My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 06:090A
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2006
>
SR 06:090A
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/16/2006 1:53:08 PM
Creation date
3/16/2006 1:51:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
3/20/2006
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 06:090A
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />ProiectEd Enrollments from 2005 to 2015 <br /> <br />PJeasanton Unified School District <br /> <br />The gap between the resident populations at the high schools widens in the projections, especially <br />with a significant jump (by 138) in the Amador Valley population in 2006, but the net adjustments may <br />again be the bigger factor. Amador Valley currently has a net reduction by 188 and Foothill has a net <br />increase of 112 compared to the resident totals.' Those adjustments reduce the differences from <br />greater than 400 resident students to only 128 in actual attendance. Keeping the enrollments <br />relatively balanced between these two schools, however, will require either increasing those <br />adjustment amounts and/or revising the attendance boundaries, because the resident gap will be <br />around 500 students from 2006 to 2009. <br /> <br />For those readers looking for additional information on these net adjustments, the Appendix A2 and <br />A3 tables provide some by-grade figures for each school. This includes both the actual amounts in <br />October 2005 and what the enrollments could be next fall if the district allowed the current levels of <br />intra- and Inter-district attendance to continue at each schoolS These are simply theoretical numbers <br />that have been provided to help the district in determining what changes to those levels may be <br />warranted. The actual levels that will be permitted in 2006-07 will, of course, be driven by capacity <br />constraints, especially for class size reduction, and other district decisions, such as for staffing. <br /> <br />Underlvlna Factors to the Proiectlons: Trends In Existlna Houslna <br /> <br />There are three key components underlying the projections: (1) student population trends between <br />the grades in existing housing, (2) the likeiy evolution of the pending kindergarten amounts in each <br />neighborhood and (3) students from new dwellings. The subsections below (with italicized headers) <br />discuss our trend findings within the existing homes. The likely enrollment impacts of new residences <br />are explained later in the main (bold header) section that starts on page 12. <br /> <br />Recent Grade-to-Grade Advancement (Cohort Surviva/J Rates in Existina Housina <br /> <br />As was noted in our past reports, grade-to-grade advancement rates are calculations of the net change <br />in the number of students in each grade as they "graduate" into the next grade in the next school year. <br />These rates are most appiicable to an accurate forecast when they are determined specifically for <br />students from existing housing. For example, if there had been a total of 100 students in kindergarten <br />last year and 105 students in first grade this year from the same group of homes, that would be a 5% <br />(1.05) net advancement rate gain. <br /> <br />Usually such rates are averaged over the last several years within each single-grade advancement to <br />avoid giving too much influence to nuances that may have occurred in anyone year. For this study, we <br />have determined the weighted average rates over the last five years from all "existing" (i.e. built before <br />fall 2000) neighborhoods, both district-wide (see bottom row of Table 3 on page 8) and by various <br />housing type and price-range categories (as is shown in Appendix B). <br /> <br />The recent advancement rates from all established district residences have significant shifts for three <br />grades In particular: first, ninth and twelfth. The 1.07 (a 7% rise) entering first grade is presumably due <br /> <br />, These two amounts do not add up to zero because they include both losses to Village School and gains from <br />incoming inter-district attendance. Outgoing Inter-district attendance and Horizon students, however, are <br />excluded from these amounts. <br /> <br />e The net inter~ and intra-district adjustments have been advanced by one grade for next fall's estimates at each <br />school, with minute revisions where necessary to correlate with the aggregate projections In each grade. <br /> <br />Enrollment Pro/ection Consultants <br /> <br />Pap,:- - <br /> <br />1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.