Debate the issues facing Seattle Public Schools, share your opinions, read the latest news. Organize and work for high quality public schools that educate all students to become passionate, lifelong learners.
Enrollment Data Available
Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps
I have had no time to check this info out but it is available so I'm putting up this link for anyone who wants to see enrollment data for 2011-2012.
"District enrollment has been increasing since 2007, with two years of moderate overall growth followed by significant growth in 2010‐11. Overall enrollment is up by more than 1,000 students this year over last, driven largely by a steady increase in kindergarten enrollment over the past five years. Kindergarten enrollment has increased by more than 650 students since 2006, including an increase of about 200 students this year over last. As these students move through the elementary grades, enrollment in grades 1‐5 also continues to climb.
Growth in kindergarten enrollment is expected to continue. Births five years prior to kindergarten enrollment fluctuated between 2006 and 2010, ending up with a difference of about fifty more births feeding into 2010 enrollment than births feeding into 2006 enrollment. During that time period, however, the Birth‐to‐Kindergarten ratio1 increased steadily, growing from 63% in 2006 to 73% in 2010. In fact, going back five more years, the Birth‐to‐Kindergarten ratio was only 58.6% in 2001, so the current ratio is the highest in over a decade.
At the middle school level (grades 6‐8), this year’s enrollment is almost back up to what it was five years ago, following a significant decline between 2006 and 2007. Enrollment at the high school level has been declining for a number of years, reflecting the smaller cohorts of students at lower grades moving through the district. High school enrollment declined by about 900 students from 2006 to 2010, although there was an increase of about 70 students this year over last year. As the larger elementary school cohorts move through middle and high school, those numbers will continue to increase.
Anonymous said…
Is there any numbers about how large an elementary school needs to be to qualify for 2 principals or an assistant principal?
Just wondering
dw said…
@just wondering, 475 was the last I'd heard, but that was a couple years ago, and things can change. Not to mention that there's no guarantee any single number was used consistently throughout the district during a given year.
Rufus X said…
@Just wondering- Most recently, the magic number was 450, at least for Elem. schools.
Jon said…
If "distict enrollment has been increasing since 2007", why did central administration decide to close a bunch of schools in 2009?
The problem, as explained by the demographic consultant, is that the district didn't quite believe the growth would be sustained AND also thought it was localized to a few areas.
I think MGJ thought this would be a way to save money and look authoritative.
Name said…
Re: closing schools even though demographics were rising. I also think the board wanted to look decisive and prove that they could do what the old board couldn't. Staff became obsessed with trying to solve old problems using the capacity management as a cover (end all city draw, reduce transportation, close Summit and AAA, get Pathfinder a new building, do something with SBOC, punish AS#1 and NOVA for being so stubbornly non-conformist, split up APP.
robyn said…
2010 was the lowest birth rate in a century. By the time all the new schools you ask for are open we won't need them.
The official determination of the staffing tiers is made when the Weighted Staffing Standards (WSS) is determined. This is all part of budget development.
As the Board and the senior staff turn their attention to budget development in February you will hear this discussed. I wish I could say that you will hear it debated, but discussed is the best we can hope for.
This information is fascinating. Those who have been worried that it will be difficult for their HS student to opt for a school other than their attendance area should be very reassured. in Section 6, there's a chart that reveals just how much movement there has been among the schools in 2010. See also, the Historical First Choice and High School enrollment by Attendance area under Section 3.
Of course, there are still 2 grades in each HS which were assigned before the new assignment plan, but overall, these numbers show that there's a lot of movement between schools, and at least in the north end, in all directions.
Actually, Charlie, the core staffing part of the WSS has been deeply debated by the WSS team. As long as weather doesn't cancel it, look for a discussion at tomorrow's board worksession. Expect changes. While the current budget development scenario looks like it might protect WSS for the most part, the core staffing model might undergo some changes that will reduce core staff in a few schools while providing more staffing flexibility in others. That is supposed to be part of tomorrow's discussion and that worksession is the only reason I am crossing my fingers against snow.
The speaker list is up for the Board meeting tomorrow; not as packed as I thought with just four people on the waitlist. The majority of the speakers are speaking on high school boundaries (with several wanting to talk about Ballard High). There are only three of us speaking about the Green Dot resolution asking the City to not grant the zoning departures that Green Dot has requested. It's me, long-time watchdog, Chris Jackins, and the head of the Washington State Charter Schools Association, Patrick D'Amelio. (I knew Mr. D'Amelio when he headed the Alliance for Education and Big Brothers and Big Sisters; he's a stand-up guy.)
Update 2: an absolutely fabulous interactive map made by parent Beth Day (@thebethocracy on Twitter - she covers Board meetings and is fun to read). end of update Update 1: Mea culpa, I did indeed get Decatur and Thornton Creek mixed up. Thanks to all for the correction. end of update I suspect some who read this post will be irate. Why do this? Because the district seems very hellbent on this effort with no oversight skid marks from the Board. To clearly state - I do not believe that closing 20 schools is a good idea. I think they hit on 20 because they thought it might bring in the most savings. But the jury is still out on the savings because the district has not shown its work nor its data. I suspect closing schools and THEN leasing/renting them is the big plan but that means the district really has to keep the buildings up. But this district, with its happy talk about "well-resourced schools" is NOT acknowledging the pain and yes, grief, that is to come fro
Update 2: So I have seen a message from President Liza Rankin on why she, Director Evan Briggs, and Director Michelle Sarju backed out of this meeting. In a nutshell: - She says there was no organization to the meeting which is just not true. They had a moderator lined up and naturally the board members could have set parameters for what to discuss, length of meeting, etc. All that was fleshed out. - She also claimed that if the meeting was PTA sponsored, they needed to have liability insurance to use the school space. Hello? PTAs use school space all the time and know they have to have this insurance. - She seems to be worried about the Open Public Meetings law. Look, if she has a meeting in a school building on a non-personnel topic, it should be an open meeting. It appears that Rankin is trying, over and over, to narrow the window of access that parents have to Board members. She even says in her message - "...with decisions made in public." Hmmm - She also says that th
Comments
"District enrollment has been increasing since 2007, with two years of moderate overall growth followed
by significant growth in 2010‐11. Overall enrollment is up by more than 1,000 students this year over
last, driven largely by a steady increase in kindergarten enrollment over the past five years. Kindergarten
enrollment has increased by more than 650 students since 2006, including an increase of about 200
students this year over last. As these students move through the elementary grades, enrollment in
grades 1‐5 also continues to climb.
Growth in kindergarten enrollment is expected to continue. Births five years prior to kindergarten
enrollment fluctuated between 2006 and 2010, ending up with a difference of about fifty more births
feeding into 2010 enrollment than births feeding into 2006 enrollment. During that time period,
however, the Birth‐to‐Kindergarten ratio1 increased steadily, growing from 63% in 2006 to 73% in 2010.
In fact, going back five more years, the Birth‐to‐Kindergarten ratio was only 58.6% in 2001, so the
current ratio is the highest in over a decade.
At the middle school level (grades 6‐8), this year’s enrollment is almost back up to what it was five years
ago, following a significant decline between 2006 and 2007. Enrollment at the high school level has
been declining for a number of years, reflecting the smaller cohorts of students at lower grades moving
through the district. High school enrollment declined by about 900 students from 2006 to 2010,
although there was an increase of about 70 students this year over last year. As the larger elementary
school cohorts move through middle and high school, those numbers will continue to increase.
Just wondering
The problem, as explained by the demographic consultant, is that the district didn't quite believe the growth would be sustained AND also thought it was localized to a few areas.
I think MGJ thought this would be a way to save money and look authoritative.
As the Board and the senior staff turn their attention to budget development in February you will hear this discussed. I wish I could say that you will hear it debated, but discussed is the best we can hope for.
Of course, there are still 2 grades in each HS which were assigned before the new assignment plan, but overall, these numbers show that there's a lot of movement between schools, and at least in the north end, in all directions.