rates of increase in enrollment

[cantretirehere]

forthekids said:

3) They don't believe the SB's future projections - no one can predict the future, however the future can be looked at based on the past. The past has shown us that the SB has underestimated the future enrollment projections. There is no reason to believe that this will not be the case now. We are not at build-out, hence more students moving into the district.

4) Let's just live with the situation and wait for the enrollment to decline - there is no reasonable indication that the enrollment will decline. Based on the experience of our D203 neighbors we can safely assume that our district will experience the same growth for many years.

Forthekids - I agree with you on the statement you made which I highlighted in red. I disagree with you on the statements you made which I highlighted in blue.

Please allow me to explain why. (Also, I apologize for the size of this first spreadsheet - I tried to resize it numerous times but for some reason it keeps showing up huge )







I think we can all agree that between the years 1991 and 2006 there have been MANY homes built in the district. Yet, we can see that from the school year 1991-92 there has been a dramatic decrease in the rate at which enrollment has increased.

Yes I understand that there is still an increase in enrollment (I’ll call that the IIE) between the years that grades 2-5 go from ES to HS. But this increase has been on a decline.

Once we look beyond the 2005-06 school year everyone without a crystal ball must make assumptions. After looking at this data, I think that it would be reasonable to assume that the IIE between the elementary years and high school years would continue to decline even while development is occurring.

The trend in the last 6 years is for the rate of the IIE to decline. From 1999-00 to 2000-01 it declined by 5.42%, in the next 5 respective years it declined by 5.75%, 6.31%, 7.38%, 2.98%, and 4.75%. If this decline continues at these rates for even the next few years we will see a negative rate of the IIE. That means that a group of 2nd through 5th graders would actually decrease in size as they approached HS.

The district is projecting that this year’s group of 2-5 graders (9200 students) will equal 10,400 students during their high school years. That is an increase of 13%. This year’s group of 9-12 graders increased 11.62% since their 2-5 grade years.

Because of the obvious downward trend in the IIE (actually beginning in 1992-93 school year), I think that it is unreasonable for the district to assume that there will be a sustained 13% rate of growth for the next 7 years and perhaps beyond, especially since there will be a point when we will be built out.

I don’t disagree that we have some crowded years ahead, and as such I do agree that steps need to be taken to alleviate what I believe will be a temporary situation. I do not agree that a 3rd high school is necessarily the BEST option.

[cantretirehere]

Long story short:
The nifty brochure that the district sent out says that the current 9200 2-5 grade kids will total 10,400 kids when they hit high school. The district is predicting an 13% increase. There have been plenty of housing starts since 1991 and each year the 2-5 group of kids has increased, but that increase is slowing.

I never said that there was no increase in enrollment, in fact, I emboldened the phrase that states that I understand that enrollment has continually risen. These numbers do show that the rate in which enrollment is increasing is slowing down.

I do not agree with the district's chosen 13% increase in the rate of enrollment, by 2012, for the current 2-5 graders. There is no indication, when looking at the trends, that this number is accurate.

[warriorpride]

cantretirehere said:

Long story short:
The nifty brochure that the district sent out says that the current 9200 2-5 grade kids will total 10,400 kids when they hit high school. The district is predicting an 13% increase. There have been plenty of housing starts since 1991 and each year the 2-5 group of kids has increased, but that increase is slowing.

I never said that there was no increase in enrollment, in fact, I emboldened the phrase that states that I understand that enrollment has continually risen. These numbers do show that the rate in which enrollment is increasing is slowing down.

I do not agree with the district's chosen 13% increase in the rate of enrollment, by 2012, for the current 2-5 graders. There is no indication, when looking at the trends, that this number is accurate.

If the 10,400 number doesn't hit in 2012 in your projections, is it safe to assume that 10,400 is hit in 2013 or 2014?

[cantretirehere]

No, I don't think it may ever be hit.

[warriorpride]

cantretirehere said:

No, I don't think it may ever be hit.

what's your max projection?

[cantretirehere]

BTW, I have e-mailed the SB, asking where I am so terribly off base.

[cantretirehere]

My crystal ball tells me around 9700.

[charmant]

cantretirehere said:

BTW, I have e-mailed the SB, asking where I am so terribly off base.

please let us know if you get a response crh

[cantretirehere]

k

[rew]

CRH, Please explain to me...I just looked at the homes platted and underway...not proposed, not projected, approved and being sold as we speak and I see 1300 homes and 1900 townhomes for the district.
I realize those students won't be here tomorrow, but where do they figure in your calcs? Do you think the enrollment elsewhere in the district is sliding so much that the growth will be balanced by soon to be empty nesters??

And those numbers don't include a huge number of proposed projects or the empty land that's yet to be planned on???

[cantretirehere]

Those numbers include every house built in this district since 1972. All that is left is 10% of the land per some post that I saw today. I think there has been quite a bit of building since 1991. Yet the IIE continues to decline.

[rew]

No, I mean the August 2005 document which showed the number of houses yet to be built in Tallgrass which was 50...not the 1100 that have been built. I wish I was more savvy to move stuff from Forum to forum...this is stuff that warrior pride put up today and shows the homes in Kinloch and Timber Creek still not finished... look in the SB credibility challenged thread.

[rew]

The 1900 townhomes included the 1300 townhomes that are going up north of the mall in Lehigh Station area...yet to be occupied!

[warriorpride]

rew said:

The 1900 townhomes included the 1300 townhomes that are going up north of the mall in Lehigh Station area...yet to be occupied!

Yeah, it sure seems that right now there are several large developments in progess. Not sure that was the case over the last year or two.

[fence]

I don't think we can say that enrollment is really declining, its just not increasing by as much from a % and there's a big difference. Especially since the numbers are large now, and any incremental increase over zero can be significant.

Using the current 2-5 with an additional 1000 kids added in to equal 10,400 kids by 2009 or 2012 or whenever doesn't reflect a one year growth rate of 13%. That actual student population would be coming from compounding a current population by x% increase for x number of years to get to that number.

At the highest level of growth in the heyday of the south housing boom, in 1991, there was an increase of 87.66% on that year's number of 1901 students. That's an increase of 1,666 students. An increase of 11.6% (this year's increase) on a number 7607 is 882 students (8489).

Even if you decrease the next year, to say 10%, that's 849 more students the next year (9337). Then drop that down again, to say 8% and that's 747 more students (10,083). Say the next year is 5%. That's another 504 (10,587). And so forth.

You could use the spreadsheet you already set up to do some modeling for the next 10 years using some various % increase numbers and see where it ends up.

Even with the slowing increases, I don't think we can accomodate the increases with what we've got. Clearly yes, at some point we've got to stabilize, and we are nearing the end of the double digit growth I hope. Otherwise, 3 high schools aren't even going to be enough.