priorities?

[cf schools]

If managing class sizes in a district this large is too challenging, maybe some people should look for a job in a smaller district instead of trying to shrink this one. I think "losing numbers" is not a good thing, any way you look at it. It isn't good for the district; it isn't good for the city.

"There are a lot of classes looking at smaller classes, and that is a real plus even if the district is losing numbers," McDonald said.

I respect Cindi McDonald, David Stoakes and all the board members. I know they have a tough job with a lot of tough decisions but one has to wonder what their priorities are and if they are making the right decisions.

[linnea]

Let's get real. Here's what the Courier says:

there was a decrease of 15 students districtwide, about half of which could be attributed to a difference in the number of students who graduated in 2008 versus the number of incoming kindergartners

I wouldn't say losing 7 or 8 students in the whole district makes any difference whatsoever. It's not like the board set out to drive students away in order to manage class sizes better.

I do think it was a mistake not to send the kids from UNI Married Student Housing to North Cedar. Those families are not living their permanently, and the kids have to be bused somewhere; why not bus them to the school with the most room?

[Curious]

NC now has 2 sections of every class? This year that may continue, but with only a few more students at the school, how will the district be able to justify 2 sections in an under-capacity school next year? The year after that? People will not move to that part of town in large enough numbers to generate substantial growth.
What will happen is more shifting of children from room to room, section to section, etc... Teachers will be hired, then moved or "downsized." How is that good for anyone? Eventually, NC will be closed, maybe not next year or the year after that, but I would be willing to bet the children starting Kindergarten at NC will finish their elementary education at another building.
As far as people using their feet to vote, parents doing what in their opinion is best for their children cannot in any way be construed as negative - if the parents feel that the children would be better served in a different setting, that is great, they should do what is best for their family. I have no idea what attendance area I live in, but I will not be sending my children to any of the public elementary buildings in CF - I will not put my "babies" into such an unstable system.

[linnea]

Curious, unless you homeschool, your child will usually have a different teacher every year anyway. When there are several sections of each grade, the schools divide the kids up differently each year - your kid won't have all the same classmates every year. And unless you live in a town with only one school, school district boundaries will change from time to time. Heck, even small-town schools end up merging with the next town over.

Throughout the school system, teachers move from one grade to another and one school to another all the time. Strangely enough, my son at NC has the same teacher this year as last year, because his teacher moved to a different grade.

I agree that all parents do what they think is best for their children. I just think some parents have a mistaken idea about what is "best".

[cf schools]

Well, linnea, last time I checked this was America and as far as I know, it's still a free country...so, with all due respect, it really isn't for you to judge what other parents think is best for their children.

And as far as the buy outs in that part of town haveing nothing to do with the school...you're absolutely right, but it is all connected. The school could be the best school in the country, but unfortunately, if it's in a location that isn't thriving or growing there is going to be issues with enrollment. That is why they say location location location in real estate.

And as far as I'm conserned this isn't about my child or your child or what teachers or classmates they have or what school they attend. I'm not worried at all about my child switching schools, that's not the point, at least for me...the point is that if my child does have to switch school it better be for the greater good of the district. And it is a real hard pill to swollow when it's my hard earned tax dollars are paying to give kids from other towns choice and priority here in the very district I pay for. I know they moved some OE kids, but only after resident students and only after they realized their plan was going to fail. They should have done it the other way around. Move OE students...give it a year or two to see how that changed the enrollment...then if needed, move residents.

For me, it's more about the money, than my child...I trust my child will thrive in any school in Cedar Falls, but the board has an obligation to the taxpayers of this district.

[linnea]

I apologize if I sounded too harsh in my statement about parents' choices. But, as it is a free country, I do have a right to voice my opinion too.

CF schools, when I mentioned the flood buyouts, it was in response to this statement of yours:

<i>If you have a school with declining enrollment you have to first find out why it's declining and correct it (if it can be corrected) before you try to boost enrollment...you can't put the cart before the horse. If you corrected the underlying issues you might find, you don't need to do any boundary changes because enrollment might just increase on it's own. I think the boundary committee understood that and tried to suggest that by encouraging the board to go to a bond and upgrade NC BEFORE they moved kids </i>

NC has declining enrollment because its the population of its district has declined. That's the "underlying issue". In my opinion, the easiest, most cost-effective solution is to expand the boundaries of its district.

I agree that it makes sense to *consider* building a new school and closing North Cedar sometime in the future, *if* population trends continue in the direction they're going. (Trends can change direction, after all - trends in the 80's and 90's were towards fewer students, which is why Valley Park School was closed.) But the numbers don't support doing that right now. And building a new school is WAAAAY more expensive than renovating an existing one. So I think the board is right not to jump on that bandwagon right now.

If at some point, a few years down the road, the board does say "Let's build a new school", it's going to be several years before that school comes on line. So most of the current elementary kids will have moved on to Jr. High before a new school is built. I don't buy the argument that "you shouldn't change the district lines now because it's only a temporary solution". Being in elementary school is temporary. Life is temporary. If the district couldn't ever change boundary lines except when a new school was in the works . . . I don't even want to think about what a mess that would be.

[cf schools]

You make some very good argument linnea...And I agree with most of what you said. I understand that IF a new school is necessary, that is a long term solution and does very little for the short term problem.

I also understand that sometimes boundaries need to be moved, that is always going to happen as populations shift, grow, and decline.

But one point I think you may be forgetting is that 700 plus people came up with what seemed to everyone as a good short term fix. I think it's hard for many families to understand why they were moved from a school that in many cases was within walking distance, so that an OE student from, say Waterloo was able to stay at that school. That family does not pay taxes here, that family does not vote here.

Moving only OE students may not have been the right answer either...but the board could have given it a couple of years to see. The numbers added up. There is no reason it shouldn't have worked. And either way...I think many families, mine included, wouldn't have been nearly as upset about moving if they knew that they are given a priority...that they were being listened to by the very board that is supposed to represent them.

How would you feel about the situation if you were moved from the school you live closest to, to the third closest school while students from other towns are bused in?

[EQ1863A]

I've been trying to figure out how I would feel if my child was moved. I hope I would be philosophical about it. The OE students are let in or not let in on a case-by-case basis; letting one particular OE child stay doesn't obligate the school to take other OE children in the future. For resident students, the decisions have to be made neighborhood by neighborhood, and once they're made, they stay that way for a long time. It's not a "this neighborhood child vs. that OE child" thing. Once the boundaries are changed, your child doesn't get to go back to their original school, even if enrollment there drops. That's just the way it is.

I also realize that you have to look at it from the location of the school, not the location of the child. For people north of 1st Street who got moved to North Cedar, there are two other elementary schools closer to them, so it doesn't seem fair. But from the point of view of North Cedar School, there isn't another neighborhood closer to them that could be added to their district. So it's the logical one to choose.

I have faith in my children's ability to adjust and prosper in a new school setting, so I wouldn't have a problem with it if I really thought it was in the best interest of the district as a whole.

[linnea]

That last post was by me, linnea, by the way. I accidentally typed the security check thingie where I was supposed to type my name. Duh.