Now
Fair
71.0°
High
87°
Low
64°
Full Forecast

Coupon

Jobs

Cars

Homes

Rentals

Alerts

Subscribe
Home > Local
Bookmark Us   •   Make Us Your Homepage

LPS school area attendance debate continues

Comments 10 comment(s)  
E-mail Story E-mail Story
Print Story Print Story
Share  Share
Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

BY MARGARET REIST / Lincoln Journal Star

Wednesday, Oct 11, 2006 - 09:16:52 am CDT

If a school is full, should students who live outside its attendance area be able to go there anyway?

A group of Lincoln Board of Education members and citizens debating whether to change policies on student transfers agreed on this much Tuesday: It’s not an easy question to answer.

Although existing policy says students can’t transfer outside of their attendance area to a school that is full, there are exceptions.

Among those:

n When a family moves to a new attendance area, students can stay in the school they’ve attended even if it’s full, as can their siblings.

n When the district changes attendance areas, students who find themselves in new areas can finish at their old schools, as can siblings.

n Transfer students can move to a middle school with their classmates even if the school is full.

Several members of the group felt the exceptions were too lenient for families moving to new attendance areas.

Those students should be allowed to finish out the year at their old school and then be required to move to the new one, several said.

“I think in general, when families move, they have some control over that decision,” said Cathy Pudenz, a member of the committee.

But when the district changes attendance areas — a decision families have no say in — students should be allowed to stay at their current school until they move to the next grade level, some said.

Many people buy homes because of the schools in the area and their children should be able to attend them, said Mitch Schainost. They shouldn’t be forced to change later because the district redraws its boundaries.

“I’m all for having homeowners be in control of their destiny,” he said. “Rather than having the rug pulled out from under them.”

Schainost is among seven citizens joining the school board in reviewing district attendance area and transfer policies as part of a pledge the board made to voters when they approved a $250 million school bond issue in February.

The bond issue will be used to build new schools and renovate existing ones.

Board members promised to review policies to make sure the district makes the best use of all its schools. Currently, some schools in the district bulge at the seams while others have room to spare.

Board member Keith Prettyman said continuing all exceptions to the transfer policy would make redrawing attendance areas ineffective.

But others like Lanny Boswell said exceptions would allow major boundary changes to be phased in over time rather than all at once.

Although change is difficult, board member Kathy Danek said, families are resilient.

“Parents and children adapt,” she said. “When they embrace that (new) facility and staff, they become a part of that community.”

But Schainost urged committee members to remember their school years. Having to go to a school when all your friends are going somewhere else is hard, he said.

“Talk to most kids continuing on with their class,” he said. “It is a big deal.”

Reach Margaret Reist at 473-7226 or mreist@journalstar.com


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Local > Back to Top of Story

Post Your Comment

Standards and Rules
All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Hide Comments Hide Comments   Newest First Newest First  
Brenda wrote on October 11, 2006 1:14 am:
" Education vouchers. Freedom to go to any school in the district. All schools must accept any student wishing to attend. Privatized administration and educators. Regent-style school board for setting cirriculum and oversight. "
more info needed wrote on October 11, 2006 1:28 am:
" When we see the overall numbers of students at each school we don't know how many of those are in the assigned attendance area and how many are transfers and we also don't see what the typical class size is. That would help us know whether or not to be concerned. How different are the class sizes across the district for first grade? third grade, sixth grade English, 8th grade Math, high school Algebra, Advanced Algebra, English 10, Composition, Oral Communications or other required to graduate classes? Why can so many students change schools during the middle of the semester--not all are due to physically moving are they? "
what a joke... wrote on October 11, 2006 6:08 am:
" You forgot one key reason kids can go to a certain schools - where their daycare is located or where their parents work. My mother-in-law is a retired teacher and told me about a family that moved into a house across the street from her school. The school was full, and thus, closed, so the family had to attned another school. It's more of a convenience school now-a-days and not a neighborhood school. The kids in my neighborhood are sent to four different elemenatry schools. And these kids all live within a two blocks of each other. My child has to drive past two other "full" schools to get to his. But my taxes are going up how much? "
it is a joke wrote on October 11, 2006 7:45 am:
" I mean LB sits on this committee and yet his kids do not attend the elementary school within their attendance area. Yet homes next door to the same school have to go elsewhere. Gosh, where does the problem originate? "
in the best interest of the children wrote on October 11, 2006 8:20 am:
" allowing parents the RIGHT to direct thier childrens education should be something we all value. if you have to place a "criteria" on getting to move or stay in a full school then make it based on academics. if we stopped the parents moving kids based on athletics and allowed the moves for students showing academic excellence then half the problem would be solved right there. your only punishing the kids forcing them to switch schools or denying them the right to a better education at another facility. "
LPS Alum wrote on October 11, 2006 9:28 am:
" I fully support open enrollment! However, not school hopping just because they can. Granted it's been years since I was a student but I recall having a difficult time "fitting in" at my assigned district school. I had many friends from all the other LPS schools due to activities outside of school and I desperately wanted to transfer. However, Since my parents lived less than 2 blocks from my assigned school this was not an option. Thus, I was sentanced to 4 years of misery. If at all possible I will not send my kids to this particular school if certain so called teachers are still there. Don't get me wrong. I feel I received a good education that ultimately did prepare me for college, however, it could have been better if the poorer teachers were removed and I was able to choose a school where I felt more socially accepted. I am a better person for not following the "in crowd" and spending large amounts of money to follow the current fashion trends in high school. Many of those students never learned the value of the $. Students should have a choice in their own education but I can see a possibility that it could encourage students to hop schools excessively hindering this education. The choice should be up to the family but a restriction should be in place so that switching does not become an annual event. "
boundaries need fixed wrote on October 11, 2006 10:23 am:
" I live 2 blocks from an elementary school but we are not in that school district. Instead kids on our street are bussed to a school a few miles away. There are houses that back to the school that aren't in the district - what a joke not to mention a waste of time & money spent bussing kids that could easily walk to school! Good thing we have a neighborhood school - too bad very few of the kids in the neighborhood are allowed to attend there. "
LPS Alum2 wrote on October 11, 2006 10:35 am:
" I believe that the LPS Transfer Policy is a joke. When I went to school here, we just had the grandfather clause. It was strict, but fair in my opinion. Then the district made a change and the pendulum swung over to an open transfer policy. I believe that it was too open. Now, most of the new elementary schools are at 105% of capacity, while the central elementary schools are declining in population and resources. They probably will be closed at some point, my question is why? The current policy leaves the principal in charge. That is reasonable. But the process beyond that is seriously flawed because it’s driven by politics. If, the principal says yes the child can come, then there isn't a problem. If, the principal says no then that discussion is appealed to LPS PSAB. Depending on that decision, the child is allowed into that school or goes to the LPS Board for a final decision. It is my understanding that these decisions are rarely disapproved of by the Board. So, the Board has created this problem. My child goes to a very good elementary school; he has very good teachers and a good administrative team. However, he is bussed to this school because we cannot get into a school close to where we live. There has to be a middle ground that allows for open transfer based on academic reasons. I would disallow athletic based open transfers. Students are in school to learn first and be athletes second. I applaud that they are finally looking at the district transfer policy. Let the debate begin. "
Keep it Simple wrote on October 11, 2006 11:38 am:
" How hard can this be? Redraw the lines to allow for growth in every district, so there is room when people move to the district. If you move to a new district then you have to change schools the next year. If parents want an certain school, then they should move to that district. "
Thank you wrote on October 11, 2006 1:05 pm:
" I just wanted to say Thank You to Mitch Schainost for taking our children's concerns and fears into consideration. Keep up the good work and keep fighting for them! When you think it is a simple solution just to redraw the lines and so forth, try looking into the eyes of your 6 year old little girl (who is extremely shy) and tell her, Well sweetie, that's just the way it goes. They should leave the transfers open, maybe making them tougher. I agree that a teenager should not be taught that it is okay to transfer to another school just because they have a better basketball (or whatever) team. Transfers need to be based upon space and if space is limited, then for more legitimate reasons than athletics. Yes, there are many, but obviously they would need to be narrowed down to a few. "

Ads by Yahoo!