What if no HS

[scarbroughknight]

While the district has already voted for a new high school is it possible it might not become a reality due to the districts inability to find the right land for a reasonable price? If so would the same boundries that were indicated if the referendum failed (White Eagle to Waubonsie for instance) be in place?
I am just wondering if the SB is bound to the referendum and could they possibly throw up their hands and say The Hell with it, perhaps delaying it for a few years longer or deciding it is not needed.
I would be curious to know.

[fence]

Hi - I'm back! I've actually been around and keeping generaly up to date on what's going on, but had a few things preventing me from diving in too deep.

Here's what I think - instead of saying to hell with it, why don't we say, let's do a 180 on how we've been histoically talking about this problem.

For example, I personally say let's build a magnet school (a la math and science academy) in 204. Or something in that vein.

It would relieve crowding by offloading a considerable # of our current HS student body, it would be forward-thinking, it wouldn't need a huge footprint, it would take less time to build, it could potentially accept all grade levels from day 1, it would unify the district, parents and students would be proud of attending, it reflects our tradition of educational excellence, boundaries would be a non-issue, etc.

We're talking about not building athletic facilities and a pool at a school that needs to be a third and equal traditional HS. So why not talk about whether or not it has to be a traditional HS?

Trying to force Matea Valley in current form continues to have our district in an uproar. Not building is simply unfair to the kids who need to live like rats in the subway for 4 years. So what about taking a different lens to the problem? Let's see where we'd end up.....

[doctorwho]

fence said:

Hi - I'm back! I've actually been around and keeping generaly up to date on what's going on, but had a few things preventing me from diving in too deep.

Here's what I think - instead of saying to hell with it, why don't we say, let's do a 180 on how we've been histoically talking about this problem.

For example, I personally say let's build a magnet school (a la math and science academy) in 204. Or something in that vein.

It would relieve crowding by offloading a considerable # of our current HS student body, it would be forward-thinking, it wouldn't need a huge footprint, it would take less time to build, it could potentially accept all grade levels from day 1, it would unify the district, parents and students would be proud of attending, it reflects our tradition of educational excellence, boundaries would be a non-issue, etc.

We're talking about not building athletic facilities and a pool at a school that needs to be a third and equal traditional HS. So why not talk about whether or not it has to be a traditional HS?

Trying to force Matea Valley in current form continues to have our district in an uproar. Not building is simply unfair to the kids who need to live like rats in the subway for 4 years. So what about taking a different lens to the problem? Let's see where we'd end up.....

Want to make sure I understand - would the magnet school have no athletic facilities ? If true - many student athletes that are exceptional at both - have to make a decision - either sports or the most challenging academically ?

I am also assuming you would not have the 204 school be residential like IMSA. ( btw - IMSA has 650 kids )

Not judging at this point, just making sure I understand the thinking.

[casey]

scarbroughknight said:

While the district has already voted for a new high school is it possible it might not become a reality due to the districts inability to find the right land for a reasonable price? If so would the same boundries that were indicated if the referendum failed (White Eagle to Waubonsie for instance) be in place?
I am just wondering if the SB is bound to the referendum and could they possibly throw up their hands and say The Hell with it, perhaps delaying it for a few years longer or deciding it is not needed.
I would be curious to know.

I think that legally the SB could throw up their hands and choose not to build. Would they ever do that? No way, the hard part is done (gaining approval from the voters for that Referendum). IMO, they would NEVER back down from the plan to build that 3rd HS but that doesn't mean they legally couldn't do that, right?

[macy]

Fence

Welcome back!

While I think the Magnet school is something to think about, I think it would require community wide support. How would we get there?


A magnet school was considered by the 05 referendum committee. I was not thought to be something that would fly in the district at the time because it wasn't an "equitable" facility. Dr. Who brought up some of the valid thoughts that went against such a concept.

[proschool]

Welcome back Fence. I feel like one of my favorite soap opera characters has returned.

It seems to me that the big advantage to a magnet school is that it can be done on a smaller scale at a lower expense.

I want to toss the possibility of achieving the same result by just building smaller high schools. A school on Wagner Farms or converted Gold Campuses can be close enough to the existing high schools to share athletic stadiums.

IMO the gifted students have been having their needs met at our existing high schools. The brightest of the bright always have IMSA. The existing high schools may be impacted negatively by having their best students siphoned away. I also think that the students who would benefit the most from smaller schools are the ones who would not be able to attend a magnet school.

Finally magnet schools do little or nothing to decrease transportation costs.

What do you think?

[macy]

I would love it if our district could come to terms with building a magnet school but I have some serious reservations and wonder if the concept could fly with residents at this point. I think IMSA does take some from our district but not as many as they might (not because they wouldn't be accepted there) but because as Dr. W states, many chose to stay in 204 for athletics, music, not wanting to live away from home or the need to stay within a somewhat normal "social" environment.

While I think it's something to think about, there are so many questions surrounding the concept. For example:

Capacity- how many students would such a school hold? Would it be enough to alleviate overcrowding at NVHS and WVHS and allow for the conversion of a gold campus to a middle school?

Target- academics? music? both? something else?

Building Facilities- I can see how kids would not chose to go there because they would not want to be separated from their friends. Same reason many in 204 chose not to go to IMSA. Also, as Dr. W said many are gifted academically, musically and athletically in 204. How many would chose a magnet school without comparable athletic facilities?

Community support- How on earth could we get the community on board with such a drastic idea at this late in the game?

[fence]

Like sands through the hourglass, so are the days of our lives.... : )

So I haven't drawn up my master plan of dissent, but clearly the concept can be whatever the community thinks it should be. A residential solution is way over the top - creating another IMSA is not at all what I'm trying to suggest. This could be a magnet for math/science, it could be magnet for music, it could be magnet for vocational, for applied tech/engineering, for water polo. Whatever. It would be a concentrated environment for kids to be immersed in something they're really good at or really love. It could even be a type of school with multiple accelerated programs that students could be admitted to based on various criteria. Whatever. Limited only by our creativity.

But yes, I would agree that the tangible benefits as related to current and obvious objections are footprint, expense and boundaries. But there are other benefits to a non-traditional school. Maybe I've been reading a little too much about what Melinda Gates is doing these days, but it is truly amazing what the benefits to students are in some non-traditional HS environs.

And if we're talking about building a 3000 student traditional HS and sharing facilities with NV, then what difference does it make if the magnet school in this scenario busses kids to sports at NV (or WV) if they so choose to participate? And true, then this doesn't solve for increased ability for kids to participate in sports. But if that's our biggest priority - sports equity - then maybe we need to step back and think about that for a sec.

And of course, some kids would choose to not attend because they don't want to leave their friends. But do they turn down PA because they can't be in class with their friends? Do they choose a lesser university because they don't want to leave their friends? Isn't it a part of life that certain opportunities require these types of decisions? Even sacrifices?

So yes, I don't have a complex plan for what the magnet school would and wouldn't offer. Or even that a magnet school as we know it is the answer. I just think it's time for different ideas. It just sounds like everyone's trying to cram a square peg in a round hole.

Build on BB but share athletic fields with NV. Move the site to Wagner even though 2 schools in the same area seems silly and inequitable. Consider a site with power lines because for heaven sake, we need that 3000 student school at all costs..... I don't know. Seems like a good time to re-group.

And yeah, the community may hate the idea, but it's going to be for all the wrong reasons. I'm not saying I have the answer, but it would be a very interesting brainstorming session to see what we could come up with, if you take away the limits that we're currently giving ourselves....

[proschool]

Question:


I know that Howie mentioned that the freshman centers in reality were able to hold more high school students than he expected.

Does anyone remember how many high school students can fit in a freshman center?