AggieMom_38 said:

---

A burden? Wow! How about we focus on the kids and what's best to help them achieve success instead of "spreading out" the burden?

---

And how would putting all proven lower performers in a single school help students? If you take out the emotions, created by potentially being rezoned, you can easily see that logically it is better overall to spread a known burden out.

Agmaker said:

---

Wow. The suggestion was to allow kids to go to the school they're close to. It was Not suggested put all Low SES in one school. Don't vilify those who are actually suggesting solutions based on past results. What you are recommending doesn't seem to be working is the point. You want to continue with same to make yourself feel good about the "burden" I guess.

---

The result of zoning by proximity alone is having all low SES in a single HS. That's what this entire thread is about. Folks are saying to ignore demographics. I know burden may be a scary word but it is what it is.

SCS01 and LOYALAG have detailed the specifics on WHY driving past to take your children to school, or why young drivers driving in high density areas is an issue. Traffic in this town is awful, and only going to get worse. There is probably a 15 minute one way difference in getting from the hwy to CSHS vs getting to AMCHS. There is 1 light on Barron, and what ? 5-6 on 2818 ? Adding an extra 30ish minutes to pick up a kid from AMCHS (an excellent school) compared to CSHS (an excellent school).

The commute is THE issue.

I'll admit I'm not familiar with any of the "demographics" issues or "SES" children that seems to be so hotly contested. But it seems the right thing to do is to divide them equally between the 2 high schools. Be honest and upfront about challenges, and if both schools are great as is purported by everyone, then equally dividing this issue between the 2 schools seems the right thing to do.

I'll assume there is a list of these children? Perhaps on a spreadsheet ? Create a random assignment formula that assigns half of the kids to AMCHS and half to CSHS. Seems fair, and creates parity with the issue. (see how the solution to that has nothing to do with neighborhoods - just a name and a random assignment to one school or the other). No random carve outs.

Agmaker said:

---

And one other thought, the fact that you label the children you think you're helping as a "Burden" is very insightful......... and troubling.

---

I can sugar-coat it if you like. The argument and logic remains the same. You are deflecting the issue by focusing on a single word. It's about making equal or fair demographics as the board clearly stated is a priority.

SARATOGA said:

---

SCS01 and LOYALAG have detailed the specifics on WHY driving past to take your children to school, or why young drivers driving in high density areas is an issue. Traffic in this town is awful, and only going to get worse. There is probably a 15 minute one way difference in getting from the hwy to CSHS vs getting to AMCHS. There is 1 light on Barron, and what ? 5-6 on 2818 ? Adding an extra 30ish minutes to pick up a kid from AMCHS (an excellent school) compared to CSHS (an excellent school).

The commute is THE issue.

I'll admit I'm not familiar with any of the "demographics" issues or "SES" children that seems to be so hotly contested. But it seems the right thing to do is to divide them equally between the 2 high schools. Be honest and upfront about challenges, and if both schools are great as is purported by everyone, then equally dividing this issue between the 2 schools seems the right thing to do.

I'll assume there is a list of these children? Perhaps on a spreadsheet ? Create a random assignment formula that assigns half of the kids to AMCHS and half to CSHS. Seems fair, and creates parity with the issue. (see how the solution to that has nothing to do with neighborhoods - just a name and a random assignment to one school or the other). No random carve outs.

---

I agree with most of this. I think sending Shanandoa to Consol makes the least sense of all for the reasons you stated. I like your solution for making demographics equal but that would create a ton of extra work to implement. So I doubt they would ever move away from the neighborhood method as it is now.

Comparable is the word not equal. Equalty is a unicorn and "equality" is Not one of the priorities. Comparability is. You hear what you want to hear.

viejo said:

---

Since so few kids actually walk to school to begin with, someone educate me on what the REAL issue is.

---

veritas47 said:

---

The solution referenced in the old threads of keeping kids near home and investing all the money WASTED on busing and annual rezoning in attracting top teachers to the neighborhood schools populated by the low performing demographics is the one that will actually give these low-performers the best chance at success in college or the workplace. By spreading them out, is CSISD actually revealing its true priorities?

---

Apparently it is the commute and money. So, take the 3 million dollars from the transportation section of the 2017/2018 budget just approved and fire the bus drivers, sell the buses and everybody get your own children to school. Using the option of north of Barron walks, rides a bicycle, or is driven to school, take the 3 million and give it to Consol and the other nearby schools to ease the 'burden.' Since your tax rate doesn't change, then every year, Consol and the nearby elementary, intermediate, and middle schools north of Barron can use that 3 million to fund whatever they want. Of course, that doesn't address the folks that will now complain about educators throwing money at problems and how that never solves anything, but hey, it's a start.

Edit-grammar

Edit, not worth it.

LOYAL AG said:

---

lost my dog said:

---

Serious question - why is it so bad your kid drives past one school to attend another? Both high schools are good. Why does the drive matter?

---

Forgive the assumption that may be entirely incorrect but you sound like someone who doesn't have children driving. ...

---

Actually, my child is a senior at CSHS, and occasionally drives.

[Refrain from being rude or refrain from posting on this board. You have been around long enough to know that. -Staff]

(this is Oogway posting) **Okay, I admit I'm a bit snarky today. Apologies to Staff & the rest of y'all.**

I apologize I am not trying to not see your side but someone is going to have to move and be further from home..the commute actually has not been as bad as you would believe it to be for my family... I worried about it for a long time and it has not been that bad...it might not be ideal but will have less of an impact then people realize...for what it is worth after the last rezoning pebble creek parents voiced lots of concerns about transportation times and it has improved tremendously ..i think whether your neighborhood changes or not they will try to improve the commute times

The letter grade system is stupid regardless.

veritas47 said:

---

02skiag said:

---

That is an extremely cynical take on the situation. So you are saying we should allow allow SES to attend a single school to "show our true colors"? Why would you want to burden a single school like that? Why would you want to burden all the students in that one school with that? It's not just test scores, it's behavior, atmosphere, etc. Putting all at risk students together creates an enabling atmosphere as well. I simply don't get your take at all, spreading out SES seems extremely obvious to me.

---

And you thought my post was cynical? Wouldn't it make sense to keep students near their homes enabling parents easier access to their child's school and teachers? Wouldnt it benefit them to use some of that $3M to fund incentives to attract top teachers and keep class sizes smaller so these students have the best opportunities to succeed?

If the TEA succeeded in banning schools from cheating the school evaluation system, does anyone actually think demographic balance would continue to be a priority for CSISD? Why did Supt. Ealy oppose the letter grade system that was proposed? It wasn't for the stated reason. It was because it no longer relied as heavily on the average rating of all campuses. As a result, their shell game would be worthless since the target demographic groups actually performed so poorly district-wide.

---

Yes, your post was very cynical towards the school board, regarding their reasoning for evening out demographics. They aren't cheating anything.

96aggies said:

---

I apologize I am not trying to not see your side but someone is going to have to move and be further from home..the commute actually has not been as bad as you would believe it to be for my family... I worried about it for a long time and it has not been that bad...it might not be ideal but will have less of an impact then people realize...for what it is worth after the last rezoning pebble creek parents voiced lots of concerns about transportation times and it has improved tremendously ..i think whether your neighborhood changes or not they will try to improve the commute times

---

I get what you're saying entirely in the bigger picture, and we also have had recent improvements to our bus times due to a route being split this spring and some other attention paid to the problem. Thing is, they're still not so great even with the extra investment.

I'm not asking for immunity against being moved, and I haven't even given an opinion about the best option or advocated much for any here or elsewhere. A big reason is personal--one of my kids will be at AMCHS going forward in any case for reasons having nothing to do with rezoning, but to their benefit. I'm in on the conversation because I want to see good policy developed. I don't think we're going to get there by dismissing legitimate concerns from my neighborhood or anywhere else. And for the record, I think the issues from Shenandoah, etc., brought up here are very valid as well.

To guard against charges of hypocrisy on talking about travel times but sending a kid to AMCHS anyways...I think it would be good if the district would look for more ways to differentiate programs at the schools via magnet programs, etc--try to attract higher-SES students rather than beating them over a head with a stick and telling them to go somewhere that has clear costs but no advantages for them. This is something that SES-balancing proponents on the national level have said is successful at bringing middle class students to schools in lower-SES areas. I don't know how this would scale to our schools, and it probably won't solve the whole problem, but maybe we could attract more of the needed flies with honey rather than vinegar. Schaefer has brought this up at board meetings to the sound of crickets from the rest of the board.

Stupe said:

---

If the school board actually cared about the low SES students, they wouldn't be putting a larger burden on them by making them go to a school farther away.

They are worried about perception, not reality.

---

Although I disagree with your overall premise, don't you think that our districts parent's perception is important? Shouldn't the district want both schools viewed equally when folks look for housing?

Quote:

---

Some of you have need to actually talk to the community leaders and lawyers involved with the SES parents and guardians. They have historically demanded to go to the newest schools even if it means getting on a bus. CSISD has always tried to make that happen in large part because long term data says SES population attendance is so much higher when those kids have to get on a bus to go to school. For whatever reasons, their attendance numbers drop significantly when they don't have to "make the bus" and then the bus (district) insures they get dropped off at the school property.

State funds are tied to actual attendance numbers and not how many students are in an area. Attendance numbers go down and state money follows...has to be made up locally. Federal programs also can be optimized with balanced SES numbers. It isn't required but my observation has always been CSISD understands how to optimize those funds within the program rules so we don't have to come up with that money locally.

You don't have to accept that should be a primary consideration in CSISD school zoning but it helps to understand how the district got here. It also helps to understand the potential downsides to the district and property taxes if SES isn't a primary consideration.

---

Seems there is a list. And that there is some data that shows improved attendance and preference to go to the "new" school. With my plan half of them will get to do just that. Implementing this plan has nothing to do with zoning or neighborhoods.

1) Zone for proximity.
2) Randomize SES assignment for demographic balance. 50/50
3) Build the West Side HS
4) Search for SOUTH land to plan / prepare (I think the 2020 census is going to shock some people)
5) Take Navasota ISD to state court. They've annexed FAR beyond their need. Send them back across the river !

The problem with your randomized SES balancing is the bussing. It's more efficient to bus based on a neigborhood.

[Be polite or don't post. We are going to be strict on this thread and we aren't going worry about picking out single sentences to edit. -Staff]

SARATOGA said:

---

Seems there is a list. And that there is some data that shows improved attendance and preference to go to the "new" school. With my plan half of them will get to do just that. Implementing this plan has nothing to do with zoning or neighborhoods.

1) Zone for proximity.
2) Randomize SES assignment for demographic balance. 50/50
3) Build the West Side HS
4) Search for SOUTH land to plan / prepare (I think the 2020 census is going to shock some people)
5) Take Navasota ISD to state court. They've annexed FAR beyond their need. Send them back across the river !

---

I agree 1&2 makes sense on paper as a stopgap but I also think the SES families would have grounds for a discrimination lawsuit in this situation.

Putting them all in one school is discriminatory as well. If both schools are excellent I think it is fine and fair. And if there really are statistics that say busing helps SES attendance I think you could successfully counter the discriminatory claim.

Wendy. I'm zoned for AMCHS and don't care about anything but proximity. I've lived here for >20 years and my kids are only in elementary school. I know nothing of booster club this or PTO that. There are lots of people zoned for AMCHS frustrated by paying for a new school closer to them and driving past it, and the thought of paying for a 3rd (West Side) school and still driving past the 2nd without a zoning fix just adds on top of the continued frustration.

Isolating the east side of Hwy 6 South of WDF to come back into the north part of town is ridiculous, and it doesn't change in any of the 4 plans. Also ridiculous. This "way we've always done it" thinking isn't going to solve the exponential growth. It is time for out of the box thinking and new ideas. The 4 plans just tinker with Nantucket and Indian Lakes and gerrymander for demographic issues. I don't think a discrimination lawsuit would hold up if randomized selection to either school was used - Better than obvious gerrymandering. And I'm guessing the busing expenses would decrease since you're busing a smaller population to 2 places rather than large groups of students all over.

Fact is that I'd probably drop off my kid at CSHS on the way to work because its closer to the Hwy. But I can't afford to spend over an hour in the car in the morning dropping off kids at 2 locations way off the highway. And being zoned to AMCHS might force my hand to have my kid spend several hours on the bus each day because I can't manage the drop off commute and work a full day. There are probably others like me who would take their kids to CSHS themselves but would have to utilize the bus to AMCHS. Rezoning for proximity saves some transportation money for the district and TONS of time for parents and kids.

If you have a high schooler zoned to AMCHS and you don't want to drive them to avoid a long bus ride, then have the young person walk across street to the library. Study/do homework from 4 - 5 then pick the kid up on your way home from work. Then, your kid can complain that they don't get to spend social time on the bus with their friends and that you are the meanest parent ever. I would wear it as a badge of honor.