|Re: Open Enrollment: LISD's MacGuffin|
Poster: Runfellow Posted: 2012/7/8 22:42:37
Regarding other "open enrollment" programs, Garland's program is a grandfathered-in desegregation program that they rebranded as "school choice". Both GISD and FWISD rate lower on almost every TEA accountability measure (AP programs, commended scores, etc.) than LISD, so I'm not sure why we should use them as a model.
Regarding the exceptional cases, there will always be some (I'm fairly sure employees of other districts can get exemptions) but most of these examples would only solve short-term issues for individual cases (i.e. squeaky wheels) while ignoring the bigger picture. We already have a problem (as fvaughan will no doubt testify) with certain courses not being offered at every school. Open enrollment in that case would be another burden-shifting "we don't have to offer X class here because they can just go to that high school" tool. Transferring bully victims doesn't solve the problem; the bully (or bullies) will simply pick another target. If someone has issues with the staff and the staff is at fault, you have a staff problem. Moving that one child won't solve it because you'll still have the same problem.
In the long term, open enrollment (of any kind, under any name) will not actually solve these problems. Only proper funding and sound leadership will do that.