|
|
Post by cantretirehere on Feb 23, 2006 10:00:22 GMT -6
thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 23, 2006 10:02:45 GMT -6
I was just saying that in terms of Fr. Center capacity if one uses 1600 as capacity in the Fr. Centers (or whatever number one wants to use), that number needs to be able to reasonably feed into a main campus at some point in time. Even if the capacity at the Fr. Campuses was 1200, 3600 students then have to fit in the main. If 1600 students were in the Fr. Campus, 1600x3 would need to fit in the main. So I guess my point is that to some extent, the capacity of the Fr. Center doesn't matter, unless there are plans to use the Fr. Center for students that are not freshman. Does that make sense? OK, yes. I didn't want to assume what extrapolation you meant. Thanks for clarifying. |
|
|
|
Post by cantretirehere on Feb 23, 2006 10:05:15 GMT -6
Why did they choose those specific times? Did they put a lot of thought into that, or did they just throw those hours out there to upset people? There are so many different ways to do split shifts that don't have to be that extreme. I question their motives in posting times that way. They could have simply responed that ITRF the in 2009 the HS would be on split shifts and given an explanation of what split shifts are.
|
|
|
|
Post by forthekids on Feb 23, 2006 10:09:50 GMT -6
Why did they choose those specific times? Did they put a lot of thought into that, or did they just throw those hours out there to upset people? There are so many different ways to do split shifts that don't have to be that extreme. I question their motives in posting times that way. They could have simply responed that ITRF the in 2009 the HS would be on split shifts and given an explanation of what split shifts are. The SB just can't win can they? When they aren't specific they take heat, when they are specific, they take heat. I guess there's just no pleasing some people. |
|
|
|
Post by title1parent on Feb 23, 2006 10:09:58 GMT -6
would there be issues with bussing? Kindergarten( am and pm) , ES and MS times .
|
|
|
|
Post by fence on Feb 23, 2006 10:11:31 GMT -6
"The result will be fewer elective classes, impacting college entrance requirements,..." This is a quote from the VoteYes site. Are they implying that the school district will not offer classes that are REQUIRED to get into college? Wouldn't a HS have to offer the classes that colleges REQUIRE for entrance? If, by law, HSs don't have to offer courses that are required by colleges for admission, then the district has us over a barrel. I have just changed my vote to YES. We can't let this happen. I didn't know that courses for college admission REQUIREMENTS were going to be impacted!!!!!! I must vote YES if this true!!!!! I am sure they have to and will provide the classes needed to get into average state university. I don't think they worded this very well at all. I think they mean the kids would get the core requirements, but if you want to apply to a specific college, or a program such as school of business, medicine, engineering, etc., apps can be evaluated in part by the participation in electives covering specific areas. It would be a limitation depending on what the kid actually wanted to do and where he wanted to go. |
|
|
|
Post by fence on Feb 23, 2006 10:17:46 GMT -6
Why did they choose those specific times? Did they put a lot of thought into that, or did they just throw those hours out there to upset people? There are so many different ways to do split shifts that don't have to be that extreme. I question their motives in posting times that way. They could have simply responed that ITRF the in 2009 the HS would be on split shifts and given an explanation of what split shifts are. I'm not sure. I've said before I think that the administration seems to take the path of least resistance alot. The am/pm shifts were probably the easiest thing to figure out so that's what they did. Prepare for the worst and then if it changes, you can adjust from there. I believe personally that when all is said and done, ITRF split shifts will happen but they might be able to overlap them after they figure out the logistics. I do agree with you that giving the next level of detail on the times was unnecessary at this point, unless they're sure that's what will happen. Who knows, maybe they're sure. I don't know enough about the logistics to say what would and wouldn't be possible with split shifts and the # of kids they need to integrate. |
|
|
|
Post by cantretirehere on Feb 23, 2006 10:26:57 GMT -6
Why did they choose those specific times? Did they put a lot of thought into that, or did they just throw those hours out there to upset people? There are so many different ways to do split shifts that don't have to be that extreme. I question their motives in posting times that way. They could have simply responed that ITRF the in 2009 the HS would be on split shifts and given an explanation of what split shifts are. The SB just can't win can they? When they aren't specific they take heat, when they are specific, they take heat. I guess there's just no pleasing some people. There's a difference between throwing out seemingly arbitrary info that contains numbers and cold hard raw numbers that are used to draw conclusions. I've seen both the YES and NO people ask questions about certain figures and how they were derived. Case in point - the recent discussion on what exactly does capacity mean? |
|
|
|
Post by forthekids on Feb 23, 2006 10:44:53 GMT -6
The SB just can't win can they? When they aren't specific they take heat, when they are specific, they take heat. I guess there's just no pleasing some people. There's a difference between throwing out seemingly arbitrary info that contains numbers and cold hard raw numbers that are used to draw conclusions. I've seen both the YES and NO people ask questions about certain figures and how they were derived. Case in point - the recent discussion on what exactly does capacity mean? What is arbitrary about stating the times for split shifts? I'm sure those times were reached after discussion. |
|
|
|
Post by cantretirehere on Feb 23, 2006 10:55:18 GMT -6
Do you honestly think that they sat down and looked at all split shift options and decided that the times that they put out on their site are their best decision? Unless they are actually willing to have those times as their best option for split shifts, then they shouldn't be out there. I am still going to give the SD the benefit of the doubt and assume that those are arbitrary. If they are then their site should have said the type of split shift scenario and the bell times would be announced after all options were explored. If you are right, and those times aren't arbitrary, and discussion went into determining them, then I would like to see all the other split shift options that were explored. I would like to see why these times were deemed to be the best as opposed to an overlapping schedule, for example. From the paragraph on the page where these times are displayed, there should be a link to a page that provides this information.
|
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Feb 23, 2006 11:12:44 GMT -6
My point is that either the freshman campuses are crowded, but then it does not go along with the administration report or the freshman campuses are not overcrowded. Which one is it?
|
|
|
|
Post by kae on Feb 23, 2006 11:24:03 GMT -6
These numbers are used and determined by the state to find out if we actually have a crowding problem. IMO, there is way too much info in the worksheet that is unknown. Someone from the SB/Admin needs to better define it. I understand about why the form is used. I tried to find more information about how to fill out the form, but I wan't able to find that. I really want to know why the school only takes 80% of the capacity and then the state futher reduces that again. If it's supposed to be used to find out if we really have a crowding problem, why would the state want such a low number. It just seems contradictory to me. I agree with you that too much in the worksheet is unknown. I really don't view Mr. Crouses comments as making anything clearer. It actually seems to do the opposite. Someone from the SB/SD or even Mr. Crouse himself should post a follow up telling us about those numbers and where they came from. I've put my email into the board and I have yet to hear anything. |
|
|
|
Post by fence on Feb 23, 2006 12:25:14 GMT -6
My point is that either the freshman campuses are crowded, but then it does not go along with the administration report or the freshman campuses are not overcrowded. Which one is it? I didn't know we had a problem with the Fr. Campuses. I thought they were OK but the main campuses and the middle schools were more the issue. Maybe I'm not understanding something. |
|
|
|
Post by rew on Feb 23, 2006 14:53:56 GMT -6
I don't think we have an overcrowding at either Gold campuses this year. (These numbers are rounded) 2005 #s are:
WVGold is 1000
WV Green 2500 = 3500
NVGold = 1100
NV Blue = 3100 = 4200
MSs
Crone = 1200
Still = 1200
Scullen =1300
Granger = 1100
Gregory = 1100
Hill = 900
The part about the Gold campuses capacity being confusing is that they add them to the green and blue campus and come up with a total, when in fact, like another poster to this board stated, it's hard to send 1200 freshman and 180 "others" to the Gold campuses, but if you pack 1380 freshman into Gold then what happens when you have 1380 x So, Jr, Sr. at the main campus (1380 x 3 = 4140) --no room.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 23, 2006 15:38:11 GMT -6
This is why I had always put forth senior 'targeted' options (dual enrollment, work /study, vocational/tech) for example.
This lets the pressure off in the main building. ITRF, a Senior-Core class center/wing may not be a bad idea either. Yes, it involves spending money... There's no $0.00 'solution' to this.
|
|
