ad hoc committee on student assignment · presentation outline at a glance: educational placement...

Ad Hoc Committee on Student Assignment

May 13, 20191

SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

2

Each year, the Board of Education’s Ad Hoc Committee on Student Assignment hosts a series of public working meetings with staff to monitor SFUSD’s student assignment policy.

Current focus: Approved by the Board on December 11, 2018

Context

Current Student Assignment System● Video showing how students are

assigned to school● Board Policy governing current

system● Interactive highlights of recent offers

Resolution 189-25A1

Presentations to the Board● April 15, 2019● March 18, 2019● December 4, 2018 ● www.sfusd.edu/adhoccommittee

Supporting Materials

https://youtu.be/-CQ-sZyFLz4

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1SE20BJauZQdn0zTiaLxNEiaedopFKdax

https://public.tableau.com/profile/henry.o.connell7367#!/vizhome/SFUSDsMarch2019EnrollmentHighlights/SFUSDsMarch2019EnrollmentHighlights

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1NdErHVC5sXqIMqZUFouZwa8M2cr_MKYx

https://drive.google.com/open?id=111IeZM5-_sFAJR2VnvHR7WGXZtx1T0wA

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1x_14F5o_DFHOBDnCtpYBiwxQvp8EKzDV

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8NDXmCeOQ-dbXZNVlpNbnZDMlg4WWk2V08wWVFDUGJ6RnR3

http://www.sfusd.edu/adhoccommittee


● Current choice system has not significantly reversed the trend of racial isolation and the concentration of historically underserved students in the same school

● Concerns about lack of: transparency, accessibility, predictability + simplicity

● Choice system seen as increasing inequity

● Concerns about the effectiveness and fairness of the CTIP preference

● Attendance areas have not changed despite demographic shifts in the City

● Families traveling across the City to attend school increases congestion, can contribute to tardiness and truancy, and is a barrier to ensuring strong community connections to local schools

WHY does the Board want to develop a new student

assignment system (189-25A1)?

3


● Initiate a process to develop a new student assignment system

● Recommend concrete, measurable definitions for: quality schools, equitable access, diversity, integrated schools, neighborhood schools

● Prioritize goals for student assignment and confirm the theory of action

● Model and present different options, indicating how well each model meets the Board’s goals for student assignment

● Support extensive community outreach

● Develop policy recommendations and an implementation plan

● Analyze transportation needs and plans

WHAT does Board Resolution 189-25A1 call on staff to do?

4


5

Current Team Members

Orla O’Keeffe Chief, Policy and Operations

Rosina Tong Executive Director, EPC

Teresa Shipp Director, EPC

Moonhawk Kim Supervisor of Analytics, RPA

Norma Ming Supervisor of Research & Evaluation, RPA

Karissa Yee Findley Director, School Portfolio Planning

Henry O’Connell Management Assistant, Policy and Operations

Tammi Wong Sr. Deputy General Counsel & Equity Specialist, Legal Department & Office of Equity


6

Tonight’s Agenda1. Staff Presentation (45 mins)

a. African American Student Recruitment and Increasing Enrollment at Under Enrolled Schools (20 m)

b. General Education Transportation Services (20 m)c. Policy Development Timeline (5 m)

2. Public Comment (20 mins)

3. Board Discussion (60 mins)


7

African American Student Recruitment

Rosina TongAlicia Marie Jones

Andrew Ishibashi & Timothy Gray Barnaby Payne

Susan Hsieh


Purpose ● Respond to the Ad Hoc Committee’s request for information on efforts

to increase student diversity at Lowell and RASOTA and increase African American families’ participation in enrollment process

By the end of this presentation we will ● Understand the strategies used to increase African American

participation in enrollment process and increase enrollment at under enrolled schools

● Understand the impact the recruitment efforts have made

8

Purpose and Desired Outcomes


9

1. EPC outreach to community and school site support

2. Lowell High School African American Recruitment

3. Ruth Asawa SOTA African American Recruitment

4. School Marketing, School Discovery and Enrollment Process Communication

Presentation Outline At A Glance:Educational Placement Center

36,628 visitors annually

14,487 assigned in March

8,000 Enrollment Fair visitors

5,194 assigned during year

3,000 residency audits

30 workshops 900 families


If EPC staff● Develops and implements an African American student recruitment plan, and ● Provides clear and easily accessible information about our schools and programs, ● Learns cultural humility aligned with SFUSD service standards● Increases partnerships with Community Based Organizations

Then● More African American families will have the information needed to participate in our

choice based student assignment system and know which schools can meet the needs and desires of their children

And as a result● African American students will be enrolled in schools that will provide them with the

quality instruction and equitable supports required to thrive in the 21st century.

EPC’s Theory of Improvement for African American Achievement


Steps to Implement EPC’s Theory of Improvement

11

African American recruitment plan

● Dedicated staff to African American outreach● Developed and implemented an outreach and recruitment plan● Focused on rising 6th graders

Clear and easily accessible information

● Dedicated staff for school marketing with a focus on PITCH schools● Produced video explaining student assignment ● Partnered with UC Berkeley graduates to research family needs and explore

prototypes for support

Professional development

● Retained consultant and held 5 all-staff workshops on cultural humility● Participated in SFUSD’s HUG customer service training

Partnerships with CBOs

● Updated enrollment policies and practices in collaboration with African American Parent Advisory Council, SF Alliance of Black School Educators, Citywide Black Family Partnerships Network, Family Liaisons in Bayview

● Met bimonthly with the African American Parent Advisory Council (AAPAC)


● EPC Executive Director● EPC counselor● AAPAC parent & community

coordinator● Special Assistant to Superintendent,

AAALI● AAPAC Parents● AAALI Educational Policy Analyst● Marketing Specialist● Ruth Asawa SOTA Principal ● Lowell HS Principal & Staff● Policy & Operations Management

Assistant

EPC and AAPAC Working Group

12

● Staff share updates on policies and recruitment strategies

● AAPAC provides feedback and help strengthen EPC’s approach

Bimonthly Meetings


Outreach Focus for 2018-19 13

Increase participation in the application process so that families have more equitable access to the school choice student assignment system

1. Increase on time applications from 5th grade students in the Bayview elementary schools.

2. Keep track of all families’ sixth grade plans so no one falls through the cracks during this transition.

3. Ensure that students with SFUSD school assignment register at schools to secure their seat.

Rising 6th Graders

Strategies


● Conducted outreach with Bayview Ignite (August 2018)

● Increased communication with Bayview & Sunnydale businesses, housing sites, and Community Centers of enrollment process (Fall 2018)

● Shared enrollment information at AAPAC events (Fall 2018)

● Held Enrollment Workshops in Fillmore (November 2018)

● Participated in Citywide Black Family Partnerships Network with AAPAC, Family Partnership and Empowerment, PPSSF, Coleman Advocates, Mission Graduates, AAALI (Spring 2019)

Outreach & Recruitment Plan14


Three year Bayview Schools Application Results for rising 6th graders

15


● Continue to implement EPC’s Theory of Action for African American Achievement and set SMART goals for the next enrollment cycle

● Unpack data to understand the impact of recent efforts

● Refine strategies and tactics as needed to increase on time applications and school registration for African American Students

16

Next Steps


17

Barnaby Payne, Principal Ruth Asawa SOTA


● Equity Frame: we share an organizational goal of addressing the racial and programmatic disproportionality of our school compared to the rest of the SFUSD high school division through the recruitment and support of underrepresented students to our school community including Black, Asian, Latino, English Language Learner students, low income students, and Students with Disabilities.

● Theory of Action: outreach is relational and we have to build connections with district and community partners on an individual basis to identify and support students and families through the application and audition process. This plan will be reviewed by the school community and SFUSD partners on a regular basis.

Equity Frame & Theory of Action18


● Targeted outreach/recruitment in SFUSD middle schools● Application and enrollment support for specific subgroups via applicant list

management● Continued site administrative check on admissions offers based on “high

potential” factors● Continued education For RASOTA Arts teachers on “high potential” factors● Develop a program for ELL students with SFUSD Multilingual Pathways dept● Continued review and revision of site “Audition Policy” towards fairness and

consistency, with support form LEAD and SFUSD Legal● Considering site driven, long-term, design challenge to completely reimagine

audition process

African American Student Recruitment & Support

19


Ruth Asawa SOTA African American Application Data

20

Applied Audition Approved

Assigned based on ranking

Enrolled/Registered

2018-19 89 34 32 31

2019-20 64 25 20 23

*Data taken from school’s online application data, which includes students who identify as African American or mixed race of two or more, including African American.


Ruth Asawa School of the ArtsApplication Data for 2019-2020

21

High Potential Factors:

ELL: 9 students (5%) ^ by 4%

Low Income: 45 students (24%)^ by 5%

Under-represented MS: 36/19%(from 11 schools)57/30% from privates/charters (10 from Creative Arts Charter)133/70% SFUSD MS

Students with IEPs13/7% (Since 17-18, 8 SDC auditions and 4 Enrolled)


22

Andrew Ishibashi, Principal Timothy Gray, AACCES Liaison

Lowell High School


● Equity Frame: To have equity centered classrooms where all students are actively listening, interacting with classmates and materials, engaged in academic conversation, and working collaboratively on “group worthy” tasks.

● Theory of Action: Through observations of equity-based instruction and classroom experiences, as well as monthly iGroup meetings (professional development led by in-house leaders), feedback and data collected on evidence of equity will inform what affects student learning and how best to create an environment conducive to academic success.

Equity Frame & Theory of Action23


● Sent outreach letters from Principal to potential 8th grade AA students● Assisted AA/LAT/FPI families in completing the Lowell application at Annual

Application Support Meetings● Participated in middle school informational nights● Held annual Welcome Reception for incoming 9th grade AA students and parents● Assigned a Peer Resource buddy to each incoming 9th grade AA student to help

adjust to school● Ongoing outreach to Lowell’s AA students - support from AACCES Liaison● Ongoing outreach to AA parents/guardians about Lowell events and resources

African American Student Recruitment & Support

24


African American Common Core Educational and Support program Liaison responsibilities:● Shares progress reports with African American students to give support before the

grading periods.● Facilitates four AACCES Parent/Guardian meetings each year in addition to Welcome

Reception and recruitment meetings.● Coordinates ACCESS Senior Scholarships to students in recognition of their

achievements. ● Support BSU Club activities and weekly meetings● Chaperone students to BSU summitt, college fairs, College Signing Day, Mayor’s

Summer Employment Fair● Attends monthly African American Success Liaison meetings● Meetings with students, counselors, administration, school liaisons● Distribute scholarship applications● Give Parent/Guardian awareness of school events, resources and student progress

Lowell High School AACESS Liaison Summary

25


Lowell African AmericanApplication Data

26

Applied Approved/eligible Assigned based on school choice ranking

Enrolled/registered

2018-19 38 10 9 6

2019-20 55 19 17 12


27

Susan HsiehMarketing Specialist


✓ Strong academic reputation

✓ Quality principals and

teachers

✓ Safe school climate

✓ Strong principal partnership

Focus on supporting under-enrolled schools that are

“marketing ready”

28

ChavezCobbMalcolm XMuirParksSanchezBrownVisitacion ValleyThe AcademyO’Connell


School Newsletters & BrochuresSee all SY 2019-20 school newsletters at https://drive.google.com/open?id=1235Ga8Z4Js0T6xIAxSVO_3le7j4nRiLr

Examples of School Marketing29

School Promo Video

For Malcolm X Academy: https://youtu.be/Mq9dlv5BJMs

Redesigned School Website

Social Media CampaignsExample: #BayviewBrilliant

Direct MailersExample: Bayview ES

Also: Promote school events, boost social media presence, rewrite school descriptions, plan parent welcome events, and provide school marketing toolkit: https://sites.google.com/a/sfusd.edu/toolkit/?pli=1

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1235Ga8Z4Js0T6xIAxSVO_3le7j4nRiLr



https://youtu.be/Mq9dlv5BJMs

https://sites.google.com/a/sfusd.edu/toolkit/?pli=1


Examples of School Discovery and Enrollment Marketing

30

Redesigned Enrollment Guide Student

Assignment Video


Social Media Posts & Text Messages




31

Chavez, Muir and Sanchez are not included because their marketing started in SY 2018-19, so we would not see actual enrollment results until SY 2019-20.

Impact on School Enrollment 2016 - 2018 (CBEDS)


32

Transportation

Archie FokinExecutive Director, Transportation


Purpose ● Begin to analyze transportation needs and plans

By the end of this presentation we will have● Built a deeper understanding of current general education

transportation services● Surfaced policy tensions and questions to explore further

33



The Story of Transportation

34

● 1980s: Transportation routes designed as part of a consent decree to eliminate segregation and accelerate the achievement of Black and Latino students.

● 2008: Transportation policy revised to support the new student assignment policy. Reduced general education fleet from 44 to 25 buses due to budget cuts.

● 2016: Transportation moved from Facilities to Policy & Operations to increase partnership with EPC and better align with Vision 2025.

● 2018: New Executive Director and plan to strengthen services for students and reduce escalating costs.

“


35

● Findings from Child Transportation Survey, November 2016 and Survey Findings (San Francisco County Transportation Authority)

● Student Commute Study 2010-2017 (UC School of Public Health)

Reports

How Students Get to School

Based on 1,746 responses from K-5 parents surveyed in Spring 2016 as part of the SFCTA Child Transportation Survey

https://archive.sfcta.org/sites/default/files/content/Planning/ChildTransportation/Child_Transportation_Study_013017.pdf



https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8NDXmCeOQ-dNGxPSHlUTnZSeHAzTnpxNmVsOVA3NHpCQnFv

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Eb8E6Cf31EATIXwAkUjqPADxgHtpb8H1

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Eb8E6Cf31EATIXwAkUjqPADxgHtpb8H1


36

202 buses

121 schools

1,509 students

$19,698 Average per student

General Education

29 buses

43 schools

2,153 students

$2,153 Average per student

Students with IEPs

$29 Million For students with IEPs

$4 Million For Gen Ed

$325,000For Field Trips

$140,000 Average per bus per year


1. Support choice in school assignment as a tactic for creating diverse learning environments.

2. Support equitable access to the range of opportunities offered to students.

3. Provide limited school bus transportation to support reasonable access for attendance area residents to their attendance areas school.

4. To support the middle school assignment process outlined in P5101, provide limited transportation for middle school students in cases where a middle school attendance area is not reasonably accessible to the middle school, taking into account factors including the availability of reasonable MUNI routes.

5. Transportation is not contemplated for general education high school students, and/or will only be considered when the Superintendent determines it is necessary to provide equitable access and reverse the trend of racial isolation and the concentration of underserved students in the same school.

6. Support the District’s vision for after school services.

7. Minimize the use of unrestricted general fund budget contributions for general education school bus transportation.

General Education Policy37


Schools with GenEd Buses 38

Legend

36 Elementary Schools

7 Middle Schools

CTIP1 area


Julian HayesPLUS Fellow

UC Berkeley Center for Cities and Schools

39

“


Research Question 1

Do students living in CTIP1 have access to city-wide schools and programs?

40Board Policy Goal 2c: Provide low income students living in areas of the city with the lowest average test scores (CTIP1) with reasonable access to city wide schools and programs.


41

Board Policy Goal 2c:

Provide low income students living in areas of the city with the lowest

average test scores (CTIP1) with reasonable

access to city wide schools and programs. K-8 Schools

Language Pathways

Do students living in CTIP1 have access to city-wide schools and programs?

Of the 8 total K-8 schools in SFUSD, 7 (90%) are accessible via bus routes from CTIP1, and 3 (38%) are accessible via bus routes that do not stop in CTIP1.

Of the 42 total elementary schools with language pathways, 23 (55%) are accessible via bus routes from CTIP1, while 1 (2%) is accessible via a bus route that does not stop in CTIP1.

“


Research Question 2

Are we providing transportation to historically underserved PITCH schools, and schools in CTIP1

areas? If so, from where?

42Board Policy Goal 1b: Provide school bus transportation to racially isolated schools that have historically been under-enrolled.


Board Policy Goal 1b:

Provide school bus transportation to racially isolated schools that have historically been under-enrolled.

● Context in 2011 (passage of policy)○ Focus on reducing racial isolation at

schools with 60%+ of a single race/ethnicity coupled with an Academic Performance Index of 1, 2, or 3.

● Context in 2019 (PLUS evaluation)○ Shifting understanding of diversity/racial

isolation in SFUSD. ○ Not all racially isolated schools are

under-enrolled. Not all under-enrolled schools are racially isolated.

43

Are we providing transportation to historically underserved PITCH schools, and schools in CTIP1 areas? If so, from where?

Research Question

1. Brown Jr. (Willie) MS2. Bryant ES3. Carver (Dr George W) ES4. Chavez (Cesar) ES5. Drew (Dr Charles) College Preparatory Academy ES6. Harte (Bret) ES7. Malcolm X Academy ES8. Muir (John) ES9. Revere (Paul) K-8

10. Sanchez ES

11. Buena Vista Horace Mann K-812. King (Thomas Starr) ES13. Marshall ES14. Moscone (George R) ES

PITCH

CTIP1



Provide school bus transportation to racially

isolated schools that have historically been under-enrolled.

44Historically Underserved PITCH Schools

# Routes to School # Routes from School

Brown Jr. (Willie) MS 0 0

Bryant ES 1 1

Carver (Dr George W) ES 1 6

Chavez (Cesar) ES 1 2

Drew (Dr Charles) ES 2 10

Harte (Bret) ES 2 5

Malcolm X Academy ES 1 6

Muir (John) ES 3 2

Revere (Paul) K-8 2 0

Sanchez ES 2 0

Total 13 32



Provide school bus transportation to racially

isolated schools that have historically been under-enrolled.

45

Elementary and K-8 Schools located in CTIP1 Areas (excluding historically underserved PITCH schools)

# Routes to School # Routes from School

Buena Vista Horace Mann K-8 1 0

King (Thomas Starr) ES 2 5

Marshall ES 0 0

Moscone (George R) ES 1 2

Total 4 7

● 12 of the 14 schools have Gen Ed transportation.

● The majority of the stops taking students to PITCH or CTIP1 schools are within or close to CTIP1.

● While 17 routes transport students to PITCH or CTIP1 schools, 39 routes transport students from these schools to other areas of the city.

46

Bus routes to 12 schools. Bus routes to 19 schools. From Drew ES From Havard EES

More than half of all schools with a GenEd bus can be accessed from stops atDr. Charles Drew or Leola Havard


RecommendedNext Steps Mixed methods research on bus ridership,

school preferences, and use of bus routes

47

Resolve tension in policy between exiting students from CTIP1 areas and bringing new students into CTIP1 areas

Measure and track access to city-wide schools through establishing specific transportation equity metrics and systematically collecting data


48

Policy Development Timeline

Orla O’KeeffeChief of Policy and Operations


Purpose ● Respond to the Ad Hoc Committee’s request that we

condense the policy development timeline proposed on 3/18/19

By the end of this presentation we will have● Reviewed a draft revised timeline● Explored some of the trade offs

49



Timeline Proposed on 3/18/19

SY18-19 SY19-20 SY20-21 SY21-22 SY22-23

Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer FallWinter

Start of School

Confirm boundaries and transportation plan

Decision: Definitions, PrioritiesTheory of Change, narrowing of options

Stakeholder engagement

Communicate new policy & impacts


Decision: Select option, adopt new policy

Enroll Students

SY23-24

Winter FallSummerSpring


Getting Started

Discover

Define

Develop

Deliver

50


Community Engagement

DRAFT Revised Timeline*51

Fall 2019 Spring 2020 June 2020 2020-21 SY* Fall 2021

Board approves new policy

Modify infrastructure to support new

policy**

Launch enrollment for 2022-23 SY

** Infrastructure development timeline may take longer depending on scale of change

Board approves definitions and

priorities

Model options and develop policy

recommendation

* Multiple dependencies, including resources


Specific Adjustments 52

● Senior district leadership plays a larger role to construct definitions and priorities for Board approval (no staff dedicated, yet)

● Community engagement decreases around definitions and priorities (shift from a 3-month collaborative process to heavy reliance on limited electronic feedback)

● A “Discovery” phase to understand other district models in greater depth is eliminated

● Less time to model different options after Board confirms definitions

Trade Offs

● Staff allocation of time on other priority initiatives

● Depth of exploration of options and strength of evidence base for new policy

● Degree of community engagement

● Collaborative design


Shift in Nature of Community Engagement Opportunities

53

Original designCurrent process

Participation Continuum


54

Next Steps


Scope of Work

1. Recommend concrete, measurable definitions:a. Quality schoolsb. Equitable accessc. Diversityd. Integrated schoolse. Neighborhood schools

2. Prioritize the different goals and confirm the theory of action

3. Model and present different options indicating how well each model meets the Board’s goals for student assignment

4. Support extensive community outreach

5. Develop policy recommendation and implementation plan

6. Analyze transportation needs and plans

Outlined in Board Resolution 189-25A1

55

Before we develop options to consider


Meeting Scope + Sequence 56

September 16, 2019

RESEARCH: Predicting family participation in school choice; factors that determine which

schools parents choose

May 13, 2019

UPDATES: African American student recruitment; transportation; policy development process

March 18, 2019

UPDATES: Round 1 offers; online application; policy

development process and timeline

April 15, 2019

RESEARCH: Case studies of Boston, Berkeley, Seattle, and San Diego; elementary school

attendance areas


Questions?

57


58

Appendix


Action Items From Ad Hoc Committee Meeting

59

What Date Identified Date Closed

Develop a shorter timeline. Consider trade-offs and pilots. 3/18/19 Ad Hoc 5/13/19 Ad Hoc

Add work to promote under enrolled schools to future agenda 3/18/19 Ad Hoc 5/13/19 Ad Hoc

Share transportation studies with the Board 3/18/19 Ad Hoc 5/13/19 Ad Hoc

How do we bring the rest of the Board into this conversation? 4/15/19 Ad Hoc


● Leverage lessons learned from other districts?

● Mitigate space constraints in the southeast and south central?

● Determine which school facilities to consider when developing models?

● Establish school enrollment capacities that reflect our evolving ideas about the built environment and Vision 2025 teaching and learning?

● Use geography (e.g., proximity, attendance areas, zones, clusters) to help achieve the Board’s goals?

● Develop models that support diversity given residential patterns?

● Decide on the extent and type of choice to include in models? Which schools should be choice schools and why? How might school clusters help achieve the Board’s goals?

How Might We….60

April 13, 2019 Ad Hoc Committee

ad hoc committee on student assignment · presentation outline at a glance: educational placement...

Documents