Post by gatordog on Sept 24, 2008 10:58:51 GMT -5
Something I don’t get. (I thank you in advance for your patience in indulging me here )
This is based on the pdf link I have on bldg capacities. (edit: link given later post). My premise is from reading that document.
Check this out:
For full 100% capacity, NV main=3200 and NV Gold=1000 = 4200 max capacity.
For full 100% WV capacity WV main=3700 and WV Gold=1000 = 4700 max capacity. As we discussed, yes WV is bigger, more square footage, with a third floor.
I understand and agree that for efficiency and optimal educational setting (what we all want!), these bldgs should operated at 80% full capacity, which was discussed during ref vote.
One issue is really of “historical” interest only. Clearly in 2006 when getting the ref passed, the SB and Admin touted NV w/ fresh cntr as holding 4200, and then WV w/ fresh cntr also holding 4200. In the NV case, the used the design capacity, but in the WV case…they scaled it down a bit from design capacity. “We only have room for 8400 HS students, tops”. We all were told and reasonably assumed that the two HS’s were virtually identical is size, didn’t we? Really, I think they should have said “we have room for 8900 tops” At best they were inconsistent in their numbers. At worst they were deceitful. (its unfortunate, to say the least, when a inconsistency helps state your case.)
As an aside….I am pretty certain this numerical “detail” wouldn’t have changed my vote. I wanted to get away from the mega-schools. I wanted schools to operate at optimal capacity. And also, I wanted the district to invest and plan now for the future (while we had the chance)
Now this brings us to today. What counts! This is bugging me…..in light of the fact that WV Green is not a 3000 seat full capacity bldg, but a 3700…. why are we telling Owen West and Gombert East folks you have to go to MV? Clearly, their assignment to MV is contrary to the geography criteria and the minimize school-splits criteria. It only made sense from enrollment & capacity balancing point of view, which I understood.
Is the goal to make WV and MV nearly the same size? Maybe so, but if that’s the case…you are underutilizing (“wasting”) space at WV. Could not the enrollment-balance criteria be interpreted as matching % capacity?
Lets consider this 3 different ways. All are based on the upcoming ~9200 HS enrollments,:
1. ORIGINAL UNDERSTANDING OF BOUNDARIES
current boundaries give this approximately. This is my original work….assuming that WV Green had 3000 capacity.
WV =2800 = 93% capacity. Assuming it holds 3000 max.
MV=2750= 92%
NV=3580=85%
I looked at this and said “yes, SB did best they could and fairly met their criteria with the boundaries. There really is no more room at WV for the Chicory/Meadows/Thatcher Grove people. There is some room for future Ashwood growth. And NV cant hold any more-TG cant fit, plus it has room for growth also.” And that is where I had left it!
2. CONSIDER FACT THAT WV HAS MORE ROOM
What does % capacity look like, when using the published/actual WV Green capacity?
WV =2800 = 76% capacity. Assuming it holds 3700 max.
MV=2750= 92%
NV=3580=85%
These start to look unbalanced, don’t they? Why is Owen E + Gombert W going to a school and pushing it >90% capacity?
3. CONSIDER OBVIOUS REMEDY…MOVE OWEN W/GOM E INTO WV
Now
WV =3140 = 85% capacity. Assuming it holds 3700 max.
MV=2410= 80%
NV=3580=85%
This move satisfies all three of the boundary criteria!! Enrollment is more balanced (in terms of bldg capacity), Geographical improvement, Still MS is no longer split, nor are Gom and Owen ES’s. And isn’t this better for the MV community in that it delivers them a HS operating at its optimal size?
Consequences/Questions/Random thoughts:
I wonder if we really are bldg a ~3200 max design capacity school at MV (that is the number for NV). If so, then why don’t they say so! Its always touted as a 3000 capacity school! (its that weird diff definition of capacity thing, I guess.)
Was SB/Admin goal really to have WV and MV be nearly equal in student body size? Is that justifiable reason to impose on Owen W and Gom E the poor geography, and additional splits at Still, Owen, and Gom?
Is the WV bldg structure and design “screwy enough” that it needs to have a little more “wiggle room” in terms of % capacity to be efficient?
I know Dr D said, “A HS ideally should be about 2000 students”. Maybe he said 1500-2000? (correct me if I am wrong). Is it their position that WV should ideally be not too much above this 2000 number? But where is the significance if its 2800 enroll or 3100? We are talking an effect of 80-90 students per class from Owen W/Gom E.
Final comment….politically, there probably is nothing to be done (I hate that reason) . But from a policy, "follow the rules", and fairness point of view: has SB NOT met their stated criteria when they made their boundary assignment for Owen W and Gombert E
edit....after some posts below
4. MY BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WV CAPACITY AND ENROLLMENT BALANCE REQUIREMENTS
stick with current boundaries. Use actual, defined max bldg capacity for WV Green! Assume MV being built as same size as NV Blue (3200 max).
WV =2800 = 77% capacity. Given that it holds 3650 max.
MV=2750= 86%
NV=3580=85% . Given max capacity of 3200. (3200 Blue, 1000 Gold)
This is based on the pdf link I have on bldg capacities. (edit: link given later post). My premise is from reading that document.
Check this out:
For full 100% capacity, NV main=3200 and NV Gold=1000 = 4200 max capacity.
For full 100% WV capacity WV main=3700 and WV Gold=1000 = 4700 max capacity. As we discussed, yes WV is bigger, more square footage, with a third floor.
I understand and agree that for efficiency and optimal educational setting (what we all want!), these bldgs should operated at 80% full capacity, which was discussed during ref vote.
One issue is really of “historical” interest only. Clearly in 2006 when getting the ref passed, the SB and Admin touted NV w/ fresh cntr as holding 4200, and then WV w/ fresh cntr also holding 4200. In the NV case, the used the design capacity, but in the WV case…they scaled it down a bit from design capacity. “We only have room for 8400 HS students, tops”. We all were told and reasonably assumed that the two HS’s were virtually identical is size, didn’t we? Really, I think they should have said “we have room for 8900 tops” At best they were inconsistent in their numbers. At worst they were deceitful. (its unfortunate, to say the least, when a inconsistency helps state your case.)
As an aside….I am pretty certain this numerical “detail” wouldn’t have changed my vote. I wanted to get away from the mega-schools. I wanted schools to operate at optimal capacity. And also, I wanted the district to invest and plan now for the future (while we had the chance)
Now this brings us to today. What counts! This is bugging me…..in light of the fact that WV Green is not a 3000 seat full capacity bldg, but a 3700…. why are we telling Owen West and Gombert East folks you have to go to MV? Clearly, their assignment to MV is contrary to the geography criteria and the minimize school-splits criteria. It only made sense from enrollment & capacity balancing point of view, which I understood.
Is the goal to make WV and MV nearly the same size? Maybe so, but if that’s the case…you are underutilizing (“wasting”) space at WV. Could not the enrollment-balance criteria be interpreted as matching % capacity?
Lets consider this 3 different ways. All are based on the upcoming ~9200 HS enrollments,:
1. ORIGINAL UNDERSTANDING OF BOUNDARIES
current boundaries give this approximately. This is my original work….assuming that WV Green had 3000 capacity.
WV =2800 = 93% capacity. Assuming it holds 3000 max.
MV=2750= 92%
NV=3580=85%
I looked at this and said “yes, SB did best they could and fairly met their criteria with the boundaries. There really is no more room at WV for the Chicory/Meadows/Thatcher Grove people. There is some room for future Ashwood growth. And NV cant hold any more-TG cant fit, plus it has room for growth also.” And that is where I had left it!
2. CONSIDER FACT THAT WV HAS MORE ROOM
What does % capacity look like, when using the published/actual WV Green capacity?
WV =2800 = 76% capacity. Assuming it holds 3700 max.
MV=2750= 92%
NV=3580=85%
These start to look unbalanced, don’t they? Why is Owen E + Gombert W going to a school and pushing it >90% capacity?
3. CONSIDER OBVIOUS REMEDY…MOVE OWEN W/GOM E INTO WV
Now
WV =3140 = 85% capacity. Assuming it holds 3700 max.
MV=2410= 80%
NV=3580=85%
This move satisfies all three of the boundary criteria!! Enrollment is more balanced (in terms of bldg capacity), Geographical improvement, Still MS is no longer split, nor are Gom and Owen ES’s. And isn’t this better for the MV community in that it delivers them a HS operating at its optimal size?
Consequences/Questions/Random thoughts:
I wonder if we really are bldg a ~3200 max design capacity school at MV (that is the number for NV). If so, then why don’t they say so! Its always touted as a 3000 capacity school! (its that weird diff definition of capacity thing, I guess.)
Was SB/Admin goal really to have WV and MV be nearly equal in student body size? Is that justifiable reason to impose on Owen W and Gom E the poor geography, and additional splits at Still, Owen, and Gom?
Is the WV bldg structure and design “screwy enough” that it needs to have a little more “wiggle room” in terms of % capacity to be efficient?
I know Dr D said, “A HS ideally should be about 2000 students”. Maybe he said 1500-2000? (correct me if I am wrong). Is it their position that WV should ideally be not too much above this 2000 number? But where is the significance if its 2800 enroll or 3100? We are talking an effect of 80-90 students per class from Owen W/Gom E.
Final comment….politically, there probably is nothing to be done (I hate that reason) . But from a policy, "follow the rules", and fairness point of view: has SB NOT met their stated criteria when they made their boundary assignment for Owen W and Gombert E
edit....after some posts below
4. MY BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WV CAPACITY AND ENROLLMENT BALANCE REQUIREMENTS
stick with current boundaries. Use actual, defined max bldg capacity for WV Green! Assume MV being built as same size as NV Blue (3200 max).
WV =2800 = 77% capacity. Given that it holds 3650 max.
MV=2750= 86%
NV=3580=85% . Given max capacity of 3200. (3200 Blue, 1000 Gold)