Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 minutes ago, Texas Jeff said:

I was surprised, looking at the maps, that more of Bryker Woods was not absorbed into Casis.

The married student housing along Lake Austin Blvd has historically been part to Mathews, to combine it with the married student housing east of Mopac.  In the proposed maps, the housing along LAB is now assigned to Casis and the part east of Mopac is still Mathews.  Which splits that community.  However, UT has started to move this housing to east campus near Disch-Falk, and those kids will probably end up at Campbell long term.

I *think* there is some room at Casis to put Bryker Woods kids at Casis.  I am surprised they didn't keep the married students together at Mathews and move the Bryker Woods kids to Casis.  I suspect the BW families would have preferred Casis to Mathews, but that is just my guess.

Also, Mathews 6th grade is proposed to end.  I think BW lost their 6th a few years ago.  Honestly getting rid of 6th in the Austin High / O. Henry vertical will help O. Henry long term.

It’s more of a cultural thing. BW parents tend to like a smaller, laid back school without the hyper intense parent culture. I think they would get more pushback if Casis was the plan. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

It’s more of a cultural thing. BW parents tend to like a smaller, laid back school without the hyper intense parent culture. I think they would get more pushback if Casis was the plan. 

Absolutely wrong. The reason BW isn't rezoned to Casis is because the Pemberton parents cut a deal with Lynn Boswell for them to stay at Casis. Spare me the "cultural" fit. That's horse shit.

Edit to add: BW kids and families are friends with Casis kids and families through all kinds of activities. We all know each other and the parent culture. 

Edited by Cap33
Posted
On 10/3/2025 at 5:58 PM, gsoda3 said:

Woof Mueller kids gonna be zoned to Northeast

I’m somewhat chuckling about this. 10 years ago we were misled by the developers that all of Mueller was zoned to Maplewood elementary and McCallum hs. We figured out that we were just east of a dividing line after plunking down a big deposit so we just rolled with it. There was such hypocrisy of people preaching to “east Muellerites” to happily send their kids to Blanton and Reagan/NE, while being uppity about their kids’ schools (or if they had money, sending their kids to private schools). Maplewood (and maybe McCallum) were too full to accept transfers so we were stuck. We ended up bailing to the burbs when our kids started school. Now the west muellerites can practice what they preached.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
7 hours ago, Cap33 said:

Absolutely wrong. The reason BW isn't rezoned to Casis is because the Pemberton parents cut a deal with Lynn Boswell for them to stay at Casis. Spare me the "cultural" fit. That's horse shit.

Edit to add: BW kids and families are friends with Casis kids and families through all kinds of activities. We all know each other and the parent culture. 

I’m sure that Boswell did cut a deal for Pemberton parents to stay there. It’s very on brand for her and has nothing to do with my point. And yes, I know the BW and  Casis parents are very connected, they basically share a neighborhood.

But I stand by my statement about most BW parents wanting to be a part of a smaller, more relaxed school than Casis. I have had dozens, if not hundreds of direct conversations with BW families about this exact topic when I was an AISD employee very close to this situation. Not going to say anymore about BW on here because I’ll dox myself and don’t really have any interest in doing so.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)

I was curious to know the collective impact of these consolidations and the recent bond programs on the schools of East Austin.  So I looked it up.
I am defining "East Austin" here as north of the river and east of 35.
I did not count LASA as an East Austin school since it's a magnet.

Here's what it would look like after the 2022 bond program is complete and if these consolidations go ahead as proposed:

Elementaries:

* 6 will be brand new as part of the 2017/2022 bonds (Harris, Andrews, Norman-Sims, Govalle, Sanchez, Pecan Springs)
* 2 have been built since 2000 (Overton, Pickle)
* 5 was built prior to 2000 (Blanton, Ortega, Zavala, Blackshear, Campbell)

Middle Schools:

* 2 will be brand new as part of the 2017/2022 bonds (Sadler Means, Marshall)
* 1 has been built since 2000 (Gus Garcia)
* 1 was built prior to 2000 (Kealing)

High Schools:

* 1 is brand new as part of the 2017 bond (Eastside)
* 2 others (Northeast, LBJ) received some money in 2017 and a large investment in 2022, with more work still to be done.

The three high schools received a total of $347 million in bond money in 2017 and 2022 combined.  Today, they collectively enroll about the same number of students as Bowie.


 

Edited by Texas Jeff
Posted
9 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

But I stand by my statement about most BW parents wanting to be a part of a smaller, more relaxed school than Casis. I have had dozens, if not hundreds of direct conversations with BW families about this exact topic when I was an AISD employee very close to this situation.

And in the context of BW vs. Casis, I'm sure you did hear that. But the choice between Casis and driving across town to Mathews that has over 50% transfers, and thus a weak tie to its own neighborhood, I think the answer is much different. 

Posted
13 hours ago, Cap33 said:

And in the context of BW vs. Casis, I'm sure you did hear that. But the choice between Casis and driving across town to Mathews that has over 50% transfers, and thus a weak tie to its own neighborhood, I think the answer is much different. 

Mathews campus is terrible. Not a blade of grass anywhere on that block. 

  • Like 1
Posted
The AISD trustee meeting is today ? Does anybody have an update on that meeting ?

The board information session is Thursday Oct 9 at 6pm. You can attend in person or watch it on YouTube.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Will this first meeting involve anything beyond a regurgitation of what was released on Friday?  Isn't this just the presentation of the plan to the board?  Will they have community speakers to liven things up with some good old-fashioned mindless ranting?

I want to fast forward to the board approving whatever they're going to do, so we can decide what to do with our kids.  I don't think anything is going to look substantively different than the plan they've had cooked up for well over a year now, regardless of the mandatory dog and pony show they have been putting on to feign giving a crap about community input.   I've got zero interest in the mud-slinging and cat-clawing that will go on between now and then.  It will be the same old pile of nonsense, with a mix of race-baiting, misdirected anger, false entitlement, and virtue signalling from middle-aged white women, all while any sensible commentary is wholly lost in the wash.

Posted
34 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

It will be the same old pile of nonsense, with a mix of race-baiting, misdirected anger, false entitlement, and virtue signalling from middle-aged white women, all while any sensible commentary is wholly lost in the wash.

I’m here for it!

  • Like 2
Posted

I attended a neighborhood meeting with our trustee and board president Lynn Boswell. She said the administration staff created the plan and gave it to the trustees 24 hours before it became public, so she and the other board members are digesting it like we are. Not sure I fully believe that, but whatever. She and other trustees are questioning many of the recommendations pertaining to the new boundaries, and it sounds like they are already going back to staff to make changes. However, she had no answers to hard questions about the rubric and the data that are clearly flawed when presented with specific examples of incorrect data and assumptions staff made. She just kept saying they were good questions and she'll have to look at the data that she says she doesn't have access to (although it's all there on the AISD website). She also had no answer to questions about whether school closures would actually save any money, or how the closures will fend off a state takeover. Several comments about how the state keeps moving the goalposts on the grading criteria but no real answers.

She has her talking points down pat, as I suspect all the trustees do, but the substance is lacking. I don't expect the proposal w/r/t the closures will change. They are getting called out for forming the list despite the data, but it's not going to change their plan. Oh, and if anyone is counting, four of the 11 failing schools survived the closure list. She outright said that they need higher performing kids to go to their zoned crappy school to raise that school's grade to passing. That's the big plan.

Can't wait for Matias to start making his in-person rounds. That will be a shit show.

Posted
14 hours ago, Cap33 said:

I attended a neighborhood meeting with our trustee and board president Lynn Boswell. She said the administration staff created the plan and gave it to the trustees 24 hours before it became public, so she and the other board members are digesting it like we are. Not sure I fully believe that, but whatever. She and other trustees are questioning many of the recommendations pertaining to the new boundaries, and it sounds like they are already going back to staff to make changes. However, she had no answers to hard questions about the rubric and the data that are clearly flawed when presented with specific examples of incorrect data and assumptions staff made. She just kept saying they were good questions and she'll have to look at the data that she says she doesn't have access to (although it's all there on the AISD website). She also had no answer to questions about whether school closures would actually save any money, or how the closures will fend off a state takeover. Several comments about how the state keeps moving the goalposts on the grading criteria but no real answers.

She has her talking points down pat, as I suspect all the trustees do, but the substance is lacking. I don't expect the proposal w/r/t the closures will change. They are getting called out for forming the list despite the data, but it's not going to change their plan. Oh, and if anyone is counting, four of the 11 failing schools survived the closure list. She outright said that they need higher performing kids to go to their zoned crappy school to raise that school's grade to passing. That's the big plan.

Can't wait for Matias to start making his in-person rounds. That will be a shit show.

 

I'm not sure how anyone can believe that the rubric they put together has anything to do with the decision making.  Any pretense along those lines should be dropped, and any arguments made trying to use the rubric data as a baseline will not work. They made it clear, in writing, when they released the rubric data that it was not dispositive and their decisions would consider other factors. Just glancing through that report was enough to know it was nonsense anyway.  Whatever went down behind the scenes to reach where we're at doesn't really matter as we'll never know for sure, but the rubric, along with any public input they claim to welcome, is nothing but gladhanding. The only thing we know for certain, and it has been the case for decades, is that educating students does not even crack the top ten priorities for district leadership (or state leadership for that matter).  It's shameful, but it's been that way for a very long time.

Matias is in over his head more than perhaps any public figure I've ever seen.  Part of me sympathizes with his situation, as he isn't the one who created this mess, although he has had his hands on making it worse for a long time now, predating his interim and formal role as supertindent.  However, his knee jerk response to everything is to lie, lie, lie, and that's where he loses any of my respect.  He lies even when he doesn't have to, as it's just his default response when he feels pressured.  This school district is in really sad shape, and he's representative of it. Incompetence from the top down. I was at the meeting at Lamar this past spring when they tried to ramrod their hamfisted plan to dump Dobie kids into the already overcrowded (and dilapidated) Lamar building.  Segura lied every time he opened his mouth, and he received a farily nasty response from the parents and teachers on hand, because even though he lies all the time he's not good at it.  He'll get more of the same at his appeerances now.  He's not a good liar, nor is he quick on his feet, but he is really good at not letting angry people who call him out for the stupid things he says bother him.  Water off a duck's back.  It would almost be impressive if it weren't so pathetic.  One of my favorites lies he tells is when he mentions how long he has been superintendent.  He always leaves out the year and half when he was interim superintendent because he didn't have the necessary qualifications to be a superintendent yet. He does it in an attempt to shift blame to past leadership, even for things that happened on his watch.   He's slimy as fuck.  He'll probably be POTUS someday.

Consolidation has to happen.  The economics deem it so.  Schools have to close.  This district is an abject failure from top to bottom, and all anyone in leadership seems capable of doing is deflecting blame.  But this plan is just another form of busing, which has been attempted a number of times in this district in an attempt to blend test scores and dodge the state.  They tried hard to push busing through when Cruz was superintendent, and even Elizalde made references to it in her short stint.  I was at a meeting at Hill Elementary about a plan to start busing kids ~2018 where a member of Cruz' staff referred to concerned parents as "rich white racists".  This wasn't an aside, but over a microphone while addressing the crowd.  The pathetic part about that comment, aside from the base vitriol of it, is that the plan to bus kids had nothing to do with inclusivitiy, equity, or anything else that most Austin parents would support.  It was about blending test scores and protecting the disctrict leadership.  That's it.  But that fucker was more than happy to play the race card when people called them out for their obvious bullshit.  The only answer they've ever come up with to their failure to educate kids in socioeconomically depressed areas is to blend kids together to fudge the state requireements for test scores.  It has nothing to do with finding a way to better educate those kids who are falling behind.  They don't give two shits about those kids.  They actually believe that hiding those kids amongst other students who perform better is some kind of solution.  The same kids will fail.  But the numbers will look better.  Fuck these people.  They are the ones responsilbe for failing the kids on the east side of town, but when faced with that fact they do their best to pin east and west against one another.

Property values are going to take a hit.   Families will continue fleeing the city.  Nothing about this is unique to Austin.  It's happened in every large city in America.  It sucks for those with kids in the sytem now, as they've already suffered through the terrible handling of the pandemic, and will now face their kids dealing with a TEA takeover for high school.  

  • Like 1
Posted

I mean, the district wouldn't be in these straits if they weren't losing $800m yo recapture. I'll bring the link later but I read that austin provides 20% of all recapture for the state.

I'm not always a fan of how the district conducts its business, nor really even often, but they are trying to win a one on one pot with a 7-2. The state has set aisd up for failure

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
22 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

I mean, the district wouldn't be in these straits if they weren't losing $800m yo recapture. I'll bring the link later but I read that austin provides 20% of all recapture for the state.

I'm not always a fan of how the district conducts its business, nor really even often, but they are trying to win a one on one pot with a 7-2. The state has set aisd up for failure

Completely agree.  The way we finance education is insane.  The district's shitty leadership for decades is every bit as much to blame as the state, though, in my opinion.  They have been put in a tough spot, but have failed to deal with it in even a marginally professional manner.  Now the reckoning for decades of inaction is here, and current students and families will pay for it.  The district admin should not get a pass for their failures just because the state shares the blame.  

  • Like 1
Posted

Our kids attend one of the DL schools that will be closing. Assuming the admin from our school and teachers go to the merged school, most parents plan to follow.  
 

I still think our family will be moving sooner rather than later. We may end up in an acceptable situation next year but the long term outlook is just terrible with the funding situation.  My mom always said a society that fails to prioritize its children will fail. I’m sad and frustrated my home is now one of them. 

  • Like 3
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
22 hours ago, Cap33 said:

She said the administration staff created the plan and gave it to the trustees 24 hours before it became public, so she and the other board members are digesting it like we are. Not sure I fully believe that, but whatever.

It's believable

Posted

Here's links to the board information session.  There are two videos, evidently there were technical problems at the end of the first one and they broke it into two chunks:

Public comment and district presentation, about 2.5 hours:


Board discussion, about two hours:
 

 

Posted

We are not Surly 1%, but we saw this coming a long time age. 

Did home school and private school. Both kids are now college grads and fully deployed. 

AISD is hopeless.  Press one for English.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
I don't live in Austin but what is the alternative to recapture/robin hood?  Austin obviously has the highest ratio of property value to number of students in the state.  

Just let all these other districts figure it out through the tax base. I’m a bit tired of our taxes going up just to have a large portion of that go elsewhere.
Posted
On 10/8/2025 at 8:21 PM, Cap33 said:

I attended a neighborhood meeting with our trustee and board president Lynn Boswell. She said the administration staff created the plan and gave it to the trustees 24 hours before it became public, so she and the other board members are digesting it like we are. Not sure I fully believe that, but whatever. She and other trustees are questioning many of the recommendations pertaining to the new boundaries, and it sounds like they are already going back to staff to make changes. However, she had no answers to hard questions about the rubric and the data that are clearly flawed when presented with specific examples of incorrect data and assumptions staff made. She just kept saying they were good questions and she'll have to look at the data that she says she doesn't have access to (although it's all there on the AISD website). She also had no answer to questions about whether school closures would actually save any money, or how the closures will fend off a state takeover. Several comments about how the state keeps moving the goalposts on the grading criteria but no real answers.

She has her talking points down pat, as I suspect all the trustees do, but the substance is lacking. I don't expect the proposal w/r/t the closures will change. They are getting called out for forming the list despite the data, but it's not going to change their plan. Oh, and if anyone is counting, four of the 11 failing schools survived the closure list. She outright said that they need higher performing kids to go to their zoned crappy school to raise that school's grade to passing. That's the big plan.

Can't wait for Matias to start making his in-person rounds. That will be a shit show.

Haven’t her kids all aged out of AISD? I think to be a trustee you should have to have kids enrolled in an AISD school. 
 

  • Like 1
Posted

Listened to the live Q&A session tonight.  The director of planning came off pretty sharp but pretty much every other person, including Superintendent Segura, came off pretty unprepared and incapable.  The call started late, had technical difficulties, then had 10+ min of the consultant moderator going over needless administrative points before they actually got to the Q&A.  
 

Anything on this topic should always be prefaced with the fact that AISD is only in this position because of the restrictions that state and federal govt have put on them; give the district $800M more in funding and all of a sudden every body with kids in AISD would be more than satisfied.
 

I am focused on SW Austin and here were my other takeaways:

Seems like they focused more on distance than commute when redrawing zones, which is stupid as fuck.  They moved a bunch of people from Gorzycki to Small middle school, meaning families are going from a 1 min commute to a 20+ minute commute even though the distance is only a couple miles different, because to get to Small they’ll have to go thru the Y (290/71 split) in Oak Hill.  To their credit they said they are looking at it so I have hope they’ll fix it.  This was the only change that affected my family so I’m hopeful, but if they don’t fix it a ton of well-resourced people are going to be fucking pissed.  It doesn’t seem like they put much thought into how many families will go private due to these changes and how that will affect district funding.

Eanes being its own thing is really fucking up the high school zoning.  There are a bunch of kids in SW Austin that are gonna get royally fucked having to go all the way to Crockett or Austin High instead of Bowie, when really most of them should be going to Westlake if they aren’t going to Bowie.

Segura gave lip service to a question about transfers for folks who purchased a home specifically for the schools they were zoned to; he said they were looking at it, but my takeaway is that those people are fucked.  Same thing around families who have been rezoned between kids and want their subsequent kids to go thru the same vertical the previous kids went to.

Overall most of the responses were non-answers, especially during the academic and transfer portions.

 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Snake Diggity said:

There are a bunch of kids in SW Austin that are gonna get royally fucked having to go all the way to Crockett or Austin High instead of Bowie, when really most of them should be going to Westlake if they aren’t going to Bowie.

The Patton / Small community is very important to the Austin High community.  Those parents always showed up.  The Travis Country community was also a huge part of O. Henry and Austin High.

I get that they are trying to fill up Crockett and change the demographics to balance enrollment, but it seems crazy to deliberately reduce the population at Small and Austin High, schools that are mostly full today.  They are trying to keep all of the high schools open by spreading the kids around ... which may lower utilization at Small and Austin High ... and again what was the point of this exercise?

Edited by Texas Jeff
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Continuing the sins of the past by redrawing the lines where kids east of 35 are zoned to crappier east Austin schools by moving the McCallum lines west and Kealing lines east. Those schools are going to take a hit and continue down the bad path.

Posted
On 10/10/2025 at 6:57 AM, DalTxHornFan said:

We are not Surly 1%, but we saw this coming a long time age. 

Did home school and private school. Both kids are now college grads and fully deployed. 

AISD is hopeless.  Press one for English.

LASA is a legit top school nationally. If that is an open option, seems acceptable. I don't know if McCallum FA academy is even relevant or how that fits it, but that was my HS in late 90s. The private school options are nice if you got that, but the Eanes and LT districts and others are reasonable options. My kids are doing quite well out in LT.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
8 hours ago, Anastasis said:

LASA is a legit top school nationally. If that is an open option, seems acceptable. I don't know if McCallum FA academy is even relevant or how that fits it, but that was my HS in late 90s. The private school options are nice if you got that, but the Eanes and LT districts and others are reasonable options. My kids are doing quite well out in LT.  

Anderson grad here.  Wife was Westlake product.

We just decided to take control of our kid's education, K-8.  Reading, Writing, and Arithmetic were the focus.  That left them plenty of time for other stuff like musical instruments, athletic teams, and field trips.  Could not have done it without my stay at home wife (who just happens to have a teaching certificate). YMMV.

LT seems like a good place to be.

  • Like 1
Posted

We’ve been mostly satisfied with Baldwin elementary.  We lost our really good principal to retirement this year and they’ve been bleeding good teachers like everywhere else, so I’m not all that happy about the trajectory.  But when I researched private schools 5 years ago I was just not impressed with any of them.  I just think our society has deprioritized education and so good schools are few and far between.  We’ve kind of decided to just ride it out in AISD.  If our kids become super unhappy or are just not progressing then we will be forced to do something but I don’t know what that would be.  I really hope my oldest can go to LASA and that it’s still as good as it is now in 4 years.  My youngest is not going to be able to go to LASA so if Bowie sucks then we will have to do private, but that’s still 6 years away.

I learned during preschool that nowhere is going to meet what I think the standard ought to be, so childcare and education are going ti be constant disappointments for me until my kids are grown.

  • Like 3
Posted
On 10/15/2025 at 10:18 PM, Anastasis said:

I don't know if McCallum FA academy is even relevant or how that fits it, but that was my HS in late 90s. 

I have one McCallum graduate who thrived there, and a freshman who looks to be following her path, both in the FAA (though also zoned to McCallum).  When my son applied last year, he had classmates at Lamar who applied to the FAA but did not get in.  And McCallum is one of those schools that this year is over-enrolled.  If schools are tightening up on garden-variety transfers after the new boundaries go into effect, I imagine it's going to be tougher to transfer via the FAA.

  • Like 2
Posted

I'm hoping my 8th grader at Lamar gets into LASA.  I will figure out the transportation challenges.  Then I will keep my fingers crossed that TEA doesn't close down LASA if they takeover.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, swraith said:

I'm hoping my 8th grader at Lamar gets into LASA.  I will figure out the transportation challenges.  Then I will keep my fingers crossed that TEA doesn't close down LASA if they takeover.

The new bus hub system for LASA sucks. You either live close by one of the new hubs or "too bad, good luck". 

Posted
3 hours ago, South Austin said:

I have one McCallum graduate who thrived there, and a freshman who looks to be following her path, both in the FAA (though also zoned to McCallum).  When my son applied last year, he had classmates at Lamar who applied to the FAA but did not get in.  And McCallum is one of those schools that this year is over-enrolled.  If schools are tightening up on garden-variety transfers after the new boundaries go into effect, I imagine it's going to be tougher to transfer via the FAA.

It's a bummer.  I've got two 8th graders at Lamar through the FAA.  They both desperately want to go to McCallum with their friends.   My fear is that one of them gets in and the other doesn't.  In that situation, I suspect we'll just put them both at St. Stephen's and be done with public school altogether.

Posted
Just now, Samson's Wig said:

It's a bummer.  I've got two 8th graders at Lamar through the FAA.  They both desperately want to go to McCallum with their friends.   My fear is that one of them gets in and the other doesn't.  In that situation, I suspect we'll just put them both at St. Stephen's and be done with public school altogether.

Man, that would suck.  I hope it doesn't come to that.  Although the school consolidation and redrawn boundaries are really problematic for a lot of families, I think that McCallum might be relatively okay all things considered.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, Larry T. Spider said:

McCallum should be fine through all of this. It’s been the most underrated HS in the district for years and always cracks me up when certain uppity demographics turn their nose up at it.

Yep.  We've loved it.  The facilities are for shit and always seem to be toward the bottom of renovation funding priorities.  But the staff and faculty, the parent support, and the overall student body are really, really good considering how much high school can suck.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
35 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

I've got two 8th graders at Lamar through the FAA.  They both desperately want to go to McCallum with their friends.   My fear is that one of them gets in and the other doesn't. 

Are they Siamese twins?

  • Haha 2
Posted
13 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

Are they Siamese twins?

lol, no.   But I'm not too keen on driving one of them across town for school at the same time another has to be driven somewhere else.  The FAA has never been deemed an official magnet program, because they would then have to provide buses for the kids if it were a magnet program.  One of many little wrinkles or our underfunded system.   We've been hauling them to Lamar and back every day for three years due to no buses, and I'm not super keen on continuing it for another four, especially if it's to two different schools.

Posted

McCallum looks like it will be in better shape post redrawing so should have more room. My kids are still elementary so a long way to go so hopefully I will have several options when it comes time.

 

image.thumb.png.a945969944923d87458b03b9109e7046.png

Posted
1 hour ago, Samson's Wig said:

It's a bummer.  I've got two 8th graders at Lamar through the FAA.  They both desperately want to go to McCallum with their friends.   My fear is that one of them gets in and the other doesn't.  In that situation, I suspect we'll just put them both at St. Stephen's and be done with public school altogether.

humble brag

Posted

Reagan, Pearce, Blanton, Andrews, and Harris were all schools I attended. They were a bit rough while was there, but not bad. 

I go back to the Reagan area all of the time for various reasons. Having grown up in East Austin I’ve always felt pretty comfortable while in the Reagan area.  

Last week I had to be over there for the first time in about 5 months and for the first time ever, even I was nervous about driving through there or getting out of my car. It seems the area, which has always been in severe decline, is reaching some new lows.

I have no idea how kids can be safe and learn in that environment. Combined with the voucher system, you’ve got to believe that the decline in schools is going to accelerate at warp speeds and create a permanent long term disadvantage for kids from families with limited means. It breaks my heart. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Dbeasy said:

Combined with the voucher system, you’ve got to believe that the decline in schools is going to accelerate at warp speeds and create a permanent long term disadvantage for kids from families with limited means. 

That’s definitely the goal. Some states have conjured up voucher systems that (unsuccessfully) prioritize those kids. Pretty telling that ours is the opposite.

Posted
11 minutes ago, Larry T. Spider said:

That’s definitely the goal. Some states have conjured up voucher systems that (unsuccessfully) prioritize those kids. Pretty telling that ours is the opposite.

Opposite? I thought the voucher system did have some mechanism for prioritizing disabled and low income families? I'm not totally in favor of vouchers and am more focused on Austin continuing an open transfer system so I have more choices... but as a resident of East Austin where the school choices are already rough and only going to get worse as they consolidate ( awful ones joining the mediocre ones or vice versa) I would like some good options. My preferences is not private but I have plenty of neighbors that do not send their kids to public and instead go for private or charter. Furthermore as our 60% of our school tax dollars dollar go outside of Austin I can see that vouchers could be attractive when your options that are paid for from tax dollars are not great.

Posted
52 minutes ago, ZB'Tejas said:

Opposite? I thought the voucher system did have some mechanism for prioritizing disabled and low income families? I'm not totally in favor of vouchers and am more focused on Austin continuing an open transfer system so I have more choices... but as a resident of East Austin where the school choices are already rough and only going to get worse as they consolidate ( awful ones joining the mediocre ones or vice versa) I would like some good options. My preferences is not private but I have plenty of neighbors that do not send their kids to public and instead go for private or charter. Furthermore as our 60% of our school tax dollars dollar go outside of Austin I can see that vouchers could be attractive when your options that are paid for from tax dollars are not great.

I think in theory your thoughts are sound. The problem is that the cost of private schools will far outweigh the vouchers. So how will those with limited means gain access? They won’t, except for a few “token” acceptances that come with more financial aid. The majority of those with limited means will just have bad choice. And by limited, I mean 70%+ of the population living within the school district boundaries. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 hours ago, ZB'Tejas said:

Opposite? I thought the voucher system did have some mechanism for prioritizing disabled and low income families? I'm not totally in favor of vouchers and am more focused on Austin continuing an open transfer system so I have more choices... but as a resident of East Austin where the school choices are already rough and only going to get worse as they consolidate ( awful ones joining the mediocre ones or vice versa) I would like some good options. My preferences is not private but I have plenty of neighbors that do not send their kids to public and instead go for private or charter. Furthermore as our 60% of our school tax dollars dollar go outside of Austin I can see that vouchers could be attractive when your options that are paid for from tax dollars are not great.

Vouchers make the problems caused by recapture worse, not better.  Incentivizing residents to pull their kids out of the system means less resources for the district.  Not just the reduction in funding but also the reduction in other resources brought by families who can afford private schools.  I pointed this out in my email to the decision makers in this current process; my 2 kids have a combined 18 years of schooling left, so pulling my kids out of AISD means a reduction of ~$270,000 in funding to the district over that time.  On top of that, my wife and I have donated several thousand dollars per year to our kids’ public schools via fundraisers etc., and my wife volunteers a couple hundred hours per year at the school, and that all goes away as well.

There’s a logical theory that vouchers could eventually improve an education system by having private enterprise build up to offer quality affordable options, but that’s only possible over a very long time frame and with a lot of luck.  The guarantee is that in the short and medium term, poor urban kids get royally fucked even worse than they already are.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Posted
5 hours ago, ZB'Tejas said:

Opposite? I thought the voucher system did have some mechanism for prioritizing disabled and low income families? I'm not totally in favor of vouchers and am more focused on Austin continuing an open transfer system so I have more choices... but as a resident of East Austin where the school choices are already rough and only going to get worse as they consolidate ( awful ones joining the mediocre ones or vice versa) I would like some good options. My preferences is not private but I have plenty of neighbors that do not send their kids to public and instead go for private or charter. Furthermore as our 60% of our school tax dollars dollar go outside of Austin I can see that vouchers could be attractive when your options that are paid for from tax dollars are not great.

Let’s say you are low income and get awarded the 10k voucher for your child. Where are you going to go with that? St Andrews costs 23k per year so you have to come up with 13k, which you don’t have. The voucher is worthless to you.

Now let’s say you are upper middle class and get the same 10k voucher. You have been opting for public school because 23k is a big expense. Now your costs are 13k and that’s more manageable. Only about 1k per month so you go.

That low income kid from the first scenario is actually worse off now because the funding for your upper middle class kid is pulled from the system. There is an economy of scale to this and each kid that leaves hurts the ones left behind. Which brings us back to my original comment about all of this being a feature not a bug.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
8 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

Let’s say you are low income and get awarded the 10k voucher for your child. Where are you going to go with that? St Andrews costs 23k per year so you have to come up with 13k, which you don’t have. The voucher is worthless to you.

Now let’s say you are upper middle class and get the same 10k voucher. You have been opting for public school because 23k is a big expense. Now your costs are 13k and that’s more manageable. Only about 1k per month so you go.

That low income kid from the first scenario is actually worse off now because the funding for your upper middle class kid is pulled from the system. There is an economy of scale to this and each kid that leaves hurts the ones left behind. Which brings us back to my original comment about all of this being a feature not a bug.

Really unfortunate that St Andrews is the only private school in Austin. And I’m sure they don’t offer scholarships. Sad state of affairs.

Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Lamar said:

Really unfortunate that St Andrews is the only private school in Austin. And I’m sure they don’t offer scholarships. Sad state of affairs.

I'm not really sure what your point is. Yes, there are many private schools in Austin and many offer scholarships. So? That doesn't do much for a kid from a poor family whose parents can't get him to school across town every day. Or the kid in West Texas who lives in a town without a private school (or one small one). 

And let's not forget that private schools don't have to admit students with any type of learning disabilities.  So these vouchers aren't going to do shit for the kid who has ADHD and would be an A-plus student with just a few accommodations.

Edited by HornOnTheBayou
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, HornOnTheBayou said:

Or the kid in West Texas who lives in a town without a private school (or one small one). 

Wait, AISD is consolidating schools out in Midland and Alpine? I had no idea of their reach.
 

There are many options in Austin for education and the voucher program will make that more accessible for more people. St Andrews is just 1 school.

  • Fuck You 2

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...