Green Bay School District dual campus feasibility study

Dual Campus

Feasibility Study

OCTOBER 2009

DUAL CAMPUS FEASIBILITY STUDY

SUPERINTENDENT’S REPORT – OCTOBER 2009

2

Table of Contents

Chapter 1 – Design of the Study

1.0 Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................3

1.1 Need for the Study ...............................................................................................................3

1.2 Review of the Literature ......................................................................................................3

1.3 Methodology of the Study ...................................................................................................5

1.4 Questions of the Study .........................................................................................................5

1.5 Assumptions of the Study ....................................................................................................5

Chapter 2 – District and School Enrollment Trends

2.0 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................6

2.1 Enrollment Trends: Actual West Side .................................................................................6

2.2 Enrollment Trends: Projected West Side .............................................................................7

2.3 Open Enrollment ..................................................................................................................8

2.4 Summary ..............................................................................................................................9

Chapter 3 – Educational Programs, Services, and Staffing

3.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................10

3.1 Student Scheduling Data and Student Course Offerings ...................................................10

3.2 Educational Support Services ............................................................................................17

3.3 Co-Curricular Programming ..............................................................................................19

3.4 Transitions..........................................................................................................................21

3.5 Summary ...........................................................................................................................21

Chapter 4 – Facilities and Transportation

4.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................22

4.1 Overview of High School Facilities ...................................................................................22

4.2 Facility Condition Assessment ..........................................................................................23

4.3 Transportation ....................................................................................................................23

4.4 Summary ............................................................................................................................24

Chapter 5 – Conclusions and Recommendations

5.0 Summary and Conclusions ................................................................................................25

5.1 Recommendations ..............................................................................................................25

Appendices

A Study Team Members ........................................................................................................26

B Bibliography ......................................................................................................................27



3

1.0 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study is to determine the feasibility of restructuring two comprehensive high

schools on the west side of Green Bay (Southwest and West High Schools) into two campuses;

one high school would serve grades 9 and 10 and the other high school serve grades 11 and 12.

1.1 Need for the Study

In November of 2006, the referendum to build a fifth high school in Green Bay was defeated.

After the referendum defeat, the Enrollment Management Task Force (ETMF) was formed to

study the issue and to provide recommendations regarding the overcrowding of schools on the

east side and student space availability on the west side. In September of 2008, the Board of

Education accepted the report from the ETMF. A number of recommendations were contained

in that report, two of which reinforced the consideration of a dual campus high school on the

west side of the District. Specifically, the report referenced a recommendation to revise

attendance boundaries for middle and high schools to utilize underused space at various high

schools and to study the development of alternative or magnet schools on the west side of the

District to better use west side secondary space. After September of 2008, the Board of

Education met a number of times to review the Task Force recommendations and to determine

potential solutions to the enrollment problem. Factors that weighed heavily on the Board were

the state of the funding sources of the State, coupled with the decline of enrollments on the west

side in a revenue cap environment. This decline in enrollments will lead to both fiscal

constraints and lost opportunities for students.

Additionally, the Board made a commitment to the community to study the potential of the dual

campus concept in an effort to be fiscally responsible. The current state of the funding formula

does not provide the District with sufficient funds to maintain programs and costs. Over the last

four years, the District has made $28 million in budget reductions, including a reduction in 185

full-time positions. The 2008-09 budget deficit was $6 million. This deficit will continue in the

future with deep, real cuts to programs and staff. The Board of Education recognized that there

may be potential in cost savings by restructuring to a dual campus at under-enrolled west side

high schools. There potentially could be some academic benefits to students as well. As it was

not known at that time as to whether these ideas would lead to financial and academic

opportunities, the Board directed the administration to study the feasibility of a dual campus.

1.2 Review of the Literature

The focus of the literature review was to investigate two important areas: school size and grade

level organization. A number of sources were used in writing this feasibility study. Members of

the study team (see Appendix A for a listing of team members) contacted researchers and authors

on this topic. There was a significant amount of current research on school size at the high

school level. There is very little current and dated research on the concept of dual campus.

The research on school enrollment size shows a moderate effect of school size on student

performance. A possible hypothesis for the relationship between smaller schools and



4

achievement is that larger schools are less effective in connecting with students on a more

personal level. As size increases, anonymity also increases, reducing the connectedness and

sense of belonging students may feel toward their school. Personal connections between faculty

and individual students are more difficult in a larger school. Newman et al. (2006) reported that

students and teachers at smaller schools tend to have more positive attitudes toward their school.

Byrk, Easton, Kerbow, Rollow, and Sebring (1993) reported that in smaller schools, students felt

that teachers were more interested in them.

The argument for building larger schools has been based on financial factors. There is a cost

savings potential for larger schools as districts can afford to have more full-time staff in a

building and less traveling time and expenses due to teachers working in more than one building.

Another advantage of larger high schools is the ability to offer a wider set of course choices to

students, particularly advanced courses. For example, in a small school there may not be enough

students enroll in an advanced course to justify allocating teacher time to the course.

School size is not an easy thing to manipulate, given the substantial investments in physical

plants of larger buildings. It is financially prohibitive to replace larger buildings with smaller

ones to solve this dilemma. Some people have suggested taking a larger physical plant and

breaking it up organizationally into two or more smaller “schools” within a school. This model

creates smaller educational units, each with a separate educational program, its own staff and

students, and its own budget, within a larger physical plant.

Schools-within-a-school attempts to simulate the effects of smaller schools while optimizing

existing buildings. However, the research on schools-within-a-school has been inconsistent and

certainly has not produced as strong of an effect as the school size research. The difficulty

comes from truly separating the “schools” both physically and operationally. The smaller units

have to be truly and completely autonomous, including administratively, to obtain any of the

effect identified by the research. The pull of economizing by sharing functions (such as

administration) is so great that the separation between the “schools” is reduced, and with it, the

advantages. (McCabe and Oxley, 1989; Oxley, 1994; McMullan, Sipe and Wolfe, 1994;

Raywid, 1996).

For several years earlier in this decade, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded many

smaller school efforts with millions of dollars, based on the research cited above. However, they

have recently stopped funding smaller schools’ grants, apparently because these schools were not

producing results. Evaluations of their funding have been unavailable up to this time. One

might conclude that smaller schools work well when created naturally, but they are difficult to

“manufacture” to get the same effect.

A review of the research indicated that there is yet to be consistent and common agreement as to

the perfect size of a school; arguments can be made for large schools’ ability to provide extra-

curricular and athletic diversity and for small schools to concentrate on serving the individual

student.



5

Various grade level groupings have been researched with very little agreement as to the ideal

grade configurations. There are a number of schools in the Midwest that have dual campus

configurations. Some of these have reverted back to the traditional nine through twelve grade

arrangements while a number of schools continue to operate under a split grade/dual campus

model.

1.3 Methodology of the Study

The study team implemented a number of methodological procedures to address the purpose of

the study. They include, but are not limited to:

1. Researching the pertinent literature and research

2. Analyzing area demographic data and trends

3. Analyzing current K-12 enrollment data

4. Analyzing projected enrollment data

5. Analyzing open enrollment data

6. Analyzing class size data

7. Analyzing school schedules

8. Analyzing programs and services

9. Analyzing course offerings

10. Analyzing special education and English language learner programming

11. Analyzing staffing

12. Analyzing facility operating costs

13. Analyzing conditions/status of each facility

1.4 Questions of the Study

There are a number of questions to assist in investigating the purpose and needs of the study

which will help provide the Board with information to determine whether to proceed with

exploring the option of a dual campus on the west side at the high school level. Those questions

are as follows:

1. What is the current status of the west side of the School District, including its enrollment

and enrollment trends, finances, programs and services, staffing, organizational

configuration, facilities and related issues at the high school level on the west side of

Green Bay?

2. What are the advantages and disadvantages, both programmatically and fiscally, of the

current organizational structure versus the proposed dual campus structure?

3. What are the options and implications to the school district moving toward a dual

campus?

4. What are the recommendations relative to implementing a dual campus in Green Bay?

1.5 Assumptions of the Study

The study team identified specific operating assumptions that would help facilitate the

programming options for a dual high school campus concept. They are listed below.



6

1. Enrollments continue to decline on the west side as student population on the east side

continues to increase.

2. Within a revenue cap environment, it will be difficult to maintain high quality,

comprehensive high schools over time within a declining student population at the west

side schools.

3. The District continues to have more students leave the school district through open

enrollment than those students who want to attend the school district from outlying

school districts.

4. Revenue caps will continue to pose financial constraints on the school district relative to

its ability to provide quality educational options for students.

5. Parents and patrons expect the District to provide a quality array of programs and

services for our student populations.

6. Parents of students in the Green Bay Schools desire that the quality of modern-day

services and programs, and organization configurations, and teaching and learning

processes be made available to the school district students.

7. The District is committed to providing high quality, cost effective programs, services and

delivery systems that best meet the needs of all students in the School District.

8. The District strives to be the school district of choice in Northeastern Wisconsin.

2.0 Introduction

The purpose of this section is to provide an overview of the current and long range enrollment

trends on the west side of the District. Historical and projected enrollment data are provided

along with data and the impact of open enrollment on west side secondary schools.

2.1 Enrollment Trends: Actual West Side

During the past 10 years, the K-12 enrollment at west side schools has decreased from 8,434

students to 7,499, which is a 12.47% decline. However, over the past 5 years, this decline has

slowed to 4.84%. The majority of the decline has been at the secondary level. Middle school

enrollment has decreased from 1,886 students to 1,536, a 22.79% decline; high school student

enrollment has gone from 2,821 students down to 2,316 students, a 21.8% decline over the past

10 years. At the elementary level, there has been an enrollment decline of 2.19%, from 3,726

students down to 3,647. It should be noted that over the past five years, there has actually been

an increase in student enrollment at the elementary level of 6.96%, an increase of 159 elementary

students on the west side of the district. Historical data show (see Table 2.1.1) that as the

increase in K-5 enrollment is taking place during the past few years, the decrease in the middle

schools has slowed. The low enrollments that were in the middle schools are now filtering

through the high schools.



7

Table 2.1.1

2009-10 Enrollment History - West Side of District

5-Year & 10-Year Actual Percentages

History Percentage

School Name 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 5-Years 10-Years

Beaumont 310 314 303 274 295 302 294 279 319 306 1.31% -1.31%

Chappell 262 260 264 266 234 220 229 255 217 273 19.41% 4.03%

Elmore 257 257 258 265 245 231 215 220 275 293 21.16% 12.29%

Fort Howard 310 352 279 260 271 258 289 287 333 350 26.29% 11.43%

Jackson 376 370 358 342 341 337 343 327 340 341 1.17% -10.26%

Jefferson 183 179 178 163 157 146 168 176 170 173 15.61% -5.78%

Keller 401 408 414 302 494 447 446 472 458 443 -0.90% 9.48%

Kennedy 339 294 278 296 300 293 297 291 324 337 13.06% -0.59%

King 491 483 452 416 419 403 398 389 421 430 6.28% -14.19%

Lincoln 266 261 271 233 244 250 238 256 219 196 -27.55% -35.71%

MacArthur 285 296 315 309 310 322 294 290 295 301 -6.98% 5.32%

Tank 247 230 222 219 178 184 238 221 210 204 9.80% -21.08%

Total Elem: 3,727 3,704 3,592 3,345 3,488 3,393 3,449 3,463 3,581 3,647 6.96% -2.19%

Franklin 860 875 913 914 849 792 763 696 685 705 -12.34% -21.99%

Lombardi 1,026 1,005 1,025 968 946 922 898 920 858 831 -10.95% -23.47%

Total MS: 1,886 1,880 1,938 1,882 1,795 1,714 1,661 1,616 1,543 1,536 -11.59% -22.79%

Southwest 1,578 1,538 1,488 1,484 1,443 1,429 1,459 1,422 1,367 1,300 -9.92% -21.38%

West 1,243 1,284 1,312 1,299 1,310 1,326 1,270 1,232 1,099 1,016 -30.51% -22.34%

Total HS: 2,821 2,822 2,800 2,783 2,753 2,755 2,729 2,654 2,466 2,316 -18.96% -21.80%

TOTAL: 8,434 8,406 8,330 8,010 8,036 7,862 7,839 7,733 7,590 7,499 -4.84% -12.47%

2.2 Enrollment Trends: Projected West Side

The 2009-10 enrollment projections indicate the decline in enrollment on the west side of the

District will be reversed and a moderate increase in enrollment will take place over the next 10

years (see Table 2.2.1). It is projected that the present west-side enrollment of 7,499 students

will increase by 1.68% to 7,625 students by 2019-20. The majority of this increase will take

place at the middle school level where enrollment is projected to rise from 1,536 students to

1,669, a 133 student increase (8.68%). Elementary enrollment is projected to continue to rise, as

it has over the previous five years, however it will increase at the slower rate of 3.29% over the

next five years with an overall ten-year increase of 1.73%. Due to the lower enrollments seen in

the District’s middle schools during the past five years, as these reduced numbers filter through

the high schools, high school enrollment numbers are projected to continue declining for

approximately the next five to six years. After that period, west-side high school enrollments are

projected to begin increasing.

District-wide, elementary enrollments are increasing and the low middle school enrollment

numbers are beginning to flow into the high schools. Comparing the September 3rd

Friday count



8

of 2009-10 and the September 3rd

Friday count of 2008-09, District elementary school

enrollments show continued growth with an increase of 110 students. Of this number, 59 were

west side students and 51 were on the east side. At the middle school level, there was a decrease

of 58 students with 7 on the west side and 51 on the east side. West side high schools saw a

decline of 149 students compared to a 56-student decrease on the east side of the District.

Table 2.2.1

2009-10 Enrollment Projections - West Side of District

5-Year and 10-Year Growth Percentages

Current Projections Growth

Percentage School

Name 2009-10 2010-

11

2011-

12

2012-

13

2013-

14

2014-

15

2015-

16

2016-

17

2017-

18

2018-

19

2019-

20 5-Years 10-Years

Beaumont 306 294 297 304 318 339 344 349 351 346 343 10.82% 12.08%

Chappell 273 271 267 261 259 264 265 272 274 274 270 -3.23% -1.14%

Elmore 293 305 310 314 314 307 297 298 301 299 300 4.85% 2.26%

Fort Howard 350 359 376 391 398 396 379 384 379 383 379 13.14% 8.15%

Jackson 341 337 355 358 360 361 363 362 357 358 356 5.89% 4.33%

Jefferson 173 174 174 183 173 161 159 158 154 153 155 -7.20% -10.31%

Keller 443 449 457 455 441 450 451 450 452 453 455 1.59% 2.79%

Kennedy 337 334 323 313 327 331 328 338 343 344 337 -1.71% -0.06%

King 430 428 405 413 418 391 396 390 385 390 387 -9.06% -10.05%

Lincoln 196 195 195 214 221 225 229 236 231 224 224 15.01% 14.11%

MacArthur 301 306 290 282 307 312 306 299 298 310 294 3.54% -2.26%

Tank 204 212 220 235 241 229 226 231 223 213 211 12.47% 3.54%

Total Elem: 3,647 3,665 3,670 3,724 3,778 3,767 3,743 3,767 3,748 3,747 3,710 3.29% 1.73%

Franklin 705 688 691 664 708 720 778 750 774 765 797 2.07% 13.00%

Lombardi 831 806 891 881 867 820 827 848 865 850 873 -1.37% 5.03%

Total MS: 1,536 1,493 1,582 1,545 1,574 1,539 1,604 1,598 1,638 1,615 1,669 0.21% 8.68%

Southwest 1,300 1,295 1,204 1,208 1,200 1,212 1,257 1,237 1,228 1,190 1,203 -6.74% -7.49%

West 1,016 986 959 973 953 957 943 955 991 1,030 1,043 -5.76% 2.67%

Total HS: 2,316 2,281 2,163 2,181 2,153 2,170 2,200 2,192 2,219 2,220 2,246 -6.31% -3.03%

TOTAL: 7,499 7,439 7,415 7,450 7,505 7,476 7,548 7,557 7,606 7,582 7,625 -0.31% 1.68%

2.3 Open Enrollment

Tables 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 below display open enrollment data for the west side secondary schools.

Data are provided for the last three years for students who have enrolled in the District from

outlying districts (see Table 2.3.1). Table 2.3.2 displays data for the last three years by

secondary schools for students who left the District. The data in these two charts show that there

is significant disparity between the students who open enroll into the District versus those who

exercise open enrollment and leave the District.



9

Table 2.3.1

Open Enrollment-IN

2007-08 2008-09 2009-10

Franklin Open Enroll New 0 1 0

Open Enroll Continuing 2 0 1

Total Franklin 2 1 1

Lombardi Open Enroll New 2 4 1


Total Lombardi 7 9 7

Southwest Open Enroll New 12 8 7


Total Southwest 33 26 18

West Open Enroll New 7 6 1


Total West 18 11 4

Table 2.3.2

Open Enrollment-Out

2007-08 2008-09 2009-10

Franklin Open Enroll New 12 11 18


Total Franklin 30 35 46

Lombardi Open Enroll New 10 9 13


Total Lombardi 26 26 45

Southwest Open Enroll New 15 14 28


Total Southwest 58 49 69

West Open Enroll New 8 18 18


Total West 42 50 66

2.4 Summary

During the past 10 years, the K-12 enrollment at west side schools has decreased substantially

leaving most west side schools under capacity. The majority of the decline has been at the

secondary level. However, over the past five years, this decline has slowed and there has

actually been an increase in student enrollment at the elementary level on the west side of the

district. The decrease in the middle schools has slowed. Low enrollments that were in the

middle schools are now filtering through the high schools. The 2009-10 enrollment projections

indicate the decline in enrollment on the west side of the District will be reversed and a moderate



10

increase in enrollment will take place over the next ten years. The majority of this increase will

take place at the middle and elementary school level. The District’s high schools will continue

to decline in enrollment until the increase in elementary and middle school enrollment moves up

to the high school level. Open enrollment data continue to show a trend of more students leaving

the west side secondary schools than are entering them.

3.0 Introduction

This section provides an overview of the benefits and challenges in the educational programs and

services with regard to the grade 9-12 structure and a grade 9-10, 11-12 structure.

3.1 Student Scheduling Data and Student Course Offerings

Table 3.1.1 listed below displays four year historical data and one year future data demonstrating

the decline in the number of students taking classes at each school. Table 3.1.2 shows the

decline in number of sections of coursework at each school over the last five years.

Table 3.1.1 Number of Students in Attendance

Date of Report SW WHS

1/13/2006 1428 1312

1/12/2007 1422 1227

1/11/2008 1369 1184

1/9/2009 1351 1076

*futured 2009-10 1282 1010

*Verified with Zangle 2010 track at the time of Staffing in February 2009

Does not include students enrolled in Alt. Programs

(I.E. Forward Bound, GED II etc.)

Does not include those (verified) who will not return to WHS

Table 3.1.2 Number of Course Sections/Year

Year SW WHS

2005-06 365.5 314

2006-07 352 303

2007-08 345 280

2008-09 328.5 277

2009-10 309.5 257

Data does NOT include Library, Guidance, ELL or Sp. Ed.



11

High School Credit Course Offerings

In the current structure, declining enrollment has limited course offerings for students at both

schools. For example, advanced placement offerings have been reduced or eliminated due to

declining enrollment. There are also more student scheduling conflicts created due to the

number of sections of courses offered having decreased.

In the dual campus structure, combining grade levels at each building will increase the number of

class sections at one site giving students at that site more course options and scheduling

flexibility. However, students wanting classes offered on the other campus would need

transportation.

Also available to all students in a dual campus structure will be classes that are currently held

exclusively at one campus. For example, Southwest offers Early Childhood, American Sign

Language and Chinese which are not offered at West. West will offer International

Baccalaureate and is offering Automotive Shop, and Metals classes which are not available at

Southwest.

It is anticipated that some freshmen and sophomores may take classes at the grade 11-12 school.

This will require additional transportation (shuttle service) between the two buildings. A

conservative estimate of needing one shuttle bus for periods 2-7 to run between the schools is

projected.

The table below (Table 3.1.3) describes opportunities and effects on course offerings within the

current and dual campus structure.

Table 3.1.3 Credit Course Offerings

Opportunity/Status Cost Effect Remarks

Option #1

WHS 9-12

SWHS 9012

(Current)

Southwest has more AP offerings

Southwest offers Early Childhood

Southwest offers American Sign

Language

West will offer International

Baccalaureate (IB) courses in 2011-12

school year

West offers Automotive Shop class

West offers metals class

Will need to run smaller sections of

classes or fewer section offerings

Staffing costs of running

smaller sections

With declining enrollment,

AP course offerings at

Southwest will continue to

be more limited.

Advanced West students

do not get an opportunity

to take as many advanced

classes at their school.

Southwest technical school

students do not get an

opportunity to take metals

and automotive shop

classes at their school.

Option #2

WHS 9/10

SWHS 11/12

Students from West and Southwest

could take offerings in metals, auto

shop and early childhood at their home

school.

Shuttle Cost

+$47,790

($44.25 per shuttle round

trip x 6 shuttles x 180

days)

Students wanting classes

offered on the other

campus would need

transportation.



12

Credit Course Offerings Opportunity/Status Cost Effect Remarks

Students from West would have more

opportunities to take advanced classes.

Southwest student taking advanced

classes would have more flexibility in

their schedules.

Staffing savings when

sections are combined.

Combining grade levels at

each building increases the

number of class sections at

one site giving students at

that site more course

options and scheduling

flexibility.

Option #3

SWHS 9/10

WHS 11/12

Students from West and Southwest

could take offerings in metals, auto

shop and early childhood where

offered.

West will offer IB courses in 2011-12

school year.

Students from West would have more

opportunities to take advanced classes.

Southwest students taking advanced

classes would have more flexibility in

their schedules.

Shuttle Cost

+$47,790

($44.25 per shuttle round

trip x 6 shuttles x 180

days)

Staffing savings when

sections are combined.

Students wanting classes

offered on the other

campus would need

transportation.

Combining grade levels at

each building increases the

number of class sections at

one site giving students at

that site more course

options and scheduling

flexibility.

Table 3.1.4 below identifies the total number of FTE for regular education teachers in the current

structure. Library, guidance, ELL and special education are not included in these totals, as these

staff totals will remain consistent in the current or proposed dual campus model. As the data

indicate, in the current structure, there has been a decline of FTE over the last five years, aligning

with declining student enrollments.

Table 3.1.4 Teacher FTE/Year

Year SW WHS

2005-06 73.1 62.8

2006-07 70.4 60.6

2007-08 69 56

2008-09 65.7 55.4

2009-10 requested 61.9 51.4

Data does NOT include Library, Guidance, ELL or Sp. Ed.

Incorporating Staffing for 9-10 and 11-12 Buildings

When the 2009-10 staffing is redone with a dual campus structure (see Table 3.1.5), providing

course offerings for grades 9 and 10 at one campus, and grades 11 and 12 at the other campus, a

reduction of 3.2 FTE (regular education teachers) is achieved. At an average cost of $65,000 per

full-time teacher (salary and benefits), an approximate savings of $208,000 may be achieved. A



13

positive result to this is the ability of offering more course opportunities and accommodating

more student course requests. This amount differs from earlier projections for a number of

reasons. The earlier projections with higher cost savings estimates were based on 2008-09

staffing data. A complete analysis was done using actual 2009-10 staffing data and re-staffing

was completed to ensure the number of sections requested were accurate within staffing course

guidelines. In addition, decreasing enrollment and tighter staffing for the 2009-10 school year

caused for a lower FTE savings than what was previously estimated.

Table 3.1.5 Staffing Comparison: Current vs. Dual Campus Structure

Current Structure Total FTE Dual Campus Structure Total FTE

2009-10 SW 61.9 Grade 9-10 Campus 50.4

2009-10 West 51.4 Grade 11-12 Campus 59.7

TOTAL 113.3 TOTAL 110.1

One benefit of a dual campus structure is students, who were prevented from taking classes due

to low enrollment, would now have access to those classes. This is an issue particularly for

advanced placement classes. Below are some examples of how this would benefit students,

particularly at West High School.

Table 3.1.6 Enrollment Opportunities

Course 2009-10 Staffing at

Southwest Only

2009-10 Staffing at

West Only

Result of Dual Campus

Structure

AP Statistics 1 section (26 requests) 1 section (9 requests) Two sections offered at the

11/12 campus

AP Calc BC

Calculus 2/CEP

1 distance learning section

(4 requests)

1 distance learning

section- hosting site (6

requests)

1 section offered at the

11/12 site

AP Psychology 2 sections (37 requests) 1 section (14 requests) Two sections offered at the

11/12 campus

Advanced Art 1 1 section (10 full-year & 4

semester requests)

0 sections (5 full-year & 2

semester requests)

1 section offered at the

11/12 campus

Student System Scheduling Impact

The current structure allows for the Zangle student system to function within the parameters as

they are presently set up. Implementing a dual campus model would take a significant amount of

programming resources and time to plan, test and implement conversion logic. Costs would vary

depending on timing of the school year when the conversion to the student system would take

place. To minimize costs and be ready for a future school year, planning, testing and

implementation would need to occur prior to December 1st when the student system data are

rolled to a future school year (cost range = $69,000-$91,000). As timelines for implementation

are delayed throughout a school year, the cost impact becomes greater. Additional

transportation/enrollment mapping changes would need to be completed as a result of merging

the two schools and if the conversion of the student system is completed after the year end roll to

the future school year, costs would be even more significant (cost range $94,000 - $160,000). In



14

addition, outsourcing some of the related work is likely and will result in higher costs. Table

3.1.7 outlines work that would need to be completed and potential scenarios with related costs

for completing this work.

Table 3.1.7 Student System Conversion


Option #1:

WHS 9-12

SWHS 9-12

(Current)

No changes necessary None The student system is presently

configured appropriately

Option #2:

Dual campus

conversion:

Existing

mapping

parameters;

set-up and

training

completed

prior to December 1

Set-up (programmer) plus adjust reports

Testing (programmer, super-users)

Edulog changes

Additional clerical time to adjust data

Training

Zangle technical support

Monitoring and support

Minimum costs:

$4,000

$12,000

$14,000

$7,000

$12,000

$5,000

$15,000

Total Minimum

Cost: $69,000

Total Maximum

Cost: $91,000

If outsourcing is needed, cost

would increase to $8,000; If

additional mapping parameters

changes were needed, other than

remapping current West and

Southwest areas, an additional

cost of $14,000 would be

incurred.


would increase to $16,000

Cost reflects remapping West and

Southwest transportation

parameters.

Cost does not include potential

addition to work related to school

choice

Continued monitoring and support

is necessary due to conversion and

new methods for data conversion

and entry.

Option #3:

Existing

mapping

parameters;

set-up and

training

completed

after

December 1


Minimum costs:

$4,000



additional transportation mapping





incurred.



15

Student System Conversion Opportunity/Status Cost Effect Remarks

and before

scheduling is

initiated


Edulog changes


Training



$12,000

$14,000

$9,000

$12,000

$5,000

$15,000

Total Minimum

Cost: $71,000

Total Maximum

Cost: $93,000




Southwest transportation

parameters.



choice




and entry.

Option #4:

Existing

mapping

parameters;

set-up and

training

completed

after

scheduling is

initiated



Edulog changes


Training

Master schedule changes



Minimum costs:

$4,000

$12,000

$14,000

$9,000

$12,000

$8,000

$5,000

$15,000








incurred.




Southwest parameters.



choice





16

Student System Conversion Opportunity/Status Cost Effect Remarks

Total Minimum

Cost: $79,000

Total Maximum

Cost: $115,000


and entry.

Option #5:

Existing

mapping

parameters;

set-up and

training

completed

after Year-

End



Edulog changes


Training

Master schedule changes

Enrollment changes

Schedule changes



Minimum costs:

$4,000

$12,000

$14,000

$9,000

$12,000

$16,000

$3,000

$4,000

$5,000

$15,000

Total Minimum

Cost: $94,000

Total Maximum

Cost: $160,000








incurred.




Southwest parameters.



choice




and entry.



17

3.2 Educational Support Services

Special Education

The overall special education enrollment has been declining at West over the past several years,

consistent with decreasing special education enrollment at Franklin. Special education

enrollment has been more consistent over the same time period at Southwest.

It may be more difficult to staff certain special education course offerings, if the course numbers

are low. With the current decline in special education enrollment at the west side feeder schools,

there will likely be a corresponding decrease in special education teaching positions. This will

require some adjustment in how special education is delivered at West High School.

With a dual campus arrangement, there will be greater flexibility in assigning special education

teachers based on student need. With more sections at each grade level, there will be more

options for focused teacher support. For example, instead of covering the curriculum for team

taught sections over four grade levels, teachers can focus more directly on a limited range of

curriculum options, and develop more expertise in each area. Any cost differences would be

minimal, and there may be some cost reductions due to less duplication of course offerings

across two sites.

Program for Deaf/Hard of Hearing Students (DHH)

For years, Kennedy, Lombardi, and Southwest have been identified as the school sites for

students with hearing impairments who require the services of a teacher for the hearing impaired

and an educational interpreter. Many of the students enrolled at these three sites are under

tuition contracts with districts in the surrounding area. Some declines in enrollment have been

noted in the past few years.

Maintaining the current campus arrangement will have no impact on services for students with

hearing impairments. These students can continue to be supported at Southwest. It should be

noted that student interest is high in the sign language courses offered at Southwest for foreign

language credit, based on the number of sections offered and student enrollment. With many

regular education students fluent in sign language, it provides for meaningful interaction among

all students at Southwest. Without the DHH program at Southwest, interest in sign language

classes may decrease.

With a split campus, most DHH sections can be divided equally across grade levels. However,

in 2009-10, five sections contain a combination of 9-12th

grade students. There may not be

enough students to offer five classes at both campuses. Therefore, there is the potential for

additional costs. These additional costs would include a 0.5 FTE DHH teacher, and 0.6 FTE

educational interpreter, for total costs of $60,000.



18

Table 3.2.1 Educational Support Services

Special Education (excluding DHH) Opportunity/Status Cost Effect Remarks

Option #1

WHS 9-12

SWHS 9-12

(Current)

The overall special education enrollment

at West over the past several years has

been consistent with decreasing special

education enrollment at Franklin.

Special education enrollment has been

more consistent over the past several

years at Southwest.

None, or minimal It may be more difficult to

staff certain special education

offerings, if the course

request numbers are low.

With the current decline in

enrollment at the west side

feeder schools, there be a

likely decrease in special

education teaching positions.

This will require adjustments

on how special education is

delivered.

Option #2

WHS 9/10

SWHS 11/12

With students being grouped at West for

grades 9/10 and Southwest for grades

11/12, there will be greater flexibility in

assigning special education teachers

based on student need. With more

sections at each grade level, there will be

more options for focused teacher

support. For example, instead of

covering the curriculum for team taught

sections over four grade levels, teachers

can focus more directly on a more

limited range of curriculum options, and

develop more expertise in each area.

Minimal, although

there could be some

cost reductions due to

less duplication of

efforts across two

sites.

West High is the feeder site

for any students with visual

impairments. There may be a

need for additional equipment

to be purchased, based on

grade levels of students with

visual impairments.

Typically, the numbers of

students with visual

impairments is small, so it is

unlikely to impact Option #2.

Option #3

SWHS 9/10

WHS 11/12

With students being grouped at SW for

grades 9/10 and West for grades 11/12,

there will be greater flexibility in

assigning special education teachers

based on student need. With more

sections at each grade level, there will be

more options for focused teacher

support. For example, instead of

covering the curriculum for team taught

sections over four grade levels, teachers

can focus more directly on a more

limited range of curriculum options, and

develop more expertise in each area.

Minimal, although

there could be some

cost reductions due to

less duplication of

efforts across two

sites.

West High is the feeder site

for any students with visual

impairments. There may be a

need for additional equipment

to be purchased, based on

grade levels of students with

visual impairments.

Typically, the numbers of

students with visual

impairments is small, so it is

unlikely to impact Option #3.



19

Table 3.2.2 Educational Support Services

Deaf/Hard of Hearing Opportunity/Status Cost Effect Remarks

Option #1

WHS 9-12

SWHS 9-12

(Current)

For many, Kennedy, Lombardi and

Southwest have been identified as the

school sites for students with hearing

impairments who require the services

of a teacher for the hearing impaired

and an educational interpreter. Many

of the students are under tuition

contracts with districts in the

surrounding area. Some declines in

numbers have been noted in the past

few years.

Cost is predicated on

enrollment, often driven

by contracts with other

districts.

Maintaining the current

campus arrangement will

have no impact on services

for students with hearing

impairments. We can

continue to support student

needs for high school

students at Southwest. It

should be noted that sign

language classes have

become a very desirable

foreign language offering

at Southwest. Without the

DHH program at

Southwest, interest in the

sign language classes may

be decrease.

Option #2

WHS 9/10

SWHS 11/12

With a split campus, most DHH

sections can be divided equally across

grade levels. However, in 2009-10,

five sections contain a combination of

9-12th

grade students.

Additional 0.5 FTE DHH

teacher; additional 0.6

FTE educational

interpreter

Total costs approximately

$60,000

There may not be enough

students to offer five

classes at both campuses.

Option #3

SWHS 9/10

WHS 11/12

With a split campus, most DHH

sections can be divided equally across

grade levels. However, in 2009-10,

five sections contain a combination of

9-12th

grade students.

Additional 0.5 FTE DHH

teacher; additional 0.6

FTE educational

interpreter

Total costs approximately

$60,000

There may not be enough

students to offer five

classes at both campuses.

Student Services

The dual campus option would not affect the staffing for student services personnel. The number

of students needing service would not change. As a result, the FTE for counselors, school

psychologists and school social workers would remain the same.

3.3 Co-Curricular Programming

The advantage to merging the two schools will be stronger athletic and co-curricular teams. By

adding a second freshman team in areas of high participation athletics, students will have the

ability to develop their skills. However, as students move up to the junior-varsity and varsity

level, less skilled athletes will lose their opportunity to continue their development and ability to

participate in these sports.

There are some savings which can be realized under this category with a dual campus option.

Merging grades would create duplication of coaches in most of the athletic programs and



20

advisors in some activities. For instance, there would not be a need to have two varsity football

coaches. The proposal, though, includes some expansion of riders and costs to support an

intramural program that is recommended to be implemented to encourage interest at the lower

grades and the addition of freshman teams within certain sports. The cost savings are merely

estimates for it is difficult to determine student interest in sports and activities.

When looking at merging sports, one option would be to shift varsity sports to the grade 11-12

building and junior varsity/freshman sports to the grade 9-10 school. This shift will require a

shuttle service to be provided after school each day. Another option is to have each sport

offering housed at one site. For instance, all football teams would practice and play at

Southwest, and all soccer teams would practice and play at West. This option creates continuity

of programming and a cohesive team culture. There will be increased costs in transportation, as

students would need to be transported to the respective school where their sport/activity is

housed. Activities that are more associated with upper classmen participation would be merged

into one group and housed at that school, thus reducing the number of riders needed.

Table 3.3.1 Athletics


Option #1

WHS 9-12

SWHS 9-12

(Current)

Current levels of programming would

remain in place.

Both schools currently offer full

Varsity and JV level programming.

Freshmen levels are not consistently

supported through all sports.

Minimal Future participation at

Freshmen and JV levels

may continue to be

adversely impacted by low

participation.

Option #2

Dual campus

split sport

level

programs

Lower level programs would be

housed at the 9-10 site.

Varsity programs housed at 11-12 site.

Intramural offerings would be limited

by facility and time availability.

+$15,934

Shuttle service to schools.

-$174,875

Elimination/consolidation of

co-curricular riders

+$20,000

Expansion of intramural

offerings

-$55,715

Changes in administrative

support

Challenges in developing

continuity of programs

would exist with levels of

sports split from one site

to two.

Less effective/efficient use

of facilities.

Option #3

Merge to

9-10/11-12

campuses-

Programs

Site-Based

All levels (Varsity, JV, Freshmen)

would be housed at one site.

Continuity of programs would be

enhanced by keeping all levels

together.

Promotes more efficient/effective use

of facilities.

+$15,934

Shuttle services to schools

+$20,000

Expansion of intramural

offerings

-$174,875

Elimination/consolidation of

co-curricular riders

Continuity of

programming.

Creation of cohesive team

culture.



21

Athletics Opportunity/Status Cost Effect Remarks

Increased intramural opportunities.

-$55,715

Changes in administrative

support

Table 3.3.2 Activities


Option #1

WHS 9-12

SWHS 9-12

(Current)

Current levels of programming would

remain in place.

Minimal Activities and clubs will

continue to be supported

based on participation

numbers.

There would be challenges

in promoting participation

for clubs/activities

drawing from both

schools.

Option #2

Dual campus

split sport

level

programs

Activities run at appropriate school site

based on data grade level participation

(e.g. National Honor Society)

-$23,595

Elimination of riders

+$15,934

Shuttle services to schools

Student clubs would not be

adversely affected.

The cost savings that would be realized by implementing a dual campus option for co-curriculars

would be $84,772.

3.4 Transitions

One of the School District’s priority foci of student engagement has led to a number of programs

and services to assist students in connecting with schools and helping them transition during the

critical stages in their school lives. A number of these programs and services concentrate on the

eighth and ninth grade transition period and during freshmen year when national data show that

it is the most difficult year for students in high school. Link Crew, an eighth grade to ninth grade

transition program is operating at each of the four high schools. At the ninth grade, schools offer

student support structures for struggling students which include a freshmen study base, closed

lunch with academic support and other unique programs (e.g., Fresh Start at West). Each of

these programs is designed to make the transition to the school year successful. The dual

campus concept will create another transition for students to a new school. The School District

will need to consider supports to assist with this transition.

3.5 Summary

The cost savings associated with dual campus under this section of the report will be realized in

staffing the schools and combining co-curricular activities resulting in a reduction of co-



22

curricular riders. Additionally, courses not run due to low enrollments may be available to

students if they choose to travel to the other school.

Costs would increase in the area of transportation for shuttle service, during the day and after

school for athletics and activities, and possible increases in special education staffing.

4.0 Introduction

This section describes the facilities and transportation consideration if the District remained

status quo with its west side high schools or moved to a dual campus option.

4.1 Overview of High School Facilities

The building capacities at Southwest and West High Schools are similar. Southwest’s capacity

is 1,471 students and West’s is 1,363; which is a difference of 108 students. Both schools have a

similar number of general classrooms and science labs. West High School has a main

gymnasium and a smaller gymnasium with a total size of 24,138 sq. ft. Southwest has one main

gym with a total square footage of 19,744. The seating capacity of the Commons at both schools

is 400. West High School has a larger auditorium with a seating capacity of 1,500 compared to

Southwest’s auditorium with a seating capacity of 800. Southwest High School has an area

where a District Early Childhood program is operated and students use this area in conjunction

with their early childhood education classes. West High School does not have a similar area.

Southwest is the only high school in the District that has a pool. There is an automotive shop

located at West in the technical education area. Southwest no longer has an area dedicated for an

automotive shop. There is a football and track stadium located at both high schools. Both

schools have a spectator seating area on one side of the field with a capacity of approximately

1,500. However, Southwest has recently added a visitor seating area with a capacity of 1,000

bringing the total seating capacity at the stadium to 2,474. Southwest has parking spaces for 469

cars compared to 300 parking spaces at West High School. There would need to be available

parking for approximately 750 cars for a 1,000-1,100 students at the grade 11-12 campus. It’s

not clear at this time as to whether there is enough space to accommodate the additional parking

at Southwest. It is known that West High School does not have the space to accommodate the

additional spaces.

Table 4.1.1

High School Facilities

Southwest West

Building Capacity 1,471 1,363

Number of General Classrooms 28 28

Number Science Rooms 10 9

Size of Main Gym (sq. ft.) 19,744 15,871

Auxiliary Gym (sq. ft.) 0 8,267



23

High School Facilities

Southwest West

Physical Education and Co-Curricular Indoor Areas (sq. ft.) 43,635 39,371

Seating capacity of Commons 400 400

Seating capacity of Auditorium 800 1,500

Classroom and area for Early Childhood Education 1 0

Automotive shop 0 1

School pool 1 0

Seating capacity for football stadium 2,474 1,560

Number of parking spaces 469 300

Size of school site (acres) 35.0 11.6

4.2 Facility Condition Assessment

The referendum approved on February 15, 2000, provided for significant renovations to both

Southwest and West High Schools. At that time, modifications to the physical structure of the

buildings were done to accommodate curricular changes, different learning styles, modern-day

teaching methods, technology up-grades, etc. The renovations at both schools were designed to

provide flexibility for accommodating multi-purpose functions. Both Southwest and West High

Schools meet present health, life safety and accessibility statutes and codes.

Air-conditioning and modern-day mechanical and electrical systems were included in the

renovation of both high schools. Currently, each school has several sections of roofing that are

in need of replacement.

Both sites for the two high schools are undersized. The recommended size for a high school site

is 40 acres, plus one additional acre for each 100 students of estimated capacity. The Southwest

site is 35.5 acres compared to the recommended site size of 54.5 acres. The West High School

site is 11.6 acres with a recommended site size of 53.6 acres. It should be noted that the West

High football field, practice field and tennis courts are located on park property belonging to the

City of Green Bay. Fisk Park is a 21.4 acre site.

The overall physical condition of the building structures at both Southwest and West High

Schools is very good.

4.3 Transportation

There are significant fiscal implications on transportation when considering a dual campus

option. Table 4.3.1 below shows the potential impact on the status quo and dual campus

structure. Presently, 70 ninth and 10th

grade students are being bussed to West High School.

With restructuring, 480 existing West High School ninth and tenth grade students would be



24

bussed to Southwest. This is a difference of 410 students that would require an additional 8

busses.

Presently, at Southwest High School, 358 eleventh and twelfth grade students are being bussed.

With the restructuring, 582 existing Southwest eleventh and twelfth grade students would be

bussed to West High School. This is a difference of 224 students that would require an

additional 4 busses.

West side high school restructuring would require a total of 12 additional busses to transport

students. The 2009-10 annual cost per bus, including mileage, is $32,825, which results in a

total cost of $393,900 for 12 busses. This cost is anticipated to increase by approximately 6.5%

annually using the past 5-year average transportation cost increase.

Table 4.3.1 Transportation


Option #1

WHS 9-12

SWHS 9012

(Current)

Currently, 70 West High School

students in grades 9 & 10 and 351

Southwest High School students in

grades 11 & 12 are transported to their

respective schools.

Minimal Nine busses are used to

transport students to two

high schools

Option #2

WHS 9/10

SWHS 11/12

This option is not so dissimilar to

Option #3. Variances in grades are not

so significant to cause either an

increase or decrease in bussing costs

Significant

$393,000 additional

+6.5% annual rate increase

Twelve additional busses

would need to be added,

which would result in cost

increases with an annual

rate increase averaged at

+6.5%

Option #3

SWHS 9/10

WHS 11/12

Under this option, an additional 480

grade 9 & 10 West High School

students would need transportation to

Southwest High School.

Additionally, under this option, 582

grade 11 & 12 Southwest High School

students would need transportation to

West High School

Significant

$393,000 additional

+6.5% annual rate increase

Twelve additional busses

would need to be added,

which would result in cost

increases with an annual

rate increase averaged at

+6.5%

4.4 Summary

The current west side high school facilities are in excellent condition, mechanically sound, and

could accommodate a dual campus option. Over the years, each facility has been renovated and

each can accommodate specialized programming that is unique to that school. Examples of this

include the automotive and metals shop at West and the early childhood center at Southwest.

Transporting students outside of their current attendance area from their home to school and back

will add significant transportation costs. Parking at the grade 11/12 campus will provide

challenges.



25

5.0 Summary and Conclusions

From a financial perspective, implementing a dual campus option will not result in significant

cost savings to the District. The table below illustrates the significant costs and savings under

each category contained in this report.

Table 5.0.1 Estimated Expenditures/Savings of a Dual Campus Option

Category Savings/Expenditures

Student Scheduling Data & Student Course Offerings

Shuttle service during the day

Staffing

Student system impact

+$47,790

-$208,000

+$160,000

Educational Support Services

Special Education

+ 1.0 DHH teacher

+$60,000

Co-Curricular Programming -$194,656

Transportation

Transporting to and from school

+$393,000

Total* $258,134

*Total costs indicated above are estimated, large impact costs. Incidental costs are not included (e.g. uniforms,

school logos, etc.)

Public forums were held during the spring of 2009 at each of the two campuses to introduce the

idea, answer questions and concerns and to gauge public response to the idea. Overall the

response was not favorable.

5.1 Recommendations

The study team recommends that the Board of Education not pursue the dual campus option as a

solution to resolve the enrollment issue facing high schools on the west side. It is projected that

significant savings by combining the campuses will not be realized to the extent that would make

this a viable option. Additionally, public reaction, primarily from parents of current and future

west side high school students, has not been supportive of the proposed restructuring. The

School District cannot afford to lose more students to open enrollment where a significant

number of families have indicated they would pursue if dual campus were implemented.

It is further recommended that the District engage West and Southwest parents and community

members in processes to deepen understanding of the revenue and enrollment issue and assist in

finding other alternatives and solutions to the enrollment issues facing the west side high

schools. Looking forward, it is the hope of all involved that, through the spirit of collaboration

and problem solving, the quality of programs and services at these schools can be improved

within a cost containment environment.

DZ:tn G:\Dave\Dual Campus\Feasibility Study.docx

DUAL CAMPUS FEASIBILITY STUDY APPENDIX A


26

Dual Campus Feasibility

Study Team Members

Sandy Beyer, Associate Principal – West High School

Amanda Brooker, Manager of School and Community Relations

Margaret Christensen, Executive Director of Learning-West Quadrant

Bryan Davis, Principal – Southwest High School

Mike Donart, Transportation Manager

Kurt Gundlach, Activities Director – Southwest High School

Kim Pahlow, Executive Director of Learning-Southwest Quadrant

Mary Pfeiffer, Former Executive Director of Instruction-Southwest and West

Todd Sobrilsky, Activities Director – West High School

Mike Stangel, Director of Facility Planning and Related Services

Luke Valitchka, Principal – West High School

Jim VanAbel, Associate Principal, Southwest High School

Jerry Wieland, Executive Director of Educational Services

David Zadnik, Assistant Superintendent/Chief Learning Officer

DUAL CAMPUS FEASIBILITY STUDY APPENDIX B


27

Bibliography

Bryk, A.S., Easton, J.Q., Kerbow, D., Rollow, S.G., & Sebring, P.A. (1993). A view from the

elementary schools: The state of reform in Chicago. A report of the Steering Committee,

Consortium on Chicago School Research (Reports – Evaluative). Chicago, IL: Consortium

on Chicago School Research.

Daresh, J.C., (1984). School Size, Grade Level Organization, and School Management Trends. A

Briefing Paper Presented to the Task Force. Oak Hills Local Schools, Cincinnati, Ohio.

McCabe, J.G., & Oxley, D. (1989). Making big high schools smaller: A review of the

implementation of the house plan in New York City’s most troubled high schools. New York:

Public Education Association; Bank Street College of Education.

McMullan, B.J., Sipe, C.L., & Wolfe, W.C. (1994). Charter and student achievement: Early

evidence from school restructuring in Philadelphia. Philadelphia: Center for Assessment and

Policy Development.

Newman, M., Garrett, Z., Elbourne, D., Bradley, S., Noden, P., Taylor, J., et al. (2006). Does

secondary school size make a difference?: A systematic review. Educational Research

Review, 1(1), 41-60.

Oxley, D. (1994). Organizing schools into small units: Alternatives to Homogeneous grouping.

Phi Delta Kappan, 75(7), 521-526

Raywid, M. (1996). Taking stock: The movement to create mini-schools, schools-within-schools,

and other small schools. New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education.

Rigney, C.E., (1985). A Comparison Between Two Types of Secondary School Structures in the

State of New Jersey and the Impact Several Variables Have on That Structure. Doctoral

Dissertation, The Graduate School of Education, Rutgers, The State University of New

Jersey.

Green Bay School District dual campus feasibility study

Documents

school enrollment trends

open enrollment

table of contents chapter

educational support

educational programs

student scheduling data

student course offerings

facility condition assessment