school district no. 42 considering school closure riverside elementary school october 6, 2009

School District No. 42

Considering School Closure

Riverside Elementary SchoolOctober 6, 2009


Considering School ClosureOctober, 2009

Introductions



Background

2006-07 - Cornerstone Report recommends school closures

Fall, 2007 - Three schools considered for school closure. Decision made to not close schools at that time

Spring, 2009 - Riverside and Mount Crescent considered for closure. First meetings with parents.

Fall, 2009 - Consultation process continues



Purpose and Process

We will present the district staff perspective and share with you the many pieces that go into consideration for school closure

School closure is never tied to just one thing; many factors need to be considered together

We will give you all the information we have and try to bring an understanding of why we are here

At the end of the presentation you will have an opportunity to provide further input and ask questions that you feel have not been addressed in the presentation



What has changed since Spring 2009

Full-day kindergarten announced

Opening of new bridges

Enrolment continues to decline

Increased financial pressure on all school districts



Major issues raised in Spring 2009

Senior staff have taken all questions asked in the spring and incorporated them into the major categories that form the basis of this presentation:

1. Enrolment numbers

2. Facilities

3. Financial impact

4. Educational opportunities



1. District/School enrolment Long range projections show a continuing downward

trend

Large numbers of Grade 12 students are not being replaced by incoming Kindergarten students

Declining school enrolment

Capacity compared to utilization across the district



District enrolmentProjection Report for Public School Headcount Enrolments 2008/09

Ministry of Education enrolment projections – all grades

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

14,349 14,121 13,918 13,770 13,679 13,658 13,682 13,763 13,856 14,021

Ministry of Education enrolment projections – elementary

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

7,930 7,851 7,833 7,822 7,900 8,027 8,115 8,197 8,338 8,487

2009 District enrolment K-12 (Sept. 30/09)

K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1550 1551

1500 1492

1450 1428

1400

1350

1300

1250 1221 1223

1200

1150

1100 1060 1061

1050

1000 981 969 990 958 977 1002

950

900

981 969 990 958 977 1002 1060 1061 1221 1223 1428 1492 1551

Ministry of Education enrolment projections

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

126 114 103 101 102 105 107 106 108 111 111 112

Enrolment by year

2005-2006 379

2006-2007 352

2007-2008 300

2008-2009 201

2009-2010 99

Riverside enrolment numbers (Sept 30/09)

2009 Enrolment by grade

K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total

7 15 12 7 9 10 23 16 99

Capacity 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 %

Highland Park 340 366 345 326 305 90%

Pitt Meadows 471 495 511 532 563 120%

Davie Jones 340 254 252 272 288 85%

Edith MacDermott 387 349 353 361 344 89%

Total 1538 1500 98%

Difference between Capacity and utilization +38

Analyzing Capacity and Utilization: West

Capacity 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 %

Albion 457 519 530 577 586 128%

Alexander Rob. 518 573 575 545 555 107%

Blue Mountain 317 202 171 170 159 50%

Kanaka Creek 573 584 566 553 578 100%

Webster’s Corner 270 135 122 115 130 48%

Whonnock 270 228 212 237 230 85%

Total 2405 2238 93%

Difference between capacity and utilization +167

Analyzing Capacity and Utilization: East

Capacity 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 %

Fairview 495 390 366 319 283 57%

Riverside 471 352 300 201 99 21%

Hammond 518 362 371 401 444 86%

Maple Ridge 518 406 393 428 426 82%

Glenwood 410 192 184 171 168 41%

Laity View 696 565 570 581 600 86%

Alouette 495 404 382 381 376 76%

Mount Crescent 401 209 212 199 166 41%

Eric Langton 471 338 312 332 350 74%

Harry Hooge 471 387 379 360 354 75%

Yennadon 602 456 469 505 536 89%

Golden Ears 564 495 491 463 455 81%

Total 6112 4257 70%

Difference between capacity and utilization +1855

Analyzing Capacity and Utilization: Centre

2. Facilities Age and expected lifespan

Construction quality

Access



3. Financial ImplicationsEstimated year by year savings: $380,000

Principal salary and benefits

Clerical salary and benefits (full-time)

Custodial salary and benefits

Noon hour supervisors

Instructional supplies

Heat and light

Minor maintenance



4.Educational OpportunitiesSome things we have heard from people about the benefits of small schools:

Fewer classes at each grade level

Continuity with same teacher year to year

Less students at each grade level and in school

Access to communal space – gym, library

Cohesiveness of staff and parents



4.Educational OpportunitiesBut what happens when they get really small…

Fewer classes at each grade level

Small peer groups

Less staff/parents to “spread out” tasks

Less time in the building by itinerant staff

Limited resources

Increased costs



Next Steps

Reflect on tonight’s proceedings

Review all input received

Provide a recommendation to the Board on December 9, 2009



Future considerations if a decision is made to close a school

Development of a transition plan for an orderly and safe accommodation/placement of students

Consider secondary uses





Please provide further input and ask questions that you feel have not been addressed in the presentation



Thank you

school district no. 42 considering school closure riverside elementary school october 6, 2009

Documents

district school district

school closureoctober

presentation school

introductions school

school closuresfall

school closureschool

introductionsschool

district staff perspective