open up in new window - Waverly-Shell Rock Community Schools

Waverly-Shell Rock Community SchoolsCharting Our FutureThrough CommunityDiscussionSeptember 29 & 30, 2008Short & Long RangeFacility Needs

Welcome&Purpose of ourCommunity MeetingsSupt. Jere Vyverberg

Introductions…Dr. Sammye Wheeler-Clouse,McREL Consultant

DISTRICT ADVISORY COUNCILHeidi Harms Elem./HS Parent Linda Withers Elementary ParentKen Kappmeyer HS Parent Leroy Rops SR/JH ParentRuth Mick HS Parent Krista Kirkpatrick Elem/JH ParentJason Dieke Former Student Kari iStaack JH Teacher/ParentJere Vyverberg Superintendent John Englin Board MemberJeremy Everett HS Student Bruce Lantzky Elementary ParentJim Janssen Dir. of Curriculum Nathan Bleadorn HS Student

DISTRICT FACILITIES TASK FORCECOMMITTEEJon Cornick Carey/Irving Parent Duane Harms SR BusinessJason Gomes Southeast Parent Jonathan Epley High School ParentJim Janssen Curriculum Director Roger Wilcox Elementary PrincipalMicky Bahlmann Elementary Principal Christi Lines Elementary PrincipalSteve Kwikkel Junior High Principal Ken Winter High School PrincipalMarsha Koenig Southeast Teacher Pat Howell Carey TeacherKelly Flege West Cedar Parent Carol Young West Cedar TeacherShelby Soeder Irving Teacher Rick Snyder High School TeacherDennis Stufflebeam Bus. Mgr./ Board Sec. Darryl Wiltse Dir. of Trans./ Maint.Jere Vyverberg Superintendent Dave Arns High School TeacherJim Reed AEA 267 Special Ed Heather Obermier Shell Rock TeachereDavid Fox HS Assoc. Principal Cheryl Elsbury-Reiher Board PresidentLibby Bingham Shell Rock Parent Lynn Bibler K-12 Parent

District Fact SheetsOur current reality…• Enrollment trends• Special education enrollment• Bonding/Financials/FEMA• Location of facilities withinfloodplain/floodway• District-owned land• District i Financial i data• FEMA Funding Summary• DNR Hydrologist letter• High School Facility Report• Junior High Facility Report• LSI District Land Acquisition

District Quick Facts…• Number of Students: 2036• Number of Teachers: 135• Number of Associates: 27• Teacher with Masters:42%• Administrators: 8• Number of librarians: i 3• Number of bus routes: 21• Miles traveled daily: 1200• Instructional SupportLevy until 2014• Local Option Sales Tax until 2028• Tax Rate: $12.38 per $1,000valuation• District area: 162 square miles• District population: p 16,818• Families in the district: 1,250• Valuation of Buildings:$39,970,112• Taxable valuation of propertywithin the school district:$449,833,917• Bonded indebtedness until June2009• .33 Physical Plant andEnhancement Levy

Ways of Reporting Number of StudentsThere are two common ways in which Iowa school districts determine thenumber of students being served during any given school year. These are:#1. Certified Enrollment: Taken by all Iowa schools on October 1 eachyear, this count includes all students who are residents of the district and enrolled inregular or special education programs. Includes “weighted” students attending W-SR, Greenview, or AEA 267 classes; those served by other state approved schools ortreatment facilities; and those opened enrolled out attending another school district.#2. Actual Head Count: Also taken on October 1 each year, this countincludes all served students. This includes non-resident special education students,open enrolled in and tuitioned-in students from other districts, foreign exchange, andhome school students.Because school officials must provide staff/facilities for theactual number of students within a district/building, “ActualHead Count” figures are used in the report.

Student Head Count Figures…WSR District Enrollment(Includes shared and, in 2008, new SR pre‐school students)2036204020352030202520202015201020052000199519901985198019751970199219992006‐7 2007‐8 2008‐9Enrollment

WSR 9‐12th High School Enrollment785779 778780775773770Enrollment7657607557502006‐7 2007‐8 2008‐9

WSR 7th & 8th Junior High School Enrollment335331 331327330325320Enrollment3153103053002006‐7 2007‐8 2008‐9

WSR K‐6 Enrollment Totals(2008‐9 figure includes 21 new pre‐school students)930927920910900890880870860888 8932006‐7 2007‐8 2008‐9Enrollment

WSR 5‐6th Irving Elementary EnrollmentWSR PK‐4th Shell Rock Elementary Enrollment255254165162159250241245240 Enrollment230235160155150151Enrollment2302251452202006‐7 2007‐8 2008‐91402006‐7 2007‐8 2008‐9Important Notes: Beginning Fall 2008…1. Shell Rock’s 5 th and 6 th grade students began attending Irving Elementary2. Shell Rock started a new pre-school program—these 21 students areincluded in the Fall 2008 figure of 159.

WSR K‐4th Carey Elementary Enrollment(2 section school)WSR K‐4th West Cedar Enrollment(2 Section School)220213220215210205200194203215210Enrollment 205 197200199204Enrollment1951951901901851851802006‐7 2007‐8 2008‐91802006‐7 2007‐8 2008‐9WSR PK‐4th Southeast Elementary Enrollment(1 section school)11010510599Enrollment1009795902006‐7 2007‐8 2008‐9

W-SR 2008-09 Special Education Enrollments(refer to handout for additional information)Carey:Irving:K-4 4gradeTotal Special Education: 19Percent in Special Education: 9 %5-6 gradeShell Rock: PK-4Southeast: K-4Total Special Education: 37Percent in Special Education: 15 %Total Special Education: 33Percent in Special Education: 20 %Total Special Education: 4*Percent in Special Education: 4 %(* an additional 20 students are being served in anAEA pre-school special education program)West Cedar: K-4Total Special Education: 20Percent in Special Education: 10 %

W-SR Financial Information(Please refer to handout for additional information)Current General Obligation Bonds will be paid off on June 1, 2009.Current payment is: $410,000For the 2009 fiscal year, WSR will receive $8,331,642 in revenue from the 2009 state t aid generated bystudent enrollment numbers.Total District Budget: $16.8 millionGn General lFndT Fund Tax Levy - $10.48Management Fund Levy- $ .77Physical Plant & Equip. Levy - $ .33Debt Service $ .80Total $12.38General Fund RevenueGeneral Fund ExpendituresProperty Tax – 29.47 % Teacher salaries/benefits - 56.56%State Funding – 61.9 % Other employee salaries/benefits – 14.48%Federal Funding – 2.8 % Purchased Services (AEA) – 20.31%Miscellaneous – 583% 5.83 Supplies, equipment, misc. – 8.65%Totals - 100 % 100%Waverly-Shell Rock Schools anticipates receiving $1,046,235 in local option sales tax dollars duringthe 2009 fiscal year. In a typical year, the school will pay approximately $628,726 of that total inprincipal and interest for tax revenue bonds sold. By the fiscal year 2014, it is anticipated theschool will receive at least $1,596,765 each year in local option sales tax dollars.

Locations of Schools Within Floodplain:(Please refer to handout in packet)

District Purchased Land(refer (ee to handout) dou)

Iowa DNR Hydrologist:August 27, 2008, letter(Refer to information packet)

General Building Information:Fall 2008Fall 2008 HeadComp Sp. Ed.Building Count Teachers Classrooms Labs Programs OfficesHighSchool77847 41 5 9 29Junior331 25 22 1 3 9HighIrving 254 24 22 1 3 8Southeast 97(does not include 20AEA sp. ed. pre-schoolstudents)13 12 1 3 1West204 15 15 1 2 6CedarCarey 213 13 12 1 2 6PShell Rock 159(includes 21preschool)10 16 1 5 8

High School Fact Sheet(additional information in handout)Enrollment trend: + 5 since 2006Fall 2008 Headcount: 778Major Facility Needs:• Additional classrooms (every classroom usedmost every period of the day)• Handicapped accessibility for front entrance• High efficiency lighting & electrical

Junior High School Fact SheetFall 2008 Head Count: 331(refer to handout tfor additional linformation)Enrollment tTrend:steadyMajor Facility NeedsInstructional Needs• 7 classroom updates• 3 additional classrooms• 2 additional officesMajor Infrastructure• Electrical• Plumbing• Roof system• Tuck pointingLimitations• Green space• Parking• Landlocked• Classroom sq/ft

Washington Irving Fact SheetEnrollment trend: + 13 since 2006Fall 2008 Head Count: 254Major Facility Needs:• Permanent facility that addresses thelong range needs of students

Shell Rock Fact SheetEnrollment trend: +8 since 2006Fall 2008 Head Count: 159Major Facility Needs:• 1991-9292 improvements continue tomeet current educational space needs

Carey Elementary Fact SheetEnrollment trend: + 19 since 2006Fall 2008 Head Count: 213Major Facility Needs:• May need additional classroom(s) tobalance special education programming

West Cedar Fact SheetEnrollment trend: + 7 since 2006Fall 2008 Head Count: 204Major Facility Needs:• May need additional classroom(s) tobalance special education programming

Southeast Elementary Fact SheetEnrollment trend: - 8 since 2006Fall 2008 Head Count: 97Major Facility Needs:• May need additional classroom(s) tobalance special education programming

About McREL• Mid-continent Research for Educationand dLearning• Internationally recognized leader inresearch-based best practices.• Independent, nonprofit, nonpartisanorganization• Located in Denver, Colorado• Mission driven

McREL’s MissionMaking a difference in the qualityof education and learning for allthrough excellence in appliedresearch, product development,and service.

What do we do?• Conduct research• Develop resources and tools• Provide technical assistanceprofessional development, andconsulting

Waverly-Shell Rock ProjectGoal: Based on analysis of localldata and national literaturereview, provide information andrecommendations that will assistWaverly-Shell Rock SchoolDistrict in making a decisionabout K-12 grade configuration.

Grade Level ConfigurationDfiii DefinitionGrade configuration refers to the groupingof grades for a specific level(e.g., grades K-4 for elementary, grades 5-6for intermediate, grades 7-8 for juniorhigh, and grades 9-12 for high school).

Waverly-Shell Rock Current GradeLevel ConfigurationCurrent grade configuration for theWaverly-Shell Rock schools isK-4, 5-6, 7-8, 9-12.

Review of Relevant ResearchCorrelation of student achievement to:• Grade level l configuration• Frequency/Number of transitions• School size• Class size• Inclusion of special educationstudents

Grade Level ConfigurationResearch• What is happening within the school and thegrade structure of the school itself is moreimportant than [grade] configuration. (Kinney,2008)• More important than the physical or structuralsetup is the appropriate p selection and sequencingof curriculum, effective teaching practices andalignment of the written, taught and testedcurriculum. u (Hooper, 2002;Klump, 2006;Renchler, 2000)• The issue is how should we configure educationalginstitutions, not what grade-span configuration isbest. (Howley, 2002)

Grade Level ConfigurationResearch• Almost any building or grade configurationcan be used to create success for students.(Hooper, 2002)• No particular sequence of grade spans isperfect or in itself guarantees studentachievement and social adjustment.(Renchler, 2000)• One-and two-grade schools present thechallenge of how to preserve a sense ofcontinuity and stability when all or half of thestudent population turns over every year.Pagler & Fager, 1997)

Transition from School toSh School lResearch• Whenever students transition from one school toanother, their achievement drops, regardless ofwhen the transition happens. (Pardini, 2002)• A correlation exists between the number oftransitions a student makes and the likelihoodthat he or she will drop out of school. (Pardini,2002)• How the transition is handled will influence theHow the transition is handled will influence thestudent’s adjustment. (Education Week, 2008;Shoffner & Williamson, 2000)

School Size Research• Small schools have not shown to increase studentachievement on state tests or college entranceexamines, but percentage of students attendingcollege increased. (Hoff, 2008)• Biggest value of small schools is when they aredistinctive schools of choice. (Nathan & Tao, 2007)• In small schools anonymity is decreased (Klonsky,2002), poverty’s effect on student achievement isweaker, gender-based achievement gaps arenarrower (Black, 2006), high attendance andgraduation rates improve, and better behavior exists.(Nathan & Tao, 2007)• Small rural schools contribute to higher state-wideSmall rural schools contribute to higher state widestudent achievement. (Black, 2006)

School Size Research• Respondents believe e that smaller schools are morelikely to have small class sizes, a strong sense ofcommunity, and teachers who take a personalinterest t in students. t (Johnson, 2002)• Large, comprehensive high schools shortchangetoo many students. t The Bill & Melinda GatesFoundation believes that, with the right elementsin place, small schools offer a promisingalternative. ti (Vander Ark, 2002)• A common characteristic of effective small schoolsis leadership. (Vander Ark, 2002)• Size alone does not make a good school. (VanderArk, 2002)

Class Size Research• Small class size does not necessarily reduceachievement gap. (Jacobsen, 2008)• Low-attaining students were nearly twice as likely tobe disengaged in classes of 30 students as they were inclasses of 15. (Viadero, 2008)• Small classes (fewer than 20) in the early gradesgenerate substantial gains for students, and studentsretain their gains in standard size classrooms in theupper grades, middle school, and high school. (Biddle& Berliner, 2002)• Teachers need to be provided with the pedagogicalskills, tools, and guidance to maximize theachievement level with class-size size reduction.(Holloway, 2002)

Special/Regular EducationProportionsAt this point no research or literatureexists related to an optimum ratio ofregular education students to SpecialEducation students within a school.

ReferencesBiddle, B. J., & Berliner, D. C. (2002). Small class size and its effects. Educational Leadership, 59(5), 12-23.23Black, Susan. (2006). The right size school. American School Board Journal, 193, 63-65Cromwell, S. (2006, September). Where does sixth grade belong? Education World. Retrieved September25, 2008, from http://www.educationworld.com/a_admin/admin/admin060.shtmlDavies, M., Ed. (2004). Helping children cope with school transitions. Retrieved September 25, 2008, fromhttp://www.kellybear.com/TeacherArticles/TeacherTip38.html.Eccles, J. (1999). Transitions to school: What helps children succeed? Retrieved September 25, 2008, fromhttp://www.apa.org/ppo/issues/peccles.htmlp pp pHandley, P. (2002, February). Every classroom teacher’s dream. Educational Leadership, 59(5), 33-35.Hoff, D.J. (2008, May 21). Study of small high schools yields little on achievement. Education Week, p. 10.Holloway, J. H. (2002, February). Do smaller classes change instruction? Educational Leadership, 59 (5),91-92. 92Hooper, D.W. (2002, March). Configurations alone don't breed success. School Administrator, 59(3), 44.Howley, C.B. (2002, March). Grade-span configurations. School Administrator, 59(3), 24.Jacobson, L. (2008, February). Class-size reductions seen of limited help on achievement gap :New studyshows greatest value for high achievers.. Education Week, 27(25), 9.Jehlen, A, & Kopkowski, C. (2006, February). Is smaller better? NEA Today, 24(5), 24-30.Johnson, J. (2002, February). Do communities want smaller schools? Educational Leadership, 59(5), 42-45.National Association of Secondary School Principals (U.S.), & Education Alliance at Brown University.(2006). Breaking ranks in the middle: strategies for leading middle level reform. Reston, VA: NationalAssociation of Secondary School Principals.

References continuedKlonsky, M. (2002, February). How smaller schools prevent school violence. EducationalLeadership, 59(5), 65-69.Klump, J. (2006). What the research says (or doesn’t say) about K–8 versus middle school gradeconfigurations: Assessing the benefits of K–8 schools. Northwest Education, 11(3). RetrievedSeptember, 25, 2008, from http://www.nwrel.org/nwedu/11-03/research/index.phpNathan, J., & Thao, S. (2007). Smaller, safer, saner, successful schools. Washington D.C.: NationalClearinghouse for Educational Facilities.Paglin, C. and J. Fager (1997). Grade configuration: Who goes where? Portland OR, Northwest RegionalEducational Laboratory.Pardini, P. (2002, March). Revival of the K-8 school. School Administrator, 59(3), 6.Raywid, M.A. (2002, February). The policy environments of small schools and schools-withinschools.Educational Leadership, 59(5), ( 47-51.Renchler, R. (2000). Grade span. Research Roundup, 16(3), 2–4. Alexandria, VA: National Association ofElementary School Principals; Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 440 471)Schumacher, D. (1998). The transition to middle school. Champaign IL: ERIC Clearinghouse onElementary and Early Childhood Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED433119)Shoffner, M. & Williamson, R. (2000). Facilitating student transitions into middle school. Middle SchoolJournal, 31(4), 47-51.Vander Ark, T. (2002, February). The case for small high schools. Educational Leadership, 59(5), 55-59.Viadero, D. (2008, April). Students Observed to Be "On Task" Less as Class Size Grows. EducationWeek, 27(31), 9.

Data Collection:Our Process & Timeline…

Steps for Achieving the Goal• May 19 – Learn about the district andcommunity– Visit all Waverly-Shell Rock schools– Interview each principal– Meet with Central Office staff– Present to the Board of EducationJune October Analyze nationalJune – October – Analyze nationalresearch/literature on grade configuration

Steps for Achieving Goal Cont.• September – Collect local data– Meet with community ygroups• Teachers• Community Leaders• School Leaders• Central Office Staff• October –– Open-ended survey for all stakeholders– Compile data and write report• October 30 - Provide report of findings, options,and recommendations

Small Group Discussion:iAt your table…• Identify a recorder and discussionfacilitator• Respond to all questions (refer to list ofdiscussion questions)• Turn in responses

Next Steps…1. On-line survey2. Compilation of results3. Timeline4. Presentation to board