Blueprint APS – Phase One: Scenario Development Presentation to the Board of Education December 18, 2018 WHAT TO EXPECT Tonight’s purpose is to provide an overview of the Blueprint APS: Phase 1 scenarios and the process and information used to develop them. The overview presented tonight will allow the Board to begin to formulate its approach for Phase 2 – Scenario Selection. We are completing the final edits on the Blueprint APS: Phase 1 – Scenario Development Report. The substance presented tonight will not change. We will deliver the final Report in January 2019. It will: • Be about 200 pages long, including potentially 5 appendices • Detail the process for developing the scenarios • Contain in-depth feedback from extensive community engagement that formed the basis for the scenarios • Describe the data and research used to shape the scenarios • Explain the scenarios, the underlying scenario options, and the scenario dimensions • Provide analysis of the scenarios STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS What IF Task Force What THEN Task Force Margee Cannon, Neighborhood Liaison Coordinator, City of Aurora Jessica Cuthbertson, Teacher and Parent, APS Amber Drevon, Parent and former Board of Education President, APS Karen Hancock, Planning Supervisor, Planning & Development Department, City of Aurora Josh Hensley, Planning Coordinator, APS Vanecia Kerr, Executive Director, College Track Colorado Miguel Lovato, Senior Grants Program Officer, Daniels Fund and APS Alumnus Robert McGranaghan, Director, CU Anschutz Medical Campus Community-Campus Partnership Tamara Mohamed, Director of Community Relations, Aurora Chamber of Commerce Omar Montgomery, President, Aurora Branch of the NAACP Skip Noe, Chief Financial Officer, Community College of Aurora and former Aurora City Manager Amy Schwartz, Executive Director, Build Strong Education Starla Sieveke-Pearson, Executive Director Curriculum and Instruction, APS Jocelyn Stephens, Executive Director of Education, Public Education and Business Coalition and APS Parent William Stuart, Former Deputy Superintendent, Parent and Alumnus, APS Linda Witulski, Member, Rotary Club of Aurora and former Principal, APS Greg Cazzell, Director of Security, APS Steve Clagg, Chief Information Officer, APS Brandon Eyre, Legal Counsel, APS Jennifer Gutierrez, Director of Exceptional Student Services, APS Karen Hancock, Planning Supervisor, Planning & Development Department, City of Aurora Josh Hensley, Planning Coordinator, APS Mackenzie Khan, Director of Charter Schools, Office of Autonomous Schools, APS Dianne Lewis, Communications Coordinator, APS DJ Loerzel, Director of Accountability and Research, APS Shawn Smith, Director of Transportation, APS Amy Spatz, Director of Construction Management and Support, APS Kathleen Shiverdecker, Executive Director of School Performance, APS Kristen Stueber, Director of Human Resources, APS Julia Teska, Budget Director, APS Lisa Toner, Principal, APS Bruce Wilcox, President, Aurora Education Association 3 AGENDA • • • • • • Preparing for Blueprint APS Blueprint APS Phase 1 Process Task Forces and Scenario Composition The Scenarios Scenario Analysis Next Steps STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 4 PREPARING FOR BLUEPRINT APS PHASE I SCENARIOS • Oct. 2017: Board of Education discussed initial framing for Blueprint APS, reviewed overarching questions to explore, and affirmed need to proactively address these questions • Nov. 2017 Board Orientation & January 2018 Board Meeting: Newly elected Board discussed Blueprint APS and overarching questions • November 2017-Feb 2018: APS spoke to potential partners to support Phase 1 Public Engagement and Scenario Development • February 2018: APS released a public Request for Information (RFI) for potential partners for Phase 1 of Blueprint APS • March 2018: APS reviewed responses to RFI and interviewed potential partners • April 2018: Board of Education provided with background materials on the planning for Blueprint APS, summary and analysis of RFI responses, and MGT Consulting’s Proposal • May 15, 2018: MGT Consulting presented to the Board on Phase I process STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 5 PREPARING FOR BLUEPRINT APS PHASE I RESULTS • June-Sept. 2018: Phase I Community engagement through: • Interviews, Board members participated in 1-1 interviews with MGT Consulting • Focus Groups, welcomed and observed by Board • Community Forums, hosted by the Board • August-Dec. 2018: What IF & What THEN Task Force Meetings • Board updates on Phase I Progress: • MGT’s APS Background Data Report (August 2018) • MGT’s National Education Trends Report (Sept. 2018) • MGT Update presentation to the Board on Phase I (Sept. 2018) • MGT Overview of Themes from Community Engagement (November 2018) • October 2018: Board held a workshop on Future of APS, with presentations from APS Planning Department, City of Aurora Planning Department; and Chamber of Commerce STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 6 WHAT IS BLUEPRINT APS? A process to develop a long-term educational and facilities plan for how APS responds to the changing enrollment and proactively meets the interests and needs of the community, as articulated by the community Not a new strategic plan; Supports implementation of the district’s current strategic plan APS 2020 STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 7 BLUEPRINT APS PROCESS Phase 1: Scenario Development Phase 2: Scenario Selection (May-Dec 2018) (Winter/Spring 2019) • Engage the community in identifying potential scenarios for how APS can best serve students moving forward by aligning its educational vision and facilities plan • Consideration of all possible scenarios from Phase 1, AND • Determination of the best scenario for APS moving forward to Phase 3 Phase 3: Implementation (Spring 2019 and beyond) • Implement APS’ approach to best serving its students moving forward, including making any adjustments in policies and practices to align with the selected scenario BLUEPRINT APS: PHASE 1 PROCESS Analyze scenarios against criteria Identify scenario drivers and implementation factors using Background Data and initial Community Engagement feedback Analyze preliminary scenario options and implementation responses using National Education Trends and additional Community Engagement feedback Develop scenario options, organize scenarios by dimension, and identify implementation requirements using final Community Engagement feedback Compose scenarios with description, implementation requirements, pro/con analysis, and narrative detail 9 BACKGROUND DATA - TOPICS Total Population Population by Age Gender Structure Female Childbearing Age Population School Age Population Future School Age Population APS Live Births Racial/Ethnicity Distribution Foreign Born Population Unemployment Education Household Income Major Employers Home Values Owner-Occupied Homes Residential Development Households with Children Potential Students from New Developments Historical Enrollment Projected Enrollment Inter-District Students School Demographics - Race School Demographics - Free and Reduced Lunch School Demographics – Special Education School Demographics – Non-English/Limited English Proficiency School Demographics – Gifted and Talented School Performance Framework School Facilities Condition School Capacity and Utilization Bond Projects 10 BACKGROUND DATA – DISTRICT OVERVIEW • Population in the west and the northeast parts of the district has decreased from 2010-2016, but the population in the southeast has grown. • Foreign-born and minority populations are concentrated in the west and northeast areas of the district. There are an estimated 160 languages spoken in Aurora and 130 countries represented, making Aurora the most culturally diverse city in Colorado and among the top 30 in the country. • Unemployment is higher in the western part of the district, while incomes are higher in the southern part. Public entities are the largest employers, e.g., Buckley Air Force Base, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, University of Colorado Hospital, and Aurora Public Schools. • Home values are the highest in the southern part of the district. Homes in the northeast are less likely to be owner-occupied. Households with children are concentrated in the east. • The eastern part of district is mostly vacant, undeveloped land. An estimated 50,000 homes are expected to be built in the district over the next 30 years. • District enrollment has declined in the last 2 years after many years of consistent growth. Elementary enrollment has experienced the most significant decrease, but middle and high school enrollment have also decreased. Enrollment is projected to be essentially flat over the next five years, with the potential for enrollment increases if housing development is built out as expected. STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 11 BACKGROUND DATA SCHOOL AGE POPULATION .I I .-- . ?max?? I I I i Legend - I 22:03:21 (S to 17) (2010a; 2016) I r--1 sow" . - 3:303 . ?nuu: I School Age Population Change 0-200 l. 200.352 4 000 3,699 - 352-503 l: 3,000 2,000 1 132 1,474 1,000 363 575 0 NE NW SE SW District 12 BACKGROUND FOREIGN BORN POPULATION Northeast Anxhu and.? A Shaw-Ill Northwest . Soulthwest . Inl I 1 ll Legend I. Average Percent Foreign Born by Percent Born 1 II QU ad ra (2016) I I 0-11.61 I 1 -. 35% 31.16% 116123.21 .m I 23.21 - 34.82 30% - 34.82-46.42 -n45.42.58493 25% 24'46?6 22.71% 20% 17.98% 15.60District Development Stage Development In Flames: Planned Development sea I: Mugs-Use Development Planned Arapahoe a County Development 1 Largo PubchGov't Lona Holding: Drum 01 swoon 5mm." .L Mme Department Mach 0 20?s Smith Rd KIND-lulo'v - ?xing Yale Ave APS Schools 0 Elementary School Other School RTD 0 til-dale School Light Rant 0 6-12 School a 0 Hugh School Gaylord . Charter School Rockies Future School Sites .. Futum K-8 Schools Mlle: A Future High Schools 0 0 5 1 2 Mlelull Medical 1 -. . . ankv Peovla uture 6th Ave Extenaon cm luau rovvo- l' VALLEY n31, ?n'lhl PEAK leator, 9?2 Vs'a PCM (women a HARIONY WE - A 21.. Mach-x- BACKGROUND HOUSING DEVELOPMENT gyapahoe County) Mississippi Ave Eli APS "Am .Yalo Vlatrland Band I Mermtp I a: Ham'pdcn BACKGROUND DATA SCHOOL CAPACITY AND UTILIZATION 2017?18 October Count Standard Capacity for All APS Traditional Schools with Current Mobiles Smith Rd - no 1 . Inn-ne-eu-no-tuane in." II . as Fletcher-estu-w-m?? .Sable es (3): - North MS (1) A Mont'vi_ew 8 vd Anuhul.? Clyde Mm" P-8 (2) ntview ES (2) ?Ml ?mm? l Crawforg es (2). 0 Paris as (1) '55 If) - as 2.085?? K?enton ES (4) MS (6) .Laredo ES (3) (1 0 Hinkley HS (2) AWCPA c6- 12 (4) Central aug . Vista PEAK Ito bag?). HS (3) Peoria ES (1) Elkhart ES (2) I Preparatory - . A . Av. ?go-g res (1) . Sixth ?William smm?rrls 9 Lansl .9 ES (?So Avenue 55 (2) Aurora Quest K- 8 I Vista ?s Ly Knoll es (3) Mosley 8 - - Ex I?Igglfow h-un-u-un am: a? VG .Virginia COUN Wheelin a as (1). OTollgate ES . Arr piccolo Mississippi Ave .?Aurora MS II I I . urp ree GaIIeway HS .Arkansas ES (1) I [9.3 (1) . ts: . ercen 90% represents 'r MracIlek MS 7 v. .- numb? Jewell Ave Mun-g .Jewell ES (1) I I I 900/ 94% of mobiles .. . . Rangllewew HS (4.5) (3'99" 53 (2) lino Ave_, Aux . number is I .Cenlu ES . 95% lo 100% shown the I II ry .Iiassar ES (2) moblle count Yale Ave 0 Yale ES (1) is zero - Aurora .0 (1 mobile equals II Dartmouth ES. Columbia MS Frontier 100% 2 classrooms, unless Dalton 5s (1) P-8 (1) speci?ed othenmse) Hampden Ave .- i! .1 MDWISIOH of Support Services ?Planning Depanment February 23 2018 BACKGROUND DATA ENGLISH PROFICIENCY .l 'l Nortsz'WeEt: Sam Lane Sable - Northeast Fleicwh . rt Montview. . I Allura Clyde Craxgord . - Paris . . Bostog. Kento?? Vega Vagg?h East .Laredo Van uard m; If . I Hinkley 9 .u oa a ?APS.~dline El Ragnar-:1? .., 5W3: mm WSW i. 5 Aurora AcaderE? I II Mosley . Lotu's . Global ?"339 I ma Cou_rt QWheeling - I Legend urora ?in; Tollgage Vanguard East . . a eway Murphy . . . . . . percent NEP LEP IAPsomine Arkansas Non?EngIISh/lelted English ProfICIency "-Jewell I Mrachek '3 CI 24, - 204, 1 . Southeast 3! Qua ra nt 20% 39% angexaew Slde Creek Aurora century Yal 13-5537- 80% 39% - 57% Dartmouth f-Aurora rontier 57% - 75% E'Imma i- 1 0 APS Quadrants I I 60District -1200 I no .b I no -1000 200 200 ?100 -600 800 C) GREELET 6 .5 SCHOOL DISTRICT I 27J WELD COUNTT I .4 STD RE-8 ADAMS 12 FIVE I .4 STAR SCHOOLS ADAMS COUNTY Im 14 EATON RE-2 CENTENNIAL R-l l: JEFFERSON I . COUNTY R-l '5 FALCON 4- COLORADO DIGITAL BOC a ch?E 0m ?490 -732 A100 Net Of 10 Sending/RCCeiving DistriCts BACKGROUND DATA INTER-DISTRICT STUDENTS COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT - QUESTIONS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. What are the areas in which APS excels? What are APS’ strengths? What are the areas in which APS struggles? What are APS’ weaknesses? What is unique about the Aurora community? What types of programs and services should APS provide to best serve the Aurora community? What characteristics should a school have to ensure children have access to opportunities to prepare for successful futures? What characteristics should a school district have to ensure children have equal access to opportunities to prepare for successful futures? Why do/do you think parents choose traditional APS schools over other educational options? What can traditional APS schools do that no other option can? What do other options do better than traditional APS schools? In the future, why should APS parents choose APS schools over other educational options outside the district? STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 18 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT - COMPONENTS 4 Components: • One-on-One Interviews • Focus Groups • Community Forums • Online Survey 19 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT - INTERVIEWS • 30 interviews • Conducted May-September • Stakeholders with a unique perspective based on their position or history with the community 20 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT – FOCUS GROUPS • 7 focus groups • Students • Parents • Community Partners and Funders • Administrative and Building Leadership • Licensed Employees • Classified Employees • Developers, Builders, and Realtors • Focus groups provided in depth feedback from a shared perspective • Conducted July-September • Interpretive services and child care available for Parent Focus Group • About 75 total participants 21 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT – FORUM AND SURVEY PROMOTION Promoted to key stakeholder constituencies • Families • Schools and APS Staff • Community and Business Partners 22 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT – FORUM AND SURVEY PROMOTION Promoted to Families • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Sent multiple school messenger calls with community forum invitations in English, Spanish and nine other top languages Provided posters announcing community forums in English and Spanish to every APS school. The posters provided contact information for other families who speak other languages. Provided fliers announcing community forums in English, Spanish and nine other top languages to every APS school Featured Blueprint APS on APS website homepage Highlighted Blueprint APS and the community forums on every traditional school website Posted community forums on district calendar Created a Blueprint APS website with details on process, forums, how feedback can be provided; Website available in English and Spanish Sent APS Connect electronic newsletter from Superintendent to all parents, which included a feature on Blueprint APS and community forums Posted community forums on Facebook posts multiple times Posted Facebook events for each community forum Posted on community forums on Instagram Posted multiple tweets on Twitter about community forums Many schools included announcements about community forums in their own newsletters to families per district request Sent invitations for community forums to the Board of Education Directors to promote 23 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT – FORUM AND SURVEY PROMOTION Promoted to Schools and APS Staff • Provided posters announcing community forums in English and Spanish to every APS school for display • Provided fliers announcing community forums provided in English, Spanish and nine other top languages to every APS school • Featured Blueprint APS on APS website homepage • Highlighted Blueprint APS and community forums on every traditional school website • Listed community forums listed on district calendar • Posted community forums on Infinite Campus Parent Portal • Created Blueprint APS website with details on process, forums, how feedback can be provided; Website available in English and Spanish • Shared in APS Connect electronic newsletter from Superintendent, which goes to all staff and included feature on Blueprint APS and Community Forums • Featured Blueprint announcement and community forums in the Superintendent’s Bulletin • Posted community forums multiple times on Facebook • Posted Facebook events for each community forum • Posted on community forums on Instagram • Posted multiple tweets about community forums on Twitter • Superintendent discussed Blueprint APS and community forums with principals at Principal Back to School Message • Superintendent discussed Blueprint APS and community forums at Superintendent’s Back-to-School all-staff meetings • Superintendent discussed Blueprint APS and community forums with principals at first School Leaders Meeting • Chief of Strategic Management discussed Blueprint APS during monthly logistics webinar for principals • Superintendent discussed Blueprint APS and community forums at Charter Leaders meeting • Provided electronic invitation to Aurora Education Association, Classified Employees Council and School Executives of Aurora Presidents for distribution to their membership • Sent invitations for community forums to Board of Education Directors to promote 24 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT – FORUM AND SURVEY PROMOTION Promoted to Community and Business Partners • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Featured Blueprint APS on APS website homepage Highlighted Blueprint APS and community forums on every traditional school website Listed community forums listed on district calendar Created Blueprint APS website with details on process, forums, how feedback can be provided; Website available in English and Spanish Shared in APS Connect electronic newsletter from Superintendent, which goes to community partners, included feature on Blueprint APS and community forums Posted community forums on Facebook multiple times Posted Facebook events for each community forum Promoted community forums on Instagram Posted multiple tweets on Twitter about community forums Included community forums in the Aurora Chamber eblast newsletter Included community forums in the CU-Anschutz Community Campus Partnership newsletter Superintendent sent over 200 Blueprint APS invitations to partners in English and Spanish with request to share more broadly with their memberships, including community partner groups, Home Owners Associations, developers, realtors; copies of invitation also available in top 10 languages As a result of this, information about the community forums was shared with City of Aurora employees and homeowner's association and neighborhood contacts from the City Sent invitations to community forums to state and local officials Sent invitations for community forums to Board of Education Directors to promote 25 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT – FORUM AND SURVEY PROMOTION News Coverage • • • • Yourhub.com Aurora Channel 8 Aurora Sentinel Aurora TV 26 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT – COMMUNITY FORUMS • 4 community forums: • Wednesday, September 5th, 4:30pm @ Gateway High School • Thursday, September 6th, 6:00pm @ Vista PEAK Preparatory • Saturday, September 15th, 10:00am @ Aurora West College Prep. Academy • Monday, September 17th, 6:00pm @ Mrachek Middle School • Widely promoted to encourage participation • Interpretive services and child care made available at each forum • About 100 participants total • Large group input with clickers (example below) • Facilitated small group discussions 27 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT – ONLINE SURVEY • • • • • Accessible via a link on APS website Open September 1st through September 24th Available in 11 languages Widely promoted to encourage participation 909 completed surveys submitted ONLINE SURVEY LANGUAGE RESPONSES English 862 Spanish 45 French 1 Arabic 1 Vietnamese 0 Karen 0 Amharic 0 Burmese 0 Nepali 0 Oromo 0 Somali 0 Total 909 28 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 2 Task Forces 4 Community Forums • IF Task Force: 15 members to envision possible scenarios based on community input • THEN Task Force: 15 members to plan for how to potentially implement possible scenarios • Gather input from students, families, staff and the community 7 Focus Groups • Gather perspectives of particular constituencies, including: students, parents, Admin/PT employees, licensed employees, classified employees, community partners; realtors/developers/builders Online Survey •Gather Input from students, families, staff, and community members Potential Scenarios for the Future of APS 30 Interviews • 1-1 interviews of community leaders who provide a unique perspective Over 1,000 community members provided community engagement input. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT – MAJOR THEMES The major themes are the common elements of feedback from participants across all four community engagement components. • Participants want greater educational choice, preferably in neighborhood schools, and not necessarily through more charter schools. • Participants see Aurora’s diversity as both a strength and a challenge. • Participants want a greater emphasis on meeting the needs of the whole child, e.g., mental health programs, health clinics, nutrition programs, after hours access to schools. • Participants want a greater emphasis on college and career preparedness through more Career and Technical Education, Advanced Placement, Concurrent Enrollment, and International Baccalaureate programs and greater coordination with local employers for internships and real-world experience. • Participants recognize the benefit that comes from strong district engagement with parents and the community. 30 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT – BIG IDEAS The big ideas are singular concepts that emerged from at least one source of community engagement feedback. These are not major themes and, in some cases, are duplicative of current APS practice. This is not an exhaustive list. • Eliminate grade level transitions • Competency-based grade levels • Small schools • Small class sizes • School-based decision-making • Change the school funding model • Year-round calendar • Community partnerships • Business Advisory Councils • Promote APS’ positive stories • Provide adult education classes • Make senior year different and relevant to career pathways • Full day prekindergarten 31 NATIONAL EDUCATION TRENDS RESEARCH The national education trends research served two purposes: 1) informed the What IF Task Force of what other districts are doing across the nation, and 2) explained how themes and big ideas from community engagement feedback might impact learning. The research included: • Career and Technical Education (CTE) • Centralized v. school-based decision-making • Managing complexities of school choice • School calendar • School funding • School grade configuration • School grade levels • School schedule • School size 32 TASK FORCES 2 Task Forces • The What IF Task Force was charged with developing the characteristics of each potential scenario to meet the needs of APS students and the Aurora community. • The What THEN Task Force was charged with developing the implementation responses to each scenario from the What IF Task Force. • Each was scheduled to meet once a month from August through December • Added 2 meetings to complete work 33 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS What IF Task Force What THEN Task Force Margee Cannon, Neighborhood Liaison Coordinator, City of Aurora Jessica Cuthbertson, Teacher and Parent, APS Amber Drevon, Parent and former Board of Education President, APS Karen Hancock, Planning Supervisor, Planning & Development Department, City of Aurora Josh Hensley, Planning Coordinator, APS Vanecia Kerr, Executive Director, College Track Colorado Miguel Lovato, Senior Grants Program Officer, Daniels Fund and APS Alumnus Robert McGranaghan, Director, CU Anschutz Medical Campus Community-Campus Partnership Tamara Mohamed, Director of Community Relations, Aurora Chamber of Commerce Omar Montgomery, President, Aurora Branch of the NAACP Skip Noe, Chief Financial Officer, Community College of Aurora and former Aurora City Manager Amy Schwartz, Executive Director, Build Strong Education Starla Sieveke-Pearson, Executive Director Curriculum and Instruction, APS Jocelyn Stephens, Executive Director of Education, Public Education and Business Coalition and APS Parent William Stuart, Former Deputy Superintendent, Parent and Alumnus, APS Linda Witulski, Member, Rotary Club of Aurora and former Principal, APS Greg Cazzell, Director of Security, APS Steve Clagg, Chief Information Officer, APS Brandon Eyre, Legal Counsel, APS Jennifer Gutierrez, Director of Exceptional Student Services, APS Karen Hancock, Planning Supervisor, Planning & Development Department, City of Aurora Josh Hensley, Planning Coordinator, APS Mackenzie Khan, Director of Charter Schools, Office of Autonomous Schools, APS Dianne Lewis, Communications Coordinator, APS DJ Loerzel, Director of Accountability and Research, APS Shawn Smith, Director of Transportation, APS Amy Spatz, Director of Construction Management and Support, APS Kathleen Shiverdecker, Executive Director of School Performance, APS Kristen Stueber, Director of Human Resources, APS Julia Teska, Budget Director, APS Lisa Toner, Principal, APS Bruce Wilcox, President, Aurora Education Association 34 TASK FORCES – WHAT IF TASK FORCE Meeting #1 • Purpose was to identify the drivers for possible scenarios for APS’ future • Examined and discussed Background Data Briefing • Brainstormed answers to community engagement questions 35 TASK FORCES WHAT IF TASK FORCE STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 36 TASK FORCES – WHAT THEN TASK FORCE Meeting #1 • Purpose was to identify scenario implementation factors • Curriculum and Instruction • Communications • Facilities • Funding • Human Capital • Parent and Community Involvement • Technology • Transportation • Safety and Security • Policy • Quality Control 37 TASK FORCES – WHAT IF TASK FORCE Meeting #2 • Purpose was to review and develop the preliminary scenario options • Examined National Education Trend Research 38 TASK FORCES – WHAT THEN TASK FORCE Meeting #2 • Purpose was to identify implementation responses for each preliminary scenario based on the implementation factors, e.g., curriculum and instruction, facilities, funding, etc. 39 TASK FORCES – WHAT IF TASK FORCE Meeting #3 • Primary purpose was to develop the scenario options • Organized scenario options into four dimensions to facilitate scenario option development and scenario composition • Analyzed scenario options in light of Community Engagement Summary • Developed scenario options in the Choice Philosophy and Leadership Structure dimensions 40 TASK FORCES – WHAT THEN TASK FORCE Meeting #3 • Primary purpose was to develop the implementation responses to the scenario options • Analyzed the implementation responses to scenario options in the Choice Philosophy and Leadership Structure dimensions 41 TASK FORCES – WHAT IF TASK FORCE Meetings #4 and #5 • Primary purpose of these meetings was to develop and finalize the scenario options. • Completed transformation of scenario options and dimensions 42 TASK FORCES – WHAT THEN TASK FORCE Meetings #4 and #5 • Primary purpose of these meetings was to develop and finalize the implementation responses to each of the scenario options. 43 TASK FORCES – JOINT TASK FORCE Meetings #6 and #7 • Purpose was to compose, finalize, and analyze the scenarios 44 CREATING PRELIMINARY SCENARIOS OPTIONS Community Engagement Themes Educational Choice Leverage Diversity Whole Child College and Career Parental and Community Engagement National Trends Research on Community Engagement Themes Community Engagement Big Ideas Eliminate Grade Level Transitions Competency-Based Grade Levels Small Schools School-Based Decision-Making National Trends Research on Community Engagement Big Ideas STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 45 PRELIMINARY SCENARIO OPTIONS Choice Philosophy Leadership Structure Educational Program Selection School Size and Configuration FINAL SCENARIO OPTIONS Educational Program Selection 2?51 "a @e Core Choice Philosophy Decision-Making Emphasis School Size and Configuration Grade Levels SCENARIO COMPOSITION • 5 Scenario Principles from community engagement themes 1. Providing educational choice 2. Leveraging international diversity 3. Enhancing ability to meet the needs of the whole child 4. Enhancing college and career preparedness 5. Fostering communities and neighborhoods 48 SCENARIO COMPOSITION • Three Core Components • Scenario Principle or Driver • District Structure • School Structure • Three Core Components drew from these three dimensions 49 SCENARIO COMPOSITION Narrative considerations draw from these two dimensions Decision-Making Emphasis Grade Levels 8 SCENARIO COMPOSITION Each Scenario has a summary capsule with a description of the scenario, a description of the implementation requirements, and analysis of the scenario’s pros and cons. Additional narrative and commentary provides additional detail and explanation. SCENARIO A – Aurora Scholar Principle: Status quo Description: APS continues its current programmatic path, which includes a variety of specialized offerings such as project-based learning, International Baccalaureate, International Leadership, health sciences, etc. available at different schools around the district, although not in all schools. APS is primarily organized around neighborhood schools with students primarily attending the school located within their assigned geographic attendance area. APS serves as a charter authorizer, by reviewing and deciding on charter applications and renewals and ensuring they meet state and federal requirements. Students can choose to attend any school with available capacity, but APS does not provide transportation . APS has small elementary schools and large high schools with a mix of P-5/6-8/9-12 and P-8/9-12 grade configurations. Implementation Requirements In areas of declining or shifting enrollment, need to close and/or consolidate schools, reassign staff, reconfigure transportation routes, and redraw attendance boundaries. Need guidelines for when closure, consolidation and repurposing are triggered and protocols for community engagement for these activities. Need to determine whether to continue with the P-8 model. In areas of increasing enrollment, need to identify funding resources for constructing new buildings that are not currently included in the 2016 Bond. Analysis Pros: Maintains a district and school structure familiar to and predictable for the Aurora community. Small, neighborhood elementary or P-8 schools allow the elementary schools to serve as the community hubs community engagement said Aurora wants. P-8 schools eliminate a grade level transition, which can help student achievement1. The enrollment of a large high school provides the number of students needed to support co-curricular opportunities like athletics and the performing arts and a variety of academic programming. Cons: Will need to close/consolidate schools and redraw attendance boundaries. Closing schools will disrupt communities, and reduce in convenience of proximity. Maintains inequities in what programs students have access to at their neighborhood school. Financially difficult to offer students all the same programs, at the same scale, in every school. Does not include a strategy or approach to working with charter schools. District run schools will likely continue to see a decline in enrollment as charter schools fill the demand for choice and provide options closer in proximity for some families May not explicitly address major themes from the community engagement2: leveraging the diversity in Aurora, enhanced programs to support the needs of the whole child, and expanded career and college preparedness opportunities. 51 DRAFT SCENARIOS A B C D E F Continue Status Quo Enhance College and Career Connection Foster Neighborhoods and Communities Meet Needs of Whole Child Meet Needs of Whole Child Meet Needs of Whole Child 52 FINAL SCENARIOS Scenario A B C D E Title Aurora Scholar Independent and Informed Community Partner Whole Child Global Citizen Principle Status Quo College and Career Neighborhoods and Communities Whole Child International Community Program District School 53 SCENARIO A – AURORA SCHOLAR Symbol Principle Description Status quo APS continues its current programmatic path, which includes specialized programmatic offerings such as project-based learning, International Baccalaureate, International Leadership, health sciences, etc. available at different schools around the district, although not in all schools. APS is primarily organized around neighborhood schools with students primarily attending the school located within their assigned geographic attendance area. APS serves as a charter authorizer, by reviewing and deciding on charter applications and ensuring they meet state and federal requirements. APS has small elementary schools and large high schools with a mix of P-5/6-8/9-12 and P-8/9-12 grade configurations. 54 SCENARIO A – AURORA SCHOLAR Implementation Requirements • Need to close and/or consolidate schools in shorter term • Need to build new schools in longer term in areas of growing enrollment • Need to reassign staff • Need to reconfigure transportation routes • Need to redraw attendance boundaries • Need guidelines for closure/consolidation/repurposing and protocols for community engagement STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 55 SCENARIO A – AURORA SCHOLAR • • • • Pros Maintains a familiar district and school structure Small neighborhood elementary schools serve as community hubs P-8 schools eliminate a grade level transition Large high schools provide critical mass of students for programs • • • • Cons Will need to close schools and redraw attendance boundaries Financially difficult to offer same programs in every school No charter strategy May not explicitly address major community engagement themes STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 56 SCENARIO B – INDEPENDENT AND INFORMED Symbol Principle Description Enhancing college and career preparedness Builds on current district programming. Makes enhancing and expanding college and career preparedness programming the top priority through greater access, coordination, and partnerships. Exploration in elementary school. Electives in middle school. Real world experience and college credit in high school lead to senior year serving as a transition to student’s next phase of life. District provides greater educational program choices at APS-operated schools. Greater access to Career and Technical Education programs could be regionally based. District does not necessarily compete directly with charters where charter programs are effective, but district does not actively engage charter schools as a program delivery partner. District has small elementary schools and large high schools. Housing smaller learning communities within large secondary school buildings provides small learning environments to support students and economies of scale 57 SCENARIO B – INDEPENDENT AND INFORMED Implementation Requirements • Identify new programs • Align curriculum across all grade levels • Develop policies for flexibility • Make internships meaningful to employers • Could repurpose schools to house new programs within choice model • May need to reassign staff, reconfigure transportation routes, redraw attendance boundaries • Establish policies for school-within-a-school model STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 58 SCENARIO B – INDEPENDENT AND INFORMED • • • • Pros Greater opportunities for exploration of multiple career pathways District retains control over programs Leverages advantages of small learning environments Maintains economies of scale from large school buildings • • • • Cons May need to redraw attendance boundaries Additional CTE facilities will be expensive Lack of transportation will reduce access to programs Could reduce schools’ role as community centers STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 59 SCENARIO C – COMMUNITY PARTNER Symbol Principle Description Fostering neighborhoods and communities Expands current wrap-around services through greater access, coordination, and partnerships to meet needs of whole child. Significant emphasis on addressing mental health. Schools are open for after school use and have space available for community partners to provide services. Students primarily attend the school within their assigned attendance boundary area or a charter school within their neighborhood. Building size and grade level configuration are flexible and based the needs of a particular community or region in the district. 60 SCENARIO C – COMMUNITY PARTNER Implementation Requirements • Greater coordination of wrap-around services internally and externally • Schools designed for community services and after hours use • Close/consolidate schools and redraw attendance boundaries • Charter school plan STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 61 SCENARIO C – COMMUNITY PARTNER • • • • Pros Increasing wrap-around services supports greater academic achievement Neighborhood schools supports sense of community Consistent experience for transient students Proactive approach to charter school relationship Cons • Will need to close schools and redraw attendance boundaries • Fewer program choices at each neighborhood school • Less diverse schools STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL 62 SCENARIO D – WHOLE CHILD Symbol Principle Description Enhancing the ability to meet the needs of the whole child Expands current wrap-around services through greater access, coordination, and partnerships with community organizations. Schools are open after hours and have space available for partners to provide services. District provides greater educational program choices at APS-operated schools. The emphasis is on greater choice throughout the district, but neighborhood schools still form foundation of district organizational philosophy. Flexible school size and configuration to meet the needs of a particular community or region in the district. District should rethink the traditional school structure and perhaps utilize the school-within-a-school model, particularly at the middle and high school level to ensure a greater connection between the school and each student. 63 SCENARIO D – WHOLE CHILD Implementation Requirements • Greater coordination of services, internal and external • Identify new programs community desires • Hire staff to teach, administer, and coordinate new programs • Could repurpose schools to house new programs • Will need to redraw attendance boundaries, reassign staff, and reconfigure transportation routes • Need policy for school size and configuration 64 SCENARIO D – WHOLE CHILD • • • • Pros Enables greater academic achievement Encourages diversity within schools Allows flexibility for building size and configuration to meet each community’s unique needs Satellite transportation would increase program access Cons • Will likely need to redraw attendance boundaries • Could reduce schools’ role as community centers • Lack of building and program consistency could negatively impact transient students and lead to inequity 65 SCENARIO E – GLOBAL CITIZEN Symbol Principle Description Leveraging strengths and building support for an international community Recognizes the strengths and assets of international students and families. Enhances existing language acquisition programs with greater access, coordination, and community partnerships to leverage the strengths and assets of international students and families that give Aurora its international diversity. Multi-language instruction is available for all students. Expand and leverage current services through greater access, coordination, and partnerships to meet the needs of the whole child. District organizational philosophy is neighborhood schools. APS remains the charter school authorizer and strategically engages charter schools as a program delivery partner. Flexible school size and configuration based on the needs of a particular community or region in the district. 66 SCENARIO E – GLOBAL CITIZEN Implementation Requirements • Greater coordination of services, internally and externally • Recruit professional staff with international and multilanguage backgrounds • Train staff to identify and meet unique needs • Will need to close schools, reassign staff, redraw attendance boundaries, and reconfigure transportation routes 67 SCENARIO E – GLOBAL CITIZEN • • • • • Pros Enables greater academic achievement Schools serve as centers of community Schools are accessible Flexible building solutions Supports both immigrant and native populations Cons • Will need to close schools and redraw attendance boundaries • Challenges in recruiting and retaining staff for language instruction • Expanding mental and physical health services has budgetary considerations 68 SCENARIO ANALYSIS • Joint Task Force analyzed scenarios to provide APS Board of Education with starting point for its analysis • Scenarios that are likely to meet a specified criterion receive an “X” 69 SCENARIO ANALYSIS # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 • • • • • Scenario Criteria Supports strong student achievement Supports an equitable learning environment for all students Supports greater school choice for families Supports the diversity in the Aurora community Supports schools as center of neighborhoods Supports the needs of the whole child Supports greater college and career preparedness APS can adapt to changes in enrollment in the shorter term APS can execute this scenario within existing staff resources in the shorter term APS can execute this scenario in existing facilities in the shorter term APS can execute this scenario within existing financial resources in the shorter term APS can execute this scenario with existing transportation resources in the shorter term APS can adapt to changes in Aurora community in the longer term APS can adapt to changes in student needs in the longer term Requires a significant paradigm shift from the “status quo” A X B X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X C X X X X X X D X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X E X X X X X X X X X X X X Criteria 1-2 speak to the educational impact of the scenario. Criteria 3-7 ask how likely the scenario supports the community engagement major themes Criteria 8-12 address implementation of the scenario in the shorter term within existing resources Criteria 13-14 look toward implementation over the longer term Criterion 15 captures the extent of departure from what APS does currently. For example, “It is more likely than not that Scenario E supports strong student achievement.” 70 NEXT STEPS • Final Blueprint APS Phase 1 Final Report (~200 pages) available January  Includes: Scenarios, APS Background Briefing, National Trends and Research Brief, Community Engagement Brief, Scenario Options Considered • Direction from Board on Phase 2 Community Engagement • Recommended Engagement Opportunities: • Community Forums • Online Survey • Blueprint in a Box Presentation for Board to present to community groups • Direction from Board of Education on Timeline for further discussions about Blueprint APS 71 CONSULTING GROUP