The Next Generation:

March 19, 20, &22 Open Houses

What model or models do you have an interest in?  What do you see as the strengths of the model(s)?

Thanks for taking time with me at Centennial Hall to review all the high school options.  I like the idea of a 9/10 closed campus and an 11/12 campus.  Smaller schools with kids their own age may help keep more kids in school—it will be smaller bridges to cross from 8th grade to 9th  grade and then 10th to 11th.  This also solves the sports and activities concern of having 2 high school teams competing for same community financial support.  I also think this will allow kids to have more opportunities to sports/activities.  I stated that I though some of the ideas were too career oriented and that kids in high school should not be concerned about what they are going to do with the rest of their life—they need exposure to many opportunities. Thanks to you and all who are dedicating so much time and energy to this important issues.  You inspired me to write a letter to the editor requesting the Legislature to provide full funding for our classrooms.

I prefer the two comprehensive schools, with strong content areas—much like the “personalized schools.”  I’d like to see options for “tracts” for kids depending on abilities and interests. College courses, tech courses, vocational courses, etc…

I’m intrigued by the 9-10 /11-12 model because of the developmental differences & focus these two groups display.  Keeps the city/school population unified.  I do like the idea of incorporating some vo-tech/technology opportunities put forth in the academy model.  We might be able to hook more kids for whom college is not the answer because kids can pursue their interests.  I see there are problems to settle with distribution of teachers for exploratories and advanced or remedial classes that would be a part of any school.  Teacher perspective:  Cross discipline, “Phoenix-type” models are a burn-out for teachers.  It involves excessive planning with no financial incentive.

Two reformed comprehensive high schools—with this model the high school students, mixing us (high school students) with middle school students or even elementary school students is  horrible idea.  We will have to sacrifice the strong SE power of the Crimson Bears, but to do something to possibly screw your child’s future just because of sports team…

Model 1—We liked the four year advisory.  Kids get lost in these large schools—one advisor for all four years is a real plus.  Five different options with each school having a small school feel due to the 400 student limit.  Model 3—We liked the idea of focusing on the developmental differences between 9/10 and 11/12th graders.  We liked the idea of letting the 9th/10th graders have access to lots of activities with their peers.

9-10 11-12 model or 8-9 10-12 model.  Two campuses, one school.

I do not think the One School, Two Campuses is a good idea.  We don't want the campuses split in two nor the students divided up into two schools.  The students gain a great deal by going to school with older and younger students.  It would also make the town more decisive than it already is with the "Town vs Valley" mentality.  Our community needs to come together for the good of the entire community and if these two schools are set up properly, they could be the catalyst for that to happen.
Also, the decision regarding the High School must NOT be based on "sports".  For too long the basketball and athletic programs have been in the forefront of the decision making process for our High School.  It is time to put academics in their rightful place to determine what it is the best interest of the entire student body, not the just the few who play basketball.  If the decisions are made based on what is academically right for both schools, the sports programs will also be in their proper perspective for the good of the entire community. I hope that students, their parents and counselors will be allowed to choose which school is the best school for the student to achieve his/her most potential and not have "boundaries" set up for the two schools. I believe that whatever is the final decision, the schools should be small classrooms with a counselor assigned to a student for the entire four years of High School .  This is important so that the counselor really gets to know the student and make decisions with parents as to what is best for that student. Much more needs to be done to have classes with other skill sets than just what students need in college.  There must be opportunities for students to become apprentices, be prepared for a business or vocational school, etc. PLEASE listen to the teachers and former teachers who have been involved with our schools in the community.  They are an excellent resource as they know exactly what the problems are and have many good suggestions that need to considered during your decision making process.  They can discuss and articulate this much better than I can as a parent, grandparent.  We need to support our teachers much more than we do so that we can keep "quality" teachers in this school district.
Thank you for considering these comments.

I’m very interested in the one school/two campuses proposal  I have long felt that 14 and 18 year olds do not belong together.  There is a vast developmental difference in that age range and there are advantages to not exposing kids to issues they are not quite mature enough to deal with.  I am also much in favor of closed campus for the younger students.  They need social time, but it does not have to be off campus.  I also feel the access to UAS for upper grade levels would be great.  I like the continued sense of one community high school.  Due to the necessity of travel fundraising for this I feel one set of sports teams is the most appropriate.  I am also intrigued by possibility of the intramural options to help continue athletic activity amongst students who are not able to play to varsity level.

Two comprehensive high schools.

None of the five models really excited me.  I don’t like the idea of choosing which school to attend.  I really believe that this will create one school being more elite over the other.  The parents who are involved and really care about their child’s education will be much more involved and push for more things.  I’m afraid children whose parents aren’t involved will end up in a school that may end up in a school that may become “less.”  Also, most of the five models seem geared towards careers after high school.  I believe that most high schoolers don’t know what they want to do with the rest of their lives.  These proposals seem intense and quite focused on singe career choices.  I believe it is best for our youth to be exposed to many different career choices and t be able to try classes in many different areas to see what really interests them.  If I had to choose one proposal, I would probably choose #3.  I like having a closed campus for the younger grades.

Proposal 3 seems to make the most sense to utilize the new space and to provide for the students’ needs.  In this way, sports could be focused at one or the other facilities, depending on a particular sport.  Concerns with whatever proposals that are selected:  1) Transportation between campuses.  City buses are mentioned as a way to get students back and forth.  Could routes be streamlined so that time that should be spent in school isn’t wasted by traveling back and forth?  If this is the case, why are we doing this and planning for  LESS instruction?  2) Would the high school experience be diminished by having two campuses and not having one place for the entire four years?  3) Downtown seems like it has far more classrooms  than Thunder Mountain.  3) In this model, how do you involve freshmen/sophomores in sports programs—how do you decide were practices are held?

Two reformed comprehensive high schools—Juneau needs two small high schools.  All grades in EACH.  Juneau needs two schools so that the educational opportunities will be equal with smaller classes—more attention to students by teachers.  As for sports, Juneau needs two schools so that more students can play. It is not necessary to have the been teams, All State Stars—It is VERY important for students to have the chance to play even though they may not excel.

My wife and myself VERY strongly support proposal #3.  We have two children—one in 2nd grade and one in 4th grade…so we have deep interest in the new high school.  We agree with all the statements in the “characterized  by “ box for #3.  We also hope you couple proposal #4 with #3 in the 11th and 12th grades only.  In the 9th and 10th grades, kids need a broader based education as a foundation for all students and as a foundation for which academy to enter in 11th and 12th grades.  Please, PLEASE offer a skilled trades academy as an alternative path for success for kids who don’t want to go to college.  Also, open up a dialogue w/CBJ Transit to provide 15 minute bus service at peak hours.  Also, with one school and two campuses, do we really need two principals?  That could cause unnecessary internal friction.

Personalized Schools:  Positive- choice and focus.  Negative- balancing enrollment—most popular choices—kids and friends from younger years losing daily contact.
Academic and Career Academies:  Positive- some vocational ed  Negative- I worry about homogenizing it too much—may not provide enough actual skills to kids who need to be able to earn a decent wage and support themselves upon graduation.  My personal concern is that students who will not be continuing in formal education following high school should be able to support themselves comfortably.

The proposal I like the LEAST is #3.  Having kids “running between” campuses because their needs are best met between the two is not desirable, disjointed & safety issues (inclement weather) are issues.  The proposals I like the BEST are #1 and #4.  That said, the components I find most important no matter what is chosen are:  small classrooms/learning communities, an advisory community as a liaison between students, counselors, teachers, and parents, “schooling” according to students’ learning styles with a choice in projects according to student interest, more opportunities for student involvement in clubs, activities, and athletics 9NOT one school).  I would like to see students be allowed to learn at the time of day when they learn the best (morning person vs. afternoon).  Ninth grade community more separate and monitored.  Carrier and tech programs more valued as education.  Yaakoosge continues but also integrates the Home Bridge kids program more so as to help bride the gap between home school and mainstream schooling.  Thank you for the opportunity to ask our questions and input.

I like the idea of academic and career academies, as long as kids don’t have to be locked into one academy.  One school/two campuses feature seems very appealing in terms of addressing developmental issues of students and providing age-appropriate campus features (open/closed campus; close to UAS, etc.)  I wish it were possible to have 9/10 and 11/12 and 2 sets of athletics though these seem to be mutually exclusive.  I would like to have room for Montessori education in the new school.  High commitment to providing highest quality curriculum in safe, respectable environment is most important to me.

I’m not really knowledgeable in this whole process.  I can see pros and cons in each proposal, and can’t come up with a supporting thought for one or the other.  However, I don’t see any inclusion of the Montessori School(s) System.  Is there a plan for this?  Another thought that occurs to me frequently is the lack of financial teaching in schools.  With money such a hugely important issue, why isn’t overall money management taught for kids to make decisions that work for them both short-term and long-term.

The models with smaller learning communities seem to me to provide the best opportunity for all involved—students, teachers, and families.  For teachers: it appears to provide opportunities for interaction among themselves that could provide for professional development and support as well as relationships with their students and their families which could have significant benefits for all concerned.  For students—the opportunity for their education to seem more relevant to them and the opportunity to be known and cared for as a unique, worthwhile person.  For families—the opportunity, because of the smaller size and consistency of the learning community, to be more comfortable and involved in their child’s high school experience.

One school, two campuses.  It doesn’t separate the community and all the children get to meet up at the high school.  No rivalry between the 2 schools in sports and such.  We live “out the road” so the school would be closer part of the time.  It is close to UAS which is good for the upper levels.

A combination of these models that would serve students best would look like this:  1. Single high school—two campuses.  2.  Each campus contains SLCs, specialized or career clusters to reinforce strengths of the area (downtown—voc ed, theater enhanced program;  valley—college connections, language, music perhaps)  3.  Juneau would retain single sports teams but could enhance other activities to include more kids (esp. intramurals) as needed.  4.  Open enrollment so students could select course that fits them best.  5.  Buses between schools could run every ½ hour to transport kids.

This is a difficult task.  Because so much is dependent upon the motivation and capability of teachers, it is difficult to discern how these models will actually function; what they will look and feel like.  Elements most desired:  Students exposed to multiple learning and teaching styles over the course of 4 years.  Integrated, multi-disciplinary learning for blocks of time [NOT project learning ALL of the time—SOME of the time].  Offer range of options in class selection, e.g., students most interested in science field also have access to art or welding.  I do NOT support career track choices at age 14.  I support RIGOR for all students, and challenging curriculum, along lines suggested in “Academic and Career Academies.”  Research shows MORE students do better with a challenging, rigorous (often referred to as “college prep”) curriculum. (Ed Trust)  Student projects, papers, research, addressing real life issues and context.  Open enrollment.  Academies with different STRENGTHS at each campus, capitalizing on unique attributes and ready access to resources, such as voc tech support in town.

I like the idea of having one school and two campuses.  But I would like to see 9-12 in a school system so that you could maximize the variety of students in the high school.  I am an incoming freshman and my sister is one now.  She tells me how much help it is to have older students at the school to give out tips on good classes and teachers.  I wouldn’t want my high school experience to be limited to my grade, the one above and the one below.  Meeting new people and seeing their views is a part of high school that we shouldn’t neglect.

I prefer proposal #5.  Leave JDHS alone and pull out special programs and put them into TMHS.  Proposals #1 and #4 do not make clear where AP classes would be located.  I see this as a weakness for these two, otherwise, I would choose these options second.

I think the strength of the models are those that involve student CHOICE—no boundaries.  I think the strongest for me is probably the 2 comprehensive reformed high schools that are made up of SLCs and have a senior project—maybe that’s a combination of the two?  I don’t think we’re ready for small schools within the school—that will make it hard for people to be able to move between programs—which I think will be important.  SLCs with most of the day in the SLC and a few classes out of the SLC will provide ours students with the ability to do some of the myriad things we as a community have been used to doing.  SLCs will force students into making some choices, and having more options as a part of their day will help. *Advisories! *Smaller groupings *Focused/Theme-based SLCs

I think the end result should be one school two campuses in combination with academic and career academies.  I think it is important to foster environments that address both developmental and academic needs while at the same time allowing students the exposure to apply classroom teachings in a practical manner.  I love the ideas of career academies and giving students the exposure to careers in JUNEAU.  Please consider Yaakoosge in these models as well.  Some characteristics I think should be ABSOLUTELY kept in whatever model is chosen:  closed campus, variety of course offerings (with real world application), preparing ALL students for post-secondary education.

I am most interested in proposal #3 splitting 9/10 and 11/12 between the two schools.  Developmentally this is the best proposal which is very important.  Maintains smaller learning environments which is a huge priority for me.  Doesn’t pit downtown vs. valley.  Keeps diversity by having all kids in a grade together.  Doesn’t stigmatize kids by having such a defined track (i.e. smart kids vs. dumb).  Negative is it doesn’t allow for larger sports program—continues to limit opportunity for kids to be involved in sports.

I don’t like anything that segregates students into very segregated tracks, particularly the concept of physically segregating the students.  This is the European/Asian system which puts intense pressure on very young students to perform at a high level to qualify for the upper tack and stigmatizes those in the lower or technical tracks.  I’m a college professor.  I took woodshop and other voc-tech courses and benefited greatly from them. I was in advanced classes and in classes where I rubbed elbows with students that weren’t as advanced.  The community at the school and after graduation benefited from the student integration.  The best model presented is the split between 9/10 and 11/12.  This preserves the community of peers, yet allows a smaller school.

Personally, I like the 9/10 and 11/12 split.  Is best given Juneau’s unique situation.  I know of no other remote community with two high schools.  They may have one or they may have more than two.  Therefore, two schools could be very divisive on cultural, economic, geographic funding issues.  Let’s keep Juneau one!

Proposal #1 and #3.  Both encourage smaller learning centers and encourage more interaction between student and teacher.  I encourage the focus on 9th grade success in Proposal #3.  Extracurricular activities will cross over programs and allow for a continuity and camaraderie between programs-no one school “has’ and one “has not.”

Proposal #3—Emphasis on the 9th and 10th grade.  The middle schools have gone back to separate 6th grade sections.  I think this should also be done for the high school level.  It gives 9/10 grades a chance for a better start.

Proposal #3—closed campus for 9/10   open campus for 11/12, emphasis on the next couple of years for 11/12, given emphasis for CORE classes for the 9/10 and further educational planning for 11/12.

One school, two campuses.

Stop building the new school. Convert it to a pool/community center.  Invest in the existing building.

First choice:  Personalized Schools.  Second choice:  One School, Two Campuses.  Graduation rates, parent involvement, life skills:  writing resumes, budgets, reading contracts, impacts of decisions made.  Will costs of transportation and/or sports take away money that can be used for education?

Three facilities, Multiple Choices [#5] allows most choice with academic and career academies possible within that model.  These are the choices I would like to have available for my son.

Two comprehensive high schools sound great.  A traditional model with smaller student bodies would help students stay connected, especially if both schools had complete art, music, and athletic programs.

I would like to see two separate traditional high schools with two separate sports programs.  The “reformed” comprehensive model sounds to me a lot like the current DZ model that appears to not be working.  Maybe I am mistaken or unclear on that matter.  I do however like the idea of having the children head in a direction such as “early scholars” or a trade profession and access to peers and educators to help them along the way.

Some of my concerns:  I am not in favor of #2 which is two separate high schools.  #1- my concern is tracking, going into a “career path, i.e. High Tech, Early College, or Science/math at a young age—9th grade.  Once a student is in, can they change their mind?  #2- This interests me.  I like the fact of a 9/10 and 11/12, a closed campus for the 9/10.  But what types of academic changes will there be fore this proposal?  #4 sounds really great too.  This MAY BE my top choice.  **Additional concerns:  Are the current teachers prepared for such a DRASTIC change in the district?

I believe the career based academies and school plans that split kids by their interest in one particular field would be the worst idea for Juneau kids.  I am a freshman and there are so many opportunities out there that I would not be able to explore in either of these learning environments.  I have no idea what I want to do with my life and if I choose a career pathway when I am thirteen years old I am shutting so many doors.  What do I do if I have a passionate interest in music, math, science, and language?

These are not PROPOSALS.  They do not address HOW the schools operates and delivers.  There are claims of certain proposals providing certain things, but no explanation of how those things will be actually provided.  E.g.  Proposal #5 claims to provide “numerous electives and extra curricular programs!”  This is a budget questions—if you don’t have sufficient $$ you won’t be able to offer numerous electives, etc.  Plus, ALL of these proposals need to offer numerous electives and extra-curriculars.  Here are the strengths that our high schools MUST support:  1.  Rigorous academics that are relevant to each kid.  One size fits few.  Can’t generalize that “all 9th graders need x.”  All kids need individual ed. plans that respond to their academic and social growth needs.  2.  Choice:  Kids need to be heard.  They need to love learning.  This is done by letting them find and follow their passions.  With more than one school, kids need to choose where they want to attend, based on what is offered.  They need to WANT to be at school.  Don’t lock them in with closed campus.  This is fundamentally disrespectful to them.  3.  Connected to Reality:  Studies and social life need to be connected to the STUDENTS’ realities.  This means addressing real issues for the kids—like sports.  You cannot have a valid proposal without realistically looking at the issue of sports and activities.  If the academic programs are going to be realistic, then they need to grow from interests of the kids and community.  Partnerships, internships for ALL.  4.  Help kids see their future:  All proposals should give graduates a post-secondary plan (#1).  All of the proposals have “buzz words” that are essential to all proposals.  They are not unique to one proposal.  E.g. #4 “will meet state education and industry standard”  Duh…They all will/must.  What about the drop-outs?  How will each of these decrease the k ids we lose, and connect/enrich the MANY who are barely hanging in there?  Splitting 9-10 and 11-12 is contrary to serving individual needs and interests.  What do you do with the 12th grader who needs 9th grade math?  What about the 11th grader who decides to play an instrument?

9/10  closed campus, town, technical business (Bill Ray Center, University Tech Bldg)  11/12 open? Campus, valley, UAS, sports  Fresh ideas to teach students.  Re-evaluate number of staff, central office for $$$ to be saved.  Both principals must work together for programs, sports, etc.  On the side—There is no reason not to have music and art teachers below high.  No rent for schools—no wings in TMHS.

As an advanced student at JDHS, I feel that option 3 (one school, two campuses) is the best.  By keeping classes of students together, you allow students to stay with their friends and have enough students for advanced level classes.  It also allows the sports teams to remain competitive in the state, something that is important for many students.  It would be good to switch the campuses though, with JDHS as the 11/12 school.  This would make for a smoother transition and would allow the upper classes to use the better gym and vocational facilities.  Thanks for listening to my thoughts.

One school, two campuses. As a person that works in the school system, I think two campuses is a great idea.  I am a big supporter of closed campus for 9th/10th graders.  I think the 11th/12th graders should go to JDHS and 9th/10th to TMHS.

I am a retired teacher and parent of five graduates of J-DHS.  I believe proposal #3 (one school, two campuses) is the best alternative.  This would provide less crowding, school unity, integrated classes, single administration, single sports team, and single other extra-curricula activities).  I suggest all other proposals will promote divisiveness.  Juneau, though a city, is really a “small town” and the memories of current and forecast sizes of student bodies are in my view insufficient to effectively and/or efficiently run a variety of separate “schools.”  I strongly support more program options within a single system, and support more learning emphasis in other areas besides “college-bound” academics.

One school two campuses and two other proposals such as Three Facilities and Academic Career Academies.  Working a solution to having athletic teams could be a reality under those options.  Having only one school be a member of ASAA would solve the activities dilemma.  A lack of money and venues is a reason why teams in ASAA at two schools will not work.  Please hold a community forum on JUST ACTIVITIES before a final suggestion is made to the school board.

I like the idea of continuing one JDHS school—Proposal #3.  Strengths:  One school-community support would be consistent—(I fear combativeness in our community if the school is divided along geographical lines.)  I also support having SMALLER LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS within these 2 schools.  This is very important.  It would be very beneficial if these smaller environments were based upon areas of student interest.  Hopefully, there would be opportunities for students interested in vocational pursuits (I.e. NOT college – but opportunities to work with plumbers, electricians, etc.)  I support having sports/art classes/music classes available to more students;  however, I can’t imagine the town of Juneau supporting two basketball teams, two soccer teams, etc.  Given that we live on N. Douglas (past Eaglecrest) I hope that there will be some flexibility in establishing the start time.  A “zero hour” class would be very difficult for an 11 or 12 grader to attend.  Maybe this could be part of the flexibility in adopting “smaller learning environments.”

I like the model of two schools with 9/10 at one school and 11/12 at the other, with one school, two campuses.  I think JDHS would be the more appropriate campus for 11/12 rather than the proposal of Thunder Mountain.  The existing voc/ed opportunities are already in place downtown, and are more appropriate at the 11/12 level.  Also, varsity sports are more typically 11/12 and the JDHS gym will be the best gym, easiest access.  Thanks.

The most urgent need for JDS is the integration across ethnic, gender, and economic distinctions.  Promising personal choice that involves parents and families from K through 12 means a change from “teaching subjects” to “inspiring and teaching students.  Thus, Personalized Schools of Proposal #1 should go forward.  Respecting developmental stages is a part of personalized education.  Thus, the “one-school, two campuses” idea of Proposal #3 should be adopted.  It lends itself to avoiding more school sports competition and expanding physical activities through intramural sports.  Thank you for this opportunity.

I can see a combination of the “One School Two Campuses” and “Juneau’s Academic and Career Academies. ”working well together, with career academics having an upper and lower level rather than being location dependent.  I understand that this likely means that teachers commute between the two campuses.  I think it is important to make sure 9th graders stay in school, and the 9/10 and 11/12 seems a great way to meet this goal.  I like the career academies, or a way for kids to study subjects of interest to them, but think it remains important for all to receive a good education in the basics that develop critical thinking and skills they will need whatever the future holds.  It is a little dismaying to see so many of the options focused on “career,” particularly as 9th grade is just too early for kids to determine or feel stuck with a particular future.  That is one reason why I like combining career academies with the 9/10-11/12 approach.

One School: Two Campuses.  Recognizing the fact that many kids bridge between houses and transportation to facilitate this bridge will be a bit of an issue.  I think that the combination of rades 9 though 12 under one roof in our current social climate is a key element in our student drop out rate.  The younger students look to the older a role models, and often the older have not the maturity to handle that responsibility.  Likewise, without stability/support at home, the younger kids don’t necessarily have the emotional tools to handle the older kids influence.  In a 9-10 and 11-12 school division, each group of kids is primarily dealing with age-peers and as such has a better ability to control their influences.  Within this model, all of the other academic structures can occur—but with tighter overall.  The kids will have a better chance of succeeding and completing high school with the skills needed to move forward in life.  Breaking up the grades is a tested national model.  Has anyone on the advisory committee talked to school districts using this model?

I am NOT in favor of #1 Personalized Schools.  Everyone has different beliefs and schools should always be focused on academics NOT substitute for parenting failure.  The #3 (1 school, 2 campuses) will not be effective in developing students for real world situations such as traditional college or large organizations.  Proposal #5 will further divide our community and student-cultural development.  I am interested in #2 with an addition of a technical school that develops trade skills to support current tourism industry needs (this tech school can be funded by industry and city tourism tax).  I’m interested knowing long term benefits of proposal #4.

Although there are many benefits to each of the options, the One School, Two Campuses is the one that is most focused on the social, academic, and developmental needs of the kids.  Almost any of the “small school” concepts can be overlaid on this one foundational format and actually work better (because the programs would be more age appropriate) for the kids.  This is a divided community on so many levels.  Though I do believe the new high school building is necessary, I’ve always been concerned with how it would exacerbate existing community divisions.  The 9/10-11/12 model, with competitive and intramural sports addresses this problem in a positive way.  Challenges would include ensuring that those 9/10thg graders who need “more” would access the 11/12 campus easily.  Activities like drama, that benefit from 9-12 involvement would also need to be creatively connected between the schools.  The transition between schools might be seen as problematic by some, but could also be viewed as an opportunity for a right of passage.  Another point where kids can be celebrated, an intermediate goal that is not so far away.

One School:  Two Campuses---I am NOT in favor of the three models where kids commit to specialized programs.  The 9-10 11-12 model may best address our limited financial/teacher resources and offer kids the most options.  It’s important, especially in 9-10 for kids to continue to explore MANY options and directions for their futures.  This is the best option for connecting with kids at the point they need major encouragement to continue with high school.

I like the idea of specialized schools, but not until 11 and 12th grade.  A 12 or 14 year old shouldn’t be allowed to start narrowing the focus of their education.  Trade and craft schools that also give basic education are a much needed addition to Juneau and the best option for some kids.  Trades have dignity.  I like smaller learning communities, but not restrictive ones.  Keep AP classes.  Train teachers to teach all levels of students effectively in one room, as at the Charter School.

Interested in 9-10/11-12 with 11-12 in valley nearer to UAS.  Advantages:  one school—not splitting sports teams and other groups.  More opportunities for 9-10s to excel n extra-curricular programs.  Each have opportunity to attend each facility.  Need to ensure to maintain and enhance advanced classes. Support smaller learning communities.  Support smaller class sizes!

I like the 9/10 and then 11/12.  I worry that two separate schools would exacerbate the town/valley divide.  I like the kids having the chance to know all the other kids.  Plus, there wouldn’t be two complete, separate sports teams.

Proposal #3—One School, Two Campuses.  I like this idea—it will bring kids of the same age together to build each other up.  I also like some of the ideas in #4—academic and career—to give kids choices in areas of specific study.  I really don’t like #2 because of equity.  There is NO way to draw boundaries that are equal.  (Look at FD and DZ)

My preference is one school—two campuses.  Advantages:  1.  Better to 9th grade transitions to high school.  2. Keeps current freshmen and sophomore classes together through graduation.  3.  Easier to deal with sports programs—keep one team for standard sports.  4.  More parking for 11/12 students which have cars.  5.  Close to UAS for college classes for 11/12.  If a different model is selected, try to keep current sophomore class together for its last year in high school.  Allow choice in schools regardless of location or residency.  Transport teachers back and forth as necessary to offer broadest range of classes;  i.e. languages and advanced courses.

Being the parent of a 6th grader now, I see the pull out of 6th graders working well at DZ, and would like to keep 9/10 separate from 11/12.  9/10 would continue academics (voc, middle, and AP) then 11/12 could focus more on academy type prep.  Smaller class sizes all areas, advisors (not counselors) linked to students, families= great ideas.

I do not like the idea of two separate comprehensive high schools.  This would just be a dilution of what we have.  I like the idea of 9/10 and 11/12 schools, although I am concerned that this will limit choice for students.  There would have to be buses going back and forth after school for clubs/drama/sports.  I also like the idea of generally “raising the bar”—with higher expectations on ALL students.  If we do have 2 separate schools, they should have different focuses:  one more tech/vocational than the other. To engage students in their education, smaller learning environments within each high school may help—i.e. vocational/college bound/native studies/math tech although this would be most appropriate at a 1/12 grade level.  The 9/10 would have to be RIGOROUS enough to prepare students for any of these smaller academies.

I believe there should be JDHS open campus and half day at one school and half at another.

I like the idea of #3.  I like this because it takes away the “choice” of which school to attend.  I think that kids might be influenced more by their friends than academic considerations. The choice at each school could be which smaller learning community could be best for you.  I like the concept of academic teams.  I taught middle school for many years and the team concept with 90 minutes of planning time/day was terrific.  Kids benefited from consistent policies in all classes and interdisciplinary work.  9th graders really need TLC and guidance.  It was tough at JDHS when I had freshmen classes of 35+ students. I think the athletics and music situation could be worked out with practices held at individual schools but then combined for performances.  There would be exceptions with the freshman “star” good enough to be on Varsity or the advanced bassoonist—but still the musician would shine when the groups combined.  The athlete might have to travel to TMHS to play varsity.  Also #3 would eliminate the split between town and valley.

One school – two campuses 9-10 11 – 12.  Allow for small learning communities at least 9th grade teams that loop into 10th.  Keep one set of athletics, drama and music programs, easy fundraising burden on community.  Closed campus and developmental culture and 9-10 limits negative influences promoting attendance and achievement.  We haven’t budgeted fro two comprehensive staffs anyway, so splitting JDHS staff between 2 buildings allows for continuation of such programs as AP without duplication.

Tow reformed comprehensive high schools – greater opportunities for all.  I like the idea of keeping students and younger students separate.

Models of teaching to students need to be adapted to different levels of learning.  I find smaller groups of student’s helps and smaller students stay together for several years would help them become more of a congruent group and the teacher or group of teachers would get to know the kids better.  Having a school that look more like a college where students have no specific clan and no home ground would not help ground them for social interactions.  We need to show some consistency.  Another option for that would be that the students stay in the same classroom and the teachers would circulate.  It would cut down on the traffic in the halls and the little time some students have to get from one clan to another.  Obviously that would not work for specialty classes.

Each model has merit, however it is obvious with our current graduation rate that 9-12 model is not successful.  My preference is the personalized schools or academic career academies.  I believe these models have the greatest chance of engaging students and being successful.  With either of these choices – it will be important that counselors are adequately trained to assist students and parents make their academic decisions.

I don’t like academics if that’s all there is.  Some students might get stuck where they don’t want to be and will experience hidden penalties if the change.  I don’t like the 9-10 11-12.  I like 2 high schools with some of all of it.  Have academies/school with-in school option at both, but also have mainstream that isn’t tracked so students have mobility from year to year.

Not #3..too many transitions and too segregated by age.  #2 seems too expensive.

#1,4, and 5 with choice and open enrollment.  Kids can choose according to their academic interests and priorities, including extracurricular and friends.  Maybe some would choose by location and that’s OK to.  Strength favoring smaller learning communities.  Exploring future careers, which could give kids direction and incentive in studies.  My kids are strong in arts and communication.  They’ll follow the stage with music and drama.  We appreciate classes with students of mixed grade levels the most.

I see the strengths of model #4 is that students are still accountable and responsible for learning the basics (writing, ss, science) but also given the opportunity of trying out a variety of career choices.  In some ways I also see either the proposal 3 splitting 9/10 & 11/12 or dividing females and males as another addition/component to the model.

#1 & #4 seem to offer arrange of choices for a wide variety of interests.  Not all students have a strong ideas of what they want for a career, however they need to be prepared to have a basic understanding of what it takes to support themselves after graduation.  Education based on job opportunities available in Juneau need to be offered if we want kids to stay/return to Juneau to live.

I feel that no matter what choice is made, there should be an option for students to have school start at a later hour for this age group.  There have been many schools that have done this and their drop out rate has dropped dramatically as well as increase performance for some students.  In addition I wish the district would create a position and budget for appropriate software to provide better communication – parent connect frequently doesn’t work, and the high school had many teacher don’t use it or may only use it just when grades are due.  I find the communication here is very poor.  Also, the system could be for health records, letters etc and we could go to a paperless system for many things. JSD is way behind many Alaskan school districts in this matter, which surprises me. 

I am most interested in proposal #1 & 4 and what I like about these is the options and choices children have and the “size” of the small learning communities.  I also liked the fact hat kids can move from these personalized schools if they realize that is not what their interested in.  I like that they are open enrollment based on choice.  Kids need to be challenged and find the course to have relevance to them and the career desires.

I find all the models interesting but have questions of all also.  Which ever method of delivering education is chosen, I am concerned that it best addresses the disconnect that many students feel/experience in our present model that leads to dropping out or otherwise not making the most of their high school education.  I encourage our district to go for change, to try something new that can excite and energize kids.   I am not knowledgeable about research that may show whether a career academy format ups the graduation rate or a personalized school would based on learning styles etc. but I would want to pay attention to that data.  I like in some of these models the community connections i.e. senior projects with community mentors or career internships.  I would worry a bit if an academy format forced kids to make a choice between interests i.e. giving up foreign language study in order to get an enriched math/science course load.  If career academies were melded with the 9/10 & 11/12 split, perhaps there could remain more flexible between academy track at the 11/12 level.  I do have interest in the one school and 2 campus ideas but see it as a physical structure that might solve some problems with divisiveness in the community and the issue of athletics et. But not as an academic structure in and of itself.  I’d like to see one of the other models combined with this if it  were to be selected.  I also think it could be possible for there to be some shifting of teachers between 2 campuses to facilitate transitions and keep kids connected, maybe something along the lines of the looping that is done in some elementary classrooms.  Finally, what kind of advisement will be available for students and families making choices between a variety of smaller learning communities.  This could be important and necessary.

I dislike the one school/two campuses model --proposal #3.  As a valley resident I want my child to go to school in the valley and as a resident of Juneau I don’t want students traveling Egan to go back and forth between school and home or to get a class at another school.  I like the emphasis on smaller more personalized community and learning experience offered in proposal # 1 & 4.

Prop #1:  Strengths: Choice, lots of choice.  Weakness: possibly too much choice how to determine the resources each of the five schools get.
#2 Strengths: No downside to downtown vs. valley student’s weakness – I assume the most expensive.  This is the proposal I like the most.
#3 Strengths: Not a lot to recommend this.  Weakness:  Too much busing, poorly spreading out the campus will not help. #4  Strengths: Great if you know what you want to do.  Weakness: If you are less motivated/interested this is a problem. #5 Strengths: Several strengths.  Weakness: Vast differences between schools. Huge disparity between campuses, too much busing.
Proposal #3 9/10 & 11/12, like separation of ages, university relationship for 11/12, closed for 9/10.  Especially for first few years, two campuses allows everyone to be at both locations.  No one feels cheated by being @ old facility, etc.  All have good inclusion of fostering student success and learning the environment, high expectations.  Some flexibility on course options project vs. text learning.  Extracurricular – student interest is high enough to support multiple teams, what are the financial considerations?  For schools and community?  If only one team, what are transportation issues?  Very interested in the high caliber science, math and art options/offerings.

I like proposal #2 and #4.  There are my preferred proposals because of theme based academies ~ career pathways are great idea where students can start to focus on areas that interest them.  I don not like splitting the school into 2 campuses.  This is not a good fit for many students since many students need advance classes and many students need remedial classes, i.e. 10th graders who re in an advance track in math would need an 11th grade course; many 11th and 12th graders are still struggling and taking 9th and 10th grade courses.  The split school doesn’t work well since kids don’t fall into neat categories by grade level.  Also 2 separate athletic teams is more important to me and my family since it allows more kids to the opportunities to participate (which can help student to have a healthier lifestyle).

#2 – greater choice by interest than theme based academies and community support.

Personalized schools – no interest, none
2 reformed – interested, needs to prove for movement between facilities for classes and activities, won’t have $$ to duplicate everything at start.
9/10 & 11/12 – no interest
Academies – curiosity, not yet interested. No
3 facilities – interested as with #2, need to provide for student movement between facilities, classes and activities.  
I like #2 or #5

#2 first choice…I like smaller communities, senior project, variety.
#1 with 2 school based activities and 2 activity/sports program.
I like smaller schools within schools.  Thank you

I am intrigued by the 9/10 & 11/12 model because of the developmental difference and focus these two groups display. Keeps the city and school population unified.  I also like the idea of incorporating some vocational/technology opportunities put forth in the academies model.  We might be able to hook more kids for who college is not the answer because kids can pursue their interests.  I see there are problems to settle with distribution of teachers for exploratory and advanced or remedial classes that would be a part of any school.   Teacher perspective: cross discipline, “Phoenix type models are a burn-out for teachers.  It involves excessive planning with no financial incentive.  Smaller learning communities have advantages for kids who tend to get lost in a big school.

I would like to see some consideration to adding an IB (International Baccalaureate) program for advanced students or at least more AP and advanced courses to keep kids challenged.  Smaller groups of students (10-15) with a counselor/mentor to follow them through high school and keep them connected to both extracurricular and available classes.  Perhaps smaller cohorts would lower the drop-out rates as well.  Model 9/10 -11/12 looks interesting although the kids say that would ruin the high school experience.

Academic and Career Academies would be difficult as I think most kids don’t quite know where their interest lie until they are exposed to many different classes and programs.  We would favor keeping one athletic program as it seems nearly impossible for this community to support 2 separate programs for all sports and travel involved.

I would like to see a combination of the One School: Two Campuses and the personalized school.  Our community does not need the divisiveness that will occur with the 2 separate high schools, having personalized attention to each students needs is critical to the success of that person.  Having the younger kids on a closed campus with their peer group can be an excellent opportunity for those students to bond with their friends, a close campus is such safer.  The older students would have more access to UAS and other Valley amenities.  One sports team – The Bears – no rivalry in town, we have enough rivalry with the rest of the state. Increased tactile learning opportunities, enhanced vocational opportunities HS, voc teachers are terrific, please expand their opportunities from training in their fields.  Address issue of prescription day use and sales at the HS and MS through partnerships with JPF, Seanet, JSD, JUS, NCADD in addition to parents and physicians.

One school – Two Campuses 9/10 -11/12.  This model best meets the needs of a small isolated community where divisiveness is ever present between the town and the valley.  Any of the other models is that we don have the resources to split grades between schools.  There would be inequities.  I do not want to see sports rivalries between schools fro very limited fund raising dollars. Or the staffing problems with splitting staff, books, etc.

All models have merit.  Prefer the model with strengths: smaller size, closer community, choice and project-based.  I like the academy approach although would like to see solid partnerships created before implementation fear/concern the beginning would be at the expense of students learning.  I also like the personalized approach with theme project base.  The 2 campus approach might offer motivation to continue if the 9/10 experience is positive.

One school – 2 campuses, 9/10 -11/12.  One school/one community, one sports burden on community, smaller learning communities but still one group.  Like the idea it can accommodate 8/9/10 or 11/12/13 or what the community needs at that time.

I am very leery of considering alternatives before operating budget impact are analyzed.  Clearly, some of these models will stretch the workable funding more that others.  I like the 9/10 -11/12  model the best, because I think it will ease the transition from middle school to high school and address the under achievement observed in too many of our ninth graders.  I also would like to see elements of the academic and career academies incorporated into the 9/10 -11/12 model.

One school/two campuses and alternative school.

One school, two campuses, kids stay together.  It stops the rivalry between town and valley.

One school two campuses – keep the kids together – town is too small to split up the kids too much.  Not a bad idea to have younger kids separated fro older kids.  Keeps program available – keeps all having options.  Had an experience with a school that split and had rivalry – then the school came back together to remedy the situation.

One school: two campuses 9/10 -11/12, one community concept.  Afraid the valley students with a brand new facility will be the “haves” and “have nots”.  Too small of a community to have 2 schools, especially since we cannot drive out.

My recommendation to the school board via the advisory committee is Proposal #3. With the 11/12 campus to have #4 academies.  The 11/12 program should use the community, especially intern-type programs with businesses.  Also I feel parents could provide assistance or be an asset to the teachers in many ways.  The 11/12 academy style will provide direction, a smaller environment and real life skills.  Grade 9 children will be in a better setting than with the much more developed 12 grade children.  Please adopt the Proposal #3.

I am still very intrigued by the 9/10 -11/12 split.  But putting on my new high school project manager hat, after reviewing the web site, One school proposal I have a comment.  A small but important one.  TMHS is currently under construction and has school colors (blue and silver), and a mascot (the Falcon).  Many major decisions have already been made a round these two feature: all interior and exterior colors, art installations (a 30” totem pole with a falcon on the top, for example) gymnasium graphics, interior and exterior signage, etc.  Short of very expensive changes that will seriously affect the construction schedule, the train has left the station on these decisions as far as the construction phase is concerned.  It appears that discussion within the advisory committee has promoted that under the one school option the two schools will show the same mascot (bears) and colors (black and crimson).  This will, in reality, be a tall order.  It would likely be more realistic and possibly a good exercise for the community, should this model be selected to come up with a new mascot and colors for “Juneau Douglas High School” but retain the existing colors and mascots for each facility.  An alternative would be to find a new mascot and colors for the downtown campus (which was I think designed with a bit less focus on the colors and mascot, but this could be argued) and maintain the JDHS symbols for the whole school.  I don’t think it’s a bad thing to recognize that these two campuses would have distinct and different feels to them, with Juneau Douglas High School symbolized by “umbrella” colors and mascot.  Sorry for the small wrench, but don’t want anyone disappointed should this be the selected model.

I have the most interest in the one school, two campuses alternative.  The 3 facilities, multiple choices model would be my 2nd choice primarily because it keeps the current JDHS as is now.  I the one school, two campuses alternative, I think the resource of the district will be more equitably distributed.  I think the strength of it is the focus on 9th grade student success and it maximizes the use for both campuses.  Ninth graders are at such a different level of developmental than 12th graders, I think this would greatly help the drop-out rate and the transition to high school.  The fact that this option offers smaller class size is also a plus.

Proposal #3 seems best to me.  It would allow friends to stay together, it would let incoming freshman enter a group of students roughly their age and it would reverse the potentially negative effects of certain other models.   Splitting the schools by downtown/valley would fragment this community and create fierce rivalries between the schools.  I also believe that students my age are in not position to have to decide whether they will purse science/technology or arts or anything else.  High school should be a time for exploring with out making decision to young. 

Our family likes proposal #3 (9/10 -11/12 split) combined with smaller learning community in each.  Pros: Juneau doesn’t get split down the middle. Young people in Juneau can have a common experience, friends won’t be split between the 2 high schools, not so intimidating from the freshman and every other year kids would be the big fish.

I like the ideas of #3 9/10 -11/12.  I like this because it takes away the choice of which school to attend.  I think that kids might be influenced more by their friends than academic considerations.  The choice at each school could be which smaller learning community could be best for you.  I like the concept of academic teams.  I taught middle school for many years and the team concept with 90 minutes of planning time/day was terrific.  Kids benefited from consistent policies in all classes and inter-disciplinary work.  9th graders really need TLC and guidance.  It was tough at JDHS when I have freshman classes of 35+ students.  I think the athletics and music situation could be worked out with practices held at individual schools but then combined for performances.  There would be exceptions with the freshman star good enough to be on varsity, or the advanced bassoonist – but still the musician would shine when the groups combined.  The athletes might have to travel to THMS to play varsity.  Also, #3 would eliminate the split between town and valley.

9/10 -11/12 split – purges the old system and allows both schools to belong to the whole community.  Shares team sports etc.  I also really like the Juneau Academic Career Academies.  All kids should get the opportunity to take advanced classes if that is where their interest lies.  They will have the responsibility to work hard – but also the opportunity to be challenged.  Thanks for doing this!

I like the idea of a magnet school system because we students don’t like the idea of school lives.

We favor the option of the 9/10 school (downtown) 11/12 school (valley)  This would alleviate concerns of town/valley rift and mitigate the intimidation factor for under classmen. For the 11/12 school, we would favor breaking it into separate learning groups (academies) to represent different tracks/interests (i.e. math/science, vocational track, etc.)

I prefer proposal #3. Comments on each model: #1-- Who helps kids/families decide what if kids want to change tracks.  I really wonder about keeping 4D separate that sets up division. #2-- Be clear on the equity issues, bullying, culture, homophobia.  Integrate 4D to these schools.  Must deal with the “them” “us” differences of cultures.  If there are two separate sports teams – cost competition and not cohesive.  #3-- My choice.  It is possible to build a bridge from 10th grade to 11th grade if structured so that kids can better adjust as they move.  Must deal with “late bloomers” and “early bloomers.”  What’s the “upward mobility track” for fast learners?  #4—Need a strong vocational work option for those who want to pursue that with flexibility for academics.  #5—I really believe YD needs to be integrated to mainstream.  I think this may be the most divisive of all.

I really appreciate the open houses and chance to comment on the school proposals.  At first, I was looking forward to having two athletic teams for each sport, but now feel that would be divisive.   Though I can see the advantages of a career-based education, I feel that high school is the time to explore many areas, and not concentrate exclusively on the area that is of most interest at that one point in time.  After talking with some current high school students, I am supporting proposal #3.  This proposal also prevents a lot of arguing over who gets to attend the newest school.

    I have been following the proposals for the new high schools, but have not been able to attend the community forums because I work for the legislature and this is my busy time.
I have no children in school, but my daughter went through her entire pre-college education in Juneau.  She is scheduled to graduate from college this spring.
     Because of the experience our family had with the Juneau school system, I am very concerned about three things:  (1) increasing opportunities for career and vocational education;
(2) increasing the rigor of academic courses and adding more AP classes, advanced language classes, etc.;  (3) maintaining strong programs in art, music, and theater.
     We must recognize that many students have limited interest in academic subjects.  Meanwhile, the state needs skilled workers of all kinds.  We need to provide more practical, vocational educational choices for students who might otherwise drop out of school.
     We also have young people who have been and continue to be capable of getting admitted to and excelling in the finest colleges.  PBS aired a program this morning on the role that Advanced Placement classes plays in getting high school students ready to go to college and succeed.  According to that program, even students who do not do well on the AP tests demonstrate improved performance in college. I can assure you that the AP classes my daughter was able to take at JDHS played a significant role in her acceptance into one of the finest colleges in the country.  I have been very discouraged to see fewer and fewer AP classes being offered at JDHS.  After all, our children must compete with children who have been educated in expensive, private schools.
    Lastly, I have talked to students who have told me they stay in high school only because of the art, theater, or music program.  It is critical that both vocationally oriented and academically oriented students have access to excellent classes in the arts.  Again, I have no doubt that my daughter's involvement with band helped her get accepted into college.  She continues to perform in the college orchestra.
    In short, I favor offering our high school students a selection of educational tracks.  If no child is to be left behind, the different interests and strengths of each child must be appreciated.  My greatest fear is that having two high schools in Juneau will dilute the opportunities for all students and that they will settle into the mud of uniform mediocrity.
 
My five children have graduated from JDHS.  I was unable to attend the HS meetings but want to submit my preference for Proposal #3.  I do not want to see this community divided geographically or otherwise with two comprehensive high schools. I believe that many of the attractive programmatic ideas included in the other proposals are also possible within the framework of the 9-10, 11-12 age/grade groupings.

    As a parent of a teenage son and two more children attending the school system I have many concerns.  The biggest issue I have is if you do  intend to make changes, what guarantee that these new plans will be  followed through.
    Having these forums are great for the community but hopefully it wont be just a quick decision because we are running out of time and have to choose an option.  I believe education is always changing and we need to have these ideas evaluated every year to ensure that our student are coping and or make adjustments to their needs.
    While sports are good and can give students self esteem not to mention physical education for life, I do not agree with having sports as our  main focus; not everyone is a wonderful athlete.  We all have our own unique qualities that make us excel in life.  Whether it's music, sports, technology or just the power to engage people.   This community has had many great athletes; musicians and many other wonderful people
who have left our school system and gone on to change our community for the better.   With that said let's not single out just one group of people.   I'm not saying we shouldn't incorporate sports but so many
students are having a hard time with these new school options. Why not let the student create their own forums to figure out what would best benefit their sports, musical and other elective needs.  Let's make them
be part of the plans so they can feel included and want to work with us and not against us. That's a NO to Reformed Comprehensive High School plan
The Three Facilities option is a little too vague and would need more clarification.  No comment.
    I do however think your committee may be on to something with the Personalized School and the Juneau's Academic and Career Academies. This would be a great time to see what other schools have done and model or pull ideas from both options and create schools that meet the needs in this community. Whichever option we choose it should include smaller class sizes. I don't think you will find very many negatives to this option
    I would also like to say I never had many problems with the way JDHS was set up when I attended school. I guess it's what we called a traditional system.  However having my own kids has opened my eyes.  My son struggled and as a parent I didn't understand because he is a helpful, intelligent teenager who is fun to be around.  In his situation the time came to make some changes and we choose to have him attend the
Alternative High School.
    With much thanks to the teachers and Principle Laurie Scandling it was the best choice for him.  If my son hadn't had this option many doors would have been shut and he would never been given a chance.  I also have another son in the system that has Dyslexia and again his needs are different and they cannot be conformed to just one way of teaching.
    We always focus on the drop out rates and the bad kids that don't make it, I think it's time to focus on the people who have changed our community and our world for the better.  Let's not try to push our kids
into a box that we pick out just because it's pretty or it's convenient.
    Let's use all our resource to research which options are best for our kids.  I personally would like to know what the teachers and staff think who work with these students everyday. This shouldn't be limited to
current educators but to include past, and future educators.
    Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your work on this important project.  I appreciated the opportunity to discuss the proposals with you at the recent open house.  Here are my comments:  Proposal #1 for personalized schools seems most like my vision.  I think small learning communities are very important, and I would describe Proposal #1 as one school located at three sites with a total of five learning communities.  I prefer open enrollment with the option to take electives at other learning communities.  I want the curricula to prepare all students for independent adulthood but respect the fact that they have different learning styles and will get there in different ways-- college, technical school, apprenticeship, or perhaps just a good high school education that gives them solid basic math and reading skills.  I don't favor requiring senior projects or splitting up students by age.

 1. I am very concerned about having two separate high schools and division that it will cause this community. There is already a downtown/valley divide and I am convinced that having two high schools will make it worse. I envision problems with fundraising, with sports teams rivalries, and discrimination. I am a business owner who regularly financially supports the various clubs and sports teams. I am not excited about having to decide which school to give money to or to split the donations between the two schools. My husband is also on the JYFL board and there is no way they can budget for two football teams. Therefore, I strongly support one school district with two campuses.
2. In separating these two campuses, I am very excited about Proposal #3. For all the reasons stated in the brochure, I think it benefits the students and the community. I am strongly against having a “vocational” school and an “academic” school. There is no way we should force our children to decide as entering Freshmen what they want to do for the rest of their lives. Most college graduates don’t even know that. However, I think it is important for them to have the opportunity to explore all fields of study. The problems I see with the other ideas of the open campuses is the continuity of teachers over a two year period. It has really strengthened my son’s academics when he has had the same teacher for two or more years. He has also been in a situation where his math teacher moved and no one knew where he should be placed for math the next year, so he repeated an entire quarter until we figured it all out. 
3. In further supporting Proposal #3, I sense that having the 9th and 10th graders separated could really help with drop out rates. I believe smaller communities that foster strong teacher-student-parent relationships will help kids be successful. I believe this proposal can let kids be kids by giving them not only educationally appropriate curriculum, but also age appropriate curriculum.
    I have talked with a handful of other people who were excited about Proposal 3 as well. I realize that is far from a mandate, but it has been an interesting topic to bring up in conversation with people. People seem to be far more interested in that proposal than the others.
    I wanted to be brief, as I hope the committee has a lot of other feedback from the meetings. Please feel free to call me if you have questions or wish to hear further comments.

In thinking about what is best for all students, what are your thoughts on the delivery of activities and sports at the high school level?

I think one sports department.  To have separate and identified teams sets up a competitions that is better placed elsewhere.  Look at the cost.  This budget will be massive.

One sports team is fine but  MAXIMIZE OPTIONS for student activity in plays, clubs, intra-murals sports, etc.  Studies show how advantageous involvement in activities is for kids.

I think there should be teams for each school, but students get to choose which team.

Athletics and music and language clubs, etc., should be available to all kids.

Activities and sports should be available to all, whichever school.  If the given activity is not at one school, students should be able to travel to the other location for that activity.

Will there be a drama teacher at both schools?  A full music program at both schools?  If the same opportunities aren’t provided at both schools, then students will suffer.

District wide sports is ok, if necessary for some reason.  Other activities should be happening in each place, so there would be more chances for everyone.

I think that with two separate schools and teams, there will be more rivalries and smaller groups of kids to choose from.  This will lead to worse teams, and more arguments.

I am extremely concerned about the sports activities.  I would really like to see one sports team for the community.  If there are two teams, one team may be “stacked” because the students know the best team is from that school.  Also there may not be enough players at one school to have a team.  I also think a rivalry between schools in such a small community is asking for problems.

One district community team that serves both schools.  Hope there are lots of choices for kids.

Keep one Juneau team.

One Juneau team—clubs at both locations.

Because of funding constraints, I think the 9/10 and 11/12 model works best for these considerations.

Intramural sports should be offered for all kids that are interested—school sponsored sports should be supported by the COMMUNITY in ONE building.

Uncertain:  → would like to see more opportunity at different levels.  → concern with the divisiveness of two schools.

Equity—thus one school, two campuses is the only way to go.

As fun as it is to win state championships, I hope there will be increased opportunities for MORE kids to compete on the varsity level.  I hope both schools can have a full complement of interscholastic sports.  I know this may “dilute” the “talent,” but will also allow MORE kids to participate.

Well, I mentioned some on the previous page.  Eventually in Juneau IF the population grows, we are going to have to offer two of everything—like Fairbanks—but they have a population of 60,000.  For right now I like the thought of two buildings, but one athletic team/sport and one band and one orchestra and one choir.

Have competitive with tryouts and an intramural sports program also.  Mainly, just have the students organize themselves.

I don’t think we have enough resources for two competitive teams in most sports.  I would favor an ACTIVE intramural/parks & rec program.  It would be necessary to have “activities buses,” especially if there is a 9/10 school so kids can get home.

More intramural sports/activities at both locations!  Make it affordable and easy (activity buses) so more kids can participate.  Do NOT make one school the sports school and the other one the arts school!

One team for football, one team for baseball.  Basketball and soccer could survive as one or two teams.  One team for swimming.

I think two teams would be great.  More participation but funding can be difficult (my experience with club soccer). Intramural sports could be increased with one competitive team.

Complete separate sports teams.

I would like to have as many opportunities for as many kids as possible—NOT just the stars.

I’m concerned about having rival sports teams at the two schools.  Does not build a healthy Juneau community.  Splits talent and lowers team quality.  Difficult to fund raise for twice as many teams.

Not a priority for me.

9-10 kids need to have the opportunity to join 11-12 as their abilities and interests dictate in after-school activities.

There needs to be as many sports teams and activities as possible.  Another reason for promoting the 9/10-11/12 model is that with one competitive track of teams, and intramural teams and clubs, even MORE kids will connect with an activity—and at a developmental level appropriate for them.

There is demand to expand funding and need of variety of sports such as tennis, golf, soccer (junior and varsity), swim and shooting team.  This is the first high school that does NOT pay for transportation for athletics.  I see so many talented kids that don’t join sports because of the cost.  The state should earmark funding for sports transportation and develop a sports stadium with the college.

Single competitive team, multiple local intramural teams.  Two schools offer two facilities for school activities.  Activities can be learned better towards all groups.  Activities can be learned towards crossing all grouping in one school—two campus model

I think it would be a pity to divide our community with two competing sports programs.  It seems that a competitive team and an intramural team for each sport would be a good idea.  Activities maybe are different;  some, like orchestra or Drama Club may need the participation of the full community to have enough students;  others may not.  Definitely this could be difficult to figure out and properly staff, and may just need to develop over time.  Thoughts on how the sports and activities are organized should be secondary to deciding on academic programs.

It is unrealistic to think we will be able to financially support “2 of everything” teams.  This issue keeps getting pushed under the rug and it is REAL.  It would help build a lot of confidence among the public if a COLLABORATIVE community process to address the sports/activities challenges would begin NOW.

I’d like to have as many kids participate in sports as possible.  We should not be concerned with “championships,” etc.  The HEALTH and well being of students should be the #1 priority.

Have sports and activities at both schools—build community/loyalty pride for both—competition helps build that pride.  Have two schools—this community CAN support two sports programs and twice as many kids will get to be involved.

Activities and sports are/should be lifelong skills that our youth take with them.  We should want our youth to LOVE being active and by not focusing on AAA status and varsity only, we can include more kids in physical activity.

I’m not terribly concerned here except that I would like to see more kids involved in sports and activities of their liking and feel good about participating, even if they may not be a top player.  We need to encourage healthy lifestyles and that is including physical activity at any level of competition or non.

Concerned about kids having to make a choice between what’s best for them academically (if they are choosing a school) and what activities/sports they can participate in.  Will students at both schools get to play their sport, be in the orchestra, be in the school musical, etc.?  Whichever model we go with, I would not want it to make these choices unavailable to all students but hope they will be more available.

There should be a great variety of activities and sports available at all schools—sports should be available to ALL with less emphasis on competition (and the level of competition) and more emphasis on life long patterns of health, team work, and recreation.  Give all students the chance to not only participate by play in competitions.

Options for participation, not limited by school.

Healthier lifestyle.  Winning a state championship ISN’T very important in the overall scheme of things.

One team for basketball and football.  Two teams—one for each school—on all the other sports.

Best result is greatest number of participating.  Until Juneau can find and create adequate $$ and organization of duplicate programs (which it eventually should, so long as there is demand), participation must be open with no regard to school of record.

I definitely support a model that offers two separate school athletic and activity programs.  Activities get kids involved and connected—and gives CONFIDENCE skills and LEADERSHIP skills to students.  Is limited to such a few students now—two drama/musicals a year, two dance drill teams—I believe the expenses will be solved and the skill level of all teams will be top notch.  May take a few years, but more kids will gain.

One large school eliminates cross-town rivalry.  We have a small population overall.  Do we really need two separate schools and teams?

The 10th grader plays h.s. soccer and the past two years there have only been enough boys try out to make one varsity team and one JV team.  I don’t believe there are enough youth to fill two teams (one for each high school).  There definitely needs to be strong sports programs as well as clubs and other activities.  For some youth, these extra-curricular activities are the only things that keep them in school and help them make it to graduation.

Two campuses promo the possibility of more opportunity for students to participate and compete against each other IF: there are enough to fill the spaces at each venue and there are qualified, competent coaches and staff to ensure a quality program will be provided.

One school/two campuses solves this problem.  I go along with the solutions presented in proposal #3.

Ideally for all activities to be available to kids at each school—transportation between campuses provided.  Things such as football teams—I can see advantages and disadvantages of both structures (one team for both schools OR each school with own team).

If student body is so large that two sets of activities and sports teams are necessary to provide all students with extra-curricular opportunities, then it must happen.  I think this is the case currently.

Maintaining one community team in each sport seems vitally important in a community of this size.

In this community I think it is important.  I was born and raised here and learned a lot from the sports I was involved in, such as making goals and learning how to reach them.

Generally, Juneau should move towards INCREASING participation in sports and activities.  Therefore, transition to a two team town.  Increase intramural and non-competitive options for new sports such as ultimate Frisbee or flag football.

High school level sports are serious, and they need to be kept competitive.  We can’t afford to split the talent of the high school teams.

I would prefer separate sports teams for the two high schools.  The more kids that participate the better.  Same with activities.

I think thought there’s a big hullabaloo in the sports community about breaking up the state championship teams, I think we’ll deal with two teams after a group gets through.  I like the idea of more opportunities for more kids—get a kid into an activity and connected, they get attached to school—though it will mean more STAFF has to get involved in offering activities to support.

I want more students to be able to participate in sports, clubs, extracurricular activities.  For more variety of activities to be offered.  During school like band, choir, etc. and after school

I don’t see the need to have sports teams that are competitive statewide—I’d be satisfied with more opportunity and more parity with other cities in the region.  Some activities and sports could cross over between the campuses, e.g. arts and drama.  The 9/10-11/12 split maximizes the proximity of students with similar interests.

First, with community (non-profit) funding, these groups need a special meeting to explain impacts and insight.  Must only have one sports team due to the funding stream and geography.  Do not have facilities to split teams.  Expenses will go up probably 20% and participation will drop due to fewer opportunities.  Hockey would definitely fold, swimming will be difficult, maintaining football will be doubtful.  REITERATE:  NO DECISION WITHOUT SPECIAL MEETING WITH BOARDS PROVIDING FUNDING.

Activities and sports are essential for a well-rounded student.  It allows a student to set goals, maintain fitness, and expand their options.  Student athletes (must maintain attendance and grades) are very important to school success.  NOT HS students playing in club sports.

The community cannot support two different sets of activities.  In a two school model one will become a have and the other a have not campus.  A transition from 8th grade will be less difficult if the specter of upperclassmen giving grief to 9-10 graders.

As many extracurricular and sports should be offered as possible.  Distribution of resources between schools should be equal.  Opportunities for all students should be equal.

Teams at each school so more kids can play.  Possibly putting together “super” teams to play other schools up north.

The more students involved the better.  I don’t care if we are competitive at the state level as long as the maximum number of students are involved.  Some of the HS sports programs are so competitive they turn away a huge number of students.

There should be two sports teams and separate activities.  I am not aware of how the football team works or the soccer team/club, but volleyball, basketball, and wrestling could have two teams.

Since I do not currently have a child in high school, I do not feel informed enough to comment.  But from what I hear, there are many choices for students to get involved—art, theatre, music, sports.  Are there enough choices though for ALL varied interests?  I do not know.

The high school teams should stay together.  Power in numbers, there are many clubs and after school activities that are made up of six people alone.  These are great activities and passions of these students, so what happens to this club when schools and students are split—do they become non-existent?  If you split teams and programs, you are showing the community that you DO NOT support these programs.

Although sports and activities are secondary to academics, many students become and stay engaged through sports and activities.  The current structure of many sports and activities naturally eliminate students in low-socioeconomic status.  With more sports teams and activities (no matter the structure of the high schools), more students would be able to participate.

It appears to me as well as reading the news and statistics regarding obesity rates in the U.S., we need to emphasize and promote sports and physical activities in all grades.  These age groups really need to move.  It helps them focus and to learn.  They learn about exercise habits at these ages and that can last a lifetime.  It needs to be present to all students!

I think splitting up the high school sports and activities would bring more entertainment to the community and more competition.  It would also give more students an opportunity to make the teams.  However, for some sports there might not be enough players at one school to form a full team. (District teams)

Keep one school identity as explained on reverse side.

Activities and sports teams should be provided at each school to maximize opportunities for students to participate.

I’m in favor of one set of varsity teams with expanded intramural type athletics open to all.  As far as music, etc. (vocal and instrumental and theatre productions) I think the two smaller communities should offer more possibilities for multiple smaller scale productions, but these should be open to participation from both schools. 

I like the idea of more teams available for participation but wonder how the community would support them financially.

Just split it and for the sports that do not have enough players to create two teams, just make a city team.  And other high-cost activities like music can be offered to all students.  I want decisions to be driven primarily by academic success for ALL students, not sports opportunities for the most athletically gifted. However, if three sites considered one school, then competitive sports district-wide.  Lower-cost activities, including intramural sports, can be offered on-site.

Other Comments:

I am most concerned about the interlocking issues of drop-outs and racism in our schools.  I have been in Juneau for 30 years, had 4 children in school here and served on a site council, so I have seen the schools from a variety of perspectives.  My children include whites and minorities, boys and girls, honor roll and learning disabled students, jocks and students with problem behaviors.   The commonalities are that they all did fine in elementary school, did OK in middle school and (for my 2 older more resilient children) HATE high school at JDHS.  I think what they hate is the overcrowding, negative social climate, and resulting sense of chaos.  My 2 younger children are less resilient, and I will not send them to high school in Juneau unless it improves dramatically.  I think smaller learning communities are a first step in the right direction. JD High will become a more reasonable size.  I have two concerns from the various proposals:  1) I feel there will be a need for a small alternative school like Yaakoosge for students who never seem to fit in regular programs and to allow for more fluidity of grade levels for out of sync or marginal students.  2) My concern about Career Academy or Career track type plans is that it is still fairly young to have students choose to limit their exposure to different possibilities.  I also feel that this would lead to more divisiveness and stereotyping among the schools.

It seems that the car has gotten in front of the horse…again.  This discussion should and did occur years ago during the planning phase of the 2nd high school.  Revisiting the issue at this time does not make a lot of sense and is disingenuous to voters who were told that two comparable high schools were to be built.

No preference on whether 9/10 or 11/12 would be in valley.  Either could be accommodated.

I also believe that basic education is more important than 40 electives.  The students can do that in college.  The level at which some students graduate is appalling and we need to improve the standard.  More electives will NOT improve that.  Coming from Europe, we had two different branches in high school.  One—language, the other math.  Within each there were three different emphasized branches and some limited choices in each but not 20-30 or how many they have here.

Need a first class PE program at high school level.  Vigorous exercise increases I.Q., lengthens life span, etc., including potential increase in student ability to grasp academic subjects.

We need passionate, intense, enthusiastic teachers who fully know their subject and LOVE it.  High school is about newfound freedom and challenges; kids who are embracing that should not have their freedom ripped away from them.  Coming from middle school and into the high school, I felt free and grown-up.  Even though I don’t always go off campus during lunch, knowing that I can and it is an option for me is enough.  In a way it is a reward; I work all morning in test and long classes and I get to walk down the block and get away from it all.  I believe though if kids misuse open campus it is the principal’s job to revoke their open campus.  Don’t take away off campus—you take away freedom and in a funny way our first step to real life.

I am concerned that we are having this discussion now.  It seems to me this decision of what type of school should have been decided earlier.  It would, I think, been more helpful to have the school, academically, decided before the interviewing process of a new principal.  Then the prospective principal and community would know what direction the school is going in.

Thank you for all of your time and energy.  Your efforts are appreciated.

Thanks so much for the process and all the thought that has gone into this!

One school two campuses allows for comprehensive schools while removing many society issues.

Has there been any consideration about same sex programs?  Many school districts have public same sex schools (Chicago, NY) because it fosters academic achievement (not just PE classes—but science, math, etc.).

More voc-tech opportunities doesn’t require the physical segregation of students on different tracks.  If facilities like shops are only present at one campus, shuttle buses are a good option.

Important:  Small learning environments, small school populations.  Increased options to explore areas of interest.  Address drop-out rate by focusing on 9th graders’ success and interest in school.  Closed campus.  More opportunities to be involved in a variety of extracurricular activities.  Prepare ALL students to SUCCEED after high school.  Students have a plan for after graduation.

As a teacher in a 9/10-11/12 school, I would miss the opportunity to teach 10th & 12th or 10th and 11th graders as I currently do—that would be icky…  Choose WISELY and carefully.  This is my future.  Job satisfaction is on the line!!  I am excited and fearful of what is to come---

Proposal #3 continues to put 9th and 10th graders who do not live downtown at a disadvantage for participating in Zero hour and after school activities—since most of the student population lives in the valley.  You should put 9 & 10 in the valley school where the majority of kids (who are not driving yet) can WALK in order to participate in after school activities.  Putting 9/10downtown continues to favor only kids that live downtown.  By 11 & 12, kids can drive so they can get to the downtown school—put them in the downtown school.

Offer classes during range of hours—why not offer shop in the evening?  Hockey could become a PE class & ice time for a 2nd hockey team (negotiated with the city) made possible by scheduling time during the day—during what is now low usage public times.  Increase partnerships with UAS.

Please, Please think ahead 20 years down the road when making the final decision.  20 years ago I don’t think they though of the impact of changing over to the middle school system.

Thank you to each of you who have given so much of yourselves and your lives to this project.

Thanks!

This planning effort turned out a LOT better than I expected!  Thank you for developing such well formed proposals!

With cost overruns, it is sad to see the facility and what would be promising programs cut, due to lack of funding BEFORE the new school’s doors are even opened.  This is not a good way to bring a new facility of a new school online, particularly for the students who are not sure whether they want to continue in school or not.  Because of the frequency of use of the field and track at Adair Kennedy, we really were looking forward to having another facility that is sure to be used, particularly this close to the new school.  With funds for this now being questioned, it’s sad to realize that this won’t be actually possible.

I think the best model would be to combine elements from several proposals:  1) Strong sense of community  2) Small, intimate, personal learning environments  3) Family and community involvement  4)  Strong athletics and clubs  5) High expectations  6)  Prepare youth for real world and post secondary education.  I STRONGLY disagree with the idea of having an athletics program at only one school.  Athletics need to be available to ALL students no matter which school they attend.

As with activities, we need to make all facilities available to all, and provide the opportunity and transportation to all kids to use them.  We are only one community.

Thanks for all your hard work!

Whatever is decided, the schools need to take advantage of the latest research saying that smaller learning communities improve student achievement.

I spent the majority of my time cutting through the overly complex verbiage.  I understand that all options will have “high expectations.”  How is that relevant to making a decision on how the schools will be run?  How about a simpler “common elements” and a smaller differences section…

Make sure you create an environment where students are INDIVIDUALLY KNOWN and valued for their uniqueness, and where students can access the classes they want, and good counseling for college and careers.

I’m hoping that some of these proposals can possibly be combined to make Juneau’s high school top and desirable to be at.

I also feel strongly that the auditorium needs to be completed, not only for the school but for the community as well.  What are the plans for all the students who want to be involved in performing arts if an auditorium isn’t part of this school?

Thanks for asking for our input.  I want to see Proposal #4/ or any proposal to be closed campus unless they have a college course or job after school.  Lunch should be served at school in our commercial kitchen.

Don’t like 9/1-11/12 model because it doesn’t give Thunder Mountain a chance to build community.

Analyze these proposals by overlaying goals, mission, challenges, opportunities of each, identifying main impacts:  (Categories in table include cost, responsiveness to kids with special needs, sports and activities, advanced learning, early graduation, unity, etc.

I saw almost nothing to address the needs of advanced students or college preparation, not only academically but socially.

There is a need to build a pool at the valley high school.  Effectively balance resources to both schools for #2 and consider city recreation opportunities such as ice skate rink.  Involve the college to maximize funding for areas such as sports, arts and science.

The connection between the two “campus” building will be important.  Regular shuttles between?  Promotion of the concept that Juneau is the whole campus, and there are the two high schools of the campus…a unified community surrounds them.

The suggestions were so draped in educational jargon and euphemism that it was very difficult for me to understand what you meant.  Please use real language.   Thanks.

Do not necessarily support closed campus for 9-10.

I REALLY think we need a closed campus.  I live near JDHS and witness many instances of unsafe behavior and dangerous driving, smoking, etc.  The best way to keep kids is for parents to know where their kids are and who they are with.  An open campus makes this impossible.

Complete separate sports teams!

I pray that this committee listens to the community.  I also hope that what is best for our kids is chosen, not just what we can afford, or the administration wants.

Thanks for doing so much public input work—this is really important!

To engage students in their education, SMALLER learning environments within each high school may help—i.e. vocational (huge need for trades and women in this community)/college bound/native studies/math tech/although this would be most appropriate at a 11th/12th grade level.  The 9/10 would have to be RIGOROUS enough to prepare students for these smaller academies.

No closed campus at all!!

I like the idea of higher level classes being available thru the university for 11th and 12th graders.  I also think that having more career oriented smaller learning communities would be good in the 11th/12th.

Thoughtful, well-researched presentation with ideas clearly offered.

Kids do not know at age 14 what they want to do and what they are interested in—don’t make them choose some sort of “academy” at that age.  I have no idea how transportation will be provided in any of the options where boundaries are open—I don’t think we can support that within this community I these proposals.

I prefer separate special ed classrooms;  my daughter is not able to sit/learn in regular education.  Advanced classes—the teachers are great.  My other child loves to learn and “go fast.”  Not having to hear the same message three times before moving on is what she loved.

Yakoosge should be an option to pick from for kids in the beginning without having to fail to be placed in it.

Thank you for giving an opportunity to comment.  Am concerned about the technology or interest area smaller schools.  Very few h.s. students know what their interest is or will be.  What I would hate to see is that children not be able to experience lots of different things and be focused on one path.

Start both high schools at 9:30 or later.  If you have to have a higher student/teacher ratio, have that in the advanced classes.

This community cannot financially support two reformed comprehensive high schools.  Equal programs cannot be offered at each school, and busing students and/or teachers between schools seems inefficient and costly.

Start school later.  Teens operate better later in the morning.

How about starting school later and ending later, 10:00-4:00?  Seems like it would be much more in tune with teenagers.

General:  1) Be very clear on the CORE for each student.  2) D not segregate students by YD, culture, ethnic, homophobia. 3) offer honor programs in ALL categories.  4) Watch VERY carefully how the program is set up to avoid setting people apart (i.e., YD).  5) This will need a MAJOR increase in # counselors, special counseling skills for the teachers, and time/forum for core conferences among teachers, counselors, students, and families.  6) Be clear on how kids can switch tracks.  This needs to be handled carefully so the kid doesn’t feel failure.  7) There will need to be massive increases in student assessment so options can be clearer to student/family.