STUDENT REASSIGNMENT REPORT

a

STUDENT REASSIGNMENT

REPORT

NRMPS BOARD OF EDUCATION

a

STUDENT REASSIGNMENT

REPORT

NRMPS BOARD OF EDUCATION

STAFFSTUDENTS

PARENTS COMMUNITY

IT’S POSSIBLE

POSSIBLITIES

IT’S POSSIBLE

POSSIBILITIES

4

TIME-LINE

Jan-Aug 2012 Committee

Deliberations/ Monthly Reports to the School Board

Aug - 2012Committee

Recommendations Presented to the

School Board

Aug – Dec 2012Public Input/ Community

Engagement

Board of Education Approval

August 2013Implementation

Contiguous boundaries

Respect neighbor-

hoods

Proximity to schools

Modify feeder

systems

Stay within enrollment capacities

Consider anticipated

growth

Enrollment balance

5

Board of Education Priorities.

COMBINED MAP

Lessens reassignment impact Better balances student metrics Better aligns feeder patterns Contiguous attendance zones Addresses many utilization

concerns

7

OUTCOMES

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

• Academic Proficiency – percentage of impacted population scoring Proficient in BOTH Reading and Math. 2010 testing data supplied by NRMPS, calculated across 2011-12 grades 4-9.

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

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

8

Student Balance Metrics

HIGH SCHOOL DATA

PROPOSED HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS

High School Attendance ZonesCurrent/Recommended

(See data tables in handouts.)

Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

9-12 Student Count

Nash Central Northern Nash

Rocky Mount Southern Nash

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%Statistics based on residence

(2011 geocode).

Does not measure impact

of special programs such

as IB.

HS Utilization

HIGH SCHOOL MOBILE UNIT13-14

Enrollment Current Proposed Gain/(Loss)

SCHOOL 9-12 Count Capacity Mobile Units Mobile Units 13/14

Nash Central 1116 1150 4 2 (2)

Northern Nash 1234 1150 3 3 0

Rocky Mount 1391 1390 - - 0

Southern Nash 1057 1068 7 2 (5)

14 7 -7

Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

HS Minority %

Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

HS Free/Reduced Lunch %

Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

HS Academic Proficiency %

These data reflect the percent of students who passed both Math and Reading EOG’s in grades 4-9

HS STUDENTS IMPACTEDFROM TO 9 10 11 12 Tot

NCHS Northern Nash High 91 84 76 61 312

NNHS Rocky Mount High 74 79 57 63 273

RMHS Northern Nash High 1 1 2

SNHS Nash Central High 49 45 48 43 185

Total 214 208 182 168 772

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

English I

NCHS NNHS RMHS SNHS 0

20406080

100

56 6149.6 54.3

78 80 79 75

2010-11** 2011-12

NCHS NNHS RMHS SNHS 0

20

40

60

80

10079 74 70

8573 78 72

84

2010-11 2011-12

Mathematics

HS COMPOSITE

NCHS NNHS RMHS SNHS 62.00%

64.00%

66.00%

68.00%

70.00%

72.00%

74.00%

76.00%

78.00%

80.00%

10-11 Composite

11-12 Composite

GRADUATION RATE

GRADUATION RATE

WLG NCHS ECHS NNHS RMHS SNHS District0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

50.0

74.4

95.7

81.577.2 79.4 76.7

2009-102010-11

MIDDLE SCHOOL DATA

PROPOSED MIDDLE SCHOOL DISTRICTS

Middle School Attendance ZonesCurrent/Recommended

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

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

6-8 Student Count

Edwards Nash Central Parker Red Oak Southern Nash

NEW MS (RM HS site)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

MS Utilization

MIDDLE SCHOOL MOBILE UNITS

13-14 Current Proposed Gain/(Loss)

Name 6-8 Count Capacity Mobile Units Mobile Units 13/14

EMS 488 827 2 - (2)

NCMS 614 670 2 1 (1)

PMS 353 557 1 1 0

ROMS 890 850 4 4 0

SNMS 946 850 6 2 (4)

New Middle 513 750 - - 0

15 8 -7

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

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

MS Minority %

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

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

MS Free/Reduced Lunch %

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

MS Academic Proficiency %

These data reflect the percent of students who passed both Math and Reading EOG’s in grades 4-9

From To 6 7 8 Total

EMSNEW Mid 83 74 83 240

Parker Mid 60 52 59 171

NCMSEdwards Mid 57 57 56 170

NEW Mid 42 45 36 123

PMSNEW Mid 38 37 33 108

Red Oak Mid 41 57 45 143

ROMNash Central Mid 45 42 34 121

NEW Mid 17 12 13 42

SNMS Nash Central Mid 61 47 45 153

Total 444 423 404 1271

MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS IMPACTED

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

MIDDLE SCHOOLS

READING

NCMS Edwards Parker ROMS SNMS 0

20

40

60

80

5158 57

70 6856 58 58

73 7060 60 62

73 71

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Linear (2011-12 )

NCMS Edwards Parker ROMS SNMS 0

20

40

60

80

100

64 71 7084 81

69 69 7284 81

69 66 7385 81

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

MATHEMATICS

ALGEBRA I - MS

NCMS Edwards Parker ROMS SNMS 85%

90%

95%

100%

105%

95% 96%

91%

98%100%

Proficiency

COMPOSITE

NCMS Edwards Parker ROMS SNMS 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

56%64% 62%

76% 74%

61% 64% 64%

79% 75%

64%59%

65%

79% 76%

2009-20102010-20112011-2012

ELEMENTARY DATA

PROPOSED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS

Elementary School Attendance ZonesCurrent/Recommended

Bailey Baskerville Benvenue Cedar Grove

Coopers Johnson MB Hubbard

Middlesex Nashville Pope Red Oak/Swift Creek

Spring Hope Williford Winstead/Englewood

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

K-5 Student Count

Bailey

Baske

rville

Benve

nue

Cedar

Grove

Coope

rs

John

son

MB Hub

bard

Middles

ex

Nashv

illePop

e

Red O

ak/S

wift Cree

k

Spring

Hop

e

Williford

Winstea

d/Eng

lewoo

d0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

ES Utilization

ELEMENTARY MOBILE UNITSSCHOOL 13-14   Current Proposed Gain/(Loss)

K-5 Count Capacity Mobile Units Mobile Units 13/14Bailey 620 664 1 - (1)

Baskerville 372 427 - - 0 Benvenue

  680 668 6 2 (4)Cedar Grove 221 223 2 2 0

Coopers 624 601 3 1 (2)Johnson * 472 575 - - 0

M B Hubbard 492 512 4 - (4)Middlesex 340 418 - - 0 Nashville 709 682 2 2 0

Pope 279 311 2 - (2)Red Oak/

Swift Creek 589 810 2 2 0 Spring Hope 550 542 4 2 (2)Williford ** 437 581 1 - (1)Winstead/Englewood 1107 1133 4 2 (2)

31 13 -18

Bailey

Baske

rville

Benve

nue

Cedar

Grove

Coope

rs

John

son

MB Hub

bard

Middles

ex

Nashv

illePop

e

Red O

ak/S

wift Cree

k

Spring

Hop

e

Williford

Winstea

d/Eng

lewoo

d0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

ES Minority %

Bailey

Baske

rville

Benve

nue

Cedar

Grove

Coope

rs

John

son

MB Hub

bard

Middles

ex

Nashv

illePop

e

Red O

ak/S

wift Cree

k

Spring

Hop

e

Williford

Winstea

d/Eng

lewoo

d0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

ES Free/Reduced Lunch %

Bailey

Baske

rville

Benve

nue

Cedar

Grove

Coope

rs

John

son

MB Hub

bard

Middles

ex

Nashv

illePop

e

Red O

ak/S

wift Cree

k

Spring

Hop

e

Williford

Winstea

d/Eng

lewoo

d0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Academic Proficiency %

These data reflect the percent of students who passed both Math and Reading EOG’s in grades 4-9

From To K-5 count K 1 2 3 4 5

Benvenue Elementary

Baskerville Elem 31 5 5 6 8 7

Red Oak/Swift Creek 6 1 2 1 1 1

Winstead/Englewood 26 6 7 4 5 1 3

Total ES   63

ELEMENTARY STUDENTS IMPACTED

Elementary School63

Middle School1271

High School772

Grand Total 2106

TOTAL STUDENTS IMPACTED

FEEDER PATTERNS

RMHSNCHS NNHSSNHS

SNMS

PMS

NCMS RMMS

EMS

ROMS

EMS

PMS

ELEMENTARY PERFORMANCE

READING

Bailey

Baske

rville

Benve

nue

Cedar

Grove

Coope

rs

DS John

son

Englew

ood

MB Hub

bard

Middles

ex

Nashv

ille

OR Pop

e

Spring

Hop

e

Swift Cree

k

Willi

ford

0

20

40

60

80

2009-102010-112011-12

MATHEMATICS

Bailey

Baske

rville

Benve

nue

Cedar

Grove

Coope

rs

DS John

son

Englew

ood

MB Hub

bard

Middles

ex

Nashv

ille

OR Pop

e

Spring

Hop

e

Swift Cree

k

Willi

ford

0

20

40

60

80

100

2009-102010-112011-12

COMPOSITE

Bailey

Baske

rville

Benve

nue

Cedar

Grove

Coope

rs

John

son

Englew

ood

Hubba

rd

Middles

ex

Nashv

ille

Pope

Spring

Hop

e

Swift Cree

k

Willi

ford

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

80% 79%

72%

78%80%

53%

68%64%

69%

88%

58%

65%

80%

44% 2009-20102010-20112011-2012

Transportation Analysis

Transportation Analysis

• Two models were examined to gauge proposed regular education bus runs with boundaries.

Model 1 - Maintain current school bell times. This model will allow pairing of the maximum amount of runs on same routes morning / afternoon.

Model 2 – Adjust school bell times between secondary and elementary schools by 15 minutes. This will allow pairing of the maximum amount of runs on same routes morning / afternoon.

Transportation Model Comparisons 2012-13 School

Year2013-14 Model 1

2013-14 Model 2

Number of Buses* 133 127 121

Total school year mileage on all buses 1,920,366 1,643,310 1,638,072

% Total Mileage with Students on Buses

71.4% 75.9% 76.2%

Average time students ride buses per day (AM / PM)

2 hours 24 minutes

2 hours 11 minutes

2 hours 18 minutes

School Year Cost to Operate Buses** $3,701,345.40 $3,171,589.20 $3,161,478.60

Estimated Annual Savings $529,756.20 $539,866.80

* - Based on eligible assigned students from 9/18/12 student database. Does not include EC, SOC, McKinney Vento, or Tar River Programs. Future assigned students subject to change.

** - Based on 2011-12 expenditures for regular school buses. Future expenditures subject to change.

Summary

• Proposed boundaries reduce overall mileage and ride times in all two models.

• Model 1 will allow us to maintain current start and end times during the 2013-2014 School Year

• Model 2 is the most optimal scenario for Transportation using proposed boundaries, however it would also require us to change starting and ending times at schools.

STAFFING IMPACT

FromStudents

Reassigned# of Teachers to Be

Reassigned

Total ES 63 3

Total MS 1271 51

Total HS 731 29

Grand Total 2065 83

PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

K-12 SURVEY SUMMARY

RESOURCE & PROGRAM

EQUITY

ACADEMIC SUPPORTEMS PMS NCMS ROMS SNMS NCHS NNHS RMHS SNHS

CIS x x x x x x x

AVID x

AIG x x x x x

AP/ Dual Enrollment x x x x

EC x x x x x x x x x

LEP x x x x x x x x x

CTE Academy x x x x

CTE Exploratory x x x x x

IB Program x

CO-CURICULAR PROGRAMS

EMS PMS NCMS ROMS SNMS NCHS NNHS RMHS SNHS

Band x x x x x x x x x

Chorus x x x x x x x x x

Strings x x x x

Drama x x x

Dance x

Art x x x x x x x x x

ROTC x x x x

ATHLETICS EMS PMS NCMS ROMS SNMS NCHS NNHS RMHS SNHS

Football x x x x x x x x x

Soccer x x x x x x x x x

Track x x x x x x x x x

Tennis x

Offered No

Team x x

Offered No

Team x x x x

Volleyball x x x x x x x x x

Cheerleading x x x x x x x x x

Baseball x x x x x x x x x

Softball x x x x x x x x X

Wrestling x x x x x x x x x

ATHLETIC PROGRAMS

STATE GUIDELINES – ATHLETIC ELIGIBILITY

NCHSAA Athletic Guidelines Students may not transfer from one school to another for athletic

purposes: a school can not use athletic teams as a vehicle to solicit or

encourage a student-athlete or member of his or her family to enroll the student-athlete at a different school.

Student athletes who transfer to a school out-of-zone will cause the student-athlete to be ineligible for sports.

A student is eligible at his assigned school provided it meets LEA policy.

FLEXIBILITY OPTIONS

“Grandfathering”

FLEXIBILITY - OPTION 1ELEMENTARY

Offer NO grandfathering to elementary students. All current elementary students will attend their assigned school and matriculate through their reconfigured feeder pattern.

No preference for siblings

SECONDARY Allow flexibility for students entering the highest grades in affected schools. 

8th Graders at Middle School; Allow students to remain Only through the completion of that school. This does not

allow them flexibility to attend HS out-of-zone. No preference for siblings

12th Graders Only. This will allows students entering the highest grades of all affected schools the option

to remain at the school previously attended.

TRANSPORTATION  School bus transportation WILL NOT be provided for students electing to exercise this

clause. 

Eligible students electing to exercise the Student Assignment Flexibility Option for the 2013-2014 school year must do so by the deadline established by the Board of

Education.

IMPACTStudents Eligible for

Flexibility OPTION 18th Graders

404Seniors

168 572

FLEXIBILITY - OPTION 2

ELEMENTARY Offer NO grandfathering to elementary students. All current elementary students will attend

their assigned school and matriculate through their reconfigured feeder pattern. No preference for siblings

SECONDARY Allow flexibility for students entering 8th Grader at Middle School;

Allow students to remain Only through the completion of that school. This does not allow them flexibility to attend HS out-of-zone.

No preference for siblings

Allow flexibility for continuing students in grades 11 and 12 Only. This will allows students entering these grades the option to remain at the school previously

attended. 

TRANSPORTATION School bus transportation WILL NOT be provided for students electing to exercise

this flexibility provision. 

IMPACTStudents

Eligible for Flexibility OPTION 2

8th Grade404

11th Grade 182

12th Grade 168 754

Eligible students electing to exercise the Student Assignment Flexibility Option for the 2013-2014 school year must do so by the deadline established by the Board of

Education.

QUESTIONS