Ad Hoc Committee on Student Assignment Monday, September 16, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Ad Hoc Committee

• n Student

Assignment

1

Monday, September 16, 2019 6 pm to 8 pm

Context

Each year, the Board’s Ad Hoc Committee on Student Assignment hosts a series of public working meetings with staff to monitor SFUSD’s student assignment policy. This year’s focus is Resolution 189-25A1: Developing a Community Based Student Assignment System for SFUSD (Approved 12/11/2018)

2

Current Policy

• Video
• Board Policy
• Interactive highlights

Policy Development Materials

• May 13, 2019
• April 15, 2019
• March 18, 2019
• December 4, 2018

www.sfusd.edu/adhoccommittee

Supporting Materials

Tonight’s Agenda

1. Staff Presentation (45 mins) a. Quick Summary of Board Resolution 189-25A1 b. Quick Update on Process and Timeline c. Exploration of definitions, policy goals, and priorities 2. Public Comment (25 mins) 3. Board Discussion (50 mins)

3

Desired Outcomes for Tonight’s Discussion

1. Receive high level feedback from the Board on potential policy goals (right track/ wrong track) 2. Understand how potential policy goals might be prioritized relative to each other (e.g. diversity and proximity)

4

SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Summary of Board Resolution

5

6

• 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 and 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 Board wants to develop a new student assignment system

7

• Initiate a process to develop a new student assignment system, focusing on

elementary schools

• 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 Board Resolution 189-25A1 calls on staff to do

SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Process and Timeline

8

9

Community Engagement

Policy Development Timeline

Fall 2019 Spring 2020 June 2020 Fall 2021 2020-21 SY* Board approves new student assignment policy for elementary schools Modify infrastructure to support new policy* Launch enrollment for 2022-23 SY Develop Definitions, Goals, Priorities, Theory

• f Action, + Options

Gather input from community and develop recommendation

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

10

November 18

Ad Hoc Committee

Definitions, goals, priorities, theory of action, and options (review proposals and provide feedback)

December 3

Committee of the Whole

Staff Recommendation: Definitions, goals, priorities, theory of action, options, and community engagement plan Action: Green light to launch community engagement

September 16

Ad Hoc Committee

Potential policy goals, priorities, and diversity (discuss and provide feedback)

October 21

Ad Hoc Committee

• n Student Assignment

Potential policy goals, priorities, diversity, and quality schools (discuss and provide feedback)

Fall 2019 Objective: Develop Definitions, Goals, Priorities, Theory of Action, + Policy Options

11

Objective: Gather input from community and develop policy recommendation Spring 2020 April 20

Ad Hoc Committee

• n Student Assignment

Review draft policy recommendation and provide feedback

May 18

Ad Hoc Committee

• n Student Assignment

Review draft policy recommendation and provide feedback Action: Green light on recommendation for First Reading

January and February

Community Workshops

Share (definitions, goals, priorities, theory of action, and options) and listen to understand concerns and aspirations

March 16

Ad Hoc Committee

• n Student Assignment

Review feedback from Community Workshops and consider potential modifications to reflect concerns and aspirations

12

Objective: Board approves new student assignment policy for elementary schools June 2020 June 23

Regular Board of Education Meeting

Second Reading and Action

June 9

Regular Board of Education Meeting

First Reading

June 15

Ad Hoc Committee on Student Assignment

Review First Reading

SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Community Engagement

13

14

• Worked with the various parent

advisory bodies (PAC, AAPAC, SpEd CAC) to develop a grant request to support community engagement and communications

• Awarded $100,000 grant from the Haas
• Jr. Foundation
• Will hire a .75 FTE Community

Engagement Coordinator to help coordinate and facilitate a robust community engagement process

Update on Community Engagement

• Design and lead meaningful and authentic

engagement with community stakeholders

• Activate a diverse range of voices,

especially those of underrepresented and marginalized families

• Offer multiple modes of engaging and

easy to understand information

• Develop materials that communicate

complex information to a variety of audiences

Haas Jr. Grant Goals

15

Community Engagement

Policy Development Timeline

Fall 2019 Spring 2020 June 2020 Fall 2021 2020-21 SY* Board approves new student assignment policy for elementary schools Modify infrastructure to support new policy* Launch enrollment for 2022-23 SY Develop Definitions, Goals, Priorities, Theory

• f Action, + Options

Gather input from community and develop recommendation

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

How and Why We’ll Engage the Community

16

IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation Inform Consult Involve Goal

To provide balanced and objective information in a timely manner To obtain feedback on analysis, issues, alternatives, and decisions. To work with the community to make sure that concerns and aspirations are considered and understood.

Promise to the Public

“We will keep you informed” “We will listen to and acknowledge your concerns” “We will work with you to ensure your concerns and aspirations are directly reflected in the decisions made.”

Engagement Strategies

• Website
• Email Newsletter
• Newspaper Op-Eds
• Public Comment

○ Ad Hoc Committee Meetings ○ Board Meetings

• Focus Groups with LEAD,

Principals, Teachers, and District Advisory Bodies (October - December)

• Online Survey
• Town Halls x 5 ( May)
• Community Workshops x 12

(January - February)

SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Exploration of Definitions, Policy Goals, and Priorities

17

• October 21st Ad Hoc Committee: Staff will present an

update on quality schools and equitable access

• November 18th Ad Hoc Committee: Staff will

recommend definitions for diversity and measures for integrated schools

• November 18th Ad Hoc Committee: Staff will present
• ptions, and within that context will recommend a

definition for neighborhood schools

Definitions:

• Quality Schools
• Equitable

Access

• Diversity
• Integrated

Schools

• Neighborhood

schools

18

Desired Outcome 1: Receive high level feedback from Board on potential policy goals (right track/ wrong track)

19

• Predictability
• Proximity
• Diversity

Board Resolution 189-25A1 lists a number of potential policy goals

• Predictability
• Simplicity
• Transparency
• Access to a school where sibling(s) attend
• Accessibility to neighborhood options
• A strong commitment to integrated schools
• Access to a diverse school
• Equity
• Access to a high quality school

20

Synthesized Goals

Equity Lens

Stated in Resolution

• The work of eliminating oppression, ending biases, and ensuring equally high
• utcomes for all participants through the creation of multicultural, multilingual,

multiethnic, gender equitable, multiracial, and inclusive practices and conditions; removing the predictability of success or failure that currently correlates with any social or cultural factor.

Equity Lens: Use SFUSD’s Definition of Equity as a Guide

21

How is the option aligned with and supportive of SFUSD’s efforts to:

• Ensure every learner receives what they need to develop to their full potential?
• Eliminate oppression, end biases, and ensure equally high outcomes for all

participants?

• Support the creation of multicultural, multilingual, multiethnic, gender

equitable, multiracial, and inclusive practices and conditions in SFUSD schools?

• Remove the predictability of success or failure that currently correlates with

any social or cultural factor?

Equity Lens: Potential Questions to Explore When Evaluating Options

22

23

The goal of student assignment is to

• ffer families of elementary students a

high degree of predictability about where their elementary children will be enrolled in school.

• Families should have a right to

predictability, simplicity, and transparency as they go through the student assignment system.

• Even families who are happy with

their children’s schools want more predictability in the enrollment process, and are uncomfortable with a process that feels excessively complicated or random.

Goal: Predictability Values Informing the Goal (the WHY?)

Ref: Board Resolution 189-25A1

24

The goal of student assignment is to create strong community connections to local schools and reduce the number of families with elementary students traveling across the city.

• Families traveling across the city to

attend schools far from their home increases congestion, can contribute to tardiness and truancy, and increases the difficulty in ensuring strong community connections to local schools.

• In nearly every other major school

district in California, a student can enroll directly in their ‘neighborhood’ school without going through a choice process.

Goal: Proximity Values Informing the Goal (the WHY?)

Ref: Board Resolution 189-25A1

25

The goal of student assignment is to create integrated elementary schools that provide students with the

• pportunity to experience the rich

diversity of our city.

• The SFUSD strongly believes that

students are best served in learning environments that are racially and socioeconomically integrated.

• There is a robust body of research

that demonstrates benefits for all students from diversity—academic, cognitive, social.

• Most families want their school

communities to reflect San Francisco’s socioeconomic and cultural diversity.

Goal: Diversity Values Informing the Goal (the WHY?)

Ref: Board Resolution 189-25A1

26

It is not a goal of the student assignment policy to provide families with choice in the elementary school assignment process.

• SFUSD’s choice system has increased

inequity and has not provided equitable access to a range of opportunities.

• Meaningful ability to choose is

inequitably distributed, and therefore the “all choice” system has accelerated inequitable choices and outcomes in our District.

• Choice systems are limited in their ability

to reverse the trend of racial isolation because applicants pools for individual schools are racially isolated.

NOT a Goal: Choice Values Informing This (the WHY?)

Ref: Board Resolution 189-25A1

Summary: Potential Policy Goals for Elementary Assignment

27

Predictability: The goal of student assignment is to offer families of elementary students a high degree of predictability about where their elementary children will be enrolled in school. Proximity: The goal of student assignment is to create strong community connections to local schools and reduce the number of families with elementary students traveling across the city. Diversity: The goal of student assignment is to create integrated elementary schools that provide students with the opportunity to experience the rich diversity of our city.

• Potential Policy Goals

○ Is Diversity, Predictability, and Proximity a good synthesis of the potential goals? ○ Is it correct to assume that choice is not a potential policy goal? ○ Are there other potential policy goals that aren’t fully captured by this synthesis?

• Values Informing the Goals (the WHY?)

○ Did we accurately capture the values that are important to the Board? ○ Are there other values that aren’t fully captured?

Questions for Board Discussion

28

Desired Outcome 2: Understand how potential policy goals might be prioritized relative to each other

29

• Any new student assignment policy will strive to achieve all of the Board’s

policy goals. In many cases, the goals will be fully aligned.

• However, there will be cases where some goals will be in conflict with one

another.

• Therefore, we need to prioritize the goals so that its clear which goals are

most important to achieve in cases where there are tensions.

Why Prioritize Goals?

30

• We will use the priorities to

trade-off between multiple goals when designing policy options.

How Will Staff Use Priorities?

31

• Compromising the extent to

which one thing is achieved in

• rder to achieve a balance

between two or more desirable but incompatible outcomes.

What do we Mean by ‘Trade-off’?

• At a certain point, increasing the number of students who attend school close

to home may result in a decrease in school diversity. (Proximity vs. Diversity)

Example of Trade-Offs Between Goals

32

More students attend school close to home Schools are More Diverse

How Should We Trade-Off Between Policy Goals?

33

• Series of prompts (see handout) designed to help think about how we might

trade-off between goals if there are any tensions between them.

○ E.g. “I would support a policy that relies on some students travelling between neighborhoods if it results in more diverse schools.” (distance and diversity) ■ Strongly disagree/ disagree/ not sure/ agree/ strongly agree

• Prompts also include questions about school choice that are intended to

help surface whether choice is important to the Board, and should be considered as a potential policy goal.

• Which goals are most important for any policy to achieve? Why?

Questions for Board Discussion

34

SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Next Steps

35

• Potential Policy Goals

○ Is Diversity, Predictability, and Proximity a good synthesis of the potential goals? ○ Are there other potential policy goals that aren’t fully captured by this synthesis? ○ Is it correct to assume that choice is not a potential policy goal?

• Values Informing the Goals (the WHY?)

○ Did we accurately capture the values that are important to the Board? ○ Are there other values that aren’t fully captured?

• Prioritizing the Goals

○ Which goals are most important for any policy to achieve? Why? [See handout]

Tonight’s Board Discussion

36

37

November 18

Ad Hoc Committee Definitions, goals, priorities, theory of action, and options (review proposals and provide feedback)

December 3

Committee of the Whole Staff Recommendation: Definitions, goals, priorities, theory of action,

• ptions, and community

engagement plan Action: Green light to launch community engagement

September 16

Ad Hoc Committee Potential policy goals, priorities, and diversity (discuss and provide feedback)

October 21

Ad Hoc Committee

• n Student Assignment

Potential policy goals, priorities, diversity, and quality schools (discuss and provide feedback)

Fall 2019 Objective: Develop Definitions, Goals, Priorities, Theory of Action, + Policy Options

SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Questions

38

SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Appendix

39

Current Student Assignment System

• Video showing how students are currently assigned to school
• Board Policy governing current system
• Interactive highlights of March 2019 school offers
• Annual Enrollment Highlights (2012-2019)

Resolution 189-25A1 (Approved December 11, 2018) Recent Presentations to the Board about Resolution 189-25A1

• May 13, 2019

○ (African American student recruitment @ Lowell and RASOTA, marketing for PITCH schools, Gen Ed transportation, revised policy development timeline)

• April 15, 2019

○ (Case studies from other districts, elementary school attendance area boundaries, next steps for policy development)

• March 18, 2019

○ (Round 1 application results, update on online application, policy development process and timeline)

• December 4, 2018

○ (Committee of the Whole discussion of Resolution 189-25A1)

• www.sfusd.edu/adhoccommittee

40

Supporting Materials

Feedback on Resolution 189-25A1 from District Advisory Bodies

• Advisory Councils’ joint considerations on Resolution 189-25A1
• AAPAC Bayview School Portfolio feedback
• Community Advisory Committee (CAC) on Special Education
• PAC’s Top 5 Findings

41

Supporting Materials (Continued)