Thursday, August 19, 2010

Middle School attendance areas/assignments

The new draft of attendance areas includes middle school assignments: http://sfusd.ggnet.net/resources/changes.php

What do parents think about their assignments?

256 comments:

  1. So, lower performing schools get sent Roosevelt, but starting at Arguello the students go to Presidio? Geographically makes sense, I suppose.

    Roosevelt has been so up-and-coming lately, and this will kind of dampen that, no?

    Map seems good for some, but doesn't seem to take into account students and families who don't have the resources to give feedback or work to turn a school around.

    Luckily our family has many years to watch and see, but I know many at our school who are going to be upset.

    ReplyDelete
  2. From a quick glance, I am surprised so many schools are assigned to Presidio and so few to Roosevelt. It doesn't seem like the numbers would add up right. Is Roosevelt a much smaller school?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Roosevelt is tiny and pretty sweet lately. We know a family who is so happy there.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Not sure how the CTIP zones come into play here. If you don't like your feeder middle school, and you live in CTIP 1, could you apply to a coveted school, like Presidio?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I posted this on The School Boards and Rachel Norton's blog earlier but figured I’d ask other people here. If we’re in the boundary for New Traditions even though we prefer schools in other attendance areas such as Clarendon, George Peabody or Jose Ortega, does that mean we’re now the lowest in priority for those schools under the new plan? If that’s the case, it’s frustrating to think that we actually had better chances last year for the non city-wide schools that we actually want.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I was actually really hopeful for Roosevelt as an option, that a new system would make things more equitable for all middle schools. Presidio is a wonderful school, but Roosevelt could be great too.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think if you want a special program, language immersion and such, they don't have the same boundaries. We are in New Traditions area too. Great school, but not the school for us.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The basic lines make sense--I'm not seeing gerrymandered lines in completely nonsensical places, but we're Grattan-Hoover so perhaps that's coloring my perception. My understanding is that if you live in a CTIP 1 tract, you get priority for high-performing schools. For example, if enough CTIP 1 people outside Clarendon's attendance area request Clarendon, nobody in Clarendon's attendance area who requests it will get it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I am really surprised at the how Roosevelt mapped out, too. I thought Peabody would surely feed into Roosevelt. They even use the Roosevelt auditorium for their school functions.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "For example, if enough CTIP 1 people outside Clarendon's attendance area request Clarendon, nobody in Clarendon's attendance area who requests it will get it."

    You, my dear, have unearthed the reason why this new system is anything but a neighborhood assignment system, especially if you live near a highly desirable school. It is the great equalizer. (Unless you happen to live in a million dollar home in a low performing census tract. Then you win.)

    ReplyDelete
  11. K-8s and all-immersion programs do not have attendance areas. All the other schools, including schools that used to be designated "alternative" like NT and Clarendon, now have attendance areas.

    ReplyDelete
  12. It looks like Argonne will be a neighborhood school. Is that correct? Also, our assignment school is McCoppin, but half the school is for Cantonese bilingual kids (not available to non-Cantonese speaking kids). Will that change or will only half the school be for neighborhood kids?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Smart money will colonize the Mission and have the nanny drive the kids to Clarendon in the Land Rover. I can't for the life of me figure out why they didn't go with area attendance and individual family socio-economic status rather than attendance area and census tract residence.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The grand social experiment continues... It has just donned a new outfit. But I do like the idea of low income kids having access to better schools. I just hope their parents will seek out the opportunity.

    ReplyDelete
  15. And I am assuming the census tract doesn't include the most recent census (I know, how could it?). Would be nice though. Things have really changed in this town in the oats 10 years.

    ReplyDelete
  16. 9:29, If you're in the attendance area for NT, you can request schools in other areas, but you're at the bottom of the totem pole, after CTIP 1 area people and people who live in the attendance area of the school you're requesting. If you want an "alternative" school (all-immersion or K-8), you're on equal footing with people all over the city, but I believe the CTIP 1 people get priority for alternative schools as well.

    I'm all in favor of low-income families having the opportunity to send their kids to better schools too. Unfortunately, historically, the numbers were not great despite outreach efforts--as you could see from the crazy unbalance of high/low income students at schools like Clarendon under the old system where they tried to use the lottery to balance school populations by income. Now more affluent families have another way to game the system, by choosing housing in CTIP 1 areas.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I thought they were planning to have Starr King and Ortega feed the same middle school, so the Mandarin immersion kids will have the same middle school program.

    For the same token, CIS and West Portal should feed the same middle school.

    Language immersion needs critical mess (a lot of kids speaking the language). Having one single school with a big immersion program is better than having two smaller schools with two smaller programs.

    ReplyDelete
  18. How do folks think changing Clarendon from an "Alt school" to a "neighborhood school" will change it? Seems that most of the "best" schools in the city have Alt status. If Clarendon does not, will it change for the worse?

    ReplyDelete
  19. 9:21
    If you have a CTIP 1 address, you have a magic ticket for school assignment. Presidio is yours, if you can get there by car or Muni, just don't count on school buses.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Hey 10:20 AM: "Critical mess" ... Nice!

    ReplyDelete
  21. I also think the Roosevelt thing is weird. With the CIS/DeAvila being brand new, it only has 2rd graders now, so won't be sending anyone to middle school until fall 2014. I'd also think it would make sense to send the CIS and West Portal Cantonese kids to the same middle school to get a critical mass of kids to do a zero-period Cantonese.

    ReplyDelete
  22. To 10:45 AM: New Traditions also loses its "alt" status. It's an up-and-comer school that historically had a lot of African American kids coming from deeper in the Western Addition or Bayview, but is gentrifying. I wonder how it will change by becoming a neighborhood school in that neighborhood. I imagine it will look a lot like Clarendon or Grattan (for demographics) quickly (if it already doesn't).

    ReplyDelete
  23. They've changed the CTIP maps, now I am not in CTIP 1 :(

    ReplyDelete
  24. The immersion kids at Jose Ortega and West Portal will follow a different feeder path than the GE kids at their schools. For ex. West Portal GE kids will go to Hoover. West Portal immersion kids will go wherever the Chinese immersion program is. There is info on the website about this.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Agreed, New Traditions is already attracting lots of middle class families from the Panhandle area. I know several families in this demographic who are there and very happy walking to school each day.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I think Clarendon will stay about the same. It's already got a lot of white and asian kids and low free lunch kids. That is who lives in its new assignement area (middle class kids) so I don't see a big change there.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Where is the info that Jose Ortega MI kids will follow a different path? Does this mean that they won't go to Aptos? I'm confused!

    ReplyDelete
  28. Does someone have a link to the new CTIP maps?

    ReplyDelete
  29. 11:32, link please?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Anon, 9:29 a.m.--yes, you'll now have the best chance at New Traditions, your neighborhood school. You'll have lower priority at the others you mention. At least that's the way it seems. The district is still working out details. It's so interesting because parents have long ranted and raved about wanting more priority at their neighborhood school and now the district is going to give that option but now of course parents are going to complain about having less choice.

    ReplyDelete
  31. http://sfusd.ggnet.net/files/elementary-attendance-areas.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  32. elementary to middle school feeder assignments:

    http://sfusd.ggnet.net/files/feeder-pattern-elementary-list.pdf

    map:

    http://sfusd.ggnet.net/files/feeder-pattern-elementary-map.pdf

    remember folks...this is still in DRAFT form...go to the meetings and voice your thoughts if you think these assignments are bad

    ReplyDelete
  33. 11:47

    I don't see any reference on whether the immersion kids at West Portal, Starr King and Ortega would have a different feeding pattern from the GE kids.

    ReplyDelete
  34. i have been told that Clarendon's GE program (second community) is part of the attendance area system, but the Japanese Program (JBBP) is not.

    ReplyDelete
  35. On this link, click "PowerPoint Presentations" under "Learn more about the details." Then go to Appendix A re: language pathways.

    http://sfusd.ggnet.net/resources/changes.php

    But I think the other poster was wrong. Looks like Canonese kids will go to 3 middle schools Francisco, Hoover and Marina. Mandarin kids don't have a middle school yet. It's blank for King and Ortega!

    ReplyDelete
  36. Only immersion programs and K-8 are city-wide. JBBP is not a immersion program.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Ah, I see that the info about most immersion language programs is listed in the FAQ. Presumably, if you're kids is in West Portal Cantonese Immersion, getting into Hoover will be just as hard as it is for everyone outside of that area of town, where for the rest of the West Portal kids, it's a no-brainer. So if the Cantonese programs are set to go to (say) ISA, people are going to be pissed.

    ReplyDelete
  38. 11:57 - you are correct. Clarendon's GE program is attendance area. The Japan program is city wide. It's on pge. 10 of the power point someone just linked to.

    "Clarendon (Japanese FLES pathway will be city-wide)"

    ReplyDelete
  39. 11:58

    Actually the last page has a list of schools which will "continue" or have new language pathways.

    I think 11:32 was wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  40. 11:58, not true. read the materials. West P cantonese kids will go to Hoover too.

    ReplyDelete
  41. I hope Ortega Mandarin gets Aptos like the rest of the school.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Interesting....then shouldn't all JBBP be treated equal? How about Rosa Parks JBBP?

    ReplyDelete
  43. So 11:58 AM, that means that the Clarendon JBBP went from being available citywide now to being "reserved" for folks in that specific attendance area. That feels like a mistake. (It's the same thing for the JBBP program at Rosa Parks, but Parks doesn't have anywhere near the demand that Clarendon has.) I see that the Russian and Spanish FLES programs are practically forgotten too.

    ReplyDelete
  44. "Anonymous said...

    "For example, if enough CTIP 1 people outside Clarendon's attendance area request Clarendon, nobody in Clarendon's attendance area who requests it will get it."

    You, my dear, have unearthed the reason why this new system is anything but a neighborhood assignment system, especially if you live near a highly desirable school. It is the great equalizer. (Unless you happen to live in a million dollar home in a low performing census tract. Then you win.) "

    This is what I have been trying to say to the community - that this new SAS, regardless of its merits, is certainly not a neighborhood system if you happen to live near a desirable school.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Roosevelt is ALREADY a good school. Check out the test scores. It's a sweet place. Just doesn't have the multi-year repuation of Presdio, but as someone who looked at many middle schools last year, I preferred Roosevelt. And for people not so far out in the avenues, much more easy to get to--Presidio is other side of the moon unless you happen to live there.

    ReplyDelete
  46. 12:06 PM here. Looking at the PowerPoint here, it looks like the JBBP programs are considered "citywide" programs, as are all the immersion and "bilingual" programs (for immigrant kids). (See page 9 of the presentation.)

    What's unfortunate is that for the Italian program at Clarendon, the Russian program at Argonne and the Spanish program at McKinley, the district considers them non-citywide programs. So a Russian family that lives just outside the Argonne boundary will be at a disadvantage in getting into that program, while a Japanese family wanting to get into either Clarendon or Rosa Parks won't be at a disadvantage. I think that weakens the programs, too.

    ReplyDelete
  47. For my family, the big unanswered question in here is -- what happens to the special ed kids for middle school? For inclusion kids, the only choices are at a limited number of middle schools, forcing many special ed kids to say goodbye to kids they've been with in class with for years. And K through 8 options for middle school inclusion are nonexistent. (Lillienthal is the only K through 8 that offers inclusion but their people say they've virtually never had a inclusion slot open in middle school!) Rachel Norton on her website says that she is working on expanding inclusion opportunities at other middle schools. There is going to be a meeting on September 14th at which the Board will hear about special ed options. It is important that special ed families attend this meeting to make their voice heard that we need expanded options for inclusion kids in middle school.

    ReplyDelete
  48. "For example, if enough CTIP 1 people outside Clarendon's attendance area request Clarendon, nobody in Clarendon's attendance area who requests it will get it."

    Past request patterns do not bear out the idea that Clarendon and Miraloma--not to mention the west side schools--will be overwhelmed by CTIP1 folks from the east side. There will be a few dogged families, and middle class east side folks, but no where near an overwhelming amount. With buses being pared back a lot, why would families trek over the hill every day? Many families don't even have cars. I think they also took into account leaving some room in schools like Clarendon to accomodate out-of-neighborhood CTIP1 folks. Clarendon has huge capacity, after all.

    Who won't get in is folks in other west side, non-CTIP1 neighborhoods. There is already someone saying that on this thread even! And it's true--if you are in the New Traditions area, you probably won't get Clarendon GE because the excess spots will go to CTIP1 people and neighbors.

    And yes, it will be harder for you to get the citywide spots--though we'll have to see how that plays out. I'd bet that some of the more moderately popular schools will be fairly available, like Daniel Webster SI, as families breathe a sigh of relief for having Grattan and don't cast the net wider.

    But hey--you have practically guaranteed entry to a decent school. It makes sense for those placed into the Bryant and Muir areas to get some priority into other schools, compared to those of you lucky enough to live in a wide area filled with high-test-score schools.

    It's a balance! Which is what we need in a city with widely divergent incomes such as this one. This system seems less confusing and more balanced to me. I think we should all give it a chance.

    ReplyDelete
  49. "Also, our assignment school is McCoppin, but half the school is for Cantonese bilingual kids (not available to non-Cantonese speaking kids). Will that change or will only half the school be for neighborhood kids?"

    I think they are keeping the CB program, but then, the CB kids are also mainly neighborhood kids!

    ReplyDelete
  50. I think it is just plain stupid to put a school right on or near the boundary so that people living across the street from a school (who look through the living room windows at that school) don't attend that school. Now I accept that there are likely going to be some geographical situations where it is difficult to create a map that is proximity based, but this is just looking for trouble as there surely will be a Rossevelt.

    The issue is this - what does the District care if the Rossevelt community gets up in arms? If SFUSD cared that so many families bail out of public schools they wouldn't do things like this in the first place. Rachel may care, but most of them really couldn't give a rat's ass what the community thinks.

    ReplyDelete
  51. "I can't for the life of me figure out why they didn't go with area attendance and individual family socio-economic status rather than attendance area and census tract residence."

    ....because lots of people, including on this blog, complained bitterly about how complex and opaque the diversity index was and how people were cheating the system. This is simpler, but a blunter instrument, I agree. And I even benefit from it (have lived in CTIP1 a long time already, and argued against dropping the individual SES diversity index fwiw).

    ReplyDelete
  52. Now more affluent families have another way to game the system, by choosing housing in CTIP 1 areas.

    True, but it will be interesting to see if they do. There are a few middle class blocks in these neighborhoods, but they are mostly Inner Mission, Bayview, Sunnydale, Tenderloin. I've spoken with several families who got excited about moving to the Mission for about 5 seconds until they realized they would have to live on the "wrong" side of Cesar Chavez or Diviz or Valencia--even in Viz Valley there is a line between lower-middle class and poor. Yes, these neighborhoods are changing, but the police action is still higher on one side of these dividing lines. I happen live on the "wrong" side of one of these lines, but few of my friends with professional jobs and kids have chosen to--so far. Will be interesting!

    ReplyDelete
  53. "They've changed the CTIP maps, now I am not in CTIP 1 :("

    Really? As far as I can tell, they have only added one tract to the CTIP1 designation since March (the area just east of Duboce Park, in the Muir Elementary area), and they haven't removed any tracts.

    Here is the original map from March to compare with today's map (see page 5 of this pdf):

    http://portal.sfusd.edu/data/epc/
    CTIP_description.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  54. 12:23, re special ed:

    Thank you. You are raising a real and very important question. I heard Rachel raise it too at the meeting last night, thankfully.

    It will be important for families to mobilize around this issue.

    ReplyDelete
  55. I suspect richer families who want to use the CTIP preference to get into Clarendon/Rooftop/wherever are far more likely to either lie about their addresses (a notorious problem with neighborhood school systems) or rent a short-term squat. A few months of rent and utilities on a studio in Hunter's Point is, after all, cheaper than 6-9 years of private school. After getting their desired assignment, they can then claim that they moved to be closer to the school.

    The question for families in those assignment areas is whether there are 20-30 families willing and able to do this. Everyone at our preschool (now in the Clarendon assignment area, as are most families enrolled there) is assuming that there will be, and oscillating wildly between hope and depression. Although maybe we're too cynical. Did SFUSD create any kind of plan to deal with efforts to game the system like that?

    ReplyDelete
  56. I agree with Don-
    "I think it is just plain stupid to put a school right on or near the boundary so that people living across the street from a school (who look through the living room windows at that school) don't attend that school."
    Not only do some live near a boundary, but some may live near TWO boundaries. Take a look at Glen Park and Monroe schools. Some kid could be right near both schools and be assigned Hillcrest!

    ReplyDelete
  57. Gotta love being placed in a school not of your choice now and then being forced to a middle school even further from your house in 6 years. Why on earth wouldn't priority for middle school be based on neighborhoods until next year's K class catches up to the new system?

    ReplyDelete
  58. The logic is amazing.

    So, a rich family, living in a nice neighborhood (which would already have a nice neighborhood school) would use a fake CTIP1 address to get into a nice school in another neighborhood?

    ReplyDelete
  59. ".go to the meetings and voice your thoughts if you think these assignments are bad"

    "as-if" that would make any difference at all!

    ReplyDelete
  60. "So, a rich family, living in a nice neighborhood (which would already have a nice neighborhood school) would use a fake CTIP1 address to get into a nice school in another neighborhood?"

    No, even sillier still: they'll use the fake CTIP address to get into a nice school IN THEIR OWN NEIGHBORHOOD.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Roosevelt has great test scores!

    79% proficient or above in math.

    Compare that to Everett:

    4% proficient or above in math.

    OUCH.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Wow. Don admitted Rachel cares.

    ReplyDelete
  63. CTIP maps have not changed.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Are you guys aware that just because a school is in your attendance area -- it does not necessarily mean you will be assigned to that school.

    ReplyDelete
  65. 1:02,

    I was going to say that, but didn't want to make it look so silly.

    ReplyDelete
  66. They are going to have bus routes from Bayview and the Mission to coveted schools, so parents from those areas will enroll their kids at those scholls, if they know they can.

    ReplyDelete
  67. CTIP maps have not changed.

    Yes they have, but only slightly: added an area near J Muir south of Duboce Park.

    ReplyDelete
  68. "Roosevelt has great test scores!
    79% proficient or above in math.
    Compare that to Everett:
    4% proficient or above in math."

    Is that true? I feel sorry for people who have to go to Everett.

    ReplyDelete
  69. They are going to have bus routes from Bayview and the Mission to coveted schools, so parents from those areas will enroll their kids at those scholls, if they know they can.

    I bet you they will have buses to citywide schools, but not to neighborhood ones. Okay, so that might include Clarendon, but Clarendon also has huge capacity. Most poorer families have not competed for popular lottery schools--for lots of reasons. Lack of transport, not lack of access to info, overwhelmed with daily life, want to be in the 'hood, etc etc. The lottery was always between and among middle class families from all over the city. Now it will subside because more families will be happy with their neighborhood options for Feinstein, Alamo, Jefferson, Grattan. Those middle class folks in marginal areas will compete for citywide along the immersion-lovers and a few poor folks.

    In other words, most neighborhood schools will remain quite inaccessible to low-income families from the east side. Miraloma and Grattan are quite safe from the hoi polloi.

    I really suggest everyone take a deep breath. This system is a huge step up for middle class, west side families. I'm sure there will be bumps for some, and glitches, but let's see how it plays out.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Everett has some nice programs, such as 826 Valencia and Beyond the Bell on site. More importantly, it will change with middle class families from McKinley, Milk, and Moscone--just as Aptos did. Aptos was once also a "ghetto school." Now it has a solid middle class base. Everett will be losing some of its lower income base and gaining more middle class--if people give it a chance. If families band together, it can be a good experience. If I were assigned there, I'd be running to talk with the folks who helped lift Aptos about six years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  71. "This system is a huge step up for middle class, west side families."

    And the kids who need the help the most, still won't be getting any, from these changes.

    ReplyDelete
  72. True--I am worried about racial and SES concentrations continuing at schools such as Bryant. But then, what could the board do? Any attempt to gerrymander districts so that middle class families were forced to be with significant groups of low-income Latinos and especially African Americans would be met with howls and screeches. Only in immersion programs do middle class families voluntarily do that. No judgment there--it is what is. It's a conundrum. At least this way (once it is underway and middle class families understand they are getting an improved deal) the BoE gets the west side and middle class families off their backs. Hopefully the highly concentrated, high-poverty schools will get lots of $$$ for wrap-around services and teacher recruitment, as they seem to be doing at Muir.

    ReplyDelete
  73. But why should kids that need the most help get it from an assignement system? They should get it from enrichment programs, wrap around social services, food, healthcare, counseling. Trying to solve society's ills by making kids drive all over town to elementary school is not the answer.

    ReplyDelete
  74. "Only in immersion programs do middle class families voluntarily do that."

    You don't get a lot of African American children at immersion schools, because face -it -- if you did, the middle class would not flock so eagerly to those school sites.

    ReplyDelete
  75. 1:58, you may be right, but I hope the poorer schools will get real bucks for those services (and no sour grapes complaints from parents across town who are now in high-test-score schools but with less money per pupil).

    ReplyDelete
  76. Cases in point--Rosa Parks JBBP, Montessori when @ Cobb, Starr King, Paul Revere--all grew more slowly than they would have without the larger AA base. Same with New Traditions and Harvey Milk, which are both really sweet schools but families turn away.

    ReplyDelete
  77. I would have to disagree with 2:07 PM. My daughter has three African American children in her immersion class.

    ReplyDelete
  78. 2:15

    there are always exceptions, but as a general rule, you don't have a lot of African Americans enrolled in Mandarin Immersion or Spanish Immersion classes, and those who are enrolled are upper or middle class.

    ReplyDelete
  79. It'll be easier to get into McKinley now, now that its feeder middle school is Everett.

    ReplyDelete
  80. ...unless the families work together to help turn Everett around, as was done at Aptos. It's all about critical mass.

    Rachel Norton asked a good question last night about bridge programs for current 4th and 5th grade families that are feeding into low-performing schools. What can the district offer to make the transition more positive? I'm thinking especially of academic supports for GATE kids, and also arts programs. These are the areas where Everett and ISA and Mann are most lacking. If I were a family at Milk, McKinley, or Marshall, it is where I would concentrate--also boosting the Spanish immersion program for Marshall kids. Everett has a beautiful campus, btw, and great location. The 826 Valencia program is a bonus too.

    ReplyDelete
  81. So the middle class westside families who reap substantial gains by the new boundary maps won't mind, say if their budget gets cut in half and redeployed at the underperforming population schools for the enrichment programs, wrap around services, etc. that are being recommended. they won't mind? really?

    ReplyDelete
  82. 2:26

    That is what tax dollar is for. Those poor performing schools are already getting more money than middle class schools. Nobody is crying unfair that John Muir could get additional 2 million per year.

    For SF, then it is more reason to satisfy the middle class first, because they are the tax base. A big negative result of the old system is that middle class families (often duel income) were leaving the city. A reversal of the trend will increase the tax base, and more money can be dedicated to help the kids from low income families.

    ReplyDelete
  83. So the middle class westside families who reap substantial gains by the new boundary maps won't mind, say if their budget gets cut in half and redeployed at the underperforming population schools for the enrichment programs, wrap around services, etc. that are being recommended. they won't mind? really?

    I'm sure they will piss and moan mighty hard. I'm just saying that there is a tradeoff here. Supposedly there is federal funding for low-income schools in need of a turnaround. Now that west side parents will have solid access to neighborhood schools, ones without too many poor kids from the east side, they have to understand that the poor kids get that money.

    I always hope it is not a zero-sum game. I always hope we can raise adequate funds for all. But if we are going to accept highly concentrated poor schools in our district as the price of keeping middle class families in the district, then I think we also have a responsibility to fund the at-risk kids adequately. Their needs are much, much higher than those of middle class and upper middle class kids, on so many levels, and so much less ability to provide for them from within the community. I hope San Franciscans can see this and agree that we have this responsibility. It's not only about our own kids!

    ReplyDelete
  84. "Now that west side parents will have solid access to neighborhood schools"

    the access will not be solid, it will be *slightly* better than the current assignment system, but still no guarantee of getting into your assignment area school.

    ReplyDelete
  85. If we had this 10 years ago, we would have been Sutro and Presidio, and that would have been great. As it was we did homeschool for one and CACS for another the because Roosevelt was such a bad fit for their older brother.

    Now the two we have left in SFUSD are at Gateway High and we're happy enough. Still, both elementary and middle school assignments were very stressful. Oh well. All's well that ends well.

    ReplyDelete
  86. (PS Roosevelt was pretty roughneck back in the 90's/early 2000s. I hear it is much better now.)

    ReplyDelete
  87. the access will not be solid, it will be *slightly* better than the current assignment system

    Don't oversell your case. The big fight, based on available buses and desired immersion programs, will be for citywide schools. I really doubt that most neighborhood schools, especially those way over the hill on the west side, will be crowded out. Even if you are crowded out, you are sent to your nearest not-crowded school--and how many low-test schools are there on the west side?

    Obviously we will have to see how this works in practice, but I would put money on the odds of west side parents not getting a good school are "slight"--not the other way around. Yes, there is still *some* balance in the system with CTIP1 and citywide options, but it is obviously a step up for west side parents. Take a deep breath for heaven's sake.

    ReplyDelete
  88. (PS Roosevelt was pretty roughneck back in the 90's/early 2000s. I hear it is much better now.)

    Yes. Much, much better. It is a good school.

    ReplyDelete
  89. I see a lot of folks commenting here who suggest that schools like Clarendon are going to "fill up" with (1) CTIP 1 kids and (2) neighborhood kids. On the CTIP issue, I have to agree with those commenters who suggested that that all depends on whether school buses bring them from the CTIP 1 areas. If not and that's the current plan, I doubt you will see lots of CTIP 1kids coming in. On the neighborhood issue, looking closely at the Clarendon zone I really don't see that area as having lots of school-age kids. The Twin Peaks chunk is very barren of kids. Midtown terrace and Forest Knolls do have some school-age kids, but you also have tons of older people living in those homes with grown-up kids. Same is really true of Golden Gate Heights. That leaves some parts of Inner Sunset -- where you will see a fair number of school-age kids. But overall I'd say that, given Clarendon's huge capacity, there's going to be LOTS of room for non-CTIP1, non-zoned kids to come in. Lakeshore is in a similar boat. Big capacity, but the zone -- a slice of Merced Manor and Lakeshore -- has lots of older folks with grown-up kids. Yes, there are kids in the Park Merced development, but not a huge number. It would be interesting to see what the District's number say about the number of kids in each zone who are now in school -- I bet you'll all find that there's going to be plenty of room for others. So don't get all panicked yet!

    ReplyDelete
  90. It will be very difficult for eastside middle class families to find options outside of their area. Forced to stay in the eastside, the district hopes that the eastside middle class families will turnaround the troubled schools there, that McKinley E.S. feeds into Everett M.S., and Everett becomes McKinley (becomes successful through parental support).

    You are to vote with your feet. Stsy in SFUSD and turnaround an Everett, or leave SFUSD for private school, leave SF entirely,
    or flock to the citywide programs and schools (already full).

    ReplyDelete
  91. Marina Middle School is going to be a great place to go to school in a few years. Sherman, Yick Wo, Parker and Redding are going to feed into it. Dividing line is mainly Geary and Divisadero so, lets see large parts of Cow Hollow, Russian Hill, the Marina, Nob Hill and North Beach.

    ReplyDelete
  92. This is just making me mad. We are 0/15 and our wait pool school is now our attendance area school. Sooo annoyed.

    ReplyDelete
  93. I do think there's a solid chance that a kid in the Grattan or Clarendon zone would end up at John Muir, just like we see now. Imagine that there are enough kids in the Grattan zone, plus CTIP1 requesters, to fill it perfectly. Then if more "zone" kids are in Clarendon than can fit, where will they go? Not West Portal. We've seen in the past couple of years, many "westside" folks on here who were assigned Muir. People on the far west (west of Park Presidio and 19th Ave) will be fine. All the schools over there are fine academically. It's the folks in the middle who might get squished between people who move to a zone on purpose, driving up the number of kids in the zone on one side, and "popular enough" schools all around. Clarendon, West Portal and Miraloma are essentially surrounded by fine schools that will get a enough demand to fill.

    But overall, I think the new system will reduce stress levels for most people. There will be a tradeoff of being "stuck" with McKinley and wanting Grattan. We'll have to see.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Agreed, 3:17. We'll have to see. But it's hard to think of something much better that balances the needs of this diverse district. I really don't get people complaining about landing in New Traditions but longing for Clarendon. There is still some possiblility for choice if you hate your assignment area, but geez, no one could ever design a system that gives everyone access to Clarendon! Last year, 1,500 applied there .... just not possible. This system is an improvement--and I was a skeptic so that's a turnaround for me.

    ReplyDelete
  95. I would not suggest that poor families in CTIP 1 areas are going to crowd middle class attendance area residents out of a school like Clarendon, any more than low-SES people who had priority under the old lottery system crowded more affluent families out of schools like Clarendon. Relying on CTIP 1 rather than an individual family's SES does create more room for those with resources to game the system, either because they live in a not-too-bad part of a CTIP 1 area or by renting housing in a CTIP 1 area. I did not find the SES factors -- section 8 housing, free lunch eligibility--that opaque. I think what really bugged people was affluent European families being able to claim a home language other than English to get a leg up on the diversity index or people making claims not easily challenged by the districts about mother's educational level, but it would have been easy enough to do away with those items and look at poverty only.

    ReplyDelete
  96. I agree. This is an improvement for those advocating for proximity/neighborhood schools, over the last system. I cant see this system improving diversity for the reason you cite: CTIP 1 families do not have a history of wanting to get their kids into Clarendon -- otherwise the old system would have worked.

    I just don't get what all the pro-neighborhood folks are complaining about....they've gained more by this new system.

    ReplyDelete
  97. 3:17 PM here. I agree, 3:22, that this is an improvement. I was also a skeptic. I do still think that the language programs and schools are weird, as (obviously) are the special ed stuff. I hope to see that improve, but I'm still skeptical.

    ReplyDelete
  98. My 2 million dollar home is in CTIP1.
    How cool is that?

    ReplyDelete
  99. 3:23, I don't disagree with you. I argued all the way through the process for keeping the SES factors and diversity index. The diversity index became a scapegoat for the failure of most people to get Clarendon et al who wanted it--but they were not really competing with their opposites on the diversity index. The failure of the old system was that people with low-SES didn't play the system, really.

    And maybe that isn't the best model anyway--well-funded wrap-around services for high-poverty schools, a la ER Taylor which is funded by an individual donor, may be the better way. I consider that point truly debatable!

    Anyway, some of us who will benefit from CTIP1 (despite arguing against it) are not trying to "game" the system; we've just lived in our neighborhood for however long already--and intend to stay. I don't claim it's fair. But I'm not gaming anything, let alone cheating. I've always abided by the rules. Others may cheat, I suppose. I don't see why, when you can live in a nice, quiet neighborhood and have a very strong probability of getting nice, quiet local school with high test scores and a strong PTA. Why go to the trouble of cheating?

    Regarding home language, that was in fact changed last year: if another language was listed then kids were tested, and if they turned out to be fluent in English (even with another language), they were not designated as ELLs for the diversity index. Most European families have kids who can speak English (plus French, German, etc.). The only advantage to speaking another language, for a middle+ class family, was getting into an immersion program as a native speaker. But the myth persisted that these families had an advantage. They didn't, not last year.

    Also, the factor of mother's education was dropped before that as an unverifiable factor. Therefore the only factors left were section 8, CalWorks, free lunch and so forth--verifiable poverty--plus ELL, which was tested for.

    But people railed against using the diversity index. They felt it was being manipulated by EPC and that neighborhood districts, even with the blunt instrument of CTIP, would be simpler.

    So great, I benefit. But I agree with you!

    ReplyDelete
  100. It will be interesting to see if the realtors pick up in the new maps and if housing prices go up in the foggy Sunset (all good schools) or Western Addition and Mission and Bayview (CTIP). But then, realtors in my experience know very very little about SFUSD so maybe not.

    ReplyDelete
  101. I've been in my home for 16 years, it was kind of a crappy neighborhood when I bought the house, now it is considered a great neighborhood, how am I "gaming" anything?

    ReplyDelete
  102. I've already gotten messages from Real Estate Agents "your home is in CTIP1, your property values have just gone up. If you want to SELL, call me now!"

    ReplyDelete
  103. For the commentator who (12:53) who posted that a student could live near the Glen Park and Monroe and get Hillcrest, I think they did a good job of drawing the dividing lines. The border around Glen Park is mostly 280 and San Jose Ave which make a pretty good point of division and with Monroe, Cleveland and Hillcrest all fairly close together I think that it was inevitable that some students would be physically closer to one but assigned to one of the others.

    As a Glen Park resident I am pretty pleased with how the draft maps look as I think it will lead to Glen Park Elementary becoming a much better school (and feeding to Aptos). I think they did a good job overall drawing lines in my part of town. Obviously I am less knowledgeable about issues in the rest of the city but I would be interested in hearing more people's overall impressions.

    ReplyDelete
  104. I've already gotten messages from Real Estate Agents "your home is in CTIP1, your property values have just gone up. If you want to SELL, call me now!"

    I don't believe you, but it's funny!

    ReplyDelete
  105. 3:48, wow, that was fast. I guess it won't be long before we see homes marketed as either "CTIP 1" or being is "good" school zone as is common in many other cities

    ReplyDelete
  106. Re Roosevelt, there are 50 on the last waitpool list. Killer test scores *and* popular!

    ReplyDelete
  107. 3:51, this is 12:53-
    I'm glad you like the new boundaries.

    My point is that a kid could live close- within walking distance to both Glen Park and Monroe schools but the new area assignment would be further away to Hillcrest. That does not seem like a good division to me.

    ReplyDelete
  108. 3:55, it's true, I swear it!
    My husband and I listened to the message on our machine, looked at eachother and both said, at the same time "VULTURES!"

    ReplyDelete
  109. 3:55, it's true, I swear it!
    My husband and I listened to the message on our machine, looked at eachother and both said, at the same time "VULTURES!"


    Oh that is so funny!!!

    ReplyDelete
  110. Quick question: Is Hoover good?

    ReplyDelete
  111. 3:44 said: "The failure of the old system was that people with low-SES didn't play the system, really."

    Right on! SFUSD built this huge, complicated system (due to lawsuits filed against it), and it didn't work ... because it was too huge and complicated!

    Plus, no one wants to trek across town for school. If the aftercare and busing and whatnot aren't available, the schools just aren't as desirable for some people. And different types of people want different things.

    ReplyDelete
  112. 3:51/12:53. Fair point. Particularly as Monroe, Hillcrest and Glen Park all feed into different middle schools.

    I still think that using 280 as a divide makes sense particularly as one of the only ways to cross is the long pedestrian bridge that exits at the very busy Monterrey Ave/Circular Ave/280 on-ramp intersection.

    Just curious, how do you feel about your own boundary, or are you in that little Hillcrest panhandle?

    Cordially,

    Chris

    ReplyDelete
  113. Yes, Hoover is good. Strong music program, offers honors academics, and draws from Clarendon and West Portal areas--Forest Hills. Traditionally has offered Cantonese and Spanish immersion but it sounds like the Spanish will be dropped/moved to Lick, Everett and Mann. Anyway, Hoover is one of the big 5 (of the non-K8 schools): Presidio, AP Giannini, Aptos, Hoover and Roosevelt. They are all grouped at the top in terms of rankings. Aptos and Hoover both are more diverse (less Asian+white) than the others, so are a little lower scoring, but not much. One negative: I don't love the facility myself, but that is a minor quibble....it's certainly a lucky break if you feed into it.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Re Hoover, it is good and will only get better with feeder schools of Clarendon, Jefferson, West Portal and Grattan. With those demographics it will have top scores (already has very high scores). Their music program is very good and I think I heard Orla say in the meeting last night that it will continue the Cantonese immersion and maybe Japanese--fed by Clarendon?

    ReplyDelete
  115. The boundaries seem reasonable from a quick glance. The new system should be much better than the old. Not a fan of the fact that CTIP1 residents are given golden tickets (because you should work to improve your local school) but hopefully the number of CTIP1 participants will be kept to a minimum.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Arguably the whole west side has golden tickets for being able to afford homes in Forest Hills, Inner Sunset, etc.--no one entering kinder now helped build up those schools. Everyone's situation is different and a little flex is a good thing in a crazy diverse district such as ours. Agreed that it is good to build up local schools. Not everyone can and not every school is in a position to be built up. I love seeing the efforts at JSerra, Sunnyside, Aptos et al and would go to any of these. I'd have a hard time sending my kid to Bryant though. The factors are complex.

    ReplyDelete
  117. I wonder what (non-city wide)schools people think WILL attract large numbers of CTIP 1 students, particularly if most busing is removed?

    Here are some that I could see:

    Glen Park - good public transit links, feeds into Aptos, already has mostly CTIP 1 kids (based upon free lunch numbers) and very few neighborhood kids currently attend; West Portal - pretty easy transit, feeds into Hoover; plus maybe Sunnyside and Alvarado.

    Overall I think the schools in good neightborhoods in the Central/East side of town will likely attract most of the CTIP 1 applicants due to shorter drives and denser public transit links from the CTIP 1 areas. The west side schools will be much more heavily neighborhood kids.

    Thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
  118. 4:40 PM: mostly agree, except equating "free lunch" kids to "CTIP1" kids. Many Chinese immigrants are poor, but live in CTIP2 tracts (often with lots of roommates).

    ReplyDelete
  119. Lick - thoughts about the feeder schools?

    ReplyDelete
  120. It's "Forest Hill" not "Forest Hills." Watch out, you're New York is showing.

    ReplyDelete
  121. And of course, I write "you're" wrong. Ugh.

    ReplyDelete
  122. FYI - Here is how the assignment works for Middle School

    All elementary schools will feed into a particular middle school.
    At the beginning of the enrollment process, SFUSD fifth graders will receive an initial assignment offer to
    a middle school based on the elementary school they attend.
    Students will have an opportunity to accept their initial assignment or participate in a choice process.
    Students who participate in the choice process will maintain their initial assignment unless they get an
    assignment to a higher ranked choice.
    Students will be assigned to schools using the following order of preferences:
    1. Initial assignment – students who received an initial assignment to attend that school.
    2. Siblings - younger siblings of students who are enrolled in and will be attending the school during
    the year for which the younger sibling requests attendance.
    3. CTIP1 - students who reside in CTIP1 census tracts.
    4. Attendance Area -students who live in the attendance area of the school.
    5. Densely populated attendance areas - students who live in attendance areas that do not have
    sufficient capacity to accommodate all the students living in the attendance area.
    6. All other students.

    ReplyDelete
  123. 4:43. Good point. However, I think that there are relatively few Chinese family's on the South and East sides of town and many of the free lunch kids in those areas will be Hispanic or AA kids who are concentrated in the CTIP 1 tracks.

    That being said I am not trying to demonize the CTIP 1 kids. I think that the new system does a good job of giving disadvantaged kids a chance to go to good schools. I am just trying to figure out what "neighborhood" schools are going to a mix of CTIP 1 and neighborhood kids (or maybe even majority CTIP 1) and what schools are going to be majority neighborhood kids.

    ReplyDelete
  124. Someone help me understand how there will be any open seats if you keep your assigned middle school until you get a better one.

    Mathmatically, that doesn't sound like it would work unless there is all this excess capacity at the middle school level, or unless they anticipate a lot of "trades", Lick student wants Aptos, Aptos student wants Lick.

    ReplyDelete
  125. 5:04, I believe they have calculated excess capacity at many of these schools. Not sure if the computer would also be able to handle switches such as those you suggest, but I think that is supposed to be the case, based on the way this was all presented last spring.

    ReplyDelete
  126. Re Forest Hill -- you are right, my New York is showing! Oops! Time for a cawfee. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  127. In response to Lick--

    I think this one will succeed. Alvarado and Fairmount will bring strong immersion kids with a mix of middle class and not and a history of PTA organizing. Moscone will bring high-scoring, low-income kids who have beat their demographic and have discipline and skills to succeed, plus parents who pushed to get them into Moscone. The only down card is Bryant, but the other schools will be strong.

    Plus, Lick has some good mojo going in, with a strong, increasingly mixed community, good electives (Blue Bear band, dance studio, art studio), 826 Valencia, Beyond the Bell, and a lot of heart. It will also be embraced by Noe Valley.

    I think Everett too has a good shot though a little harder pull. It can definitely be done if the folks work together.

    I'm a little more concerned about Denman and King. I think they should re-look at the feeders for Presidio and Roosevelt and re-work them--Peabody should go to Roosevelt and maybe Tenderloin or Park to Presidio. It can handle it along with Cobb.

    I think Aptos is going a little more upscale, and that's a shame considering they've done a good job with their many sub-groups. Hoover and Giannini are golden golden, with just one set of low-income at-risk kids coming in, sheesh, and probably not too many (Malcolm X is tiny).

    I don't have a read on Marina and Francisco.

    ReplyDelete
  128. Good analysis, 5:19 PM. I wonder about Roosevelt, too. I guess there will be a Cantonese program there with all the DeAvila kids coming (eventually). But what happens until then? I also think that Presidio should feed into that, seeing as they're so, so close and currently share facilities!

    ReplyDelete
  129. Thanks, 5:43.

    Re Roosevelt, and looking at its proposed feeder schools not as they are now but based on their new proposed attendance boundaries, it just looks like an awful lot of CTIP1 kids from the Tenderloin and Western Addition would be funnelled into Roosevelt, whereas no CTIP1 areas would be funnelling into Presidio. Granted that Cobb currently constitutes a low-income school, but for how long? Its attendance area is not low-income. And it is tiny. So Roosevelt gets slammed, and Presidio gets off scot-freee. So moving Peabody into Roosevelt would make sense, and then switch Tenderloin into Presidio. It's not that much further, and they'll be busing anyway from downtown.

    Mann also gets slammed by the way, while Aptos climbs the income ladder and Hoover and A.P. get a few kids bused in.

    As I said, I think the mixed schools will be okay--Lick certainly, Everett probably, as long as the community embraces it.

    ReplyDelete
  130. "Re Hoover, it is good and will only get better with feeder schools of Clarendon, Jefferson, West Portal and Grattan. With those demographics it will have top scores (already has very high scores). "

    You're forgetting Malcolm X also feeds into Hoover.

    ReplyDelete
  131. Roosevelt is getting shafted by having all under-performing low- scoring schools feed into it.
    They should feed Argonne into it, and Tenderloin into Presidio.

    ReplyDelete
  132. "You're forgetting Malcolm X also feeds into Hoover."

    I know that, but Malcolm X is tiny compared the rest of the schools feeding in. And some of those kids will choose not to make the trek across town. Ultimately, the scores of those kids will be overwhelmed by the ones from Clarendon, Jefferson, Grattan, and West Portal. Really, this is just a gesture toward SES diversity. You see the same thing back East where they bus a few kids in from the city to the 'burbs--everyone feels good about it, and the kids do not make a dent in overall scores.

    Plus, Hoover will now be losing the feeder bus from the Mission that brought immersion nd bilingual kids from the Cesar Chavez Ave area.

    Hoover will be golden, I'm tellin' ya.

    ReplyDelete
  133. I checked the population at Malcolm X- something like 8 kids are currently in 5th grade. Indeed, it is less than a dent for Hoover.

    Even though Hoover looks like it will be golden (and it is the school my elementary feeds into) I will seriously look at Lick. I would agree with the comment about good mojo.

    ReplyDelete
  134. My biggest suggestion and/or complaint about this plan is that they need to group language programs better. Mandarin from Ortega and King in one school; put Japanese from Rosa Parks and Clarendon together in another. It looks like they are working on expanding Spanish spaces at Lick, Everett and Mann, which is good. By why aren't West Portal and CIS being sent together? The language plan needs better articulation.

    And I would agree about re-arranging the Presidio and Roosevelt feeder schools.

    ReplyDelete
  135. The API at New Traditions is 807. It is not considered a low scoring school.

    ReplyDelete
  136. 5:01, actually you're wrong: Visitacion Valley and the Bayview are actually heavily Chinese neighborhoods.

    ReplyDelete
  137. Weird and sad that Denman is mentioned only once in 136 posts. Those elementary schools must be screwed since none on this thread are overly concerned about feeding into it.

    ReplyDelete
  138. "Wow. Don admitted Rachel cares."

    I have never said that Rachel Norton doesn't care. Obviously she does. She's the one commissioner that goes out of her way to communicate with the public. My complaint with her as with all on the Board is that they pay lip service to parents, but do nothing to help them in their role in site governance.

    For example, SFUSD is rewriting its BSC to make it incorporate the Single Plan into it as required by law. The Board turned a blind eye when the administration simply canceled the BSC last year. Now that the CDE read them the riot act for doing that, they are acting. But the Board should have known what was going on and insisted that parents be given their due in properly constituting and monitoring school site plans. But that is off topic.

    ReplyDelete
  139. Weird and sad that Denman is mentioned only once in 136 posts. Those elementary schools must be screwed since none on this thread are overly concerned about feeding into it.

    More nuanced view is that Denman and its feeder schools are off the map of most people here. I mean, who here goes over that way except maybe for soccer games at Crocker Amazon? Real question.

    As I said earlier, I'm a little worried about Denman. It has no large powerhouse schools like with networked parents (at this time anyway) feeding into it. But by the same token, it is by no means a complete collection of failing schools, either. The current map has it aiming to be a working class school, but not a failing one:

    Longfellow: 802 API
    32% Latino, 31% Filipino, 25% Asian

    Sheridan: 833 API
    29% Latino, 29% AA, 15% Filipino, 14% Asian
    7/10 API rank (10 = similar schools, meaning it outperforms its demographics)

    Monroe: 803 API
    47% Latino, 32% Asian

    Cleveland: 683 API
    67% Latino, 12% Asian, 11% Filipino
    this is the low performer with 1/1 API rank

    JSerra: no API data this year, but 50s CST which is mid-range.
    64% Latino

    Monroe has an organized parent base with the SI program, and has really built up. Junipero Serra has done well for its demographics, has a good principal, and a new influx of middle class Bernal parents coming in. Longfellow are good to strong performers for their demographics, with reputations for being functional schools. Sheridan is a strong, disciplined school. Cleveland is the lone true underperformer. (I actually know a teacher who recently went over there, who is great.)

    The current Denman MS underperforms with a 690 API. Current demographics are 30% Latino, 26% Asian, 23% Filipino, and 13% AA. I was underwhelmed when I toured there a couple of years ago.

    The current trajectory with these feeder patterns would have it be a mid-range school that isn't failing but doesn't sparkle. I'm sure that white and middle+ class parents would pass it right by and seek a spot at Hoover, Aptos, Presidio, maybe Lick instead. Is that okay with the district? Have a reasonably functional working class school? That is what this feeder pattern points to, for the most part. What should SFUSD do to support it?

    ReplyDelete
  140. VV MS is the one that's really being set up to fail with only low-performing and lower/working class ESs feeding into it.

    ReplyDelete
  141. Visitacion Valley?

    I think it is similar to Denman--
    a mix of middle-performing and low-performing, very diverse (Latino, Filipino, Asian, AA, very few white) set of kids, working class, lots of immigrants. The area is increasingly Asian. You are right--not any middle class base schools. How will SFUSD support this school to help it outpeform and sparkle?

    ReplyDelete
  142. I don't see how diversity at elementary schools are going to improve based on boundary maps. Look at Muir's boundary vs. Sherman.

    Hoover will be one of the most priveledged schools in the city.

    But I'd choose Lick over Hoover any day of the week and twice on Sunday! My daughter is in the GE program there. Small school. Wonderful, caring staff. Great kids (growing diversity). Lots of arts (dance, rock band, valencia 286, theater, etc. etc.) differentiated instruction. She looooves going to school everyday.

    ReplyDelete
  143. 8:40 PM: This map has nothing to do with immersion programs. There's a separate plan. But that fact is not at all clear from how this is presented. There's more in the presentation, but it's a little self-contradictory.

    ReplyDelete
  144. Thank you, 8:37. I wish someone would provide us with a clearer presentation of the language pathways. I watched the video of last night's meeting, and still didn't get a clear picture of this. This is really important for those with kids in language programs!

    ReplyDelete
  145. 11:27--YES. I love James Lick. It's already got it going on, and I think will only improve with these feeder schools. It's a good mix. I wish the other feeder patterns were as equitable.

    ReplyDelete
  146. We live in the Inner Sunset and are in the Jefferson attendance area. Seems like it is a solid school but I'm concerned about its lack of ethnic diversity - 67% Asian our child is half-Asian, but we'd prefer a place with a mix more like Grattan or Clarendon. I wonder how the new boundaries will affect Jefferson. Our section of the neighborhood was formerly in the Grattan area, which tells me that Jefferson boundary moved east a bit. My guess is that there will be a modest balancing of ethnicity, but probably still 50-60% Asian. I'm also guessing that over the next few years, Jefferson's area will grow further east to swallow some of Grattan's and Clarendon's current area given the likely huge demand for those two schools.

    ReplyDelete
  147. 6:34 am -- you have pointed out the downside for the westside school parents. The neighborhoods have a large number of Chinese kids and the new assignment system is only going to lead to those schools becoming more demographically homogenous. If you want more diversity and live on the westside, you're going to have to figure out where the small number of other non-Chinese families are most likely to go. For the past five years Sunset Elementary and Feinstein have been the sunset/parkside elementaries that are relatively diverse. Both have solid PTA funding and a good track record. Or, as you mentioned, you could try to get into a neighborhood school elsewhere that is more diverse. If I were you, I'd be talking to like-minded westsiders and trying to get into a place like Sunset or Feinstein in order to keep those diverse, rather than trying to help increase the diversity of your already-heavily one ethnic group school. And that suggestion is from someone who tried it for four years at another westside school and found that it just didn't happen. Mark it up to racism (of both sides frankly), poor principal leadership, the new assignment system, or whatever, but many of the westside schools are just not going to get more diverse.

    ReplyDelete
  148. If you look at the number of people from CTIP1 areas that listed Clarendon as their first choice, it will more than fill the 44 K spaces in the Second Community Program. The other 44 K spaces in the JBBP will remain city-wide. Potentially CTIP1 requests may keep all of the attendance area folks out. Take a look at page 10 of the following document link.

    http://sfusd.ggnet.net/files/city-wide-schools-July-6-2010.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  149. Where did you get the "number of people from CTIP1 areas that listed Clarendon as their first choice"

    ReplyDelete
  150. August 19, 2010 3:00 PM
    It may look like a dream assignment area for Marina MS, but Yick Wo parents are going to lobby hard to be included in the North Beach feeder system into Francisco MS. The NE quadrant of the city really sticks together and Yick Wo has already sent half of last year's 5th graders to FMS and the kids are loving it. We have a strong/isolated community here and we want to continue our dedication to our neighborhood middle school.

    ReplyDelete
  151. More nuanced view is that Denman and its feeder schools are off the map of most people here. I mean, who here goes over that way except maybe for soccer games at Crocker Amazon? Real question.
    Thank you for your comment. I thought it was insightful that you reflected on this area of the city. I am a native of the Excelsior/Mission Terrace area and still live here. I went to Monroe for kindergarten some 30 plus years ago, but my parents opted for a parochial school in the neighborhood as many (and most long-term residents that I know here) have done through out the years. This is a highly lower middle/working class area of the city. As my family belongs to this "class" as well. It concerns me that Denman, with its lack of diversity will not be supported, but forgotten. I did not receive any of our middle school choices this year (we went 0/5- Aptos being our first choice, but we lived one block outside of the 'attendance area'), but was thankfully able to get into Aptos during the second round waitpool. We would have went parochial if we didn't get in, despite the hardship.
    In last year's attendance area map our address belonged to Sunnyside Elementary and in the new proposed version it is being aligned with Monroe. That makes a BIG difference to our family considering where our future pre-schooler will be attending school in 2 years. Controversially, I know that some portion of each school will be open for lottery applicants. I have to say the lottery system allowed us to send my daughter to nearby schools (not necessarily our attendance area school) that we felt was a better fit. I'm just going to keep my eyes open during the next two years to see how this new system evolves.

    ReplyDelete
  152. I find these comments about rich people gaming the system offensive. Why would they? Most of them send their kids to private school anyway. The only people I have ever heard of who are gaming the system in terms of neighborhood are people who rent apts in areas (like Orinda) so they can send their kids to school there but the people who do this are not rich but middle class who cannot afford private schools and its cheaper to pay for the apartment. MCDS is a case in point. SF families pay to send their kids there rather than rent an apt., house, etc. in Milly Valley or Tiburon which are considered good school districts.

    ReplyDelete
  153. maybe some middle class people rent because they cannot afford to buy a house. If you rent do you have to rent in a low-income area? And to the poster about Presidio residents, most education is funded by state taxes which all working people pay as well as federal taxes. There is some paid by local taxes but people renting in the Presidio definately pay their fair share of supporting a school district.

    ReplyDelete
  154. 10:29, from Mission Terrace & Excelsior. Thanks for the reply to my post about Denman. Funny, I'm an Aptos parent as well! Welcome to our community.

    Actually, one of my worries with the new feeder system for Aptos is that we would become *less* working class--I like the mix we have now of everything.

    I really love the south side of town! It's a different world. Present company excepted I'm sure ;-) but it is a less pretentious part of town. Love McClaren Park too.

    But yeah--what is SFUSD going to do to support Denman kids? Working class, lower-middle income, diverse, not failing (note this is not a CTIP1 area), but not highest scores either. What are the opportunities for these kids? I agree with you it could be forgotten.

    ReplyDelete
  155. I agree - No one is gaming the system by renting and living in a rental home in a good school district.

    The only gaming is when a family rents a home but doesn't live there.

    ReplyDelete
  156. Personally I'd be concerned about Presidio being able to take on so many students. My daughter went there - and the school was amazing. But I wonder if they can continue to excel if so many schools feed into it. Seriously McCoppin and Peabody should be assinged to Roosevelt - that just makes way more sense. And Roosevelt is an amazing school too.

    ReplyDelete
  157. 10:12 AM, that is an amazing document. It shows how white the demand really is at Clarendon. Unfortunately, it only shows those schools that are changing from citywide to attendance area (so no Rooftop, Lawton or Lilienthal stats), but it is fascinating.

    ReplyDelete
  158. I don't think Presidio should be overloaded in terms of numbers. In fact I think it won't be with the current feeder schools--they seem to have deliberately under-enrolled. I just think they should rearrange the current Presidio - Roosevelt - Hoover configuration.

    Rosa Parks should get a bus to Hoover to connect with the JBBP kids from Clarendon. Rosa Parks GE kids would lend some diversity to Hooover as well. In its place, Grattan should go to Roosevelt. It's just as close, just a different direction.

    To keep Cantonese language intact, CIS should go to Hoover to join West Portal. In its place, Jefferson should go to Roosevelt. (May need to do something in the meantime given that CIS has no upper grades right now).

    Then, Presidio should get Tenderloin and in return Roosevelt should get Peabody. McCoppin should go wherever numbers balance is needed at that point.

    I would consider putting a Mandarin program in Aptos, and busing in Starr King. The Starr King GE kids would help Aptos stay diverse. Let Mann focus on Spanish, and send Daniel Webster as well Flynn there for now (maybe send IB Flynn kids to ISA eventually, but it isn't in place yet, so what the heck?) and Cesar Chavez.

    Basically, I think they need to shuffle for both language pathways and equity/balance.

    ReplyDelete
  159. 10:12 am -- I looked at your source. I see it shows a map with dots of the dispersion of families putting Clarendon as first choices. But I don't see how you are able to count 44 dots that are in the CTIP 1 zones. The CTIP 1zones are very narrow -- I think you are assuming a lot about where exactly on the map some of those dots are and that they are in CTIP 1 zones.

    ReplyDelete
  160. 12:04,

    In general, I agree with you. Rosa Parks and Clarendon should feed to the same school, CIS and WP should feed to the same.

    Based on location, I feel CIS and WP should feed to Hoover, and Clarendon and Rosa Parks should feed to Roosevelt. Roosevelt is closer to Japan Town, and Hoover is closer to Sunset, which has a concentration of Chinese residents.

    Presidio is taking too many schools (and only good ones), so Tenderloin should feed into Presidio, McCoppin and Peabody can feed into Roosevelt.

    From diversity point of view, some of the Aptos and Denman feeder schools should be swapped. Aptos is getting all the good schools right now, many of which are actually closer to Denman. I would give Sheridan and Longfellow to Aptos, and give Miraloma, Sunnyside and Glen Park to Denman.

    ReplyDelete
  161. 12:26, I take your point, and I think we are thinking along the same lines, but your suggestion would leave Hoover undiverse--which is why to send Rosa Parks there. It's a puzzle, but the point is they can rearrange to make it more equitable and support language pathways.

    ReplyDelete
  162. "We live in the Inner Sunset and are in the Jefferson attendance area. Seems like it is a solid school but I'm concerned about its lack of ethnic diversity - "

    The K class at Jefferson is surprisingly diverse this year. It appears to be closer to 55% Asian children, with many Caucasian kids, as well as several Middle Eastern, Latino, and AA students (and that's just in my daughter's class).

    Now my older daughter's 3rd grade class is less diverse, but the trend seems to be that the younger classes are a bit more mixed, with this year's K's being the most ethnically diverse.

    I actually think that Sunset (which is losing citywide status) will potentially become less diverse in the new neighborhood assignment system, as it's farther west; and that Jefferson - closer to the inner sunset and feeding into the same MS as Grattan and Clarendon - may become more diverse.

    Of course my view may likely be influenced by my bias towards the school, but I think it's a great place to educate a child!

    ReplyDelete
  163. 12:33,

    You are right. Maybe Hoover can take McKinley and/or Milk and/or Alvarado.

    However, They plan to phase out the Spanish program at Hoover, so that doesn't work.

    ReplyDelete
  164. I forgot....Malcolm X feeds into Hoover, Carver feeds into Giannini, so there are some diversity for those two schools.

    With the current plan, Presidio is the most un-diverse school.

    ReplyDelete
  165. "I forgot....Malcolm X feeds into Hoover, Carver feeds into Giannini, so there are some diversity for those two schools."

    Not really. These schools are small (Malcolm X has 8 kids in the 5th grade right now). And eventually they are slated to go to a magnet school that will be the replacement for Willie Brown (per Carlos Garcia the other night).

    So there is a token effort at SES diversity at Presidio (Cobb), AP (Carver) and Hoover (Malcolm X) and Aptos (JOES GE). On the other hand, Roosevelt gets lots, and Denman, and King, and Everett, and Mann, and Lick. It needs to be re-jiggered.

    ReplyDelete
  166. I agree.

    I think current Roosevelt parents will be pissed at the current map.

    ReplyDelete
  167. Horace Mann is being assigned four schools with very low test scores, a huge achievement gap, and historically poor parent involvement. There will be little socioeconomic diversity and most kids will be ELL Spanish. This seems like a school that is being screwed over, I don't get it. How does the assignment of kids from Webster, Starr King, Chavez and Buena Vista create equity and less "underserved" kids in one place? How will language pathway objectives be met for the tiny percentage of kids learning Mandarin? Why wasn't Moscone placed here--too high scoring and diverse?? How would you be feeling if your child was going to Horace Mann? If the plan is to send four schools here with significant challenges and huge achievement gaps it should be prepared to provide more resources and interventions there also.

    ReplyDelete
  168. 1:40--agreed! Look at the difference between Hoover and Mann in this proposal. They are removing the buses from Hoover and Aptos from the Mission and concentrating kids at Mann. This is not approaching their stated objectives.

    Lick looks okay though.

    ReplyDelete
  169. It looks as though middle school feeder draft was proposed to keep the white middle class and chinese happy; thus, they will be retained in the district, boosting test scores and enrollment. These families, especially the whites, are the first to flee to the suburbs or go private. The chinese go to millbrae, burlingame miltpitas or cupertino. Other populations tend to be at a disadvantage socio-economically and are much less able to go private or move to a better school enviroment. They're pretty much stuck. What's going to happen when some or many of the lower performing middle schools get closed for repeated poor performance or have their principals and staff replaced as per one the "reach for the top" funding stipulations. Some of the "token" feeders are almost funny. Malcom X at Hoover? Imagine all of the negetive scrutiny those students will get. Archie Bunker himself could't have planned the current middle school feeders better. Now quit the clowning around sfusd and present a fair/diverse draft that doesn't seem like a caste system and : instead, one that supports all sfusd students. Diversity really does work. It helps to understand and accept others including one's self. It's not an all or nothing, winner or looser type of enviroment. It also encourages other to strive. It may not look as pretty on the surface but at the end of the day I feel it is much more healthier.

    ReplyDelete
  170. why don't they leave the middle schools alone until the first group of kinders in the new assignment comes up to middle school? No one who is in elementary currently had any idea they were selecting a middle school when they chose an elementary via the choice system and that seems unfair.

    ReplyDelete
  171. 2:25 pm -- they actually did this so that those from the eastside who used the old lottery system to get into schools on the westside wouldn't get dumped back into eastside middle schools (and have their kids lose the chance to go to middle school with their friends) simply because of their address. This was pointed out to SFUSD and Rachel during the discussions in the spring and they listened to us. Thank goodness!

    ReplyDelete
  172. 12:04,

    Nicely done. One thing you neglected to consider is the bilingual language programs. McCoppin has a Cantonese bilingual program that would pair up well with CIS/DeAvila at Roosevelt. (Roosevelt is expected to add a Cantonese program.) There are other Cantonese and Spanish bilingual programs around the City that should be considered for language pathways.

    ReplyDelete
  173. 2:31 I understand why they did this, I am asking why implement it now. I actually think it's fairly good with the small tweaks it needs in language immersion and maybe with Roosevelt/Presidio/Aptos/Hoover feeder schools.

    Still, there are many, many people who chose elementary schools based on programs, start times, aftercare, etc. that had NO IDEA they were also selecting a middle school for themselves at the same time. Everyone currently in elementary school is under the previous "choice" system and assumed they would have choice in middle school selection as well. I am not opposed to feeder schools, but it is unfair to those currently enrolled to take away choice now. Perhaps people would have chosen other elementary schools had they known. Also some people chose elementary schools for a program they will not continue with in middle school, or their child started playing an instrument they want to continue with in middle school. It would be better to wait and implement the feeder school process with the group of kinders coming into elementary next year.

    ReplyDelete
  174. this seems relevant to the middle school feeder draft.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_segregation

    ReplyDelete
  175. 2:37,

    Actually, the district has stated that the goal of Chinese immersion programs is to make the kids trilingual. Cantonese Immersion kids will get Mandarin in middle school. Mandarin Immersion kids will get Cantonese in middle school.

    So, no, It is not a natural mix for CIS Cantonese Immersion kids and McCoppin Cantonese bilingual program, because the CIS kids will be learning Mandarin.

    ReplyDelete
  176. 2:52, and yet the plan is to add Cantonese and Japanese programs at Roosevelt, CIS-DeAvila's middle school. No Mandarin. I agree it's cockamamie, but it's what's in the presentation.

    ReplyDelete
  177. 2:52 here

    I think the district has no idea what to do with the language pathways yet, so they draw the simplest plan based on neighborhood and capacity.

    It is a pity because they did a great job with the immersion programs at ES level.

    ReplyDelete
  178. 3:02 here. You're totally right. Looking at the map of language programs, it's shocking how few there are in the west. Clearly these were always magnet programs to help gentrify east side schools. And now, the two Mandarin programs are too far from the Chinese areas and too far from each other. Remember when the Mandarin parents wanted the program at Feinstein? Crazy talk. That would mean that the programs at Ortega and Feinstein would natually feed into Aptos. Clearly there's no need for that!

    ReplyDelete
  179. Another one I haven't seen mentioned is ISA being the middle school for the kids from Bernal Heights/Flynn and the kids from Muir. From what I can see it's the only middle school where no one from its actual geographical location are in the attendance area.

    ReplyDelete
  180. Look at the maps this way: the main objective is REDUCED TRANSPORTATION COSTS. Can kids get to school without too much reliance on yellow school buses? The maps are a necessary first step for eliminating most transportation services for general ed students.

    ReplyDelete
  181. 5:18

    That's why Peabody NOT going to Roosevelt doesn't make any sense. I'm guessing that you're happy with your feeder school and don't want any changes that may jepordize your most likely high performing, segregated placement

    ReplyDelete
  182. I wonder if there are plans to turn the McCoppin bilingual program into an immersion program. There is definitely the demand for it, and the Cantonese speakers are already there. This would make it a much more popular school.

    ReplyDelete
  183. I agree it makes no sense to send Peabody kids to Presidio. Roosevelt is much closer.

    ReplyDelete
  184. 5:45

    take that tinfoil cap off your head, there is no conspiracy.

    ReplyDelete
  185. Yup, really stretching it, 5:45.

    I'm just grateful to have a board member who actually HAS a child in an SFUSD school.

    ReplyDelete
  186. "Rachel Norton's kid goes to Argonne (which will feed into top-ranked Presidio MS). Former BOE member Eric Mar's daughter goes to McCoppin, which will also feed into Presidio. Hmmm."

    I agree. It is hypocritical for Rachel to be rambling on about social justice when she doesn't have to deal directely with any real social justice issues.

    Where are the BOE members from South Bernal and the Excelsior?

    ReplyDelete
  187. Rachel has a kid in special ed. Walk in those shoes for a while and you will really understand the social injustice found on all levels. Y

    ReplyDelete
  188. BOE candidate Emily Murase has kids that go to Rosa Parks.

    ReplyDelete
  189. 8:59 PM

    I've also had to deal with several family members with severe disabilities.

    That doesn't give anybody an excuse to abuse their authority for their own gain.

    These BOE members need to suffer what the rest of us suffer.

    They and the entire city governance are immune from going 0/14 or 0/28 or whatever.

    They don't have to worry about their child getting beat up or worse, in a Mission or Excelsior District school.

    ReplyDelete
  190. Oh please.

    Rachel's kids started at Argonne long before she was a BoE member, and long before this SAS system was designed.

    She is also the only member of the board who actually communicates with parents and follows up on good and frequently asked questions, and also dogs the issue of special ed assignment that is handled so atrociously by the district.

    Please spare us all these anonymous tin hat theories.

    ReplyDelete
  191. Is it true that there are no MS Honors tracks for Spanish immersion kids?

    Isn't that discriminatory?

    If SFUSD believes in having schools w/Honors tracks, why not have Spanish immersion programs with Honors tracks? Who said they are mutually exclusive?

    ReplyDelete
  192. I have family members with disabilites too. And I have a child with disabilities. Very very different - one you observe- one you live with day to day. i think you need to lay off the freaky accusations.

    ReplyDelete
  193. ^ since this is x-post from the "summary" thread above, here is the x-posted answer to this same question. apologies for the repeat:

    James Lick, which has the largest SI program at the middle school level, has no honors track, but does differentiated education within the classroom.

    It is true that Hoover's SI kids are not in the honors track--it is a mixed class. However, they proceed together as a class, and the teachers reach for their level. It seems like an honors class in some ways.

    I don't know what is happening at Everett, but I think it is similar to Lick.

    This is the trade-off for immersion. In practice, it functions as a diverse, mixed classroom setting. This is why all the immersion schools have mixed test scores, because their populations are very mixed--middle class kids + newly arrived immigrants, in most cases.

    [in response to another question]:

    I have no reason to think that Aptos's excellent honors program will be dismantled. They have recently added a sort of honors+ math track as well--as all kids are now on the track to 8th grade algebra, there is a track that has a very small set of kids taking 7th grade math in 6th, and on up to 9th grade geometry in 8th. One class of kids with the highest test scores in math (high 500s or perfect 600) and/or teacher rec.

    ReplyDelete
  194. I think it is uncool to mention where BOE members kids go to school.

    It's creepy.

    It's probably that Don person, being an even creepier, sock-puppeting jerk.

    ReplyDelete
  195. Kate, please remove posts that say where Rachel's kids go to school.

    ReplyDelete
  196. why not have Spanish immersion programs with Honors tracks? Who said they are mutually exclusive?

    In practice, SI programs are very mixed in socio-economic terms. They combine very poor, immigrant ELL kids with kids from highly educated English-speaking families who want their kids to get a second language. They have served as magnet programs for SFUSD to diversify east side schools by attracting white/middle+ class families to low-income schools.

    What this means is that at the middle school level many kids in these classes would not qualify for honors (in terms of test scores, GATE, or teacher recommendation). So schools like James Lick work on differentiated instruction. They do work on it--there have been professional dev't classes for the teachers and lots of discussion about it.

    If you are a prospective parent for an SI middle school program, I strongly suggest speaking with a current parent of an SI middle school student. I know lots of parents at Lick who would be willing to talk about what this has meant in practice for their GATE kids--the challenges and the opportunities. Please talk to someone about specifics!

    One thing about Lick is that they have funded a zero period in order to provide the SI kids with an elective--at Hoover this has been a problem--since SI kids get an additional academic class (science, math, soc studies, english lang arts AND spanish lang arts) the elective period normally used for music, art etc is used up. So Lick provides an additional period for this--which is great considering their cool electives offerings.

    It's important to know that all kids at the middle school level get the same academic core curriculum + PE. BUT they also greatly differ in other ways--band offerings, orchestra, art studio, and so forth, and how they approach GATE.

    ReplyDelete
  197. Here's what I don't get.

    If you are going to create feeder middle schools, with default assignments, then you darn well better have GATE programs at all of those middle schools. GATE programs are not electives, they are CORE courses designed for students that REQUIRE more rigorous instruction.

    It is outrageous that you can feed these children into school where most DO NOT have courses to help them reach their potential.

    This is like sending IEP students to schools that have no resources to deal with students with learning differences.

    Someone please tell me how this is different?

    ReplyDelete
  198. I will add again - Why have GATE identification, if it is not available to students that are identified?

    By the way - I don't know why anyone is cheering about Lick.. This is like mediocre. Are we supposed to be cheering over mediocre?

    Give me a break

    ReplyDelete
  199. What is with this assumption that if you are poor and Spanish speaking, you couldn't possibly be GATE and need the added challenge of an Honors track? Surely there would be enough Spanish-speaking GATE kids city-wide to have a single Spanish-immersion GATE track at a single school.

    ReplyDelete
  200. There should be at least on all immersion middle School in Spanish.

    There would be economies of scale for bilingual staff (administrators, librarians, electives teachers), and for Spanish-language materials, from libraries to text books.

    You could even scour the city to find the one Spanish-speaking drama teacher or music teacher and have a kick-ass Spanish language theater program or chorus. You could never build the same kind of rich programs by having lots of little Spanish immersion tracks in lots of schools.

    Wish they'd make Everett or Lick all immersion.

    ReplyDelete