Comments  69

• LFE 11/22/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Why is splitting WAVE the only option? Another solution would be to rezone to make room for WAVE to be housed at one school. For example, Clear Creek Intermediate and League City Intermediate are only 1 mile apart. Clear Creek Intermediate Zone actually has neighborhoods that are closer to League City Intermediate than Clear Creek. Why not rezone these neighborhoods to League City -- the closer school, and then you would have room for WAVE on one campus at Clear Creek Intermediate?

• Jeffrey Ellis 11/22/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Dr. Smith,
  
  
  $200,000 is the cost of splitting the existing WAVE program into two, and moving half the program -- students, teachers, equipment, etc. -- to League City Intermediate. Calling this "duplicating" and "expanding" the WAVE program gives the impression that you are trying to put a positive spin on this. This is being done due to projected overcrowding at Westbrook, not to "duplicate that success in League City, where even more students can excel."
  
  
  Dividing the resources and student body of this program into two could serve to weaken the overall WAVE program. Alternatives should be considered that would keep the entire program together while still addressing the crowding problem at Westbrook. For example, the entire program could be relocated to League City Intermediate and fit within the facility there with very modest redistricting to enable some current League City Intermediate students to instead attend Bayside or Clear Creek Intermediate. There are surely other options to be considered as well.
  
  
  
  
  
  

• Randal Michnovicz 11/23/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Putting WAVE in Clear Creek Intermediate School would increase advanced learning opportunities for WAVE students. Clear Creek Intermediate is fairly underutilized, is right next to Clear Creek High School, and is near the underutilized League City Intermediate. WAVE could offer classes to be taken at the high school in addition to the ones offered at WAVE, such as Biology and Algebra II, for students who want to learn.

• CCISD Teacher 11/23/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I think this is a great idea!  Opening a second magnet program that will serve our students in the southeast part of the district will meet our students' needs while providing an opportunity for them to attend school with peers that live in their local neighborhoods.  We need to maximize our building capacity; by relocating students from Westbrook Intermediate to League City Intermediate we are making great use of preexisting structures.  

• theresa goodwin 11/28/2011 12:00:00 AM

  My son attended the WAVE program and is now a junior at Brook. The program does an excellent job of preparing gifted students for both high school and college. I can think of no better expenditure for our future. Thanks for doing such a great job.

• Robert Ploutz-Snyder,PhD 11/28/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Dr. Smith,
  I applaud your interest in Gifted Education, and I completely agree with your assessment that the WAVE program is a flagship of CCISD.  One of our daughters is in the program and our second is eagerly awaiting her opportunity.  WAVE is an amazing success story for CCISD, but I am very concerned about talks of splitting up the program or"duplicating" it.  I do not believe that splitting WAVE into two separate schools/programs will be successful academically, socially or fiscally, and it has a very high likelihood of degrading the highly successful program at Westbrook.  PLEASE listen to parents and faculty of the current WAVE program-we have a vested interest in the program and intimate knowledge of what makes it so successful.  If it is growing too big for the current location, then consider relocating the whole program to a larger school--or even creating a Magnet school expressly purposed for the WAVE program.  If it is not centrally located enough--move it.  But please don't split up this program.  It is the crown jewel of CCISD; please don't tear apart all of the parts that make it so special by dividing or "duplicating" it.  It's not broken--it's just large.  Let's not try to fix an unbroken program--let's just move it lock, stock and barrel to a larger home if we must.  It is a whole entity--it is not something that can be split into parts with the hope that at least one of those parts can be as good as the original. I ask that  you please listen to the parents.  Listen to the teachers and leading administrators of WAVE.  Ask a few WAVE kids about what make the program right for them...  Lastly--if the School Board insists that they can duplicate WAVE for a mere $200,000, please get an independent, unbiased outside financial evaluation of this estimate. I am highly suspicious of this figure.. It is virtually never cost effective to duplicate services--economy of scale always prevails.  Duplicating WAVE is not going to be a cost-effective alternative to moving the whole program, if indeed it has outgrown Westbrook.  Finally, I would ask that you please allow longer deliberations about this important decision--involving parents, students, teachers and administrators of the WAVE program sufficient time to provide input.  Let us not rush into a quick decision that may inadvertently undermine the very program with which you speak so highly of.  Thank you.
  

• S.V. Lock 11/28/2011 12:00:00 AM

  November 28, 2011
  
  Dear Dr. Smith,
  
  With all due respect, I disagree with the plan to duplicate WAVE primarily because it cannot be "duplicated". The program blueprint may be estabished, but the GT trained and experienced staff, WAVE students and the hard-won synergy that exists within the WAVE Program at WIS are unique. These are the result of years of trial and error to get the balance right on how to educate and support GT students during a critical timeframe in their education.
  
  Another primary benefit to many of these kids is the close interaction with other students from across the district who are like minded. After middle school, many of these relationships will continue and benefit all high schools and communities in the district. Creating WAVE North and WAVE South campuses would dilute the talent and set-up an artificial competition between the two groups (one campus would always be seen as at "superior" to the other: it's inevitable).
  
  In addition, the broadcasted investment of an additional $200k to create a twin program in the empty classrooms at LCI seems low. I assume that the bulk of the funding for a new WAVE would come from existing WIS funding, and thereby would reduce the funding to the current WAVE.
  
  If the issue is budget born and budget driven, then why not reconsider charging a transportation fee to those who attend CCISD magnet schools instead? If it means keeping the kids together, I would be willing to pay a surcharge for my child to take the bus to WAVE. I would even support a cap on the imcoming 6th grade student enrollment at WAVE (similiar to the limited slots at Seabrook Science Magnet).
   
  It's important for the WAVE students and WAVE staff to stay together; the model and location work very well (as a measure of success, perhaps take a look at the percentage of annual CCISD National Merit Scholar Finalists and Scholarship Recipients who went to WAVE). 
  
  I ask that you and your team please find solutions to the district budget shortfalls and facilitiies utilization issues that do not include splitting WAVE into two campuses.
  
  Thank you for all you do and for your consideration on this issue,
  Susan Vaughn Lock
  Parent of 8th grade WAVEr; & 4th grader at J.F. Ward Elementary
  CLHS class of 1982

• CCISD Moderator 11/28/2011 12:00:00 AM

   

  Thank you for sharing your concerns with us. There is a great deal of misinformation regarding the District’s proposal to replicate WAVE. Here are the facts:

  1. Clear Creek ISD supports the WAVE program.
  2. Clear Creek ISD has no plans to eliminate, reduce, or dilute offerings to Gifted and Talented students. In fact, the proposal calls for an expansion of the program.
  3. The District’s recommendation to the Board of Trustees is to replicate this program and ensure  its accessibility to all Gifted and Talented students in Clear Creek ISD.
  4. The proposal to the Board of Trustees provides equal funding, GT certified staffing, courses and technology at both locations.
  5. There is no intermediate campus in the Clear Creek Independent School District that can accommodate WAVE and WAVE’s future growth without displacing 400-600 students from their home-zoned intermediate school.
  6. Westbrook Intermediate is over capacity, primarily due to the growth of WAVE. Today, there are more WAVE students attending Westbrook Intermediate than students who live around the school.
  7. WAVE is the only CCISD program that does not have an enrollment cap.
  8. Two locations will prevent the likelihood of an enrollment cap since there are no intermediate schools that can accommodate WAVE as it is today.
  9. Clear Creek ISD has successfully replicated programs and opened new schools in the past and this experience will benefit the opening of a second WAVE program.
  10. Clear Creek ISD is confident two locations will be beneficial to all students, Gifted and Talented and general education.

   

• LFE 11/28/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Yes, I understand that housing WAVE at a single campus may require rezoning non-wave students to another intermediate school. But your comment’s reason not to consider it seems to short-sighted for the following reasons:

  1. The SBAC is suppose to advise on just this issue.

  2. Splitting WAVE program will affect over 700 students – not just the proposed 300 that would be moved to another intermediate school.

  3. Looking at Clear Creek Intermediate and League City Intermediate attendance zone, I find it surprising that there are currently neighborhoods CLOSER to LCIS but zoned to CCIS! If you keep neighborhoods east of CCIS at CCIS but rezone the other neighborhoods to LCIS (a newer facility) would make more room especially since LCIS is currently underutilized.

  4. Demographic prediction is for CCIS and LCIS population to not increase in the next 10 years (per presentation by CCISD demographer to SBAC). So locating WAVE at CCIS and rezoning some students to LCIS would result in stable enrollment.

  5. In a time of budget deficits and constraints, the best way to assure the educational opportunities remain, is to come up with a solution that does not cost a minimum of $200,000 (but probably more). That is keep WAVE at one campus… located at CCIS and rezone some students to LCIS. This also means disrupting the least number of students.

• Sophie Baker 11/28/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Splitting up WAVE will reduce the amount of funding each group receives. This will lessen the resources. With less specialized teachers at each school there will be half as many chances to take Biology, or advanced Maths, or mini-courses, which is one of the main GT factors of WAVE. An alternate solution would be to move the whole school to a single intermediate school, while adjusting neighborhood zoning to cause the overflow of regular students to go to a nearby school. As a freshman in high school, if I had not have had all the resources and opportunities given to me during WAVE my prospects would be much lower. And if you think of the electives at Westbrook, the band program is 1st in state, the orchestra is quite good, the theater teacher is raved about, the art teachers are sworn by, and the journalism has prompted many young students to pursue it further. To take half of the students away from these accomplished programs while being challenged only academically and not creatively seems like a cruel punishment for the gifted minds in WAVE. 

• Jonathan Y (former student) 11/28/2011 12:00:00 AM

   

  I 100% agree with this "idea," but can you makethis idea reality? "Duplicating" WAVE in my mind is impossible. Howcan someone replicate an experience? I went to Westbrook in 6th, and 7thgrade and I would give anything to be in a school environment like thatagain. Nothing compares to WAVE! 

  My main concern out the many is the environment.  Howdo you expect to recreate the environment? The teachers who madeit their duty to teach every student in a way that made usfeel accomplished and yet still having fun, the minicourses that would teach you about things that are important to you. I personally took(in my two years) everything from culinary arts, to history, to even writingskills. Those things have helped me in many areas, not to mention they were justfun! And finally the student interaction which was phenomenal! Icould come to school every day and be around people just like me, I couldhave actual smart conversations with people and I could prepare myself forthe future in a group of people that all had the potential to what Iwanted to do. All of these things made the WAVE experience. 

              Nowif you think you can recreate WAVE, then please, the morethe merrier. But if you mess WAVE up, then you are just trying to exposekids to an experience that they would fully get. 

   

• Former Parent 11/29/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I agree that WAVE is a flagship offering in CCISD. It appears that district administration has decided to split the program into two locations in an effort to better utilize schools that were overbuilt in the League City area. I can certainly understand the fiscal responsibility to alleviate this problem.
  
  
  I am concerned that we are using this group of students as the solution to a problem without considering what is best for the students.
  
  
  I am also perplexed by the use of the term "expanding". How do you expand a program that already allows 100% of the qualified and interested students to attend? Does this mean we are changing the qualification requirements to attend WAVE? If not, how can you claim the program will expand? 
  
  
  It should also be noted that "equal funding" of the two programs does not mean the same thing as adequate funding. Splitting current funding into two piles while losing economies of scale means both locations will have inadequate, but equal, funding.
  
  
  I also have concerns that a survey with limited options (such as move the program to LCIS or cap the program) is not an effort to collect opinions but a veiled threat to the parents. 
  
  
  GIven the way things have been handled over the past year, I am not confident this is in the best interest of WAVE students. I think the district should step back, start over and attempt to come up with a win-win situation. To do that, you would need input from the parents, students and teachers at WAVE.

• JAW 11/29/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I respectfully disagree with Dr. Smith, as well as the Modertor. It is the "tunnel vision" of the press releases, as well as the Moderator's comments, that bother me the most. If change is needed, so be it. However, slow it down, consider ALL options (there are many), then make an informed decision that will benefit the greatest number of students. I get the feel with all of the sudden, polished press releases the district is making a "knee jerk" decision to solve a problem that has existed for years. LCI has been underutilized for years. WIS attendance has gradually been increasing for years. Why now is WAVE the target for a quick resolution? If having two WAVE locations was part of a long range goal (which I doubt) then it should have been a plan phased in over time. Your plan is to "duplicate the successful WAVE program". That is NOT what you are doing- you are dividing, breaking up, the successful WAVE program. Is this what is best for our kids? In all of the press releases the figure of $200,000.00 to "duplicate the successful WAVE program" is mentioned. In the same press release I am reminded how WAVE has grown over the years. From that I can conclude that in 1996 WAVE started out small. Then why doesn't the district take that $200,000.00 and start another magnet- a Math Magnet? Start small- house it at CCI where the kids can walk to CCHS for high school classes. That would NATURALLY pull kids from the WAVE program. A Math magnet- similar to the Science Magnet- would provide additional opportunities for ALL students, not just our GT students. In conclusion I urge, no beg, Dr. Smith, the School Board to slow down, consider all options before making the decision to divide (not duplicate) WAVE. Look at every attendance boundary, look at the possibility of housing WAVE in its entirity at another location, create other opportunities for students. Stop the "tunnel vision", there are many options yet to be considered. Our area and school district deserves well thought out, researched decisions. Not "quick fixes" as this one appears to be. Most importantly, our kids deserve the right decision.

• WAVE Parent 11/29/2011 12:00:00 AM

  We believe it is a good thing for the parents, students, and CCISD to have a second program. Most of the discussions are around the current WAVE population. What about the future growth in WAVE population? If the entire program is moved to other intermediate school, how long would it be before the other school run out of capacity - perhaps, another two or three more years? What happens next? Didnt this already happen once - having to move WAVE from Webster to Westbrook?
  
  If we cant have a dedicated school for WAVE, then creating more than one location seems to be the viable option. Having a program close to the students zoned area will help them with their commute and allowing them time for other activities (please dont overlook this aspect. A well rounded kid's education doesnt stop in the classroom). With the traffic getting heavier every day in this part of town, it makes more sense to have these programs closer.  Now that CCISD is giving us an option to have the same program closer to our zoned area, why would we not take it? Why put the kids through the 'commute' grind while we have an option?
  
  We are parents of WAVE kids and we support WAVE programs at two locations.

• WG 11/29/2011 12:00:00 AM

  The growth of the WAVE over the years has not necessarily resulted in a better program.  The experiences my children are having compared with those of children who attended the program when the WAVE was in Webster are vastly different.  The smaller program allowed more interaction with teachers and with other students.  There was not the animosity that exists between the WAVE and RAZ kids.  While the larger program has brought in more federal funding for CCISD, it has attracted children with shiny promises only to find out that they that are ill-prepared or unable to meet the rigors of the WAVE. 

  If CCISD is bent on increasing the size of the WAVE, then the only reasonable option seems to be to move it to CCIS.  The economies of scale and the single campus solely for the purpose of a GT program is very intriguing, and more likely to attract the interest of parents and students than the diluted campus concept being proposed. 

  The WAVE is stressful enough without the children having to worry about losing the friendships they have recently established.  Some are extremely upset by this proposed split.  As parents of a 6^th grade WAVE student, we are eagerly awaiting the outcome so WE can decide where to send our child next year.

  
  

• Former WAVE Student 11/29/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I am a former WAVE student (now in high school), and I can proudly say, WAVE changed my life. WAVE's atmosphere is something completely unique--it was somewhere where I didn't feel like a nerd because of the the "Gifted and Talented"  label, it was somewhere where I had more fun learning than I ever have, it was somewhere where I first met many like-minded GT students who had the same interests as me. It was somewhere I felt I actually belonged, where I was actually accepted.
  
  
  Personally, I disagree with the proposal to split WAVE in half.  Splitting WAVE in half will thin the resources available for the WAVE program and reduce the quality of both the Westbrook and League City halves. By splitting WAVE, will future WAVE students get the same wonderful experience I had? WAVE as a community isn't just a school--splitting it is like splitting a family.
  
  
  Some of WAVE students' greatest achievements (for example, the band was rated #1 in the state of Texas) were results of collaborations between WAVE students who only were able to work together because WAVE brings together GT students from all over CCISD. 
  
  
  Even if supposedly the teachers are of the same quality, the students' unity as WAVE students is destroyed if the WAVE program is split into two separate WAVE schools. By separating WAVE students, instead of one very good WAVE team, there will simply be two weak WAVE teams--WAVE students work better together, instead of on two different teams.
  
  
  If this proposal is accepted will future WAVE students meet as many other GT students or make as many new friends? Will they still be able to play in an exceptional orchestra or band? Will they have as many opportunities to excel?
  
  
  What will happen to WAVE?

• Sane Parent 11/30/2011 12:00:00 AM

   

  The discrepancy in population between Westbrook and League City Intermediate School is egregious. Everyone agrees that something needs to be done to maximize facility usages and even-out school populations. However, no one ever wants the change to affect them. In my opinion, many of the arguments against moving the WAVE program to League City Intermediate are both hollow and disingenuous attempts to mask personal discontent over having to be the individuals affected by the change. Persons posting, against the “split”, seem to be more interested in a “solution” that does not affect them oppose to one that works best and make sense. Can you not see the inequity that the size of the WAVE program is placing on students that are close to Westbrook and are zones elsewhere because of the growth of WAVE?

   

  I feel that the argument that WAVE cannot be duplicated is irrational? The district, and districts all across the state, duplicate schools and programs all the time with great success. To place a “cap” on the WAVE program and turn qualifying students away, is the most egregious option; and cannot be compared to the districts efforts to duplicate the program and provide the WAVE experiences to all interested and qualifying students as the program and district grow. Don’t we equitably provide OMEGA at each intermediate campus throughout the district, why not WAVE?

  Do you remember the strife when Clear Lake HS, split Clear Creek HS? or when Space Center split Clear Lake Intermediate? The answer is no, because people got over it because in the long-term it was the right thing to do. 

  Yes, WAVE will be different--and to make many of the comments that have been made is to assume the worst, unjustifiably. Change is a part of life, and will have to continually be reconciled and now, in the context of this change is a great time to practice that. 

  At this point there is no one campus that can hold the 750 student WAVE program; it must be split or capped; and in those terms I do not see how one cannot understand the validity of the districts efforts.

  Many of the assertions above provide no evidence and seem to be assumptions based on a personal agenda to maintain the status-quo; as you provide not alternatives to the current issue. Moving the WAVE program to Clear Creek Intermediate to me, makes no sense as that would displaced CCI students unnecessarily when simply moving them to League City would require moving less students. 

• Nathan G 12/1/2011 12:00:00 AM

  This idea in theory is a good one. But, when you look at the reality of the situation, it is not. I can understand splitting the current 6th grade and people coming into WAVE, but splitting 7th grade up is a terrible mistake. there are only like 150 WAVE 7th graders, but there is like 300 WAVE 6th graders, with more coming in next year. Splitting WAVE would be like splitting up a family that grew up together to 2 seperate countries. And that 200,000 dollar estimate for replication, A complete miscalculation. It costs that much to replicate a NORMAL school. WAVE has all this technology, that is at least an extra 100,000 to 200,000 dollars. If you split WAVE, you will reduce the funding for BOTH schools, and the experience just wouldn't be the same. Most mini-course teachers would have to choose one school, which is horrible. This so called "Replication" is just going to split WAVE into 2 different, cheap programs with too little funding to do anything. It will cost way more to replicate the WAVE experience, so stop kidding yourselves CCISD, its not possible to replicate it. This is basically like removing the Base of the wave tower, and before long, the entire thing will fall.
  -WAVE 7th grader
  Nathan G

• CCISD Community Member 12/1/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I believe this is a great opportunity for CCISD to offer this program to more children, closer to their homes. This could provide opportunities to students that may live too far from Westbrook. It would also allow CCISD to allow the students that are closest to this campus to attend the campus. These students in the immediate area should be the district's concern as well. Due to the location of WBI and the subdivisions zoned to it, not dividing the program could cost the district additional money to bus these children to another campus if the WAVE program grew too large for the campus (which it already has). I applaud you Dr. Smith and the School Board for looking into and considering this option!

• Parent of future WAVE student 12/1/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I have been following this situation since I first heard about it. My daughter is currently in 5th grade and was identified as GT in Kindergarten. Her extremely high IQ means that it is very difficult for her to find true "peers" with whom she can carry on a conversation. Splitting the WAVE program would mean that it will be less likely that she will find a true friend because half of the GT students in the district will go to a different school. I don't know a lot about the schools in League City but I would much rather see the entire program moved to a different campus than have it split. I especially like the idea of putting the program at an intermediate school that is close to a high school so that 8th graders could take high school classes when appropriate.
  

• WAVE Parent 12/1/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Why replicate the WAVE?  The WAVE is a good program, but it is generalized GT program.  If CCISD wants to grow their magnet program, why not officer other enrichment areas with more emphasis on math and science as HISD does?  Why not start a rocket science magnet, such as the highly successful SystemsGo program in Fredericksburg, TX?  We are after all the school district that surrounds NASA. 
  
  The CCISD Science Magnet is a very popular program.  The Science Magnet is capped, which has resulted in the admission of students that truly have a science focus.  And the drop out rate at the Science Magnet is much lower than the WAVE, especially during the first year.  I know this because I've had children attend both programs, and the drop out rate after the 1st 9 weeks at WAVE is very noticeable. 
  
  The point is there are other options to splitting the WAVE.  Unfortunately, CCISD does not seem interested in pursuing any of these, or even letting all of the parents voice their concerns in a open meeting.  Don't we pay the taxes that fund the district? 
  
  This problem did not arise overnight.  It has been years in the making.  A hastily made decision made behind closed doors without involving the stakeholders rarely work out well, and creates a lot of trust issues.  We can't afford that right now.  We need to work together on this solution.
  
  
  

• RKB 12/2/2011 12:00:00 AM

  There are indeed students who live far from Westbrook for whom a closer school could be an advantage.  However, there are a number of things in the above comments which show a lack of knowledge and understanding of the issue:
  
  1.  Many of the students who would go to the "new WAVE" are either farther from LCI than Westbrook or have much more traffic to get to LCI than Westbrook.  Get some input from parents of students zoned to Clear Springs and those zoned to Clear Falls north of the lake and you will hear this repeated over and over.
  
  2.  The district buses students all over the district to schools farther from them because the one closer to them is full:  Westbrook is hardly unique in this.  A great deal of the problem here is that many of our schools were not put where they were most needed.  To break up a successful program to correct/camouflage this is throwing out the baby with the bathwater.  This is what appears to be happening, and it is not irrational to be concerned about this.  (I don't believe we would be talking about splitting WAVE if LCI were not so underutilized.)
  
  3.  If you go talk to current and future WAVE parents, the ones who are the MOST against the split are those whose children would be zoned to the "new WAVE".  The concern is much less about distance than it is about concern for the quality of the program. 
  
  4.  Intermediate schools across the district do NOT provide Omega programs equitably.  Many of them have dropped classes when there were not "enough" students in them.  One can only expect this problem to get worse in the near future with the budget woes, which is in fact a great deal of the concern you are hearing from WAVE parents:  if there aren't enough kids for Geometry, Biology, etc., then that will get dropped b/c we can't "afford" it.  "Sane parent" does not seem to be familiar with the way either WAVE or Omega are currently functioning, b/c his/her arguments are making incorrect assumptions. 
  
  5.  You do not hear about CLHS splitting CCHS or SCI splitting CLI b/c the parents of students at CLHS and SCI are generally happy with those schools.  You DO still hear not only about CFHS splitting CLHS, but also CBHS splitting CLHS, b/c those schools forced students to leave their neighborhoods to go to school and those forced to move do not think they got the good end of the deal.  The LCI WAVE is much more likely to resemble these splits.
  
  6.  The fact is that we are in a budget crisis and splitting WAVE WILL COST MORE than the current WAVE, with the exact same number of students and the exact same classes, due to economies of scale.  If money were not an issue at the moment and the administration and board seemed to genuinely feel that WAVE was being diminished by it's size and would be improved as a smaller, more intimate program, w/ more teachers and smaller classes to go along with it, that might be different.  Instead, the administration claimed this was "just an example", then submitted a proposal, put out the press release right before Thanksgiving break, with a board meeting the Monday after the break, intending to have the board vote on the issue two weeks later, right before Christmas break.  Further, the concerned community has been made to feel like comments and suggestions are very much unwanted.  The community sees the process being "rushed along" and put to the board at a time when most people are busy with the holidays, so it is not at all surprising that parents are very concerned about the future of the WAVE program.  All most of us would like is for the process to slow down, get community ideas and input, and do a very careful financial evaluation to determine how much any reasonable options would really cost.  The district has said the math magnet is "too expensive", so it is not irrational to be concerned about whether a "split WAVE" program would be adequately funded.  To spend more money to have WAVE be inferior to what it is currently would be a great tragedy, given the difference that it makes in so many children's lives. 
  
  Finally, let me say that I think having a cap would be the ABSOLUTE WORST thing that could be done.  I know there is a comment otherwise on this blog, but I have yet to speak to a current, former, or future WAVE parent who thinks that a cap would be acceptable.  These children are not receiving an appropriate education in their neighborhood schools (many have been looking forward to WAVE through years of boredom in elementary school).  To cap enrollment of WAVE would be completely equivalent to capping Special Education enrollment:  you simply do not limit how many children are allowed to have an education that is appropriate for their abilities.
  
  If the district really does support the WAVE program, then PLEASE, slow down, get community input, look at multiple options and the costs/benefits of each.  Going through the process quickly and secretively does not inspire confidence on the part of the public:  if you do it openly and really go through the process properly,  I think you will find we can come to a decision that makes sense and is supported by the community.
  
  

• PTA Parent 12/2/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I am disappointed in some of the comments that I read that have a certain air of entitlement concerning the location of the WAVE program. Every child in CCISD deserves an outcome that is beneficial to them.  To suggest that displacing children that are not in the WAVE program and dividing their "family" as a perfectly acceptable and preferred solution is well....rude and wrong. My child is not in WAVE ,but he is in OMEGA, and to suggest that he would not be affected by being displaced or that his displacement and disruption is not just as important as anyone elses just so WAVE children can "stay together" is a very poor argument. What are these WAVE children going to do when they get to High School and are no longer in the protected environment of having the same kids they have known for the last 3 years? I'll tell you, they will do just fine. They are smart intelligent children that will adapt just fine with new friends and new students. And not completely new friends either as half will move together. LCIS was divided and those children have performed fine....Seabrook was split....they're good too.  If we had been affected by a boundary change and required to attend a different school, it would be different and not what we have been used to, but my child would adapt just fine. It's life. WAVE children are no different and your tax dollars are no different than mine or anyone elses in this district. Every child affected by this decision should be considered on the same playing field. The selection of how many "mini" courses a child can take is also a VERY poor argument. Really???? We should be concerned about whether or not WAVE children can take scuba or whatever they offer? Save it for college. If you can now only choose from 15 instead of 30 then I really can't see that as a valid point. Are you still getting your advanced courses provided by GT certified teachers with this split? Yes. Be careful what you ask for with asking to keep the program together so WAVE kids can be "together" for 3 years of learning. You may get what you ask for, along with a cap on enrollment in the WAVE program. That would be a huge loss of opportunity to many in the district and it may just be your child that doesn't make the cut.  

• Angered WAVE student 12/2/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I think that if WAVE is split, it cannot fulfill it's potential due to the fact that one half is in one school and the other is in another school. 2 students from both schools that house WAVE might have ideas that are brilliant, but they cannot communicate with each other due to different locations. It would be half a mind, not a whole. Half a mind cannot come up with ideas, only a whole can. If we move WAVE to a different school, that school will face the same problems as Westbrook Intermidiate is facing now. I criticize Dr. Greg Smith and the school board for coming up with this idea.  

• Cheri Reichel 12/2/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I am a former WAVE parent.  My son, who is now in college, began 6th grade at the Webster Intermediate campus and then moved with the program to the Westbrook campus for 7th and 8th grades.  The program needs to stay together.  There is no need to "expand" the program, which I read as diluting the program.  Already all eligible students may attend.  Frankly, so long as the program is kept together, it doesn't matter what building they use.  The program could move every few years and I don't see how it would affect the students at all.  (Although my son did prefer Webster to Westbrook.)  WAVE is not the building, it's the people. 
  
  I agree with the person who said one campus would always be viewed as superior to the other and I can predict that would be Westbrook, for many reasons.  I am one who agrees that WAVE cannot be replicated nor does it need to be.  (The moderator argues that CCISD has successfully replicated programs in the past and I would ask what programs?  None with the unique characteristics of WAVE, I'm sure.) 
  
  LFE has some good ideas about utilizing CCIS for the entire program, if needed.
  
  Many of the teachers in the WAVE program have been there for many years.  They know how to do this thing.  They would have to be split up between the two campuses to get the new campus operating in the same mode as Westbrook.  There would be benefit lost by splitting up the entire GT population, staff and students; that is a major current benefit of WAVE. 
  
  It's a bad idea and other options need to be considered.  I honestly don't understand how any current or former WAVE family could be for this idea.  We know the program intimately, more so than administration or the board of trustees who sit and look at it from simply an administrative -- rears in seats -- viewpoint.  I'm glad my son has graduated.  Good luck to the rest of you still in it!

• CCISD Moderator 12/2/2011 12:00:00 AM

   

  In Clear Creek ISD we do believe education is a partnership with parents and the community.

  While there are differing opinions on how to sustain WAVE’s growth for many years to come, we do want our parents and the community to know that Clear Creek ISD is committed to maintaining the quality of WAVE. This proposal, while not supported by some, is genuinely intended to expand the program. Expansion is not possible at WAVE’s current location.

   

  In addition to building strong partnerships with parents, Clear Creek ISD does believe communication develops unity. We realize we can improve in this area as it pertains to WAVE. 

   

  Yes, some feel this proposal is being rushed. However, WAVE’s enrollment growth has been a challenge (and a good one to have) for the District for many years. It has been the focus of previous school boundary advisory committees where attendance zones around Westbrook Intermediate have been reduced to accommodate WAVE. The opportunity exists today to duplicate WAVE at a second location.

   

  The purpose of this blog is to engage in a healthy dialogue on important education issues. I would like to thank all of those who have contributed, and we will continue to post responses. Please refrain from attacking someone’s perspective. Everyone is entitled to their own thoughts and opinions.

   

  I would like to clarify a few items:

   

  The District is not considering closing an existing intermediate school.

   

  Eight of our 10 intermediate schools offer Robotics, including League City Intermediate. The only schools that do not offer this program are Seabrook Intermediate and Creekside Intermediate. Clubs are driven by student interest. 

   

  The proposal calls for mini-course offerings at both locations and both locations would have equal budgets to assist in paying for the adjunct teachers who come in to support the courses. The budgets would be duplicated, not split. Mini-courses are offered based on teacher and student interest.  

   

  League City Intermediate does offer fine arts, band, etc. It has a wonderful orchestra program. Please view the website here. LCIS Orchestra has won sweepstakes awards at UIL competitions in 2010 and 2011. It also ranked 2nd at the Early Music Festival at the Texas Renaissance Festival. I hope you would agree that is pretty impressive considering the school is significantly smaller than Westbrook Intermediate. We are very proud of the accomplishments of all of our schools.

   

  We are in the process of conducting a technology inventory between the two proposed sites.

  The Board has not taken action on the proposal to open a second WAVE and the Board will continue to review public input.

   

  If you submit a post between Friday and Sunday, please know that submissions are not automatic and we will post on Monday. Thank you!

   

• Alexis S. (current WAVE student) 12/2/2011 12:00:00 AM

  As a 7th grade student attending the WAVE program at Westbrook Intermediate, I oppose the idea that CCISD should split up the WAVE program. If this does happen, then I would ask that you start with incoming 6th graders for the 2012-2013 year. The main reason my fellow students and I oppose the splitting of WAVE is because we have bonded as friends very strongly. At WAVE, we are really like a family. If you split up WAVE, we would never see many of our friends again, because we would go to different schools for the rest of intermediate school and all of high school. With the incoming 6th graders, they would not have met any of the other people from different schools, so there would not be this issue of having a strong bond being broken apart. This solution would make most of the current 6th and 7th graders satisfied, because we would have not lost any of our friends until high school, which would be inevitable anyways. Another way to limit the population at WAVE is to raise the standards for admission to WAVE. Though it is not really my place to comment on this, some people that are currently in WAVE do not seem like they should be there. There are people failing several classes, and it would probably be good for them to go back to their home schools, so they don't have a bad permanent record. Please reconsider splitting the WAVE program, or consider these alternative solutions.

• Concerned Parent 12/3/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I believe it should all  be moved to Clear Creek Intermediate (the lowest performing school) and possibly rezone the  Harbour Park  Area to Bayside and the League City Elementary Students to LCIS.

• Parent of a Gifted and Talented Student 12/3/2011 12:00:00 AM

  In order to eliminate the overcrowding at Westbrook Intermediate and the excessive population of the WAVE program, a new set of admission standards should be instituted.  Raising the entrance requirements would preserve the exclusivity the WAVE program should strive to maintain.  A number of students are admitted solely based on results from kindergarten IQ tests.  The education of our brilliant children would be better balanced with lower numbers through an application process and tempered with an effort to socialize our kids with individuals outside the WAVE program. 

• Frustrated Parent 12/3/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I believe that the WAVE program should stay at Westbrook, but I believe that there should be an acceptance cap placed on the program such as the Seabrook Science Magnet Program. This would greatly cut down on the overpopulation problems. Some people are saying that the only place to take high school classes are at Westbrook. This is not true. I've had children go to Westbrook and Seabrook and classes such as Algebra and Biology are both offered. I just believe that the WAVE program would benefit greatly if it was not split into two campuses. I feel that to try to "replicate" the WAVE program would cause many of the GT students to suffer.

• CRC 12/3/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Personally, as a former WAVE student, I think that this would be a terrible idea. You cannot duplicate things, especially the WAVE program. Doing this would dilute the overall student body and provide less diversity. Additionally, where would you get the teachers who have been at WAVE from the beginning. Granted League City Intermediate is under populated, problems with this could be solved with redistricting.
  Rome wasn't built in a day, neither was WAVE, it took years to create the atmosphere and the academic and social environment. In my personal opinion, redistricting could be done to avoid the overpopulation of schools.

• CRC 12/3/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Also, one thing that I forgot to mention is how there would have to be a reduced number of mini-courses since the teachers who have experience teaching those classes would be divided among two schools.

• Christopher Crookston 12/3/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Though getting sweepstakes at UIL is a good achievment, that pales in comparison to the band and orchestra at Westbrook. There is a reason that both the band and orchestra are #1 in the STATE. Consider this when thinking about whether or not the electives will be the same.

• 6th Grade WAVE student 12/4/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Many students in WAVE are angry with this decision. Some are thinking of quitting WAVE and joining OMEGA programs in their home school. Splitting WAVE would be a huge blow to moral in the students. In conclusion, splitting WAVE is a bad ieda.

• Sane Parent, Ph.D-less 12/4/2011 12:00:00 AM

  The majority of our schools are farther away from Westbrook, than League City. This is a minor point, in that most, if not all, of the WAVE students are transported from their home campus by school bus to Westbrook. The distance point is moot. 

  cross-district bussing, is happening in the case of a few elementary schools however, Westbrook is the only over crowded Intermediate campus; with the majority of the campus being WAVE students. The school construction point is moot; CCISD buys land where it is available to build future campuses. “Breaking-up” the WAVE program, which is very suggestive language, is no different than the need from time-to-time to split over crowded schools. Why should the WAVE program be exempt in this case? It will be split and rebuild, no differently than almost every other real campus in our district. 

  The district, I’m sure will do all it can to maintain an equitable degree of quality between the two WAVE programs; just as we seem to do between our ten intermediate schools. Yes, all ten are different is some way however, no one would argue that any are poor and all provide an education that exceeds state and national standards; each WAVE program I’m sure will do the same. This is a very speculative point with no evidence of truth, other than ignorance.

  In the case that individual campuses, do not have enough students to fill classes. No student is denied. This has been the case at only two intermediate schools, and students needing advanced classes have been allowed to transfer to schools with the classes they need. 

  The schools get over crowded! What do you expect? There are not community issues with parents who have students attending CBHS. Also, once CFHS has students that never attended CLHS, that issue will disappear. “Good end of the deal” what is that suggesting? I feel that this comment underscores the sense of entitlement that is motivating these arguments. Did you know, as in the case with Clear Lake High School last year that, many of our high schools Valedictorians are not WAVE students?

  As a community member, and parent; I feel that the districts actions have been presented in a timely manner to allow for debate and in-put. There are GT students all across the state that do just fine in a regular school setting; and the fact that CCISD proposes to make another WAVE program in the midst of this economic crisis, should allow for nothing but support from all stake holders. When shutting down WAVE completely would be a great costs savings--and do nothing but make CCISD similar to every other district in the state. 

  1. Leaving WAVE “as is” at Westbrook is not possible without a cap or continuing to displace RAZ students. Have you considered the RAZ students that the growing WAVE program has affected. Did you come to their aid, when the growing WAVE program was sending them to other schools?
  2. The idea of displacing all 900 students at CCI, to make “room” for a WAVE school, also underscores the selfish/arrogant nature of these WAVE arguments. Are you really suggesting that it’s better to displace 900 students than the 300 WAVE students that would need to move?

  There are not too many options to be had here. Westbrook is OVER-CROWDED, League City is UNDERUTILIZED. All the other intermediate campuses are of acceptable sizes. Moving WAVE students to League City, is obviously the most effective option that affects the least amount of students--there is no arguing that point. To the 300 students that are going to have to move, I can assure you that when you’re in high school none of this is going to matter. You will be fine, the sun will rise, and life will continue. it’s called CHANGE.

• Cheri Reichel 12/4/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Additional comment:  my child has graduated therefore I am not personally affected by this, yet I feel strongly about it.  I know what benefit and opportunities my son had in WAVE and would want the same for others.  The GT population is roughly 7% of the total CCISD population so it shouldn't be too difficult to predict future enrollment based on future growth of the district as a whole.  All options need to be considered:  locations to house the whole program, other magnet schools which might draw GT students (such as a health professions magnet).  Most importantly, I have noted from reading the comments that the vast majority of WAVE parents-- present, future and former--are against this split.  Rather than assume it's for selfish or silly reasons, it would do the board and the administration well to think about WHY these people are very concerned about a split.  There are real reasons that one just might not understand if you're not personally involved.  Also, the board and administration should solicit opinions, and listen to them, of long time teachers in the program.

• Another WAVE Parent 12/4/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I agree that there will be a good WAVE and a not as good WAVE when the district formalizes the decision they have made.  Teachers are already telling students it is a done deal.  Unfortunately, the new WAVE at LCIS is destined to be the not as good WAVE.  The location and the fact that many teachers will be newly GT certified (if they are certified at the beginning of next year), ensures that.  Where exactly are all the new certified GT teachers going to materialize from?  
  
  As parents who will be geographically and most likely program challenged by this decision, this has gotten too hard.  I think we are going to opt out.  We will go to the Omega program in our home district.
  
  Thank you CCISD for staying ahead of the wave, and picking school locations that have benefited your district.
  

• Laura DuPont 12/5/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I have seen and heard the comment numerous times now that 8 of the 10 intermediate schools have robotics.  I am a parent of a former WAVE student who participated in the robotics program.  What seems to be missing in these comments is the understanding that the Westbrook WIRED Robotics team participates in a different program entirely than the other intermediate schools.  WIRED participates in the B.E.S.T. Robotics program, in which they have placed in the top three for at least the last 5 years against a field of high school teams, including the Robonauts.  This includes at least 1 first place finish overall, and numerous top three awards every year.  They design and create a robot out of PVC pipe and wood, and need the shop tools to accomplish this.  Their tool inventory has grown over the last 10 years, to include numerous tools that they have earned through scholarship awards presented by B.E.S.T. 
  The other intermediate schools participate in the VEX Robotics program.  This program  uses KNex building kits to create robots which is completely different than building a robot from scratch.  The motors, controllers, and software differ completely between the two programs. 
  I am not making this point to say one Robotics program is better than another, just to say that this is certainly not "Replication".  Pulling these students from the program they have been participating in, to go to another completely different program, while their teammates stay on the long-running WIRED team is not Replication.
  Students have to fill out an application to participate in the WIRED Robotics program, and it is a competitive field to make the team.  Many students have been looking forward to participating on this team from early in elementary school when they may have seen a sibling or friend participate.
  
  I think that there are many details such as this that are being completely missed in all proposals and discussions concerning WAVE Replication.  Details that are causing those of us involved to continue to question  how this can be "Replication".  Details that are in fact necessary to make a smart decision on the program, that is in the best interest of the students.

• JAW 12/5/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I appreciate open discussions, but there are so many comments on here that show a lack of understanding of GT students, as well as misinformation. For example, WAVE did not outgrow Webster Intermediate- Webster was closed as an intermediate school to create Clear View. Westbrook is not the only intermediate school over capacity. And every time a parent of a GT child tries to advocate for their child- getting an appropriate education that meets their needs- the entitlement word is always brought up.  I am not against change- for it. However, I am very concerned about how this whole process has played out. I will agree that a change is needed. I would rather see the district open new opportunities for ALL students. WAVE is a strong successful program. This current proposal does not include a plan. Only scoop up half of the kids, half of the teachers,  and everything is going to fall perfectly in place. That's it- that is what the PR machine keeps telling us. Never mind all of the options mentioned, ideas, concepts that need to be explored. The PR machine just keeps assuring us everything is going to be ok. For the kids sake I hope and pray they are correct. But when you jump into something with little or no planning, and for the wrong reasons, the outcome typically is not a good one. WAVE was created based on sound research- there are a lot of details to the program. This is not a typical boundary change situation as some have mentioned. WAVE is a complex program.The district's plan is not sound because enough time or effort has been put into it. Administrators at the Education Support Center and Board of Trustees- just how many times have you toured the WAVE program? I would really like to be assured that you are familiar with the program before making any decisions.

• RKB 12/5/2011 12:00:00 AM

  There are indeed students who live far from Westbrook for whom a closer school could be an advantage.  However, there are a number of things in the above comments which show a lack of knowledge and understanding of the issue:
  
  1.  Many of the students who would go to the "new WAVE" are either farther from LCI than Westbrook or have much more traffic to get to LCI than Westbrook.  Get some input from parents of students zoned to Clear Springs and those zoned to Clear Falls north of the lake and you will hear this repeated over and over.
  
  2.  The district buses students all over the district to schools farther from them because the one closer to them is full:  Westbrook is hardly unique in this.  A great deal of the problem here is that many of our schools were not put where they were most needed.  To break up a successful program to correct/camouflage this is throwing out the baby with the bathwater.  This is what appears to be happening, and it is not irrational to be concerned about this.  (I don't believe we would be talking about splitting WAVE if LCI were not so underutilized.)
  
  3.  If you go talk to current and future WAVE parents, the ones who are the MOST against the split are those whose children would be zoned to the "new WAVE".  The concern is much less about distance than it is about concern for the quality of the program. 
  
  4.  Intermediate schools across the district do NOT provide Omega programs equitably.  Many of them have dropped classes when there were not "enough" students in them.  One can only expect this problem to get worse in the near future with the budget woes, which is in fact a great deal of the concern you are hearing from WAVE parents:  if there aren't enough kids for Geometry, Biology, etc., then that will get dropped b/c we can't "afford" it.  "Sane parent" does not seem to be familiar with the way either WAVE or Omega are currently functioning, b/c his/her arguments are making incorrect assumptions. 
  
  5.  You do not hear about CLHS splitting CCHS or SCI splitting CLI b/c the parents of students at CLHS and SCI are generally happy with those schools.  You DO still hear not only about CFHS splitting CLHS, but also CBHS splitting CLHS, b/c those schools forced students to leave their neighborhoods to go to school and those forced to move do not think they got the good end of the deal.  The LCI WAVE is much more likely to resemble these splits.
  
  6.  The fact is that we are in a budget crisis and splitting WAVE WILL COST MORE than the current WAVE, with the exact same number of students and the exact same classes, due to economies of scale.  If money were not an issue at the moment and the administration and board seemed to genuinely feel that WAVE was being diminished by it's size and would be improved as a smaller, more intimate program, w/ more teachers and smaller classes to go along with it, that might be different.  Instead, the administration claimed this was "just an example", then submitted a proposal, put out the press release right before Thanksgiving break, with a board meeting the Monday after the break, intending to have the board vote on the issue two weeks later, right before Christmas break.  Further, the concerned community has been made to feel like comments and suggestions are very much unwanted.  The community sees the process being "rushed along" and put to the board at a time when most people are busy with the holidays, so it is not at all surprising that parents are very concerned about the future of the WAVE program.  All most of us would like is for the process to slow down, get community ideas and input, and do a very careful financial evaluation to determine how much any reasonable options would really cost.  The district has said the math magnet is "too expensive", so it is not irrational to be concerned about whether a "split WAVE" program would be adequately funded.  To spend more money to have WAVE be inferior to what it is currently would be a great tragedy, given the difference that it makes in so many children's lives. 
  
  Finally, let me say that I think having a cap would be the ABSOLUTE WORST thing that could be done.  I know there is a comment otherwise on this blog, but I have yet to speak to a current, former, or future WAVE parent who thinks that a cap would be acceptable.  These children are not receiving an appropriate education in their neighborhood schools (many have been looking forward to WAVE through years of boredom in elementary school).  To cap enrollment of WAVE would be completely equivalent to capping Special Education enrollment:  you simply do not limit how many children are allowed to have an education that is appropriate for their abilities.
  
  If the district really does support the WAVE program, then PLEASE, slow down, get community input, look at multiple options and the costs/benefits of each.  Going through the process quickly and secretively does not inspire confidence on the part of the public:  if you do it openly and really go through the process properly,  I think you will find we can come to a decision that makes sense and is supported by the community.
  
  

• Former Parent 12/6/2011 12:00:00 AM

  There is another, long term question that arises from this situation. Is it OK for district administration to present an idea without input from the major stakeholders during a holiday with a quick board vote required? If not, who will run for school board and ensure that all voices are heard? If not you, then who?

• SK 12/6/2011 12:00:00 AM

  The decision to split WAVE or move the entire group to another location will come with great opposition and support - just like every new proposal.  Change is difficult for everyone involved but change doesn't have to be a tragedy.  It is not possible for a decision to be made that will please all of the stakeholders.  It is important to advocate for the things we think are best for our children; however, the focus should be on teaching our student's survival skills.  Parents and school staff need to communicate with the students that the change will be ok, and that we will adapt, survive, and thrive.  I am concerned about the students who will listen to parents complaining and participate in discussions about this topic for the rest of the school year.  These students and parents will still complaining about the outcome of the change next year instead of focusing on adapting and accepting the change (whatever it may be).  As adults, we must help our students build the confidence and skills so kids are prepared to face new changes/challenges.

• Former Student 12/6/2011 12:00:00 AM

  One major thing about WAVE is the mini courses available to students. Splitting WAVE may reduce the number of mini courses available because there is only one qualified instructor for it. The main attraction is those mini courses, so you are going to lose attraction to the WAVE program.
  

• CCISD Moderator 12/6/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Some people have voiced opposition to opening a second location for WAVE, essentially saying the school district ‘can’t’ possibly duplicate the success at Westbrook Intermediate.

  Here in Clear Creek ISD, we view challenges as opportunities for growth for all students. For example, we opened Clear Falls High School in 2010 because Clear Lake High School was well over its capacity. At the time, Clear Lake High School was rated as an Exemplary high school by the Texas Education Agency and had developed a culture of excellence. If we felt that we could not possibly duplicate the success at Clear Lake High School, we would have simply added portable buildings and hoped for the best. Instead, we dedicated the necessary resources and staff and asked for community support to successfully launch Clear Falls High School. This required more than 1,000 students from both Clear Lake High School and Clear Creek High School to leave behind their friends, teachers and schools. This move affected students in general education, special education and gifted and talented alike. It required teachers to move from two established high schools to create a new one. It required purchasing technology or moving capital resources from one campus to another to accommodate a new student-body. Yes, it was difficult but worth the effort! Today, Clear Falls High School is a thriving community of students, staff and parents. It is home to a biotechnology program that rivals those offered at the university level. It is less than two years old. We accomplished the same when Clear Creek High School was overcrowded and the District successfully opened Clear Springs High School. Clear Springs High School is excelling in many ways with only two graduating classes to date. While each school has some unique attributes and their own campus culture, our expectations for all schools and programs are the same. This approach would be applied to opening a second WAVE location. 

  Yes, WAVE at Westbrook has BEST Robotics. But why couldn’t the second location have the same opportunity? Why would we not do our part to ensure the standards of quality and excellence are afforded to students at both locations? This is the equivalent of saying that the students at Clear Falls High School would not be given the same opportunities as those at Clear Lake High School. That is not the CCISD way! In a fast growing public school district, change is inevitable. 

  This proposal to open a second WAVE program will allow the program to flourish. It is not possible at its current location unless we decide to move more students, who are zoned to Westbrook Intermediate, out of their neighborhood school or prevent WAVE’s growth by placing an enrollment cap on the program. Neither option is supported by the District.  

  The District is opposed to a proposal on this blog to move students out of Clear Creek Intermediate and bring WAVE, in its entirety, to that location. Clear Creek Intermediate has 825 students zoned to that school today. Adding WAVE to Clear Creek Intermediate would bring the school to more than 1,570 students. The school can accommodate 1,100 students, meaning the District would have to move at least 470 home-zoned students out of Clear Creek Intermediate to accommodate WAVE. Under this scenario (which does not include WAVE growth projections), 375 general education students would be left at Clear Creek Intermediate. That is an imbalance in student populations. So, why not move everyone out of Clear Creek Intermediate and move WAVE to that location? First, we are opposed to closing a school to its community. Furthermore, the numbers do not add up in the long run. For example, hypothetically we divide (and remember, the District is opposed to this proposal) the 825 Clear Creek Intermediate students by half; 412 students would move to League City Intermediate and 413 students would move to Bayside Intermediate. Bayside Intermediate would be at capacity next school year and we would need to adjust boundaries to accommodate the exponential growth expected in the Education Village area… thereby, recreating the same dilemma we have today at Westbrook Intermediate.

  The fear of the unknown can seem overwhelming at times, but the school district will continue to invest its human and financial capital in doing what is best for our programs and for our schools to thrive.  We can work through the differences and the uncertainties, such as how many mini-courses will be offered at both locations, how to sustain advanced academic offerings, and even make the transition between two campuses an exciting and rewarding one for all 748 students.

• Facts 12/6/2011 12:00:00 AM

  At no point in the demographic projections through at least the next six years do the student population numbers for Clear Creek, Bayside and League City together justify more than two Intermediate Schools. No matter how you look at it, there is an entire extra Intermediate School in the League City/Kemah area.
  
  
  Of course, you would not (even hypothetically) split Clear Creek evenly between League City and Bayside because they start off with a difference of about 200 students and different growth projections. 
  
  
  League City and Clear Creek Intermediate serve the same community as they are not very far apart. The community would still have an Intermediate School if only one of the two existed - which in fact was the case only a couple of years ago.
  

  
  

  If you cap the enrollment at Westbrook and leave WAVE there, you still have the problem of overbuilt schools in League City/Kemah. Without WAVE as the solution to the problem, students in that area will still be relocated due to this problem. It is incorrect to place the blame for this relocation on WAVE. It may be that WAVE can be part of the solution but they did not create this problem.

  
  

  It would be wise to realize these are two very separate, different issues. The idea of a stand alone WAVE may be good or bad but the facilities facts are just the facts.

• HEY 12/6/2011 12:00:00 AM

  DONT SPLIT WAVE.

• mm 12/6/2011 12:00:00 AM

  i go to league city and putting wave there would just cause problems. PLEASE DO NOT MOVE WAVE TO LCI! it would be terrible for us maybe "RAZ" students.

• WAVE Parent 12/6/2011 12:00:00 AM

  CCISD has pretty obviously been working on the idea to split the WAVE for awhile.  It would have been nice if CCISD could have communicated this idea a year or 2 in advance, so that those of us who chose the WAVE could have made a more informed decision.  Having changed schools many times growing up, and having known many kids who changed schools, I know how disruptive it can be.  It is especially disruptive for kids in middle school.  So anyone saying it is not a big deal is wrong.  It is why CCISD usually does staggered rezoning.  Given my experience, we would not have chosen the WAVE if we knew this was a possibility.

  As for Falls, this is another major rezoning change that Seabrook has had to endure.  We were very upset by this change, since we had picked our home location based on Lake zoning.  As parents whose children are now zoned to Falls, we have/are speaking with every source we can find (parents, teachers, students, education experts, and coaches) to understand the differences between the two schools, and from the information we’ve gathered the jury is still out on Falls.  The district might want to look into the nick name the CCISD kids have given to that school.

  So if CCISD is going to make this change, our preference would be that it be staggered.  We are also ok with capping the WAVE, as this is currently a problem without an end.  We would hate to see kids a few years from now faced with the 3rd WAVE.

• K. Metzinger 12/6/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Why not move WAVE in it's entirety to LCI? I understand there are only about 400 students there now, with no projected growth. 1/3 will graduate this year leaving about 260 kids who could complete 7th & 8th grade there.(no incoming 6th graders) Alternately, those from Goforth could rejoin their elementary peers (from whom they were separated) at CCI. The kids from Hyde could go to Bayside where they would get to know the kids they will be attending high school with. (The kids currently at LCI are now split between two different high schools.) LCI, with a capacity of 1100, will have more than enough room for the WAVE program as a stand alone school and allow for expansion if needed. This proposal impacts the least number of students and those impacted will get to stay with their peers through High School.
  I must respectfully say that it seems the District and the "moderator" have already made up their minds and are not open to any suggestions. They have been disingenuous in many of their arguments. For example: "the district philosophy is diversity and as such is opposed to a WAVE only campus." Yet Clear View High School is a campus strictly for a specialized group of students and it offers specialized courses of study.
  Also, "the District does not support moving kids from their home campus." Again, the kids who live near Clear View were displaced from Webster Intermediate and now are bused 20 minutes away to League City. Clearly the District is not opposed to these types of measures. 
  I agree with previous posts that note that the driving force behind this issue is clearly not what is in the best interests of the WAVE Program or the GT population. Despite the District line of "replicating and expanding this successful program" it is really all about the numbers. They are correct that this is not a new issue. The population imbalance has been with us for several years, but in typical fashion, the District chooses to wait for the crisis and then deal with it in a reactionary way. I submit to you that a task force of parents, teachers and administrators should have been given the charge, at least a year ago, to look into this and come up with SEVERAL proposals to be put forth to the community. They way in which they are handling this is sowing the seeds of mistrust. The district has stated that they will complete a survey of all GT parents prior to the Board Vote.(It should include input from those most experienced with the program: past parents/students as well!) I have yet to see such a survey, with the vote only a few days away. Again, this is disingenuous as they will not have time to review the results and take them into consideration prior to the Monday vote.
   In my opinion, at this point, the proper course of action is to delay the vote until further study (say end of January) and proceed with full disclosure (specifics on program costs, details, etc.) to ensure the best long term outcomes.

• Laura Dupont 12/7/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Right now, the stakeholders (parents, students and faculty) in this district are yelling out to the district and to the Board of Trustees to be heard.  The district is once again trying to make huge changes without listening to stakeholders, without understanding the real costs, and without understanding the unique characteristics of the program.  That's why the students and parents are frustrated and worried. 

  While your expectations for all schools and programs may be the same, surely you understand that this is not what happens in reality.  While you can say that students in high schools and intermediate schools get the same opportunities because the course listings may be the same - this is definitely not what happens in practice.  The implementation of those classes and programs depends significantly on the staffing.  The OMEGA program in intermediate school  is not even close to being "the same" across the 10 intermediate schools, and the learning that takes place is different too.  There is perhaps nowhere that demonstrates these differences even more than in fine arts.  Yes, a student can go to any one of the 10 intermediate schools and learn to play violin or flute - but whether they get excited about band or orchestra or choose to drop out of it after a year depends more on the teaching; whether they experience an environment where 78 students make it on to region band or where region is hardly encouraged depends on the teaching; whether they understand how to be musicians who work as a team striving to be number  1 in state, or simply come to school and play something together each day depends on the teaching.  The same thing happens with courses and programs at the high school level. 

  Yes, League City could have BEST Robotics - but how many people in the district or on the BOT even knew that difference existed to plan for it.  Yes, League City could have a music composition lab for a mini course - but that requires $30,000 that most likely was not included in the proposal.  These differences and many others involved in this proposal require financial outlay that has in no way been planned into the $200,00 proposal.  That is what the stakeholders understand that the district and BOT appear not to.

  The stakeholders are frustrated with this lack of understanding and planning.  You cannot ensure the standards of quality and excellence are afforded to students at both locations if the upfront planning and cost/benefit analysis has not been done.  That's what we are asking you to do.  Right now, because of this lack of planning a major change, if the WAVE program is replicated, there are many students who are already looking outside of the district for schools, or looking at simply going back to a home-zoned school.  Has the district made any attempt to understand these numbers and COSTS!

  The whole argument always seems to boil down to numbers.   Is moving 300 students from Westbrook to League City the only plan the district has for balancing intermediate school enrollment.  Is the SBAC not supposed to be addressing intermediate attendance zones also.    Two of the schools currently zoned for Clear Creek Intermediate were home-zoned for League City Intermediate just 2 years ago.  In fact, many of the kids in these two elementary schools live closer to League City than they do to Clear Creek Intermediate.  So, how does that make Clear Creek a more likely choice for their home school?  Are we trying to fix the past rezoning mistakes by "fixing" a program that is not broken - in fact it is already flourishing - in order to put a band aid on the old problem? 

  If the district is going to invest its human and financial capital in doing what is best for the programs and schools to thrive, then as a parent and a taxpayer I expect these decisions to be made with sufficient understanding of the situation, with sufficient cost/benefit analysis, with sufficient assessment of actual costs, with sufficient estimate of cost/benefit to students, with some attempt to talk to stakeholders, and with careful planning.  This is true especially in times when education funding is the way it exists today.  I do not see any of that being done in this situation.  You can't work through differences in academic offerings, fine arts offerings, etc. if those differences are not even adequately understood.

   

• CCISD Moderator 12/7/2011 12:00:00 AM

  WAVE DRAFT PROPOSAL

  To view the November 14, 2011 draft proposal presented to the Board of Trustees, please click here.
  
  This is still in draft form. The Clear Creek Independent School District will present a final proposal to the Board of Trustees on Monday, December 12, 2011 at 7 p.m. The final draft will include updates such as technology inventory and mini-course offerings and associated costs.

   

   

   

• MJS 12/7/2011 12:00:00 AM

  We understood that Westbrook Intermediate is over its capacity due to the WAVE program in that school, then we need find one school can fit WAVE program instead spliting it, all the intermediate schools except League City Intermediate are well utilized,since the League City can not fit the entire WAVE program, we should consider conver Clear Lake high 9th grade center to house the WAVE  program since Cleak Lake high its main compus can house his own students without over capacity,the WAVE students is keeping growing then the 9th grade center of Clear Lake has enough room  for it now and future ,and  this movement should  be no money issue and staff problem.

• A Current HS Student, Former Wave Reject 12/7/2011 12:00:00 AM

  You really need to understand where I am coming from before you argue against me. I am currently in 11th grade and rank 24 at CSHS and moving up each semester. To often the Clear Creek forgets that STUDENTS are educated, and go through the program and have the GREATEST understanding out of all the participants in the educational program. I say this because students are the ones being taught and are the only ones who understand the ramifcations of all the proposals.

  
  Now back to WAVE. I was originally an accelerated math student and placed within the same classrooms as the WAVE kids in Elementary school. When tested for WAVE, I was half a point off. Today many of my friends are peers are former WAVE students and I speak for all of them when I say that WAVE acceptance needs to be reformed because too many parents are able to force the child in through multiple testings and too many students that would be perfect for the WAVE program (such as me and several others I know) are not accepted.
  
  

  Too matters with the current issue. Place WAVE wherever needed, zone as needed but try to keep as many sudents within the same school as possible for the longest time possible should be a key priority. Having WAVE students seperated is a GOOD IDEA!!! WAVE students often grow a surperior attitude because they are told they are the smartest and are special. Keeping them seperated would hopefully lessen this belief that those who are/have been in WAVE are better. Also mix them as much as possible with other students to help them develop social skills that are often missing

  
  

• Former WAVE mom 12/7/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Hello all,
  
  

  The comments from everyone are thoughtful and well considered.  There is no one answer that will satisfy everyone, however, we must consider that we are in a growing area and that we can't continue to keep squeezing kids into one school indefinitely.  WAVE is unique, the students there love it and they do forge a bond.  How many other schools /programs have kids coming back year after year for a reunion?  The benefits of WAVE are great, the prep for high school coursework is unbeatable, my current 11th grader was more than prepared for her freshman year in high school, whereas I know that my current 8th grader (in Omega) is not  getting anywhere near the same rigor.   That's OK!  Different kids, different effort - all of us with more than one child have learned that lesson!  My oldest loved WAVE - she is sad to hear that it might change, but people - come on!  Change happens - I have a 5th grader who is deciding right now which school to attend next year - and honestly until now Westbrook was it hands down, now I'm not sure because one of the great things about it is all the kids coming together.   BUT, many kids in our district are very very capable, and I have no problem with letting my son go to his home-zoned school if that is his choice.  They keep their friends, they spend much less time in our cars and ultimately they go to high school - where - guess what?  no WAVE exists.  Personally, I wish there were WAVE classes at every campus, because having this "Super WAVE" at Westbrook has created this utopian campus that  now  must evolve into something else - whether current students/parents like it or not.
  
  

   

  
  

   

• WAVE student 12/8/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I go to WAVE and I'm a seventh grader there. I really don't want WAVE to be split because I've made a lot of new friends there. What happens to GT students is we get seperated from all of our elementary school friends and we are only left with the few other GT students we know from our elementary schools that choose to go to WAVE. Then, we meet a bunch of new friends. We all love being with our old friends and our new ones, and that's a lot of fun. But in eighth grade, we are all really sad because we get pulled away again from all we know, and we get put back with our old friends (that's a good thing). but the bad part is, most kids we meet aren't going to the same high schools as us because of how we all get mumble- jumbled up in our classes. So we then lose all those friends. So when you think about it, it really isn't fair to split us up earlier than we want to. And no, it won't affect all the future generations of WAVE, but they won't get the chance to meet some great new people. If you go to Westbrook Intermediate, when you walk through the front doors, the first thing you see are some signs on notebook paper on those doors saying "SAVE WAVE" with a surfer on a wave. No students want to be split from their friends. We all love being together at Westbrook, and it is really fun as is. PLEASE don't split us.

• WAVE Parent 12/9/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I read the Draft WAVE Replication Proposal, which appears to have been quickly cobbled together with a minimum amount of data, and almost no consideration of parent concerns.  It would have been nice to have seen more than one option seriously considered.
  
  Looking at the numbers that were provided, it is pretty obvious that CCISD sat on this problem for years, and still does not have a long term solution.  Splitting the WAVE in effect kicks the can down the road, since the proposed rezoning of some League City elementary schools and the addition of the second WAVE puts LCI at capacity, and leaves Westbrook near capacity.  In addition, given the anticipated RAZ and WAVE growth at Westbrook, it appears that CCISD always considered Westbrook a temporary home for the WAVE.  Again, CCISD had no plan.
  
  It is also interesting that the cost to move the wave has grown substantially.  On this very blog CCISD implies they will only need to "invest $200,000 in the expansion of WAVE."  Yet now we see a one-time cost of $727,000 in addition to the $200,000.  Unfortunately, we are not given much insight into these expenditures, as the descriptions lack explanation.  For example:  The proposal states that "no increase in  transportation is anticipated", yet the proposal shows FFE Transportation costs of $120,000.  There is a $150,000 cost for Curriculum.  Doesn't the curriculum already exist?  And what is the $350,000 facilities cost?
  
  The statement: "The WAVE budget has been decreasing for the past 5 years" should ring alarm bells for every future WAVE parent.  Yet the proposal does not address this issue at all.  Were parents even aware of that?
  
  In a very difficult fiscal environment, where is all of this money going to come from to split the WAVE?  CCISD has been decreasing the WAVE budget for 5 years.  Given the developing trust issues, what makes anyone think this won't continue to happen, and perhaps disproportionally for the not as good WAVE?
  
  If I presented this proposal, I would have been dressed down and set back to get my data straight and develop a solution for the long term problem.  Until there is a long term solution, that DOES include the consideration of a new STEM program, I would cap the WAVE and keep it where it is.  Come on CCISD, give us a real plan! 
  
  

  CCISD Moderator to  WAVE Parent

  Prior to Westbrook  Intermediate,  WAVE was housed at Webster Intermediate.   WAVE is the only elective program in CCISD that does not have an enrollment cap.

  You have not read the proposal correctly. The $727,000 is the cost for a new magnet. Duplicating WAVE at a second location is $236,535. Yes, the curriculum and the majority of the staff already exist. These are among the core reasons CCISD is proposing a second location for WAVE versus starting a new magnet program.

  All department budgets have been decreasing for the past five years. This is not an anomaly for WAVE. The proposal recommends the WAVE budget remain at is today as well as a second equal budget for the new location.

  If the Board takes no action at all, it will cost the District $100,000 next year to maintain WAVE at Westbrook Intermediate. The growth will require an additional portable building and a new teacher. CCISD’s operating budget is based on the number of students enrolled in the district. The per-student funding level is established by the State. CCISD receives $5,340.00 per student. Staffing makes up 86% of CCISD’s budget. Regardless if WAVE is at one or two locations, the staffing ratios are dependent on the number of students at a location. The District uses a staffing ratio of 150 students per teacher at the secondary level. This ratio applies to WAVE.  If the Board approves the District’s proposal, students and staff would move to the new location. The District is proposing to hire a WAVE Liaison, WAVE Basics teacher and additional fine arts staff to the second location. The $160,000 for the additional staff would come through the District’s attrition model where historically 200-250 of the District’s 5,000 employees retire or resign annually. The proposed $36,535 operating budget for the second location will be a reoccurring cost that is above and beyond what the District currently has budgeted. Technology to open a second location is estimated to be a $40,000 one-time cost. If approved by the Board of Trustees, this would likely come from the Capital fund. This fund is a reserve the District has for capital improvements such as technology replacements, carpeting, HVAC systems, etc.

  An enrollment cap is an option the Board would consider.

   

• Parent of 2 WAVErs & 2 other GT's 12/9/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Thank you for posting the proposal that will be presented on Monday.  Just to clarify, the 7th graders take the real SAT, not the PSAT.  Thank you for outlining the logistics, finances, and timeline.
  

• WAVE Parent 12/11/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I find it interesting that no new comments have been released since the proposal was uploaded to the blog.  After reading it, I can see why.  The proposal is lacking data, is poorly thought out, is difficult to interpret, and has no long term solution. However, it is clear that the addition of the second WAVE moves "LCI close to [the] capacity of 1,040"; and is only a temporary fix for Westbrook.  Is the CCISD plan to relocate kids every year?
  
  
  The proposal is also misleading, especially when comparing the cost of replicating WAVE with the cost of a new STEM magnet.  The costs for the STEM program are lumped under big categories, with no explanation of what is behind the cost.  Still the chart begs many questions.  For example, why would there be one time costs of $340K for Facilities for a STEM magnet, but not for a WAVE? Wouldn't a STEM program be moving into an existing school?  What Facility and Renovation improvements would the STEM program receive that the second WAVE would not?  And what Technology considerations are being given to a STEM program that are not being giving to the second WAVE.
   
  Given the need for STEM in this country, can't grants be obtained perhaps from large corporations in this area to help with this funding?  Didn't Systems Go give a proposal to CCISD that identified partial funding?  What has CCISD done to pursue these types of grants?
  
  
  Also, the idea that a second WAVE would not impact the Science Magnet Program is without merit.  Seabrook is one of the furthest schools from LCI, and while the distance may be shorter than that to Westbrook, the commute time may very well be longer (we haven't seen the bus route yet).   In addition, the idea that no one time costs are needed to improve the Facilities and Technology is a big red flag that the two WAVE programs will not be equal.  Given this, some parents will make the decision to put their children in Omega, rather than the new WAVE, and Omega kids and Science Magnet kids take the same classes, some of which are at or near capacity.
  
  
  My last question is where is the $200K coming from?  It does not appear that the budget is increasing, so who is going to be "Peter" to pay this "Paul"?
  
  

  CCISD Moderator to WAVE Parent

  Shifting attendance boundaries is unfortunately a component of a fast growing school district. No, we do not plan to shift boundaries every year. The last boundary committee met in 2009 to adjust boundaries in anticipation of new schools.

  Comments posted to this blog are not automatic. It requires action on our part. There is no one in the office between Friday evening and Sunday. Please see previous Moderator post from last Friday. 

  CCISD’s operating budget is based on the number of students enrolled in the district. The per-student funding level is established by the State. CCISD receives $5,340.00 per student. Staffing makes up 86% of CCISD’s budget. Regardless if WAVE is at one or two locations, the staffing ratios are dependent on the number of students at a location. The District uses a staffing ratio of 150 students per teacher at the secondary level. This ratio applies to WAVE.  If the Board approves the District’s proposal, students and staff would move to the new location. The District is proposing to hire a WAVE Liaison, WAVE Basics teacher and additional fine arts staff to the second location. The $160,000 for the additional staff would come through the District’s attrition model where historically 200-250 of the District’s 5,000 employees retire or resign annually. The proposed $36,535 operating budget for the second location will be a reoccurring cost that is above and beyond what the District currently has budgeted. Technology to open a second location is estimated to be a $40,000 one-time cost. If approved by the Board of Trustees, this would likely come from the Capital fund. This fund is a reserve the District has for capital improvements such as technology replacements, carpeting, HVAC systems, etc.

   

• Disappointed WAVE Parent 12/12/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I am very sad to hear about the decision to spit WAVE tonight.  What most bothers me about the decision is the timing:  these kids are in the middle of exam week and are finding out tonight their program is being changed drastically.  Would have thought the district would have had sense to take this into consideration and tabled the decision for later.  I really thought with hearing the input tonight they would have at least taken a moment to rethink the options from what was said...but as I suspect the District made up their minds LONG before this was presented to the public.  Asking for input was just for show.  And that is truly how many WAVE families feel.  

• lance Evans 12/13/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Wave splinting to 2 campuses would really damper the spirits of the wave students that are already at Westbrook int. they would have to get to know the students that maybe they did not know so well. A even more serious problem is that best friends could be separated. One campus just for wave is the best option because, The WAVE students would not be bothered in electives and outer places by regular student. as well the regular students would not feel left out about them having a seventh period and we don't.
  

• CCISD Moderator 12/13/2011 12:00:00 AM

  The Board of Trustees for the Clear Creek Independent School District unanimously approved a second location for WAVE at League City Intermediate.

   

  Parents addressed the Board Monday night, many advocating closing either League City Intermediate or Clear Creek Intermediate and moving WAVE in its entirety to one of those locations. These were two of six options presented to the Board.

   

  None of the board members would carry a motion to close a school to its community, citing a similar proposal in 2004 when parents favored moving WAVE to Space Center Intermediate,   before the Board approved moving WAVE to Westbrook. The Board was also not in favor of placing a cap on WAVE.

   

  The focus for CCISD remains on our students. The administration will form a planning committee of educators, parents and students to best prepare for opening a second location. The District is excited about the opportunities this presents for both WAVE and regular attendance zone students at Westbrook and eventually at League City Intermediate.

   

  Thank you to all the parents, students and community members who participated in this forum.

  Since a decision was made in regard to WAVE, the forum will close on Wednesday, December 14, 2011 at 3:30 pm.

• Decisions, decisions 12/13/2011 12:00:00 AM

  What can we learn from this situation?
  
  
  1) The district did not have a communicated strategic plan (including this split) for serving the GT population. If this did exist, much of the loss of goodwill could have been avoided.
  
  
  2) The district had this individual decision in the works for some time without communicating with stakeholders as evidenced by visits to WAVE last year by the League City principal among other things. Their tactical choices resulted in a win (press release over Thanksgiving holiday, "allowing input" to superintendent after the fact, quick decision over busy holiday season, selective information provided to board, no district research on alternatives, etc). 
  
  
  3) We all have to evaluate those tactical choices against our own ethical compass.
  
  
  4) The GT population has become complacent about services because we were happy with WAVE. We can not depend on the board or the district to look after the needs of our children. We need to make the sacrifice to be involved in every committee in the district so we know what opportunities exist. We need to field candidates for school board who will look after ALL children (not just WAVE, of course).
  
  
  5) The district has made their decision, now it is time to make OUR decisions. We have choices - private school (for some with the resources), home school GT groups (for some with the time and talent), improving and supporting OMEGA or sticking by WAVE and supporting this decision. Whatever decision we make as individuals, we need to move on in a positive direction for the sake of our children. There is no wrong personal choice on this topic by a parent and individual choices will be different depending on the needs of your child.
  
  
  6) The district does not care which choice we make. If we don't support WAVE and it ceases to exist, that is just one program they can cross of their list of worries. 

• Misunderstood 12/13/2011 12:00:00 AM

  As expected, and as shown repeatedly in the past, CCISD had made up its mind already and any solicitation of opinion from parents was just PR.   
  
  GT parents have been begging for a separate WAVE campus for years.  However, CCISD thinks they know better than us what is best for our children.  I understand homeschoolers a little more every time this happens.
  
  I have a dream that someday there might be one campus to house WAVE and either the science magnet as it currently exists or a new magnet program.  All under one roof, all sharing technology.  Separate programs with separate staff who share resources as needed. 

• SMH 12/13/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I had expected the approval that came last night, but not in such a strong action by the Board.  They spent one hour listening to prents who thought they had a say in the decision, they didn't.  Then they spent another 30 minutes trying to defend the desision they were about to make.  I am not against the split entirely, but feeling like we had no say from the very beginning was disheartening.  I truely felt that my time last night was wasted and I should have been home with my family.  i think they made the parents even more upset because nobody likes to be dupped.  The Board should have said in a blog that they were ready to move forward with this expansion and not much would change their minds.  They were set walking into that meeting, but made every parent there feel like they could sway the decision or stall it.  Not the case. 
  
   It is too bad that we, as parents were not invited to participate when this idea was formulatng months or years ago.
  
  I am courious to know how many 8th graders are really going to go to LCI? 

• bob 12/13/2011 12:00:00 AM

  stupid

• Moving Forward 12/13/2011 12:00:00 AM

  Okay, since the decision is made then let's get moving forward so that the "eventually" for LCI WAVE exciting oppotunities the moderator mentioned can happen as quickly as possible.  It's going to take a lot of work and dedication from everyone to make those eventual oppotunities occur for our children that will be there next year and I know that those WAVE parents, students and teachers going that direction have the work ethic to make it happen.  There is certainly justifiable disappointment in the air but focusing on our losses will only make it harder to reach those opportunities so let's focus on having as much as possible available to those LCI bound children on that very first day of school.  I know it sounds like a pep talk but it's our most beneficial choice from where we are with the decision that's been made.  So, to our moderator, what can we do starting today (not later) to make those eventual opportunities a reality the quickest?  Point us in the direction and let's get it done?  
  
  CCISD Moderator to Moving Forward:
  I would again like to express my sincere appreciation to each person who took the time to participate in this discussion. This is our first blog that has generated a response! I hope you will return and participate in the future.
  
  What do we do moving forward?
  
  First and foremost, continue to be an advocate for your child and continue to be involved in the district’s progress. I realize many felt left-out of this process, and if there is a lesson learned on our end it is this-
  Our parents and students are the most valuable resources we have in this school district. Without your involvement we would not have successful programs such as WAVE. We can and will improve in the area of parental-involvement on critical issues facing the Clear Creek Independent School District.
  The District will create an expansion planning team in January. This team will consist of parents, students and educators to ensure both programs are successful. The superintendent is committed to investing the human and financial capital needed to meet district and parent expectations. This committee is charged with providing timely updates to the Board of Trustees on its progress.
  
  As many of you know, our coordinator of Gifted and Talented programs is leaving this week. (This had nothing to do with the WAVE expansion). Ms. Taylor will be greatly missed. The District is filling this position and has also moved it to a director-level. This position will also encompass advanced academics. This is a critical position for the district and for parents of Gifted and Talented students as he or she will be looking at the K-12 vertical alignment of GT offerings.
  If you want to help shape the vision and future of GT offerings, please consider getting involved in the District Education Improvement Council (DEIC). This group of teachers, parents and community members work alongside the administration to create the long-range and near-term plans for the district. This is a great forum for parents of GT students to be involved in the district decision-making process.
  

• CCISD Moderator 12/14/2011 12:00:00 AM

  While some on this blog have expressed dismay with the way the board meeting was conducted this month, the board procedures are sound and endorsed by the Texas Association of School Boards. The school board as an entity may not deliberate in closed session or at any other time unless it is during a public meeting. The Board of Trustees is the governing body of the district. Each member is elected by the public. Board members receive regular and timely updates from the Superintendent on proposals, action items and other pertinent activities of the district. The Board did receive feedback from the community, both electronically and in-person. It is not uncommon for school boards to hold a public hearing on the evening of potential action. In November the board held two public hearings on two items that were voted on later that evening. In August the board held a public hearing on the budget and took action during the same meeting.
  
  One way to be further involved in the decision-making process is to attend school board meetings. The Board holds two meetings per month. One is called a ‘workshop’ where administration updates the board on programs or introduces new proposals for consideration. In this format, the board and administration actively engage in a dialogue in order for board members to familiarize themselves with a topic and hear questions/concerns from fellow board members. The WAVE proposal was presented during a workshop and so was the CREATE magnet proposal. Generally no action is taken during the workshop.

   

• From WIS WAVE to LCI WAVE 12/14/2011 12:00:00 AM

  I have to with agree "Moving Forward". It's time to make it happen.  All our WAVE students, parents, and teachers can ask for at this point is that this transition becomes as painless as possible and that the resources are there for our future location to succeed! As pointed out previously, our WAVE communuity has the work ethic to make this happen.  My son, who is in 6th grade WAVE this year was disappointed of the change, however we have to focus on the positive aspects of the situation.  Best Wishes to everyone in the WAVE community.  My heart goes out to all of you!  

• rkb 12/14/2011 12:00:00 AM

  While the vote has been taken, I want to comment on a couple of issues.
  
  I would respectfully submit that few parents would consider the speed with which this has been put through and the level of community input accepted to be appropriate if it were an issue that affected their children.  The district is now talking about putting together a task force of teachers and parents to figure out how to make this work, but in truth, there should have been a task force formed months before such a major decision was made. 
  
  There have been comments suggesting there is a sense of entitlement amongst GT parents.  As a parent of GT students, I do not think my children are better than other children nor more worthy of receiving an appropriate education.  (Nor have I heard this from other GT parents; indeed, many have both GT and non-GT children.)  However, I do think that my children are as worthy of an appropriate education as other children, and the fact is that their needs are often not met in our neighborhood elementary and intermediate schools. One advantage of such a large district should be a greater ability to have magnet schools to better meet these educational needs.
  
  

  It is not "suggestive language" to point out that breaking up WAVE is what is in the proposal. When you divide a magnet school's teachers and resources and force students currently at the magnet school to move, then you are splitting the magnet school, not duplicating it. The WAVE program functions as a unit and is very much a community. All the students in it (currently 750) are affected, not just those forced to move. It is disturbing to hear such concern voiced for the displacement of other students in the district while dismissing the effect of this proposal on WAVE students. Multiple board members stated that they would not want to be the one to go tell LCI that they are "closing" their school, and I completely understand that.  But they don't seem bothered to tell WAVE that they are ripping it in two.  It could be argued that students from LCI would actually be better off in a larger school which presumably could offer more courses, sections of courses, etc.  This alone doesn't mean that would be the right course of action, but it would be nice to see some acknowledgement of how huge of an effect this decision has for WAVE.  Again, I don't think my children are any more important than other children in the district, but I do think they are as important, and splitting the WAVE program does far more than "move 300 kids".

  Finally, regarding the comments that all of our schools "meet or exceed state and national standards" and the oft-repeated view that GT kids are "bright kids" who will do "just fine" no matter what.  Meeting state and national standards says little to nothing about whether a school is meeting GT students' educational needs. GT students do not necessarily do "just fine" in whatever school situation they are in, and "just fine" isn't a worthy goal. When children are sitting in classes where they already know the material, they are not learning. When children are never challenged, they do not learn how to handle challenges. Many GT children find themselves not knowing how to cope when, sooner or later, they are in a situation where they really are challenged. This is something they need to learn while they are younger, and they are learning this at WAVE. Former WAVE students will tell you that their years at WAVE made a difference in their lives well beyond high school: it does matter. Education is not merely about acquiring knowledge, but rather, about learning how to think and how to learn.

  Those of us who know WAVE and care about our students will, of course, do our very best to make this work, even though we believe the district has just tried to fix something that was not broken.  I will be only too delighted if we are wrong and both programs flourish.