Proposed student shuffle in Osseo schools underlines district contrasts

  • Article by: Kim McGuire , Star Tribune
  • Updated: January 18, 2014 - 7:33 PM

Families feel strongly about boundaries, grade realignment.

  • 41
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
mcoleman307Jan. 19, 14 9:16 AM

Thank you Osseo leadership for providing some forward thinking solutions! I'm sorry so many of your parents in Maple Grove are choosing to live in fear rather than support their children and community. Unfortunately the sort of segregation between poverty/wealth and whites/minorities MLK was working to end seems to still be the goal of many in Maple Grove.

17
26
tswan14Jan. 19, 14 9:48 AM

It's sad that once again, the Maple Grove parents can't realize that their children need some diversity in their lives. A couple years ago, they were the ones complaining and fighting to keep the Magnet school out of their boundary. The 400 kids that would have to move from Park Center and Maple Grove to Osseo Senior High should be honored. Osseo is an awesome high school that has some of the best school spirit I have ever seen. I know someone who's daughter left Maple Grove to go to Osseo because she was being bullied at MG. The MG parents need to get off their high horse.

20
23
ConcernedParentJan. 19, 14 9:49 AM

Unfortunately this article did not convey the message at hand as it is not about segregation or poverty/wealth nor has that been the argument at any of the meetings. The issue is centered around open enrollment numbers and the fact District 279 administration tried to move 100 residents out of Basswood while letting 125 open enrolled kids stay at the same school. There is no other school in the state that gives preferential treatment to open enrolled kids over residents and this overcrowding is happening because of that fact. Also, the district continues to be very short sighted with continued yearly boundary adjustments which actually means kids shuffling around schools in the district which is not good for kids stability. The district needs to think long term and more strategic in the future.

31
8
parentbwJan. 19, 1410:25 AM

Once again the liberal media takes hold. This issue has nothing to do with race/economic status. It's purely due to the fact that the leadership has no comprehensive plan for the next 5-10 years, and that means we'll have to continue moving our children in and out of different schools at a moment's notice. How would you feel if you had to move your child from a school they have loved for years, that is only 2 miles from your home? Only to let more students stay who aren't even in the district? It makes absolutely no sense....and the ones who lose are the kids.

25
11
joanieb101Jan. 19, 1410:26 AM

For our family, it has nothing to do with test scores or affluence of the school community. It's all about uprooting my child, who lives within the current school boundary, from her current school and allowing students who don't live in the boundary continue to open enroll. The students who open enroll are getting preferential treatment over those of us living within the Basswood boundary.

26
6
jvfordJan. 19, 1410:38 AM

I have two daughters who will be moved from the only school they have known.I do not think it is fair that they will be moved from their home school, while open enrolled kids will be allowed to stay. We will be banned from open enrolling our kids at Basswood, but others in the district will be allowed to. This is what upsets me. I was ready to accept the fact that my girls were going to move schools, until I found out about the preferential treatment of open enrolled students.

28
5
d279parentJan. 19, 1410:59 AM

Parents of current Basswood students in 'census area 284' were emailed on January 8 that this 'boundary change adjustment' was proposed. There was no prior information that the Administration knew or cared that Basswood's enrollment has been over 1,000 students for the past several years. Open enrolled students were new to Basswood this fall--just a few months ago, including from the Cedar Island/Oak View area. Additionally, many other enrollment options are now closed, leaving residents in CA284 without the full ability to choose where to attend school. It is clear that enrollment is not being managed well. Finally, a process like this does not respect residents or instill trust as the D279 Strategic Plan declares.

18
6
baddistrictJan. 19, 1411:18 AM

This is not about living in "fear" as some comments have said. That's just ignorant. Nor is it anyone's right to say what's best for the kids of census 284 as other comments have posted. Only the paretns have that rigth. This is about getting the best possible education for the KIDS, and moving them from a #2 school to a bottom school hinders their eduction. Kids of 284 should NOT be pentalized for the school boards lack of planning over the last decade. Allowing open enrollees to stay while kicking out the children who live in the assigned area is giving preference to open enrollees. The article also failed to mention the District solicited feedback from the Oak View parents but never from anyone from 284 when developing the proposal. Another example of giving preference to other groups. Everyone has the right to choose where they want their kids to go to school by choosing a location to live.

20
6
maggie15Jan. 19, 1411:45 AM

My husband and I do not have school-aged children, so we have less at stake here than do school parents, but I attended one of the information meetings and I have to defend the parents I heard there against the insinuations of divisions by affluence or racial makeup made in the article and in the above comments. At no time did I ever have the impression that segregation or poverty/wealth was the issue here; lower test scores, however, is definitely an issue. But primarily I heard parents very clearly stating that it is an unjust and irresponsible proposal for their children to be uprooted and moved, separated from siblings, in order to make room or keep room for open-enrolled students. The accusations made by the first two commenters here are degrading, inflammatory and unwarranted. I can only assume they were not at the meetings and do not have first-hand knowledge of the ongoing discussions on the Basswood overcrowding issue.

23
7
marlow21Jan. 19, 1411:53 AM

This is simply an issue of fairness. Open-enrolled kids at Basswood shouldn't receive priority over kids that live in the boundary area of the school. It's very easy for the first two commenters to make their comments because this issue does not affect their families. Families in census area 284 have made decisions to live in the area partly due to the strength of Basswood elementary school. Residents within schools' boundary areas should receive priority over open-enrolled students, plain and simple.

21
5

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

question of the day

Poll: Can the Wild rally to win its playoff series against Colorado?

Weekly Question

ADVERTISEMENT