3. STUDENT REASSIGNMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
Media Center, Nash Central High School
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 - 6:00 pm
 Call to Order……………………………………………………………………Victor Ward
 Roll Call………………………………………………………………………..Carina Bryant
 Approval of Minutes from the May 29, 2012 Meeting
 Committee Operating Procedure
 Scenario Review and Revision………………………………Mike Miller, OREd
 Report to School Board 6/25/12
 Questions?
Next Meeting
Scenario Review and Revision (continued)
Monday, June 25, 2012
4:00 pm
3

4. Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools

5. Jan-Aug 2012 Aug - 2012 Aug – Dec 2012 August 2013
Committee Committee Public Input/ Community
Deliberations/ Recommendations Engagement Implementation
Monthly Reports to Presented to the
the School Board School Board Board of Education
Approval
5

6. Board of Public Engagement
Education
Committee Chairs
Technical Support
Community
Feedback Committee
ORED
Staff 6

7. Contiguous boundaries:
 Attempt to maintain contiguous school boundaries without using
satellite attendance areas.
Respect neighborhoods:
 Avoid dividing easily recognized “neighborhoods” or identified
“developments” or “sub- divisions” unless it is necessary to meet other
guidelines. Whenever possible and practical use major highways,
railroads, rivers, and streams as natural boundaries.
Proximity to schools:
 While it is recognized that all students cannot be assigned to their closest
school, consider students proximity to other schools when creating
school boundaries.
7

8. Modify feeder systems:
 In order to maximize facility use and establish reasonable numbers of students at each
site, consider the use of 6 middle school feeder systems instead of 5. This would
allow smaller, more instructionally suited middle schools and less dependence on
mobile classrooms.
Stay within enrollment capacities:
 Unless it is likely that a school enrollment will be declining, assign students to the
four high schools in a way that their enrollments are under established capacities.
Consider anticipated growth:
 Enrollment growth patterns should be taken into consideration, where feasible, to
ensure that anticipated growth will not adversely impact one school significantly
more than the others.
Enrollment balance:
 In keeping with the intent of SB612, attempt to balance the percentage of academic
and economic populations at each middle and high school.
8

9.  February 13 – Understanding the Optimization Process
 March 26 – Out of Capacity table and Scenario Data
 April 30 – Scenario Review and Revision
 May 29 – Scenario Review and Revision (cont.)
 June 12 – Scenario Review and Revision (cont.)
 June 25 – Final Scenario Presentation
9

10.  Transparent
 Lines of Communications
 Committee Meetings
 Open to the public
 Website
 Information posted immediately after each meeting
 E-mail/ Phone Line
 An e-mail address to answer questions/ receive feedback etc has
been established to ensure seamless communication and to
make all information readily available to the public.
 A phone line has been established for those with limited or no
internet access to provide feedback to the committee.

11. Mike Miller, OREd
11

12.  Revisiting Optimal HS Scenario
 Scenario HS 02
 Lessen reassignment impact
 Consider student balance metrics
 Guidance from BoE on Middle School feeders
 Consider feeder patterns for 5 MS vs. 6 MS
 Scenarios ready for June 25 meeting
12

13. Factors to Consider:
 Reassignment impact
 Student balance metrics
 Provide relief for Southern Nash HS
 Fill Rocky Mount HS
 Proximity
 System-wide HS utilization = 100%
13

14. Assignment Change Considerations:
 Current assignment
 Balance metrics
 Contiguity
 Transportation issues
 Natural/man-made barriers
 Capacity
14

15. 9-12 Student Count
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash
CURRENT 1232 1204 1130 1232
IMPACT + METRICS 1130 1233 1393 1042
(See data tables in handout.)

16. Statistics based on residence (2011 geocode).
Does not measure impact of special
programs such as IB.
Utilization
140%
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash
CURRENT 107% 105% 81% 115%
IMPACT + METRICS 98% 107% 100% 98%
Minority %
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash
CURRENT 67% 69% 84% 51%
IMPACT + METRICS 66% 59% 87% 53%

17. Statistics based on residence (2011 geocode).
Does not measure impact of special
programs such as IB.
Free/Reduced Lunch %
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash
CURRENT 67% 65% 72% 64%
IMPACT + METRICS 65% 57% 76% 67%
Academic Proficiency %
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash
CURRENT 60% 61% 53% 63%
IMPACT + METRICS 57% 69% 52% 62%

18.  Maximum Utilization: 107% (NNHS, currently 105%)
 Minimum Utilization: 98%
 Total Grade 9-12 students reassigned: 745

19. CURRENT HIGH SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL SCENARIO HS 02 – REV. 1
19

20. 6-8 MS
High School Middle School Utilization
count capacity
Northern Red Oak 885 850 104% (currently 113%)
Central Central 907 670 135% (currently 90%)
Parker, Edwards,
Rocky Mount 1066 2134 50% (currently 54%) *
NEW *
Southern Southern 946 850 111% (currently 127%)
* RM MS calculations include current RMHS facility, capacity = 750

21.  Optimal High Scenario HS 02
 Lessen reassignment impact
 Consider student balance metrics
 Scenario HS 02 - Revision 1
 Scenario data + map
 Total Grade 9-12 students reassigned: 745
 Middle Schools: Clean Feeders
 Severe utilization imbalance between Central MS and
Rocky Mount area MS
21

22.  July, August Meeting Dates
 Explore Middle School Feeder Options
22

23. February 13 – (4:00-5:30)*
March 26 (6:00)
April 30 (6:00)
May 29 (6:00)
June 12 (6:00)
Tuesday June 25 (4:00–5:30)*
July/August - TBD

24. QUESTIONS