|
|
Post by karinaroman on Jun 18, 2013 20:01:21 GMT -5
so if elmdale understood option c better (i.e. that they wouldn't have to go to Connaught...as that seems so untenable to them), then the only objection would be that in that option, fisher remains top heavy? wouldn't a smaller elementary efi program there be kept pretty separate? wouldn't that be preferable to a "mega" school where it's 900 plus kids but more "balanced"? would it not be easier to retrofit the school for a smaller new program than a larger one? and if in a few years, the middle school problem were addressed, some 7 and 8s might be moved out of fisher eventually anyway?
but most of all, is elmdale not willing to compromise at all?
this option seems to make the most sense for all involved and certainly would piss off the fewest (especially if Cambridge were not needed since last night showed where they stand).
I want to send in my email to the board (as we are being encouraged to do) but to me it seems so clear what the solution is that I don't know what to say in my email. how do I try to convince people of the obvious?
|
|
|
|
Post by vickysmallman on Jun 18, 2013 20:35:07 GMT -5
I think we need to make sure that a lot of us are there on Thursday making the obvious clear. Pair that with emails to the board.
I think we do need to focus on ease of implementation, walkability, the notion of having a small K-6 program at Fisher Park that could be run independently, without compromising the integrity of the 7-8 programs (to me this is a massive plus)...
|
|
|
|
Post by kellskitchen on Jun 18, 2013 21:35:48 GMT -5
Here's the email I sent today....
It is with concern that I followed the meeting at Cambridge School on Tuesday evening. There are many important arguments and repercussions to many of the proposed solutions so far, especially for Cambridge School and its important, vital community programs.
The main objective of the Working Committee is to solve the overcrowding and programming demands of both Devonshire and Elmdale Public Schools. THIS should be the focus of the near West Accommodation Review.
ELMDALE
The concerns of a top-heavy Grades 7 & 8 at Fisher Park needs to be addressed and laid to rest. If parents and the Working Committee had a clearer picture of what the physical JK - 6 program at Fisher Park would actually look like, there would be far more support behind it. There should be NO disruption to grades 7 & 8 as they currently stand, and a small EFI JK - 6 program could be segregated at that location. English should be removed from Elmdale and students directed to either Hilson Public School or Connaught Public School.
DEVONSHIRE
The solution for the overcrowding at Devonshire is simple - offer a dual-track English/EFI option at Connaught School. The boundary should be North-South, from Carling to the Ottawa River, extending from Faimont Avenue to Hinton Avenue. The English attendance boundary for Connaught should be Hinton Avenue to Breezehill Avenue and from Carling to the Ottawa River.
BOTH solutions offer a neighbourhood school for all students - walkable for most, with the programming that parents desire for their children.
BOTH solutions do not affect change to either Hilson (with the exception of bolstering its English program) or Cambridge Schools.
BOTH solutions make use of REAL unused classroom space at both Fisher Park and Connaught Schools.
BOTH solutions solve the overcrowding at Devonshire and Elmdale Schools.
I implore the OCDSB and the Working Committee to refocus its efforts to solving the problem at hand - rather than circling and wrangling with options that have created polarization within the greater Near West communities.
Sincerely,
Kelly Serjeantson
Devonshire Parent
|
|
|
|
Post by marthadulmage on Jun 18, 2013 22:04:58 GMT -5
The reason I think the middle school question is worth asking now is that Fisher Park is such a big part of the options being considered. It wouldn't trigger an ARC for the working group to simply make a recommendation that the board looks at middle school capacity downtown in the short term, with a view to making more room at Fisher Park, or at least reducing the top-heaviness there if Jk-6 were added. The boundaries for Glashan are pretty huge so it's no surprise they are at capacity. Mcnabb is one possibility but there may be other options. My main point was this might be a way to make option c more palatable to Elmdale, but maybe I'm dreaming, particularly since it would be an unknown.
Another idea that came to me recently was adding EFI at Connaught and Hilson, and moving the MFI from Hilson to Fisher Park. MFI doesn't start until grade 4, so there wouldn't be the issue of very little kids at Fisher Park. It would split up siblings earlier, though.
Kelly, I thought your submission was great. Thanks for sharing.
|
|
jess
New Member
Posts: 1
|
Post by jess on Jun 18, 2013 22:18:18 GMT -5
Great email Kelly!
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicholas Olmstead on Jun 18, 2013 23:07:55 GMT -5
Something for our reps to look into... I was speaking with an alternative program person at the Board meeting tonight, i can't remember his name, and he mentioned that any movement of Summit triggers an ARC. Not sure if it's true or not but the logic being, Summit is a different beast unto itself so if it's moved from Fisher it's ARC no matter what. If true, that chops AB and D out of the equation (or at least the moving Summit parts of them).
Like I said, not sure if it's true but might be worth looking into.
|
|
|
|
Post by cwhitehead on Jun 19, 2013 5:53:51 GMT -5
Summit considers itself a school located at the Fisher Park site. The OCDSB considers Summit to be a program at Fisher Park school. There was an unpleasant confrontation between the two viewpoints at Monday's meeting: board staff berating Summit for showing up with 2 reps at the table while there were already 2 reps for Fisher.
That being said, the Alternative concept, "D" does trigger an ARC since it closes the English program at Connaught altogether and opens a new English stream at Fisher. From a purely practical point of view, there is absolutely no way of knowing how many Connaught kids would want to switch to Alternative in order to stay at Connaught. The Summit and Churchill reps have strong concerns that, because of union staffing rules, the existing English teachers at Connaught could stay where they are, the Summit teachers would choose not to apply for jobs at a K-8 Connaught, and the new school would effectively just have an Alternative sticker applied to it.
I have my own views on this, which I will share with the working group by e-mail.
And an ARC would definitely take more time. Hard to say how long. I'm really not keen on a second interim solution.
|
|
megk
Junior Member
Posts: 92
|
Post by megk on Jun 19, 2013 7:02:38 GMT -5
Why haven’t school floor plans been released for the proposed schools? Did I miss that? They were released during the Glebe ARC. You can clearly see in the floor plans what the proposed spaces were at Cambridge - including the windowless room which the board labels 'classroom'. Let’s get those on the table for Fisher Park and Connaught. Let’s get those on the table for Elmdale and Devonshire too. Karyn (board staff), clearly stated they use floor plans to make decisions and not use of school space, so put us all on the same page.
|
|
|
|
Post by karinaroman on Jun 19, 2013 8:04:14 GMT -5
is it better to get the emails to the board before Thursday or after Thursday?
Kelly, thank you for posting yours. it certainly helps me clarify my own thoughts which are swirling around and around.
|
|
megk
Junior Member
Posts: 92
|
Post by megk on Jun 20, 2013 8:38:11 GMT -5
I looked over the Connaught floor plans this morning and believe the Board has not included the 2 daycare rooms in their classroom calculations. The board is appropriating these rooms this fall, so they aren't official classrooms until September. If this is true, then there are more free rooms at Connaught then previously thought and therefore could fit in more EFI students (+13 instead of +11 free). For 2013/2014 school year, the two rooms will be Devonshire JKs, after that they will be free.
Can Christopher or Lil confirm this with the board?
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicholas Olmstead on Jun 20, 2013 8:56:41 GMT -5
Wouldn't that be where the new FDK before and after care program is run? The Board is taking over that program too so it would make sense that they stay care space... But then again, not much is making sense about this so far so I could be way wrong.
|
|
megk
Junior Member
Posts: 92
|
Post by megk on Jun 20, 2013 9:08:16 GMT -5
I believe the rooms are not going to be dedicated daycare space in 2013 school year. They are going to be the new JK rooms for 2013 Devonshire kids. But again, need this confirmed.
|
|
|
|
Post by cwhitehead on Jun 20, 2013 10:09:19 GMT -5
Quickly, Karina: by the end of June is fine for comments.
Meg: I will try to get clarification about this.
\
Nicholas: with the intro of FDK, there is also the understanding that an Extended Day program is available to everyone at the school that wants it, with a minimum of 20 students needed to start such a program. Whether that is delivered in the regular classrooms or if it requires a more specialized space, I don't know for certain, but I suspect that it will be delivered in regular classrooms before and after the school day. Certainly at Connaught, the daycare space is closing and being used for FDK, but there will definitely be an Extended Day program running.
What the implications of the Connaught precedent (daycare space becomes FDK classroom space ) for DSAP is not clear to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by karinaroman on Jun 21, 2013 7:31:02 GMT -5
question regarding the proposed new boundaries for elmdale in all scenerios last night. I can't find them on this forum, but last night's package showed that the elmdale catchment would go up to harmer, right beside Fisher for those staying at elmdale. I've been so consumed with our own boundaries I only noticed this last night. to me that's very weird that families facing fisher would not get redirected to fisher. especially if, as in concept c, the boundaries suggest splitting up the civic hospital area (and, therfore, splitting up the Devonshire cohort) so that the western part of the civic hospital area goes to fisher.
and there was a rumour that up until a week ago, the proposed new boundary for elmdale didn't go up to harmer, but in fact stopped a few streets west of that. so there are some conspiracy theories circulating about how this came to be.
|
|
|
|
Post by lisawhite on Jun 21, 2013 8:19:11 GMT -5
I haven't heard any of those conspiracy theories, so I'm not sure what they are. I'm looking at the boundaries in front of me right now. The proposed Elmdale boundaries are pretty much identical for Concepts A, B, and C. They are a little different for D. The boundaries for A,B,C are identical to the boundaries proposed by the Board staff for the Fisher Park (vs Gowling) option last fall when they presented the initial 2 scenarios (they used that word then) for public consultation. So it seems like those boundaries were conceived by the Board before the working group was established.
At the risk of repeating myself, I remain very concerned about splitting up the Civic Hospital community which is why I dislike option C.
|
|
