Solutions for LBJ+LASA
Prepared by a joint planning group of LBJ and LASA students.

Table of contents
I. Solutions
II. Addendum 1

 Solutions
The Problem
LBJ and LASA students agree that there are major issues on our campus.
● LBJ and LASA must share limited space and resources as they continue to grow.
● The LBJ and LASA communities are fundamentally separate. There is no common
purpose.
Our objective
We ​do not​ want to force interaction between schools. Rather,​ we want to dismantle the
barriers that currently prevent LBJ / LASA from sharing resources and experiences.
Why? We want to expand the learning opportunities available to students. We want
students to have every resource available to them in pursuing their academic and
extracurricular interests. We want to empower students to have conversations with
people of diverse backgrounds, both inside and outside the classroom.
When students see the benefits of this collaboration and diversity in their lives, they will
develop empathy. They will begin to build bridges of common purpose across the
divisiveness that exists in our community. Ultimately, students will graduate as mature,
compassionate community-builders who have developed the skills they need to succeed
in the real world.
Our process
Under the guidance of Mr. Craig Shapiro, this student group was provided data on current
facility usage and staff surveys as well as an architectural report. We discussed issues
within and between the two schools, looking for solutions to the stated problem. We
presented our ideas to LBJ Principal Sheila Henry and LASA Principal Stacia Crescenzi.
Independent of Mr. Shapiro, we subsequently met with both principals individually to
discuss the feasibility of each presented idea and understand the compromises that
implementation would demand from each school. We used this feedback to decide which
solutions would do more good than harm.
Our group has met together for approximately 20 hours in total.

 Our solutions
● Short term (implementation begins next school year)
○ Completely aligned bell schedule with all blocks and lunch shared
■ Joint UIL activities coordinated and shared seamlessly
■ Students able to establish clubs that are accessible to both schools
■ Underclassmen able to ‘shadow’ classes between schools
○ Improve common spaces
■ New furniture that invites collaborative work
■ New student art installations to humanize the school and build pride
■ Major outdoor improvements to support doubled lunch population
● Seating areas, awnings, paths
○ Improve wayfinding between schools
■ Shared hallway color scheme
■ Classrooms organized by department
■ Wayfinding signs / maps at staircases
○ Standing LBJ+LASA student advisory group
■ Discuss more solutions, meet with admin to plan implementation
■ Plan community-building projects that involve both schools in
advancing our solutions
● Medium term (implemented in next several school years)
○ Students able to take classes at both schools as long as they meet
prerequisites and agree to the requirements
○ Continued improvement to common spaces and wayfinding
● Long term
○ Uncertain- Possible LASA move pending location of a suitable site and
successful bond election
We understand that these ideas will not be popular with every single person on campus.
However, we are of the opinion that they are necessary steps towards accomplishing our
objective.

What's next?
The principals will meet together to discuss our solutions and decide which ones to
pursue. They will then plan how to implement the solutions, incorporating logistics and
input from stakeholders as they reach consensus on a plan of action.

 Our conditions for implementation
We support these solutions ​ONLY IF​ implementation meets the following conditions:
The principals plan with a willingness to make compromises.
● The principals agree to advocate for their students but also to make the hard
compromises that are necessary to implement these solutions. The consequences
of each solution are considered thoroughly and addressed without becoming
permanent barriers to change.
Principals come to decisions in time for thorough publicity and implementation.
● The principals adhere to the big-picture implementation schedule we’ve outlined,
and come to decisions with plenty of time left in the semester to publicize and
prepare our communities for next year’s changes.
Principals continue to involve students in the planning and publicity process.
● The principals continue to work with our group in planning and implementation.
We are empowered to share our feedback and interface with the community,
soliciting student feedback when deemed appropriate.
● Our group is also empowered to spearhead publicity, taking an active role in
explaining what the policy changes are aiming to achieve and helping stakeholders
understand why compromise is a good thing for students and for the community.
Outside groups accept that this process will have the greatest chance of success if the
principals and students retain full control.
● No AISD-mandated deadlines are imposed on our principals as they meet together
to plan. Their decisionmaking process is based solely on the implementation
schedule we've outlined and their understanding of school logistics.
● The CACs understand that they purposely hold a subordinate role to the students’
recommendations in this planning process. CAC members share their feedback in
appropriate venues but refrain from lobbying administration or community
members with the intent to undermine our hard work.

 Statement of the LBJ+LASA Joint Student
Planning Group 2/6/17
We are deeply appreciative to members of the Jaguar community and the broader AISD
community for coming together to listen to our ideas last week. We worked long and hard
to prepare our presentation and we are excited that it is already having a real impact on
the way people think about the relationship between LBJ and LASA.
That said, it has come to our attention that some individuals have drawn incorrect
inferences from the solutions we proposed. We would like to take this opportunity to stop
the spread of misinformation by reiterating the positions of our group:
● We do not support the “combination” of LBJ and LASA into one school under one
principal. LBJ and LASA are two separate schools with increasingly divergent needs
and cultures. They are thriving as they pursue those needs. They are better able to
serve their students as separate institutions. Combination would set students from
both schools back.
● We do not support “forcing” interaction between LBJ and LASA. Administrations,
academic departments, and student bodies should remain functionally separate.
Forced interaction only leads to miscommunication, resentment, and discontent.
● We do support removing barriers to productive interaction between our two schools.
We believe in having purposefully separate schools that are able to collaborate and
share constantly. This will allow students to pursue diverse, character-building
experiences within an environment that best serves their academic needs. For
example, a student could take an advanced course only offered at one school.
Sharing should occur voluntarily, and only if it opens opportunities to students.
● We believe that given enough space and resources, the “collaborative co-location”
model we outlined with our short-term solutions could be expanded into a long-term
plan for LBJ and LASA. A thoughtful, well-executed plan for co-location ​could
provide students with opportunities and a diversity of experience that wouldn’t be
possible if the two schools were physically separate.
● We do not “endorse” a long-term co-location plan for LBJ and LASA. The work of our
group was completed with the premise that LASA would ultimately leave the LBJ
campus. We believe complete physical separation is a valid long-term solution as
long as it serves the individual needs of each institution.

 ● With this in mind, FABPAC should only recommend that LBJ and LASA remain
co-located if it believes doing so would best serve the individual needs of each
institution. It would be especially inappropriate for FABPAC to extrapolate our
short-term desire for collaboration into a long-term “combination” plan that
ignores the stated priorities of the LBJ / LASA communities, undermines our
administrations, and leaves students from both schools worse off.
In short, we advocate for short-term solutions that enable collaboration while respecting
the individual character of each school.
Long-term planning for LBJ and LASA should consider the benefits of future collaboration,
but it should do so with an ​overriding focus​ on the individual needs of each school.
All community members should hear this message unequivocally: ​whether in the short
term or in the long term, we support collaboration, ​not​ combination.
We hope that by improving the frequency and quality of ​collaboration​ between our two
schools, we can reduce tensions on campus and grow a culture of mutual understanding.
We want students to have access to as many resources as possible to learn and grow into
empathetic citizens.
We ask for your assistance in amplifying our message.
Thank you for your attention,
Mohavey Bell
Christina Douglin
Katia Galicia
Hannah Gronwald
Alexis Joseph
Mariah Mackey
Oscar Newman
Maria Rivera
Quinn Simpson
Emily Yi