a g e n d a - durham public schools · magnet review • hugh osteen, deputy of operational...

Mission Statement In collaboration with our community and parents, the mission of Durham Public Schools is to provide all students with an outstanding education that motivates them to

reach their full potential and enables them to discover their interests and talents, pursue their goals and dreams, and succeed in college, in the workforce and as engaged citizens.

1. Call to Order 4:00 p.m. 2. Moment of Silence 3. Agenda Review and Approval 4. Public Comment 5. Report on Magnet Schools 6. Adjournment

A G E N D A

Durham Public Schools Board of Education

Special Called Work Session April 20, 2016

Fuller Administration Building 511 Cleveland Street, Durham, NC

1

Magnet Schools Review

April 20, 2016 - FULLER BUILDING, DURHAM, NC

2

Magnet Review • Hugh Osteen, Deputy of Operational

Services • Stacey Wilson-Norman, Deputy of

Academic Services • Scott Denton, Assistant Superintendent of

Auxiliary Services • Donna Hudson, Director, Office of Student

Assignment • Margaret Henderson, Director, Magnet

Programs • Mary Griffith, Magnet Recruitment/Marketing

Specialist

3

Handouts • Evaluation – January 2016 • Individual Magnet School Profiles • Magnet Program Offerings K-12 Continuum • Map of school locations • Student movement charts • Magnet applications by school

4

Overview • DPS Magnet School Purposes and Quick

Facts Regarding Magnet Schools • Magnet School Locations/Assignment

Zones • Transportation • Key Findings from Hanover Review of

DPS Magnet Schools • Recommendations for Next Steps • Discussion

5

DPS Magnet Schools Purposes Magnet Guiding Principles adopted by the DPS Board of Education in August of 2011:

• Utilize school facilities effectively (fill to capacity and prevent over or under enrollment)

• Promote school diversity

• Provide diverse program offerings throughout the district that meet student interest and provide expanded learning opportunities

6

DPS Magnet Schools • 23 Magnet Schools

o 10 elementary o 5 middle o 2 secondary (6-8) o 6 high

• Program and Calendar Magnets o 5 Year Round (calendar) o 18 Program Magnets

• 9 have a base assignment zone and magnet seats

• 14 are filled 100% through magnet lottery and have no base assignment zone

7

DPS Magnet Schools

• 12,768 (38%) DPS students attend magnet schools (PreK-12)

• 357 former charter/private/home school students assigned to magnet schools last year

8

MAGNET SCHOOL LOCATIONS AND ASSIGNMENT ZONES

9

Magnet School Feeder Patterns Program Magnets Elementary Middle High

International Baccalaureate Burton Shepard Hillside

Montessori George Watts Lakewood

Montessori Morehead Lakewood

Humanities/Integrated Arts Club Blvd

Core Knowledge/Integrated Arts R.N Harris

Visual and Performing Arts Sandy Ridge

Visual and Performing Arts Durham School of the Arts Durham School of the Arts

Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Math (STEAM) W.G. Pearson

Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM w/a focus on technology) Lowes Grove

Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM w/a focus on engineering and design) Neal

Business Management & Sustainability, Arcitecture and Construction, Biomedical Technology & Computer Engineering (STEM) Southern School of Energy and Sustaibability

Technology Small High School New Tech High School

Health Sciences Small High School The City of Medicine Academy

Early College Small High School at NCCU Josephine Dobbs Clements

Middle College Small High School at DTCC Durham Tech Middle College

Calander Magnets Elementary Middle High

Year-Round Pearsontown Rogers-Herr

Year-Round/Language Immersion Holt The School for Creative Studies The School for Creative Studies

Year-Round Easley The School for Creative Studies The School for Creative Studies

11

Magnet School Applications Historical Trends

DPS Program and Calendar Magnet Schools Apps

2011-12 Apps

2012-13 Apps

2013-14 Apps

2014-15 Apps

2015-16 Elementary Magnets Burton IB 124 149 187 173 201 Club Humanities 299 427 379 494 553 Geo Watts Montessori 531 461 643 699 929 Morehead Montessori 498 454 567 705 756 RN Harris Core Knowledge 107 241 203 230 240 Sandy Ridge Arts (Opened in 2011-12) 941 524 505 543 550 WG Pearson STEAM 280 351 305 337 336 Easley Calendar 90 73 66 81 101 Holt Calendar 78 83 107 133 173 Pearsontown Calendar 401 397 551 597 669 Totals 3349 3160 3513 3992 4508 Secondary Magnets City of Medicine Academy 164 154 235 410 403 Durham School of the Arts 1988 2201 2101 2357 2327 Hillside IB 159 231 153 160 167 Hillside New Tech 126 154 195 202 223 JDC Early College 233 284 307 384 411 Lakewood Montessori (Opened in 2010-11) 169 115 337 422 417 Lowes Grove STEM (Magnetized in 2013-14) 112 117 96 Middle College at DTCC 118 123 158 156 160 Neal STEM (Magnetized in 2013-14) 45 74 67 Shepard IB 302 359 469 477 375 Southern School of Energy and Sustainability (Magnetized in 2013-14)

140 135 102 WG Pearson Gifted and Talented (Phased out in 2012) 133 Chewning (Phased out in 2011-12) 63 Rogers-Herr Calendar 466 313 374 422 430 The School for Creative Studies Calendar and Program (Opened in 2013-14)

413 651 765 Totals 3757 3780 4804 5557 5540 Grand Totals 7,078 6,669 8,317 9,549 10,048

12

Elementary School Movement Chart Durham Public Schools

Elementary School Student Residence and Attendance 2015-16

Where Students Attend

CECA

S

DPI F

TE S

choo

l

Hom

eles

s

Beth

esda

Ele

men

tary

Burt

on E

lem

enta

ry

C C

Spau

ldin

g El

emen

tary

Club

Bou

leva

rd E

lem

enta

ry

Cree

ksid

e El

emen

tary

DPS

Hosp

ital S

choo

l

E K

Pow

e El

emen

tary

Easle

y El

emen

tary

East

way

Ele

men

tary

Eno

Valle

y Ele

men

tary

Faye

ttev

ille

Stre

et E

lem

enta

ry

Fore

st V

iew

Ele

men

tary

Geo

rge

Wat

ts E

lem

enta

ry

Gle

nn E

lem

enta

ry

Hilla

ndal

e El

emen

tary

Holt

Elem

enta

ry

Hope

Val

ley E

lem

enta

ry

Lake

woo

d El

emen

tary

Litt

le R

iver

Ele

men

tary

Man

gum

Ele

men

tary

Mer

rick-

Moo

re E

lem

enta

ry

Mor

ehea

d M

onte

ssor

i

Oak

Gro

ve E

lem

enta

ry

Park

woo

d El

emen

tary

Pear

sont

own

Elem

enta

ry

R N

Har

ris E

lem

enta

ry

Sand

y Ri

dge

Elem

enta

ry

Sout

hwes

t Ele

men

tary

Sprin

g Va

lley E

lem

enta

ry

W G

Pea

rson

Ele

men

tary

Y E

Smith

Ele

men

tary

Tota

l Stu

dent

s

Comments

Where Students Reside 105 1 37

648

346

261

492

919

10

515

581

583

562

281

735

350

700

657

653

644

484

352

335

698

207

608

529

797

345

594

620

529

519

391

16,0

88

Unmatched Address 77 2 0 32 3 0 0 1 2 5 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 2 7 2 1 0 3 1 0 2 5 2 0 0 77

CECAS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DPI FTE School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Homeless 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bethesda Elementary 1,305 9 0 0 623 115 16 16 3 0 11 2 4 1 22 2 6 5 2 2 8 2 12 8 14 0 9 11 145 137 5 19 35 56 5 1,305

Burton Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C C Spaulding Elementary 414 2 0 2 3 3 211 3 0 1 3 0 0 0 8 0 3 0 0 0 7 22 0 0 3 83 3 0 18 10 1 6 0 22 0 414

Club Boulevard Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Creekside Elementary 1,125 10 0 0 0 5 0 8 880 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 8 0 0 0 11 0 1 0 1 11 0 2 154 5 0 9 2 7 0 1,125

DPS Hospital School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E K Powe Elementary 709 3 0 0 0 10 0 18 0 0 339 0 0 3 0 116 172 3 5 0 5 9 1 0 4 2 1 0 1 4 2 0 0 11 0 709

Easley Elementary 584 1 0 0 0 4 0 7 1 0 2 363 0 89 0 0 5 5 60 1 5 0 7 4 0 0 1 0 2 3 20 0 1 3 0 584 Eastway Elementary 741 2 0 2 1 27 2 23 0 0 9 3 544 3 5 1 16 8 0 11 2 4 5 0 22 4 2 0 0 15 2 1 0 22 5 741

Eno Valley Elementary 977 5 0 0 0 3 1 18 2 1 1 123 2 419 0 5 19 8 13 12 2 2 58 23 8 3 1 0 2 4 224 2 1 12 3 977 Fayetteville Street Elementary 340 0 0 0 0 8 3 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 225 6 0 3 2 0 6 1 0 0 1 4 1 1 18 7 0 17 3 28 1 340

Forest View Elementary 631 10 0 0 3 8 4 5 2 0 7 0 0 1 2 518 11 2 3 0 9 4 1 0 1 14 0 0 10 6 2 1 1 6 0 631 George Watts Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Glenn Elementary 1,191 5 0 1 5 24 4 192 3 2 53 5 6 8 2 6 26 551 9 41 6 12 15 4 10 11 12 3 0 22 125 1 9 17 1 1,191 Hillandale Elementary 638 3 0 0 0 2 2 16 1 0 4 65 0 1 0 11 13 1 474 2 2 1 1 1 0 4 2 1 1 5 19 0 1 5 0 638

Holt Elementary 1,133 3 0 0 0 4 0 50 0 0 22 5 4 25 0 3 19 82 63 543 4 2 16 4 125 11 1 0 2 4 129 3 0 6 3 1,133 Hope Valley Elementary 698 11 0 0 0 8 0 17 5 0 7 0 1 0 2 16 3 3 0 0 515 10 0 0 0 7 1 0 62 15 0 11 0 4 0 698

Lakewood Elementary 588 3 0 0 0 16 6 22 0 0 15 0 1 0 0 8 8 10 2 1 18 408 0 2 0 14 0 1 18 7 2 3 0 22 1 588 Little River Elementary 246 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 7 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 3 0 0 199 13 0 1 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 246

Mangum Elementary 282 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 7 260 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 282 Merrick-Moore Elementary 786 2 0 0 6 25 1 32 3 0 7 2 4 5 1 5 5 7 6 16 3 1 12 4 498 10 17 3 2 34 18 7 15 25 10 786

Morehead Montessori 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Oak Grove Elementary 775 8 1 0 1 26 0 14 3 0 13 0 0 5 0 2 5 3 5 13 11 0 11 3 7 2 542 6 2 20 12 3 41 13 3 775 Parkwood Elementary 976 7 0 0 0 14 2 11 8 0 9 1 1 0 8 13 3 1 1 0 19 2 1 1 0 11 2 493 243 20 0 65 0 38 2 976

Pearsontown Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 R N Harris Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sandy Ridge Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southwest Elementary 672 7 0 0 0 5 1 8 5 1 2 0 0 1 4 9 4 1 0 1 11 3 0 0 1 8 4 4 101 3 0 464 1 23 0 672

Spring Valley Elementary 512 6 0 0 3 12 3 15 0 0 3 2 1 0 0 1 1 2 7 5 0 0 2 1 0 3 3 1 1 10 7 2 415 6 0 512 W G Pearson Elementary 233 1 0 0 0 14 1 2 0 0 4 0 8 0 0 0 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 6 4 1 1 1 180 0 233

Y E Smith Elementary 455 3 0 0 0 13 4 7 0 0 3 1 5 0 1 1 13 4 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 4 0 8 10 2 0 1 13 357 455

Total Students 16,088

13

Middle School Movement Chart Durham Public Schools

Middle School Student Residence and Attendance 2015-16


CECA

S

Brog

den

Mid

dle

DPS

Hosp

ital S

choo

l

Durh

am S

choo

l of t

he A

rts (

6-8)

Geo

rge

L Ca

rrin

gton

Mid

dle

Jam

es E

She

pard

Mid

dle

Lake

view

Sch

ool

Lake

woo

d M

onte

ssor

i Mid

dle

Litt

le R

iver

Ele

men

tary

Low

e's G

rove

Mid

dle

Luca

s Mid

dle

Nea

l Mid

dle

Roge

rs-H

err M

iddl

e

Sher

woo

d G

ithen

s Mid

dle

The

Scho

ol fo

r Cre

ativ

e St

udie

s

Tota

l Stu

dent

s

Comments

Where Students Reside 10

597 6 644

1,00

4

512

12

302

34

653

639

787

632

904

292

7,02

8

Unmatched Address 15 2 1 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 15

CECAS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Brogden Middle 851 2 513 0 100 13 38 3 87 1 7 1 7 20 9 50 851

DPS Hospital School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Durham School of the Arts (6-8) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

George L Carrington Middle 1,298 1 17 2 116 947 27 2 34 15 5 31 11 6 4 80 1,298

James E Shepard Middle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lakeview School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lakewood Montessori Middle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Little River Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lowe's Grove Middle 1,195 2 7 0 93 3 127 2 33 0 619 8 9 257 13 22 1,195

Lucas Middle 763 0 10 0 63 15 32 0 17 16 3 558 8 2 0 39 763

Neal Middle 1,316 1 36 0 131 24 199 3 28 2 19 19 744 25 4 81 1,316

Rogers-Herr Middle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sherwood Githens Middle 1,590 2 13 0 138 2 89 2 103 0 0 21 8 322 870 20 1,590

The School for Creative Studies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


14

High School Movement Chart Durham Public Schools

High School Student Residence and Attendance 2015-16


Hom

eles

s

CECA

S

C E

Jord

an H

igh

City

of M

edic

ine

Acad

emy

DPS

Hosp

ital S

choo

l

Durh

am S

choo

l of t

he A

rts

(9-1

2)

Durh

am's

Perf

orm

ance

Lea

rnin

g Ce

nter

Hills

ide

High

Hills

ide

New

Tec

h Hi

gh

J D C

lem

ent E

arly

Col

lege

HS

Lake

view

Sch

ool

Mid

dle

Colle

ge H

S @

DTC

C

Nor

ther

n Hi

gh

Rive

rsid

e Hi

gh

Sout

hern

Sch

ool o

f Ene

rgy

and

Sust

aina

bilit

y

The

Scho

ol fo

r Cre

ativ

e St

udie

s

Tota

l Stu

dent

s

Comments

Where Students Reside 2 6

2,00

2

303

21

995

255

1,30

7

225

354

30

159

1,49

5

1,86

5

1,40

0

235

10,4

19

Unmatched Address 55 2 1 3 1 16 3 0 3 1 2 1 22 0 0 0 0 55

CECAS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C E Jordan High 2,222 1 1,652 35 1 244 36 89 21 52 1 20 16 33 21 27 2,222

City of Medicine Academy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DPS Hospital School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Durham School of the Arts (9-12) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Durham's Performance Learning Center 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Hillside High 1,881 1 233 67 0 151 56 1,037 129 93 4 26 19 14 51 42 1,881 Hillside New Tech High 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

J D Clement Early College HS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lakeview School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Middle College HS @ DTCC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Northern High 2,073 1 33 65 1 186 40 37 19 49 11 28 1,349 208 46 64 2,073 Riverside High 2,087 2 26 54 2 204 41 33 11 31 3 23 51 1,582 24 36 2,087

Southern School of Energy and Sustainability 2,101 0 55 81 1 207 82 108 44 127 10 40 60 28 1,258 66 2,101 The School for Creative Studies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


15

TRANSPORTATION

16

Magnet Transportation Defined • County wide with neighborhood service

• Burton, City of Medicine, Club Blvd, DSA, Early College, George Watts, Hillside IB, Lakeview, Lakewood Montessori, Morehead, RN Harris, Shepard, WG Pearson, School for Creative Studies (p.m. only)

• County wide with express stops at select schools and SDC • School for Creative Studies (a.m. only)

17

Magnet Transportation Defined • Pathways with shuttle to/from base high

schools o Middle College, CTE Stem at Lowes Grove,

Hillside, Jordan, Neal, Northern, Riverside, Southern

• Regional with neighborhood service o Easley, Holt, Pearsontown, Rogers Herr,

Sandy Ridge

18

Magnet Transportation Defined • Annual Cost - Magnet Routes: $1.57 Million

> Elementary Costs - $408,379 > Middle Costs - $204,903 > Secondary/High Costs - $962,153

• Annual Year Round Costs: $160K

• Total Magnet Excess Cost: $1.735 Million See Handout for Detailed Calculations

19

HANOVER REVIEW

20

Magnet Review: Hanover Research

• DPS Magnet Schools were measured against the three purposes

o Utilization of School Facilities o Promotion of School Diversity o Provide Diverse Relevant Programs

21

Magnet Review Key Findings: Hanover Research …DPS magnet schools are fulfilling their stated purposes through supporting efficient usage of school facilities, attracting a diverse student population, and offering a wide range of magnet themes. …DPS has collaborated with its surrounding community to strengthen its magnet offerings adding magnet sites and programs based on feedback gathered through structured conversations with community members and an online survey.

22

Magnet Review Key Findings: Hanover Research Utilization of Schools 1. Both average enrollment and school capacity

(percentage) have increased for DPS schools over the past six years, but the enrollment growth has been faster in magnet schools

2. Elementary schools in the district operate closest to capacity while middle and high schools have lower capacity ratings…(We find similar trends in magnet schools.)

3. Overall, by design, magnet schools prevent the sending schools from being over capacity through the lottery assignment process.

23

Magnet Review Key Findings: Hanover Research Continued….

4. Magnet schools application numbers have increased over the past five years by 39% from 2011-12 to 2015-16.

• 19 DPS magnet schools experienced an increase in the number of applications

• 4 magnet schools experienced a decrease. Of those four schools, Lowe’s Grove and Southern were both designated as magnet schools in part to pull back some of the base assignment zone who had opted out of these schools. Therefore, the enrollment trend, rather than the number of applications, may be a better indicator of attractiveness for these two schools.

24

Magnet Review Key Findings: Hanover Research Promotion of School Diversity

1. At each school level the proportion of Hispanic students has increased from 2010-11 to 2015-16, and the growth is even greater among magnet schools.

2. The proportion of students who qualify for Free or Reduced priced lunch grew by a larger amount in magnet schools, percentage wise, than in the district overall.

3. However, the proportion of FRL students is still higher in the district (68 percent) than among just magnet schools (62 percent).

25

Magnet Review Key Findings: Hanover Research Availability of diverse and relevant program offerings

1. Based on community feedback and BOE approval in August 2012, DPS added 5 magnet schools to fill gaps in the magnet program themes continuum.

2. The magnet schools at DPS currently fulfill 6 broad themes across the K-12 continuum, including STEM, Arts, Montessori, World Languages, International Baccalaureate (IB), and Year Round.

26

Magnet Review Key Findings: Hanover Research Continued….

Application numbers for magnet schools have increased over the past five years, growing by 39% from 2012 to 2016. This growth suggests increased interest in DPS magnet programs. • Overall, the number of applications to DPS magnet schools

from students attending charter schools increased by 35 percent from 2014 to 2016.

• Overall, the number of applications to DPS magnet schools from students attending private schools increased by 16 percent from 2014 to 2016.

3. Families are motivated to apply to DPS magnet schools because of their good academic reputations compared to other options, the specialized thematic curriculum, small schools, and the perception of small class sizes. (From parent survey/community conversations)

27

RECOMMENDATIONS

28

RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Study updated demographic patterns in district and

consider a comprehensive reassignment plan • No comprehensive assignment plan since merger (1994) • To alleviate some of the highest concentrations of poverty • Possibly to coincide with any new school openings

2. Study all priority zones and consider the impact of eliminating the priority zones at Watts and Morehead • Demographic of the priority zone has changed since

conception of the schools 3. Explore adding an additional Montessori elementary

school 4. Transition free pre-K programs at Montessori schools

to “sliding scale” charges based on need

29

RECOMMENDATIONS 5. Develop marketing campaigns and expectations for

traditional/neighborhood schools that are customized to the assignment zone families of each school (their target audiences)

6. Split district for transportation purposes between Lowe’s Grove and Neal – both are STEM choices at middle school level currently open to district-wide applications

7. Explore possible theme changes at Burton (Humanities?), Shepard (Humanities & Law?) • Cost of operating whole school IB programs • State of the art law facility at Shepard • Consider impact on Hillside IB Diploma Programme • Would require a theme development committee made up of

stakeholders including the 3 current IB principals

5. Consider equity of magnet transportation among magnet schools

30

DISCUSSION

31

An Evaluation of Magnet Schools

Prepared by Hanover Research January 2016

For Durham Public Schools

Department of Research & Accountability

32

Hanover Research | January 2016

In the following report, Hanover Research compiles and

analyzes district-wide data to evaluate the extent to which

Durham Public Schools’ magnet schools are fulfilling their

intended purposes.

EVALUATION OF MAGNET SCHOOLS

Prepared for Durham Public Schools

January 2016

www.hanoverresearch.com

33


© 2015 Hanover Research 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary and Key Findings ............................................................................... 4

Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 4

Key Findings ........................................................................................................................... 4

Purpose #1: Utilization of School Facilities ........................................................................ 5

Purpose #2: Promotion of School Diversity ....................................................................... 5

Purpose #3: Availability of Diverse and Relevant Program Offerings ............................... 5

Section I: Overview of Data Sources ................................................................................ 7

Section II: Utilization of School Facilities ........................................................................ 10

Enrollment and Capacity Trends of Magnet Schools ........................................................... 10

Summary of Findings ....................................................................................................... 10

Data Sources .................................................................................................................... 10

All School Levels ............................................................................................................... 11

Elementary Schools ......................................................................................................... 12

Middle Schools ................................................................................................................. 13

High Schools ..................................................................................................................... 14

Secondary Schools ............................................................................................................... 15

Effect of Magnet Schools on Capacity Rating of Sending Schools ....................................... 16

Summary .......................................................................................................................... 16

Data Sources .................................................................................................................... 16


Secondary Schools ........................................................................................................... 16

Application Trends ............................................................................................................... 19


Data Sources .................................................................................................................... 19

Overall .............................................................................................................................. 20

By Magnet School ............................................................................................................ 21

Section III: Promotion of School Diversity ...................................................................... 22


Data Sources .................................................................................................................... 22

All School Levels ............................................................................................................... 23


34



Middle Schools ................................................................................................................. 25

High Schools ..................................................................................................................... 26

Secondary Schools ............................................................................................................... 27

Section IV: Availability of Diverse and Relevant Program Offerings ................................ 28

Application Trends Overall .................................................................................................. 28

Application Trends Disaggregated by Charter and Private School Applicants .................... 28


Data Sources .................................................................................................................... 28

Applicants from Charter Schools ..................................................................................... 29

Applicants from Private Schools ...................................................................................... 30

Charter School Applicants by Magnet School.................................................................. 31

Private School Applicants by Magnet School .................................................................. 33

“Kitchen Table Data” from Community Conversations ....................................................... 35


Data Sources .................................................................................................................... 36

Beliefs about Motivation to Apply to Magnet Schools .................................................... 37

Beliefs about Motivation to Not Apply to Magnet Schools ............................................. 38

Themes/Programs that would be Attractive to Durham Families .................................. 39

Other Considerations for the Future of Magnet Schools ................................................ 40

Additional Magnet School Survey (MSS) Responses ....................................................... 41

Outcomes ......................................................................................................................... 46

Magnet School Options ....................................................................................................... 47


Data Sources .................................................................................................................... 47

Magnet School Program Options Continuum ................................................................. 48

Variety of Program Themes at Magnet Schools .............................................................. 50

35



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND KEY FINDINGS

INTRODUCTION

In this report, Hanover Research (Hanover) evaluates the extent to which magnet schools within Durham Public Schools (DPS) are fulfilling their intended purposes. These purposes are outlined in the Magnet Guiding Principles adopted by the Board of Education (BoE) in August of 2011 and include the following:1

Utilize school facilities effectively (fill to enrollment capacity),

Promote school diversity, and

Provide diverse and relevant program offerings throughout the district that meet

student interests and provide expanded learning opportunities. The report is organized as follows:

Section I: Data and Methodology describes the data that Hanover organized for this

report and how we present comparisons between magnet schools and DPS schools overall.

Section II: Utilization of School Facilities discusses enrollment and capacity trends

of magnet schools, the effect of magnet schools on capacity of sending schools, and application trends.

Section III: Promotion of School Diversity describes district-wide demographic/

socioeconomic trends and magnet school demographic/socioeconomic trends.

Section IV: Availability of Diverse and Relevant Program Offerings explains

application trends disaggregated by charter/private school applicants, “Kitchen Table Data” from community conversations, and magnet school options.

KEY FINDINGS

As illustrated in the points below, this report ultimately provides evidence that DPS magnet schools are fulfilling their stated purposes, through supporting efficient usage of school facilities (including alleviating potential over-capacity at sending schools), attracting a diverse student population to magnet programs, and offering a wide range of relevant magnet themes. Further, as shown in the final key finding below, DPS has collaborated with its surrounding community to strengthen its magnet offerings, adding magnet sites and programs based on feedback gathered through structured conversations with community members and an online survey.

1 “Plan for Evaluation of Magnet Schools Against the DPS Magnet Purposes.” Durham Public Schools. Provided by DPS

to Hanover Research.

36



PURPOSE #1: UTILIZATION OF SCHOOL FACILITIES

Both average enrollment and school capacity have increased for DPS schools over

the past six years, but the enrollment growth has been faster in magnet schools. The average capacity rating, or the proportion of used classroom capacity, fell from 2010-11 to 2012-13 for the district overall, and capacity ratings have remained around 91 to 92 percent since then. However, the capacity ratings among magnet schools have increased to approximately 95 percent.

Elementary schools in the district operate closest to capacity, while middle and

high schools have lower capacity ratings. The average capacity rating among elementary schools is between 98 and 101 percent, between 89 and 96 percent among middle schools, and between 76 and 90 percent among high schools. We find a similar trend among magnet schools across different levels.

Overall, by design magnet schools prevent the sending schools from being over

capacity through the lottery assignment process. The building capacity is static, while enrollment is dynamic. In 2014-15, all sending elementary, middle, and high schools were at a lower percent capacity due to their students assigned to a magnet school.

Magnet school application numbers have increased over the past five years.

Overall, the number of applications to DPS magnet schools increased by 39 percent from the 2011-12 academic year to the 2015-16 academic year.

PURPOSE #2: PROMOTION OF SCHOOL DIVERSITY

At each school level, the proportion of Hispanic students has increased from 2010-

11 to 2015-16, and the growth is even greater among magnet schools. In DPS overall, the proportion of Hispanic students has increased by 7 percentage points,2 whereas the increase is close to 10 percentage points among just magnet schools. This change in the racial/ethnic composition of DPS students coincides with decreases in the proportions of black and white students.

The proportion of students who qualify for free or reduced-price lunch grew by a

larger amount at magnet schools, percentage-wise, than in the district overall. However, the proportion of FRL students is still higher in the district (68 percent) than among just magnet schools (62 percent).

PURPOSE #3: AVAILABILITY OF DIVERSE AND RELEVANT PROGRAM OFFERINGS

Based on community feedback and BoE approval in August 2012, DPS added five

magnet schools to fill gaps in the magnet program themes continuum across the elementary, middle, and high school levels.

o These additions closed continuity gaps in the STEM magnet theme at the middle school level (with the introduction of magnet programs at Lowes Grove and

2 To about 28 percent, second to black students, who comprise 48 percent of the DPS student body.

37



Neal) and the Year Round theme at the high school level (through the School for Creative Studies).

o These additions also provided additional continuity and support in the Arts magnet theme in middle and high school (through the School for Creative Studies), in the Year Round theme in middle school (again through the School for Creative Studies), and in the World Languages theme in elementary school (through Holt).

The magnet schools at DPS currently fulfill six broad themes across the

elementary, middle, and high school continuum, including STEM, Arts, Montessori, World Languages, International Baccalaureate (IB), and Year Round. Except for the Montessori theme, all themes are represented at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. Given the nature of the theme, Montessori is present at elementary and middle school magnets only.

o Each DPS magnet school has a more detailed program theme that is aligned with the overarching magnet themes discussed above. Program themes at DPS magnet schools range from Agricultural Science/Business Entrepreneurship to Health/Medical Careers to a Year Round Language Academy.

Families are motivated to apply to DPS Magnet schools because of their good

academic reputation in comparison to other options available, the specialized thematic curriculum, and small schools and the perception of small class sizes. These responses came from Kitchen Table Conversations (KTCs) and a survey from 2012.

38



SECTION I: OVERVIEW OF DATA SOURCES

This section provides an overview of the data sources compiled for this report. Specific details for each section and subsection of the report are provided within each respective section. To support this study, DPS provided Hanover with several datasets, including six years of school enrollment by students’ gender and race/ethnicity (2010-11 to 2015-16), six years of school capacity, five years of school enrollment by students’ FRL status (2010-11 to 2014-15), and three years of magnet school applications (2013-14 to 2015-16).3 In addition, the report presents data tables provided by DPS. These include:

Two tables with information about the number of students who left elementary,

middle, and high schools to attend a primary or secondary magnet school in 2014-15, and how, overall, the magnet assignment of those students prevented over-capacity conditions from their sending schools.

A data table containing a breakdown of DPS magnet applications from 2011-12 to

2015-16.

Various tables from a presentation from the Instructional Services Committee

meeting on May 7th, 2012. These tables include Kitchen Table Conversations (KTCs) data as well as responses from the DPS Magnet Schools Survey (MSS). Data from these sources were collected in March 2012.

Two tables with information about the K-12 magnet program options continuum

from elementary school to high school, as well as detail on the magnet school themes.

Note that we observe enrollment and capacity information at the school-year level, while the application information is at the student/applicant level. The data on school enrollment by gender and race also indicate magnet schools in each of the six observed years. This information allows Hanover to compare enrollment and capacity statistics of only magnet schools to the entire district. Figure 1.1 lists non-magnet and magnet schools in DPS as of the 2015-16 year, segmenting the schools by grade band or level (e.g., elementary, middle, and high school).

3 In the rest of the report, Hanover also uses just the spring year to represent a school year. For example, 2010-11 is

synonymous with 2011.

39



Figure 1.1: Magnet and Non-Magnet Schools in DPS (2015-16)

SCHOOL LEVEL NON-MAGNET SCHOOLS MAGNET SCHOOLS

Elementary Schools

Bethesda

C.C. Spaulding

Creekside

E.K. Powe

Eastway

Eno Valley

Fayetteville Street

Forest View

Glenn

Hillandale

Hope Valley

Lakewood

Little River

Mangum

Merrick-Moore

Oak Grove

Parkwood

Southwest

Spring Valley

Y.E. Smith

Burton

Club Boulevard

Easley (Year-Round)

George Watts Montessori

Holt (Year-Round)4

Morehead Montessori

Pearsontown (Year-Round)

R.N. Harris

Sandy Ridge

W.G. Pearson

Middle Schools

Brogden

Githens

Lucas

Lakewood Montessori

Lowe’s Grove

Neal

Rogers-Herr (Year-Round)

Shepard International Baccalaureate

High Schools

Hillside

Holton Career & Resource Center

Jordan

Northern

Riverside

The Durham Performance Learning Center

City of Medicine Academy

Hillside New Tech

J.D. Clement Early College

Middle College

Southern School of Energy and Sustainability

Secondary Schools The School for Creative Studies

Durham School of the Arts

Other Schools5

Hospital School

Lakeview

4 Holt became a magnet school in 2011-12.

5 These schools are classified as “specialty” schools.

40



Figure 1.2 highlights the years in which a school was indicated as a magnet school in the data for all schools that were ever a magnet school in DPS. This list includes the Southern School of Engineering, which is no longer a school in DPS. Many of the schools listed below are magnet schools for the entire six-year period, as indicated in the “Total” column. However, others are magnet schools for a portion of the time, because they became a non-magnet school, had not been established, had been re-established as a new magnet school, or had been merged into another school in DPS.

Figure 1.2: Schools Indicated as Magnet Schools

SCHOOL NAME 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 TOTAL

Elementary Schools

Burton Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6

Club Boulevard Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6

Easley Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6

George Watts Montessori Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6

Holt No No Yes Yes Yes Yes 5

Morehead Montessori Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6

Pearsontown Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6

R.N. Harris Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6

Sandy Ridge No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 5

W.G. Pearson Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 5

Middle Schools

Lakewood Montessori Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6

Lowe's Grove No No Yes Yes Yes Yes 4

Neal No No Yes Yes Yes Yes 4

Rogers-Herr Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6

Shepard International Baccalaureate Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6

High Schools

City of Medicine Academy Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6

Hillside New Tech No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 5

J.D. Clement Early College Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6

Middle College Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6

Southern School Of Engineering* Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 4


No No Yes Yes Yes Yes 4

Secondary Schools

Durham School of the Arts Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6

The School for Creative Studies No No Yes Yes Yes Yes 3

Total 17 19 22 22 22 22 124 *In 2015, the Southern School of Engineering was fully integrated into the Southern School of Energy and Sustainability.

41



SECTION II: UTILIZATION OF SCHOOL FACILITIES

This section addresses the first purpose of the magnet schools at DPS: Utilize school facilities effectively (i.e., fill to enrollment capacity). To evaluate progress towards this purpose, Hanover reviews enrollment and capacity trends, as well as application trends, for magnet schools over the past five to six years.

ENROLLMENT AND CAPACITY TRENDS OF MAGNET SCHOOLS

This subsection compares average total enrollment and capacity of all DPS schools to magnet schools in the district.6 These comparisons are discussed for all school levels combined and also separately for each level. We further compare average capacity ratings between the two groups, which is defined as total enrollment divided by school capacity.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Overall, utilization of school capacity7 has been high in the past six years (90 to 94

percent). Relative to all DPS schools, the school capacity rating for magnet schools has risen in recent years, to approximately 95 percent.

In general, DPS schools have higher total enrollment and percent capacity now than

five years ago. The same is true for the magnet schools in the district.

Capacity ratings are highest in elementary school (around 100 percent), lower in

middle school (89 to 96 percent), and lower still in high school (76 to 90 percent). We find the same pattern among magnet schools of different levels.

DATA SOURCES

For the analyses discussed in this subsection, Hanover analyzed summary statistics that describe the average enrollment and capacity in schools during a particular year at a specific level.8 For each group of averages, we provide a side-by-side comparison of all schools in DPS and only the magnet schools. In addition, when we describe average school enrollment and capacity, Hanover also computes the average capacity rating for all schools in the respective year and level. A school’s capacity rating is defined as the proportion of the school’s total enrollment over its capacity. A school can have a capacity rating of over 100 percent, which indicates that its enrollment is over-capacity. When Hanover presents the comparisons between DPS overall and only magnet schools, we indicate the number of schools from each group that are described in the comparison. These numbers are often described in a range rather than as a single value. The reason is

6 All text from this subsection is drawn from a prior report that Hanover prepared for DPS in December 2015. See:

“Magnet School Enrollment and Demographics.” Hanover Research, 2015. 7 A school’s capacity rating

8 Ibid.

42



that the number of schools in the district or at a specific level varies from year to year. Further, the number of magnet schools in the district also fluctuates over time.

ALL SCHOOL LEVELS

From 2011 to 2016, overall enrollment and percent capacity have increased for both magnet schools and all of DPS (Figure 2.1). The six-year growth has been faster among magnet schools (13.2 percent) than in the district overall (7.3 percent). Overall, schools in DPS have a capacity rating of around 90 to 94 percent, so schools are enrolling students close to capacity without exceeding capacity. Among magnet schools, the average capacity ratings are similar. However, capacity ratings have fallen slightly for the district overall from approximately 94 to 92 percent, while capacity ratings for magnet schools have rebounded to about 95 percent following a dip to 88 percent in 2013. Figure 2.1: Comparison of Enrollment and Capacity in DPS Overall versus Magnet Schools

(All School Levels)

CHARACTERISTIC 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

All DPS Average (n=50-55)

Total Enrollment 606.1 604.7 590.4 606.3 634.8 632.1

School Capacity 642.6 647.2 645.5 670.5 688.5 689.8

Capacity Rating 94.3% 93.4% 91.5% 90.4% 92.2% 91.6%

Magnet Only Average (n=16-22)


School Capacity 525.8 505.6 594.5 585.0 595.3 595.3

Capacity Rating 94.8% 94.2% 88.2% 90.1% 95.1% 94.6%

Source: DPS.

9

9 “Magnet School Enrollment and Demographics.” Op. cit.

94.3% 93.4% 91.5% 90.4% 92.2% 91.6% 94.8% 94.2% 88.2% 90.1%

95.1% 94.6%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Cap

acit

y R

atin

g

All DPS Average (n=50-55) Magnet Only Average (n=16-22)

43



ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS

Elementary schools in DPS operate very close to capacity, with capacity ratings between approximately 98 to 101 percent during the observed period, although they are slightly lower in more recent years (Figure 2.2). Among magnet elementary schools, enrollment is similarly close to capacity. Enrollment has risen slightly at magnet schools with increasing capacity over time, while it has decreased slightly at elementary schools overall. Figure 2.2: Comparison of Enrollment and Capacity in DPS Overall versus Magnet Schools

(Elementary Schools)

CHARACTERISTIC 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016



School Capacity 534.2 538.7 522.3 536.2 540.1 542.3

Capacity Rating 101.0% 97.8% 99.4% 99.9% 98.3% 98.0%

Magnet Only Average (n=8-10) Total Enrollment 484.5 491.6 484.6 489.2 495.3 490.3

School Capacity 474.0 500.5 500.5 486.3 496.3 496.3

Capacity Rating 102.2% 98.2% 96.8% 100.6% 99.8% 98.8%

Source: DPS.

10

10

Ibid.

101.0% 97.8% 99.4% 99.9% 98.3% 98.0% 102.2%

98.2% 96.8% 100.6% 99.8% 98.8%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Cap

acit

y R

atin

g


44



MIDDLE SCHOOLS

Overall, middle schools have had capacity ratings between 89 to 96 percent, and the rating is lowest in the current school year (Figure 2.3). Magnet schools at the middle-school level have had capacity ratings between 90 to 99 percent, and currently have a 95 percent rating. Relative to all middle schools in the district, magnet middle schools are operating closer to full capacity across the examined time period. Figure 2.3 presents both average total enrollment and average capacity values, but we do not focus on these values since there is high variation in the number of magnet middle schools relative to the small number of schools. The fluctuation in these numbers is more likely to reflect changes in which middle schools are classified as magnet schools than actual changes at schools that are magnet schools for the full six years. Figure 2.3: Comparison of Enrollment and Capacity in DPS Overall versus Magnet Schools

(Middle Schools)

CHARACTERISTIC 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016



School Capacity 672.2 679.6 688.2 683.4 747.8 747.8

Capacity Rating 91.4% 94.3% 92.1% 96.1% 95.4% 89.4%


School Capacity 642.5 464.7 614.8 614.8 614.8 614.8

Capacity Rating 90.4% 94.5% 93.3% 98.6% 98.2% 94.5%

Source: DPS.

11

11

Ibid.

91.4% 94.3% 92.1% 96.1% 95.4%

89.4% 90.4% 94.5% 93.3%

98.6% 98.2% 94.5%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Cap

acit

y R

atin

g


45



HIGH SCHOOLS

During the observed period, the average capacity rating of high schools in DPS increased from about 81 percent to close to 90 percent (Figure 2.4). The average capacity ratings of magnet high schools were much higher in 2011 and 2012, at 99 and 105 percent respectively, but have since fallen below the yearly rating for all high schools in the district. Like magnet middle schools, there are relatively few magnet high schools in DPS, fluctuating between three and six in the past six years. Therefore, we do not focus on the average total enrollment and average school capacity values. Figure 2.4: Comparison of Enrollment and Capacity in DPS Overall versus Magnet Schools

(High Schools)

CHARACTERISTIC 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016



School Capacity 996.1 1006.8 1037.2 1037.2 1037.2 1037.2

Capacity Rating 80.9% 80.0% 76.4% 76.6% 87.3% 89.7%


School Capacity 216.7 248.7 577.5 577.5 577.5 577.5

Capacity Rating 99.2% 105.4% 65.3% 67.3% 82.8% 83.9%

Source: DPS.

12

12

Ibid.

80.9% 80.0% 76.4% 76.6%

87.3% 89.7%

99.2% 105.4%

65.3% 67.3%

82.8% 83.9%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Cap

acit

y R

atin

g


46



SECONDARY SCHOOLS

Two magnet schools serve students across middle school and high school, and are examined separately as secondary schools. For these magnet schools, capacity ratings have remained high across the examined period, varying from approximately 94 to 104 percent.

Figure 2.5: Enrollment and Capacity in DPS Magnet Schools (Secondary Schools)

CHARACTERISTIC 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Magnet Schools Average (n=1-2) Total Enrollment 1505.0 555.5 1554.0 912.5 1049.5 1082.5

School Capacity 1450.0 579.8 1500.0 969.0 1077.5 1077.5

Capacity Rating 103.8% 95.8% 103.6% 94.2% 97.4% 100.5%

Source: DPS.

13

13

Ibid.

103.8% 95.8%

103.6% 94.2% 97.4% 100.5%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

47



EFFECT OF MAGNET SCHOOLS ON CAPACITY RATING OF SENDING SCHOOLS

This subsection illustrates the effect of magnet schools on capacity at sending schools based on lottery data from 2015.

SUMMARY

Overall, by design magnet schools prevent the sending schools from being over

capacity through the lottery assignment process. The building capacity is static, while enrollment is dynamic. In 2014-15, all sending elementary, middle, and high schools were at a lower percent capacity due to their students who were assigned to magnet schools.

DATA SOURCES

DPS provided Hanover with the following two data tables based on lottery data from the 2014-15 academic year:

Students leaving base for Magnet-Elementary,14 and

Students leaving base for Magnet-Secondary.15

These two tables were reformatted and incorporated directly into this report.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS

As shown in Figure 2.6, DPS magnet schools affect the percent capacity of the elementary schools from which magnet school students are sent. Specifically, for all sending elementary schools, the percent capacity decreases when compared to the percent capacity that the schools would reach if none of their students were assigned to magnet schools.

SECONDARY SCHOOLS

As shown in Figure 2.7 below, DPS magnet schools also affect the percent capacity of the secondary schools from which magnet school students are sent. Specifically, for all sending secondary schools, the percent capacity decreases when compared to the percent capacity that the schools would reach if none of their students were assigned to magnet schools. However, the majority of the sending schools would be over-capacity without the assignments to magnet schools.

14

“Students Leaving Base for Magnet-Elementary.” Op. cit. 15

“Students Leaving Base for Magnet-Secondary.” Op. cit.

48



Figure 2.6: Effect of Magnet Schools on Capacity of Sending Schools (Elementary Schools)

% CAPACITY % CAPACITY

IF NO STUDENTS WENT TO

MAGNETS

MAGNET ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS

Bu

rto

n

Clu

b B

lvd

.

Easl

ey

Har

ris

Ho

lt

Mo

reh

ead

W. G

. Pe

arso

n

Pe

arso

nto

wn

San

dy

Rid

ge

Wat

ts

TOTA

L

SEN

DIN

G E

LEM

ENTA

RY

SC

HO

OLS

Bethesda 94% 107% 20 3 - 14 - 7 5 36 2 1 88

Creekside 117% 123% 2 3 - 2 - 1 4 31 2 3 48

Easley 109% 111% 1 1 - - 3 - - - 6 - 11

Eastway 107% 113% 6 6 - 8 - 1 6 - 7 2 36

Eno Valley 93% 110% - 2 30 1 - 1 2 - 67 2 105

Fayetteville St 67% 70% 3 - - 2 - - 7 - 1 - 13

Forest View 108% 111% 2 2 - 2 - 2 4 8 1 2 23

Glenn 110% 127% 2 36 - 9 7 1 3 - 41 2 101

Hillandale 97% 101% 1 1 - 13 1 - 2 - 9 2 29

Holt 103% 114% 1 11 - 1 2 2 3 - 40 3 63

Hope Valley 102% 105% 1 2 - 2 1 2 1 12 - - 21

Lakewood 108% 114% 5 4 - 3 - 2 4 5 - 3 26

Little River 61% 62% - - - - 1 - - - 4 - 5

Merrick-Moore 109% 114% 4 8 - 4 6 2 7 - 5 - 36

Oak Grove 93% 96% 4 1 - 2 6 1 2 - 3 1 20

Parkwood 90% 103% 9 3 - 3 2 5 8 54 1 2 87

W. G. Pearson 94% 96% 2 - - 1 - 2 3 2 - 1 11

E. K. Powe 113% 127% 1 7 - - - - 1 - 1 48 58

Smith 100% 102% 2 1 - 2 - - 2 1 1 1 10

Spaulding 84% 92% 1 - - 3 - 16 2 2 3 - 27

Spring Valley 91% 94% 2 3 - 4 2 2 2 - 3 - 18

TOTAL 70 96 30 77 31 47 71 174 198 75 869 Source: DPS.

16

16

“Students Leaving Base for Magnet-Elementary.” Durham Public Schools. Provided by DPS to Hanover Research.

49



Figure 2.7: Effect of Magnet Schools on Capacity of Sending Schools (Secondary Schools)

% CAPACITY

% CAPACITY IF NO STUDENTS

WENT TO

MAGNETS/CTE

PATHWAYS

MAGNET SECONDARY SCHOOLS

DSA

Lake

wo

od

Mo

nte

sso

ri

Low

es

Gro

ve

Ne

al

Ro

gers

-He

rr

She

par

d

The

Sch

oo

l fo

r C

reat

ive

Stu

die

s

Hill

sid

e IB

Hill

sid

e N

ew

Te

ch

The

Cit

y o

f M

ed

icin

e

Aca

de

my

Jose

ph

ine

Do

bb

s C

lem

en

ts

Sou

the

rn S

cho

ol o

f En

erg

y

and

Su

stai

nab

ility

Jord

an C

TE P

ath

way

Hill

sid

e C

TE P

ath

way

s

Riv

ers

ide

CTE

Pat

hw

ay

No

rth

ern

CTE

Pat

hw

ays

TOTA

L

SEN

DIN

G M

IDD

LE

SCH

OO

LS

Brogden 74% 87% 33 32 5 7 2 15 21 1 - - - - - - - - 116

Carrington 85% 95% 45 11 6 2 - 11 51 2 - - - - - - - - 128

Githens 119% 149% 50 47 6 6 100 37 8 - - - - - - - - - 254

Lowe’s Grove 92% 121% 33 10 6 6 107 49 19 - - - - - - - - - 230

Lucas 103% 114% 24 9 1 5 - 12 17 - - - - - - - - - 68

Neal 106% 126% 41 5 7 5 4 63 38 - - - - - - - - - 163

TOTAL 226 114 31 31 213 187 154 3 - - - - - - - - 959

SEN

DIN

G H

IGH

SCH

OO

LS

Hillside 104% 124% 36 - - - - - 21 51 39 23 29 30 51 9 8 2 299

Jordan 102% 110% 46 - - - - - 12 15 11 12 14 5 3 5 12 11 146

Northern 81% 92% 34 - - - - - 21 17 3 14 19 18

3 51 10 190

Riverside 118% 130% 36 - - - - - 27 4 10 19 11 11 3 1 53 5 180

Southern 84% 99% 35 - - - - - 35 29 15 14 35 34 12 5 7 8 229

TOTAL 187 - - - - - 116 116 78 82 108 98 69 23 131 36 1044 Source: DPS

17

17

“Students Leaving Base for Magnet-Secondary.” Durham Public Schools. Provided by DPS to Hanover Research.

50



APPLICATION TRENDS

This subsection explores application numbers across all magnet schools in the district for the past five years, as well as applications by magnet school for the past three years.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Overall, the number of applications to DPS magnet schools increased by 39 percent

from the 2012 to 2016 academic years.

Examining more detailed application data for a subset of this time period, we

observe that across all DPS magnet schools, the number of applications increased by 22 percent from 2014 to 2016.18

o Nineteen DPS magnet schools experienced an increase in the number of applications (5 percent to 79 percent).

o Four magnet schools experienced a decrease (-5 percent to -41 percent). Of those four schools, Lowe’s Grove and Southern were both designated as magnet schools in part to pull back some of the base assignment zone who had opted out of these schools. Therefore, the enrollment trend, rather than the number of applications, is a better indicator of attractiveness for these two schools.

DATA SOURCES

DPS provided Hanover with a data table containing a breakdown of DPS magnet school applications over the past five years. This table was reformatted and percent change from year-to-year and from 2012 to 2016 were calculated and added to the table. This table, along with a newly created figure to show the number of applications and year-to-year change, were included in this report. In addition, Hanover created a table with the breakdown of all applications from 2014, 2015, and 2016 by magnet school. Specifically, Hanover segmented data by magnet school from three data files, including:

Magnet Schools Lottery Application and Assignment Data 2013-14,

Magnet Schools Lottery Application and Assignment Database 2014-15, and

Magnet Schools Lottery Application and Assignment Database 2015-16.

Hanover further calculated change from 2014 to 2016 based on these data.

18

Note that within the 2014 to 2016 student-level application data, an individual student could apply to more than one magnet school in a given year. These numbers represent all applications from students in a given year, regardless of whether a student applied to more than one magnet school. Further, a small proportion of the 2014 to 2016 records suggested that a student submitted an application to the same school in the same year. In order to maintain consistency with other applicant data provided by DPS (i.e., the aggregated lottery application counts provided in the “Magnet Application Historical 5 Year Trend 2011-2016” file), we have included all applicant records provided. However, this potential duplication only affects less than 1 percent of total application records from 2014 to 2016 (i.e., 255 out of 30,493 records, 0.84 percent of total records).

51



OVERALL

Across all DPS magnet schools combined, the number of applications steadily increased from 2012 through 2016, growing by 39 percent over this period (see Figure 2.8).

Figure 2.8: Count of Magnet School Applications for 2012 through 2016

SCHOOL YEAR MAGNET LOTTERY APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED

2012 7,894

2013 8,397

2014 8,997

2015 10,547

2016 10,949

2012 to 2016 change 39%

Note: Trend lines and percentages in graph represent year-to-year percent change in lottery applications. Source: DPS.

19

19

“DPS Magnet School Lottery Applications: Historical 5-Year Trend.” Durham Public Schools. Provided by DPS to Hanover Research.

7,894 8,397

8,997

10,547 10,949

6% 7%

17%

4%

-5%

5%

15%

25%

0

4,000

8,000

12,000

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Ye

arly

Pe

rce

nt

Ch

ange

Nu

mb

er

of

Ap

plic

atio

ns

Magnet Lottery Applications Percent Change

52



BY MAGNET SCHOOL

From 2014 to 2016, the number of applications to DPS magnet schools increased by 22 percent. During this timeframe, 18 DPS magnet schools experienced an increase in the number of applications (5 percent to 79 percent) and four magnet schools experienced a decrease (-5 percent to -41 percent). Please refer to Figure 2.9 for additional details.

Figure 2.9: Count of Magnet School Applications by School for the 2014 through 2016

SCHOOL NAME 2014 2015 2016

2014

TO

2016

CHANGE

Burton International Baccalaureate Primary Years Programme (PYP) Elementary School

203 198 213 5%

City of Medicine Academy 251 435 434 73%

Club Boulevard Humanities Elementary School 390 548 569 46%

Durham School of the Arts 2,190 2,512 2,451 12%

Easley Calendar Magnet Elementary School 78 95 140 79%

George Watts Montessori Magnet Elementary School 679 848 948 40%

Hillside International Baccalaureate Middle Years and Diploma Programme

201 - 190 -5%

Hillside New Tech High School 214 210 247 15%

Holt Calendar Magnet Elementary School 116 154 194 67%

Josephine D. Clement Early College High School 322 408 440 37%

Lakewood Montessori Magnet Middle School 357 441 430 20%

Lowe's Grove STEM Magnet Middle School 137 124 101 -26%

Middle College 123 143 136 11%

Morehead Montessori Magnet Elementary School 608 739 777 28%

Neal STEM Magnet Middle School 51 83 71 39%

Pearsontown Calendar Magnet Elementary School 573 657 711 24%

R.N. Harris Core Knowledge/Integrated Arts Elementary School 217 268 245 13%

Rogers-Herr Calendar Magnet Middle School 401 475 465 16%

Sandy Ridge Visual and Performing Arts Elementary School 526 576 564 7%

Shepard International Baccalaureate Middle Years Programme 489 507 393 -20%

Southern School of Energy and Sustainability 193 178 113 -41%

The School for Creative Studies 471 708 727 54%

W. G. Pearson STEAM and Gifted and Talented Elementary School

330 382 355 8%

Total 8,997 10,547 10,949 22% Source: DPS.

53



SECTION III: PROMOTION OF SCHOOL DIVERSITY

This section addresses the second purpose of the magnet schools at DPS: Promote school diversity. To evaluate progress towards this purpose, Hanover reviews demographic/ socioeconomic trends for the district overall and for magnet schools over the past six years. Specifically, this section compares the composition of schools by gender, race/ ethnicity, and free/ reduced-price lunch (FRL) status to that of magnet school students. Hanover makes these comparisons for all school levels combined and separately within each level.20

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

At each school level, the proportion of Hispanic students has increased, but the

proportion of Hispanic students at magnet schools has increased more drastically for each respective level.

At most school levels, the proportion of white students has decreased or not

changed significantly from 2011 to 2016. However, the proportion of white students has decreased by a greater amount among magnet schools at these levels.

At elementary and high schools, the proportion of black students decreased by

about the same amount, percentage-wise, at both magnet schools and the district schools overall. Among magnet middle schools, the proportion of black students decreased by a smaller amount than at these school levels overall.

At each school level, the proportion of students that qualify for free or reduced-

price lunch increased more at magnet schools than all DPS schools in the corresponding level.

DATA SOURCES

For the analyses discussed in this subsection, Hanover analyzed summary statistics that describe the average proportion of enrolled students in each observed demographic subgroup. For each group of averages, a side-by-side comparison of all schools in DPS and only the magnet schools is provided. In the comparisons between DPS overall and only magnet schools, we indicate the number of schools from each group that are described in the comparison. These numbers are often described in a range rather than as a single value. The reason is that the number of schools in the district or at a specific level varies from year to year. Further, the number of magnet schools in the district also fluctuates over time.

20

All text from this subsection comes from a prior report that Hanover prepared for DPS in December 2015, using data provided by DPS. Further, demographic/socioeconomic trends for each magnet school over the past five years can be viewed in the supplement from the prior Hanover report. See: “Magnet School Enrollment and Demographics.” Op. cit.

54



ALL SCHOOL LEVELS

Over the past six years, DPS has experienced little change in the gender composition of the student body (Figure 3.1). In terms of racial/ethnic composition, changes mostly involve the proportions of Hispanic students and black students. From 2011 to 2016, the proportion of Hispanic students has grown about 7 percentage points, to approximately 28 percent of all students. During this period, the proportion of black students decreased by approximately 7 percentage points, to about 48 percent. Black students are still the largest racial subgroup in DPS. Finally, the proportion of students that qualify for free or reduced-price lunch increased about 4 percentage points, to 68 percent, in 2015. Among magnet schools in DPS, the proportion of Hispanic students has grown more than in the district overall, and the proportion of FRL students has done the same. However, the increase in FRL students is much higher in magnet schools (10 percentage points) than in DPS overall (4 percentage points). The growth in Hispanic students coincides with decreases in the proportions of black and white students, by 6 and 3 percentage points respectively. Figure 3.1: Comparison of Enrollment by Subgroups in DPS Overall versus Magnet Schools

(All School Levels)

SUBGROUP 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2011 TO

2016

CHANGE

All DPS (n=52-55)

Male 50.9% 50.6% 50.6% 51.1% 50.7% 50.0% -0.9%

Female 49.1% 49.4% 49.4% 48.9% 49.3% 50.0% 0.9%

American Indian 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.0%

Asian 2.1% 2.2% 2.3% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 0.0%

Hispanic 21.4% 22.9% 24.8% 25.9% 27.3% 28.4% 7.0%

Black 54.3% 52.8% 51.2% 50.0% 48.8% 47.8% -6.5%

White 19.1% 18.9% 18.3% 18.3% 18.6% 18.5% -0.6%

Multi-racial 2.7% 2.8% 3.0% 3.2% 2.7% 2.7% 0.0%

Pacific Islander 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0%

FRL 64.2% 62.4% 64.3% 65.9% 68.0% - 3.8%

Magnet Only (n=17-22) Male 48.0% 48.4% 48.8% 49.4% 48.7% 48.0% 0.0%

Female 52.0% 51.6% 51.2% 50.6% 51.3% 52.0% 0.0%

American Indian 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% -0.1%

Asian 2.3% 2.2% 2.0% 1.9% 1.9% 2.0% -0.3%

Hispanic 19.3% 20.9% 23.4% 25.3% 27.4% 29.0% 9.7%

Black 53.2% 53.8% 53.5% 50.7% 49.1% 47.2% -6.0%

White 21.7% 19.7% 17.4% 18.5% 18.4% 18.3% -3.4%

Multi-racial 3.2% 3.2% 3.3% 3.4% 2.9% 3.2% 0.0%


FRL 51.7% 53.5% 57.5% 57.8% 61.7% - 10.0% Source: DPS.

21

21

Ibid.

55



ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS

At elementary schools and magnet elementary schools in DPS, the gender composition of students has not changed by more than 1 percentage point over the past six years (Figure 3.2). Among elementary schools overall, the proportion of Hispanic students has increased by about 6 percentage points over this period, which coincides with a combined decrease of 5 percentage points in the proportion of black and white students. Among magnet elementary schools, there has been a greater increase in the proportion of Hispanic students (8 percentage points) and a greater decrease in the proportion of black and white students (8 percentage points combined). The proportion of FRL students has increase by 3 and 4 percentage points in all elementary schools and magnet elementary schools, respectively. Figure 3.2: Comparison of Enrollment by Subgroups in DPS Overall versus Magnet Schools

(Elementary Schools)

SUBGROUP 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2011 TO

2016

CHANGE

All DPS (n=29-30)

Male 50.6% 50.0% 50.5% 51.0% 51.6% 51.4% 0.8%

Female 49.4% 50.0% 49.5% 49.0% 48.4% 48.6% -0.8%

American Indian 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% 0.0%

Asian 2.3% 2.2% 2.2% 2.3% 2.1% 2.1% -0.2%

Hispanic 26.3% 27.1% 28.6% 29.7% 31.2% 31.8% 5.5%

Black 48.0% 46.9% 46.0% 44.8% 44.0% 43.7% -4.3%

White 19.9% 20.3% 19.6% 19.4% 19.3% 19.2% -0.7%

Multi-racial 3.1% 3.0% 3.2% 3.3% 2.9% 2.8% -0.3%


FRL 68.9% 65.4% 67.4% 70.4% 71.8% - 2.9%

Magnet Only (n=8-10)

Male 50.1% 49.9% 49.6% 49.5% 51.2% 50.5% 0.4%

Female 49.9% 50.1% 50.4% 50.5% 48.8% 49.5% -0.4%

American Indian 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.0%

Asian 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 2.0% 1.7% 1.9% 0.1%

Hispanic 25.1% 26.7% 28.7% 30.8% 32.3% 33.4% 8.3%

Black 44.6% 44.6% 42.7% 38.8% 40.3% 39.1% -5.5%

White 24.2% 22.9% 22.6% 24.2% 22.1% 22.0% -2.2%

Multi-racial 4.0% 3.8% 3.9% 3.9% 3.3% 3.3% -0.7%

Pacific Islander 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% -0.1%

FRL 58.1% 58.0% 58.6% 58.6% 62.2% - 4.1% Source: DPS.

22

22

Ibid.

56



MIDDLE SCHOOLS

In both middle schools overall and magnet middle schools, the proportion of male students has fallen by about 1 percentage point or more during the past six years (Figure 3.3). However, male students are still a slight majority of the middle school student body in DPS. Among middle schools overall, there have been 6 and 1 percentage-point increases in the proportion of Hispanic students and multi-racial students, respectively. During the same period, the proportion of black students has fallen by 8 percentage points. The growth of Hispanics and multi-racial students in the middle school student body is slightly higher in magnet schools, while the proportions of black and white students have decreased by 4 and 6 percentage points, respectively. In addition, the proportion of FRL students has grown more dramatically in magnet middle schools (15 percentage points) than in all DPS middle schools (5 percentage points). Figure 3.3: Comparison of Enrollment by Subgroups in DPS Overall versus Magnet Schools

(Middle Schools)

SUBGROUP 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2011 TO

2016

CHANGE

All DPS (n=9-10)

Male 51.4% 51.9% 51.8% 51.4% 49.9% 50.4% -1.0%

Female 48.6% 48.1% 48.2% 48.6% 50.1% 49.6% 1.0%

American Indian 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2%

Asian 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 2.4% 2.3% 0.5%

Hispanic 20.9% 22.5% 25.1% 26.8% 26.6% 27.1% 6.2%

Black 58.7% 58.2% 55.7% 54.0% 51.5% 50.5% -8.2%

White 15.9% 14.8% 14.7% 14.4% 16.2% 16.2% 0.3%

Multi-racial 2.4% 2.4% 2.4% 2.7% 2.8% 3.5% 1.1%

Pacific Islander 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% -0.1%

FRL 63.0% 66.1% 66.6% 69.4% 68.3% - 5.3%

Magnet Only (n=3-5) Male 51.7% 51.5% 52.6% 52.3% 50.0% 50.2% -1.5%

Female 48.3% 48.5% 47.4% 47.7% 50.0% 49.8% 1.5%

American Indian 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0%

Asian 2.2% 2.1% 1.5% 1.3% 1.9% 1.7% -0.5%

Hispanic 18.4% 19.6% 24.1% 25.4% 26.0% 26.2% 7.8%

Black 57.1% 61.7% 61.4% 58.9% 55.4% 53.5% -3.6%

White 19.9% 14.5% 10.8% 11.5% 13.4% 14.2% -5.7%

Multi-racial 2.2% 2.1% 2.1% 2.8% 3.0% 4.1% 1.9%


FRL 51.1% 56.0% 65.0% 67.7% 65.7% - 14.6% Source: DPS.

23

23

Ibid.

57



HIGH SCHOOLS

From 2011 to 2016, the proportion of male high school students decreased by almost 3 percentage points, occurring mostly in the last three years (Figure 3.4). Among high schools in DPS and magnet high school specifically, the proportion of Hispanic students has more than doubled, growing by 13 and 16 percentage points, respectively. During the same period, the proportions of black and white students decreased by about the same amount combined. The proportion of FRL students increased by more than 8 percentage points in DPS high schools and by more than 20 percentage points in magnet high schools. Figure 3.4: Comparison of Enrollment by Subgroups in DPS Overall versus Magnet Schools

(High Schools)

SUBGROUP 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2011 TO

2016

CHANGE

All DPS (n=9-11)

Male 48.5% 48.2% 48.2% 48.8% 47.1% 45.8% -2.7%

Female 51.5% 51.8% 51.8% 51.2% 52.9% 54.2% 2.7%

American Indian 0.3% 0.4% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.0%

Asian 2.0% 2.2% 2.2% 2.0% 1.9% 2.2% 0.2%

Hispanic 11.8% 14.0% 16.7% 19.2% 22.3% 25.0% 13.2%

Black 66.9% 64.7% 62.4% 60.9% 59.7% 57.8% -9.1%

White 16.5% 16.3% 15.3% 14.4% 13.5% 12.4% -4.1%

Multi-racial 2.4% 2.3% 2.9% 2.9% 2.2% 2.2% -0.2%


FRL 51.7% 50.5% 53.0% 55.0% 60.1% - 8.4%

Magnet Only (n=4-6) Male 41.9% 45.1% 45.7% 48.2% 43.3% 41.5% -0.4%

Female 58.1% 54.9% 54.3% 51.8% 56.7% 58.5% 0.4%

American Indian 0.3% 0.3% 0.4% 0.4% 0.2% 0.2% -0.1%

Asian 3.2% 2.9% 2.5% 2.0% 2.0% 2.5% -0.7%

Hispanic 9.8% 10.8% 14.8% 18.5% 22.3% 25.9% 16.1%

Black 69.2% 69.9% 67.5% 64.5% 63.2% 60.1% -9.1%

White 15.1% 13.5% 11.5% 11.7% 10.4% 9.1% -6.0%

Multi-racial 2.4% 2.4% 3.2% 2.8% 1.8% 2.0% -0.4%


FRL 42.9% 45.8% 51.8% 52.4% 63.2% - 20.3% Source: DPS.

24

24

Ibid.

58



SECONDARY SCHOOLS

At these two magnet schools, the proportion of Hispanic students rose by almost 7 percentage points, while the proportions of black, white, and multi-racial students decreased by about that amount combined. During this period, the proportion of FRL students increased by 8 percentage points at these two schools.

Figure 3.5: Enrollment by Subgroups in DPS Magnet Schools

SUBGROUP 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2011 TO

2016

CHANGE

Magnet Schools (n=1-2) Male 40.7% 40.9% 39.5% 45.3% 46.0% 46.3% 5.6%

Female 59.3% 59.1% 60.5% 54.7% 54.0% 53.7% -5.6%

American Indian 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.0%

Asian 2.9% 3.3% 4.1% 2.1% 2.4% 2.2% -0.7%

Hispanic 15.5% 17.4% 18.1% 20.7% 19.6% 22.1% 6.6%

Black 42.3% 40.9% 39.3% 42.2% 42.5% 39.4% -2.9%

White 34.6% 33.8% 33.9% 30.7% 32.1% 32.9% -1.7%

Multi-racial 4.4% 4.2% 4.1% 4.0% 3.0% 3.1% -1.3%


FRL 38.7% 40.3% 38.0% 45.7% 46.5% - 7.8% Source: DPS.

25

25

Ibid.

59



SECTION IV: AVAILABILITY OF DIVERSE AND RELEVANT PROGRAM OFFERINGS

This section addresses the third purpose of the magnet schools at DPS: Provide diverse and relevant program offerings throughout the district that meet student interest and provide expanded learning opportunities. To evaluate progress towards this purpose, Hanover reviews magnet application numbers overall, application numbers disaggregated by charter and private school applicants, “Kitchen Table Data” from community conversations, and magnet school options.

APPLICATION TRENDS OVERALL

As discussed in Section II above, application numbers for magnet schools have increased over the past five years, growing by 39 percent from 2012 (7,894 applications) to 2016 (10,949 applications). This growth suggests increased interest in DPS magnet schools. Please see Figure 2.8 for additional details on this overall growth.

APPLICATION TRENDS DISAGGREGATED BY CHARTER AND PRIVATE SCHOOL APPLICANTS

This subsection reviews application numbers by school from 2014 to 2016 and disaggregated by the number of students from charter schools and the number of students from private schools who applied to DPS magnet schools during this three-year timeframe.26

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Overall, the number of applications to DPS magnet schools from students attending

charter schools increased by 35 percent from 2014 to 2016.

Overall, the number of applications to DPS magnet schools from students attending

private schools increased by 16 percent from 2014 to 2016.

DATA SOURCES

Hanover created tables with the breakdown of all applications in 2014, 2015, and 2016 by magnet school and by whether applicants came from a private school or a charter school.

26

Note that within the 2014 to 2016 student-level application data, an individual student could apply to more than one magnet school in a given year. These numbers represent all applications from students in a given year, regardless of whether a student applied to more than one magnet school. Further, a small proportion of the 2014 to 2016 records suggested that a student submitted an application to the same school in the same year. In order to maintain consistency with other applicant data provided by DPS (i.e., the aggregated lottery application counts provided in the “Magnet Application Historical 5 Year Trend 2011-2016” file), we have included all applicant records provided. However, this potential duplication only affects less than 1 percent of total application records from 2014 to 2016 (i.e., 255 out of 30,493 records, 0.84 percent of total records).

60



These tables were constructed by segmenting data by magnet school from three data files that DPS provided to Hanover, including:

Magnet Schools Lottery Application and Assignment Data 2013-14,

Magnet Schools Lottery Application and Assignment Database 2014-15, and

Magnet Schools Lottery Application and Assignment Database 2015-16.

Change from 2014 to 2016 was also calculated from these data by Hanover.

APPLICANTS FROM CHARTER SCHOOLS

Across all magnet schools, the number of applications from students who were attending charter schools steadily increased from 2014 through 2016, growing by 35 percent over this period (see Figure 4.1). Figure 4.1: Count of Magnet School Applications from Charter Schools, 2014 through 2016


N PERCENT OF ALL APPLICATIONS

2014 716 8%

2015 844 8%

2016 968 9%

2014 to 2016 change

35%


27

27

“Magnet Schools Lottery Application and Assignment Data 2013-14,” “Magnet Schools Lottery Application and Assignment Database 2014-15,” and “Magnet Schools Lottery Application and Assignment Database 2015-16.”

716

844 968

18% 15%

-5%

5%

15%

25%

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

2014 2015 2016

Ye

arly

Pe

rce

nt

Ch

ange

Nu

mb

er

of

Ap

plic

atio

ns


61



APPLICANTS FROM PRIVATE SCHOOLS

Across all magnet schools, the number of applications from students who were attending private schools increased from 2014 through 2016, growing by 16 percent over this period (see Figure 4.2). Figure 4.2: Count of Magnet School Applications from Private Schools, 2014 through 2016


N PERCENT OF ALL APPLICATIONS

2014 1,065 12%

2015 1,189 11%

2016 1,231 11%

2014 to 2016 change

16%


28

28

Ibid.

1,065

1,189

1,231

12%

4%

-5%

5%

15%

25%

950

1,000

1,050

1,100

1,150

1,200

1,250

2014 2015 2016

Ye

arly

Pe

rce

nt

Ch

ange

Nu

mb

er

of

Ap

plic

atio

ns


62



CHARTER SCHOOL APPLICANTS BY MAGNET SCHOOL

As noted above, from 2014 to 2016, the number of applications from students attending charter schools increased by 35 percent. During this timeframe, 18 DPS magnet schools experienced an increase in the number of applications from charter school students (17 percent to 500 percent29), while five magnet schools experienced a decrease (-6 percent to -57 percent). Please refer to Figure 4.3 for additional details.

29

Note that the 500 percent growth in applications represents growth from a school with one reported application from a charter school student in 2014 to six applications in 2016 (Neal STEM Magnet Middle School).

63



Figure 4.3: Count and Percentage of Students from Charter Schools who Applied to a Magnet School in 2014 through 2016, by School

MAGNET SCHOOL 2014 2015 2016 2014 TO

2016

CHANGE N % N % N %

Applicants from Charter Schools


3 1% 4 2% 6 3% 100%

City of Medicine Academy 30 12% 60 14% 60 14% 100%

Club Boulevard Humanities Elementary School

26 7% 21 4% 31 5% 19%

Durham School of the Arts 299 14% 316 13% 351 14% 17%

Easley Calendar Magnet Elementary School 3 4% 2 2% 5 4% 67%

George Watts Montessori Magnet Elementary School

20 3% 33 4% 32 3% 60%


7 3% - - 12 6% 71%

Hillside New Tech High School 15 7% 35 17% 27 11% 80%

Holt Calendar Magnet Elementary School 6 5% 8 5% 11 6% 83%

Josephine D. Clement Early College High School

32 10% 50 12% 74 17% 131%

Lakewood Montessori Magnet Middle School 34 10% 34 8% 32 7% -6%

Lowe's Grove STEM Magnet Middle School 3 2% 1 1% 7 7% 133%

Middle College 7 2% 3 2% 3 6% -57%

Morehead Montessori Magnet Elementary School

21 3% 18 2% 25 3% 19%

Neal STEM Magnet Middle School 1 2% - - 6 8% 500%

Pearsontown Calendar Magnet Elementary School

15 3% 34 5% 48 7% 220%

R.N. Harris Core Knowledge/Integrated Arts Elementary School

9 4% 11 4% 18 7% 100%

Rogers-Herr Calendar Magnet Middle School 23 6% 33 7% 33 7% 43%

Sandy Ridge Visual and Performing Arts Elementary School

40 8% 30 5% 31 5% -23%

Shepard International Baccalaureate Middle Years Programme

31 6% 30 6% 27 7% -13%

Southern School of Energy and Sustainability 28 15% 28 16% 14 12% -50%

The School for Creative Studies 58 12% 68 10% 77 11% 33%


12 4% 28 7% 30 8% 150%

Total 716 8% 844 8% 968 9% 35% Note: Percent listed is the percentage of applications from charter school students out of all applications for the school that year. Source: DPS.

30

30

Ibid.

64



PRIVATE SCHOOL APPLICANTS BY MAGNET SCHOOL

As noted above, from 2014 to 2016, the number of applications from students attending private schools increased by 16 percent. During this timeframe, 13 DPS magnet schools experienced an increase in the number of applications from private school students (3 percent to 85 percent), seven magnet schools experienced a decrease (-20 percent to -78 percent), and two magnet schools experienced no change, and one magnet school did not have enough applications from private school students to calculate the percent change. Please refer to Figure 4.4 for additional details.

65



Figure 4.4: Count and Percentage of Students from Private Schools who Applied to a Magnet School in 2014 through 2016, by School

MAGNET SCHOOL 2014 2015 2016 2014 TO

2016

CHANGE N % N % N %

Applicants from Private Schools


19 9% 24 12% 22 10% 16%

City of Medicine Academy 10 4% 10 2% 18 4% 80%

Club Boulevard Humanities Elementary School

78 20% 93 17% 97 17% 24%

Durham School of the Arts 203 9% 224 9% 209 9% 3%

Easley Calendar Magnet Elementary School 20 26% 22 23% 37 26% 85%

George Watts Montessori Magnet Elementary School

149 22% 198 23% 228 24% 53%


11 5% - - 4 2% -64%

Hillside New Tech High School 11 5% 3 1% 6 2% -45%

Holt Calendar Magnet Elementary School 24 21% 28 18% 27 14% 13%

Josephine D. Clement Early College High School

10 3% 12 3% 8 2% -20%

Lakewood Montessori Magnet Middle School

15 4% 24 5% 15 3% 0%

Lowe's Grove STEM Magnet Middle School 5 4% 6 5% 2 2% -60%

Middle College 6 5% 1 1% 7 5% 17%

Morehead Montessori Magnet Elementary School

121 20% 177 24% 175 23% 45%

Neal STEM Magnet Middle School 1 2% 3 4% - - -

Pearsontown Calendar Magnet Elementary School

157 27% 130 20% 176 25% 12%

R.N. Harris Core Knowledge/Integrated Arts Elementary School

34 16% 43 16% 34 14% 0%

Rogers-Herr Calendar Magnet Middle School 15 4% 22 5% 12 3% -20%

Sandy Ridge Visual and Performing Arts Elementary School

67 13% 67 12% 70 12% 4%

Shepard International Baccalaureate Middle Years Programme

6 1% 14 3% 8 2% 33%

Southern School of Energy and Sustainability 9 5% 4 2% 2 2% -78%

The School for Creative Studies 29 6% 33 5% 35 5% 21%


71 22% 52 14% 42 12% -41%

Total 1,065 12% 1,189 11% 1,231 11% 16% Note: Percent listed is the percentage of applications from private school students out of all applications for the school that year. Source: DPS.

31

31

Ibid.

66



“KITCHEN TABLE DATA” FROM COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS

This subsection reviews Regional and School Improvement Team (SIT) Kitchen Table Conversation (KTCs) and Magnet School Survey (MSS) responses from March 2012. All of the data in this subsection come from a presentation given at the Instructional Services Committee Meeting on May 7th, 2012.32

In the Regional KTCs, SIT KTCs, and the DPS MSS, the following four questions guided the conversations:

What do you believe motivates families to apply for DPS magnet schools?

What do you believe may keep families from applying to DPS magnet schools?

What additional themes/programs need to be considered that would be attractive

to Durham families?

What else needs to be considered when planning for the future of DPS magnet

schools?

Responses to KTC questions, as well as questions asked in the DPS MSS, are presented below.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Overall, respondents believed that families are motivated to apply to DPS magnet

schools because of their good academic reputation in comparison to other options available, the specialized thematic curricula, and small class sizes and schools.

Respondents believed that families chose not to apply to DPS magnet schools

because of a lack of information about the school, insecurities regarding acceptance through the lottery process, the location of the school, and a lack of sibling preference for placements.

Overall, respondents believed that families would be interested in the following

themes/programs at magnet schools: language immersion/dual language/world languages, STEM (science, math, engineering, and technology), performing arts, Montessori, and CTE/vocational/trade.

Overall, respondents believed that magnet schools could be improved by revising

the lottery process (e.g., adding a sibling preference), making magnet programs more accessible, ensuring funding is equitably distributed to improve all schools, aligning magnet programs vertically through feeder schools, and ensuring fidelity of existing magnet school programs.

Among its responses to such community feedback gathered in 2012, DPS added new

magnet school programs at the elementary, middle, and high school levels that increased vertical alignment/continuity of magnet school programming and/or reinforced existing magnet themes identified as important by the community (e.g., world languages, STEM, and arts).

32

Ferebee, L., Henderson, M., and Cooper, J. B. “Magnet Schools Survey Report: Instructional Services Committee Meeting.” Durham Public Schools. 2012. Provided by DPS to Hanover Research.

67



DATA SOURCES

Data in this section came from a presentation from the Instructional Services Committee Meeting on May 7th, 2012.33 DPS provided this presentation to Hanover, and the data table and figures from this presentation were reformatted and incorporated into this report. The DPS Magnet and Public Affairs Departments organized three venues in March 2012 where the Durham community could provide feedback regarding DPS Magnet Schools. The data collected from these venues then became the basis of the presentation. These venues included the following:

Four Regional Kitchen Table Conversations (KTCs) (n = 196)

o Southern High School

o Northern High School

o Jordan High School

o Staff Development Center

DPS School Improvement Team (SIT) Kitchen Table Conversations (KTCs)

o All DPS SITs were given “toolkits” with instructions for gathering input regarding magnet schools from their school.

DPS Magnet Schools Survey (DPS MSS) (n = 311)

o Administered online via K-12 Insight. The link to the survey was embedded on the DPS website.

33

Ferebee, L., Henderson, M., and Cooper, J. B. “Magnet Schools Survey Report: Instructional Services Committee Meeting.” Op. cit.

68



BELIEFS ABOUT MOTIVATION TO APPLY TO MAGNET SCHOOLS

The first research question asked in the KTCs and the MSS was: “What do you believe motivates families to apply for DPS magnet schools?” Overall, respondents believed that families are motivated to apply to DPS magnet schools because of their good academic reputation in comparison to other options available, the specialized thematic curricula, and small class sizes and schools. For a full list of themes, please refer to Figure 4.5 on the following page.

Figure 4.5: Kitchen Table Responses to the Question: “What do you believe motivates families to apply for DPS magnet schools?”

REGIONAL KTCS SIT KTCS DPS MSS

Prestige/School Reputation Specialized, Thematic

Curriculum Base School Not As Attractive

Base School Not As Attractive Prestige/School Reputation Specialized, Thematic Curriculum

Specialized, Thematic Curriculum

Base School Not As Attractive Perceived Better Academics

Perceived Better Academics Perceived Better Academics Smaller Setting/Class Size

Location Smaller Setting/Class Size More Diverse, Exploratory

Curriculum

Summary of Content Analysis

Base School Not as Attractive as Magnet School Options The Appeal of a Specialized, Thematic Curriculum Perceived Better Academics Prestige/School Reputation Smaller Schools/Class Size

Source: DPS.34

34

Ibid.

69



BELIEFS ABOUT MOTIVATION TO NOT APPLY TO MAGNET SCHOOLS

The second research question posed in the KTCs and the MSS was: “What do you believe may keep families from applying to DPS magnet schools?” Overall, respondents believed that families chose not to apply to DPS magnet schools because of a lack of information about the school, insecurities regarding acceptance through the lottery process, the location of the school, and a lack of sibling preference for placements. For a full list of themes, please refer to Figure 4.6 below.

Figure 4.6: Kitchen Table Responses to the Question: “What do you believe may keep families from applying to DPS magnet schools?”


Lack of Information The Lottery Process Insecurity of Winning the Lottery

Insecurity of Winning the Lottery

Location Inconsistent Success of Magnet

Schools

Location Fear of Lack of Transportation

Not Enough Magnet Seats

Unclear, Untimely Communication

Love/ Loyalty for Neighborhood/

Base Schools Lack of Sibling Preference

Lack of Sibling Preference Lack of Information The Lottery Process


Insecurity of Winning the Lottery Lack of Information The Lottery Process Location of Magnet Schools Lack of Sibling Preference

Source: DPS.35

35

Ibid.

70



THEMES/PROGRAMS THAT WOULD BE ATTRACTIVE TO DURHAM FAMILIES

The third research question asked in the KTCs and the MSS was: “What additional themes/programs need to be considered that would be attractive to Durham families?” Overall, respondents believed that families would be interested in the following themes/programs at magnet schools: language immersion/dual language/world languages, STEM (science, math, engineering, and technology), performing arts, Montessori, and CTE/vocational/trade. For a full list of themes, please refer to Figure 4.7 below. Figure 4.7: Kitchen Table Responses to the Question: “What additional themes/programs

need to be considered that would be attractive to Durham families?”


Language Immersion/Dual Language/World Languages

STEM/Science/ Math/Technology

Montessori

STEM/Science/ Math/Technology



CTE/Vocational/ Trade

Performing Arts Performing Arts

Performing Arts Sustainability/

Green STEM/Science/

Math/Technology

Project-Based Learning Leadership Year-Round


Language Immersion/Dual Language/World Languages STEM/Science/Math/Technology Performing Arts Montessori CTE/Vocational/Trade

Source: DPS.36

36

Ibid.

71



OTHER CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE FUTURE OF MAGNET SCHOOLS

The fourth research question posed in the KTCs and the MSS was: “What else needs to be considered when planning for the future of DPS Magnet Schools?” Overall, respondents believed that magnet schools could be improved by revising the lottery process (e.g., adding a sibling preference), making magnet programs more accessible, ensuring funding is equitably distributed to improve all schools, aligning magnet programs vertically through feeder schools, and ensuring fidelity of existing magnet school programs. For a full list of themes, please refer to Figure 4.8 below.

Figure 4.8: Kitchen Table Responses to the Question: “What else needs to be considered when planning for the future of DPS Magnet Schools?”


Educate/More Information Equitable Funding for All Schools Increase Accessibility

Sibling Preference Fidelity to Existing Magnet School

Programs Revise/Clarify the Lottery

Process

Revise/Clarify the Lottery Process

Non-Magnet Schools Resources and Support

Improve All Schools

Vertical Programming Alignment

Revise/Clarify the Lottery Process Parental Input

Improve All Schools Future Magnet School Resources Neighborhood and Community

Schools


Revise/Clarify the Lottery Process Increase Student Accessibility to Magnets Equitable Funding for Improving All Schools Sibling Preference Vertical Programming Alignment through Feeder Schools Fidelity to Existing Magnet School Programs

Source: DPS.37

37

Ibid.

72



ADDITIONAL MAGNET SCHOOL SURVEY (MSS) RESPONSES

In addition to the four research questions from the KTCs and the MSS discussed above, respondents for the MSS were also asked questions about their knowledge of the magnet schools in DPS, views regarding the magnet schools, and opinions about the offerings at the schools, among other topics. For a full list of questions and responses, please refer to Figure 4.9 through Figure 4.16 below.

Most respondents (98.4 percent) were aware of the magnet schools currently available through DPS and thought that the DPS magnet schools were attractive (86.9 percent). Figure 4.9: Magnet School Survey (MSS) Responses to the Question: “Were you aware of

the magnet schools currently available in Durham Public Schools?”

Source: DPS.

38

Figure 4.10: Magnet School Survey (MSS) Responses: “I believe that the magnet school options in Durham Public Schools are attractive.”

Source: DPS.

39

38

Ibid. 39

Ibid.

54.3%

44.1%

0.3% 1.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Yes, I was aware I was aware of some No, I was unaware Other

42.8% 44.1%

7.4% 4.8%

0.9% 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Strongly Agree Agree Don't Know Disagree Strongly Disagree

73



Most respondents (61.4 percent) also believed that DPS should expand its magnet offerings. The largest percentages of respondents (18.3 percent) were interested in additional magnet programs in science.

Figure 4.11: Magnet School Survey (MSS) Responses: “I believe that the district should expand its magnet offerings.”

Source: DPS.

40

Figure 4.12: Magnet School Survey (MSS) Responses: “If Durham Public Schools were to add additional magnet school programs, I would be interested in the following (please

select your top three).”

Source: DPS.

41

40

Ibid. 41

Ibid.

38.6%

22.8%

8.0%

3.5%

18.0%

9.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree StronglyDisagree

Don't Know Other

11.0% 7.1%

11.3%

18.3%

12.5% 9.9%

12.1% 11.8%

6.1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

74



The largest percentage of respondents (21.3 percent) thought that the biggest factor that would discourage families from enrolling in a DPS magnet school was that the magnet school was too far from the family’s home.

Figure 4.13: Magnet School Survey (MSS) Responses: “What do you believe are factors that might keep families from enrolling in DPS magnet schools?”

Source: DPS.

42

Nearly half of respondents (45.5 percent) thought that students in elementary magnets should be given priority admission to magnet middle schools, and slightly more than half (52.4 percent) believe that students in middle school magnets should be given priority admission to magnet high schools. Most respondents (70.4 percent) also thought that students should have priority admission to magnet schools that a sibling is already attending.

42

Ibid.

21.3% 17.3%

8.7% 9.7% 12.6% 13.9% 16.5%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Pe

rce

nt

of

Re

spo

nse

s

Magnet Schools Too Far From Home

Some Magnet Schools in Unsafe Areas

Don't Offer the Types of Programs Wanted

Parents/Students Like Their Child's Assigned School

Don't Know How to Apply

Concern w/ Racial and Ethnic Makeup of Magnet Schools

Other

75



Figure 4.14: Magnet School Survey (MSS) Responses to the Question: “Should students in elementary magnets be given priority in admission to magnet middle schools (for

example, elementary to middle)?”

Source: DPS.

43

Figure 4.15: Magnet School Survey (MSS) Responses to the Question: “Should students

attending middle school magnets be given priority in admission to magnet high schools?”

Source: DPS.

44

43

Ibid. 44

Ibid.

23.5% 21.9%

13.5% 14.8%

6.8%

19.0%

0.6% 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

StronglyAgree

Agree Disagree StronglyDisagree

Don't Know Other Did NotAnswer

23.5%

28.9%

10.0% 10.6% 9.0%

17.0%

1.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

StronglyAgree



76



Figure 4.16: Magnet School Survey (MSS) Responses to the Question: “Should siblings of current magnet school students have priority in admission to that same magnet school?”

Source: DPS.

45

45

Ibid.

44.7%

25.7%

9.0% 4.8% 3.9%

11.6%

0.3% 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

StronglyAgree



77



OUTCOMES

Based on the feedback received in the 2012 KTCs and from the MSS, the Board of Education (BoE) approved the addition of five new magnet school programs at DPS in August 2012. These programs include:46

Holt (elementary school)

Lowes Grove (middle school)

Neal (middle school)

The School for Creative Studies (middle school)

The School for Creative Studies (high school)

These programs will be discussed in more detail in the “Magnet School Options” subsection at the end of this report.

46

“K-12 Magnet Program/Calendar Options Continuum.” Durham Public Schools. Provided by DPS to Hanover Research.

78



MAGNET SCHOOL OPTIONS

This subsection reviews the magnet school program options continuum for elementary, middle, and high school, as well as the variety of program themes at each magnet school.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

The magnet schools at DPS fulfill six themes across the elementary, middle, and high

school continuum, including STEM, Arts, Montessori, World Languages, International Baccalaureate (IB), and Year Round. Except for the Montessori theme, all themes are represented at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. Montessori is present at elementary (Morehead and Watts) and middle (Lakewood) school magnets only.

Based on community feedback and BoE approval in August 2012, five magnet

schools were added to DPS to fill gaps in the magnet program themes continuum across the elementary, middle, and high school levels or to provide additional support for these themes.

o These additions closed continuity gaps in the STEM magnet theme at the middle school level and the Year Round theme at the high school level.

o These additions also provided additional continuity support in the Arts magnet theme in middle and high school, in the Year Round theme in middle school, and in the World Languages theme in elementary school.47

Each DPS magnet school has a more detailed program theme that is aligned with the

overarching magnet themes discussed above. The program themes at DPS magnet schools cover a variety of topics, ranging from Agricultural Science/Business Entrepreneurship to Health/Medical Careers to a Year Round Language Academy.48

DATA SOURCES

DPS provided Hanover with the following two data tables:

K-12 Magnet Program/Calendar Options Continuum,49 and

Magnet Schools with Themes List B.50

These two tables were reformatted for clarity and incorporated into this subsection of the report.

47

“K-12 Magnet Program/Calendar Options Continuum.” Op. cit. 48

“Magnet Schools w Themes List B.” Durham Public Schools. Provided by DPS to Hanover Research. 49


“Magnet Schools w Themes List B.” Op. cit.

79



MAGNET SCHOOL PROGRAM OPTIONS CONTINUUM

There are six magnet themes offered through DPS magnet schools. These include:51

STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)

Arts

Montessori

World Languages

International Baccalaureate (IB)

Year Round

Each of these program themes, except for Montessori,52 are offered by at least one magnet school at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. As mentioned previously, DPS added five magnet school programs based on 2012 community feedback and BoE approval in August 2012. These five programs filled gaps in the magnet program options continuum or provided additional support for these themes. These gaps were filled as follows:

The addition of Lowes Grove and Neal filled a gap in the STEM magnet theme at the

middle school level.

The addition of the School for Creative Studies (6-12) also provided additional

coverage for the Arts magnet theme in middle and high school and the Year Round magnet theme in middle school. The addition of this school also filled a gap in the Year Round magnet theme at the high school level.

Holt provided additional coverage for the World Languages magnet theme at the

elementary level. Please refer to Figure 4.17 for a full list of the schools that fulfill each magnet them at the elementary, middle, and high school levels.

51


Montessori is only offered at the elementary and middle school levels, as shown in Figure 4.17.

80



Figure 4.17: Magnet Program/Calendar Options Continuum for Elementary, Middle, and High School

MAGNET THEME ELEMENTARY MIDDLE HIGH

STEM WG Pearson Lowes Grove

Neal

City of Medicine Hillside New Tech HS


Arts Club Blvd RN Harris

Sandy Ridge

Durham School of Arts 6-12 School for Creative Studies 6-12

Durham School of Arts 6-12 School for Creative Studies 6-12

Montessori Morehead

Watts Lakewood -

World Languages

Burton Holt

Shepard Hillside IB Program

International Baccalaureate

(IB) Burton Shepard Hillside IB Program

Year Round Easley Holt

Pearsontown

Rogers-Herr School for Creative Studies 6-12

School for Creative Studies 6-12

Note: New magnet school programs added based on 2012 community feedback and Board of Education Approval in August 2012 are bolded. Source: DPS.

53

53

“K-12 Magnet Program/Calendar Options Continuum.” Op. cit.

81



VARIETY OF PROGRAM THEMES AT MAGNET SCHOOLS

Aligned with the magnet themes discussed previously, each magnet school has a more detailed program theme. Program themes at DPS magnet schools range from Agricultural Science/Business Entrepreneurship to Health/Medical Careers to a Year Round Language Academy. For a full list of the program themes at each magnet school, please refer to Figure 4.18.

Figure 4.18: Themes at Each Magnet School

MAGNET SCHOOL THEME

Program Magnet Schools

Burton International Baccalaureate (IB) – Primary Years

Programme (PYP)

Club Blvd Humanities

RN Harris Core Knowledge with Integrated Arts

Morehead Montessori

WG Pearson STEAM

(Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, and Mathematics)

Sandy Ridge Visual and Performing Arts

George Watts Montessori

Lakewood Montessori Middle

Lowes Grove Agricultural Science/Business and

Entrepreneurship

Neal Engineering Academy

Shepard IB – Middle Years Programme (MYP)

School for Creative Studies 6-12 (SCS) Creative Studies

Durham School of the Arts 6-12 (DSA) Visual and Performing Arts

Hillside IB Program IB - Diploma Programme

Hillside New Tech HS New Tech

JD Clement Early College Early College

Middle College HS at DTCC Middle College

City of Medicine (CMA) Health/Medical Careers

Southern School of Energy and Sustainability Energy and Sustainability

Year Round Magnet Schools

Easley Year Round

Holt Year Round Language Academy

Pearsontown Year Round

School for Creative Studies 6-12 (SCS) Year Round Creative Studies

Rogers-Herr Year Round Source: DPS.

54

54

“Magnet Schools w Themes List B.” Op. cit.

82


PROJECT EVALUATION FORM Hanover Research is committed to providing a work product that meets or exceeds partner expectations. In keeping with that goal, we would like to hear your opinions regarding our reports. Feedback is critically important and serves as the strongest mechanism by which we tailor our research to your organization. When you have had a chance to evaluate this report, please take a moment to fill out the following questionnaire. http://www.hanoverresearch.com/evaluation/index.php

CAVEAT The publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this brief. The publisher and authors make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this brief and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose. There are no warranties that extend beyond the descriptions contained in this paragraph. No warranty may be created or extended by representatives of Hanover Research or its marketing materials. The accuracy and completeness of the information provided herein and the opinions stated herein are not guaranteed or warranted to produce any particular results, and the advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for every partner. Neither the publisher nor the authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. Moreover, Hanover Research is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional services. Partners requiring such services are advised to consult an appropriate professional.

4401 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 400

Arlington, VA 22203

P 202.559.0500 F 866.808.6585

www.hanoverresearch.com

83

http://www.hanoverresearch.com/evaluation/index.php

http://www.hanoverresearch.com/evaluation/index.php

Magnet School Information Profile

1

Name of Magnet School: Burton Elementary

Address: 1500 Matheson St., Durham, NC 27701

School Number: 308

Date School Became a Magnet School: 1995

Magnet Theme: International Baccalaureate Primary Years Programme (PYP)

Theme Description: Burton's IB-PYP is a high quality program of international coursework developed and authorized by world renowned International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO). The IB Programme is designed to help develop the intellectual, personal, emotional and social skills to live, learn and work in a rapidly globalizing world.

Features of the magnet school include:

• Aims to develop inquiring, knowledgeable and caring young people who desire to create a better and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect.

• Students may begin a second language beginning in kindergarten, and upon completion of the high school IB education possess a high degree of second language mastery in French, Mandarin Chinese or Spanish.

• Teachers receive certified IB training

• Primary Years Programme (PYP)-grades K-5 links to Middle Years Programme (MYP) - grades 6-10

Magnet School Funds: $24,000

Magnet positions: 2.5 ($132,388) Second languages and IB Coordinator Total Magnet Funding: $416 per pupil Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): Yes

A significant number of students at Burton attend the school by application through the lottery which takes place every January of the school year. A small percentage of students are automatically assigned to the school because they reside in the designated Walk Zone within a half mile radius of the school.

School with Assignment Priorities Transportation Services

Burton IB Primary Years Program (K-5) - Sibling Attending and Applying Priorities, General App Pool, Link Priority to Shepard Middle IB

District wide

84


2

School Capacity and Enrollment:

Magnet School Application Numbers:

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 203 198 213

School Demographics (Socio-economic, ethnic/racial):

School Characteristic 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Average Total Enrollment 358 364 368 377 374 344 364.2 School Capacity 376 376 376 376 376 376 376.0 Percent Male 49.2% 51.6% 52.4% 52.5% 54.3% 56.7% 52.8% Percent Female 50.8% 48.4% 47.6% 47.5% 45.7% 43.3% 47.2% Percent American Indian 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1%

Percent Asian 0.6% 0.3% 0.0% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% Percent Hispanic 46.4% 46.2% 50.0% 52.5% 54.3% 54.7% 50.7% Percent Black 48.3% 48.4% 43.8% 41.6% 40.4% 41.0% 43.9% Percent White 2.8% 3.3% 3.8% 2.9% 2.4% 1.7% 2.8% Percent Multi-racial 1.7% 1.6% 2.2% 2.7% 2.7% 2.3% 2.2% Percent Pacific Islander 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Percentage FRL 85.8% 81.8% 81.8% 91.4% 85.6% 91.4% 86.3%

Administrator Stability (number of principals over five year period): 2 Administrators

Teacher Turnover Rate (Percentage):

Additional comments relevant to discussion:

IB training of teachers is required by IBO to retain IB affiliation. IBO reauthorization visit is spring of this year.

Year Capacity Enrollment 2015-16 376 344 2014-15 376 374 2013-14 376 378 2012-13 376 369 2011-12 376 363

2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 20.69 14.93 29.41 27.78 16.67

85


1

Name of Magnet School: Club Boulevard

400 West Club Blvd, Durham, NC 27704

School Number: 318


Magnet Theme: Humanities

Theme Description: Club Humanities Magnet Elementary School seeks to develop students within a humanities-rich environment. The instructional program promotes deep understandings and meaningful connections to the community and the world.

Features of the magnet program include:

• Teachers prepared to engage students in learning through the integration of arts and culture as well as community interaction and service - hands-on interdisciplinary approach, rich with literature, the arts, and higher order thinking - teacher-developed units that integrate the arts, science, and social studies topics with literacy instruction and Common Core curriculum

• Core curriculum complemented by specialized art, dance, music, and Spanish classes for all students. The faculty includes seven full-time specialist teachers (Art, Music, Dance, Drama, Spanish, Library Media and Physical Education) who bring arts, humanities and literature to life.

• Students involved in service projects, performances, and other special events through a choice of Literacy Enrichment Clubs such as author and artist studies, science content units, and studies of world countries and cultures.


Magnet positions: 2 ($105,910) Total Magnet Funding: $276 per pupil Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): Yes

Assignment Priorities Transportation Services Provided

Walk Zone, Sibling Attending and Applying Preferences, General App Pool

District wide

86


2



2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Number of Applications 390 548 569


School Characteristic 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Average Total Enrollment 510 501 510 523 503 492 506.5 School Capacity 492 492 492 492 492 492 492.0 Percent Male 49.4% 51.7% 50.4% 51.4% 52.5% 52.4% 51.3% Percent Female 50.6% 48.3% 49.6% 48.6% 47.5% 47.6% 48.7% Percent American Indian 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% Percent Asian 0.0% 0.4% 0.6% 1.0% 0.8% 0.6% 0.6% Percent Hispanic 32.2% 33.5% 36.5% 38.6% 41.0% 38.8% 36.8% Percent Black 33.5% 32.1% 29.6% 27.9% 25.8% 27.8% 29.5% Percent White 28.6% 29.1% 28.2% 28.5% 29.2% 30.1% 29.0% Percent Multi-racial 5.1% 4.6% 4.9% 4.0% 3.0% 2.4% 4.0% Percent Pacific Islander 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% Percentage FRL 63.1% 61.2% 57.2% 61.5% 63.6% 61.5% 61.4%

Administrator Stability (number of principals over five year period): 3 administrators in past three years

Teacher Turnover Rate (percentage):

2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 19.81 17.65 14.29 9.38 9.09



87


1

Name of Magnet School: City of Medicine Academy (CMA)

Address: 301 Crutchfield St., Durham, NC 27704

School Number: 317


Magnet Theme: Health and Life Sciences

Theme Description: The City of Medicine Academy is designed for highly motivated Durham high school students who are ready to undertake serious academic work and career-related internships through a four-year health and life sciences curriculum.


• A stand-alone specialized high school for health and life sciences in North Carolina

• Designated as an anchor health and life sciences school for North Carolina by NC New Schools Project

• Offers 28 high school credits and professional certifications in health care or college level courses through the partnership with Durham Technical Community College

• Strong partnership with Duke Medicine that includes paid summer internships, clinical experiences, shadowing, mentoring, and co-teaching by health professional and CMA instructor on CMA’s campus

• 1:1 technology environment

Magnet School Funds: $1000 in magnet school level funds Textbook Funds for Durham Tech courses: $10,000

Magnet positions: 0 (All specialty positions at the school funded through CTE)

Total Magnet funding: $34 per pupil (NC New Schools funds the professional development for CMA free of charge and Durham Tech course tuitions are waived for CMA students)

Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): No


No lottery priorities Districtwide

88


2





School Characteristic 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Total Total Enrollment 219 294 329 323 321 296 297.0 School Capacity 250 320 320 320 320 320 308.3 Percent Male 20.1% 24.5% 22.2% 22.6% 22.7% 17.9% 21.7% Percent Female 79.9% 75.5% 77.8% 77.4% 77.3% 82.1% 78.3% Percent American Indian 1.4% 0.7% 0.6% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.6% Percent Asian 4.6% 5.4% 6.4% 6.2% 4.4% 4.1% 5.2% Percent Hispanic 10.0% 13.3% 16.7% 20.4% 23.7% 29.1% 18.9% Percent Black 75.8% 69.7% 63.8% 61.0% 56.7% 55.4% 63.7% Percent White 5.9% 7.8% 8.8% 8.4% 11.2% 8.4% 8.4% Percent Multi-racial 2.3% 2.7% 3.3% 3.4% 3.4% 2.4% 2.9% Percent Pacific Islander 0.0% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% Percentage FRL 53.4% 58.4% 56.4% 56.4% 52.0% 52.3% 54.8%

Administrator Stability (number of principals over five year period): Two administrators. Current administrator is in year three.


2014-45 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 13.04 40.91 21.05 41.38 18.18


A CIHS grant to fund additional students in accessing Durham Tech coursework has been approved during first two rounds of evaluation. It has been sent to General Assembly for funding. We are hopeful that there will be funding to significantly grow the capacity for the school to offer college level courses for many more DPS students.


89


1

Name of Magnet School: Durham School of the Arts (DSA)

Address: 401 N. Duke St., Durham, NC 27701

School Number: 323


Magnet Theme: Visual and Performing Arts 6-12

Theme Description: Specialized visual and performing arts secondary school for grades 6-12 focused on rigorous academics and excellence in the visual and performing arts.


• Community Partnerships with Duke University, Durham Performing Arts Center

• All high school students declare one of the following arts concentration areas that they pursue all four years of high school:

o Chorus, Band, Strings, Piano, Guitar, Dance

o Theatre (Acting & Technical Theatre)

o Visual Arts (Drawing, Painting, Clay, Sculpture & Photography)

o Creative Writing (Writing Thru Literature, Newspaper & Yearbook)

o Digital Arts (Game Art Design & Digital Media)


Magnet positions: 3 ($158,865) Total Magnet Funding: $135/per pupil

Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): No


Durham School of the Arts (6-12) - No Lottery Priorities District wide

90


2



2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Number of Applications 2,190 2,512 2,451


School Characteristic 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Average Total Enrollment 1,412 1,505 1,554 1,564 1,650 1,639 1,554.0 School Capacity 1,400 1,450 1,500 1,638 1,655 1,655 1,549.7 Percent Male 40.7% 40.9% 39.5% 38.9% 39.7% 39.6% 39.9% Percent Female 59.3% 59.1% 60.5% 61.1% 60.3% 60.4% 60.1% Percent American Indian 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% Percent Asian 2.9% 3.3% 4.1% 3.9% 4.1% 4.0% 3.7% Percent Hispanic 15.5% 17.4% 18.1% 18.8% 19.7% 21.9% 18.6% Percent Black 42.3% 40.9% 39.3% 38.4% 37.2% 34.7% 38.8% Percent White 34.6% 33.8% 33.9% 34.3% 34.8% 35.2% 34.4% Percent Multi-racial 4.4% 4.2% 4.1% 4.2% 3.5% 3.5% 4.0% Percent Pacific Islander 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% Percentage FRL 38.7% 40.3% 38.0% 38.6% 45.2% 50.0% 41.8%

Administrator Stability (number of principals over five year period): No administrator change


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 10.58 8.29 11.17 18.95 11.7



91


1

Name of Magnet School: Easley

Address: 302 Lebanon Circle, Durham, NC 27712

School Number: 313


Magnet Program: Year-Round Calendar

Year-Round magnets are known as calendar magnets since they are magnet schools because of their special calendars. Easley does not implement a specialized magnet program/theme.

Magnet School Funds: $1000 (for recruitment/marketing…no specialized program to implement)

Magnet positions: 0 Total Magnet Funding: N/A Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): Yes. Only students residing in the region of eligibility may apply.



Easley Elementary (K-5) - Students residing in the attendance zone have automatic enrollment to the school and do not need to apply. The region consists of students residing in the attendance zones of most of Eno Valley and Hillandale Elementary Schools. Sibling Attending, Sibling Applying, General App Pool, Link Preference for Rising 6th Grade Applicants to The School for Creative Studies

Regional transportation. The Easley region consists of most of the Eno Valley and Hillandale Elementary attendance zones


92


2






Administrator Stability (number of principals over five year period): Two administrators in five years. Current principal is serving her second year.


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 21.15 8.22 10.96 18.52 17.28


93


1

Name of Magnet School: Hillside IB

Address: 3727 Fayetteville St., Durham, NC 27707

School Number: 325


Magnet Theme: IB Middle Years and Diploma Programme

Theme Description: The IB-MYP/DP is a high quality program of international coursework developed and authorized by world renowned International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO). The IB Programme is designed to help develop the intellectual, personal, emotional and social skills to successfully live, learn and work in a rapidly globalizing world.


• Middle Years Programme (MYP) grades 6-10- Rigorous program of academic challenge and critical thinking that draws connections among subject areas and to the real world

• Diploma Programme (DP) – grades 11-12 – rigorous yet balanced college preparatory coursework culminating in a series of examinations which may earn students college credits and possibly the IB Diploma. An IB Diploma is highly revered throughout the world, and guarantees college admission at many colleges across the country


• Students develop high levels of proficiency in a second language through the IB course of study

Magnet School Funds: $50,000 Magnet positions: 2 ($105,910) Total Magnet Funding: $390/student Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): No


Link Priority for Applicants from Shepard IB

District-wide

94


2




**School Demographics (Socio-economic, ethnic/racial, enrollment): This data is not available for Hillside IB program as DPS does not disaggregate the demographic of this program within the comprehensive high school.

Administrator Stability (number of principals over five year period): 2 Administrators


2014-45 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 25.77 18.32 30.73 27.75 22.64


Hillside IB is the only magnet school-within-a-school of all the DPS magnet schools. The teacher turnover rates are for the comprehensive Hillside High School which includes the IB magnet program as the district does not disaggregate data on the IB program as a stand-alone. The demographic of the IB program is reflective of that of the whole school.

Year Capacity Enrollment 2015-16 400 ** 2014-15 400 ** 2013-14 400 ** 2012-13 400 ** 2011-12 400 **

95


1

Name of Magnet School: New Tech High School


School Number: 701


Magnet Theme: New Tech

Theme Description:

New Tech High School is an innovative high school patterned after the nationally known New Tech High School model and part of the NC New Schools Network. Students at the school may select one of several pathways that include free college level coursework in an Information Technology (IT) area. The pathways are designed to prepare students for one of many high demand jobs in the IT field.


• Rigorous, real-world investigations and projects that require collaboration and are enhanced by 1:1 technology access and industry partners

• Teachers trained by certified New Tech Network coaches • Students take honors and/or AP level courses • Students have opportunities to complete college level courses at no cost prior to high school graduation through a collaborative

partnership with Durham Tech • High school specialty electives that prepare students for college level classes in IT areas such as coding, robotics, design, and

mechatronics

Magnet School Funds: $1000 New Schools Contract: $41,850 New Tech Contract: $17,000

Magnet positions: 0 Total Magnet Funding: $150 per pupil (All specialty teachers funded through CTE) Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): No



Students who reside in the Hillside attendance zone are assigned first. Students residing outside the attendance zone may be assigned to remaining lottery seats. Student must submit the required hard copy application packet to the school and apply on line.

Hillside High School attendance zone only. Students must reside in the Hillside attendance zone to receive transportation.


96


2


2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

Number of Applications 214 164 198


School Characteristic 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Average

Total Enrollment 338 349 340 321 273 225 307.7

School Capacity 400 400 400 400 400 400 400

Percent Male 61.2% 59.3% 63.2% 63.2% 61.5% 64.4% 62.2%

Percent Female 38.8% 40.7% 36.8% 36.8% 38.5% 35.6% 37.8%

Percent American Indian 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 0.4% 0.4% 0.2%

Percent Asian 0.6% 0.9% 1.2% 0.9% 0.7% 0.4% 0.8%

Percent Hispanic 4.7% 6.9% 9.7% 9.3% 11.0% 12.9% 9.1%

Percent Black 88.5% 85.4% 82.6% 83.5% 81.7% 80.9% 83.8%

Percent White 3.0% 3.7% 4.1% 4.7% 4.8% 3.1% 3.9%

Percent Multi-racial 3.0% 3.2% 2.1% 0.9% 1.1% 1.8% 2.0%

Percent Pacific Islander 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 0.3% 0.4% 0.4% 0.2%

Percentage FRL 50.6% 52.6% 50.0% 52.6% 64.6% 55.7% 54.4%

Administrator Stability (number of principals over five year period): 4 administrators

Current principal is serving her second year at the school.


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 27.78 60.00 26.09 40.91 23.53


Administrator turnover and teacher turnover over the past five years have negatively impacted stability of school. Current administrator, now beginning her second year, has been trained in the New Tech instructional model and has been involved in streamlining and rearticulating magnet theme in partnership with Durham Tech. Through collaboration between school, Magnet, CTE, and community partners, a CTE content focus of IT is being put in place to strengthen attractiveness of school and align with job demand in the local community and RTP. Certifications and college level coursework opportunities through Durham Tech will be available beginning 2015-16 school year. CIHS grant to fund additional students in accessing Durham Tech coursework has been approved during first two rounds of evaluation. It has been sent to General Assembly for funding. We are hopeful that there will be funding to significantly grow the capacity for the school to offer college level courses for many more DPS students. An additional goal is to move New Tech to its own site to distinguish itself from Hillside High School and strengthen the connection with IT industries in RTP.

97


1

Name of Magnet School: Holt Language Academy Year-round Elementary

Address: 4019 Holt School Rd., Durham, NC 27704

School Number: 328

Date School Became a Magnet School: 1993 Year-round, 2013, added language academy magnet program

Magnet Theme: Year-Round Calendar, Language Academy

Theme Description: Holt is both a year-round calendar as well as a program magnet school. The year-round calendar supports sustained exposure to a second language, making it ideal for students learning another language.


• All students study an additional language (Spanish or Mandarin Chinese) beginning in Kindergarten with the opportunity to become conversational in that language by end of grade 5

• Global cultures integrated into core curriculum for greater understandings of the world and its people

• International staff

• Operates on a year-round calendar with three-week breaks between each 9 week instructional period, and a five week break during summer

Magnet School Funds: $15,000 VIF Contract (for Global Schools Network professional development): $9,900

Magnet positions: 2 ($105,910) Total Magnet Funding: $224 per pupil Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): Yes – The year-round program has a region of eligibility for applicants.


Holt Elementary (K-5) - Students residing in the attendance zone have automatic enrollment to the school and do not need to apply through the lottery. Grades K-5 are applicable for students residing in the Holt region. Students from within Holt’s region will receive first consideration to all grades during the application/lottery process, including Kindergarten through Grade 3 Language Academy. The region consists of schools from Eastway, Glenn, Little River, Mangum, Merrick–Moore, Oak Grove, Spring Valley and parts of Eno Valley and Hillandale attendance zones.

Assignment Priorities are Attendance Zone, Sibling Preference, Link Preference to The School for Creative Studies(due to year-round calendar match).

Regional

98


2



2013-14 2014-15 2015-16





School Capacity 585 585 585 585 585 585 585.0

Percent Male 54.3% 52.5% 52.1% 49.5% 52.0% 50.5% 51.8%

Percent Female 45.7% 47.5% 47.9% 50.5% 48.0% 49.5% 48.2%


Percent Asian 2.2% 1.4% 1.2% 1.2% 0.7% 0.8% 1.2%


Percent Black 41.8% 42.1% 39.5% 37.0% 39.2% 36.3% 39.3%

Percent White 6.7% 6.0% 5.6% 5.1% 6.5% 5.4% 5.9%



Percentage FRL 83.4% 87.2% 86.8% 88.6% 86.8% 85.1% 86.3%

Administrator Stability (number of principals over five year period): No administrator change.


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 14.48 18.18 16.09 14.94 10.75


The language academy program is being phased in one grade level at a time. This year it goes through grade 3 and next year will go through grade 4. This will impact allotment requests in order to accommodate the larger numbers of students who will be taking daily languages.


99


1

Name of Magnet School: J D Clement Early College High School

Address: NCCU Campus, Robinson Science Building, 1801 Fayetteville St., Durham, NC 27707

School Number: 309

Date School Became Magnet School: 2004

Magnet Theme: Early College

Theme Description: J D Clement Early College is a small high school for students in grades 9-12 and is located on the campus of North Carolina Central University.


• Opportunities for highly motivated students to complete their high school requirements as well as earn up to two years of college credit

• Small learning environment offering rigorous, high-quality coursework with extensive support

• Early College High School courses, including college-level courses taken at North Carolina Central University, offered at no charge to students

• Flexibility in the school day as students attend classes on the college campus

• Expectation of a high degree of individual responsibility

Magnet School Funds: $1000 (recurring grant funds cover cost of college textbooks – tuition fees are waived by NCCU) Magnet positions: 0 NCCU provides building facility and allows students to attend classes Recurring state grant funds pay for student textbooks for the students

Total Magnet Funding: $2.86/per pupil Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): No


Entrance criteria/entrance at the 9th grade only. Student must complete the additional required JDC application packet to the school via the online application process.

District wide

100


2






Administrator Turnover: (Over 5 years) – Two administrators over five years. Current principal in year 3


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 10.58 8.29 11.17 18.95 11.7


NCCU donates space for the Early College on NCCU campus and a recurring state level grant funds college level textbooks for students.


101


1

Name of Magnet School: Lakewood Montessori Middle School

Address: 2119 Chapel Hill Rd., Durham, NC 27707

School Number: 342


Magnet Theme: Montessori

Theme Description: The Montessori Middle School program focuses on community building and student leadership. The Montessori method of instruction is an internationally recognized instructional program.


• All core teachers earn their Montessori teaching credentials through intensive training from certified Montessori institutions

• A co-teaching model for core subject areas to allow for project-based learning

• Large uninterrupted blocks of work time to allow for independent, small group, and large group learning

• Strong emphasis on community building in the classroom

• Expectation of student service learning hours


Magnet positions: .5 ($26,478) Total Magnet Funding: $182 per pupil Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): No



Link Preference from 6th grade applicants of Morehead and Watts Montessori

District-wide

Year Capacity Enrollment 2015-16 300 302

102


2





Administrator Turnover: (Over 5 years) – Two administrators, but current principal is serving her first year at the school.


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 14.29 9.76 42.42 NA NA


2014-15 300 286 2013-14 300 290 2012-13 300 291 2011-12 300 181

103


1

Name of Magnet School: Lowe’s Grove

Address: 4418 South Alston Ave., Durham, NC 27713

School Number: 346


Magnet Theme: STEM School of Technology

Theme Description: The magnet program at Lowe’s Grove provides opportunities for all students to experience highly engaging coursework in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) subject areas within a 1:1 technology environment.


• Opportunities for students to customize their learning experience within their school day through specialized STEM electives in the two focus areas of Agricultural Science/Biotechnology and Business/Entrepreneurialism

• STEM clubs • Integration of multiple technologies such as iPads to expand opportunities for learning and expose students to a variety of

technology options. 1:1 IPad Learning environment. • Students work in collaborative groups and use technology to solve problems or complete projects • Partnerships with corporate and community experts in the fields of technology and engineering such as: NC Biotechnology

Center, Fidelity, and Soil and Conservation

Magnet School Funds: $22,000 Magnet positions: 2 ($105,910) Magnet Funding: $165 per pupil Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): Yes



Students residing in Lowes Grove’s attendance zone and students currently attending Lowes Grove do not need to apply for a lottery seat- No lottery priorities.

District wide Pathway Model (Pathway model is defined as students will be transported from their base school in the morning to the assigned school and returned to the base school in the afternoon). Note: Parents must transport their student to the base school at approximately 6:15 a.m.to catch the Pathway bus to the assigned school and pick up their children at the base school in the afternoon.


104


2


2013-14 2014-15 2015-16





School Capacity 774 728 774 774 774 774 766.3

Percent Male 51.4% 55.4% 54.9% 54.6% 52.3% 50.7% 53.2%

Percent Female 48.6% 44.6% 45.1% 45.4% 47.7% 49.3% 46.8%


Percent Asian 2.5% 1.6% 1.8% 0.9% 1.3% 1.0% 1.5%


Percent Black 66.4% 67.9% 66.2% 68.7% 65.8% 64.4% 66.6%

Percent White 7.7% 6.4% 6.4% 6.5% 6.2% 5.2% 6.4%



Percentage FRL 84.2% 82.3% 79.8% 83.6% 85.7% 79.2% 82.5%

Administrator Turnover: (Over 5 years) - Three administrators. Current principal is beginning year two.


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 36.56 34.09 NA NA NA


Lowe’s Grove was originally designated a magnet in large part to draw back students residing within the attendance zone who had left to go to other schools (charters, private, other DPS schools). Although there are not large numbers of magnet applications, overall enrollment at the school has increased over the past 4 years indicating that the school is retaining its base students in higher numbers than in past years.

It was also designated as a STEM magnet in response to significant community interest in STEM schools as community conversations and surveys indicated.

105


1

Name of Magnet School: Middle College High School (at Durham Technical Community College)

Address: 1616 Cooper St., Durham, NC 27703

School Number: 353


Magnet Theme: Middle College (grades 11 and 12)

Theme Description: The mission of MCHS at Durham Technical Community College (DTCC) is to expand learning opportunities for highly motivated students to earn a high school diploma while acquiring college credits toward an associate degree, a four-year college, or an industry certification credential.

Located on the campus of DTCC, MCHS is a high school for 11th and 12th graders from three school districts: Durham Public Schools, Orange County Schools, and Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools. Students apply to the school, and once accepted, take a hybrid schedule of high school and community college courses.


• All college classes and the use of required materials are free • Students can earn a year or more of university transfer credit • Majority of classes taught at the honors level • Advanced students may acquire an Associate Degree as they graduate from high school • Students may earn an industry certification credential • High school classes begin at 11:00 a.m. • Flexible college course scheduling (college classes meet twice per week) • Expectation of a high degree of individual responsibility

Magnet School Funds: $1000 (Additional local funds provide college textbooks to all Middle College students, and students’ Durham Tech tuition fees are waived)

Magnet positions: 0 Total Magnet Funding: $5 per pupil Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): No


Entrance criteria. Student must submit the online customized application during the application window.

DPS transportation provided to Middle College from student's base DPS school. Durham, Chapel Hill-Carrboro and Orange County School Districts provide transportation for their districts' students to Middle College.

106


2






Percent Asian 5.1% 5.8% 4.6% 0.8% 1.3% 3.8% 3.6% Percent Hispanic 9.2% 8.7% 11.0% 17.1% 22.2% 28.3% 16.1% Percent Black 33.7% 31.1% 29.4% 26.8% 45.8% 38.4% 34.2% Percent White 49.0% 51.5% 47.7% 48.0% 28.8% 27.0% 42.0% Percent Multi-racial 3.1% 1.9% 5.5% 7.3% 2.0% 2.5% 3.7% Percent Pacific Islander 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Percentage FRL 18.4% 10.7% 20.0% 10.9% -* -* 15.0%

*Data not available

Administrator Turnover: (Over 5 years) - 0


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 0.00 0.00 14.29 28.57 33.33


Students do not apply for Middle College until 11th grade.


107


1

Name of Magnet School: Morehead Elementary

Address: 909 Cobb St., Durham, NC 27707

School Number: 354



Theme Description: The Montessori method of instruction is an internationally recognized instructional program and is a well-established magnet program in Durham Public Schools.


• All classroom teachers trained by certified Montessori trainers

• Multi-age, child-centered learning environments based on the work of Maria Montessori

• Use of specialized Montessori materials designed for facilitating a variety of developmental levels and nurturing a level of independence for student learning

Magnet School Funds: $30,100 Magnet positions: 1 ($52,955) Pre-K is locally funded but not through magnet funds Total Magnet Funding: $374 per pupil Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): No – Morehead does have a priority zone which means that students within the designated zone are given priority seating in the lottery assignment.


Sibling Attending, Priority Zone, Siblings Applying, General App Pool

Students have a link priority to Lakewood Montessori

District wide

108


2







Administrator Turnover: (Over 5 years) – 2 principals in 5 years. Current principal is in year three.


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 0.00 21.62 21.62 5.56 5.88


Montessori is a pre-K – 5 program at the elementary level. Students may apply beginning in pre-K through the magnet lottery and maintain their magnet seats throughout grade 5.


109


1

Name of Magnet School: Neal Middle School

Address: 201 Baptist Rd., Durham, NC 27704

School Number: 355


Magnet Theme: STEM Academy of Engineering and Design

Theme Description: The magnet program at Neal provides opportunities for all students to experience highly engaging coursework in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) with a special emphasis on the Engineering and Design. The school implements one of the only full-scale middle school Project Lead the Way engineering and design programs in the state, and all students have access to these courses.


• Multiple coursework opportunities in STEM focus areas such as Project Lead the Way (PLTW) elective courses: Flight and Space, Magic of Electrons, Energy and the Environment, Design and Modeling, Medical Detectives, and Robotics

• Incorporation of the Engineering Design Process as a common problem-solving strategy in all subject areas • Partnerships with corporate and community experts in the fields of STEM including: NCSU Engineering Place, Lenovo,

Cisco, and Duke University • Partnering STEM program at Southern School of Energy and Sustainability for interested students to continue their

pursuit of 21st century skills and college and career preparation during their high school years

Magnet School Funds: $22,000 Magnet positions: 1 ($52,955) Magnet Funding: $93 per pupil (CTE funds entire Project Lead the Way program)

Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): Yes


Students residing in Neal's attendance zone and students currently attending Neal do not need to apply for a lottery seat - No lottery priorities.

District wide Pathway Model (Pathway model is defined as students will be transported from their base school in the morning to the assigned school and returned to the base school in the afternoon). Note: Parents must transport their student to the base school at approximately 6:15 a.m. (will likely change to later time when new bell schedule is in place) to catch the Pathway bus to the assigned school and pick up their child at the base school in the afternoon.

110


2



2013-14 2014-15 2015-16





School Capacity 664 664 810 810 810 810 761.3

Percent Male 50.6% 49.6% 54.3% 54.0% 52.2% 52.4% 52.2%

Percent Female 49.4% 50.4% 45.7% 46.0% 47.8% 47.6% 47.8%


Percent Asian 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% 0.7% 0.5% 0.3%


Percent Black 67.2% 63.9% 63.7% 60.0% 54.8% 54.2% 60.6%

Percent White 5.5% 5.3% 5.3% 5.6% 5.7% 5.4% 5.5%



Percentage FRL 84.8% 85.6% 83.3% 89.2% 81.9% 77.6% 83.7%

Administrator Turnover: (Over 5 years) - Two administrators within five years. Current administrator is in year one at the school and has experience as a successful magnet school principal.


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 40.80 36.8 NA NA NA

*Large numbers of Teach for America teachers effected turnover rates


Neal was originally designated a magnet in large part to draw back students residing within the attendance zone who had left to go to other schools (charters, private, other DPS schools). It was also designated as a STEM magnet in response to significant community interest in STEM schools as community conversations and surveys indicated. Although there are not large numbers of magnet applications, overall enrollment at the school has increased significantly over the past 4 years indicating that the school is retaining its base students in higher numbers than in past years.


111


1

Name of Magnet School: Pearsontown

Address: 302 Lebanon Circle, Durham, NC 27712

School Number: 364



Year-Round magnets are known as calendar magnets since they are magnet schools because of their special calendars. Pearsontown does not implement a specialized magnet program/theme.

Magnet School Funds: $1000 (for recruitment/marketing…no specialized program to implement) Magnet positions: 0 Total Magnet Funding: $1.20/student Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): No. Students must reside within the region of eligibility to apply.





Pearsontown Elementary (K-5)- No attendance zone. The region consist of students who reside in the Bethesda, Creekside, Fayetteville Street, Forest View, Hope Valley, Lakewood, Parkwood, W.G. Pearson, E.K. Powe, Y.E. Smith, Southwest and C.C. Spaulding attendance zones. Sibling Applying and Sibling Attending Priorities, General App Pool, Link Priority to Rogers-Herr Middle

Regional transportation for students who reside in the Bethesda, Creekside, Fayetteville Street, Forest View, Hope Valley, Lakewood, Parkwood, W.G. Pearson, E.K. Powe, Y.E. Smith, Southwest and C.C. Spaulding attendance zones


112


2



Percent Asian 4.5% 4.1% 3.8% 4.5% 3.8% 4.7% 4.2% Percent Hispanic 7.8% 9.1% 8.5% 8.8% 10.2% 11.0% 9.2% Percent Black 62.6% 57.6% 56.7% 53.5% 50.7% 48.9% 55.0% Percent White 20.3% 24.4% 26.3% 28.1% 29.4% 29.1% 26.3% Percent Multi-racial 4.3% 4.6% 4.5% 4.7% 5.5% 5.9% 4.9% Percent Pacific Islander 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Percentage FRL 32.0% 34.1% 33.0% 31.1% 34.1% 31.2% 32.6

Administrator Stability (number of principals over five year period): Two administrators in five years. Current principal is serving his third year.


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 10.79 12 18.87 12.24 13.46


113


1

Name of Magnet School: RN Harris

Address: 1520 Cooper St., Durham, NC 27703

School Number: 367


Magnet Theme: Integrated Arts/Core Knowledge

Theme Description: The Core Knowledge curriculum is a nationally recognized instructional program that follows a thoroughly defined series of interesting and challenging topics designed to produce culturally literate students. Integrating the arts further strengthens learning and brings the curriculum to life. It features comprehensive cultural units, Suzuki violin instruction and A+ Schools and Multiple Intelligences programs. Additional enrichment is provided through performances, museums, art galleries, theaters, special university programs and master classes throughout the year.


• Official Core Knowledge School where content is sequenced by grade level and ensures that all students obtain a well-rounded foundational education

• A+ Model School with all staff trained in Arts Integration

• Specialized arts classes offered such as: Suzuki Violin, F.L.I.G.H.T Dance Troupe, Chorus, Art walk Gallery-display of student work from grades K-5, and 21st century classrooms


Magnet positions: 1 ($52,955) Total Magnet Funding: $194 per pupil


A significant number of students at RN Harris attend the school by application through the lottery which takes place every January of the school year. A small percentage of students are automatically assigned to the school because they reside in the designated Walk Zone (attendance zone) within a half mile radius of the school.


Sibling Attending, Siblings Applying, General App Pool District wide

114


2






Percent Asian 0.5% 0.5% 1.1% 0.8% 0.8% 0.6% 0.7% Percent Hispanic 25.0% 25.9% 31.3% 31.5% 33.8% 40.6% 31.3% Percent Black 69.2% 69.5% 62.3% 63.0% 62.3% 55.4% 63.6% Percent White 1.1% 0.8% 1.6% 1.4% 1.3% 0.9% 1.2% Percent Multi-racial 3.9% 3.2% 3.7% 2.5% 1.3% 1.7% 2.7% Percent Pacific Islander 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Percentage FRL 86.1% 82.4% 83.6% 86.4% 100.0%* 100%* 84.6%

*RN Harris is one of the elementary schools that have been granted free lunch to 100% of the students, therefore, this number is not reflective of the actual poverty rate at the school and not included in the average percentage rate.



2014-45 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 13.00 9.84 3.23 5 12.9



115


1

Name of Magnet School: Rogers-Herr

Address: 911 West Cornwallis Rd., Durham, NC 27707

School Number: 370



Year-Round magnets are known as calendar magnets since they are magnet schools because of their special calendars. Rogers-Herr does not implement a specialized magnet program/theme.

Magnet School Funds: $1000 (for recruitment/marketing…no specialized program to implement) Magnet positions: 0 Total Magnet Funding: N/A Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): No – there is a region of eligibility to make application





Rogers-Herr Middle (6-8) - No attendance zone. The region consist of students residing in the attendance zones of Bethesda, Creekside, Fayetteville Street, Forest View, Hope Valley, Lakewood, Parkwood, W. G. Pearson, E. K. Powe, Y.E. Smith, Southwest and C.C. Spaulding. Assignment Priorities are Sibling Attending and Applying, Link Preference for Applicants from Pearsontown Elementary, Sibling Applying Preference, General Applicant Pool

Regional transportation for students who reside within the attendance zones of Bethesda, Creekside, Fayetteville Street, Forest View, Hope Valley, Lakewood, Parkwood, W. G. Pearson, E. K. Powe, Y.E. Smith, Southwest and C.C. Spaulding


116


2




Administrator Stability (number of principals over five year period): Two administrators in five years. Current principal is serving her first year.


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 19.31 26.67 33.33 57.18 35.71


117


1

Name of Magnet School: Sandy Ridge Elementary

1417 Old Oxford Hwy, Durham, NC 27704

School Number: 369


Magnet Theme: Visual and Performing Arts

Theme Description: The Visual and Performing Arts magnet elementary school provides various opportunities for students to participate in arts classes and experiences. The school implements a regular schedule of arts specialist classes for all students.


• Music, Visual Arts, Dance, Theater classes for all students • Multiple choral music and theater performances annually • Multiple art gallery walks annually • Regularly scheduled residencies with visiting professionals and artists • Regularly scheduled art-focused field trips • Two daily enrichment classes allowing students to receive both foundational skill instruction, as well as

integrated enrichment that brings the arts into the content areas


Magnet positions: 3 ($158,865) Total Magnet Funding: $342 per pupil Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): No. Sandy Ridge does have a designated Choice Zone which means that lottery assignment priority is given to those students who reside in the designated zone.


Sibling Attending, Siblings Applying, General App Pool in the following order: Designated Choice Zone, 7 Priority Schools (Mangum, Eno Valley, Little River, Easley, Holt, Hillandale and Glenn), General App Pool

Students must reside in the following base elementary school districts to receive transportation services (Mangum, Eno Valley, Little River, Easley, Holt, Hillandale and Glenn)

118


2





School Characteristic 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Average Total Enrollment 590 583 595 603 594 593 School Capacity 628 628 628 628 628 628 Percent Male 39.3% 39.3% 41.0% 43.0% 43.8% 41.3% Percent Female 60.7% 60.7% 59.0% 57.0% 56.2% 58.7% Percent American Indian 0.5% 0.2% 0.3% 0.7% 0.2% 0.4%

Percent Asian 1.9% 1.9% 2.0% 1.7% 1.5% 1.8% Percent Hispanic 14.7% 17.3% 20.7% 24.7% 25.8% 20.6% Percent Black 59.2% 59.0% 55.5% 54.7% 55.1% 56.7% Percent White 19.8% 16.1% 15.1% 13.4% 13.6% 15.6% Percent Multi-racial 3.9% 5.5% 6.2% 4.6% 3.7% 4.8% Percent Pacific Islander 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% Percentage FRL 53.4% 56.2% 58.0% 60.4% 64.6% 58.5%

Administrator Turnover: (Over 5 years) – Two administrators. Current administrator is in year two.


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 28.35 21.95 NA NA NA



119


1

Name of Magnet School: The School for Creative Studies (SCS)

Address: 5001 Red Mill Rd., Durham, NC 27704

School Number: 314


Magnet Theme: Creative Studies and Year Round

Theme Description: The School for Creative Studies is a small school established for grades 6-12 that operates on a year-round calendar. The school and classroom environments are collaborative in nature and designed to prepare students for a thriving creative economy.


• Innovative classroom instruction that encourages the development of creativity and collaborative problem-solving skills

• Program of study features a variety of options for students to customize their creative education. Coursework selections may include media and broadcasting, film making, documentary studies, writing and journalism, architecture, music composition/audio production, graphic design and marketing, and other creative areas for which there is demand in the job market

• Regular student interaction with creative and design experts from the community (Duke Center for Documentary Studies and local architects, for example) incorporated into the instructional program through industry visits, internships, classroom presentations and artists-in-resident programs


Magnet positions: 2 ($105,910) Total Magnet Funding: $210 per pupil Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): No


The School for Creative Studies (6-12) -(Grades 6, 7 ,8 9, 10, 11 offered for 2015-16. Sibling Attending Preference, Link Preference from Holt and Easley Elementary Schools, Siblings Applying, General App Pool

District wide express stops in the morning (group stops at select DPS schools and staff development center) with community bus stops in the afternoon

120


2





School Characteristic 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Average Total Enrollment 261 449 526 412 School Capacity 300 500 500 433 Percent Male 51.7% 52.3% 53.0% 52.3% Percent Female 48.3% 47.7% 47.0% 47.6% Percent American Indian 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0%

Percent Asian 0.4% 0.7% 0.4% 0.5% Percent Hispanic 22.6% 19.6% 22.2% 21.4% Percent Black 46.0% 47.9% 44.1% 46% Percent White 27.2% 29.4% 30.6% 29% Percent Multi-racial 3.8% 2.4% 2.7% 2.9% Percent Pacific Islander 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Percentage FRL 52.9% 47.9% 47.9 49.6%

Administrator Turnover: (Over 3 years since opening) - 0


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 17.20 17.5 NA NA NA


The school will be completely phased in with grades 6 – 12 next year during the 2016-17 school year. School capacity for the school will be 700 when that happens.

Year Capacity Enrollment 2015-16 600 526 2014-15 500 449 2013-14 300 263 2012-13 N/A 2011-12 N/A

121


1

Name of Magnet School: Shepard Middle School

Address: 2401 Dakota St, Durham, NC 27707

School Number: 338


Magnet Theme: International Baccalaureate Middle Years Programme (IB-MYP)

Theme Description: The IB-MYP is a high quality program of international coursework developed and authorized by world renowned International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO). The IB Programme is designed to help develop the intellectual, personal, emotional and social skills to live, learn and work in a rapidly globalizing world.


• Aims to develop inquiring, knowledgeable and caring young people who desire to create a better and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect.

• Students may begin a second language beginning in kindergarten, and upon completion of the high school IB education possess a high degree of second language mastery in French, Mandarin Chinese and Spanish. At the Middle Years level, students will begin or continue a study of a second language.



Magnet positions: 3 ($158,865) Total Magnet Funding: $364 per pupil Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): No



Link Priority for applicants from Burton to Shepard and from Shepard to Hillside IB, General App Pool

District wide


122


2






Administrator Turnover (Over 5 years): 0 Note: A new administrator was just named in February, 2016.


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 25.97 19.72 21.54 13.79 8.2


123


1

Name of Magnet School: Southern School of Energy and Sustainability

Address: 800 Clayton Rd., Durham, NC 27703

School Number: 368 Date School Became a Magnet School: 2013

Magnet Theme: STEM – Energy and Sustainability

Theme Description: Students attending Southern School of Energy and Sustainability select one of four small academies in which to complete his or her high school requirements.

1. The School of Biomedical Technology 2. The School of Computer Engineering 3. The School of Business Management and Sustainability 4. The School of Architecture and Construction Engineering


• Focus on the integration of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) in relation to energy and sustainability

• Potential for students enrolled in each academy to earn college credit through a partnership with Durham Tech • Certifications possible in: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Computer Aided Design (CAD), National Center for

Construction, Education Research in Construction, Electrical Trades, Carpentry, Computer Engineering Comp-Tia and A+, Technology and Computer Networking

• The benefits of a smaller school as well as athletics, band, and other extracurricular activities offered at a comprehensive high school


New Schools Contract: $58,925 Magnet positions: 1 ($52,955) Total Magnet Funding: $89 per pupil (CTE funds all specialized teachers/classroom materials and equipment for each of the academies) Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): Yes


Students residing in Southern's attendance zone and students currently attending do not need to apply for a lottery seat - No lottery preferences.

District wide Pathway Model (Pathway model is defined as students will be transported from their base school in the morning to the assigned school and returned to the base school in the afternoon). Note: Parents must transport their student to the base school at approximately 6:15 a.m. (likely to change to later time when new bell schedule is in place during 2016-17) to catch the Pathway bus to the assigned school and pick up their child at the base school in the afternoon.

124


2


The table above includes The School of Engineering for all five years.


2013-14 2014-15 2015-16





School Capacity 1540 1540 1540 1540 1540 1540 1540.0

Percent Male 50.3% 50.4% 50.2% 49.9% 55.7% 55.9% 52.1%

Percent Female 49.7% 49.6% 49.8% 50.1% 44.3% 44.1% 47.9%


Percent Asian 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.1% 0.3% 0.4% 0.3%


Percent Black 72.2% 70.0% 72.7% 71.3% 67.8% 65.4% 69.9%

Percent White 5.1% 5.3% 4.1% 3.8% 4.0% 3.4% 4.3%



Percentage FRL 71.1% 68.3% 70.4% 73.4% 80.5% 75.9% 73.3% *The School of Engineering was integrated into Southern High School beginning 2013-14.

Administrator Turnover: (Over 5 years) – Two administrators in past 5 years. Current administrator is in year two.


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 27.78 12.66 NA NA NA


Southern was originally designated as a magnet in large part to draw back students residing within the attendance zone who had left to go to other schools (charters, private, other DPS schools). Therefore it is important to look at the enrollment trend as well as magnet applications in order to determine attractiveness. It was also designated as a STEM magnet in response to significant community interest in STEM schools as community conversations and surveys indicated.


125


1

Name of Magnet School: George Watts Elementary

Address: 700 Watts St., Durham, NC 27701

School Number: 347



Theme Description: The Montessori method of instruction is an internationally recognized instructional program and is a well-established magnet program in Durham Public Schools.


• All classroom teachers trained by certified Montessori trainers

• Multi-age, child-centered learning environments based on the work of Maria Montessori

• Use of specialized Montessori materials designed for facilitating a variety of developmental levels and nurturing a level of independence for student learning

Magnet School Funds: $46,200 Magnet positions: 1 ($52,955)

Pre-K is locally funded but not through magnet funds Total Magnet Funding: $ 292 per pupil Base Attendance Zone (Yes or No): No – Watts does have a priority zone which means that students within the designated zone are given priority seating in the lottery assignment.


Sibling Attending, Priority Zone, Siblings Applying, General App Pool District wide

126


2








2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 24.00 9.38 12.9 5.48 10.29



127


1

Name of Magnet School: WG Pearson Elementary


School Number: 388

Date School Became a Magnet School: 2006 opened as a Gifted and Talented (GT) Magnet – theme was changed to add the focus of “STEAM” (science, technology, engineering, arts, and math) for the 12-13 school year

Magnet Theme: STEAM Gifted and Talented

Theme Description: The STEAM Gifted and Talented (GT) magnet elementary program is based on the belief that every student possesses specific gifts and talents.


• Students' interests and talents are nurtured through engaging, active instruction in the focus areas of STEAM: Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Math

• 1:1 learning environment - learning is broadened and more engaging because of multiple learning resources available through the mobile devices

• Beginning in second grade, students can customize their learning through choice electives in the STEAM subject areas

Magnet School Funds: $45,000 Magnet positions: 1.5 ($79,433)

Total Magnet funding: $212 per pupil



No lottery preferences Districtwide

128


2







Administrator Stability (number of principals over five year period): Three administrators. Current administrator is in year one.


2014-15 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12 2010-11 19.31 26.67 33.33 57.18 35.71



129

K-12 Magnet Program/Calendar Options Continuum

(Attached)

130

K-12 Magnet Program/Calendar Options Continuum

Magnet Theme Elementary Middle High

STEM WG Pearson Lowes Grove, Neal Southern, New Tech, City of Medicine

Arts Club Blvd, RN Harris, Sandy Ridge

Durham School of Arts, The School for Creative Studies

Durham School of Arts, The School for Creative Studies

Montessori Morehead, Watts Lakewood

World Languages Holt, Burton Shepard, Neal Hillside IB

International Baccalaureate (IB)

Burton Shepard Hillside IB

Year Round Easley, Holt, Pearsontown

Rogers-Herr, The School for Creative Studies

The School for Creative Studies

131

DRAFT – PREPARED FOR STUDENT ASSIGNMENT DISCUSSION – AUGUST 11, 2011 Updated on August 17 based upon comments provided at the August 11, 2011 work session

Guiding Principles – Student Assignment (Non-Magnet)

1. Utilize school facilities effectively (at least 85% utilized)2. Promote diversity3. Consider K-12 feeder pattern4. Consider student stability5. Consider levels of transportation available6. Consider impact on student performance

Guiding Principles – Magnet Programs

1. Utilize school facilities effectively (at least 85% utilized)2. Promote school diversity3. Provide diverse and relevant program offerings throughout the district that meet

student interest and provide expanded learning opportunities4. Consider K-12 feeder pattern5. Consider levels of Transportation available6. Consider program continuity across grade levels7. Consider impact on student performance

These principles are not listed in priority order.

132

School Locations

2

133

Durham Public Schools School Feeder Patterns

Elementary Schools Middle Schools High SchoolsBethesda Neal Southern

Lowes Grove HillsideC. C. Spaulding Githens Jordan/Hillside

Creekside Lowes Grove Jordan/HillsideGithens Jordan/Hillside

Easley (Base) Brogden RiversideCarrington Northern/Riverside

Eastway Lucas NorthernBrogden Riverside

EK Powe Githens Jordan Brogden Riverside

Eno Valley Carrington Northern/RiversideLucas Northern

Fayetteville St. Lowes Grove HillsideGithens Hillside

Forest View Brogden RiversideGithens Jordan

Glenn Neal SouthernBrogden RiversideLucas Northern

Hillandale Brogden RiversideCarrington Riverside

Holt (Base) Carrington RiversideBrogden Riverside

Hope Valley Lowes Grove JordanGithens Jordan

Lakewood Githens Jordan Little River Lucas Northern

Carrington NorthernMangum Lucas Northern

Carrington NorthernMerrick Moore Neal Southern

Oak Grove Neal SouthernParkwood Lowes Grove Hillside

Githens HillsideSouthwest Githens Jordan/Hillside

Lowes Grove HillsideSpring Valley Neal Southern

W. G. Pearson (Base) Brogden RiversideGithens Jordan / Hillside

Y. E. Smith Neal Southern

3

134

Magnet School Feeder Patterns

Program Magnets Elementary Middle HighInternational Baccalaureate Burton Shepard Hillside Montessori George Watts Lakewood Montessori Morehead LakewoodHumanities/Integrated Arts Club BlvdCore Knowledge/Integrated Arts R.N HarrisVisual and Performing Arts Sandy RidgeVisual and Performing Arts Durham School of the Arts Durham School of the ArtsScience, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Math (STEAM) W.G. PearsonScience, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM w/a focus on technology) Lowes GroveScience, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM w/a focus on engineering and design) NealBusiness Management & Sustainability, Arcitecture and Construction, Biomedical Technology & Computer Engineering (STEM) Southern School of Energy and SustaibabilityTechnology Small High School New Tech High SchoolHealth Sciences Small High School The City of Medicine AcademyEarly College Small High School at NCCU Josephine Dobbs ClementsMiddle College Small High School at DTCC Durham Tech Middle College

Calander Magnets Elementary Middle HighYear-Round Pearsontown Rogers-HerrYear-Round/Language Immersion Holt The School for Creative Studies The School for Creative StudiesYear-Round Easley The School for Creative Studies The School for Creative Studies

4

135

Annual Lottery Applications, Seats and Assignment Snapshot2015-16

Rev. 11.16.15

Schools1st Choice

Apps2nd Choice

Apps3rd Choice

AppsLottery Seats

Lottery Assignments PK KI 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Elementary Magnets AP/S/AS AP/S/AS AP/S/AS AP/S/AS AP/S/AS AP/S/AS AP/S/AS

Burton IB 100 56 45 55 66 93/55/61 30/0/0 23/0/0 23/2/2 17/1/3 15/0/0Club 311 163 79 102 156 302/90/144 77/0/0 50/6/6 54/6/6 41/0/0 29/0/0Easley 82 14 5 25 34 74/22/31 5/1/1 8/1/1 5/0/0 6/0/0 3/1/1Geo Watts 547 288 94 73 82 416/57/60 260/8/11 80/4/5 56/2/2 46/0/0 45/1/2 26/1/2Holt 87 53 33 24 29 100/22/27 16/0/0 18/0/0 16/0/0 14/1/1 9/1/1Morehead 338 333 85 45 49 348/40/44 206/5/5 61/0/0 49/0/0 32/0/0 43/0/0 17/0/0Pearsontown 590 54 25 190 255 361/136/172 89/7/8 76/10/15 57/9/19 55/21/29 30/7/12RN Harris 131 60 49 54 65 110/50/61 39/1/1 27/1/1 24/0/0 23/2/2 16/0/0Sandy Ridge 383 117 50 145 249 261/105/149 58/11/35 62/5/15 63/7/25 65/7/13 41/10/12WG Pearson 176 108 52 133 208 159/80/158 42/0/0 36/0/0 47/17/22 23/0/0 29/19/26Totals 2745 1246 517 822 1193Secondary Magnets AP/S/AS AP/S/AS AP/S/AS AP/S/AS AP/S/AS AP/S/AS AP/S/ASCity of Medicine Academy 249 105 42 91 100 326/85/94 47/5/5 22/1/1 N/ADSA 1798 410 119 337 525 867/215/241 324/18/25 308/14/18 628/64/191 127/26/50 74/0/0 N/AHillside IB 81 56 30 210 184 153/150/153 24/50/24 7/10/7 N/AHillside New Tech 70 68 60 181 115 167/100/100 20/43/10 7/4/2 4/5/3JDC Early College 224 134 53 101 106 224/101/106Lakewood Montessori 194 132 91 134 167 322/102/114 57/20/35 38/12/18Lowes Grove 25 36 35 45 66 68/25/37 19/10/19 10/10/10Middle College at DTCC 94 2 1 128 97 73/100/73 24/28/24Neal 18 24 25 45 49 55/25/34 9/10/9 6/10/6Rogers Herr 272 120 38 224 244 343/215/233 49/4/6 38/5/5Shepard IB 178 124 73 195 250 277/180/231 57/7/10 41/8/9Southern School of Energy and Sustainability 40 29 25 150 94 81/100/81 6/10/6 7/10/7 N/A

The School for Creative Studies 339 240 186 178 213 311/100/126 86/3/3 79/7/9 172/23/34 29/21/27 14/32/14 N/A

Totals 3582 1480 778 2019 2210CTE Pathways 283 168 81 480 423 476/380/376 56/82/47

Totals 6610 2894 1376 3321 3810Legend: AP = Applications, S = Available Lottery Seats, AS = Assignments

5

136

CECA

S

DPI F

TE S

choo

l

Hom

eles

s

Beth

esda

Ele

men

tary

Burt

on E

lem

enta

ry

C C

Spau

ldin

g El

emen

tary

Club

Bou

leva

rd E

lem

enta

ry

Cree

ksid

e El

emen

tary

DPS

Hosp

ital S

choo

l

E K

Pow

e El

emen

tary

Easle

y El

emen

tary

East

way

Ele

men

tary

Eno

Valle

y El

emen

tary

Faye

ttev

ille

Stre

et E

lem

enta

ry

Fore

st V

iew

Ele

men

tary

Geor

ge W

atts

Ele

men

tary

Glen

n El

emen

tary

Hilla

ndal

e El

emen

tary

Holt

Elem

enta

ry

Hope

Val

ley

Elem

enta

ry

Lake

woo

d El

emen

tary

Litt

le R

iver

Ele

men

tary

Man

gum

Ele

men

tary

Mer

rick-

Moo

re E

lem

enta

ry

Mor

ehea

d M

onte

ssor

i

Oak

Gro

ve E

lem

enta

ry

Park

woo

d El

emen

tary

Pear

sont

own

Elem

enta

ry

R N

Har

ris E

lem

enta

ry

Sand

y Ri

dge

Elem

enta

ry

Sout

hwes

t Ele

men

tary

Sprin

g Va

lley

Elem

enta

ry

W G

Pea

rson

Ele

men

tary

Y E

Smith

Ele

men

tary

Tota

l Stu

dent

s

105 1 37 648

346

261

492

919

10 515

581

583

562

281

735

350

700

657

653

644

484

352

335

698

207

608

529

797

345

594

620

529

519

391

16,0

88

Unmatched Address 77 2 0 32 3 0 0 1 2 5 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 2 7 2 1 0 3 1 0 2 5 2 0 0 77

CECAS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0DPI FTE School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Homeless 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Bethesda Elementary 1,305 9 0 0 623 115 16 16 3 0 11 2 4 1 22 2 6 5 2 2 8 2 12 8 14 0 9 11 145 137 5 19 35 56 5 1,305

Burton Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0C C Spaulding Elementary 414 2 0 2 3 3 211 3 0 1 3 0 0 0 8 0 3 0 0 0 7 22 0 0 3 83 3 0 18 10 1 6 0 22 0 414

Club Boulevard Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Creekside Elementary 1,125 10 0 0 0 5 0 8 880 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 8 0 0 0 11 0 1 0 1 11 0 2 154 5 0 9 2 7 0 1,125

DPS Hospital School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0E K Powe Elementary 709 3 0 0 0 10 0 18 0 0 339 0 0 3 0 116 172 3 5 0 5 9 1 0 4 2 1 0 1 4 2 0 0 11 0 709

Easley Elementary 584 1 0 0 0 4 0 7 1 0 2 363 0 89 0 0 5 5 60 1 5 0 7 4 0 0 1 0 2 3 20 0 1 3 0 584Eastway Elementary 741 2 0 2 1 27 2 23 0 0 9 3 544 3 5 1 16 8 0 11 2 4 5 0 22 4 2 0 0 15 2 1 0 22 5 741

Eno Valley Elementary 977 5 0 0 0 3 1 18 2 1 1 123 2 419 0 5 19 8 13 12 2 2 58 23 8 3 1 0 2 4 224 2 1 12 3 977Fayetteville Street Elementary 340 0 0 0 0 8 3 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 225 6 0 3 2 0 6 1 0 0 1 4 1 1 18 7 0 17 3 28 1 340

Forest View Elementary 631 10 0 0 3 8 4 5 2 0 7 0 0 1 2 518 11 2 3 0 9 4 1 0 1 14 0 0 10 6 2 1 1 6 0 631George Watts Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Glenn Elementary 1,191 5 0 1 5 24 4 192 3 2 53 5 6 8 2 6 26 551 9 41 6 12 15 4 10 11 12 3 0 22 125 1 9 17 1 1,191Hillandale Elementary 638 3 0 0 0 2 2 16 1 0 4 65 0 1 0 11 13 1 474 2 2 1 1 1 0 4 2 1 1 5 19 0 1 5 0 638

Holt Elementary 1,133 3 0 0 0 4 0 50 0 0 22 5 4 25 0 3 19 82 63 543 4 2 16 4 125 11 1 0 2 4 129 3 0 6 3 1,133Hope Valley Elementary 698 11 0 0 0 8 0 17 5 0 7 0 1 0 2 16 3 3 0 0 515 10 0 0 0 7 1 0 62 15 0 11 0 4 0 698

Lakewood Elementary 588 3 0 0 0 16 6 22 0 0 15 0 1 0 0 8 8 10 2 1 18 408 0 2 0 14 0 1 18 7 2 3 0 22 1 588Little River Elementary 246 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 7 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 3 0 0 199 13 0 1 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 246

Mangum Elementary 282 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 7 260 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 282Merrick-Moore Elementary 786 2 0 0 6 25 1 32 3 0 7 2 4 5 1 5 5 7 6 16 3 1 12 4 498 10 17 3 2 34 18 7 15 25 10 786

Morehead Montessori 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Oak Grove Elementary 775 8 1 0 1 26 0 14 3 0 13 0 0 5 0 2 5 3 5 13 11 0 11 3 7 2 542 6 2 20 12 3 41 13 3 775Parkwood Elementary 976 7 0 0 0 14 2 11 8 0 9 1 1 0 8 13 3 1 1 0 19 2 1 1 0 11 2 493 243 20 0 65 0 38 2 976

Pearsontown Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0R N Harris Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sandy Ridge Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Southwest Elementary 672 7 0 0 0 5 1 8 5 1 2 0 0 1 4 9 4 1 0 1 11 3 0 0 1 8 4 4 101 3 0 464 1 23 0 672

Spring Valley Elementary 512 6 0 0 3 12 3 15 0 0 3 2 1 0 0 1 1 2 7 5 0 0 2 1 0 3 3 1 1 10 7 2 415 6 0 512W G Pearson Elementary 233 1 0 0 0 14 1 2 0 0 4 0 8 0 0 0 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 6 4 1 1 1 180 0 233

Y E Smith Elementary 455 3 0 0 0 13 4 7 0 0 3 1 5 0 1 1 13 4 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 4 0 8 10 2 0 1 13 357 455



Comments

Durham Public SchoolsElementary School Student Residence and Attendance

2015-16

Where Students Reside

6

137

CECA

S

Brog

den

Mid

dle

DPS

Hosp

ital S

choo

l

Durh

am S

choo

l of t

he A

rts (

6-8)

Geo

rge

L Ca

rrin

gton

Mid

dle

Jam

es E

She

pard

Mid

dle

Lake

view

Sch

ool

Lake

woo

d M

onte

ssor

i Mid

dle

Litt

le R

iver

Ele

men

tary

Low

e's G

rove

Mid

dle

Luca

s Mid

dle

Nea

l Mid

dle

Roge

rs-H

err M

iddl

e

Sher

woo

d G

ithen

s Mid

dle

The

Scho

ol fo

r Cre

ativ

e St

udie

s

Tota

l Stu

dent

s

10 597 6 644

1,00

4

512

12 302

34 653

639

787

632

904

292

7,02

8

Unmatched Address 15 2 1 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 15

CECAS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Brogden Middle 851 2 513 0 100 13 38 3 87 1 7 1 7 20 9 50 851

DPS Hospital School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Durham School of the Arts (6-8) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

George L Carrington Middle 1,298 1 17 2 116 947 27 2 34 15 5 31 11 6 4 80 1,298James E Shepard Middle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lakeview School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Lakewood Montessori Middle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Little River Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Lowe's Grove Middle 1,195 2 7 0 93 3 127 2 33 0 619 8 9 257 13 22 1,195

Lucas Middle 763 0 10 0 63 15 32 0 17 16 3 558 8 2 0 39 763Neal Middle 1,316 1 36 0 131 24 199 3 28 2 19 19 744 25 4 81 1,316

Rogers-Herr Middle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Sherwood Githens Middle 1,590 2 13 0 138 2 89 2 103 0 0 21 8 322 870 20 1,590

The School for Creative Studies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



Comments


Durham Public Schools

Middle School Student Residence and Attendance2015-16

7

138

Hom

eles

s

CECA

S

C E

Jord

an H

igh

City

of M

edic

ine

Acad

emy

DPS

Hosp

ital S

choo

l

Durh

am S

choo

l of t

he A

rts (

9-12

)

Durh

am's

Perf

orm

ance

Lea

rnin

g Ce

nter

Hills

ide

High

Hills

ide

New

Tec

h Hi

gh

J D C

lem

ent E

arly

Col

lege

HS

Lake

view

Sch

ool

Mid

dle

Colle

ge H

S @

DTC

C

Nor

ther

n Hi

gh

Rive

rsid

e Hi

gh

Sout

hern

Sch

ool o

f Ene

rgy

and

Sust

aina

bilit

y

The

Scho

ol fo

r Cre

ativ

e St

udie

s

Tota

l Stu

dent

s

2 6

2,00

2

303

21 995

255

1,30

7

225

354

30 159

1,49

5

1,86

5

1,40

0

235

10,4

19

Unmatched Address 55 2 1 3 1 16 3 0 3 1 2 1 22 0 0 0 0 55

CECAS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0C E Jordan High 2,222 1 1,652 35 1 244 36 89 21 52 1 20 16 33 21 27 2,222

City of Medicine Academy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0DPS Hospital School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Durham School of the Arts (9-12) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Durham's Performance Learning Center 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Hillside High 1,881 1 233 67 0 151 56 1,037 129 93 4 26 19 14 51 42 1,881Hillside New Tech High 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

J D Clement Early College HS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Lakeview School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Middle College HS @ DTCC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Northern High 2,073 1 33 65 1 186 40 37 19 49 11 28 1,349 208 46 64 2,073Riverside High 2,087 2 26 54 2 204 41 33 11 31 3 23 51 1,582 24 36 2,087

Southern School of Energy and Sustainability 2,101 0 55 81 1 207 82 108 44 127 10 40 60 28 1,258 66 2,101The School for Creative Studies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Durham Public Schools

High School Student Residence and Attendance2015-16


Comments


8

139

Bethesda 671 712 94% 674 712 95% 651 712 91% 0Burton 371 376 99% 390 376 104% 344 376 91% 0Club Blvd. 503 492 102% 523 492 106% 492 492 100% 0Creekside 894 764 117% 943 764 123% 918 764 120% 8Easley (Year Round) 571 522 109% 540 522 103% 583 522 112% 4Eastway 580 544 107% 551 544 101% 584 544 107% 5Eno Valley 552 596 93% 477 596 80% 558 596 94% 3Fayetteville St. 246 366 67% 245 366 67% 281 366 77% 0Forest View 711 659 108% 701 659 106% 736 659 112% 2Glenn 650 591 110% 646 591 109% 699 591 118% 7Harris 383 376 102% 400 376 106% 345 376 92% 1Hillandale 670 689 97% 678 689 98% 662 689 96% 0Holt (Year Round) 601 585 103% 609 585 104% 651 585 111% 0Hope Valley 640 628 102% 648 628 103% 638 628 102% 8Lakewood 461 428 108% 472 428 110% 482 428 113% 5Little River (K-5) 350 574 61% 352 418 84% 352 418 84% 0Mangum 348 408 85% 360 408 88% 327 408 80% 0Merrick-Moore 705 648 109% 676 648 104% 692 648 107% 4Morehead 213 222 96% 220 222 99% 221 222 100% 0Oak Grove 581 626 93% 598 626 96% 609 626 97% 0Parkwood 583 648 90% 588 648 91% 534 648 82% 6Pearson 549 586 94% 574 586 98% 520 586 89% 0Pearsontown (Year Round) 814 836 97% 821 836 98% 801 836 96% 0Powe 455 404 113% 434 548 79% 514 548 94% 0Sandy Ridge 604 628 96% 629 628 100% 594 628 95% 0Smith 406 408 100% 403 408 99% 391 408 96% 0Southwest 645 585 110% 661 585 113% 621 585 106% 4Spaulding 273 325 84% 273 325 84% 263 325 81% 0Spring Valley 581 638 91% 601 638 94% 526 638 82% 0Watts 344 340 101% 360 340 106% 350 340 103% 0

SUBTOTALS 15,955 16,204 98% 16,047 16,192 99% 15,939 16,192 98% 57Brogden 641 872 74% 641 872 74% 598 872 69% 0Carrington 1,095 1,288 85% 1,095 1,288 85% 1,002 1,288 78% 6School/Creative Studies (6-8) 297 300 99% 310 300 103% 293 300 98% 0Durham Sch. of Arts (6-8) 642 640 100% 642 640 100% 644 640 101% 0Githens 1,013 852 119% 1,013 852 119% 899 852 106% 5Lakewood Montessori 286 300 95% 291 300 97% 302 300 101% 0Little River (6) N/A N/A N/A 35 78 45% 34 78 44% 0Lowe's Grove 709 774 92% 737 774 95% 674 774 87% 0Lucas 664 644 103% 664 644 103% 620 644 96% 0Neal 859 810 106% 841 810 104% 788 810 97% 5Rogers-Herr (Year Round) 644 644 100% 642 644 100% 637 644 99% 0Shepard 525 546 96% 540 546 99% 513 546 94% 0

SUBTOTALS 7,375 7,670 96% 7,451 7,748 96% 7,004 7,748 90% 16City of Medicine Academy 321 320 100% 320 320 100% 303 320 95% 0School/Creative Studies (9-11) 156 200 78% 254 300 85% 238 300 79% 0Durham PLC / ARC at Holton 256 350 73% 256 350 73% 247 350 71% 0Durham Sch. of Arts (9-12) 1,010 1,015 100% 1,013 1,015 100% 996 1,015 98% 0Early College at NCCU 342 350 98% 354 350 101% 354 350 101% 0Hillside (incl. New Tech High) 1,597 1,535 104% 1,577 1,535 103% 1,535 1,535 100% 5Jordan 1,854 1,810 102% 1,819 1,810 100% 1,997 1,810 110% 7Middle College High 161 100 161% 156 100 156% 159 100 159% 0Northern 1,455 1,790 81% 1,440 1,790 80% 1,499 1,790 84% 0Riverside 1,821 1,540 118% 1,821 1,540 118% 1,862 1,540 121% 11Southern (incl. School of Eng.) 1,298 1,540 84% 1,278 1,540 83% 1,399 1,540 91% 0

SUBTOTALS 10,271 10,550 97% 10,288 10,650 97% 10,589 10,650 99% 23Lakeview School 90 90 42Hospital School 59 59 33

GRAND TOTALS 33,750 34,424 98% 33,935 34,590 98% 33,607 34,590 97% 96

185 Student Growth was ProjectedNOTES :

1. E.K. Powe's capacity was revised based on outdated formulas. It was raised from 17:1 to the normal format of 21:1 and 26:1.2. Little River's capacity was reduced to accommodate the move to K-8. The K-5 capacity is shown separately from 6-8.3. Creekside's Mobile classroom count is increased by 2.4. Neal's mobile classroom count is reduced by 4.5. PreK students total 653.

ELEMENTARY

MIDDLE

HIGH

20th Day ADM*

Building Capacity

DURHAM PUBLIC SCHOOLS2015 - 2016 Capacity and Enrollment

DAY 20 ALL SCHOOLS

FACILITY2014-2015 Projected 2015-2016 Final 2015-2016

20th Day ADM

Building Capacity

Capacity Rating

No. of Mobiles

Capacity Rating

20th Day ADM

Building Capacity

Capacity Rating

9

140

April, 2016 1 0

Magnet Transportation Summary Magnet transportation costs are higher than the cost to provide transportation for our traditional schools. Routes are longer resulting in higher wages for bus drivers along with increased cost for fuel and bus maintenance. Below is a summary of our magnet transportation offerings and a cost analysis comparing magnet school transportation with traditional schools transportation.

Magnet Transportation Offerings County wide with neighborhood service

Burton, City of Medicine, Club Blvd, DSA, Early College, George Watts, Hillside IB, Lakeview, LakewoodMontessori, Morehead, RN Harris, Shepard, WG Pearson, School for Creative Studies (pm only)

County wide with express stops @ select school and SDCSchool for Creative Studies (a.m. only)

Pathways with shuttle to/from base High SchoolsMiddle College, CTE Stem @ Lowes Grove, Hillside, Jordan, Neal, Northern, Riverside, Southern

Regional with neighborhood serviceEasley, Holt, Pearsontown, Rogers Herr, Sandy Ridge

Transportation Cost Analysis

DPS cost per mile: $3.466 (supplied by DPI Transportation Services)

The added cost of providing magnet transportation is approximately $1,575,435 annually).

Note: Cost of EC transportation not included since program locations are not determined by Magnet programs.

Mileage Category Mileage Total Cost

Total DPS Bus Miles 14/15 4,571,431 $15,844,580 Less EC Bus Miles 802,493 $2,781,441 Less Refund Miles (Field trips/Summer Programs, etc) 271,783 $942,000 Total Regular Bus Miles 3,497,155 $12,121,139

Traditional Schools Miles 1,900,318 $6,686,502 Magnet Schools Miles 1,337,205 $4,634,752 Year Round School Miles 259,630 $899,878

Elementary School Bus Miles (Annually) - Traditional (39.0 miles per bus per day)

- Magnet (54.5 miles per bus per day) - Year Round (45.7 miles per bus per day)

1,428,110 848,004 414,685 165,421

$4,949,829 $2,939,182 $1,437,298

$573,349 Middle School Bus Miles (Annually)

- Traditional (36.2 miles per bus per day) - Magnet (50.4 miles per bus per day) - Year Round (47.3 miles per bus per day)

782,472 478,560 209,702

94,209

$2,712,044 $1,658,689

$726,827 $326,538

Secondary/High School Bus Miles (Annually) - Traditional (33.4 miles per bus per day) - Magnet (54.7 miles per bus per day)

1,286,572 573,754 712,818

$4,459,258 $1,988,631 $2,470,627

141

April, 2016 11 1

Magnet Excess Cost Calculation

Elementary School Magnet Calculation - Traditional miles per day per bus: 39.0 - Magnet miles per day per bus: 54.5 - Excess Magnet miles per day per bus: 15.5 - Multiply by DPI mileage rate: $3.466 (per mile) - Excess Magnet cost per day per bus: $53.72 - Multiply by 181 days per year x 181 - Cost per bus per year $9,723.32 - Multiply by the number of Magnet Buses: 42 - Total Excess Magnet cost – Elementary $408,379

Middle School Magnet Calculation - Traditional miles per day per bus: 36.2 - Magnet miles per day per bus: 50.4 - Excess Magnet miles per day per bus: 14.2 - Multiply by DPI mileage rate: $3.466 (per mile) - Excess Magnet cost per day per bus: $49.22 - Multiply by 181 days per year x 181 - Cost per bus per year $8,908.82 - Multiply by the number of Magnet Buses: 23 - Total Excess Magnet cost – Middle $204,903

High/Secondary School Magnet Calculation - Traditional miles per day per bus: 33.4 - Magnet miles per day per bus: 54.7 - Excess Magnet miles per day per bus: 21.3 - Multiply by DPI mileage rate: $3.466 (per mile) - Excess Magnet cost per day per bus: $73.83 - Multiply by 181 days per year x 181 - Cost per bus per year $13,363.23 - Multiply by the number of Magnet Buses: 72 - Total Excess Magnet cost – High/Secondary $962,153

Total Excess Cost for Magnet School Transportation: $1,575,435

Total Excess Cost for Y/R School Transportation (calculated used the same methodology) is approximately $160,000 and is NOT included in the Magnet cost calculation above. Total Excess Cost for Magnet and Y/R Schools is approximately $1,735,435.

142

a g e n d a - durham public schools · magnet review • hugh osteen, deputy of operational...

Documents