5 Year School Reorganization Planning Team

  • The school reorganization team will serve a critical role in advising and providing feedback on potential school reorganization plans that are developed. All final decisions on school reorganization will be made by the Board of Education.
    The reorganization team will meet from 5:30 PM - 7:00 PM on the dates listed below. All meetings will be available for the public to view via Zoom or the AUSD YouTube channel. 

The Team

  • The school reorganization team consists of parents, bargaining unit members, principals, and district administrators. The team members are: Amber Fish, Anthony Contreras, Antonio Flores, Diana Ochoa, Diana Rojas, Edna Rodgers, Gabriel Fernandez, Kim Tse, Laurie Wray, Luz Fields, Marji Aveson. Mayra Rico, Melissa Wilson, Patricia Loera, Patricia Sanchez, Rena Galvez, Kimberly Rios, Sofia Verduzco, Jennie Pielstick, Leslie Jones, Megan Savella, Arturo Ortega, Jorge Ronquillo, Dayna Mitchell, Latasha Jamal, Anjelica Juarez.

Meeting #6

  • The meeting began with Superintendent Ortega reviewing the outcomes of the last school reorganization meeting and the model preferences most favored by the school reorganization committee in a survey they were asked to take.

    The following are the two main outcomes of the survey:

    • Model 3 was by far the model that was most favored by the committee
    • Model 2 is the least favorite model

    This does not mean everyone in the group agreed on these two items but by majority the above two statements are true. In addition to the survey, these statements were proven to be true during the last school re-org meeting, demonstrated by the number of times each model had a ‘like’ statement and by the number of individuals advocating for or against each model.

    To further clarify which models the group would like to recommend to the Board of Education the group was polled, on the following statements.

    Statement 1- The School Reorganization Team would like to recommend that model 3 be considered as one of the models moving forward. One person did rank it a three, everyone else ranked it a one or two.

    Answer options:

    • Yes, I agree with that statement.
    • No, I do not agree with that statements

    Responses:

    • Yes- 18
    • No- 1

     Statement 2 – We do not recommend that we further look into model 2, but in full transparency, two members of the team did rank it as their favorite choice.

     Answer options:

    • Yes, I agree with that statement.
    • No, I do not agree with that statements

    Responses:

    • Yes- 18
    • No- 1

     Statement 3- We are recommending that you also look at model 4. Overwhelmingly, this model ranked number 2 but there were a total of 5 members who ranked this model a 3 or a 4.

     Answer options:

    • Yes, I agree with that statement.
    • No, I do not agree with that statements

     Responses:

    • Yes- 18
    • No- 1

     Statement 4 – We do not recommend that we look at model 1 any further. Four people did rank this model number 2 but as a team we are not recommending that this model receive further consideration.

     Answer options:

    • Yes, I agree with that statement.
    • No, I do not agree with that statements

     Responses:

    • Yes- 18
    • No- 1

     After each survey question, the team member who voted 'no' was given the chance to share their reasons with the group.

     The second half of the meeting was spent discussing the aspects of the models the committee had additional feedback on. The points below are items that will also be given to the Board of Education.

    • We like model 3 but only one high school
    • We like model 4 but it should be 7-12
    • We like models 3 and 4 but we don’t like that it is a 5-6-year implementation plan, we would like a shorter implementation
    • We like models 3 and 4 but we do not want to implement next year, we would like to pause for a year and the continue
    • We like model 3 and 4 but we think 6th grade should stay at the elementary
    • We like model 3 but make the TK-8 an elementary school instead.

    As the meeting concluded Superintendent Ortega provided the next steps for the team.

    • The committee will be given further opportunity to ask questions and provide open-ended input on the models that will be presented to the Board of Education.
    • The information and recommendations from the group will be provided to the Board of Education
    • The Board of Education will provide guidance on which models will be fleshed out
    • The fleshed-out plan(s) will be brought back to the committee for further input.

    The meeting can be viewed in its entirety on the AUSD YouTube Channel.

     

Objective

  • 1. Understand the "WHY" behind the reorganization

    • Maximize programs and options for students
    • Maximize the capacity of our sites

    2. Understand the pieces of the reorganization models

    • Each model will include the following pieces:

              1. The Model

                -What is it?

              2. Potential implementation plans

                -How does it work in the next five years?

              3. Potential Programmatic Drawbacks

              4. Potential Programmatic Benefits

              5. Support Staff Implications

              6. Economic Implications 

     

Meeting Summaries