is the case, then I would think that we will not see enrollment drops between K and 9th anymore b/c Renfroe and DHS are considered top notch.
Case in point… when my daughter was in kindergarten, there were something 184 in her grade. Now she is in 9th and there are 261 in her grade. In order to drop to the kindergarten grade size, DHS would have to net lose 77 of the kids in her class or 30% of them. In order to drop to 60% of kindergarten size, DHS would have to lose 187 of her classmates… about 70% of the grade.
I think we are going to be seeing big increases in 6th and 9th instead of the large drops that we used to see.
No I can’t attribute the drops to parents pulling out before RMS or DHS during those years. The historical data does not show a trend or pattern of losing enrollments when students transitioned to RMS or DHS. Between 86-95, on average we actually increased enrollments on reaching 6th grade by 27.56 students and gained on average 40 students at 9th grade.
In the grade transitions we can look at between 86-95, enrollments increased 7 times and dropped twice. 6th grade enrollments dropped in 87 and 89. 9th grade enrollments dropped in 88 and 89.
Historically, Kindergarten enrollments start high. Enrollments drop off gradually as students moved up through the grades with two exceptions. We actually bump up at the traditional transition points.
> Case in point… when my daughter was in kindergarten, there were something 184
> in her grade. Now she is in 9th and there are 261 in her grade.
Your point is well made. What we’re seeing now doesn’t fit the historical pattern of the last 30 years. We are picking up the refugees from APS and Dekalb. My best guess, is that we will continue to gain enrollments throughout the year.
Thanks Garrett. So up above 300 and we begin to have capacity issues at all levels?
Also, isn’t there a way to set up a year-round school calendar so you get more use out of fewer classrooms? Here’s one easy link: http://www.wcpss.net/year-round/capacity_gain.html Just another option instead of having to keep building.
DM,
300-350 students per grade.
I’ll take a look at your year-round schedule links. Year-round schedules imply paying personnel year-round.
Personnel is 75-80% of the budget. We probably have less flexibility to hire more teachers and pay them well, than people assume. Which probably explains why F.Ave already has an average of 26.42 students/classroom.
I blame the breeders.
I blame everyone pushing CSD to improve. Back when CSD was in large parts segregated and my house was worth virtually nothing, we never had any problems with overcrowding. Curse you, tireless education advocates!
Yep, that’s a problem. It probably also doesn’t help that the DeKalb County school district is so dysfunctional, and that Atlanta schools have had their own well-publicized problems with cheating and the school board, so that comparatively CSD looks like a safer long-term bet for families with kids.
Good point. Just recently, in the span of two days, I bumped into two separate families we knew from private preschool days many years ago. Each had been settled for years in Atlanta and both identified themselves as “APS Refugees.”
Not surprisingly, both families were house hunting in Decatur.
This is the core of it, TOK. It’s a madhouse of moving among my friends in APS districts
Also, this year alone I have had three friends ON MY STREET get transferred and all three houses were bought by people from APS districts or people who transferred IN! I don’t know anyone who walks down my street much anymore and I have lived in my house for nearly 15 years!
Accidentally make any babies lately?
Only one and it’s small.
I hear you!
We’ve been in our house for almost 9 years, and now with our only child starting Kindergarten it feels like everything is shifting.
My sense is that, until recently, DeKalb and APS had some highly functional schools within their dysfunctional systems, mostly due to the determination and commitment of loyal school leadership, staff, teachers, and families. But DeKalb redistricted in such a way that folks in some of the cheaper parts of highly functional school zones were assigned to highly DYSfunctional schools and so have bailed to tuition in CSD or private school if they cannot afford to move. I’m not hearing that folks are fleeing Mary Lin or Morningside, but I’m hearing that Grady has lost some of its functionality so its loyal families are wondering what to do.
One of the many things that school systems have to remember to do is to not undermine its highly functional schools while fixing its general problems. With enough creativity and determination, there’s a way to address deficiencies and disparities without destroying proven, successful investments or discouraging loyal families.
Good chunks of Candler Park and Lake Claire will probably be moved from Inman Park Middle and Grady next year….
Wow! Those are some of the most loyal Mary Lin/Inman/Grady supporters around. To where?
I have heard that they are being redistricted to Whitefoord Elementary and Coan middle school. I have not heard anything about Grady, but I’m sure Coan feeds a different high school.
Yep, it’s Grady, too
Huh. I imagine that lots of people in Candler Park and Lake Claire will freak out if they’re redistricted out of Mary Lin/Inman and into schools in Kirkwood and Edgewood. What’s the source for the redistricting rumors?
There’s a good resource for what’s going on at http://www.30307schools.org/.
Also, here’s a primer: http://www.30307schools.org/uploads/1/1/6/4/1164270/30307schools_primer.pdf
They stay at Mary Linn but move for middle school. Residents have been informed by the schools, I believe.
Thanks for that info TeeRuss. I had no idea that the enrollments for Whitefoord/Toomer/Coan were so far under capacity (Coan has a capacity of 1066 and enrollment of 325?!?), vs. Mary Lin/Inman being far above capacity.
Sort of like how Winnoa Park parents freaked about the proposal a number of years ago to be “pair-up” with College Heights. probably the same dynamic at work from the nay sayers.
“Sort of like how Winnoa Park parents freaked about the proposal a number of years ago to be “pair-up” with College Heights…”
I’ve been thinking about that comment for a few days and am not sure that the situation is the same. In the case of Winnona Park, a school that had always been middle class and high performing (as far as I know–I used to have elderly neighbors who were parents there once) would have been paired up with a school that had declined in attendance and resources but was still in the City of Decatur. Mary Lin and Inman parents, or at least the ones who have been there for awhile, took back those schools from disaster and fought hard to make them high quality schools for all the children who attended them. That took some courage and grit. I can understand why, after all the investment of trust, elbow grease, and donations, the community doesn’t want to be transferred out of those schools. It would be as though longtime Oakhurst families, who had faith and stuck with the school when it was underenrolled and underresourced, now that it was successful and popular, were now being moved out to a school where they would have to start the process all over again.
Karass, the Mary Lin and possible redistricting to Toomer in Kirkwood is probably more similar to the Westchester to Oakhurst move. Albeit, Mary Lin is not closing, there are parts of Lake Claire that are geographically closer to Toomer Elementary, Coan Middle, Maynard Jackson High than to Mary Lin, Inman or Grady. The comparison is similar in that they are divided by the same tracks and in different neighborhoods in the same city.
With Mary Lin, Inman and Grady bursting at the seams and the other closer schools are severely under enrolled, the math is not too difficult. Also, with less money in the school system, it’s fiscally responsible to manage the facilities and resources currently available. It is worth noting that the current families at Mary Lin had nothing to do with the earlier transformation of the school.
I’ve heard arguments about how the city will lose money from the 30307 tax base. Any reduction from 30307 will be gained from increases in 30317 across the tracks.
The big difference between these two examples is that Decatur had extensive community meetings and coffee gatherings people’s homes to discuss the changes. Of course, APS will have a study and never include the community.
Regarding Rick’s comment about “how Winnoa Park parents freaked about the proposal a number of years ago to be “pair-up” with College Heights…” Laying aside the inaccuracy of his characterization of that debate, and in the vein of important history lessons, one of the folks who apparently “freaked” about that proposal was school board member, Valarie Wilson, who voted against it. In announcing her vote, she spoke against proposals that satisfied some folks’ political correctness bone, but did nothing about what goes on inside the classroom. She said “my people” (one of her favorite phrases) “just want a good education for their kids where they live.”
Regarding Karass’ comments about the work done by City of Atlanta communities and the Oakhurst parents to make their schools as strong as they have become, it is important to note that has happened before in Decatur. Clairemont had supposedly hit hard times and was slated for closure in the 70s and 80s. Parents fought to keep it going and build it up. While under no threat of closure, Winnona was not always this great, successful target that folks like to take potshots at. Its growing success through the 90s and this last decade is due in no small part to an incredibly dedicated cadre of parents supporting both the school with hours of volunteer work and paying attention to their kids’ education at home.
Needless to say, none of this happens without strong principals. Even before the reconfiguration, Mary Mac’s students showed the greatest gains in testing of any students in the system. Gloria Lee, Jan Goodlow, Ms. Kuebler and others led other schools and, most importantly, selected powerful teachers.
I stand corrected on the history. I used to rent a cottage from some of the folks who were pioneers at Mary Lin when most other homeowners chose private school, so I have a feel for that struggle. But many public schools around here evidently had a decline in the 70s and 80s and were then were reimbraced by the community. Ms. Kuebler told me something like that, when she was first principal, Westchester was only 30% white despite the fact that the surrounding neighborhood was mostly white and middle class. All public schools, even in the most affluent community, are only as good as the teachers who teach there and the community commitment to them. It sucks to lose your school if you have put your heart into it, no matter where it is. That’s why involving the stakeholders, listening, and empathy are important when closing schools, not blaming folks for feeling bad about it.
I apologize for misspelling Dr. Mack’s last name (I left off the “k”). Also, “folk” (singular) not “people” was the word I should have used in recounting Valarie Wilson’s statements when she voted against pairing. Again, sorry for the errors.
Karass is correct. Westchester was about 30% white in 1990 and did not have many more than 100 students. No one on our street sent their children there. They went private as soon as they could. But the neighborhood turned that around with a lot of hard work from parents and faculty, and especially Cheryl Kuebler, who was a fairly new principal.
When it got so crowded that it had to be expanded, we considered ourselves victims of our own success, as many of you have stated in this thread about the present problem.
This didn’t happen in just the last few years. It has been going on slowly but surely, with a few dips here and there, for more than 20 years.
Friends in the Medlock district tell me at least 6 families have moved into City of Decatur since DeKalb reorganization announcement last spring .
I am concerned about the size of the classes at DHS. My freshmen has close to 100 more students in his class than my recent graduate had in his class . He told me they didn’t have enough desks in his English class and that the class is huge. My older son received a great education in the City Schools of Decatur and I hope we can manage the growth. Will there be enough space in the AP classes to accomodate everyone? Only certain teachers are qualified to teach AP and they are some of the BEST teachers in our system.
I think an interesting point to note here is that while the aggregate discrepancy between the projected and actual enrollment is 7%, in 6 of the 13 classes, the discrepancy between the actual and projected is double-digit, with K being off by 19%. This to me suggests the model they’re using for their projections is not very accurate at all. I don’t think the school should be aiming to be right on average but rather to minimize the discrepancies for each class.
As for a causes; baby boom, desirable school system, and economy. I know of several families that have enrolled in Decatur from private school mostly due to lower cost of public school.
By the way, I hope the system does not over react, I predict the economy will be a big damper on the baby boom in future years. The exception will be if CSD’s reputation continues to improve and more families move to Decatur and other families continue to transfer from private schools. I doubt it will compensate for the decrease in children due to economy and aging population.
That’s the million dollar question: Will the baby boom end because of demographic factors and/or the economy? Back when the economy first collapsed, I predicted on this blog that we might see a lower birth rate. To my chagrin, I was wrong. The number of strollers on our streets is almost a caricature of the 2004 Board members statement about counting strollers.
I predicted that too, but we both acknowledged that influx of new students might outweigh any slight decrease in family size, right?
Yeah, but I truly believed there might be a downturn. Both of my sets of grandparents were alive during the Great Depression and consequently had two children each even though they all came from huge families. Anecdotal, I know. But I see intended third and fourth children everywhere in Decatur now. Maybe Americans just don’t change their beliefs or behavior based on the economic situation anymore. Hope and optimism are good as long as they are not based on lack of awareness, understanding, or overconfidence.
I would think the recession is having an impact too. There are probably a number of families who were sending their kids to private schools, but can’t afford to do so anymore.
Any idea how many students are transferring in from private schools? With the economy in the tank (and looking like it will stay there for years) I can imagine that lots of people will be looking for high-quality, lower-cost alternatives.
Pardon my redundant question. Y’all type quick.
Here is a letter from Dr. Edwards that’s going to be in the August OAK newsletter responding to Caleb’s overcrowding article –
http://oakhurstga.org/?p=748
CSD’s millage is capped at 25? That I did not know.
And they project increasing it again next year to 21.6 as I recall.
State law.
Um, yes the millage is capped at 25-mils in Decatur which is actually 5-mils HIGHER than its regularly supposed to be ’cause CSD was “grandfathered” to allow the 25-mil limit. Likewise with the 50% tax valuation; it’s supposed to be capped at 40%. In other words, the situation could be a lot, lot tighter financially.
From my understanding Caleb not only lived in Decatur before the Kindergarten registration date, he had another child already enrolled at Oakhurst.
In his case, it was not a CSD issue, it was a “missed the deadline” problem.
It is a shame when people don’t fess up to their mistakes and accept the consequences. I am thankful Dr. Edwards took the time to set the record straight. Although I think she should have taken a tougher stance – by accommodating him we now have larger K class sizes at Oakhurst.
Thanks Caleb
Direct quote from Dr. Edward’s letter:
“Our year-to-year projections overall have been within a 1-2% accuracy rate over the last few years. ”
hmmmm.
Because of one parent–one child, who would’ve been considered for CSD, Oakhurst has inflated, nay, bloated K classes?
So now the learning cottages are expensive, when before they were an inexpensive alternative to opening another school building. Make up your mind.
You are comparing the “cottages” in two different contexts. Installing cottages is more expensive than using existing space at a school that is already in operation. Installing cottages is less expensive than opening up a whole new school building.
We definitely need to start planning now for the population bubble to hit middle and high school. In the past, many families defected to private school after elementary but I think that phenom is a thing of the past (thanks to fantastic schools!).
It’s already hitting. My junior at DHS says there are 180 in her class, and there are 270 freshman this year. Wow!
We need an urgent call from our Mayor, City Commissioners, School Board members, Superintendent, City Manager:
For the good of our city: STOP HAVING BABIES!
It is bleeding us dry.
This city was much more manageable when it was just the elderly and gays.
Just kidding by the way … but you get my point!
The irony is that many people still cling to the single family home on a quarter acre as the ideal living arrangement and oppose more of the transit-friendly, downtown development that appeals to markets besides breeders and attracts very few kids (which is to say tax revenue-positive households).
If we’re going to continue having a desirable school system (and I see no reason why we won’t), it’s critical that we draw more residents who put in more, tax-wise, than they take out, service-wise.
I vote for more family-friendly high density development, e.g. condos with central playground areas, grills, and garden plots. If those were present, I’d be happy to give up the headaches of home and yard ownership. But such developments probably wouldn’t help balance the budget. It would attract families with children who incur CSD costs as well as childless folks who want a sense of community without the work of single household home ownership.
In a presentation from our city manager (about proposed multiuse zoning for the Devry property) , I was given the impression that Decatur discourages high density development that could support growing families. The added revenue of attached unit designs did not come close to the added CSD costs if those unit designs encouraged family aspirations. I suppose keeping family aspirational couples to the lower density models is one way of controlling demands on CSD.
Not sure if this is a reply to me but, if so, I was advocating along the same lines as the city. Higher density, urban multi-unit development at commercial nodes skews heavily towards childless markets. That would tend to define downtown, what’s planned for East Decatur Station and much of the regulating plan for the Devry property. By design, it’s tailored towards the preferences of people without kids.
Family friendly density — such as Karass mentions — often takes the form of garden apartments (think Post-like) or multifamily embedded in single use residential areas and basically negates the benefit.
You’re right. I meant to reply to Karass one level down.
A mix of housing types is a good thing but it should always support the vision of what Decatur is about. “A City of Homes, Schools, and Places of Worship” was and is not a bad goal to focus on.
IMO: the recent pressures on CSD should be construed as an opportunity not a burden. We have a chance to leverage excellent educational facilities to attract residents and businesses that appreciate them. I think adjusting school expansion to only meet needs is failing to account for the community growth and revenue opportunities that an excellent education system can cause. We should consider expanding our schools’ capabilities as a business gaining market share when nearby competitors are faltering.
Great post here!
This should be studied systematically.
No doubt that increases are due, in part, to the economy (wanting to avoid $ for private schools) and to an influx of new residents/ baby boom. The contribution of each component should be evaluated so that the projections can be improved. If the largest driver of increased population is new residents, then I think the trend is less likely to change. If, however, the population increase is due to a move from private schools, this may change after the economy improves and may signal a potential reduction in population in the future.
I think that the only reliable way to collect these data is a representative survey.
My personal belief based on anecdotal data is that this is due to a real influx of people moving to Decatur because of the school system and other quality of life choices (restaurants, walkability, etc).
I agree with a representative survey. We just moved to City of Decatur with our 1 year old for the quality/stable school system, walkability and proximity to Emory/CDC. We were not here yet during the Census so are not in anyone’s count. We house hunted for 6 months and at every single open house we went to in Decatur we almost exclusively encountered families like ours…two parents with one or two kids under age 5. We’d love our daughter going to Oakhurst elementary (where we’re zoned now) but are not getting attached to the idea as we suspect she’ll be at Westchester (closer to us) by the time she starts kindergarten a few years down the road (and now will have a sidewalk on Scott in order to get to it!). It will be interesting to see how it all unfolds over the next few years.
+ 1 on representative survey. We are only 4 square miles and most households have telephones. I believe that survey technology can now handle cell phones too.
Are y’all advocating use of a “representative survey” in order to tighten up enrollment projections? If I’m misunderstanding, please set me straight. But if that IS what you mean, then I don’t think it would get you where you want to be. Forgive me for what is likely to become a rant, but I need to stop biting my tongue and go on record: a survey is not the answer to everything!
CSD missed their projection this year by 214 kids across 13 grades. That’s a 7% difference based on actual enrollment as of yesterday (or whenever). But it would take a much smaller degree of error in a survey to produce the same difference. Let’s say (optimistically) we surveyed 1,000 households (approximately how many we’d need to achieve sampling error of +/- 3% at a 95% confidence level), and 350 of them said they would be sending a child to kindergarten in Aug ’12. With a sampling error of 3%, that could mean anywhere from 320-380 kindergarteners. CSD missed the kindergarten mark by 66 kids this year. Now, multiply that across most of the grades and you’re easily off by a couple hundred kids across the system. And that’s assuming no other sources of bias creep in — which is never, ever the case. Measurement error, non-response error, coverage error — each one lurks, and any professional researcher worth their salt will tell you that you can’t completely eliminate error, you have to control for it the best you can, identify it when it likely is a factor, and take it into account when interpreting the data.
Even if you constructed your sample frame and your questionnaire perfectly and executed the survey flawlessly, there would still be the challenge of determining how to qualify “representativeness.” That would have to begin with profiling current CSD families and then taking into account how that profile might be evolving, in order to establish what the representative sample needs to look like demographically. Very tricky business, given the relatively small universe (2,000 households with one or more children currently enrolled? 1,500?) and (again) the margin of error inherent in statistical analysis. We could spend lots o’ time and lots o’ money — easily the cost of 1/2 a parapro, I’ll bet, maybe even a whole one — and still not achieve the precision you crave.
I don’t know have a clue how CSD generates enrollment projections right now. Common sense tells me it is quite a challenge to account for every family that might move in or out (not to mention every family that might be undecided about private school and then register late). In any case, I don’t think the discrepancy between projected and actual enrollment represents a devastating problem, or the beginning of the end of education as we know it in Decatur. As somebody pointed out in another thread not long ago, our small school system has neither the money nor the real estate to maintain spare capacity. Investing in expansion is a huge gamble unless we’re absolutely sure what we’re seeing is a long-term trend — by which point a lot of kids will have already experienced trailers and/or slightly larger classes. IMO, neither one of those things will do lasting harm or undermine a child’s education. The tradeoff for this small, intimate, nurturing, high-quality school system is for parents, especially, to maintain perspective and stay calm and flexible and not get too worked up about the unexpected, e.g., an extra couple of kids in your child’s class, or being assigned to a trailer … sorry, I mean learning cottage … or even being sent to a school in “another” neighborhood. (Unlike 10 years ago, all of our elementary schools are comparable in terms of quality.) I’m all for pushing the system to be ever more excellent, but I think sometimes discussions get going that generate a lot more heat than light.
Told you it would probably turn into a rant.
(I grew up 200 miles farther south — that is, it got hotter earlier and stayed hotter later in the year than here, plus it was more humid and there were gnats. I didn’t attend school in an air-conditioned building until 10th grade. Starting in 4th or 5th grade, every child had 45-50 minutes of phys ed every day of the year, outside unless it was pouring rain. No screens on the windows, so the gnats (along with the occasional yellow jacket) tormented us indoors and out. In the lower grades, my class always had around 30 kids; I wasn’t in a class with fewer than 25 until I got to 10th or 11th grade and got to choose electives. I not only lived through it, but also learned enough to be selected for the Governor’s Honors Program, score very high on the SAT and receive a scholarship to a selective liberal arts college. The experience did, however, encourage some curmudgeonly tendencies. Or maybe that’s just middle age.)
Bet you got up at 4:00 a.m. and licked the street clean before you walked uphill to school too.
Of course not, licking the street would be gross! It was uphill both ways, though.
That’s all good information, STG, but I’ve got two soothing words of reassurance to address your inconvenient realities: Survey Monkey. It’s on the internet so it fixes everything, right?
You’re right, Scott, I completely forgot about Survey Monkey. It’s cheap, it’s on the Web, anybody can do it. No way to keep track of who is participating or how many times, but those are minor glitches. What was I thinking? [head smack]
Yeah, but the extra kids are not evenly distributed…. +68 in Kindergarten,, +35 in 2nd grade, +29 in 4th, +29 in 5th, +28 in 6th–this creates whole new classrooms full.
It is a costly oversight, mistake, eventuality, whatever…… it will cost money. I wonder if the school system has it?
Anyone…. Bueller….. anyone Bueller?
I think that a survey, used in conjunction with the city’s existing methods, may improve their estimates. Although their projections may have been off by 6% across the board (although I do believe their math was wrong, see another post), their projections were pretty far off for some classes (e.g., 25% for kindergarten!).
Information from a survey could help refine their existing model since these data are probably not taken into consideration. And, maybe they could have improved on some individual class size estimates.
I would think that the most important estimate would be the children under age 5. Once children have entered CSD, we have real counts of children that can be followed forward. The errors in the past have not been in predicting the distribution of children already in the system but in not realizing (or acknowledging) that the under age 5 group was growing so rapidly that the increase should be factored in school configuration. Just listening to feedback from the community in Oakhurst and the rest of Decatur that the youngest age group was burgeoning, not declining, would have helped.
This year’s actual enrollment exceeds projections in all but three grades, in some cases by two dozen or more students. This discussion thread contains several anecdotal observations about families moving into the Decatur system with kids of various ages. The factors contributing to that trend are not going to disappear any time soon. I really don’t think it’s all–or even mostly–about counting strollers.
The question one should ask—would you rather have nobody moving to Decatur and schools empty? Yes, this is a problem that increased taxes will have to solve, I say open up Westchester or add to it, and have the admin staff find another place. I grew up in the 1950’s when the school population exploded (Chicago) and they added additions and even new schools every year from kindergarten past high school. One year they just said, no more room, and cancelled all kindergarten classes for two years until more room was built. My high school had 5000 students (no joke) my freshman year, larger than many colleges. It split the next year to 2500 students in two high schools, meaning I had about 600 in the graduation class of 1968. Yes it was crowded, but good students will survive, especially with parental support. I have not moved here yet, but still plan to, even though all our kids (5) are now out of college.
Well I don’t care about history
Rock, rock, rock’n’roll high school
‘Cause that’s not where I wanna be
Rock, rock, rock’n’roll high school
I just wanna have some kicks
I just wanna get some chicks
Rock, rock, rock, rock, rock’n’roll high school
When did CSD do the projections for this year’s enrollment? Wondering why this year’s K enrollment was projected to decline to 284 from last year’s actual 5/25/11 K enrollment of 298.
Huge kudos to DM for getting and posting this info – this came up in a conversation I had the other day, and presenting the data in this format is exactly what is needed by CSD (and all of us) to understand what is happening.
We are seeing both a baby boom and an influx of existing families into the system. I suspect the largest driver of the increases is the growing disparity in quality between CSD and all other intown school systems. Certainly there are some people leaving private schools, but that could also be due to the percieved quality of CSD, making it a legitimate alternative to private schools (as well as a good value for those impacted by the economy).
Thanks also to DM and Garrett Goebel for outlining the capacity situation at the K-3 and Middle school levels. As an addition to that, the FAVE school was designed with ready expansion plans included (see the architectural drawings from when it was announced). The High School may need more capacity, and I’m sure the CSD admin is looking into that.
These are good problems to have.
Ebb and flow. Adapt. We’ve done it once (reduced elementary schools) and can do it again (increased elementary schools).
Enrollment changes just like population.
Happens in a five-year cycle or so. It goes up, peaks, and starts to go down. Been watching it in Decatur schools for almost thirty years.
The total mismanagement of Dekalb county schools geared us up to look for other alternatives.
From my experience, the private schools are just as tough to get into EVEN with this “bad” economy. I was banking on some families not being able to afford tuition and my Kindergartner getting called from the wait list. Hasn’t happened.
The math Dr. Edwards is using is to calculate the percentages in the comparison columns is incorrect.
My calculation simply on the Kindergarten numbers show the actual 8/1/11 enrollment to be 23.94% higher than the projections. The percentage increase from 5/25/11 to 8/1/11 for the same class is 18.12%.
When I learned how to calculate percentage increase of A over B, the math was: (A-B)/B
Using this formula, here’s what the chart should really look like…
comparison comparison
projected to 5.25.11 to
Projected actual 8.01.11 actual 5.25.11 8.01.11
K 284 352 23.94% 298 18.12%
1 328 319 -2.74% 280 13.93%
2 270 305 12.96% 272 12.13%
3 267 271 1.50% 235 15.32%
4 233 262 12.45% 222 18.02%
5 216 245 13.43% 194 26.29%
6 203 231 13.79% 222 4.05%
7 238 235 -1.26% 220 6.82%
8 220 234 6.36% 208 12.50%
9 273 261 -4.40% 227 14.98%
10 203 227 11.82% 195 16.41%
11 180 186 3.33% 162 14.81%
12 157 159 1.27% 175 -9.14%
3072 3287 7.00% 2910 12.96%
Even the sum of the projected student column is off…
To be fair, not sure DM if you got a “draft” version of the report – but I find this a bit troubling.
Yup, they used the wrong denominators. In calculating the percent difference between projected and actual counts of students–they divided by the actual instead of the projected count. Similarly, when calculating the percent difference between last year’s and this year’s student counts, they divided by this year’s count instead of last year’s. Probably a systematic spreadsheet formula error. Any of us could do it but should be corrected. Does make the kindergarten level increase in enrollment all the more impressive.
The 5th Grade jump in actual from 5.25.11 to 8.01.11 is huge: 26.3%.
Expect a huge increase in boy/girl parties next year! Sixth grade is the year that becomes a fad!
Counting strollers would have caught that. Right?
It was an attachment from the School Board agenda for next week. Thanks for the correction.
Wow, I hope whoever did the original chart was not also in charge of the projections.
It boils down that the school system projected a 5.6% increase to enrollment and got 13%.
That constitutes a significant miss.
Somehow they need to plug into the community realtors and apartment landlords and get better information… or, are they doing that now ?
Re opening Westchester would be a good move….. though they closed it, why ? Faulty projections ?
Hmmmmm.
The chart – when I pasted it, was much prettier… my apologies for the poor layout as it appears here.
Did you send this to the school for comment? It troubles me that they may have sent out bad math, especially when mixed with some of the grammar issues in the letters that go home from the superintendent, but I’d like to know if it was a mistake or if they were doing something with numbers we don’t see…. benefit of the doubt?
I’m sure CSD employees have seen this thread by now.
Hey, if this is such a great school system and our kids are becoming so smart, let them figure it out. Course it might be something like Lord of the Flies…
It could be a senior project! A win-win! Senior doesn’t have to flounder around figuring out a project and CSD gets smart person who knows the ins and outs of Decatur as well as how to do the math. Maybe a senior who has or is taking AP Statistics.
Observation 1: The school system sends out a report on the increasing enrollment, and our administration gets the math wrong. #2: We pay a consultant to study and report on future enrollment trends and that report is laughably off the mark. What is so great about our schools again? Just asking! Actually I know what is so great, our students and parent, and teachers.
my sixth grader says he has a class “full” of kids from fernbank (wanting to avoid shamrock) and APS. I understand there may be some exaggeration in this report, but that seems like a lot of new kids in one six grade class. I wonder how many are tuition and how many actually have residence here. I hope they will check up hard this year. We were a tuition family for a year then moved here for the schools at great expense to our family. I don’t think it is right for people to scam there way in for free. I know of families that have bought a condo and rented it out, but used the address for their kids to get in the schools. I don’t want to be cold hearted, but can we turn them in? I don’t want my taxes to go up so they can get a free ride.
Yes, you can turn them it. I’ve done it before and the family “in question” is gone.
so exactly how did you turn them in discreetly? we can joke about how nazi like it would be to turn them in (J_T), but when it hits us in the pocketbook or my kid’s class size, I will not hesitate. We went through he** to move here in a horrible housing market, and I have no patience for freeloaders.
turn name into administration at schools and what you believe the situation is. they will investigate and act on it.
YES! A School Gestapo is what we need. Of course, it will only work if we get the kids involved. Since some of them will be reluctant to turn in their friends and classmates, we will probably need to provide incentive. $10 for each non-COD student outed, maybe? The fun part will be when the interloper is unveiled and we can make them wear a scarlet “A” (APS) or a Dunce Hat “D” (DeKalb!). God, I can’t wait until all the “questionables” are gone. I did NOT move back to Decatur just to be associated with such riff raff!
OK, I’m done. Carry on…
It’s not a riff raff issue.. it’s a fraud and lying issue. Really, often it’s also a theft issue. And no… kids don’t need to be involved at all. This is really not their concern.
I don’t get why people want to condone this kind of behavior. There are legitimate and honest ways to get into the Decatur system.
All I did was call central office with my evidence and apparently, they looked into the situation…. it can be done very discreetly.
Yeah, J_T! It could be like Pavlik_Morozov!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavlik_Morozov
By all means report them!
It is not right for non-residents to send their kids to CSD schools.
If you know that someone is abusing the system by using and address of a condo they own and rent out, you should report them. They are signing an affidavit confirming they live there as their primary residence.
That is very different from assuming all non Decatur kids are lying and not paying tuition. Tuition families pay into the schools system, which off sets district costs. Students must qualify with good attendance, discipline and grades. CSD is getting high performing and good behaving tuition students.
The student ratios may be higher in some classes, but tuition students NEVER take spots that a Decatur resident could occupy. We pay tuition for both our daughters at CSD. We may soon decide to rent out our large intown house and rent a much smaller house in Decatur with no net loss. The only loss would not having to pay tuition to CSD, neighbor.
I have noticed that tuition students at RMS and DHS contribute a lot to the school community. They tend to be high performers with involved parents. Makes sense since those are families that made the deliberate choice to pay tuition and commute to school for the sake of an excellent education. At one club that included parent volunteering, the tuition parents made up the majority of the parents who actually showed up. When you’re paying for an education, you make sure your family is getting its money’s worth!
When we have seats not filled in Decatur, it makes sense to accept tuition families who value our schools.
+1
First and foremost, CSD are there to serve Decatur residents. Tuition families have the privilege of being able to attend Decatur schools and to get involved and contribute.
Karass, love your realistic outlook and wealth of Decatur knowledge.
It is clear that tuition slots will become scarce at certain grades, as the Decatur population with kids grows. It’s not an exact science. CSD did not even accept tuition applications for kindergarten last year. This year they did accept them, as the opening of FAVE and making Glennwood a K-3 school allowed for tuition slots in 1st grade.
Soooo easy. Just annex Medlock. Not all of Medlock Park, just Medlock Road and Gaylemont. Reopen Medlock Elementary as a CSD school. Then sit back and watch the Medlock folks steam. All of this could easily be accomplished during the inevitable annexation of Wal-, er,Suburban Plaza…
And to all of you complaining about the people moving into COD with their chill’un just for the “free” ejumacation, don’t say I’m not doing my part. Closed on our house last week, moving in this weekend, 2 adults, 2 dogs, and nary even a gleam of a fetus in anyone’s eye!
And before anyone beats me to it, yes, Gleam of a Fetus would make an awesome band name…
I think Jim Thirlwell probably has dibs on any band name with “Foetus” in it.
Yes, but you should add “…In Your Eye”, and then it would be even awesomer!
“Gleaming the Foetus”
“You are my apple foetus.”
“Oh, hold on–you have foetus in your eye…”
I don’t think anyone is complaining about people moving to Decatur to gain access to the school system; or about people legitimately paying tuition as long as they don’t crowd out children who reside in Decatur. The complaint is about people who lie and claim they live in Decatur when they actually don’t. Those people are committing fraud, and stealing from all of us, and should be reported.
+1
Thanks to all for this meaty post. Yes – certainly examining enrollment is a priority for us! In fact, Dr. Edwards may be convening a workgroup this year with that particular focus.
Thanks to CSD Dad for catching my calculation error! Yes, the denominator column was attributed incorrectly. Since I needed to correct the spreadsheet, I also updated with our August 4 (today) numbers https://eboard.eboardsolutions.com/Meetings/ViewMeetingOrder.aspx?S=4052&MID=20579 (click on Superintendent’s Report and scroll to the bottom: Enrollment Update 8.04.11). Each year we try to improve the quality and quantity of our enrollment “watching.” This year we have provided a view by grade in comparison to projections and the last day of school the previous year.
We were also to accept more paying tuition this year with the opening of K-3 Glennwood. The most popular grades to enter CSD for tuition are K, 6, and 9. The purpose of paying tuition is to help fund the teachers that we already have hired. We do not hire additional teaching staff with tuition funds. This tuition revenue of nearly $1,000,000 helps to offset the millage (in Decatur, one levied mill generates approximately $1,165,000). Also, please note that no residents were displaced from their home school to accommodate any tuition students. All tuition students are on yearly agreements, so if room does not exist at a certain grade level the next year, then tuition will not be accepted.
I will update this chart again on Monday evening because that is an important day for us: on the 5th day of school we are able to adjust our rolls by removing students’ names that have not been present. Hence our enrollment numbers will decline (as has been the case the last five years when we have tracked enrollment more closely). For the quantitatively-desired among you, our average attendance rate on the first three days has been between 98-99%, so we anticipate a 1% decline in our enrollment numbers on Tuesday, August 9. At that point, our K-12 enrollment may sit at approximately 3,231. Registration this week at Westchester has been very slim. Our busiest times were June and the second/third weeks of July.
Again, thank you for your thoughtful posts about CSD. We will continue to do our best to educate students and manage fiscal resources in a stewardly way. As I do not view this post as frequently as some of you (!!!), feel free to call 404.370.4400 x916 (cell: 404.592.7151) or email me individual questions: [email protected] .
Best,
Thomas Van Soelen
CSD
Thanks for the input.
With a net increase from last year’s enrollment of over 370 kids vs. a projection of 215, what impact will that have on staffing, class size, space and the school budget?
Why is anyone surprised by this???
Here’s where they come from: elderly residents are moving out; the home is either renovated or torn down and rebuilt; and young families are moving in. You could likely get better predictions by looking at the housing turn over in the past 3-5 years. We moved to Decatur 5 years ago knowing we would eventually have children and we would want them in the CSD system.
Also, would it be hard to add an optional questionnaire to city voting ballots? ie. “Do you have a child you expect to send to CSD kindergarten in the next 2 years?” Yes or No.
It’s always amusing how a set of facts can spur such a divergence of responses. I see the table and am thankful that my family is part of such an in-demand school system. I see a market that loves CSD. I’m also happy that the school system conservatively estimates enrollment increases, which is financially prudent. And lastly I contrast the huge, massive, indescribable difference between this school system and those of our neighbors in Atlanta and DeKalb.
Others see the data and think our schools are run by idiots.
I hope the latter folks strongly consider private schools as an alternative.
Yet it still has to be paid for, doesn’t it?
I still have not seen an answer from Thomas Van Soleon on the financial implications for staffing, space, class size and budget implications.
From his post, he seems to be saying he would rather talk to several hundred phone callers before he posts on this blog bout what’s going on, that makes no sense to me.
You can feel good about it all you want (nothing I have seen makes a parent more paranoid than their kids’ education), but how much more will you pay for it? Care to make a donation?
The CSD has the fiduciary responsibility to NOT be surprised by over or under enrollment–otherwise why are we paying them? They are supposed to have some skills in this area aren’t they?
We cannot have a school system that careens from tree to tree in a financial sense. They need to plan for success, then come to us for the funding. Ahead of time, before kids are showing up on the first day of class. Oops. too late…..
I agree, its a good thing that people perceive CSD as better than what’s going on in Atlanta or the county, but are we that much better, or have they become that much worse?
I’m sorry that my line of thinking does not make sense to you. I found another brief moment to re-acquaint myself with the blog, so here is an answer to your multi-part question:
With a net increase from last year’s enrollment of over 370 kids vs. a projection of 215, what impact will that have on staffing, class size, space and the school budget?
class size:
As you can see from the table, the growth is in numerous grade levels, thus the impact on class size is spread out over literally 280 teachers. After “no-shows” are recorded on Monday, we can report class size averages.
staffing:
Two additional paraprofessionals were hired at Oakhurst to work with Kindergarten learners.
space:
We still have room for more students at several locations. For example, Glennwood Elementary is using several rooms for experiences such as music and art. Those could be transformed into grade level classrooms (e.g., K, 1, 2, 3) in the future. RMS and DHS are under capacity as well.
school budgets:
We expect to receive funding from the state in the fall and the spring. In fact, we certainly hope to receive more money for the state for the obvious reason of educating more students. In the past Dr. Edwards has examined those amounts and added to school allotments.
Thanks,
Thomas
Thanks, that helps !!
Where is the city border wall I was promised back in 1995?
Tee –
It’s easy to think people are idiots when they fail to communicate well.
The main reason for this failure IMO is a level of pride within this administration that consequently sidelines and offends the sensibilities of a significant portion of the community at large. It very well may be that the Superintendent’s ideas are sound – but if her poor communication skills result in a perceived lack of respect for the advice and concerns of the community – then trust is lost and it’s not easy to regain.
A recent example:
At the opening ceremony for the Fifth Avenue School, the Superintendent in effect congratulated herself and the board for having the grand vision to save the neglected and shuttered Fifth St. elementary. Not once did she mention the huge community involvement by, I daresay, many of us here contributing to this blog and many others – parents and otherwise – in finding a better solution than the originally proposed plan to enlarge Renfroe.
We’re all thankful that our families are part of such an in-demand school system.
It doesn’t serve us well to drive a wedge between those who have a right to question the actions of this administrator and those like yourself who feel otherwise. It’s not that some think she’s an idiot – it’s a question of trust and respect.
Like I said – if communication and sensibilities are a higher priority than educational results, then you may want to investigate your private school options.
I’m of the opinion that communication and sensibility enhance educational results. No prioritizing needed…
Well, here’s a +1 for teeruss…
+1
That was a +1 for FATboy’s post, not TeeRuss!
Not giving due credit to anonymous posters on a blog. The nerve of some people.
My point Chad is about giving due credit to those in the community who recognized that the Renfroe plan wasn’t the best plan. That, in fact, by involving the community in the board’s decision in weighing all those (how many?) options, we together found the best solution.
I’ve found the CSD very responsive to community input. That’s enough acknowledgement for me.
So wait, they did or did not involve the community?
This thread lead to a good outcome regarding the above table of actual vs projected enrollments. A table with accurate counts but inaccurate calculations of percent increases was posted on the public eBoard and here. The error in calculation was noted by commenters, some kinder than others, but that’s the nature of a blog. CSD thanked the original poster for catching the error and, in less than a day, made the corrections on eBoard. This seems like a good, timely outcome, better than having a table with errors on the permanent meeting record.
Geez … people in this town are COMPLETELY INSANE!!!
nah, the real people are fine. it’s just their online alter-egos that you find disturbing.
You meant COMPLETELY INVESTED IN THE SUCCESS OF OUR CHILDREN AND OUR SCHOOL SYSTEM!!!, didn’t you? To that charge, we’ll happily plead GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY!!!
Agreed… We have a super popular school system.. so much so that our enrollment projections are off. Instead of congratulating the superintendent, school board and admins on a job well done and a good problem to have… all folks can do is complain that our popularity was underestimated and absolutely freak about a spreadsheet error.
CSD has come a long, long way since my high schooler started kindergarten. Everything isn’t perfect all the time (what is?), but my kids are thriving and learning a ton and my property value is a heck of a lot more stable than that of my neighbors in 30307 and DeKalb County.
I’m thankful….I’m also kind of embarrassed by all of this nonsense from parents. Spend a week and Dr. Edwards’s job and you might get it.
Finally, someone nails it. Posting may now cease or, at the very least, migrate to some other civil servant out there failing to meet our unmeetable expectations. Have at it!
+1
Hmmm. I think that things are getting a teeny bit heated here, and for most of the comments, it seems unnecessary, as what people are saying is mostly is all consistent. I take it that almost everybody agrees on the following:
1. Decatur has a really good school system.
2. It’s a sign that our school system has a good reputation that people with kids are moving here, and to that extent, increased enrollments are a good problem to have. It’s a hell of a lot better than people moving away or pulling their kids out of the system for private schooling.
3. But the increased enrollments do pose problems: in the short term, problems like larger-than-ideal class sizes, and the long term, the capacity of our schools to handle the crowds.
4. Having predictions about enrollment that are as accurate as possible would be a good thing, in order to be able to prepare for the future and avoid those problems.
So can’t we all just get along?
There is some disagreement about whether we could get better enrollment predictions: for my part, I don’t know. Nobody thinks that these predictions can be perfect, but it’s worth asking whether they can be better. See #4 above: if we could avoid having K enrollment projections off as much as they were off this year, that’d be good, yes?
Also, FWIW, I don’t think that there is anything here, as far what actions have been taken or not taken by CSD, for people to get hepped up about. CSD is (on the whole) a well-run and responsive system.
You know, just looking at my little immediate universe, I have come to the conclusion there was no way this miscalculation could have been avoided. In the last few months, we have had three tweeners, two high schoolers, and some elementary kids plus a preKer move in, all new, and a parent get physical custody of a fourth grader and a fifth grader who have been in and out of CSD since preK. How on earth can any sort of projection predict that? STG’s statistical breakdown above proves that, really…
Plus, I accidentally had a baby that increased CHECHLC enrollment, too. It’s can’t just be my grid!
As long as CSD pays attention when people say things like “I know your consultant says our area is declining in population but here’s what’s going on on our street….”, huge miscalculations will probably be avoided. There’s statistical validity but there’s also face validity (aka common sense).
Yes, but, what Teeruss and others are avoiding blurting out, that was years ago, and yes they screwed up on the financial side of the outlook, but, at some point, grownups here have got to let it go. Really, just let it go–this is not a vacuum it’s an evolutionary system, it will change and people will make mistakes, hopefully they learn from, both, having made them AND having been reminded of them every August.
(Also, as is apparent on this blog every week, there is no such thing as “common sense”.)
Ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen your attention please.
In this corner, wearing white, from the city of the big shoulders,
The number one contender in a ten round exhibition for your entertainment.
So when the bell sounds (ding!) prepare yourselves for the MAIN EVENT!!
You’re both making good points. Karass rightly and accurately points to a difficulty the administration sometimes has admitting mistakes. Gibbetts points to the healthy approach of learning to move on. They’re not mutually exclusive. I’ve never seen a more balanced and careful historian than Karass. She rightly remembers that the numbers were manipulated in the early debate and contrary information was ignored (and denigrated) to support a favored policy. No one should forget that, but, neither does it help much to stay focused there. (Karass does not stay there; she just does not ignore that history.) In this case, there’s no political agenda being served by missing the estimates. For all the reasons folks mentioned, it’s hard to predict influx of students, even with a survey. Sampling and trend lines are somewhat useful, but our sample size is so small that it does not take much to create a problem. I just hope we err on the side of building in excess capacity. Yeah, that’s costly and may be wasteful, but it seems to be a smart bet for the coming years.
“She rightly remembers that the numbers were manipulated in the early debate and contrary information was ignored (and denigrated) to support a favored policy.”
While I could not be less interested in rehashing the earlier debate with Tom and Karass, or with anyone, I am also very aware that many readers of this blog were not present and/or not paying attention when the 2004 reconfiguration was debated, decided and executed. I was here and paying close attention. I disagree with Tom’s assessment and see no reason to let his version of history go unchallenged.
What I remember is that a multitude of issues were on the table, and various arguments were advanced to support or oppose each of the many configurations that were cnosidered. Some or the issues at stake were (rightly, in my opinion) deemed to carry more or less weight than others. Among the numbers, anecdotal evidence, allegedly relevant data from other places, and local opinions, there had to be a sifting out, to separate what was relevant from what wasn’t, what was solid from what was bogus. Emotions ran high, and some people who didn’t get what they wanted became convinced (or at least, argued loudly and publicly) that a conspiracy had prevailed and/or the decision-making was inept and/or corrupt. I don’t think that was the case at all.
I can only speak for myself but I never thought there was a conspiracy. In fact, as a parent relatively new to the system, extremely happy with Westchester, and having participated in the round table process, I went into the reconfiguration process with complete agreement with the goals, a lot of trust, and little anxiety. Two things disturbed me—one was the pitting of Westchester vs. Clairemont, however it happened, but I think that truly has resolved except perhaps among folks whose children are now grown and haven’t had a chance to develop rapport and trust with the new melded community. The other was that folks all over Decatur, especially in Oakhurst, but everywhere, were pointing out that there was a huge preschool population coming up and the projections of school population decline were unlikely to be valid. I didn’t speak up much because so many other, more articulate, more experienced folks were speaking up and I thought the facts and reasonable suggestions would rise up through all the unpleasantness, bigotry, defensiveness, and posturing and be recognized by the reasonable and earnest folks that the Board members are. I have always regretted that. Once something is done, it cannot be undone no matter how right you are, no matter how much later developments prove you right. So my advice to the parents of current young children is to speak up now if you have concerns about enrollment data or decisions, politely but firmly and hopefully strategically. Being nice and quiet results in your being better liked but not in resolution of problems. CSD leaders can handle the stress of public involvement; they’ve proven that. CSD did a much better job with listening and coming up with iterative improvements during the last reconfiguration and the community did better with less blaming and pointless devisiveness. Decatur is one of the few places that you can see participatory democracy truly work.
I think Jared’s points below are the more interesting. What will the school system do if his concerns about growth are correct? Maybe we can start with what would we have done differently — if anything — if we had accurately projected current enrollment?
FWIW, anonymous poster STG is correct that it is important for folks who were not here to understand the historical context of where we are, whose shoulders — or bones — you are standing on. For those of you who were not here, the viability of the decision to close Westchester, truncate the K-5 grade span at our elementary schools by 2 grades, and create a two-grade school critically depended on a projection of declining school enrollment. Otherwise, even its supporters agreed, the plan would not work. If enrollment did not decline, we would have trailers at schools (we did) and, in a short time, Glennwood would not be able to handle the student body size (it wasn’t). Consultants were hired and projected declining enrollment, albeit declining just enough to make the system work. Systemic evidence, not just anecdotal, was offered to contradict those projections, and serious flaws in the methodology used by the consultants were highlighted. Other arguments were offered pro and con about the plan. The board chose to go with the superintendent’s recommendation to follow the consultants’ numbers that turned out to be incorrect. The board and administration insist to this day that there is no way they could have anticipated the growth in students. You should dig around and figure out what you think. Just ask a broad spectrum of folks.
I agree wholeheartedly with Tom’s advice to folks who were not here or not paying attention in 2003-04 to “dig around and figure out what you think.” Don’t take what anybody says about it here at face value. It was a complicated situation.
Yes, the enrollment projections in hand at the time proved to be off the mark. But balancing enrollment was not the only issue being addressed. Decisions about reconfiguration weighed that issue along with several others (including the fact that at that time, our elementary schools were effectively segregated by race).
BTW, since I don’t run for this or that public office every couple of years, I’m comfortable using a pseudonym.
I’m not sure I see the connection between anonymous posting and running for office, but I hope those kind of comments don’t intimidate others from putting themselves out there if they think they can contribute as a candidate or as a poster in your own name. Running for office is hard on the candidate; it takes your time, you have to take sometimes difficult stands on a variety of things, and you still may find yourself getting shots years after running. And it’s even harder on your family, who bear huge costs and get none of the fun. All in all, however, it’s a great experience, and we have wonderful opportunities right here in our city this year. I am done running for anything but the bus, but we benefit when folks shed their fear and step up from all sides. Similarly, making posts in your own name is a little scary, but it provides a level of honesty that I appreciate in others. I think it also may check some of the more aggressive things folks say when they can hide behind anonymous handles. So, I use my name.
If Tom Stubbs vision had held the day, then I think we would be looking at a situation where (unlike today) our elementary schools would all have different levels of academic achievement and would most likely still be segregated by race – as they were prior to 2003.
But at least we wouldn’t have a problem with enrollment exceeding our expectations because not as many people with children would not be moving to Decatur to send their kids to the public schools.
Ah, the race card. Been a while since that one was thrown. You don’t know me. You don’t know my history in this community, this county or where I’ve worked nationally. You couldn’t say that if you did. The changes our board made flew in the face of every piece of research on what at risk children most need in their early years of schooling. If those were your concern, then you should have fought the changes tooth and nail. More than any other student, at risk children are harmed by multiple transitions between schools and they are helped more than any other by consistent, long term supervision through teachers and principals. Longer grade spans help those kids more than any other configuration. Whether the wonderful developments in our schools have anything to do with the 2004 reconfiguration is something no one can prove. I agree with the others that we have a great problem here, with more and more demand for our schools Whether that increased demand is a function of problems in other school systems, increased demand for inside-the-perimeter housing, or general gentrification, there are far more powerful currents in the river than the changes made in 2004. If the board had chosen differently, we would not have buses clogging our streets eating our budget, and dictating opening times of schools. We are more likely to have the capacity to handle fluctuations in student population, the “excess capacity” of K-5s being one of the items criticized by proponents of the change. (We were going to save lots of money because 4 classes spread across two schools could be compressed into 3 classes in a single school.) We need to figure where to go from here. Your comment was both wrong and out of line.
+1
Tom, Marty didn’t “play the race card.” He accurately reminded us that segregation within CSD was a compelling issue on the table at the time.
The configuration you championed would not have resolved two of the most serious shortcomings in CSD at that time: the uneven quality among the various K-5 schools and the fact that they were, effectively, racially segregated. As I recall, CSD was operating under a federal desegregation order and the hammer was going to come down shortly if we didn’t fix things. We had some schools bursting at the seams while others were substantially under-enrolled. Widely held perceptions held that there was even more difference in quality among K5 schools than there actually was. Every kid who walked into 6th grade at Renfroe knew whether he/she came from one of the “good” schools or one of the “bad” schools, which had subversive effects both academically and socially. And while balancing enrollment wasn’t the only critical issue, it had its place in the equation. CSD was losing out on federal and/or state dollars because some elementary grades were spread so thinly across so many schools, individual classes were below minimum.
Yes, there is research that supports long grade spans for at-risk children in the early grades. As I recall, however, there were a number of contributing factors that differed between CSD and the school districts in any of those studies, so that apples-to-apples comparisons about outcomes would need to be pretty heavily qualified. Furthermore, there seems to be quite a bit of research that supports the 4-5 academy model — not to mention the positive anecdotal evidence around town over the past five years that suggests it’s working out great.
I’m not playing any card. I’m just laying out the facts and reminding some of those who maybe were not here in 2003-2004 that Decatur’s elementary schools were segregated by race back then and that that, along with creating schools that were similar in academic achievement, that was the impetus for the reconfiguration.
I stand by that if it had not been for the reconfiguration, Oakhurst and College Heights would still be segregated by race today. Yes, gentrification was already underway, but parents, by and large, were not sending their kids to Oakhurst.
Marty, I do have to chime in and say you are probably not correct in assuming the schools would still be somewhat segregated. A huge demographic shift in several parts of town is really what is responsible more than anything for the changing racial compositions of the schools. Not only that, I think it is pretty unfair to imply that the reconfiguration and the current is what is responsible for the current boom in the schools. The failure of DeKalb and APS are partially responsible, as is the desirability of 30030 as a small town in an urban area. Plus, Phyllis Edwards didn’t exactly walk into a failing system!
We did have a deadline, though, in terms of getting the system desegregated. I can’t remember the details, but while the gentrification of Oakhurst was obviously well under way by that time, I think it was also clear we were not going to reach the required threshold of balance without being proactive about it.
BTW, what other parts of town have experienced huge demographic shifts? I’m not challenging your assertion, I just don’t always pay attention.
I guess I was thinking of the residential that has sprung up around the downtown area…..
There were good reasons for or against the change, but the threat of Justice Department action or issues or deadlines related to our desegregation order were hollow. We did operate under a very old desegregation order. DeKalb got it lifted without any problem, as have many other school systems, that were far more segregated than ours. We could have easily gotten our order lifted before the reconfiguration. Justice Department folks investigated not out of their own concerns, but because someone filed a complaint and they are required to come. I met with the Justice Department attorneys. They have not won any cases such as folks thought we might face since the 1980s (see, e.g., Holton v. City of Thomasville, a 2006 ruling from the 11th Circuit), and have never succeeded in an action such as forcing a school system to junk a standard K-5 elementary school for school with more truncated grade spans.
Time for a little history lesson kids. In the late 1990’s my son was at Westchester and his mom taught at Oakhurst. Westchester was almost all white, except for the “project kids” bused in. Westchester was a newly renovated beautiful facility. Less than 1 mile away, literally across the track, Oakhurst was the oldest school building in the city. There was no evidence of any repairs. No A/C and the windows would not open. Ceilings were actually collapsing on the 100% low income Black children. Below. Contrary to what I think Tom says, the Justice Department, ,if we had a Dem in the Whitehouse, when the complaint was made, would have had a easy time proving a segregated system with a unequal education experience for white and black kids.
Rick is correct that Westchester had just been renovated. It was part of the work funded by the bond money. Just as Oakhurst and the other schools were later renovated. As to the allegations of segregation, as of 2004, the racial split was Glennwood roughly 45-55, Westchester 35-65, Clairemont and Winnona 30-70. Had we kept the K-4 system and the kids from College Heights came to Winnona, the split there would have been similar to Glennwood. Oakhurst was 90-10. Equal distribution? No way. Segregationi? No way either. Indeed, during the 2001 debate over “pairing” and as shown again every year thereafter, funding per pupil was higher at Oakhurst than at any other school. There was no de jure segregation such that the Justice Department can (and should) challenge. The distribution of children was largely a function of housing patterns. While nothing is certain in litigation, no court has upheld a challenge in that context.
There were two different issues that were being addressed in that one reconfiguration decision in 2004. One was reconfiguring so that all children residing in Decatur had fair and equal access to a high quality educational environment and experience, including similar diversity across the schools. This was the goal about which I think most intelligent, caring, foward-thinking, conscientious members of the community agreed, even though some preferred one model over others–e.g. 4/5 Academy vs. K-5 vs school partnering vs. magnet schools vs. proportional distribution neighborhood schools, etc..
The other issue was addressing declining enrollment. That is where I think CSD erred seriously and then did not consider community feedback about a probable surge of young children enough. My opinion is that they thought the community feedback was just a strategy to avoid
addressing reconfiguration. Or maybe they were so convinced of the projections that new evidence did not seem valid.
At the time, many folks did not clearly see that two different issues were being considered in one decision. I know I didn’t. When the suggestion was made that parents who wanted to keep Westchester open were racist, I was horrified, hurt, and confused. I did not sign the petition to keep Westchester open until the last minute because I was so worried that I was somehow supporting something elitist or even subtly racist.
So it is possible and even rational to applaud CSD for providing a high quality education to all children in Decatur but be critical of closing too many schools in 2004. The decision was more complex than pass/fail.
STG, thank you for your brevity and resistance to the awful, sensual temptation of circumlocution.
Giblets, thank you for your use of multi-syllable words. Very rare in these days of “u” and “OMG”.
Looking at STG’s post, I think I was jumping to conclusions somewhat
Actually, things were pretty scary before Dr. Edwards arrived. But every student was going to have a library card.
Yes, I agree. But the selection of a more competent superintendent was yet another separate issue from the other two of 1) providing equitable access to quality education and resources to all children; and 2) projecting enrollment for the number of schools needed. It happened before the reconfiguration decision which addressed both 1) and 2).
+1
From my experience, prediction vs. actual enrollment – parents and out of state movers are looking at the district – BUT, children could not be registered until we received our utility bill, which is about 2 months after we actually signed on a lease.
Last November, we had no clue we’d actually get to come to GA from a western state.
February, we started thinking there might be a chance we’d get here – we started researching areas to live, and Decatur was surely one of the candidates – contacted the school office, and was told that registration can’t happen till we take residency here
April, without knowing for sure whether we’d actually be moving, I’ve become staying on top of developments, but not been able to register yet.
End of July is when we actually closed and moved out here.
So, just based on my experience, I’m wondering if the system could have a “sign-up” system or a list where they have people tell them of their interest level of moving in, it could help with better prediction?? Rather than keeping them out till they can actually register (which is 1.5 ~ 2month after they find a space to live here)??
Hi All,
I am concerned that the Board and Superintendent are still not quite aware of the surge in young families.
As many Kindergartners as I know for 2011, I literally lose track when I try to count those who will start in 2016; I could fill a class just with those I know OUTSIDE of daycare. I fear that because it’s made up of members who have older children, the Board does not have its ears to the ground to look beyond statistical projections to grasp the change in enrollment. We have a feedback loop where young families are settling in Decatur and then recruiting their friends, and it feeds on itself and is picking up steam.
Think 350 is big for Kindergarten? We can conceivably be looking at 400 in the next five years. Really. I have yet to see any acknowledgement by CSD that they have misjudged their projections for 2011 and what they are going to do in subsequent years. I don’t know how to make this any more clear. Parents are starting to get worried – it would be great if this could be directly addressed!
Jared
It would be good to have some Board members with younger children in the system as well as Board members whose children have come up through the system and are now older and/or finished with CSD. Both perspectives are important because the issues of preK-5 are so different from the issues of 6-12. Knotty preK-5 issues tend to have a lot to do with class size, school configuration, paraprofessionals, standardized testing,the gifted program, safe routes to school. RMS and DHS issues have a lot to do with curriculum, academic models, sports, discipline, advanced courses. The ideal Board candidate in terms of having their ear to the ground is the candidate with a wide age spread among his/her children.
You make it sound like issues of concern to preK-5 parents can’t possibly be comprehended fully by someone whose own preK-5 experience is several years past. That makes no sense to me. I wouldn’t want to see the Board packed with octogenarians, but I honestly don’t think that much has changed since current tweens and teens were in kindergarten. Furthermore, you’re implying that parents who sit on the Board can’t keep more than one thought or set of thoughts in their heads at once. Their job is to do what’s best for the system, not what’s best for the grade their own kid happens to be in. PLUS, there’s a lot to be said for having people making decisions who can apply experience and perspective to those preK-5 concerns. It provides ballast. In contrast, parents whose kids are still very young have limited experience and limited perspective.
A case can be made–perhaps more than one–in favor of periodic turnover on the Board. The argument you’re making does not support it, IMO.
I’m also in favor of a limited number of terms, like the President. Problem is that it’s hard to get good people to put in that much work for a stipend of $12,500/year (which I think the Board members have been foregoing because of the tight budget, right?) So there’s a downside to losing experienced Board members after 8 years not knowing whether there’s folks in the wings willing to step up behind them.
Now, why did you think that I implied that Board members with older or grown children cannot possibly comprehend the issues of elementary school? I certainly think they can and I am not a fan of agism, especially as I age! But I also think that a balance of perspectives on the Board is ideal IMHO. I know that my perspective on 4 year olds has certainly changed–I used to worry about the balance of learning through play vs. a more structured academic environment. Now I look at those little ones and think “Who let those babies onto the bus?!”
+1
And why does that person need to have kids? I think Cubalibre, for example, would be a thoughtful, curious, educated and engaged member, but she has no kids. School board concerns are not just for people with kids. I wish I had realized that years ago when reconfiguration madness was going on and before. I have been in Decatur with the exception of a couple of years since the 1980s, but I am woefully ignorant of a lot issues now that I have kids since I wasn’t planning on kids and ignored the issues when they were “hot”. Bad move on my part.
That’s an excellent point. Someone without kids would add a very interesting perspective to the Board. It might really increase the CSD-community connection. However, I suspect, but do not have the political knowledge to know for sure, that it would be hard for a non-parent, non-educator to win. I think that school board elections are driven by voting parents. But I could be wrong and I would vote for whatever candidate had the platforms and values that I thought would be the best for our children, regardless of whether or not they had children.
Valarie and Mark no longer have kids in the system, right?
Not that I know of. Of the other three, I believe that all three have high schoolers, and two have middle schoolers. I don’t think any of the current Board members has a child in any of the elementary schools or the ECLC.
Why, thanks, Nell! Despite the fact that I chose not to have children, I still care very much about them, and want all of them to have the best education/life possible. Contrary to popular belief, people who’re child-free often have either raised or helped raise other people’s (usually relatives’) children, and so the concerns parents have are not foreign to us. We can, however, step back and look at issues like this one with a somewhat less jaundiced eye than our childed counterparts, and that can be very valuable. Plus, as you so aptly reminded me in another thread, the child-free amongst us who’re paying taxes into a system they won’t use still have a vested interest in seeing that their money is spent wisely…so it’s nice when a parent can appreciate that about us.
“I have yet to see any acknowledgement by CSD that they have misjudged their projections for 2011 and what they are going to do in subsequent years.”
#1 – They put the numbers right out there. Here’s what we forecasted vs. Here is what happened. How can you acknowledge it any more directly? Or are you looking for a formal apology.?
#2 – Go back and read Mr. Van Soelens posts. He comes right out and says that it is a priority and that they are planning on work groups to address it. Or is it not good enough that they don’t have the answer yet?
#3 – Previously the issue of reopening Westchester has been raised, if I am not mistaken. That in and of itself is tacit acknowledgement that there is an awareness of the issue.
This was a response to Jared’s 1:55 post.
Hi,
The numbers shouldn’t have been a surprise – I’ve seen concerns raised directly to the Board last year about underestimating projections, but there were not adjustments made in how they were compiled – at least as far as I know.
An apology isn’t needed, but perhaps some statement that we missed the boat and need to take a new approach. The note from the Assistant Superintendent was very helpful in that direction, as will subsequent efforts I hope. However, the more important dialogue is how we manage growth now that it’s coming.
-Jared
Just noticed this:
Decatur school enrollment jumps
Posted: Aug 03, 2011 5:53 PM
Updated: Aug 03, 2011 6:26 PM
http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/15204662/decatur-school-enrollment-jumps
Renee Starzyk – email
DEKALB COUNTY, GA (CBS ATLANTA) –
While many school districts are struggling to make ends meet, City of Decatur schools report a 10 percent jump in enrollment this year.
The district opened the 4/5 Academy this week, a school for fourth- and fifth-graders. It is the first school the city has built in 41 years.
The surge in new students is a change from early 2000, when the district saw declining enrollment.
“Last week, we had a family come from Namibia that used to work for the consulate,” said Thomas Van Soelen, associate superintendent of the district. “We had a family come from Iceland, and that’s pretty rare for us. This is new for us.”
Van Soelen said students are also transferring from private schools. He said it may be because families cannot afford private tuition in the tough economy, but he also pointed to the quality education Decatur offers.
“I couldn’t speculate why families are leaving private school,” said Van Soelen. “I can say that our program in Decatur city has improved dramatically over the last 6 and 7 years.”
School leaders said the district has enough room for the new students, as well as the money to cover added costs.
Parents said they are not surprised by the rising enrollment.
“It all goes back to taxes,” said Erin Murphy, whose daughter attends the new school. “We pay higher taxes to live in Decatur, but what you see as a result of that is better police, better fire department and better schools.”
“We like it,” parent Jill Myers said of the school system. “It seems like a small family and a big warm hug.”
Copyright 2011 WGCL. All rights reserved.
“We had a family come from Iceland…”
Clearly we should stop firing arrows at CSD and instead redirect at CoD Economic Development folks for bringing in all those Icelandic Video gamers. See what a fine mess they’ve gotten us into making things so livable and workable???
Anyone know anything about Icelandic cuisine? Might be a good time for food establishments to add it to their menus.
Fermented shark.
Lol. I believe there’s an early, hilarious No Reservations episode which includes “traditional” Icelandic cuisine.
I had some colleagues of mine travel to Iceland who were treated to a ‘traditional’ meal that included, IIRC, fermented puffins that had been buried underground for a year inside a seal. Sounds similar to this dish. They reported that, yes indeed, it was vile beyond belief.
For all the (class) size queens:
Seems like it is the TEACHERS and relative affluence of the student not just the class size that makes a big difference and the smaller class size advantage does the most good early on….
http://www.salon.com/life/education/index.html?story=/mwt/feature/2011/08/06/good_school_excerpt
What I got from the article was that class size alone is not enough to make a difference in student learning–teacher quality, curriculum, and socioeconomic status of student also matter. Makes sense, most behavioral outcomes like school performance are multifactorial, not simplistic like measles virus causes measles, end of story. However, class size is an objective variable that can be manipulated much easier than family socioeconomic status or even teacher quality. It is unrealistic to think that all of your children’s teachers will be as highly qualified, talented, skilled, and committed as possible all of the time. Teachers are human beings with a range of strengths and weaknesses, ups and downs, and their effectiveness can vary over time and by the chemistry of the students in their class. Even curriculum is kind of squishy. Veterans of the “old” Expeditionary Learning say that Clairemont’s current version is very different from what it was under Principal Judy Greene when Clairemont was a much smaller school.
An oversight in the Salon article was not addressing the role of paraprofessionals and other ancillary educators. Substantive, daily paraprofessional and/or special student suppport (i.e. 1/2 FTE or more) at the elementary level can mitigate some of the burden of a larger class for teachers and increase the amount of 1:1 attention that a student receives.
The other issue that Salon didn’t address is the issue of “the kids in the middle”. In a large class, the gifted kids will get some special attention and the kids with learning disabilities and an IEP (Individual Educational Plan) will get some special attention, maybe even some one on one time, as dictated by law and as they should. If a class is large, the teacher is busy, and resources are tight, the kids in the middle can get inadequate attention. They may do just as well on their CRCT exams but be having a less engaged, less rich, less rewarding experience. I have spent a lot of time helping out in classrooms and know how challenging it is for teachers to give 1:1 attention to every student when they need it on top of instruction, classroom management, and administrative duties.
All other things being equal, if I had a choice, I would pick a class of 25 over a class of 30, a class of 20 over 25. No point in talking about class sizes smaller than that because only once in our entire time in CSD has any of my children had less than 20–a class of 17 one year right after the reconfiguration, never again.