PDA

View Full Version : All SF SFUSD March 2011 School Assignment Offers



theschoolboards
03-18-2011, 02:44 PM
SFUSD just released a full report of the March 2011 School Assignment Offers (http://www.sfusd.edu/en/assets/sfusd-staff/enroll/files/Post_March/Update%20March%2023%202011_Revised.pdf). 14,347 placement offers are being mailed today to those who turned in an application by February 18 for the 2011-12 School Year.

SFUSD recommends that you register to secure enrollment at the school site by April 15th. If you accept a placement offer, you can still choose to seek a higher choice school during any placement period. If you do not register, the placement will be cancelled and t he seat will be made available to other students. You will keep your initial assignment, if you have registered at the school, until a higher choice school can be offered. Registering at the school will not disadvantage you in the placement process. There is no priority for students who do not register at a school.

If you would like to participate in the May Placement Period, you must submit an Amended Choice Form (http://www.sfusd.edu/en/assets/sfusd-staff/enroll/files/Post_March/11-12%20Amended%20Choices%20Form%20EN.pdf) by April 15th listing any number of more preferred schools than your initial offer for the May Placement Period.

Offers for the May Placement Period will be mailed out on May 13th. You will be notified if an assignment can be offered to one of your amended choices. There will also be a final placement period in August. Parents must submit an Amended Choice Form (http://www.sfusd.edu/en/assets/sfusd-staff/enroll/files/Post_March/11-12%20Amended%20Choices%20Form%20EN.pdf) for every placement period in which they would like to participate.

For more information, visit SFUSD's website (http://www.sfusd.edu/en/enroll-in-sfusd-schools/enroll-for-next-year/march-placement-highlights.html).

51074427&access_key=key-nv9tgd84txun2phulfz

lesliebythebay
03-18-2011, 03:26 PM
Tx for posting this. I just had a chance to look over the Assignment Offers report. I wanted to pull out some of the highlights. Despite all the outcry, it seems that an overwhelming majority want choice. It just happens that the minority who want neighborhood schools are the most vocal. If that was the case, why not stay with choice? Also, demand for immersion programs is quite high.


More interest overall in SFUSD

4,930 kindergarten applicants, which is 229 more than last year (5% growth).
3,131 6th grade applicants, which is 211 more applicants than last year (7% growth).
We predict middle school enrollment will grow 31% by 2018.
More African American and Latino on-time kindergarten applicants

African American applicant pool grew 20% (from 293 applicants to 352 applicants).
Latino applicant pool grew 17% (from 961 applicants to 1,122 applicants).
Low demand based on closest school or attendance area school

23% of kindergarten applicants listed their attendance area school as a 1st choice;
24% listed a city-wide school, and 53% listed another attendance area school as their 1st choice.

The % ranged across attendance areas from 2% to 59%.
The majority of attendance areas (42 out of 58) had fewer than 30% of students list their attendance area school as a first choice.

24% of kindergarten applicants, 28% of 6th grade applicants, and 26% of 9th grade applicants listed the school closest to where they live as a 1st choice.
High demand for K8 schools

20% of kindergartners listed a K8 school as a 1st choice.
High demand for language pathways

39% of kindergarten applicants listed a language pathway as a 1st choice.
Demand outpaces capacity

First choice requests for:

Chinese immersion are 219% of capacity;
Japanese foreign language in elementary school are 174% of capacity;
Spanish immersion are 147% of capacity; and
K8 schools are 206% of capacity.

14 schools were listed as a first choice for 50% of kindergarten applicants.
There were 11 requests for every opening at these 14 schools.
74% of 6th grade applicants listed six out of 13 middle school options as a first choice: Giannini, Presidio, Aptos, Hoover, Roosevelt, and Lick.
80% of 9th grade applicants listed five out of 15 high school options as a first choice: Lowell, Lincoln, Washington, Balboa, and Galileo.
Percent who get choice similar to prior years

Four out of five applicants received one of their choices.
75% received their 1st, 2nd, or 3rd choice.
Kindergarten: 74% received 1st, 2nd, or 3rd choice (81% received one of their choices).
6th Grade: 85% received 1st, 2nd, or 3rd choice (86% received one of their choices).
9th Grade: 84% received 1st, 2nd, or 3rd choice (86% received one of their choices).

hrosemom
03-18-2011, 05:52 PM
Wow, Clarendon had 1797 requests for 88 spots. After 40 siblings and 30 CTIP1 requests, that leaves 18 spots for the other 1727 requests. A slightly great than 1% chance of getting assigned Clarendon - so much for that option for us.

hrosemom
03-18-2011, 08:32 PM
Wow, Clarendon had 1797 requests for 88 spots. After 40 siblings and 30 CTIP1 requests, that leaves 18 spots for the other 1727 requests. A slightly great than 1% chance of getting assigned Clarendon - so much for that option for us.

Now that the kids are in bed, I finally have more time to look at the report. Continuing what I was doing earler of what the real probability is of getting a spot at the high demand schools without sibling or CTIP1 preference, here's the breakdown of total spots to total requests after adjusting for those two preferences for those schools (spots, requests, % chance):

Buena Vista - 4, 435, 0.92%
Clarendon - 18, 1727, 1.04%
Alice Fong Yu - 7, 618, 1.13%
Claire Lillienthal - 12, 912, 1.32%
Rooftop - 17, 1091, 1.56%
Miraloma - 22, 639, 3.44%
West Portal - 55, 1421, 3.87%
Sherman - 25, 547, 4.57%
Alvarado - 50, 1028, 4.86%

If I take out sibling or CTIP1 requests that aren't first choice (that data is not available in the report), the probability for the schools would be even lower.

scorpioabby
03-18-2011, 10:02 PM
Why does SFUSD show so many datapoints based on first choice when the assignments are based on everybody who requested a specific school? If they want more people to get their first choice, shouldn't they run the assignment based on first choice rather than lumping all requests into the same pool?

jodi27123
03-18-2011, 10:30 PM
I was really curious about the dense population tiebreaker but it turns out we're in one of the 33 attendance areas that qualify. Only 24 attendance areas didn't get the density tiebreaker so why even bother. I would hate to be in one of those 24.

chellebellesf
03-19-2011, 11:49 AM
I was really curious about the dense population tiebreaker but it turns out we're in one of the 33 attendance areas that qualify. Only 24 attendance areas didn't get the density tiebreaker so why even bother. I would hate to be in one of those 24.

Do you have the list of the 24 schools that don't get the density tiebreaker?

jodi27123
03-19-2011, 12:37 PM
Do you have the list of the 24 schools that don't get the density tiebreaker?
These are the attendance areas that don't get the density tiebreaker:
Chavez
Chin
Flynn
Garfield
Guadalupe
Hillcrest
Lakeshore
Lau
Longfellow
Malcolm X
McCoppin
McKinley
Muir
Parks
Peabody
Redding
Sanchez
Spring Valley
Starr King
Sunnyside
Sunset
Taylor
Ulloa
West Portal

fancywu9
03-20-2011, 09:38 AM
23% of kindergarten applicants listed their attendance area school as a 1st choice
If all the schools were of similar quality, then that number would be much, much higher. I'm not surprised at all given the disparity in school quality. Just because a school is closer doesn't mean I want it. As a parent, I'm willing to go almost anywhere in the city for a great school rather than settle for an "easy" down the street option. SFUSD can muck with the assignment system all they want but until they focus more energy and resources on improving schools, parents will be frustrated by the assignment process du jour.

carol1791
03-20-2011, 12:13 PM
Wow, Clarendon had 1797 requests for 88 spots. After 40 siblings and 30 CTIP1 requests, that leaves 18 spots for the other 1727 requests. A slightly great than 1% chance of getting assigned Clarendon - so much for that option for us.

This is the way I interpreted SFUSD's data for Clarendon so help me if I miss something.
- 40 spots went to siblings
- 32 spots went to CTIP1 children (2 of them didn't list Clarendon as first choice)
- That left 16 spots to go to GE and JBBP.
- Assuming half of the spots are for GE, that meant 8 spots for 62 neighborhood children who listed Clarendon as first choice.

Is that right? I'm all for CTIP1 taking spots but 32 seems way too much. Shouldn't there be a cap at each school for the spots allocated to CTIP1? Or maybe limit the CTIP1 tiebreaker to the K-8 schools to preserve the neighborhood goal? Even Rachel Norton admitted she was wrong underestimating CTIP1 demand for Clarendon.

debrasx2
03-20-2011, 02:16 PM
carol1791 - can you do a breakdown of Miraloma too? I'm curious what the numbers look like for the school. Thank you.

shanjohn16
03-20-2011, 02:29 PM
I was really curious about the dense population tiebreaker but it turns out we're in one of the 33 attendance areas that qualify. Only 24 attendance areas didn't get the density tiebreaker so why even bother. I would hate to be in one of those 24.

I agree on the why bother. A better way to do dense population tiebreaker is to give it to those families that requested their attendance area school as first choice and did not receive it. Maybe have it apply only to citywides. For many of the most popular programs, even children in the attendance area are shut out.

ellenf75
03-20-2011, 02:42 PM
I'm happy to get one of our top 3 choices but I'm confused by the numbers on Buena Vista. How did 13 spots go to 'other' when there were 15 siblings and 59 CTIP1 first choice requests for the 63 spots? There were more than enough first choice CTIP1 requests to fill all the spots so what did these 13 other families have to leapfrog the CTIP1s?

carol1791
03-20-2011, 03:04 PM
carol1791 - can you do a breakdown of Miraloma too? I'm curious what the numbers look like for the school. Thank you.

There are the numbers I calculated for Miraloma:
- 60 total spots
- 34 went to siblings (13 within attendance area, 21 outside)
- 6 went to CTIP1 children (2 did not have Miraloma as first choice)
- That left 20 spots for 47 attendance area children (w/o sibling preference) who put Miraloma as first choice.
- 4 of the 20 spots went to "Other" so 16 went to Miraloma attendance area first choice.
- 31 kids who put Miraloma as first choice did not get it.
- 29 kids (13 w/ sibling preference) in Miraloma attendance area got Miraloma. 96 did not.

scorpioabby
03-20-2011, 08:47 PM
The more I try to play with the information in the report, the more I wish SFUSD would provide total requests by school broken down by the categories (CTIP1, attendance area siblings, non-attendance area siblings, etc). I'm also interested to know what the actual percentage of families who got their top 3 choices after adjusting for siblings and CTIP1.

lesliebythebay
03-20-2011, 09:07 PM
Oopsie. I forgot to post this here but PPSSF put out a tip sheet for enrolling and for applying in the second round.

http://www.ppssf.org/Enrollment/tips/Round2_Tips_2011_ENG.pdf

Those of us planning on applying in the second round need to submit the app by April 15.

fancywu9
03-21-2011, 08:22 AM
A bunch of people are venting over on Rachel Norton's blog too:

http://rachelnorton.com/2011/03/18/placement-results-from-the-first-round/

halfmoonmom
03-21-2011, 12:35 PM
What are the second and third rounds of assignment going to do other than assign us to one of the schools not considered the top schools? We'll get a school slightly better than what we have but forget about the top 10 or 15.

daddydrama
03-22-2011, 07:59 AM
Interesting chart of SFUSD school assignment by ethnicity 2011:

http://tungwaiyip.info/2011/2011_SFUSD_ethnicity.html

jekkosf
03-22-2011, 10:54 AM
I understand there's a May round and an August round. Anybody knows what happens after the August round if we don't get a school we want to accept?

scorpioabby
03-23-2011, 11:39 AM
I wonder if they'll adjust the system in the second and third round, considering how disastrous the first round results seem. Or like any bureaucracy, they'll wait until next year while our children this year suffer as the guinea pigs.

theschoolboards
03-24-2011, 08:28 AM
A guest post on Rachel Norton's blog (http://rachelnorton.com/2011/03/23/guest-post-the-case-for-school-equality/#comments):
Every year a significant number of San Francisco families are denied access to a viable public school option for their kids. In some cases it is the result of sheer misfortune as a result of the lottery system. In other cases it is the “misfortune” of living in an area with an undesirable attendance area school and a preference system that favors you going to that school, not escaping it. In all cases, it is unfair.

Neighborhood School Assignments Will Not Work Unless Disparity Between Schools is Reduced

I disagree that because only 24% of people selected their neighborhood school as their first choice that parents do not want a neighborhood school system.

Just about every parent I know dreams of being able to walk to, or be in close proximity to, their kid’s school…assuming of course its a good school. But, under the new assignment system you still have the same set of desirable and undesirable schools in place. You can’t expect people to automatically want to go to a struggling school simply because it is now their “neighborhood school.” And it is unfair to place the burden of turning that school around solely on the families that live in that attendance area.

Data does not accurately reflect demand

The preliminary data shows that the neighborhood school assignment system did work in neighborhoods where the school is desirable: Clarendon (62 first choice requests from the assignment area), Sherman (51), Miraloma (47) just as examples. Even in desirable neighborhood schools not considered the top 14 most requested schools, the data shows that the number of applicants who requested those schools as a first choice exceeded the capacity of the school: New Traditions, Grattan, Sloat for example. High percentages of offers for these schools went to attendance area applicants, demonstrating that there is demand for quality neighborhood schools, despite the fact that data indicates system wide a low percentage of people listed their attendance area school as a first choice

True demand for neighborhood schools is not accurately quantified in the preliminary data. For example, many parents in the Grattan attendance area who I know listed Rooftop as their first choice. Rooftop is one of the cities top schools and is a K-8 (as opposed to Grattan which is a K-5). Given the close proximity of Rooftop to Cole Valley parents considered it a great “neighborhood school” option (even though it wasn’t their attendance area school and expressed their preference for a K-8. They did so because the new lottery system did not penalize them for the order in which schools were listed.

read more>> (http://rachelnorton.com/2011/03/23/guest-post-the-case-for-school-equality/#comments)

jodi27123
03-24-2011, 12:10 PM
The more time I've let passed since the assignment letter, the more frustrated I've become. Just why did SFUSD feel like they need to overhaul the assignment system. Under the old system, at least we all had just about equal chances of getting the good schools. Now, the CTIP1s have the golden tickets and leaving the scraps for the rest of us. How is that fair, especially when so many CTIP1s are gaming the system? It's no wonder people lose faith in the public school system.