New law raises concerns about open enrollment at local school districts

I am pleased with the District Choice Program because it provides friendly competition among neighboring school districts. If school districts want to keep their students then they need to start attracting parents by actually providing better programs and top qualified teachers. If parents are enrolling their children to other districts then obviously their home district is lacking something and they are not meeting the needs of the families in their community. That will not happen by removing the law- SB680. With this law in place, the District Choice Program opens up opportunities for change in education.

If public education wasn't so horrible then you wouldn't have this problem.

I support completely open enrollment.

If you have bad students make them better or gtfo.

Curious to me that the complaining district speaks solely about the fiscal impact of families moving kids out.

Seems to me, they ought to be more concerned WHY these families are seeking education elsewhere.

Oso has it right on the nose!! All the district cares about is money money money. If they want to keep the students they have (and potentially build on what they don't have), get yourself some safe schools with super teachers and super staff and facilities and you will get the draw. This is why out kid is in private school. The parents there dictate how the school operates. We get the best because we demand it. If we don't we pull the kids and the school is out their money..no money no school. Public schools need to pick up the pace!

This will force school disticts with very cozy and comfortable administrators and principals to actually educate children and deliver results. This the best tool for parents to exercise their voice and rights on how their tax dollars are being used and for their children to get the best education possible.

Oso viejo wrote:

Curious to me that the complaining district speaks solely about the fiscal impact of families moving kids out.
Seems to me, they ought to be more concerned WHY these families are seeking education elsewhere.

You are right on!!

What they describe as "an adversarial situation" I describe as "competition". It's about time the districts faced some real competition other than with privates. Some districts should be allowed to fail in favor of districts that provide a better product. I refuse to subsidize a crappy school district like we have in Pasadena. Damn straight I'd prefer to enroll my kids in school in Walnut. Given a chance I'd put them in South Pasadena, La Canada, San Marino, or almost anywhere else than Pasadena. Maybe losing money will make the poor districts take notice. I bet Walnut thinks it's great with all the new money they have now.

As a parent of a DOC student coming from the Rowland unified district, I have an opposing view that is, understandibly not welcomed by the Rowland district. I have threee students that have thrived in the DOC school and have had opportunities that the Rowland school district coould not offer. I fear that this PR campaign may change people's minds by only hearing one side. What the elimination of the DOC amounts to is an apparthied system for low income and minority students. Student will be restricted to their district schools without and alternative. Only the wealthy will be able to go to better schools (private schools).
It is ashame to see the lack of leadership in the Rowland district. Instead of blaming DOC schools for lack of performance, Superintendent Ott should see this as a challenge and commit to make the Rowland district more competetive--more desirable than other districts.
In my opinnion, what makes a school desireable is not the geography, but the commitment and leadership to the education of students. It starts with the administration and ends with the faculty. My perception of the Rowland district is that the people that work for the district (specially administrative) care more about their salaries than the education of their students.
Ms. Ott what will you do to make want to come back to the Rowland district? I still have not heard anything but whining.
Sincerely,
Former Oswalt Parent

First, let me say, I think DOC is a great idea for the children.

Now, do the good school districts get to choose which students they let in?

Take Pasadena, for instance. If San Marino was open to transfers, they would be flooded with PUSD students (I would guess). Probably more than they can handle, and probably more than PUSD would want to let go.

So, how do they choose who gets in and who doesn't?

I'm sort of glad I didn't pay a premium to buy a house in a top notch school district. There is the potential for it to be brought down a little bit by transfers.

Also, one additional negative for DOC.. is that I like the idea of a school having neighborhood kids. Helps build community and increase personal accountability (ie less likely to do bad stuff if everyone knows your family) etc.

uncle_vito wrote:

All they have to do is get all the Mexicans out of the Rowland School district and they will not have students leaving anymore. Also get rid of the guns and killings near the school.
Vito (on a Mexican cruise) I like Mexicans in MEXICO.

vito i have news for you we are not going anywhere. i alone have fathered i say around 200 kid's do the math. we are growing and spreading throughout the country you moron. so get use to it or move the hell out to i dont know we are everywhere.

Let's see, Rowland has lost students to all the neighboring districts, but all the Rowland administrators can do is whine about the financil impact?..How about clean up your schools and provide a better program?..Only a government bureaucrat can't see the problem or its solution.

I like the idea of a school having neighborhood kids, but if the district sucks then my kid is going to have to go to a school farther away. I went to a private school in Arcadia (and then Pasadena) even though my parents lived in West Covina, because my parents did not like the schools in West Covina but did not have the money to move to Arcadia. My private schools had a lot of local kids, but also a lot of kids from other areas. It didn't matter too much what city we lived in and I can't imagine it matters much for a public school either.

As for deciding which kids to admit that is a trickier problem. Ideally, all kids who apply should be admitted and that's probably the best way to do it. The problem is a potential lag in the construction of facilities and other infrastructure (like teachers) to accommodate the influx of kids. What do you do during that period? I suppose the only fair ways are with a lottery or a waiting list. Privates often go the waiting list route. A good thing about that method is that you can get an accurate count of how many kids you are going to need to accommodate, so that's the method I would use. Where the money comes to construct facilities while the waitlisted kids are still being taught (for years perhaps) in their home district is another story.

There needs to be some economic incentive for a quality district to want to grow. Right now I think if you asked San Marino if they were interested in growing (let's say by taking over some underutilized facilities in southern Pasadena) they'd tell you they are not interested. So what incentive can you give them to want to take in additional students other than the typical fees a district receives for each child educated? Why would they want the hassle? Why did Walnut Valley decide it was worth the trouble? Declining enrollments?

Fix the anchor baby clause. Challenged people more worried about Prop 8 and not letting people in love marry instead of fixing that.

They are complaining about a School Choice Program and the impact on their funding, never mind what's good for the kids. I say, go with student vouchers and really revolutionize California education. I guarantee the kids, parents, teachers, administrators and politicians will be sufficiently motivated to find better and more timely ways of educating our kids. There's nothing wrong with free-enterprise when it's allowed to work without government intervention.

You all are kidding yourselves.

It is about District Choice that allows them to make discriminatory choices of the students they want in their district, like Walnut Valley USD who only want Asians and not Hispanics.

When Huff wrote this bill he was misguided and will not get my vote anymore the next time he runs for office...hopefully the last time he ran in 2008 will be the last!

uncle_vito wrote:

All they have to do is get all the Mexicans out of the Rowland School district and they will not have students leaving anymore. Also get rid of the guns and killings near the school.
Vito (on a Mexican cruise) I like Mexicans in MEXICO.

Oh Uncle Chito! You dont know what you are talking about! Majority of students in the district are Asian. The schools are great. My daughters school has students coming from all areas because it has all these awards. Never any shootings or drama in the area.

and then given that illegals get a free ride on your tax dollar and at the expense of the quality of education for legal citizens' children, well then you've got a hum ding zinger here in good ol' CA public education...

Reality Check wrote:

Oso has it right on the nose!! All the district cares about is money money money. If they want to keep the students they have (and potentially build on what they don't have), get yourself some safe schools with super teachers and super staff and facilities and you will get the draw. This is why out kid is in private school. The parents there dictate how the school operates. We get the best because we demand it. If we don't we pull the kids and the school is out their money..no money no school. Public schools need to pick up the pace!

I dont know about the private school thing. They seem to only want money too. My co-worker had her son in private school since pre-school, this year she put him in public school. They sent her a bill for tuition even though he would not be returning. They said she needed to let them know way in advance. They threatend to send her to collections if she did'nt pay. She let then know a 6 weeks before school started. Also while her son was in private school he would wiz right through homework. Now he is being challenged and when compaired to one of his friends who attends private school, he has a more advanced curriculum. Boy was my co-worker upset that she wasted so much money.

I went to private school from K-4. My parents separated and I had to go to public school for grades 5-6. It was a decent public school - in fact, the best in the district and my parents had to fight to get me into it because it wasn't the school I was assigned to. I still didn't learn very much in those two years. It was almost a waste of time. I went back to private school after that. I would never put my kid in a public school, because even if the academics are good (which I admit they seem to be at some public schools) the kids are not (all). It wasn't that the private school kids were all angels, but the school was able to discipline and/or expel the troublemakers. Public schools don't have that option and suffer for it. Too many bad influences remain.