Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, CooterBrown said:


Wait until I tell you that AISD 7th grade advanced ELA “book reports” are actually art projects where they draw important scenes from the book. They don’t actually write anything for a book report.

It's maddening.  I understand making that an option for some kids, since we've all but given up on actually educating the bottom half of students and instead focus on their feelings, but making it the mandatory method for a book report is just giving up on everyone, and is representative of how our system is failing by focusing on ensuring all kids feel good while neglecting to actually educate the kids who can handle it.  My autistic 8th grader would be much happier writing a five-page book report.  Those stupid fucking art projects stymie him.  The other area that this shows up prominently is how daily busy work counts for 70% or more of your final grade, while exams are typically no more than 20%. That same son will score 100 (or more if there is extra credit) on every single exam in every single class, which are all upper level, but nearly fails many of his classes because he doesn't turn in forms on time, or has the wrong color of binder.  All of this in a school district where half the teachers don't even have emergency certification (i.e., they have no fucking clue what they're doing). This bullshit to make sure kids who don't test well don't get left behind is leaving behind kids who are excellent at content mastery (which should be the fucking point) but suck at inane busy work is a crazy way to run an educational system.  We're so focused on creating a new generation of drones who will either skip college or get a business degree if they go, that we're failing to nurture the people we'll need to take the lead in the future.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
23 minutes ago, sasquatch69 said:

How is Bowie HS affected by all this?

Here's a link to the boundary map changes for all AISD schools:  Link

Bowie HS maps are on page 199.  Looks like only small changes along the southeast boundary.

Posted
24 minutes ago, sasquatch69 said:

How is Bowie HS affected by all this?

Almost not at all, and by that I mean you still have to play Westlake, Drip and LT.  Best of luck.

Bowie's boundary has some tiny changes to cede a few streets to Crockett and add a few streets from Akins, but other than that it's unchanged:

https://www.austinisd.org/sites/default/files/dept/school-improvement/docs/consolidations/BowieHS_AISD-Draft-Consol-DW-Boundaries-10.3.2025-ada.pdf

There are some changes to the middle schools that feed Bowie.

Posted
2 hours ago, CooterBrown said:


Wait until I tell you that AISD 7th grade advanced ELA “book reports” are actually art projects where they draw important scenes from the book. They don’t actually write anything for a book report.

And that's after they watch the movie version.

Posted
5 hours ago, ABSR said:

Demographically in the US last year was the peak for High School seniors.  (If your kid applied then it was the most competitive  time ever) There will be a steady decline for a while and this obviously is a trailing indicator for younger kids in the system.   My school district is feeling this but is also dealing with something they did not foresee which is that families where kids go through the “good” school system don’t move once they are empty nesters, so there is also less families with school aged kids since it is not getting reset.  I believe part of people not moving is liking the community, and the other is that home prices have gone up so it is harder for younger families to get homes in more affluent areas they may desire but can’t afford.

I wonder how much of that (the staying in your big house once empty nest) is a cultural shift. Used to be, once my kids are 18+, in college or college educated, they go out and get a job and have an apt or house with roommates, go live a life. It's not much different than the spartan life you lived as a broke colelge student, but it's a little better and it's a life. Earn some money, gain some skills, go out, go on dates, etc. but be 100% independent. The only time your kids moved back in with you was if something really bad happened and it was kinda shameful. That or there are some fundamental issues like with disabilities or handicaps that precluded the ease of a normal life.

Now it seems like a cultural norm to have your kids stay with you longer, the coddling mother saying "just live here and save some money", while you go to school or work your first couple of entry jobs to pay your dues. It's not uncommon for able-bodied adults to live at home until their 30's these days, which kinda blows my mind, but I get that it's harder than ever for kids to live without roommates in desirable cities and locations so it's not longer the burn outs and losers who live at home, but good kids who need more time and help.

And I wonder how many parents don't sell their big house because they are taking a "wait and see" approach to see if their kid will be able to muster it or if they need the extra rooms for the boomerang in case they need some more time and help.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

I wonder how much of that (the staying in your big house once empty nest) is a cultural shift. Used to be, once my kids are 18+, in college or college educated, they go out and get a job and have an apt or house with roommates, go live a life. It's not much different than the spartan life you lived as a broke colelge student, but it's a little better and it's a life. Earn some money, gain some skills, go out, go on dates, etc. but be 100% independent. The only time your kids moved back in with you was if something really bad happened and it was kinda shameful. That or there are some fundamental issues like with disabilities or handicaps that precluded the ease of a normal life.

Now it seems like a cultural norm to have your kids stay with you longer, the coddling mother saying "just live here and save some money", while you go to school or work your first couple of entry jobs to pay your dues. It's not uncommon for able-bodied adults to live at home until their 30's these days, which kinda blows my mind, but I get that it's harder than ever for kids to live without roommates in desirable cities and locations so it's not longer the burn outs and losers who live at home, but good kids who need more time and help.

And I wonder how many parents don't sell their big house because they are taking a "wait and see" approach to see if their kid will be able to muster it or if they need the extra rooms for the boomerang in case they need some more time and help.

That sounds a lot like enabling, and I suspect you're spot on for a lot of folks.

Posted

Houses have appreciated a ton, locked in some 3% rate. Sitting on plenty of money. Healthy active lifestyle so you don’t need to move to assisted living. And I also think it is a cultural shift that they have a more social life and not ready to uproot and move to some other community.

Posted

AISD staff have done a great job muddying the waters by talking about finances, their data and rubric, and threats of TEA takeover. They shift talking points any time one tries to pin them down on the basis for a specific school landing on the closure list. A friend attended an Austin Neighborhood Council meeting recently, and they heard from AISD staff who told them they need to close "islands of excellence" (their words), so that's why some well-attended and high performing schools, like Bryker Woods and Maplewood (yes, on the east side, but gentrified), are on their list. They explained that the educational balance in West Austin is not the same as East Austin, so they are "committed to looking district wide," and that "the burden of change should not fall on one part of town." (Again, quotes are their words.) So instead of raising the educational balance and addressing their own failures in some East Austin schools, they will happily close a successful West Austin school so they can keep a failing and/or half-empty East Austin school open for reasons that have nothing to do with anything they're willing to say publicly. 

Then you have the president of the board, Lynn Boswell, boasting that AISD will redevelop Rosedale and Bryker Woods into low income housing. Very little chance of any low income development on those pieces of land. Never mind that housing development isn't the district's job. 

So in sum, the great cost-savings-avoid-a-TEA-takeover plan is as follows: Disallow transfers and rezone shitty schools so better students can bring up the schools' scores--but do it in a way that punishes a few good schools so we can keep some failing ones open so it feels more equitable. I guess we'll get around to improving education another time. 

I have 2 1/2 more years of AISD. If I had an elementary school kid, I would get out of here in a heartbeat. I understand the Legislature has made things increasingly difficult, but this whole charade of a process is a complete failure of leadership. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
53 minutes ago, Cap33 said:

Then you have the president of the board, Lynn Boswell, boasting that AISD will redevelop Rosedale and Bryker Woods into low income housing. Very little chance of any low income development on those pieces of land. Never mind that housing development isn't the district's job. 

Austin ISD straight up sold the Rosedale campus for $26 million.  They are using the money to reduce the district deficit.

It's being redeveloped into housing, but not low-income.  The proposal is for 435 market-rate apartments in a six-story complex.

The revenue from the sale will be gone in a year, spent on the budget deficit.

  • Rage+1 2
Posted (edited)
On 10/26/2025 at 1:44 PM, Texas Jeff said:

Austin ISD straight up sold the Rosedale campus for $26 million.  They are using the money to reduce the district deficit.

It's being redeveloped into housing, but not low-income.  The proposal is for 435 market-rate apartments in a six-story complex.

The revenue from the sale will be gone in a year, spent on the budget deficit.

AISD is currently suing the Rosedale property owners to change their deed restriction on that property. It is currently deed restricted to being used for a public school.  They can't move forward with development until that happens.  

From an AISD meeting, they showed a slide with the proposed development.  The yellow footprint is the apartment building and the gray is the parking garage.  Good thing 49th & Ramsay Ave are built for that amount of traffic.

image.png.d679df27c436985cf5bb9c5ea580937a.png

 

Edited by CooterBrown
Posted
2 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

The district is going to release an updated plan on Friday. The changes seem to be more geared towards program offerings and rezoning more than which schools will actually close.

This is the part I'm more concernd about, personally.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
47 minutes ago, swraith said:

If that is what is needed to help balance the budget, I don't see the concern being worth the pearl clutching.  Collect what money you can.

Zero people would have a problem with their kid going to HEB Elementary if it meant well funded, high quality schools.  Unfortunately I doubt there’s meaningful money in it.

Posted

About 15 years ago I was working for Pflugerville ISD and the district was in a weird conundrum of being fast growing and needing to cut budget. It was in the fallout of the financial crisis and state leadership refused to release rainy day funding despite it clearly being a rainy day.

We ended up having to RIF a bunch of teachers but the district did everything possible to find ways to raise additional money. We sold ads on buses, started a paid pre-k program for kids that didn’t qualify, etc. Districts are usually in conservation mode but could do better in finding creative ways to raise a little money. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
14 hours ago, Cap33 said:

At this point, why not just sell naming rights to the schools?

Absolutely. 

Oracle Eastside and Dell NorthEast. The current names they have for the Eastside schools (other than LBJ) are very lame.

Posted
On 10/26/2025 at 12:47 PM, Cap33 said:

 

So in sum, the great cost-savings-avoid-a-TEA-takeover plan is as follows: Disallow transfers and rezone shitty schools so better students can bring up the schools' scores--but do it in a way that punishes a few good schools so we can keep some failing ones open so it feels more equitable. I guess we'll get around to improving education another time. 

 

 

I have heard they might make changes to transfers but not they would no longer allow them. Where is this from? Maplewood being folded into Campbell might be the only instance of better students that will be bringing up the scores of a lesser school. So many others are just taking a really bad campus and placing it into a somewhat bad one so it should have the opposite effect. Oak Springs > Blackshear;  Martin > Kealing.  Or just rezoning students Central Austin students from Kealing to O'Henry. (this one is particularly interesting... since you are going to bring Kealing down with Martin better move those central Austin kids over to O'Henry ;)

Central East Austin students that would go to McCallum now moved to NE High.

Posted
12 hours ago, Snake Diggity said:

Zero people would have a problem with their kid going to HEB Elementary if it meant well funded, high quality schools.  

I would have a problem sending my kid to a school that's never open.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 3
Posted

If we're going to start giving naming rights to Texas schools, the sponsors should match the quality offered.

Welcome to Dollar General Elementary.  Do well, and you'll move up to Golden Chick Middle School.

Posted
If that is what is needed to help balance the budget, I don't see the concern being worth the pearl clutching.  Collect what money you can.

No pearl clutching here. If that helps close the funding gap, then have at it. Put ads on buses, too.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

There was a save Bryker Woods rally this morning ahead of the superintendent’s visit. One parent was on the news saying they hired a data analytics firm to show closing the school would cost AISD money. Not sure they have all the relevant data to show that, especially with the 6.1 million in construction costs that are needed.

I think the district is in a tough spot with this one. If they continue with the closure plan, the protests will ramp up. I’m guessing there will be lawsuits related to the bond. If they take BW off the list then the perception will be that the rich white people are getting their way while closing minority schools. 

Glad I don’t have to deal with this on a personal level anymore. Insert popcorn gif.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, Larry T. Spider said:

There was a save Bryker Woods rally this morning ahead of the superintendent’s visit. One parent was on the news saying they hired a data analytics firm to show closing the school would cost AISD money. Not sure they have all the relevant data to show that, especially with the 6.1 million in construction costs that are needed.

I think the district is in a tough spot with this one. If they continue with the closure plan, the protests will ramp up. I’m guessing there will be lawsuits related to the bond. If they take BW off the list then the perception will be that the rich white people are getting their way while closing minority schools. 

Glad I don’t have to deal with this on a personal level anymore. Insert popcorn gif.

Yep they are in a tough spot.  You could bring in the smartest people on earth and I really don’t think they could come up with a perfect solution under the constraints the district is under.  There just isn’t enough money to satisfy everybody (and by that I mean there isn’t enough money to provide quality education for all the kids in the district while letting all the kids go to the school they want).

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

If we're going to start giving naming rights to Texas schools, the sponsors should match the quality offered.

Welcome to Dollar General Elementary.  Do well, and you'll move up to Golden Chick Middle School.

GIF by Giphy QA

Posted
3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

If we're going to start giving naming rights to Texas schools, the sponsors should match the quality offered.

Welcome to Dollar General Elementary.  Do well, and you'll move up to Golden Chick Middle School.

That's what I like about these Surly High girls. I get older, and they stay the same age. 

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

I have heard they might make changes to transfers but not they would no longer allow them. Where is this from?

They are going to shut down transfers except for kids finishing out at their current school and siblings. So kids who are zoned to crappy schools but plan to transfer to better ones will be told to go to the school they're zoned to. Segura glosses over this concern by saying things like, "schools are more than just a rating." A friend who attended the East Austin forum with Matias this week said that he was really leaning into the east versus west thing, I guess thinking that would keep the audience on his side. But then someone shared a different point of view that AISD is now confining kids to the failing schools in East Austin. According to my friend's retelling, Segura had no response to this.

I think staff are underestimating how many students they will lose if they follow through with this plan. Hell, even if they reverse course I think for many families the damage is done. 

5 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

Not sure they have all the relevant data to show that

The Bryker Woods group shared their findings with the BWNA. They pulled costs data from AISD, TEA, and TASB. To my knowledge, no one from AISD has agreed to have a conversation with them about their conclusions despite their requests.

Posted
5 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

There was a save Bryker Woods rally this morning ahead of the superintendent’s visit. One parent was on the news saying they hired a data analytics firm to show closing the school would cost AISD money. Not sure they have all the relevant data to show that, especially with the 6.1 million in construction costs that are needed.

I think the district is in a tough spot with this one. If they continue with the closure plan, the protests will ramp up. I’m guessing there will be lawsuits related to the bond. If they take BW off the list then the perception will be that the rich white people are getting their way while closing minority schools. 

Glad I don’t have to deal with this on a personal level anymore. Insert popcorn gif.

The district was floating a new plan for BW in the workshop last night.
It was tough to tell from the tiny map they showed, but I think they were showing all kids west of Shoal Creek going to Casis and all kids east going to Brentwood.

Not closing the school seemed to not be an option.

And $6.1 million for schools is basically maintenence money.  I have been to a few meetings for the 2022 bond and the money goes fast.  $100 million for Sadler Means for a school that will enroll 300 kids.  $140 million each for Northeast and LBJ and a big part of that money is going to new athletics buildings.  They will still need more in the next bond.  $25 million for Nelson Field and I would challenge you after the renovations to see what has been done.  $15 million for Delco Center only to discover that Delco was not built correctly, has an unstable foundation, and is used for a wrestling tournament and not much else ... and on and on.

AISD's new builds are well done but the amount of money it takes to do it is amazing.

Posted
3 hours ago, Cap33 said:

They are going to shut down transfers except for kids finishing out at their current school and siblings. So kids who are zoned to crappy schools but plan to transfer to better ones will be told to go to the school they're zoned to. Segura glosses over this concern by saying things like, "schools are more than just a rating." A friend who attended the East Austin forum with Matias this week said that he was really leaning into the east versus west thing, I guess thinking that would keep the audience on his side. But then someone shared a different point of view that AISD is now confining kids to the failing schools in East Austin. According to my friend's retelling, Segura had no response to this.

I think staff are underestimating how many students they will lose if they follow through with this plan. Hell, even if they reverse course I think for many families the damage is done. 

The Bryker Woods group shared their findings with the BWNA. They pulled costs data from AISD, TEA, and TASB. To my knowledge, no one from AISD has agreed to have a conversation with them about their conclusions despite their requests.

I agree that they are going to lose a lot of kids, probably more than they are expecting. Charters will pop up right next to the closed schools on the east side and take a bunch of students. Seems like a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation because keeping them all open will lead to financial ruin.

As far as the BW costs, tell me how option A below is going to save the district money compared to option B.

A: keep the school open and spend 6.1 million to renovate the school. Retain more students in the district of the 250ish neighborhood kids that go there. 

B: close the school and don’t spend the 6.1 million renovation costs. Fold the kids into Casis and Brentwood. No longer pay for principal, assistant principal, counselor, admin assistant, music teacher, art teacher, PE teacher, custodians, etc. Also don’t pay for utilities, groundskeeping, and other building maintenance. Possibly sell the building and property for a pretty penny.

You will lose some kids to private school and the funding that goes with them and you may pay slightly higher bussing costs. But from a purely fiscal standpoint, I don’t get the BW parents argument that keeping the school open will save money.

 

Posted
6 minutes ago, Larry T. Spider said:

I don’t get the BW parents argument that keeping the school open will save money.

I'm not a data person, and I certainly wouldn't say I understand it fully. My basic understanding is that they modeled potential savings (staff, facilities costs) and new costs (transportation, avg. daily attendance loss, etc.) using data from AISD, TEA, and TASB. They project that, using AISD-favorable (i.e. conservative) estimates, closing BW costs over $400K in year 1, with another $150K each year thereafter. Of course, AISD will sell the land in a hot minute, so the year-over-year costs aren't real. 

Is it their best argument? No. I think they went down that rabbit trail after they recognized that the rubric was bullshit. For example, BW got dinged for the age of the building even though someone from AISD facilities showed up to the BWNA meeting saying that, not only is the building in really good shape, but the bond money projects (that we voted for because BW was earmarked to get a relatively small amount) were bid and ready to go until Matias put a stop to them. 

I understand that, from a purely financial standpoint, one could make a good case that BW should be closed. But this isn't a purely financial decision and never has been. If it were, the half-empty and failing schools in areas that continue to lose kids would naturally bubble to the top. Before the stupid plan came out, staff were quoted as saying they were only looking to close schools with empty seats. They also say BW is too crowded. And yet here we are.

The point above about how quickly the money goes is infuriating. How did the district not recognize this freight train coming 3-4 years ago? How does Sadler Means, a middle school of 300 kids consistently getting Ds and Fs score a $100M reno that's too far along to stop? Especially when a much better performing all girls' middle school that has a new campus and seems to operate in its own world impervious to the fiscal issues affecting every other school could absorb them? There are just so many questions about the process, and staff have zero interest in doing anything other than getting their plan approved without answering questions or showing their work.

Posted
20 minutes ago, Cap33 said:

The point above about how quickly the money goes is infuriating. How did the district not recognize this freight train coming 3-4 years ago? 

People that didn’t work for the district at the time will never be able to understand the damage that Stephanie Elizalde did to AISD in her short time here. She knew it was a stepping stone job and she was only really being judged by a couple of metrics. She fixed those, ignored the rest of the problems, created a laundry list of others, then bolted to Dallas. It was her toxic culture that led to TEA taking over the special education department.

She is also the reason we have Segura, who is not prepared for the challenges he’s facing. Nice guy but this was a job very an experienced, savvy superintendent. But to keep staff on board after the Elizalde shit show, they had to make an internal hire of somebody well liked.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
16 hours ago, Cap33 said:

They are going to shut down transfers except for kids finishing out at their current school and siblings. So kids who are zoned to crappy schools but plan to transfer to better ones will be told to go to the school they're zoned to. Segura glosses over this concern by saying things like, "schools are more than just a rating." A friend who attended the East Austin forum with Matias this week said that he was really leaning into the east versus west thing, I guess thinking that would keep the audience on his side. But then someone shared a different point of view that AISD is now confining kids to the failing schools in East Austin. According to my friend's retelling, Segura had no response to this.

I think staff are underestimating how many students they will lose if they follow through with this plan. Hell, even if they reverse course I think for many families the damage is done. 

The Bryker Woods group shared their findings with the BWNA. They pulled costs data from AISD, TEA, and TASB. To my knowledge, no one from AISD has agreed to have a conversation with them about their conclusions despite their requests.

"We will start formally defining our policy for this review process in January 2026. Our first review will begin in Summer 2028, two years after the consolidation changes go into effect. Note that this review does not mean we will make additional changes to boundaries or transfer policies but will hold us accountable to ensuring enrollment stays balanced. "

They may do that at some point but from what I've read it won't be immediate and they will keep transfer policies in place but instead just be more thoughtful about how many they approve with less schools and the remaining ones more full than before.

We will finish up in the Elementary we are at today but the zoned middle could end up quite different so will definitely be looking at transfer options.

Posted
47 minutes ago, ZB'Tejas said:

"We will start formally defining our policy for this review process in January 2026. Our first review will begin in Summer 2028, two years after the consolidation changes go into effect. Note that this review does not mean we will make additional changes to boundaries or transfer policies but will hold us accountable to ensuring enrollment stays balanced. "

They may do that at some point but from what I've read it won't be immediate and they will keep transfer policies in place but instead just be more thoughtful about how many they approve with less schools and the remaining ones more full than before.

Where did you read that?  Grandfathering was in the initial plan they presented, but they are adjusting that plan and making a new announcement today.  I have no idea what to expect, other than it will likely change yet again before a final vote.   They know full well that as soon as they announce they are cutting off transfers completely, a significant number of families will immediately start making plans to leave AISD. 

I expect to hear that they are closing programs like the Fine Arts Academy to transfers, but not a blanket ban on transfers altogether.   It was challenging to transfer into a decent school before all this started, as they tend to be overcrowded.  Now, assuming that transfers exist at all, it will be even more difficult.  I wouldn't make any plans based on the ability to transfer. 

Posted
30 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

Where did you read that?  Grandfathering was in the initial plan they presented, but they are adjusting that plan and making a new announcement today.  I have no idea what to expect, other than it will likely change yet again before a final vote.   They know full well that as soon as they announce they are cutting off transfers completely, a significant number of families will immediately start making plans to leave AISD. 

I expect to hear that they are closing programs like the Fine Arts Academy to transfers, but not a blanket ban on transfers altogether.   It was challenging to transfer into a decent school before all this started, as they tend to be overcrowded.  Now, assuming that transfers exist at all, it will be even more difficult.  I wouldn't make any plans based on the ability to transfer. 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/12h_tZswkECRuDkOo9D0m8HHQstBZFlZXvKrSOWuBTsY/edit?pli=1&tab=t.0

I sure hope to have the option but I'm not going to rule out moving or just getting a studio in the right neighborhood if worse comes to worse.

Posted
Just now, ZB'Tejas said:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/12h_tZswkECRuDkOo9D0m8HHQstBZFlZXvKrSOWuBTsY/edit?pli=1&tab=t.0

I sure hope to have the option but I'm not going to rule out moving or just getting a studio in the right neighborhood if worse comes to worse.

Thanks.  I thought that was the language from the original proposal.  They're changing it, apparently announcing today.  We're in the same boat regarding whether to pack up and move or rent something in another school district altogether.   Even though we're AISD, Vandegrift is the closest high school to our house, which is yet another failure of AISD in prioritizing feel-good policies over rational decision-making over the last 30 years.  I had to drive one of my kids to the Performing Arts Center (brilliantly located as far away as possible from where most kids in Austin live) last night in rush hour traffic, and I wanted to hang myself by the time I got back.  It took an hour and forty-five minutes.

My biggest concern with my kids starting high school next year is that their high school experience will be disrupted by TEA taking over their junior or senior year.  I don't want them to have to change schools at that point if we can avoid it.  But that likely means moving or going the private school route starting next year, which the kids do not want to do.

  • Rage+1 1
Posted

How wrong am I to assume a TEA takeover wouldn’t really be a doomsday scenario (even though it also would certainly not mean an improvement)?  TEA taking over the district just means a change in leadership not any change in available resources.  Have Houston public schools gotten worse since they got taken over?

Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

How wrong am I to assume a TEA takeover wouldn’t really be a doomsday scenario (even though it also would certainly not mean an improvement)?  TEA taking over the district just means a change in leadership not any change in available resources.  Have Houston public schools gotten worse since they got taken over?

There is a lot of information out there on what has happened with HISD you can find with a quick search.  The short answer is: YES.  

In the past, TEA has "taken over" districts at times with little to no impact for students and families, keeping programming and classrooms essentially the same and focusing on bigger picture issues at the administrative level.   That is not what is happening now, at all, due to who is now running things and what their goals are.  I wouldn't leave my kids in a school taken over by TEA unless I had absolutely no other choice.  

 

Edited by Samson's Wig
Posted
1 hour ago, Snake Diggity said:

How wrong am I to assume a TEA takeover wouldn’t really be a doomsday scenario (even though it also would certainly not mean an improvement)?  TEA taking over the district just means a change in leadership not any change in available resources.  Have Houston public schools gotten worse since they got taken over?

What is your definition of "worse"?

On the plus side, there are no longer "F" rated schools in Houston ISD.
On the minus side, teachers have left, the community has complained, a bond to improve schools failed, and enrollment is down.

The low scoring schools are implementing the New Education System, which raises teacher pay but enforces a standardized curriculum.  I don't know much about it but it seems similar to what is going on at Mendez MS in south Austin and the three failing middle schools in north Austin.

If success is measured by state achievement tests, scores are defiantly rising.  If you measure it some other way, it's not great.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

This is more of a broad conversation about measurables in education, but TEA is good at coming in and fixing those. So, they are good at fixing compliance issues, failing schools, the budget, and addressing some student discipline issues.

They are bad at just about everything else and are willing to take a sledgehammer approach to achieve the metrics they are looking for. I think this approach is such a culture clash with Austin ISD campus level staff and parents, that it will go poorly. It is in no way collaborative. Don’t like libraries being turned into detention centers? Fuck right off.

So, at the end of the day, you may get a district that runs efficiently and has no failing schools but still be unhappy with it because they cut your fine arts programs, pushed out your favorite campus principal, and re-zoned you to another school without a second thought.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, swraith said:

So AISD listened to feedback and made a change that was an improvement?

They received about 7000 "comment cards" on the first draft.  They ended up discussing about seven different ideas for modifying the proposal at a board workshop on Wednesday.  None of the schools that were slated to close were taken off the list, but they have made very minor adjustments to the plan.

A few schools that are on the list, Oak Springs ES, Martin MS and Bedichek MS, may reopen in the next few years with a different purpose.

They are still looking at a few other scenarios, but they are trying to "balance" enrollment across the district which means limiting transfers and moving boundaries.  Some neighborhoods are being significantly impacted by these changes and the district is "looking" at the problem, but resisting change to the plan.

Edited by Texas Jeff

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...