Big changes may be in store at schools
Restructuring zones may send students to new schools

By Larry Blaskey
Douglas Dispatch
Published/Last Modified on Monday, January 12, 2009 3:11 PM MST


So where will your child be attending school next year?



Don’t be too sure.

The Douglas Unified School District is looking at several options that while may keep much of the student classes together, may put them at new schools.

District administration made an hour-long presentation during the Tuesday, January 6, meeting to discuss attendance zone options.

District Superintendent Earl Pettit has been looking at this situation for several months because of the overcrowding at some schools.

For example, the average number of students per classroom in Stevenson is 26, while it is only 22 in Faras.

Following the discussion last Tuesday, the district board agreed to put out a survey to parents and staff (which went out Friday, January 9), conduct at least one study session and have public hearings.

The aim is to have a final decision made by the third week in February to prevent delays in hiring for next year.

Why change now

The reason for the proposed changes is threefold, according to Superintendent Earl Pettit.

√ Current school attendance zones do no align with population shifts and school sites. Much of the growth in Douglas is occurring on the east side, where there is very little room for growth for district schools.

√ Overcrowded schools, classroom size reductions and too high a student/teacher ratio.

√ Sixth grade in middle school setting not desirable.

The problem was caused because attendance zones for each of the elementary schools had not been changed in not only years, but also maybe decades.

The attendance zones didn’t even change when Joe Carlson School moved from 12th Street and A Avenue to behind the high school.

The superintendent originally presented four different options: (a) No change;  (b) redistrict schools; (c) moved to a PreK-2, 3rd to 6th grade school format; and (d) move to a preK-6 model.

In C and D options, it would move sixth grade back to the elementary schools and only have one middle school – Huber.

Following is a comparison of the C and D options as presented to the board:

PreK-2, 3-6 model

• Sixth grade placed in elementary schools.

• Zones drawn to fill schools as close to 80 percent capacity as possible.

• 4 attendance zones:

√ 1 rural school zone for Faras.

√ 3 partner school zones:

-Zone 1 – Sarah Marley/Clawson.

- Zone 2 – Stevenson/Joe Carlson

- Zone 3 – ELC/Ray Borane.

PreK-6 model

• Sixth grade placed in elementary schools.

• Zones drawn to fill schools as close to 80 percent capacity as possible.

• 6 attendance zones

√ ELC/Ray Borane partner (Ray Borane school was not designed to have small children in it  - multiple floors, too many steps, etc. – so the Pre-K-6 would be split between the two schools,

√ Faras

√ Clawson

√ Joe Carlson

√ Sarah Marley

√ Stevenson

Both of the changes would also do away with the Early Learning Center as a separate school and move the preschool classes to each of the individual schools.

Of course with any change, the first priority should be its impact on the students’ learning experience.

During the meeting, Curriculum Director Leanne Marston presented information on the different options.

Pros and Cons of No Change

Pros – Honors the current neighborhood school model.

Cons

√ Class sizes too large. Currently the district has 27 classrooms in the district with 28-34 students.

√ Lack of classrooms across the grade levels for grouping and teamwork.

√ Six combination classrooms exist.

√ No room for growth.

√ 6th grade would remain at the middle school.

Currently, based on having no more than an average of 25 students per classroom, Stevenson is at 105 percent of capacity, Carlson, 99 percent; and Clawson, 94 percent. Sarah Marley and Faras are at 80 percent or less of capacity based on current enrollment.

Pros and Cons of PreK-2, 3-6 model

Pros

√ Only four classrooms have 27 students – no classrooms exceed this number.

Three to four teachers at each grade level at each school except Faras.

√ Easy implementation of differentiated instruction and ELD programs.

√ Room for growth

√ Long-term solution.

√ Same number of transitions as the current model.

√ PLC model (adopted by the district) easily implemented or can be implemented better in a school with this configuration.

√ Good for curriculum planning.

Cons

√ Modifies the traditional neighborhood school that is popular in Douglas.

√ Two combination classrooms would be needed.

√ According to the figures in the draft, none of the elementary schools is over 80 percent capacity.

The Early Learning Center, which in this model would house PreK-2nd grade, would be at 105 percent capacity, but IT Director Javier Baca said it could easily be rectified by a slight alteration in the school attendance zone.

Pro and Cons for the PreK-6 model

Pros

√ Honors the current neighborhood school model.

√ Moves the sixth grade into the elementary as per research – 6th is an elementary grade, not a middle school grade.

√ Moves the Preschool into the elementary setting.

√ One less transition than the Pre-K-2/3-6 mode3l.

Cons

√ Class sizes are too large with 18 classrooms in the district with 28-34 students in them.

√ Lack of classrooms across each grade level – this is important for the ELD implementation and differentiated instruction.

√ Eight combination classrooms would be required to implement this model.

Under this plan, all schools would be at 82 percent capacity or less except for the ELC, which would be at 89 percent.

In the preK-6 model, the district would have to increase by 1 instructor and total net cost for implementation would be $85,000.

In the Pre-K-2/3-6 model, the district could reduce its staffing by four teacher positions for a net savings of $194,000.

Pettit said that the district is not looking at laying off any instructors. Not as many positions would have to be filled over the summer if they reduced the number of teacher positions.

Forums at a variety of elementary schools on these proposals continued this week.

A copy of the power point presentation made at the Tuesday board meeting and a survey copy will be available online at www.douglasdispatch.com beginning Monday, January 12.

The surveys have to be back to the district by Friday, January 16.

 

Comments

    Once a Bulldog.. wrote on Jan 20, 2009 2:44 PM:

    " As a former DUSD student, i would say JUST CHECK THE HOMES. More often times than not, it was those students that came FROM mexico that did better academically than those that had the "right" to attend public schools. keep it in perspective. your kids will get an education..and with this plan, in less chaos. "

    John Jay wrote on Jan 17, 2009 7:26 AM:

    " Omega turns a blind eye to residency of students - many of their students live in Mexico - in fact, it is alleged they actually advertise in Mexico for enrollment of students. "

    Leroy wrote on Jan 15, 2009 4:17 PM:

    " I agree with T, Close the border for one morning.
    I have seen this with my own eyes, kids crossing with their Omega uniforms, CASS uniforms and many others you know are going to either high school are crossing the border, officers should be there around 1/4 to 7 in the morning and just look at the kids walking across, and the many more that are being driven accross. When school is out on Holiday, not much foot traffic and less cars, get these numbers from the Border Station. "

    tax payer wrote on Jan 14, 2009 11:16 AM:

    " I like the idea about have some elementary schools k-6, this give the kids one more year to mature, and 7-8 stay together. Some kids are not legal residents from here, they live with relatives and use Post Office Boxes and physical address to show proof of residensy. Look at the border crossers at the port of entry every morning. Know the kids walk north every morning and south in the afternoon on Pan American. We are the tax payers, for there schooling. Is this right? Alot of kids attend the charter schools too. "

    Ramona MacMurtrie wrote on Jan 13, 2009 7:48 PM:

    " Why can't the school districts just be rezoned and the children that live in the specific district go to the school in their district. And I do mean, live in the district. We are pushing our own children aside, we don't have room in our classrooms because we are allowing children who do not live in the district to go to school here. More background investigation is needed when children enroll in our schools. We need to ensure that these children actually live in the district they are being enrolled in. Not just having an "address" in the district but actually live and pay utilities and taxes at the address. This situation has gotten out of hand over the last few years and those of us who pay property taxes in our own school districts often cannot send our children to their own schools because they are overcrowded. I have nothing against parents who want their children to have the best education possible. That is the aim of every parent. It does bother me when our schools fall below state and national averages in literacy and mathematics standards because we spend so much time, money and effort teaching English as a second language. This leaves little time to teach math, science, social studies, literature, art and music to children who already speak English. Let's just see where our districts stand in overcrowding when we clean up the enrollment mess. "

    t wrote on Jan 13, 2009 3:45 PM:

    " How about having the truant officers actually check the residence of the students. Look how many kids cross the border in the morning to attend schools. Close the border for one morning and that will pretty much tell you who lives in Mexico "

Write a Comment

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All readers comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. They review submitted comments periodically during the day for offensive or off-topic content before posting. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. The Douglas Dispatch is not liable for messages from third parties.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
* Comments unrelated to the story.
* Personal Information (phone numbers, addresses, etc.)

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in douglasdispatch.com's reader comments represent the individual's own views and not necessarily those of the Douglas Dispatch. The Douglas Dispatch does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than authorized Douglas Dispatch spokespersons.

Your thoughtful contribution to the online discussion is appreciated.

(optional)
   









Contact Us

Email the Editor
530 11th Street (85607)
P.O. Drawer H
Douglas, AZ 85608
tel: 520.364.3424
fax: 520.364.6750