Comments on: Reflecting on student assignment

By: rpnorton

rpnorton — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 02:24:55 +0000

Hi Frank – there has been some effort put into determining why some groups are less likely to turn in their paperwork, mainly input from groups like Parents for Public Schools, the Parent Advisory Council and Coleman Advocates. In general, the answer is, all of the above. Undocumented families are worried about submitting official paperwork to the district (though it does not get reported to immigration authorities), so that’s a discouraging factor. Many other families are so consumed with the day to day struggle of getting by that they don’t realize that kindergarten admission deadlines come along quite early in the year. Many of our schools have launched great outreach campaigns for their students transitioning to middle- or high- school, so the problems seems mostly centered around families whose children are eligible for kindergarten or who are new to the district.

By: Frank

Frank — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 00:43:22 +0000

While I see the attraction of overhauling the current confusing system, I’m afraid that we’ll throw the baby out with the bathwater. With the current “choice” system, over the last 10 years, the number of “acceptable” schools went from 5 to, what, 25? That’s great! Parents are engaged and excited about immersion and some of the other types of schools offered by the district.

I see the main problem with re-segregating schools is the fact that only around 50% of African-American and Hispanic families fill out the forms on time for Round 1. Of course they’re re-segregating! Anyone who doesn’t fill these in will have their 5-year-old assigned to a low-demand (and likely low-scoring) school.

Has any work been put into finding out why these groups aren’t submitting the paperwork? Is it too complicated? Are parents afraid of deportation or other legal trouble? Do they not know about the deadline in time? Something else?

The demographic data in that PowerPoint presentation is enlightening. But no matter how great the school sign-up system is, parents who don’t sign up in time will be left out.

I see Option 3 (zones) as just cutting up the current situation into three similar ones. It seems like more work without any strong benefit.

By: Katy

Katy — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:36:14 +0000

My nine year old would like to point out that San Francisco has no MOUNTAINS. We have HILLS.

By: Paula

Paula — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 16:16:50 +0000

I appreciate how difficult this is but two thoughts:

1. Has anyone looked at the schools that have no achievement gap (are there any?) and tried to understand the ‘like’ characteristics? My guess is strong teachers; involved parents and good school leadership. Is busing kids around really going to foster a community with these key ingredients? Look at KIPP – yes a special case but shows there are other answers besides having our kids dispersed all over town that work.

2. Beware the law of unintended consequences. Detroit in the 70s tried busing. What happened? People who could leave – left. It was the last straw in a system that wasn’t supporting families. It is a tough and delicate subject to talk about but if families who have the means leave – how economically diverse will our schools be in the end? This can already be a tough city to raise a child in – astronomical housing prices; impossible to navigate school choice system….I suspect the Zebra system will push families over the edge – those who can leave will.

By: rpnorton

rpnorton — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 02:15:35 +0000

Jed -
Clearly. The schools that underserve students are a major focus of this effort. And student assignment is not the only lever we can or should use to fix this problem.

By: rpnorton

rpnorton — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 02:14:03 +0000

Hi Bernal Dad -
I think that the next problem the Board needs to solve is what should the policy be for people whose default assignment is a 1 or a 2 school. I think I can say that no Board member is completely comfortable with the idea of designating a child to a very low-performing school. This is one of the topics that remains undiscussed.

By: rpnorton

rpnorton — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 02:11:23 +0000

Erika – I like Garfield too. thanks for reading (and commenting).

By: Jed Lane

Jed Lane — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:02:12 +0000

The focus of the board in designing a new enrollment system should first and foremost be on improving the schools that “under serve” students. Worring about how to get 30 kids to reflect some designed criteria does not reflect that each child needs an education and to be prepared for the next level.
Every school should be able to accomplish that goal. Then SFUSD can offer opportunity options for qualified students.

By: Bernal Dad

Bernal Dad — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:33:36 +0000

Isn’t this reverting back to the situation before the district-wide lottery, where you had an automatic , but could get into other schools if there were vacancies.

I don’t think that there won’t be a political firestorm from Option 2. There will be winners and losers, particularly in the South and East of the City where more of the schools scoring 1 or 2 in the state rankings are concentrated.

Parents are not going to be thrilled to find out their default option is a local school that is low in test scores. You’re going to see a lot of change in housing/rental prices as folks shift around to get in West Portal or wherever’s attendance area, and a lot of fraud over addresses.

However, given that parents to the North and West of the City are more prone to , and there are more limited private options in the South and East, shifting to Option 2 . But I expect Bernal, Portero, Excelsior, Bayview and Visitation Valley parents will be not happy to lose choice.

By: Erika

Erika — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:18:36 +0000

I watched the meeting online. My daughter is only 14 months old, so I am just starting to get interested in SFUSD.

I was very dismayed that one board member (I think it was Hydra Mendoza) stated that she did not think that freeways or mountains were an obstacle because she drove everywhere. Not everyone drives everywhere. Our family has one car and has gone through periods of no car. We walk and take Muni everywhere. We live as far east as you can get in the “North Zone” and if my daughter were assigned to a school in the outer Richmond I do not know what we would do! We would probably have to leave the city rather than buy a second car or have one of us quit our job in order to spend the whole day on the bus going to and from the Richmond. Option 3 seems like it would create huge transportation stress for families.

I would like to see Option 2 become the new assignment system. Garfield is just up the street from us and it seems like a nice little neighborhood school. I would love to walk my daughter up the hill each day before going to work. Please consider the huge transportation issues that families would face if SFUSD implements these huge zones. Thank you.